Support NeoGAF

[Orayn]

Honestly, apart from just obviously saying "Yes, there are assholes within the gamergate movement", I don't see the point there This constant demonizing and flood of cherrypicked screencas on both sides is getting tedious. It's basically doing the same thing as taking the posts from the guy who ludicrously said "gamers are worse than ISIS" and the like and say "LOOK, this is what we're fighting for, these people represent the whole group"

Seriously, if we wanna play the screencap game, I could just post this
http://i.imgur.com/kbIhMnp.jpg

This doesn't mean anything but just to illustrate we could go all day and all night with cherrypicked caps. Like someone said, it's shills all the way down. I have very little trust on the "evidence" of both side, as it's like trying to chose which is the most objective between two propaganda posters

First, I said "it's shills all the way down" to make fun of /v/'s tendency to claim that any bad behavior on their side must have been a "false flag" by the opposition.

Second, you're making a huge false equivalence here that's been explained many times by better posters than me.

 

[Oersted]

Because Zoe slept her way to positive 'reviews' for her free game

Nope, nope she didn't. Was explained here over and over again.

 

[JackDT]

On #gamergate and whether it can be a real thing:

Not 'supposedly'.

Quite correct. To employ an analogy, it's like using climate change denialism as a launchpad to discuss issues regarding the scientific peer review process.

This analogy is what fits to me.

 

[JDSN]

I just get the feeling that all the people complaining about "journalist ethics" and "corruption in the industry due to marketing" are going to turn out like this:

They already turned like this, I dont see them offering any solution to solve any issues in the industry, hell, I dont even see them mentioning any other issues.

Where are this people talking about freebies?
Where are this people talking about paid trips to play games?
Where are this people talking about writers moving onto community manager jobs after doing massive coverage of this studios?
Where are this people talking about sites being friends of PR like GIant Bomb?
Where are this people about aggregation? Writer's guilds? Higher pay for writers? Criticizing sites that use metacritic?

Even doing the Lauren Wainswright thing it was the community that looked for the connection and moderation gave us free reign to do so and the community uniformly stood up to condemn the people sending her death threats? Why are people here less willing to give the benefit of the doubt to #GG? Is it maybe because of conspiracy? Or maybe they are aware that its a movement based on lies and a very specific brand of hates towards a very specific kind of voice?

There seem to be no mission for this movement, and the only plan we have seen is basically "Hey, lets make this bitch shut up".

Snip

Nope, sorry, what the guy you quoted offered is tweets made by people in the context of the movement, what you are offering is flimsy red line stuff, and when admitting that the GG site has radical elements, why do you feel the need to mention that the other side has bad apples too? No shit it has bad apples, but I dont see those bad apples sending death threats and posting disturbing comments online. Thats a false equivalence and thats a mistake both you and Boogie are doing.

 

[JackDT]

Nope, nope she didn't. Was explained here over and over again.

I may have messed up the tone in that post, I was paraphrasing the obviously false stuff that spawn the 'discussion on ethics' of gamergate. So to be clear, there was not a single review of Depression Quest. It didn't even win an award.

 

[Widge]

Our poor Boogie here, after showing solidarity for gamers via #gamergate he was lauded, after posting and noting the bravery of the Gamesutra piece, he is being slated.

It really is the nature of the hashtag now. Unequivocal support of attacks only or else you are outside the circle. It is incredibly negative. I am also starting to note several avatars as the most prominent in the stream.

 

[MrHoot]

First, I said "it's shills all the way down" to make fun of /v/'s tendency to claim that any bad behavior on their side must have been a "false flag" by the opposition.

Second, you're making a huge false equivalence here that's been explained many times by better posters than me.

True enough, I guess. Not my brightest post. Although I do stand that relying generally on caps is not really a way to construct an argument, more of an easy shortcut.

On a more positive note, for people who are really grim about this. I don't think this whole thing will have that most of a lasting impact on the indie industry in a month or so.

While all this is happening, I managed to help two friends (incidentally female) get jobs in the industry, I've seen 5 different indie game spawn these last 3 weeks around my town, 2 of the team are full females, and in general none of them really seem to care about what people think of them as long as they're making what they like. I don't think (personally) that the future of female game developpers is as grim, and personally it makes me pretty damn happy

 

[Noaloha]

Just my thoughts.

Zoe Quinn thing kicked it off. I only found one thing that she did that was bad. I don't care who she slept with. Out of the five guys, only one of them was a journalist, he had never written a review and barely spoke about the game. However other facts came up, including self doxxing and false threats in order for publicity as well as shitting on a game jam just cause it's similar to yours. This actions I found pretty shitty.
[...]

