PC Gamer: Let’s stop calling ourselves the “PC Master Race”
246 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939280]but I just said that the level of influence would depend on their personal stake in the company / games. It's pretty irresponsible to think in a binary (works on some level in a relevant company y/n)[/QUOTE]
and that's totally cool, but now you're making an assumption (about the nature of her character) that has yet to get any evidence behind it other than your own anecdotal experiences
if you're arguing strictly from evidence, then you can't have those assumptions
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939302]and that's totally cool, but now you're making an assumption (about the nature of her character) that has yet to get any evidence behind it other than your own anecdotal experiences[/QUOTE]
at this point neither side has evidence, friend
[editline]15th January 2015[/editline]
and hence, benefit of the doubt
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939319]at this point neither side has evidence, friend
[editline]15th January 2015[/editline]
and hence, benefit of the doubt[/QUOTE]
a) she works for ubisoft
b) people are influenced by the company that they work for
c) people are influenced by the people closest to them
got those three points. as I said, point a I don't know about because obviously I don't know, but if you're arguing point b or c, then i don't know what to give you because those are pretty much common sense
Information if you have a wife who is an employee at a company you are supposed to be reviewing should be disclosed no matter where she works at it - and since the only articles this guys make are pro-ubisoft it's not a good thing to not disclose that.
It's basic ethical standard - your influenced by people closest to you.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939330]a) she works for ubisoft
b) people are influenced by the company that they work for
c) people are influenced by the people closest to them
got those three points. as I said, point a I don't know about because obviously I don't know, but if you're arguing point b or c, then i don't know what to give you because those are pretty much common sense[/QUOTE]
[quote]now you're making an assumption (about the nature of her character)[/quote]
, that any kind of involvement would drive her to be influential to a significantly concerning degree
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46939332]Information if you have a wife who is an employee at a company you are supposed to be reviewing should be disclosed no matter where she works at it - and since the only articles this guys make are pro-ubisoft it's not a good thing to not disclose that.[/QUOTE]
there is absolutely nothing suggesting that his coverage of ubisoft is unusually skewed
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939338], that any kind of involvement would drive her to be influential to a significantly concerning degree[/QUOTE]
Your assuming she is not being influential - nobody can confirm or deny these facts, which is why it should be disclosed so people know he may have been.
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939338], that any kind of involvement would drive her to be influential to a significantly concerning degree
there is absolutely nothing suggesting that his coverage of ubisoft is unusually skewed[/QUOTE]
you're missing it
people are saying that there is an issue of trust, because whenever he writes about ubisoft now there will always be the question of his gf coming into it
as i said before, you have to be willfully obstinate to not believe that people are influenced by signif. others
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46939345]Your assuming she is not being influential - nobody can confirm or deny these facts, which is why it should be disclosed so people know he may have been.[/QUOTE]
but the most damning article is him stating that Watch Dogs [I]might[/I] be good - there's no need to delve into his personal life so you can have a slight chance of revealing a bias that's imperceptable in his writing
[editline]15th January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939348]people are saying that there is an issue of trust, because whenever he writes about ubisoft now there will always be the question of his gf coming into it[/QUOTE]
and the answer as of now is "no, there is no perceptable positive influence made by his gf"
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939351]but the most damning article is him stating that Watch Dogs [I]might[/I] be good - there's no need to delve into his personal life so you can have a slight chance of revealing a bias that's imperceptable in his writing
[editline]15th January 2015[/editline]
and the answer as of now is "no, there is no perceptable positive influence made by his gf"[/QUOTE]
when you say delving into his life, do you mean looking at his twitter account for tweets that he wrote and sent to be visible publicly? you're sensationalising it and making it sound like people are going through his fucking rubbish bins
if you were going through things that he wanted kept private, i'd agree, but they're going through twitter where you send things that you want people to see
and once again, you're missing the point - the answer is as of now, there is reason that i'd say and others would say that would make me not trust his opinion - that he's porking an ubisoft employee
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939369]when you say delving into his life, do you mean looking at his twitter account for tweets that he wrote and sent to be visible publicly? you're sensationalising it and making it sound like people are going through his fucking rubbish bins[/QUOTE]
I do think it's kind of weird to check his facebook for changes in is profile picture and go through tweets from a year ago, yes.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939369]and once again, you're missing the point - the answer is as of now, there is reason that i'd say and others would say that would make me not trust his opinion - that he's porking an ubisoft employee[/QUOTE]
but that's for when (or if) he makes an untrustworthy or suspicious opinion- and as of now, he hasn't
[editline]15th January 2015[/editline]
you can't genuinely tell me that "I suspect Far Cry 4 is up your alley then, though I haven't gotten around to playing it just yet. But here's a review by someone who has:" arouses a feeling of distrust
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939404]I do think it's kind of weird to check his facebook for changes in is profile picture and go through tweets from a year ago, yes.
