#GAMERGATE: The Threadening [Read the OP] -- #StopGamerGate2014

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, I'm referring to a whole lot more than that. Just today, for example, after the news of two more advertisers pulling out of Gamasutra, Leigh posted a whole bunch of tweets which were all later deleted. I don't know if she was drunk or what but she's clearly got some issues. It doesn't take some artifacted jpegs with too many red lines to see that.
I'm curious. What did she say in these tweets that makes her worse than Milo?
 
I have no love for Leigh but Milo is a complete whack job on all counts. The fact that GG has him in their corner actually harms their cause. Just a quick search on this guy's past articles and business endevours shows what a shady lunatic he is (seriously, go read about The Kernel).
 
I honestly feel like claiming Milo is "one of the good journalists" outright destroys any legitimate argument they might have had against Leigh.

The dude is shady as fuck on so many levels.

Well he did call Niero a bitch

*gasp* Nero actually insults people directly..? Do you have a conspiratorial chart to prove this?
 
A few weeks ago I saw the comparison of GamerGate crusaders to the Tea Party movement, that comparison is becoming more and more apt. They keep growing in power and influence.

How utterly depressing.

Both movements were hijacked by objectivist scumbags, so not a huge surprise.
 
Don't get me wrong, I don't trust Nero and I certainly think he's in it for the money and publicity himself (as is Devi Ever but that's a whole other conversation) but the guy has contacts and reach that 99% of other people in GG simply don't.

He's not ideal, but he's the best ally GG has. It's pretty obvious why people want him around so much, even if they strongly disagree with him on a lot of things.

That should tell you more about GG than anything else. When your leading light is a shit stirring polemicist fraud then people should ask themselves 'Wait maybe this isn't the noble cause I thought it was?'. To quote an old adage 'You shall be judged by the company you keep'

There have been many folks posting in here with legitimate concerns (if frequently unfocused and nonspecific) who have adopted GG as a way of expressing them. They need to recognise that pushing GG is now pushing a Trojan horse for the most toxic right wing reactionaries around Milo, Richard Delingpole, Adam Baldwin none of these people respect gamers they respect clicks.

When GGers showed that they would call at any port in their self generated storm these hacks held their noses and welcomed them with open arms. Don't mistake this for genuine sympathy, expect a chorus of 'Gamers are unfocused man children' articles from them when the vitriol dies down and GG stops generating clicks.

Edit: BTW what contacts? What reach? Milo was unemployable in London after the train wreck that was his awful 'news' site. It was only his being an awful person on twitter that saved him because Breitbatt needed some toxic assholes for Breitbart UK.
 
Edit: BTW what contacts? What reach? Milo was unemployable in London after the train wreck that was his awful 'news' site. It was only his being an awful person on twitter that saved him because Breitbatt needed some toxic assholes for Breitbart UK.

It's pretty simple actually, the right-wing has always been the source for most of Gaming's biggest PR nightmares. (If you look at guys like Jack Thompson they were generally fringe right)

Characters like Nero "sticking up" for gamers is a mutual benefit in that gamers might be seen in a more positive light by his right wing audience & nero + the other fringe right characters finally get their sleazy hands into a younger demographic. (something the right has struggled with.)

The alliance makes total sense if you look at it from that perspective imo.
 
It's pretty simple actually, the right-wing has always been the source for most of Gaming's biggest PR nightmares. (If you look at guys like Jack Thompson they were generally fringe right)

Characters like Nero "sticking up" for gamers is a mutual benefit in that gamers might be seen in a more positive light by his right wing audience & nero + the other fringe right characters finally get their sleazy hands into a younger demographic. (something the right has struggled with.)

The alliance makes total sense if you look at it from that perspective imo.

I agree for Milo and his ilk it makes perfect sense but really what does GG get out of it? Still the thought of Milo having to swallow his bile and 'apologise' to the 'yellow underpants brigade' is hilarious. I can't wait for the meltdown when his stats drop and he decides to drop the pretense of liking gamers.
 