I wasn't paying extensive attention to the matter at the time all that crap went down, so I genuinely don't know what proof surfaced, especially as it's not really been brought up at all the last few days (perhaps as it doesn't have much to do journalistic ethics?). You say "facts", which is a very specific, strong word. What facts appeared? A cursory internet search on my part just reveals accusations accompanied by red-lined jpegs, counter-accusations with the same, general noise of the six-of-one-half-a-dozen-the-other variety, plus a 20 min smartphone video posted on Quinn's twitter in which she appears to hastily attempt to film losing access of a tumblr account.

 

[Oersted]

I may have messed up the tone in that post, I was paraphrasing the obviously false stuff that spawn the 'discussion on ethics' of gamergate. So to be clear, there was not a single review of Depression Quest. It didn't even win an award.

Her ex-friend, besides leaking nudes, acussed her of sleeping with a Kotaku writer for getting a good review. While it was true he slept with her, he never wrote a review about her game. So yes, you messed up.

 

[Lime]

On a more positive note, for people who are really grim about this. I don't think this whole thing will have that most of a lasting impact on the indie industry in a month or so.

While all this is happening, I managed to help two friends (incidentally female) get jobs in the industry, I've seen 5 different indie game spawn these last 3 weeks around my town, 2 of the team are full females, and in general none of them really seem to care about what people think of them as long as they're making what they like. I don't think (personally) that the future of female game developpers is as grim, and personally it makes me pretty damn happy

It's great to hear that you have helped friends get into jobs in the industry. However, I would still refer to Levi's post regarding the aftermath of this whole thing:

I also think as #gamergate hopefully winds down, no one should make the mistake of thinking they didn't win. They absolutely did. The gaming community lost a lot of great voices, and there has been a chilling effect on future voices speaking up.

Fewer people making games means fewer games. Less diversity in gaming means fewer new ideas and perspectives. Not giving women a voice in games dev means there isn't much for women to relate to in games, stifling economic growth. Look to comics for what happens when a subculture systematically excludes women. Look to comic movies for what happens when women are included.

We lost so much, more than we can ever count or will ever know.

As far as which gamedevs quit, we'll never know how many women walked away or chose not to start in any career or community related to games.

Not all women are going to make themselves into targets by posting those sorts of decisions on (harassment-friendly) twitter, so I wouldn't take a lack of noise as proof that my fears are unfounded.

We can't ever know the true toll this coordinated attack on women in games took. But it's safe to say it's a lot more than three or so high profile women brave enough to publicly quit. And even if that was all the #GamerGate guys accomplished, isn't that tragedy enough? Doesn't your heart break knowing Jenn Frank had to leave because she wants her future children to be safe?

The chilling effect by this Gamergate terrorism should be undeniable.

 

[Simply Sarah]

The way I see it, this entire situation is a case of people that actually agree with each other butting heads. I don't think "pro" and "anti" #gamergate sides are actually real, at least not beyond their views on the hashtag itself. Best I can tell, the vast majority of both supposed sides want a gaming media they feel they can trust, want gaming to be inclusive, are anti-harassment , etc. Sure, there are disagreements on exactly what needs to be done and how to do it, but those types of things are normal nuance to be worked out with time.

Rather, what I see here is a false conflict created by a combination of misunderstanding, miscommunication, rushes to judgement, unwise statements, and bad actors trying to stir everything up. I mainly want to focus on the last of those, since those are the people that comprise what I consider to be the "other side".

The real bad actors here are a mixture of those that want to maintain the status quo (Be it out off sexism, feeling "gaming" needs to be a certain way, or whatever) and those that simply want to cause trouble. These are the people that started and pushed #gamergate and #notyourshield (Regardless of how they've been used since then) and they are the ones that want, above all else, to keep everyone else from coming together to actually improve things and, if anything, have previous improvements rolled back. I'm not saying all of these people are acting out of malice, but that's neither nor there, really.

This all leads to why the two hashtags in question are a problem and why they were pushed: They're intentionally and inherently divisive. By their very nature (Just look at their names) they're intended to frame any discussion in a way that pushes otherwise like minded folk onto different sides. You're either anti-corruption/pro-harassment/pro-gaming or anti-harassment/pro-corruption/anti-gaming. You're simply using minorities to push your own agendas. That's the core of what stands behind the hashtags.

Now, let me be clear than I'm not saying those are the actual beliefs of most people tweeting in those hashtags. That's actually the problem. Valid and needed discussion has been channeled into an intentionally toxic environment that make it appear that there are divisions that, quite simply, either don't exist or are far smaller than perceived. This is how this entire discussion has been manipulated by those that oppose real change.

