Giant Bomb #8 | It's a Hit!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Antiwhippy said:
Is vinny fucking around with the gummi bears thing?

I can't really tell anymore.
Click to expand...

Nope

100% Real.

firehawk12 said:
The secret, as Anthony Bourdain keeps insisting on his show, is that the awful and non-traditional parts of animals are usually prepared the best, because poor people had to try to find a way to feed themselves with tripe and feet and blood and so on.
Click to expand...

i could see that since i've eaten prepared liver and kidney before an they were good.
 
firehawk12 said:
According to wikipedia, it aired with those three shows in the first year of the Disney Afternoon syndication package:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disney_Afternoon

That's how I watched it anyway.
Click to expand...

Ah, that makes sense then. I guess I didnt start watching until 91 or 92 because that Ducktales to Darkwing combo is exactly what I remember.

edit: This thread is making me homesick for the 90s... time to go youtube some memories.
 
Infinite Justice said:
i could see that since i've eaten liver and kidney before an they were good.
Click to expand...
Right? Because they're the parts that no one wants, so I assume if you're a butcher and you have to give away all the meat to your lord or whatever, then you'll find a way to make entrails delicious. Which is why all that stuff usually tastes great.

erawsd said:
Ah, that makes sense then. I guess I didnt start watching until 91 or 92 because that Ducktales to Darkwing combo is exactly what I remember.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it aired as a separate show before that and had a year on syndication. Watched it every day. lol
 
Gabriel_Logan said:
I do wonder if some in the Giantbomb community feels it has had social issues pushed down its throat, justifiably or not, so they're gonna backlash when it rears its head in content especially one like the bombcast which for about 6 years has been almost free of that kind of stuff. I see some in this thread and in the locked podcast thread saying that it's because Samantha is a women that the backlash is happening but I do wonder if this reaction would have been the same if someone like Dave's sister or Carrie was on instead. Regardless hats off to Rorie, dude takes his job seriously. I remember when he was commenting in almost all the Screened threads.
Click to expand...

Dude... no one is pushing social issue down anyones throat, I just finished the whole podcast the GaymerX discussion was like 5 minutes, it was pretty much: "It was a cool event people were happy", No idea why would anyone would piss about that.

The rest of the podcast was pretty fun to hear, Samantha was a great guest and Drew make bunch of fun jokes, so...
 
Tan said:
I wasn't born when it started and was 3 when it ended. Also I probably never had access to the channel it was being aired on. My childhood was robbed of Gummi Bears.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I am referring to people who were growing up when it was airing. Alex's reaction to Vinny was fucking hilarious, and that he didn't know if Vinny was making those lyrics up on the spot or not was hysterical.
 
Goldmund said:
We don't cover much American history in school here (Germany), but if that period is about agrarian reform, -- I can't think of many history-shaping events in the 18th and 19th century that didn't have agrarian concerns as their basis! I'm actually interested now.
Click to expand...

To be honest it has little to do with reform in America and is more of a political philosophy that had to do with the developing nature of the country and the divide between America's first political parties. The first party the Federalists had a power base in New England which had always relied heavily on merchant shipping and trade over straight agriculture. As a result this was usually the party of many merchants and traders. Hamilton, John Adams, and Washington were Federalists. The Federalist party grew into a party that wanted to expand the power of the national government. Jefferson and James Madison grew disillusioned with the government's expanding power and decided to create an alternative party that became known as the Jeffersonian-Republicans.

Jefferson based his party around his own philosophical ideas about agrarianism that became known as Jeffersonian Democracy. This philosophy relied heavily on Jefferson's own distrust of all things urban and heavily borrowed ideas from the Roman Republic i.e the citizen farmer soldier. To Jefferson only farmers who owned their own land and relied on their own selves to survive and prosper could sustain a true democracy as they would not be living at the beneficence of others like the majority of people's living in the urban areas did. In many ways it was an anti-political machine platform that become so pervasive in the 19 century. Jefferson was very elitist in that he believed that only men who owned agrarian property were capable to be educated in the way that democracy would survive and thrive and thus were the only ones capable of voting. In other words Jefferson supporters favored small government, a strong legislature, a very limited interpretation of the Constitution, and a weakened court system.

This agrarian philosophy carried into said court system as the Federalists and Jeffersonians struggled to gain control of the Supreme Court. One of the great ironies of American history was the Supreme Court led by John Marshall, a Federalist, deciding numerous times to interpret the Constitution in a way that James Madison disagreed with vehemently, and this was the guy that penned the Constitution.