No, I'm referring to a whole lot more than that. Just today, for example, after the news of two more advertisers pulling out of Gamasutra, Leigh posted a whole bunch of tweets which were all later deleted. I don't know if she was drunk or what but she's clearly got some issues. It doesn't take some artifacted jpegs with too many red lines to see that.


Did you read his apologies? The dude actually (paraphrasingly) said "I'm sorry, I didn't know anything about you guys and didn't understand the passion that you put into games".
He owned up to the fact that he had no idea what he was talking about and apologized for jumping to stupid conclusions. We can argue all day about whether he really meant it or not but the guy made an effort to show that he was wrong and wanted to make up for it.
Leigh still hasn't done that, by the way.

I agree with you that Nero's political views aren't cool but they're views that he's entitled to have, whether we agree with him or not. As much as I believe that he's wrong about that stuff, his opinions on things outside of GG... don't have anything to do with GG.

So basically, gamer gate is willing to forgive and forget as long as they can bond with Milo over hatred of women.

I mean "I didn't know you were so passionate about games" it the shittiest excuse ever. Really? He didn't know that gamers liked games a whole lot? It's just bullshit, and when you take that away the only thing gamer gate and Milo have in common is misogyny.
 
Two more companies pulled ads from Gamasutra over gamergate complaining?

Does someone have a link to this news?
 
The guy has some really whacked-out opinions and a lot of pro-GG disagree with his other viewpoints, but he's at least done things to try to rectify his past behavior in regards to decrying gamers.

Leigh still continues to be toxic in general to this day.

No, I'm referring to a whole lot more than that. Just today, for example, after the news of two more advertisers pulling out of Gamasutra, Leigh posted a whole bunch of tweets which were all later deleted. I don't know if she was drunk or what but she's clearly got some issues. It doesn't take some artifacted jpegs with too many red lines to see that.


I agree with you that Nero's political views aren't cool but they're views that he's entitled to have, whether we agree with him or not. As much as I believe that he's wrong about that stuff, his opinions on things outside of GG... don't have anything to do with GG.

This shit right here is the crux of all that's wrong with Gamer Gate.

Some white dude who holds some horrible views and just spews vile bullshit, but hey, he agrees with us so we just agree to disagree on those things! He's entitled to his opinion, you know!

But a woman comes in with a divergent opinion and suddenly "She's toxic!" Also, she's probably a drunk and clearly got some issues, man!
 
Not be to rude, but I don't really care what she thinks a gamer should or shoudn't be. It's just an opinion.

[snip]
Not to be rude, but your post makes it abundantly clear that you didn't digest her post properly whatsoever. In fact, your re-definition of 'gamer' is the point of the whole article - that being that the formerly exclusive, white-boy geek socially awkward basement dweller stereotype is no longer relevant and that the demographic of people who play games is changing dramatically over time.

The only difference between you and Leigh is that Leigh disowns the term entirely, while you decide to embrace it. That's it. That's literally the only difference.
 
Have you actually looked at her twitter account?
There are many screencaps and archives of her flat out directly insulting people and making all kinds of crazy tweets and later deleting them and places where she actually brags about "ending careers" among other things.

Unless I've been missing a whole lot, (and not counting the Devi Ever stuff since I'm not really caught up on that whole fiasco), Nero is just tweeting about his terrible political opinions in between GG tweets rather than actually aiming his vitriol at specific people [who aren't the main antagonists to GG].

I don't like the guy and I don't agree with much of what he says but he hasn't been acting like a flat out jerk, even if his opinions are stupid.

Lol, what?!

A quick example from Nero's Wikipedia page:

On 18 July 2012, Yiannopoulos had a public argument on Twitter with Zoe Margolis, author of Girl with a One-Track Mind. He commented: "We write about how tech is changing the world around us. You write about how many cocks you've sucked this week. Back off." and later added: "Is there a difference between writing about sex for money and having sex for money? Not really. What a grubby, humiliating way to make rent."