What everyone reasonable involved (Yes, including the "anti #gamergate" folk) needs to do is step back, take a deep breath, and see who the real enemy is. This means not fighting over why X and Y is wrong or even how #gamergate is or isn't pro-harassment or whatever. The focus needs to be on the shared goals. Only from there can things actually go forward in a constructive direction.

 

[backstep]

For people who still feel inclined to associate yourself with Gamergate (trigger warnings abound), these are the people who historically affiliated with it:

It's about ethics and integrity! (taken from chatlog)

We gamers are concerned about games journalism and corruption!

"Child porn is okay if you use it to harass a woman"

Bear in mind I've never had a twitter account, and I don't have a stake in this current drama, I'm just following it here on gaf. However only the first of those links has any connection to the gamergate tag, that I can see. The second one is a random abusive twitter troll who doesn't use the tag in those messages, and the third is about some utter sicko trolling Anita Sarkesian.

That list of common words from a 4chan related irc channel is really ugly, and I believe it comes from the sort of people who began the hashtag (as I understand it). But do you really mean to say that those 3 images fairly represent the people now using it and their meaning behind it? That to use it is to offer support to IRC bigots, vicious abuse, and child porn?

Looking at twitter right now it's being used by people to express their dissatisfaction with the gaming media, for all kinds of reasons. In some ways, insisting that the hashtag belongs to such disgusting people is only going to cause people using it in good faith to push back harder - it could be taken as an attempt smear their relatively respectable (though not necessarily correct) concerns.

I can understand why it means something so ugly and negative to you, but I can also see why to them it's only meaning is to display their desire for what they consider positive changes in the gaming press. I guess what I'm saying is people were introduced to the whole gamergate thing from different perspectives. If you want to see this thing die down it wouldn't hurt to respect that what they mean by a hashtag isn't intended to mean what it does to you. Like poor boogie on here, he seems to be engaging the people using it by their own understanding of the tag, their un-malevolent intentions. I don't think he deserved the level of indignation he received for that.

 

[duessano]

The hashtag can't be changed because the trolls who have been using it for "lulz" will just lie in wait and use the next hashtag, What needs to be done is less linking to their posts about how to hurt, intimidate and harass people on both sides. They are reading these posts and feeding off of that.

For people who still feel inclined to associate yourself with Gamergate (trigger warnings abound), these are the people who historically affiliated with it:

"Child porn is okay if you use it to harass a woman"

Nowhere does it say that stuff is okay. I don't doubt Anita was harrassed but your framing of that makes it seem supporters of #gamergate are okay with that. You've usually kept the level of discourse way above that.

 

[Oersted]

Just asking again... Why do you guys think does the hashtag attracts sexism/ mysogony and harassment?

 

[Lime]

@ backstep & Deussano

I wrote "historically affiliated", meaning that Gamergate is unfortunately historically tied to the terrorism pictured. And as many have already argued and established, Gamergate can't be divorced from its dubious and problematic origins.

 

[scoobidoo112]

An interesting perspective:

 

[Simply Sarah]

An interesting perspective:

I dunno. Seems like pretty standard anti-feminist language that doesn't even address, well, anything.

 

[V_Arnold]

Nah. "Opportunistic, evidence-free gender warriors"?
Please. The premise is flawed.

One cant take an unbiased look at the state of the games industry and conclude this.
A new Anita Sarkeesian video is not bullying.

 

[Oersted]

An interesting perspective:

Bullied by game companies? What?

 

[alstein]

An interesting perspective:

AEI= right-wing think tink. I'd put anything coming from there with heavy skepticism.

 

[Delusibeta]

We interrupt this thread to bring three major reforms that I think would make the games journalism industry better. I would make a new thread but, y'know, junior'd.

1) Abolish review scores.

Review scores cause far more trouble than their worth. Boiling down a video game into a number is oversimplifying to the point of meaninglessness. It also presents a pile of problems, such as overzealous nerds upset that you haven't given what surely would be the greatest game of all time a perfect score, to publishers designing contracts around paying developers on the condition of reaching a certain Metacritic score, and a select cases where the review doesn't match the score indicating some PR leaning on editorial going on, it's ultimately not worth while. There's also a sense that games reviewers are nowhere nearly as tough on AAA games than non-AAA games, and scores is one large element of that. If I was Supreme Overlord of Games Writing, I would abolish them and get people to read the review. If anyone wants to know what is the overall best game, they can wait until the usual end of year lists.