The Jeffersonian party eventually died out, but not before the Federalist Party was completely extinguished, and was succeed by Andrew Jackson's political party. Jackson took many of Jefferson's agrarian ideas but put them in a more populist slant, opening up voting to all white men regardless of if they had property or not. Jackson gets knocked around a lot on this board a lot but people have to remember that he was one of the most popular contemporary presidents of all time.

In other words the word agrarianism in the United States probably has a different meaning than in other countries like Germany because of how much it tied into the early American political parties and really became an power struggle between those who supported a stronger versus a weaker central government. Culminating to Jackson who sort of merged the two together. I really need to learn more about 17th and 18th century Europe because I only know about it from an American and British Perspective.
 
Gabriel_Logan said:
To be honest it has little to do with reform in America and is more of a political philosophy that had to do with the developing nature of the country and the divide between America's first political parties. The first party the Federalists had a power base in New England which had always relied heavily on merchant shipping and trade over straight agriculture. As a result this was usually the party of many merchants and traders. Hamilton, John Adams, and Washington were Federalists. The Federalist party grew into a party that wanted to expand the power of the national government. Jefferson and James Madison grew disillusioned with the government's expanding power and decided to create an alternative party that became known as the Jeffersonian-Republicans.

Jefferson based his party around his own philosophical ideas about agrarianism that became known as Jeffersonian Democracy. This philosophy relied heavily on Jefferson's own distrust of all things urban and heavily borrowed ideas from the Roman Republic i.e the citizen farmer soldier. To Jefferson only farmers who owned their own land and relied on their own selves to survive and prosper could sustain a true democracy as they would not be living at the beneficence of others like the majority of people's living in the urban areas did. In many ways it was an anti-political machine platform that become so pervasive in the 19 century. Jefferson was very elitist in that he believed that only men who owned agrarian property were capable to be educated in the way that democracy would survive and thrive and thus were the only ones capable of voting. In other words Jefferson supporters favored small government, a strong legislature, a very limited interpretation of the Constitution, and a weakened court system.

This agrarian philosophy carried into said court system as the Federalists and Jeffersonians struggled to gain control of the Supreme Court. One of the great ironies of American history was the Supreme Court led by John Marshall, a Federalist, deciding numerous times to interpret the Constitution in a way that James Madison disagreed with vehemently, and this was the guy that penned the Constitution.

The Jeffersonian party eventually died out, but not before the Federalist Party was completely extinguished, and was succeed by Andrew Jackson's political party. Jackson took many of Jefferson's agrarian ideas but put them in a more populist slant, opening up voting to all white men regardless of if they had property or not. Jackson gets knocked around a lot on this board a lot but people have to remember that he was one of the most popular contemporary presidents of all time.

In other words the word agrarianism in the United States probably has a different meaning than in other countries like Germany because of how much it tied into the early American political parties and really became an power struggle between those who supported a stronger versus a weaker central government. Culminating to Jackson who sort of merged the two together. I really need to learn more about 17th and 18th century Europe because I only know about it from an American and British Perspective.
Click to expand...
Wow. Thanks. Any books you can recommend on the matter?
 
mabmiIN.png


Goddamnit shitty commentators, all rorie wants is some free time for divinity. :*(
 
Renpatsu said:
When I see this (and similar sentiments) I get the feeling that I should start participating in the GB forums more and not less if only to sway the equilibrium of the forums.
Click to expand...

Every forum could use more good people. Even GAF can get really shitty at times, just look at the 20 pages+ thread about the whole GB hiring stuff from a couple of weeks back and EmCee's message when he locked it. Some people are just shitty, especially when it comes to social issues. As a gay guy who's a pretty active member of the GB forum, it kinda hurts to see this reaction from some people, but it's not like I didn't expect it.
 
Lol at people applauding rorie for locking the comments section that's the opposite of moderation.

Other game sites have similar communities but it never becomes a point of contention the fact that it continuously becomes a focal point means he's doing a poor job of moderating. Good moderation is supposed to be invisible because it's not about mods it's about the discussion.
 
HoodWinked said:
Lol at people applauding rorie for locking the comments section that's the opposite of moderation.

Other game sites have similar communities but it never becomes a point of contention the fact that it continuously becomes a focal point means he's doing a poor job of moderating.
Click to expand...