Do you have any example of what you accuse Leigh Alexander of doing?
 
Two more companies pulled ads from Gamasutra over gamergate complaining?

Does someone have a link to this news?

xnWdpEb.png


I don't think this has been verified by a source that doesn't have a pro-GG bias though.
 
Did you read his apologies? The dude actually (paraphrasingly) said "I'm sorry, I didn't know anything about you guys and didn't understand the passion that you put into games".
He owned up to the fact that he had no idea what he was talking about and apologized for jumping to stupid conclusions. We can argue all day about whether he really meant it or not but the guy made an effort to show that he was wrong and wanted to make up for it.
Leigh still hasn't done that, by the way.

I agree with you that Nero's political views aren't cool but they're views that he's entitled to have, whether we agree with him or not. As much as I believe that he's wrong about that stuff, his opinions on things outside of GG... don't have anything to do with GG.

I love that GamerGate will happily bring up 2+-year-old Leigh Alexander tweets but can instantly forgive what Milo said about gamers two weeks before the movement started.

As for the bolded, do you honestly think that Leigh's editorial was equivalent to Milo's vitriol against gamers? Especially given that Leigh has been active in games writing for years, whereas Milo had - by his own admittance - never even played a game until a few weeks ago?
 
As for the bolded, do you honestly think that Leigh's editorial was equivalent to Milo's vitriol against gamers? Especially given that Leigh has been active in games writing for years, whereas Milo had - by his own admittance - never even played a game until a few weeks ago?

Hey, she's a woman, she was probably a fake gamer girl all these years. The proof: she personally attacked all the poor, persecuted gamers! Milo is a man, he is genetically equipped to "get" gaming.
 
This whole mess has confirmed how much I don't want to be called a gamer. Previously, I wouldn't have identified myself as such to people I know in real life due to the perception of gamers as anti-social, self-obsessed, immature people who don't have real lives. The actions of GamerGaters have just confirmed that the stereotype of what a "gamer" is has some basis in reality.

Finally read a chunk of this thread... this is the only post that sums up how I feel. No matter how well-intentioned the movement is (which it's arguably not, but whatever), GG is ultimately propelled by what is perhaps the loudest and most annoying nerd contingent on the internet.

It doesn't just make me not want to be associated with the word "gamer." It reveals how utterly sad big portions of the internet have become in 2014 and how content people are to fritter away their lives on meaningless virtual wars over what amounts to bickering about consumer products.
 
Not to be rude, but your post makes it abundantly clear that you didn't digest her post properly whatsoever. In fact, your re-definition of 'gamer' is the point of the whole article - that being that the formerly exclusive, white-boy geek socially awkward basement dweller stereotype is no longer relevant and that the demographic of people who play games is changing dramatically over time.

The only difference between you and Leigh is that Leigh disowns the term entirely, while you decide to embrace it. That's it. That's literally the only difference.
Ah, okay, thinking about it like that changed my opinion of the piece. Probably should have given it a second read before posting my thoughts
 
Hey, she's a woman, she was probably a fake gamer girl all these years.

You know, when people say this in earnest (I know you're not) it cracks me up. Like, in this very thread, people were trying to discount her knowledge of games when this is the same girl that picked the Turbo-Grafx as her favorite console of the 16-bit generation. If that isn't some good cred, i don't know what is!
 
Two more companies pulled ads from Gamasutra over gamergate complaining?

Does someone have a link to this news?

So is that 3 now that have dropped Gamasutra? That article really did some damage and wasn't very well thought out.

Amazing that the whole Gamergate thing is still going strong. In fact this thread itself has almost become like a community thread with some posters racking up huge post counts. Some of you are right into this stuff.

PjghHr6.jpg
 
What I'm trying to understand is why it even matters at this point whether Leigh is some sort of awful person. She's one woman and a lot of all this has been "focused" (In the sense that it's often hard to figure out how it connects to the larger GG concept) on a single article she wrote. I mean, OK, so you try to get advertisers to pull out from a single developer focused web site. Then what? How does that further anything?
 
