• #GamerGate bar meetup disrupted by bomb threats in Washington DC
    332 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Quq;47649605]to get you started, here are some popular choices for X: "feminism" "anita sarkeesian" "sjws"[/QUOTE] Except in almost any instance of anyone having a problem with any of those 3, they clearly describe what the problem is or at least allude to someone else who has before them. Also, I dont think ive seen anyone railing against feminism? Just the psycho bullshit some idiots keep trying to force-feed people to save their own tails?
What exactly are GamerGate's intentions? That seems uncertain to me at the moment.
[QUOTE=Lord_Ragnarok;47649632]What exactly are GamerGate's intentions? That seems uncertain to me at the moment.[/QUOTE] addressing and dealing with the corruption in gaming "journalism"
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;47649645]addressing and dealing with the corruption in gaming "journalism"[/QUOTE] How much of a division is there between people looking for corruption and people doing harassment campaigns? Wait, you changed your avatar. I keep seeing blue members with white squares around their avatars. Is there a white square around my avatar to you guys, because I'm starting to wonder if there is a transparency issue with blue members.
We call people out on doing harassment on both sides, there seems to be a larger amount of real harassment on the anti-gg side though, stuff like getting people fired, trying to erase peoples race and gender, etc.
[QUOTE=Lord_Ragnarok;47649658]How much of a division is there between people looking for corruption and people doing harassment campaigns? Wait, you changed your avatar. I keep seeing blue members with white squares around their avatars. Is there a white square around my avatar to you guys, because I'm starting to wonder if there is a transparency issue with blue members.[/QUOTE] I really don't know the numbers. yeah idk wtf that is, i've been trying to get it transparant
[QUOTE=Lord_Ragnarok;47649658]How much of a division is there between people looking for corruption and people doing harassment campaigns? [/QUOTE] 98.74% Corruption finding/killing 1.26% Actual harrassment source: [URL="https://i.imgur.com/44zB54K.png"]twitter statistics and newsweek failing to paint GG in bad light[/URL]
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;47649667]I really don't know the numbers. yeah idk wtf that is, i've been trying to get it transparant[/QUOTE] Try shrinking it down to 64X64 or less. I had to do that.
it's 64x54
[QUOTE=Lord_Ragnarok;47649632]What exactly are GamerGate's intentions? That seems uncertain to me at the moment.[/QUOTE] To get rid of collusions between game developers and game reviewers. Right now reviewers will give near perfect scores to games because the developer is in the same social group, or because the reviewers rely on advertisement revenue for some of the Triple A titles. So the reviewer won't dare give the game a bad review for fear that said developer will pull their ads from the reviewers website/magazine. A great example of this would be Mass Effect 3.
[QUOTE=Melkor;47649685]To get rid of collusions between game developers and game reviewers. Right now reviewers will give near perfect scores to games because the developer is in the same social group, or because the reviewers rely on advertisement revenue for some of the Triple A titles. So the reviewer won't dare give the game a bad review for fear that said developer will pull their ads from the reviewers website/magazine. A great example of this would be Mass Effect 3.[/QUOTE] That kind of seems to be the deal with most product journalism. It's probably a bigger issue than gaming. Why is this woman in particular so significant? [QUOTE=SIRIUS;47649673]it's 64x54[/QUOTE] Try smaller sizes. I just tried with one that was 64x48 and it didn't work, but a 40x40 did work. I'm trying to see what the limit is. Try this: [img]http://s18.postimg.org/4vmugs505/wolfywolfywolf.png[/img]
[QUOTE=Lord_Ragnarok;47649735]That kind of seems to be the deal with most product journalism. It's probably a bigger issue than gaming. Why is this woman in particular so significant? Try smaller sizes. I just tried with one that was 64x48 and it didn't work, but a 40x40 did work. I'm trying to see what the limit is.[/QUOTE] GG as a whole doesn't care about Quinn. She's largely irrelevant, but is constantly inserted into the conversation as "proof" that the movement is about harassment, and not about fixing journalistic issues in our medium of choice. When it's pointed out that 1) we don't talk about her 2) don't really care about her 3) she did actually have some very questionable relationships with journalists that resulted in coverage which was favourable, which her relationships garnered her, a form of nepotism that is largely opposed by many of the people in GG. There's no arguing the issue is larger than gaming. But honestly, I don't see that as a valid argument as to why GG is in the wrong in their actions as a consumer revolt against journalists. Journalists in all fields of the industry right now are failing at the core components of journalism. That is very true. We're focusing here because that's where our interest is, that's where one of our major hobbies is, and we feel like it's a place we can actually do something. We can't take on Time Magazine for being corrupt, we can't take on large news paper publications for their nepotism and cronyisms, we can't take on bigger subjects because we're a small group with very little pull who almost no one cares about or takes seriously, so, I think for most GGer's, they don't see the need to reform journalism in one great big sweep, it'd be nice to just get bloggers and half assed journalists to toe the line of ethics, let alone large companies that pull in more money than our consumer movement can really hope to scratch at.