2) Abolish previews for games that have had publishers.

I can think of precisely one negative preview in the last five or so years, and it seems that almost all previews are part of the PR plans of the publishers (and with the likes of IGN First and GameInformer's covers, are explicitly PR for the publishers). This is also the area where publishers are increasingly competing with the games journalists through their own YouTube & Twitch channels, and demos at shows such as PAX and EGX. If I was Supreme Overlord of Games Writing, I would leave this segment of the market, and spending more time looking at the vast amounts of games that get released and then subsequently ignored and reviewing those, rather than powering publishers' PR machine. Let them spend money on advertising and promoting themselves, and if they want to promote on games journalist sites, they can pay $$$ like everyone else can.

Indie game discovery is, broadly speaking, the one area where YouTubers absolutely destroy games journalism. If I was an indie game developer, pretty much the only "traditional" games website I would try to contact would be Rock Paper Shotgun. I would also advocate being as tough on early access and Kickstarters as I would be for finished games. In short, more of this and less of this.

3) Editors should be more willing to shut down op-eds.

Less of a major reform this, but there's been a couple of absolute op-ed howlers that should have been stopped at the concept stage, in particular Polygon comparing Watch Dogs with the Ferguson incident, and The Escapist wondering out loud what effect the recent Gaza conflict has on video games. Kotaku also has a long, long history of such dumbness (remember that Sonic bedsheet one?). If I was Supreme Overlord of Games Journalism, I would instruct editors to police such concepts for op-eds and shut down those that would lead to dumbness.

Thus, those are my opinions. We will now return to your regularly scheduled mockery, arguments and Lime reposting anyone who agrees with him/her. (I can't believe this thread wasn't locked yesterday)

 

[gogosox82]

An interesting perspective:

It should be noted that Sommers is often critical of modern day feminism and she's wrote several books criticizing it so these statements aren't that alarming.

 

[MacNille]

It should be noted that Sommers is often critical of modern day feminism and she's wrote several books criticizing it so these statements aren't that alarming.

I have heard of those books before. Are they any good?

 

[Harlock]

An interesting perspective:

Perfect. Is the sumary of nitpicking videos + clickbait articles problem.

 

[Nephtis]

It should be noted that Sommers is often critical of modern day feminism and she's wrote several books criticizing it so these statements aren't that alarming.

Maybe, but then you have things like these...

It's not like feminists don't often go against people they perceive isn't up to their standards. Questioning what she has isn't wrong - but some people's reactions to it is.

 

[jstripes]

An interesting perspective:

Gamers are being bullied?

Right.

Just like Christians are being bullied in the US.

 

[gogosox82]

I have heard of those books before. Are they any good?

I honestly haven't read them but I have heard interviews where she talks about feminism and I was never really impressed so I never read her since I assume the same kind of ideas would be presented through her books.

 

[Intheflorsh]

"Most gamers are not politcal."

What the hell gave her that impression?

Funny that she goes on to criticize others for not having evidence after making that huge, unfounded assumption.

 

[The Llama]

Kind of sad that this all comes down to gender and equality.

 

[Oersted]

It is funny how many posters here, who defend #Gamergate, go lengths to explain why the harassment/abuse and plain hate towards women is not representative of the "movement", but a "fuck yourself" is a clear indicator how feminists are not holding up to standards.

 

[unbias]

I feel as if a "nothing stops this train" gif is needed. Seems everyone wants to keep the train moving, including those that hate the train.

Spoiler

And as I type on my tablet Gronk gets a TD, yay my fantasy team.

 

[gogosox82]

Maybe, but then you have things like these...

It's not like feminists don't often go against people they perceive isn't up to their standards. Questioning what she has isn't wrong - but some people's reactions to it is.

Well she is retweeting people who are essentially agreeing with her so its to get a sense of this abuse feminists give to women they don't feel are up to their standards. Also Sommers has said some really awful stuff about feminists in the past, so its not surprising that feminists are hostile towards her.

 

[Nephrahim]

It is funny how many posters here, who defend #Gamergate, go lengths to explain why the harassment/abuse and plain hate towards women is not representative of the "movement", but a "fuck yourself" is a clear indicator how feminists are not holding up to standards.

Like all such comparisons, you could very easily look at the hypocrisy the other way.

People are horrified by the harassment that women get in the industry, but harassing people who support Gamergate for whatever reason get a blind eye.

I assure you, Twitter is still boiling from both directions. There's a reason Zoe keeps tweeting not to attack her ex.

 

[Oersted]

Like all such comparisons, you could very easily look at the hypocrisy the other way.