Woah I'm number one by a large margin! Not used to that.
To be fair I usually only post in manga/smashgaf, threads notorious for people with thousands of posts.
 
What I'm trying to understand is why it even matters at this point whether Leigh is some sort of awful person. She's one woman and a lot of all this has been "focused" (In the sense that it's often hard to figure out how it connects to the larger GG concept) on a single article she wrote. I mean, OK, so you try to get advertisers to pull out from a single developer focused web site. Then what? How does that further anything?

Think of all the good they can do with that clout!
 
So is that 3 now that have dropped Gamasutra? That article really did some damage and wasn't very well thought out.

Can't wait for the Gamergate gaming media utopia. No more controversial opinion pieces, only copy-pasted press releases. At last, we'll be free from writers we might not agree with!
 
What I'm trying to understand is why it even matters at this point whether Leigh is some sort of awful person. She's one woman and a lot of all this has been "focused" (In the sense that it's often hard to figure out how it connects to the larger GG concept) on a single article she wrote. I mean, OK, so you try to get advertisers to pull out from a single developer focused web site. Then what? How does that further anything?

They're trying to make an example out of Gamasutra (and trying to with Polygon/RPS/etc. too). So that these and other sites will be afraid to run articles that GG people dislike in the future, lest they lose their source of income. The goal is censorship.
 
What I'm trying to understand is why it even matters at this point whether Leigh is some sort of awful person. She's one woman and a lot of all this has been "focused" (In the sense that it's often hard to figure out how it connects to the larger GG concept) on a single article she wrote. I mean, OK, so you try to get advertisers to pull out from a single developer focused web site. Then what? How does that further anything?

#GG doesn't have a plan they just have spite.
 
What I'm trying to understand is why it even matters at this point whether Leigh is some sort of awful person. She's one woman and a lot of all this has been "focused" (In the sense that it's often hard to figure out how it connects to the larger GG concept) on a single article she wrote. I mean, OK, so you try to get advertisers to pull out from a single developer focused web site. Then what? How does that further anything?

It's about intimidation, mostly. "Don't write about things we don't agree with or we will get advertisers to pull out." The fact that the major targets are labeled as "SJW" just goes to show that the vast majority of all this has nothing to do with ethics in journalism, but rather trying to silence certain kinds of voices in the industry.
 
What I really, really don't understand is where they see the "SJW" menace coming from. I'd like triple-A games to become more progressive, but I don't see it at all. Is there any hint showing triple-A games adopting more "left-wing" / "progressive" messages? Any triple-A game that has been "corrupted" by the "SJWs"?

From my point of view, big games never changed and keep using the same old safe tropes. Are they seeing something I don't see?
 
They're trying to make an example out of Gamasutra (and trying to with Polygon/RPS/etc. too). So that these and other sites will be afraid to run articles that GG people dislike in the future, lest they lose their source of income. The goal is censorship.

It's about intimidation, mostly. "Don't write about things we don't agree with or we will get advertisers to pull out." The fact that the major targets are labeled as "SJW" just goes to show that the vast majority of all this has nothing to do with ethics in journalism, but rather trying to silence certain kinds of voices in the industry.

See, that's the thing. It's hard to see it as anything beyond all that. But none of that fits in with what GG is supposed to "really" be about. Rather, it all basically confirms what many GG detractors have been saying the entire time. It may scare some groups into line with them, but it atomizes the shreds of any credibility the "movement" may have once had. It seems count to any sort of long term changes in how things work. Hence:

#GG doesn't have a plan they just have spite.

There is likely a lot of truth here.
 
Can't wait for the Gamergate gaming media utopia. No more controversial opinion pieces, only copy-pasted press releases. At last, we'll be free from writers we might not agree with!