Why the hell does everyone have to get so enraged about things that people get put into completely different groups? Also, Sirius, go to the other page, I made a working avatar for you. Melkor, you can have one too: [img]http://s10.postimg.org/7x23h7mqt/braidsnsunglasses.png[/img] I tested it with my profile, it works.
[QUOTE=Melkor;47649685]To get rid of collusions between game developers and game reviewers. Right now reviewers will give near perfect scores to games because the developer is in the same social group, or because the reviewers rely on advertisement revenue for some of the Triple A titles. So the reviewer won't dare give the game a bad review for fear that said developer will pull their ads from the reviewers website/magazine. A great example of this would be Mass Effect 3.[/QUOTE] contrarily some reviewers will give awful reviews of widely accepted great games to clickbait viewers rather than do an actual balanced review of the game
i think the whole fight against bad journalism is good but man, Christina Hoff Sommers and Milo Yiannopolous are just awful. fight against bad journalism good tho [editline]3rd May 2015[/editline] also i wonder how many hilarious trigger and tumblr jokes were made.
[QUOTE=ThatSprite;47649769]contrarily some reviewers will give awful reviews of widely accepted great games to clickbait viewers rather than do an actual balanced review of the game[/QUOTE] the fact that people are willing to read shitty reviews that are intentionally over-critical is more an indictment against people than it is against journalists it's important to consider the ethical dimension that, while the employees of news companies certainly share some of the blame for misinformation and sensationalism, another part of the blame lies with the viewer that eats sensationalism up and takes no time to question what he reads the way to reconcile freedom of the press with concerns over sensationalism is to teach the reader/viewer to be a critical thinker but i don't know enough about GG to make any definitive statements, and it seems that fostering skepticism is part of what GG has been trying to do, so... of course, i think it's appropriate to issue a warning that should be issued to lots of other movements that go against the status quo -- 'critical thinking' is not synonymous with 'my agenda'. pretending otherwise reduces 'critical thinking' to another form of unquestioning conformity to an ideology.
It used to be back in the day were reviewers were separate from the people who interview developers and a problem was that the reviewer would phone it in. It was so bad that you could read a review saying there is no side block in the game and you press left or right then block you were blocking.
[QUOTE=Scum;47649799]i think the whole fight against bad journalism is good but man, Christina Hoff Sommers and Milo Yiannopolous are just awful. fight against bad journalism good tho [editline]3rd May 2015[/editline] also i wonder how many hilarious trigger and tumblr jokes were made.[/QUOTE]Christina Sommers? Milo, sure, not really a good person, but Sommers? She's seriously like one of the best people. Ohh god she calls out the problems in third-wave feminism and how its detrimental to feminism as a movement, while herself being a feminist. Third-wave is perfect and you cannot criticize the holy teachings.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;47649841]Christina Sommers? Milo, sure, not really a good person, but Sommers? She's seriously like one of the best people. Ohh god she calls out the problems in third-wave feminism and how its detrimental to feminism as a movement, while herself being a feminist. Third-wave is perfect and you cannot criticize the holy teachings.[/QUOTE] why mention feminism, it has a poisoned identity politics within parts of it, why identity politics, because a social justice warrior goes by such politics, why sjw, because they are what has been pawns and higher up convolute logic, uphold illogical fallacies, and spreading propaganda of saying GG is not what it is.
[QUOTE=Lord_Ragnarok;47649735]That kind of seems to be the deal with most product journalism. It's probably a bigger issue than gaming. Why is this woman in particular so significant? [/QUOTE] She's not important, she was just the drop that made the glass spill over.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;47649841]Christina Sommers? Milo, sure, not really a good person, but Sommers? She's seriously like one of the best people. Ohh god she calls out the problems in third-wave feminism and how its detrimental to feminism as a movement, while herself being a feminist. Third-wave is perfect and you cannot criticize the holy teachings.[/QUOTE] she calls out feminism as detrimental to feminism and holds up her own form of feminism as the answer. she's a classic case of a reactionary new traditionalist. she believes in a war against boys for christs sake. that's like the classic conservative line against any form of gender liberalism - "what ever happened to boy's being boys?!?!" this idea that feminism is somehow going to turn men and boys into... something has been going on for like 30 years now and lo and behold men and boys are still men and boys, still the main percentage of power holders, socially, economically and politically. but yeah no she's not one of the best people. she's a class A doofus whose only agreeing audience are people who don't understand and don't want to understand feminism cos fuck actual academia right? and need her to help them maintain their stupid narrative of "FEMINISTS HAVE GONE TOO FAR!"... as well as Anders Brevik she's just another thunderf00t or sargon of akkad type figure who gives stupid people easy answers. if you want to understand feminism, watch videos and read books from ACTUAL feminists, not the so called conservative thinktank "equity" feminists who think that feminism somehow marginalizes men, turns women against them and that boys reading jane eyre is a bad thing. why is she even a part of gamergate anyway?