It hasn't really become a focal point before the whole hiring thing, so I would say that it's more the moment than it "continuously" becoming a focal point. But yeah, I would agree that locking it might be a bit much even if there were some really bad comments in there (most of the deleted comments I saw were more in the line of "I'll skip this one" and "don't bring your politics into my Bombcast" and shit like that, but there was some outright homophobic shit going on).

Goldmund said:
I think on his first Bombcast Dan called this new job a life-changing event. It seemed like a rather inconspicuous thing to say. Obviously switching jobs and moving is a big deal. Maybe there was a little more to it. Maybe he wanted to get out and away from his past life, be exposed to how little he knows. So it could be pretty mean-spirited to derisively point out all the little knowledge gaps.
Click to expand...

You're overthinking it. He has lived in the Midwest for his entire life, and now the GB job brings him literally across the country to SF. That's a life-changing event for anybody. I knew I considered it life-changing when I moved to get a job for the first time, and I moved from west to east in Norway which isn't exactly as big :)
 
In terms of moderation I don't think Rorie or the rest of the staff think it's sufficient either, otherwise they wouldn't be reviewing their current guidelines and being far more explicit about curbing the more egregious discussion on the site (and outside it for that matter).
 
Myggen said:
Every forum could use more good people. Even GAF can get really shitty at times, just look at the 20 pages+ thread about the whole GB hiring stuff from a couple of weeks back and EmCee's message when he locked it. Some people are just shitty, especially when it comes to social issues. As a gay guy who's a pretty active member of the GB forum, it kinda hurts to see this reaction from some people, but it's not like I didn't expect it.
Click to expand...

It's very human's basic nature.

To quote Immanuel Kant:

Immanuel_Kant_In_Dem_Haus_Homies said:
Der Naturzustand unter Menschen, die nebeneinander leben, ist kein Friedenszustand, sondern ein Zustand des Krieges.

The natural state for human beings, those that live with each other, is not of peace, but instead of the state of war.
Click to expand...

If it's not gender, then it's race, if it's not race, then it's territory, if it's not territory, then you can bet human could create some other bizarre excuses to start conflicts. It's expected to see people being disruptive in any facet of life. Thus moderation is needed all the time.


On the flip side, Ryckert is like hunter gatherer.
 
Etnos said:
Dude... no one is pushing social issue down anyones throat, I just finished the whole podcast the GaymerX discussion was like 5 minutes, it was pretty much: "It was a cool event people were happy", No idea why would anyone would piss about that.
Click to expand...

Samantha sort of touched on that during the GaymerX discussion, I think. She mentioned the mindset that people are going to take away games like Call of Duty by making indie games. I think that mindset is being applied to Giant Bomb itself: "if they start getting serious/talking about social issues it will take away from the silly Giant Bomb I like." Which is totally not the case. They get serious when they need to (studio layoffs, Keighley x Doritos, "protecting Lara Croft," etc), but that has never gotten in the way of what Giant Bomb has been known for.

Even amid this stuff, the crazy Giant Bomb-type shit everyone likes has been coming in more frequently, it seems.
 
sub_o said:
If it's not gender, then it's race, if it's not race, then it's territory, if it's not territory, then you can bet human could create some other bizarre excuses to start conflicts. It's expected to see people being disruptive in any facet of life. Thus moderation is needed all the time.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Just limiting this to the internet, you see it in pretty much any comment section: Politics, science, social issues, gaming, movies etc. I've been around the internet for enough years to know what to expect, but it still makes me kinda sad that the GB community isn't an exception (even if I knew that tobe the case, really).

Mowki Kowski said:
Samantha sort of touched on that during the GaymerX discussion, I think. She mentioned the mindset that people are going to take away games like Call of Duty by making indie games. I think that mindset is being applied to Giant Bomb itself: "if they start getting serious/talking about social issues it will take away from the silly Giant Bomb I like." Which is totally not the case. They get serious when they need to (studio layoffs, Keighley x Doritos, "protecting Lara Croft," etc), but that has never gotten in the way of what Giant Bomb has been known for.

Even amid this stuff, the crazy Giant Bomb-type shit everyone likes has been coming in more frequently, it seems.
Click to expand...

There's a real "keep politics out of my Giant Bomb!!!" feeling to a lot of the comments that were deleted, you're right about that. It's not rational, it has never been, but it's there. I also noticed a lot of new accounts popping up to throw some drive-by insults, so I have to wonder if this too got attention on Reddit and/or 4chan.
 
Speaking of comments sections I admit to not going out of my way to reading it specifically, but on Youtube the PBS Idea Channel seems to do a good job of fostering intelligent discussion and surfacing comments worthy of being highlighted that stands in stark exception to Youtube comments in general.

Not saying GB needs to do the same thing, but I guess what it does come down to is cultivating and encouraging an audience that can communicate through healthy discussion rather than ignorant rhetoric.
 
Myggen said:
I also noticed a lot of new accounts popping up to throw some drive-by insults, so I have to wonder if this too got attention on Reddit and/or 4chan.
Click to expand...

I noticed that too, but a lot of them seemed to be familiar with the Bomb Squad. They might be new accounts, but to some degree they follow Giant Bomb. Which makes this all a bit more disappointing.
 
Mowki Kowski said:
I noticed that too, but a lot of them seemed to be familiar with the Bomb Squad. They might be new accounts, but to some degree they follow Giant Bomb. Which makes this all a bit more disappointing.
Click to expand...

Oh, don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying that they're not fans of Giant Bomb or anything. They're still part of the wider GB community.

A lot of people suck, is my conclusion (a rule I continue to live by). It's especially depressing seeing as Samantha has been a huge fan of GB for years now. I hope this doesn't push her away from the site or anything (I guess she's, as depressing as it is to think about, used to the internet treating her like this).

edit: They opened a new Domino's near Jeff! https://twitter.com/jeffgerstmann/status/489253216102543360
 
It constantly, CONSTANTLY blows my mind how people react when those mysterious creatures known as "wo-mans" talk about video games. Like what the fuck, I'd be happy if my girlfriend played more games with me. Urgh. Poor Rorie, that fridge can't arrive soon enough.

HoodWinked said:
Lol at people applauding rorie for locking the comments section that's the opposite of moderation.

Other game sites have similar communities but it never becomes a point of contention the fact that it continuously becomes a focal point means he's doing a poor job of moderating. Good moderation is supposed to be invisible because it's not about mods it's about the discussion.
Click to expand...

wat
 
BanGy.nz said:
Giantbomb need to take a much heavier hand in moderation, slash and burn all of it.
Click to expand...

Just nuke the whole site? :)

We'll see how the new policy turns out. My impression is that they're getting a LOT stricter right now, so I think that'll be reflected in the new policy.
 
Myggen said:
Yeah. Just limiting this to the internet, you see it in pretty much any comment section: Politics, science, social issues, gaming, movies etc. I've been around the internet for enough years to know what to expect, but it still makes me kinda sad that the GB community isn't an exception (even if I knew that tobe the case, really).

There's a real "keep politics out of my Giant Bomb!!!" feeling to a lot of the comments that were deleted, you're right about that. It's not rational, it has never been, but it's there. I also noticed a lot of new accounts popping up to throw some drive-by insults, so I have to wonder if this too got attention on Reddit and/or 4chan.
Click to expand...

Whats always weird to me is that the people saying these things are a small slice of the community. The vast majority of the comments I read were positive or people talking about something else entirely. A lot of the negative stuff came from a handful who then kept responding to other people who called them on their bs. However, for whatever reason, that small slice reflect on everyone.

It reminds me of the "hoodie logic" from a year ago. Some people commit crimes wearing hoodies, so all people who wear hoodies must be criminals.
 
Also, I didn't see a lot of medals or avatars on most of the vile comments. Are there seriously people who only register to complain how those evil women ruin gaming cause...?
Maybe it's actually better this way, keeps them occupied.
 
It is the same BS that Carolyn Petit at gamespot has to go through.
Everytime I think or society is progressing. That people with my age and interests are headed in a good direction. Things like this remind me that there are still a lot of just hateful people out there. And that makes me sad.
 
erawsd said:
Whats always weird to me is that the people saying these things are a small slice of the community. The vast majority of the comments I read were positive or people talking about something else entirely. A lot of the negative stuff came from a handful who then kept responding to other people who called them on their bs. However, for whatever reason, that small slice reflect on everyone.

It reminds me of the "hoodie logic" from a year ago. Some people commit crimes wearing hoodies, so all people who wear hoodies must be criminals.
Click to expand...

I feel like that slice is bigger than you think it is. I mean yeah it might be small, but it's loud. Look at the comments for the recent Bombcast; they're sitting at a count just shy of 200, and it got there at a rate faster than any I've seen. And that's before the mods/Rorie (props, btw) deleted stuff. Aside from that, there were a whole lot of people complaining about the critics of Dan's and Jason's hire a while back, and Jeff had to step in and write something about it.