Don't worry, Youtube will take over. There is nothing objectionable about Youtubeers *cough* Shadow or Mordor deals *cough*
As soon as nobody actually writes about games anymore and just copies press releases we will enter the golden age of gaming.
I even have a clever new idea for a website: I just write templates for reviews and the users can fill in the rest and give the game the score it deserves.
Here is a small sample:

"The driving mechanics are really ______ which leeds to _____ experience. All in all this is a ______ game and the visuals look ______. Overall I give this game a __/10"
 
What I really, really don't understand is where they see the "SJW" menace coming from. I'd like triple-A games to become more progressive, but I don't see it at all. Is there any hint showing triple-A games adopting more "left-wing" / "progressive" messages? Any triple-A game that has been "corrupted" by the "SJWs"?

From my point of view, big games never changed and keep using the same old safe tropes. Are they seeing something I don't see?

Pretty much, "SJW" seems to mean a different thing to every GG member I've seen. Someone on Rab Flarence's Amusment Arcade piece was literally trying to argue that "SJW's" were the ones slamming The Last of Us' near-universally praised handling of Woman and Minorities, which is some straight bizzaro world shit.
 
What I really, really don't understand is where they see the "SJW" menace coming from. I'd like triple-A games to become more progressive, but I don't see it at all. Is there any hint showing triple-A games adopting more "left-wing" / "progressive" messages? Any triple-A game that has been "corrupted" by the "SJWs"?

From my point of view, big games never changed and keep using the same old safe tropes. Are they seeing something I don't see?

No, it's just because this time around the big games are being called out on their tired clichés and over-reliance on the same trite bullshit we've seen for so many years. Add to that that the discussion is becoming more and more prominent, thanks to everyone and most especially prominent figures like Sarkeesian, Brice, Alexander, Quinn, etc. rocking the boat.

In fact, one could argue that big games have become less and less experimental and that they rely more and more on using the same formula again and again. Just look at how it's such a huge deal for a game to have a female protagonist (Remember Me, AC: Unity, etc.) or even a female character on the cover of the game (Last of Us, Bioshock Infinite). I would claim that the big games have deteriorated and grown stale in large part to their fears of financial risks.
 
As this has gone on, GGers have become more and more transparent about their true goals. They're not even pretending to be about ethics anymore. They ignore real ethical concerns while attacking "social justice warriors" and feminism. Just a few posts ago someone was here saying how this whole thing turned them off of feminism, which would have nothing to do with anything if GG was really about ethics.

Unfortunately there are still a lot of people who only follow tangentially and believe the rumours of corruption and are caught up in this hate machine. So there are a lot of good people behind GG with good intentions but they aren't paying attention to what GG is really doing and can't be bothered to actually do their own research on the claims GG made to recruit them. So they are unknowingly supporting a bad movement set on fighting against social progress in gaming.

The entire thing makes me really sad.
 
Maybe we've been understanding their issue with "ethics" all wrong.

It's not that they're in favor of ethics, but fundamentally against them.


It all suddenly makes so much sense..
 
Do you guys think we still need a specific #gamergate thread? Frankly this one has been running in circles for awhile now, and we'd be fine closing it down, but we want to have space for people to talk about it if they want to.

Let me know what you think.
 
I think most have been said really from both sides by now. We can keep discussing new tweets, but it would come down to the same thing in the end. I don't see that changing for now or any side coming with new arguments.
 
Do you guys think we still need a specific #gamergate thread? Frankly this one has been running in circles for awhile now, and we'd be fine closing it down, but we want to have space for people to talk about it if they want to.

Let me know what you think.
IMO, better to have a singular focused thread rather than new threads popping up when some new Gamergate-related thing happens
 
i wish it wouldn't have been needed 5 weeks ago when it first blew up and everyone had to be convinced again and again and again that they were joining a misogynistic, sexist movement.