[QUOTE=Wii60;47649375]examples: [url]http://i.imgur.com/M7QYcSC.png[/url] [/QUOTE] Oh my god, ouch, augh, argh, OUCH!!!! I got cancer from those comments.
[QUOTE=Scum;47649995]she calls out feminism as detrimental to feminism and holds up her own form of feminism as the answer.[/QUOTE] Hardly a mark against her considering the state of feminism today, and how much damage certain strains of feminism have done to the movements image. [QUOTE=Scum;47649995]she's a classic case of a reactionary new traditionalist. she believes in a war against boys for christs sake. that's like the classic conservative line against any form of gender liberalism - "what ever happened to boy's being boys?!?!" [/QUOTE] Nice false equivalency. And strawman. And appeal to ridicule. [QUOTE=Scum;47649995]this idea that feminism is somehow going to turn men and boys into... something has been going on for like 30 years now and lo and behold men and boys are still men and boys, still the main percentage of power holders, socially, economically and politically.[/QUOTE] That's actually demonstrably false. Recent studies have shown that unmarried women under 30 now make more money on average than their male counterparts, as well as a higher graduation rate from college than men. So you should expect to see far more women holding highly sought after jobs in the near future once all the baby boomers retire. [QUOTE=Scum;47649995]but yeah no she's not one of the best people. she's a class A doofus whose only agreeing audience are people who don't understand and don't want to understand feminism cos fuck actual academia right? and need her to help them maintain their stupid narrative of "FEMINISTS HAVE GONE TOO FAR!"... as well as Anders Brevik she's just another thunderf00t or sargon of akkad type figure who gives stupid people easy answers.[/QUOTE] Again with the logical fallacies. You should try being intellectually honest for once. [QUOTE=Scum;47649995]if you want to understand feminism, watch videos and read books from ACTUAL feminists, not the so called conservative thinktank "equity" feminists who think that feminism somehow marginalizes men, turns women against them and that boys reading jane eyre is a bad thing.[/QUOTE] And now you're using the no true Scotsman fallacy, why am I not surprised. I've read several Academic papers and books by supposed "Feminist intellectuals" when I was in college. And they were without a single exception Spectacularly unimpressive. Just like your post. [QUOTE=Scum;47649995]why is she even a part of gamergate anyway?[/QUOTE] Maybe it's because she's a raging misogynist who hates women.
[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;47645212]what the fuck is gamergate about anymore and does anyone care anymore[/QUOTE] Says the guy who says washington is run by moral paragons, and anyone getting money for PACS or SIGs don't [i]really[/i] exist. Here's one for you: All the people who blare to the high heavens about "ugh gamergate" and how they're so astoundingly tolerant of all the peoples in all their various flavors, tend to be the biggest hypocrites in some form or another, and most of the time it's [i]poor people[/i] that tend to get the snotty faces and turned up noses, including the redtext asylum of these very forums. Got an explanation for that one?
[QUOTE=27X;47650405]Says the guy who says washington is run by moral paragons, and anyone getting money for PACS or SIGs don't [i]really[/i] exist. Here's one for you: All the people who blare to the high heavens about "ugh gamergate" and how they're so astoundingly tolerant of all the peoples in all their various flavors, tend to be the biggest hypocrites in some form or another, and most of the time it's [i]poor people[/i] that tend to get the snotty faces and turned up noses, including the redtext asylum of these very forums. Got an explanation for that one?[/QUOTE] He's said his piece, leave him be
[QUOTE=Scum;47649995]she calls out feminism as detrimental to feminism and holds up her own form of feminism as the answer. she's a classic case of a reactionary new traditionalist. she believes in a war against boys for christs sake. that's like the classic conservative line against any form of gender liberalism - "what ever happened to boy's being boys?!?!" this idea that feminism is somehow going to turn men and boys into... something has been going on for like 30 years now and lo and behold men and boys are still men and boys, still the main percentage of power holders, socially, economically and politically. but yeah no she's not one of the best people. she's a class A doofus whose only agreeing audience are people who don't understand and don't want to understand feminism cos fuck actual academia right? and need her to help them maintain their stupid narrative of "FEMINISTS HAVE GONE TOO FAR!"... as well as Anders Brevik she's just another thunderf00t or sargon of akkad type figure who gives stupid people easy answers. if you want to understand feminism, watch videos and read books from ACTUAL feminists, not the so called conservative thinktank "equity" feminists who think that feminism somehow marginalizes men, turns women against them and that boys reading jane eyre is a bad thing. why is she even a part of gamergate anyway?[/QUOTE] If anything, I think she is a positive force in feminism for men and women who are so completely turned off by radicals and vocal minorities. She's against misinformation and sensationalism. There are legitimate reasons to be a feminist in 2015, and shaming a guy wearing a shirt his female friend made for him on the best day of his life isn't one of them. [editline]3rd May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=ThePinkPanzer;47645143][B]Gamergate[/B] Good part: Against corruption in games journalism! Pro freedom of speech and shit in gaming! Bad part: MRAs [B]Gamerghazi[/B] Good part: Pro positive female images in media! Bad part: SJWs[/QUOTE] Men's rights activism is totally okay, but I hate this idea that MRAs have to be just as radical as the stereotypical third wave feminists. Fedora MGTOW red piller jokes aside, anyone who truly cares about social justice and gender equality would be okay with MRAs existing. It's just a shame that whenever they meet, bomb threats are called in and fire alarms of pulled.