but that's for when (or if) he makes an untrustworthy or suspicious opinion- and as of now, he hasn't[/QUOTE]
you can think it's weird, but there's nothing inherently wrong about it because he was ok with those things being seen
and i'm afraid not - you would be right if you treat everything in isolation, but you don't when you're talking about opinion pieces and writing
you don't reserve suspicion for when someone actually does what you were suspecting, because it isn't suspicion any more is it
you reserve suspicion for when you have reasonable cause to believe that someone has done/will do X, which you have if you believe the three points i posted twice
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939404]
you can't genuinely tell me that "I suspect Far Cry 4 is up your alley then, though I haven't gotten around to playing it just yet. But here's a review by someone who has:" arouses a feeling of distrust[/QUOTE]
but i can genuinely tell you that "I suspect Far Cry 4 [which is made by ubisoft] is up your alley then, though I haven't gotten around to playing it just yet. But here's a review by someone who has: [i am also currently fucking a ubisoft employee]" does make me not trust that far cry 4 is up my alley.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939434]you reserve suspicion for when you have reasonable cause to believe that someone has done/will do X, which you have if you believe the three points i posted twice[/QUOTE]
but if you look at the reality of his writing [B]including his writing during his relationship[/B] you have no reason to suspect that he will change his impartiality at any point
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939434]but i can genuinely tell you that "I suspect Far Cry 4 [which is made by ubisoft] is up your alley then, though I haven't gotten around to playing it just yet. But here's a review by someone who has: [i am also currently fucking a ubisoft employee]" does make me not trust that far cry 4 is up my alley.[/QUOTE]
to answer your question: yes, I do believe people are influenced by their significant others BUT it is possible to keep it reasonably separate from your professional life, as this man has evidenced
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939446]but if you look at the reality of his writing [B]including his writing during his relationship[/B] you have no reason to suspect that he will change his impartiality at any point[/QUOTE]
that's really down to the person reading the article to be honest, that's not something you can say to be fact, if you wanted to be super paranoid you could say that he could be writing opinion pieces on ubisoft for that very reason
i'm not sure what you're trying to argue here.
the fact that people are now having issues of trust about what tyler wilde has written suggests that there is now an issue of trust with his articles due to what has come to light
if i was arguing any more (that his gf is forcing to write ubisoft articles), then you'd be right, but, it's entirely reasonable at the moment that people may have issues of trust
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939468]that's really down to the person reading the article to be honest, that's not something you can say to be fact, if you wanted to be super paranoid you could say that he could be writing opinion pieces on ubisoft for that very reason[/QUOTE]
that's true. Would you like to be super paranoid?
[url]http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp[/url]
That's all you need to read and see, I got no other points.
[quote]– Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived. [B]Disclose unavoidable conflicts.[/B][/quote]
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46939474][url]http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp[/url]
That's all you need to read and see, I got no other points.[/QUOTE]
but it hasn't conflicted and so it was clearly not an unavoidable conflict
[editline]15th January 2015[/editline]
seriously, where is the unavoidable conflict being displayed in his articles
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939471]that's true. Would you like to be super paranoid?[/QUOTE]
no, but i'm not arguing that he is actually taking it up the arse from ubisoft or something
i'm arguing that he's now introduced an element of distrust in his future articles about ubisoft
if he comes out and says 'yep you're right i'm boning a ubisoft person, but i'm still legit' then that'd probably be fine with me, but right now people are gonna have issues with trusting him on ubisoft, and when part of your job is to be a trusted critic/voice about videogames, that's a bad thing
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939500]no, but i'm not arguing that he is actually taking it up the arse from ubisoft or something
i'm arguing that he's now introduced an element of distrust in his future articles about ubisoft
if he comes out and says 'yep you're right i'm boning a ubisoft person, but i'm still legit' then that'd probably be fine with me, but right now people are gonna have issues with trusting him on ubisoft, and when part of your job is to be a trusted critic/voice about videogames, that's a bad thing[/QUOTE]
I don't see why you need a public statement on what his writing clearly shows
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939501]I don't see why you need a public statement on what his writing clearly shows[/QUOTE]
"but right now people are gonna have issues with trusting him on ubisoft"
"[because] he's porking an ubisoft employee"
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939526]"but right now people are gonna have issues with trusting him on ubisoft"