For better or for worse, the people who follow Giant Bomb closely are a community, which is where I think your analogy breaks down (there's no all-inclusive hoodie community of which I'm aware). That means if people are being assholes, it reflects poorly on the whole group. I think the best way for us to fix that is to let those people know their bullying isn't welcome here.
 
erawsd said:
Whats always weird to me is that the people saying these things are a small slice of the community. The vast majority of the comments I read were positive or people talking about something else entirely. A lot of the negative stuff came from a handful who then kept responding to other people who called them on their bs. However, for whatever reason, that small slice reflect on everyone.

It reminds me of the "hoodie logic" from a year ago. Some people commit crimes wearing hoodies, so all people who wear hoodies must be criminals.
Click to expand...

The loud minority of a community will always ruin it for the civil majority. That's just how it always goes. It's up to the community to let them know that this shit is not okay, and to the mods to try to bring the hammer down. It'll never be perfect, but clearer and more strict moderation guidelines will help.
 
Renpatsu said:
When I see this (and similar sentiments) I get the feeling that I should start participating in the GB forums more and not less if only to sway the equilibrium of the forums.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I just find myself spending way too much time on other forums already so I can't really justify getting active on another one :/
 
Wow. Samantha is so fucking awesome. She is really intelligent and fits in well conversing with everyone.

As for the community response, I think it's probably a good idea to send positive messages if jerks get riled up by a guest's appearance. If you enjoyed Samantha on the Bombcast, just tell her so in a tweet, or check out her game and tell her if you think it's rad. That sort of thing can go a long way, I think.
 
HoodWinked said:
Lol at people applauding rorie for locking the comments section that's the opposite of moderation.

Other game sites have similar communities but it never becomes a point of contention the fact that it continuously becomes a focal point means he's doing a poor job of moderating. Good moderation is supposed to be invisible because it's not about mods it's about the discussion.
Click to expand...

I suspect he just locked it when he left work, can't expect him to monitor it all night and he doesn't trust his euro mods. If I am right it should re-open when he gets in to work.

The "comments" after videos and articles always seem to attract more crazies than a forum thread on the same would. A lot more knee jerk reactions and attention seeking.

Also those lumping the whole GB community together is the same as looking at something like @neogafshitposts and calling it the GAF community.
 
Mowki Kowski said:
I feel like that slice is bigger than you think it is. I mean yeah it might be small, but it's loud. Look at the comments for the recent Bombcast; they're sitting at a count just shy of 200, and it got there at a rate faster than any I've seen. And that's before the mods/Rorie (props, btw) deleted stuff. Aside from that, there were a whole lot of people complaining about the critics of Dan's and Jason's hire a while back, and Jeff had to step in and write something about it.

For better or for worse, the people who follow Giant Bomb closely are a community, which is where I think your analogy breaks down (there's no all-inclusive hoodie community of which I'm aware). That means if people are being assholes, it reflects poorly on the whole group. I think the best way for us to fix that is to let those people know their bullying isn't welcome here.
Click to expand...

Eh, I don't think the GB is much more a community than people that wear hoodies. No one has been elected to represent the group or speak on its behalf; its just a loose collection of people that like Giantbomb. Some of those people are bigots, which is true of any large public community. Unfortunately, we choose to empower them by taking their hateful comments and attributing them to an entire community. NeoGAF has gotten similar criticism because every time a thread about gender or race equality comes up someone has something awful to say.

Myygen said:
The loud minority of a community will always ruin it for the civil majority. That's just how it always goes. It's up to the community to let them know that this shit is not okay, and to the mods to try to bring the hammer down. It'll never be perfect, but clearer and more strict moderation guidelines will help.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know thats the way it is, that is why I said its weird since it doesn't have to be that way. I suppose it falls down to the human mind wanting to deal with the general and not specifics. I don't think moderation will ever solve the problem but that doesn't mean they should not try.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Dan leaving Giant Bomb?
2
68
717
MagnesD3 replied
Grubb no longer at Giant Bomb
2
54
549
ChorizoPicozo replied
The GameSpot PowerBlock is now Cancelled and Giant Bomb has been asked to Stop streaming
2 3
124
1K
Chuck Berry replied
Fandom Blows Up Giant Bomb - Multiple Key Personnel Depart - Fandom Pauses All GB Content For "strategic reset"
2
55
585
SpiceRacz replied
Japan’s AAA game industry performs strongly as 5 out of 8 major companies hit record-breaking share prices
News Business 
31
2K
Unknown Soldier replied
Top Bottom