[QUOTE=Korova;47650778] Men's rights activism is totally okay, but I hate this idea that MRAs have to be just as radical as the stereotypical third wave feminists. Fedora MGTOW red piller jokes aside, anyone who truly cares about social justice and gender equality would be okay with MRAs existing. It's just a shame that whenever they meet, bomb threats are called in and fire alarms of pulled.[/QUOTE] I've not seen many MRAs overall but the ones I've seen all were on feminazi levels of stereotypes.
[QUOTE=27X;47650405]Says the guy who says washington is run by moral paragons, and anyone getting money for PACS or SIGs don't [i]really[/i] exist. Here's one for you: All the people who blare to the high heavens about "ugh gamergate" and how they're so astoundingly tolerant of all the peoples in all their various flavors, tend to be the biggest hypocrites in some form or another, and most of the time it's [i]poor people[/i] that tend to get the snotty faces and turned up noses, including the redtext asylum of these very forums. Got an explanation for that one?[/QUOTE] [URL="http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1446328&p=47567827&viewfull=1#post47567827"]can u first explain to me why you bring that up when it's always painfully irrelevant to the discussion at hand[/URL]
[QUOTE=27X;47650405]Says the guy who says washington is run by moral paragons, and anyone getting money for PACS or SIGs don't [i]really[/i] exist. Here's one for you: All the people who blare to the high heavens about "ugh gamergate" and how they're so astoundingly tolerant of all the peoples in all their various flavors, tend to be the biggest hypocrites in some form or another, and most of the time it's [i]poor people[/i] that tend to get the snotty faces and turned up noses, including the redtext asylum of these very forums. Got an explanation for that one?[/QUOTE] Got any explanation for why you took a pot shot at him by bringing up the past when it wasn't relevant? He said his piece and left, what's the point of taking shots at him after that? people are entitled to opinions as well, there was a reasonable discussion afterwards.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47649749]GG as a whole doesn't care about Quinn. She's largely irrelevant, but is constantly inserted into the conversation as "proof" that the movement is about harassment, and not about fixing journalistic issues in our medium of choice. When it's pointed out that 1) we don't talk about her 2) don't really care about her 3) she did actually have some very questionable relationships with journalists that resulted in coverage which was favourable, which her relationships garnered her, a form of nepotism that is largely opposed by many of the people in GG. There's no arguing the issue is larger than gaming. But honestly, I don't see that as a valid argument as to why GG is in the wrong in their actions as a consumer revolt against journalists. Journalists in all fields of the industry right now are failing at the core components of journalism. That is very true. We're focusing here because that's where our interest is, that's where one of our major hobbies is, and we feel like it's a place we can actually do something. We can't take on Time Magazine for being corrupt, we can't take on large news paper publications for their nepotism and cronyisms, we can't take on bigger subjects because we're a small group with very little pull who almost no one cares about or takes seriously, so, I think for most GGer's, they don't see the need to reform journalism in one great big sweep, it'd be nice to just get bloggers and half assed journalists to toe the line of ethics, let alone large companies that pull in more money than our consumer movement can really hope to scratch at.[/QUOTE] I'm throwing down my gauntlet. If GG doesn't care about Quinn, why were there chatlogs so rife with people obsessing over destroying Zoe's life? I think Gamergate is nothing but a giant spin. The ethics in gaming journalism lie only became important because they knew Gamergate would fall apart in the spotlight. The roots of Gamergate are fucked. Let's say Zoe was to poof out of existence, they have tons of other targets. I'm read the Gamergate board of 8chan to get a look into their heads. They seem to be really obsessed with SJWs and far-right conspiracy theories. Gamergate has some strange bedfellows for an ethical movement. Like Milo, Roosh, and Christina Hoff Sommers and a couple more.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.