"[because] he's porking an ubisoft employee"[/QUOTE]
but from your point why would you trust a public statement from soneone who's porking a ubisoft employee
it's strange that you think a man's statement on his work speaks more clearly than his work itself
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939535]but from your point why would you trust a public statement from soneone who's porking a ubisoft employee[/QUOTE]
because it suggests that he has an understanding of why people may not trust him, but that he is actively taking it into consideration
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939446]to answer your question: yes, I do believe people are influenced by their significant others BUT it is possible to keep it reasonably separate from your professional life, as this man has evidenced[/QUOTE]
For someone who isn't influenced by his private life he sure went through a lot of trouble to try and cover up his relationship and delete his coverage
I SEE NOTHING SUSPICIOUS IN THIS
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939540]because it suggests that he has an understanding of why people may not trust him, but that he is actively taking it into consideration[/QUOTE]
and you think that having evidently unsuspicious writing in the first place is not "taking it into consideration" enough
[QUOTE=Ryo Ohki;46939541]For someone who isn't influenced by his private life he sure went through a lot of trouble to try and cover up his relationship and delete his coverage
I SEE NOTHING SUSPICIOUS IN THIS[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Juniez;46938929]
it turns out that you can see both of the opinionated articles here, they're not nuked or whatever:
[url]http://www.pcgamer.com/watch-dogs-preview-hands-on/[/url]
[url]http://www.pcgamer.com/watch-dogs-preview/[/url][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939545]and you think that having evidently unsuspicious writing in the first place is not "taking it into consideration" enough[/QUOTE]
[quote=Cloak Raider]"that's really down to the person reading the article to be honest, that's not something you can say to be fact, if you wanted to be super paranoid you could say that he could be writing opinion pieces on ubisoft for that very reason"[/quote]
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939561]"that's really down to the person reading the article to be honest, that's not something you can say to be fact, if you wanted to be super paranoid you could say that he could be writing opinion pieces on ubisoft for that very reason"[/QUOTE]
if anyone was that paranoid there's no way they'd believe his public statement either
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939583]if anyone was that paranoid there's no way they'd believe his public statement either[/QUOTE]
sure that's true, I'm sure there'd be some people who wouldn't believe it
HEY LOOK I'M DOING RESEARCH
[URL]http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/04/24/watch-dogs-video-preview/[/URL]
[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/nyWcTl7.jpg[/IMG]
[URL]http://www.youtube.com/embed/MYxmtduG7LQ[/URL]
Mirror: [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qc2EExRzKo[/URL]
But yeah I'm done, you really just don't get the point and you keep with the "well then show me the smoking gun" remarks all over again
What Te Great Skeeve said is all you need really. This is unethical behaviour, whether you agree or not.
[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46939474][URL]http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp[/URL]
That's all you need to read and see, I got no other points.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Ryo Ohki;46939614]HEY LOOK I'M DOING RESEARCH
[URL]http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/04/24/watch-dogs-video-preview/[/URL]
[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/nyWcTl7.jpg[/IMG]
[URL]http://www.youtube.com/embed/MYxmtduG7LQ[/URL]
Mirror: [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qc2EExRzKo[/URL]
[/QUOTE]
are you sure? this is more criticism than praise. if this is what constitutes as untrustworthy positive bias then
[editline]15th January 2015[/editline]
wait, this is a video recap of the article I linked earlier..
[editline]15th January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Ryo Ohki;46939614]But yeah I'm done, you really just don't get the point and you keep with the "well then show me the smoking gun" remarks all over again
What Te Great Skeeve said is all you need really. This is unethical behaviour, whether you agree or not.[/QUOTE]
so where is the conflict of interest displayed in his writing? maybe the problem is your willingness to condemn his credibility without a "smoking gun"
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939643]are you sure? this is more criticism than praise. if this is what constitutes as untrustworthy positive bias then
so where is the conflict of interest displayed in his writing? maybe the problem is your willingness to condemn his credibility without a "smoking gun"[/QUOTE]
The conflict of his interest is him being in a relationship with a ubisoft employee that he has not disclosed
The smoking gun is that there is evidence of this.
[QUOTE=SelfishDragon;46939711]The conflict of his interest is him being in a relationship with a ubisoft employee that he has not disclosed
The smoking gun is that there is evidence of this.[/QUOTE]
if you can find me even one article of his stance having conflicted and changed during the relationship then I will surely believe you
[editline]15th January 2015[/editline]
none of the articles have been deleted yet; it shouldn't be hard
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.