People are horrified by the harassment that women get in the industry, but harassing people who support Gamergate for whatever reason get a blind eye.

I assure you, Twitter is still boiling from both directions. There's a reason Zoe keeps tweeting not to attack her ex.

He leaked nudes of her and made her sexual life a topic. She is asking for not attacking him. Something about standards.

 

[Nephrahim]

I'm just pointing out one obvious example, he's not the only case.

 

[Nephtis]

He leaked nudes of her and made her sexual life a topic. She is asking for not attacking him. Something about standards.

I don't think it was he that "leaked" her pictures. I use the term loosely as it was on a public site for a porn shoot. He also asks in his blog to not attack Zoe.

 

[Oersted]

I'm just pointing out one obvious example, he's not the only case.

The obvious example just shows very good how low #Gamergate started and why it attracts sexists. Thats all.

I don't think it was he that "leaked" her pictures. I use the term loosely as it was on a public site for a porn shoot. He also asks in his blog to not attack Zoe.

Another round of doubting nudes got leaked? Really?

 

[SapientWolf]

It is funny how many posters here, who defend #Gamergate, go lengths to explain why the harassment/abuse and plain hate towards women is not representative of the "movement", but a "fuck yourself" is a clear indicator how feminists are not holding up to standards.

It's funny how the radicals are getting so much of the attention when they are bringing the least amount of valuable discussion to the topic.

 

[Tigress]

An interesting perspective:

Why is this interesting? Cause a woman said it? Does that all the sudden mean she can't be biased and it has to be true? Cause women can very well be sexist against women. Being a woman doesn't automatically make you not biased or not sexist (against men or women).

 

[MacNille]

He leaked nudes of her and made her sexual life a topic. She is asking for not attacking him. Something about standards.

He did not leak her naked pictures. I read through all of the zoepost. No nude pics at all in there. You can access the pics at a pornsite where she uploaded them too.

 

[Sneds]

It is funny how many posters here, who defend #Gamergate, go lengths to explain why the harassment/abuse and plain hate towards women is not representative of the "movement", but a "fuck yourself" is a clear indicator how feminists are not holding up to standards.

Feminists aren't holding up to what standards?

 

[Oersted]

He did not leak her naked pictures. I read through all of the zoepost. No nude pics at all in there. You can access the pics at a pornsite where she uploaded them too.

Could you remained us why they didn't remain there?

 

[Odrion]

I don't think it was he that "leaked" her pictures. I use the term loosely as it was on a public site for a porn shoot. He also asks in his blog to not attack Zoe.

Except he hid in #burgersandfries for a month and tried to coach 4chan on how to harass Zoe & pals.

 

[MacNille]

Could you remained us why they didn't remain there?

I don't know, maybe because people found it there and then spread it for the wind? Maybe that happened?

 

[Oersted]

I don't know, maybe because people found it there and then spread it for the wind? Maybe that happened?

Why did they got spread?

Edit:

Just asking again... Why do you guys think does the hashtag attracts sexism/ mysogony and harassment?

 

[Shingro]

Fundamentally it is very difficult to build inclusion from exlusionary language. It should follow you can't reform an identity/culture (or hashtag) by calling for its death. Many things started from bad places or had leaders that went to bad places. Yes, even feminism ("The Lavender Menace" should ring bells ). We've gotten a lot of good out of feminism and the cause is good.

I do believe though that if you are devisive and insulting in pursuit of a good cause you tend to become a liability to that cause. At best you play right into the opponent's hands, at worse you actively inhibit discussion and exchange of ideas.

This is why I feel those gamers are dead articles and harassing inoccents using the #gamergate hashtag is wrong. Not an innocent? Call out an abuser? Great, whatever you like. Assume an abuser by a wide swath demographic? I think that's a mistake in the short and long term.

 

[duessano]

Why did they got spread?

Because straight men like looking at nude images of women? They weren't leaked but they shouldn't be a part of this conversation.

No more mention of images, please.

 

[Palette Swap]

An interesting perspective:

From the author of "Rape culture is a ‘panic where paranoia, censorship, and false accusations flourish’".
Interesting isn't the first word that comes to mind here.
The surprise would be if a member of a conservative think tank didn't think like that.

 

[Oersted]

Because straight men like looking at nude images of women? They weren't leaked but they shouldn't be a part of this conversation.

No more mention of images, please.

Are you serious with " Because straight men like looking at nude images of women?" These pics have been used against her.

 

[MHWilliams]

An interesting perspective:

You know what? I'm not going to play this game. You'll listen to who you want to listen to.