I guess the topic will require "a new thread" once the next company succumbs to the coordinated complaints. But hopefully such an event won't occur.
 
i wish it wouldn't have been needed 5 weeks ago when it first blew up and everyone had to be convinced again and again and again that they were joining a misogynistic, sexist movement.

I guess the topic will require "a new thread" once the next company succumbs to the coordinated complaints. But hopefully such an event won't occur.
Yeah, a new thread pointing to this thread might be better than abandoning it, with general updates in the OP concerning the ongoing controversy.
 
A friend of mine just told me that he's been wanting to read up on the issue. It would be nice to have an ongoing summary of key events - with links and evidence where needed - for people in that situation. If we have new threads for new news, being able to include a link to the summary would be helpful.

New threads will have greater visibility. People will glean information from the thread title - this one doesn't say much - and they won't tune it out because they've seen it before. That will probably generate a lot more thread whining as well.
 
What is it that you don't like about these so-called feminists? What have they done? And how would you typically align yourself as in terms of feminist values?

I think fundamentally I'm a humanist and egalitarian. I'm for equal rights and equal opportunity but not necessarily equal outcome. I'm not particularly in favor of affirmative action especially academically but also not particularly against. I prefer attempting to change culture much lower down such as with Gir Smarts/Women in Science programs or puzzle toys for boys and girls, welfare and mentorship programs - things that resolves root causes over enforcing an expected distribution.

I believe in data, and right now that means men and women - as a population - have differing physical characteristics and personal/social values so it is unreasonable to expect perfectly even distribution though we should be expect a trend towards it.

I find that modern feminism isn't self critical enough, lacks basic scientific rigor and often asks the wrong questions like how can we fix X instead of are there any underlying causes/trends we're missing with respect to X. I feel that modern feminism - or at least what I see of it goes against my personal values including equality, inclusiveness freedom of expression - especially artistic expression - especially when offensive.

I find that people who are quick to publicly identify as feminist are often cliquish and often tend to group-think/bandwagon without doing much personal research or shout buzzwords without much thought.

I find myself agreeing with a lot of issues brought up by feminists but not their proposals for dealing with it or their reasoning. Like with Anita I agree that there is a problem with the portrayal of women in video games but I am unhappy at how difficult it is to have a discussion critiquing it without being called an apologist or misogynist or being told how I'm not a true feminist.

I feel that feminism as a term implies a female perspective and, at least in Canada, we've reached a point where women are well off enough that there exists room re visit some of these issues from the male side for a complete picture. I feel that feminists who are against this are just as bigoted as those fundamentally against feminism.

I feel that those who claim feminism is already or can cover these issues are trying to stretch the definition of a label beyond its usefulness.

I therefore cannot find it in me to identify as a feminist except around people I am already familiar or trust/respect enough and then only if we agree on a less radical definition thereof.
 
Finally read a chunk of this thread... this is the only post that sums up how I feel. No matter how well-intentioned the movement is (which it's arguably not, but whatever), GG is ultimately propelled by what is perhaps the loudest and most annoying nerd contingent on the internet.

It doesn't just make me not want to be associated with the word "gamer." It reveals how utterly sad big portions of the internet have become in 2014 and how content people are to fritter away their lives on meaningless virtual wars over what amounts to bickering about consumer products.

Thankfully, it's not being a 'gamer' that causes poor behavior controls but character disturbance. Antisocial, narcissistic, and histrionic personality disorders make up something like 5% of the population and full blown psychopathy ~1%.

Most of them aren't criminals but some of them are gamers/feminists/left wingers/right wingers and so forth. You learn to spot them by observing their abusive traits rather than explicit politics.

sPzFb6u.jpg


Source
 
What's stopping you, exactly? We had a big old thread about Youtubers and that Shadow of Mordor stuff. If there's news about a gaming press scandal, people can post a thread and talk about it. If you have a more general critique of the gaming press, or suggestions for improving it that have nothing to do with #gamergate, feel free to start a thread. We've had plenty of threads like that.

Well will wait when this whole gamergate thing is over and things have calmed down.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom