Support NeoGAF

[MasterHoodie]

No, but it's true that terrorist tactics are being used by some people who share their agenda and are sympathetic to their cause. As in "terroristic threats" is one of the formal definitions of what recently happened with USU.

IDK I just think it's weird to call a hashtag a terrorist movement. I know that I'm kind of slippery sloping the whole thing when I make the Al Queda comparison, but I think it's kind of like calling Twitch chat a terrorist organization. I've seen death threats and doxxing happen there, but I always think "It's the individual being a dick" and not the whole Twitch community.

 

[Orayn]

IDK I just think it's weird to call a hashtag a terrorist movement. I know that I'm kind of slippery sloping the whole thing when I make the Al Queda comparison, but I think it's kind of like calling Twitch chat a terrorist organization. I've seen death threats and doxxing happen there, but I always think "It's the individual being a dick" and not the whole Twitch community.

I'm not calling them a terrorist organization, I'm saying that recent events (in)directly involving them fit the definition of terrorism. Some people aren't comfortable with applying that term to domestic threats like Ted Nugent implying he would try to kill the president, but that's really what it is.

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

So what would do some good, then? Doing the opposite also means letting them win, because their goal is to get women out of gaming.

Isn't issuing terrorists threats a quite serious crime? I don't think they will feel like winning once they get caught...

 

[TheBlackMarvel]

IDK I just think it's weird to call a hashtag a terrorist movement. I know that I'm kind of slippery sloping the whole thing when I make the Al Queda comparison, but I think it's kind of like calling Twitch chat a terrorist organization. I've seen death threats and doxxing happen there, but I always think "It's the individual being a dick" and not the whole Twitch community.

Would it make more sense if they removed the hashtag and just called themselves the Gamer Gate Brotherhood?

 

[Gutsy Frog]

Flawed as it might be GG stuff already led to changes:

Several gaming press sites changed their disclosure and conflict of interest policies as a result of the controversy. Polygon now requires its writers to disclose contributions via Patreon, while Kotaku wholly prohibits its staff from supporting any game developers through the website. Defy Media adopted a new and stricter journalistic and ethical standards policies for all of their subsidiaries, such as The Escapist and GameFront, and Destructoid updated their ethics policies after Gearbox Software developer Anthony Burch pointed out his personal connections with the Destructoid staff over Twitter.

But still, you know what? I'm gonna openly call out all instances of "well, YOU FAKED YOUR DEATH THREATS"/"they were false flags from anti-GGers!" coming from #GG from now on, so this thread did open my eyes to something. It's a fucking terrible idea in pretty much every way unless you have undeniable proof. It's just a deflection of legitimate criticism because you don't want to admit certain people on your side are really terrible. I think GG is a flawed group but not a "hate group". I'm still not going to associate with any group in this debate though.

At the same time, I still think those who are actively "anti-GG" constitute a "group" and there's some really bad things coming from that group.

Just as GG needs to criticize their own people for their "well, your death threats are false flags/you faked them yourself!" criticism-deflection, anti-GG needs to distance itself from horrible people like MovieBob. Well, if not distance, at least call him the fuck out. Victim-blaming is not ok.

 

[GamerJM]

So what would do some good, then? Doing the opposite also means letting them win, because their goal is to get women out of gaming.

More things along the line of #StopGamerGate2014, giving the organization more bad publicity so that the general public will realize how insane they really are. What Lime suggested isn't really feasible to actually do (though I'm guessing she knows this and just posted it in sheer frustration and anger at the events), and even if it was, it would just make GamerGate angrier at the industry and it would lead to a lot of people disliking the "anti-GamerGate side," for stopping the production of video games. Also, I don't really understand how running men out of the industry would help counteract a group that tries to run women out of the industry.

 

[Fraeon]

I'm not calling them a terrorist organization, I'm saying that recent events (in)directly involving them fit the definition of terrorism. Some people aren't comfortable with applying that term to domestic threats like Ted Nugent implying he would try to kill the president, but that's really what it is.

Furthermore, despite the disorganized nature and volume of people that use the hashtag, there absolutely seems to be a core running the thing (on an 8chan created board and on IRC). So I don't really think the movement is just a hashtag.

 

[frankthurk]

So what would do some good, then? Doing the opposite also means letting them win, because their goal is to get women out of gaming.

I kinda think GG are slowly doing themselves in. Look at the news article on the BBC about massacre threats and it being tied to GG. So GG is making a name for itself but that name is misogyny and harassment.

 

[Gutsy Frog]

So what would do some good, then? Doing the opposite also means letting them win, because their goal is to get women out of gaming.

This is an utter strawman and you know it. Even ignoring the TFYC mass-donation I'm sure most people in GG have at least one female industry person that they look up to.

 

[partyphone]

yes. if someone is making death threats they should be condemned for it. i don't think anyone here is aguring anything to the contrary. bringing up a tit for tat doesn't mean that gamergate has any actual good arguments about anything.

the patreon change is a BAD change. it is the opposite of corruption. if you talk about a game or indie dev you like and you're not supporting their patreon that would be a little suspicious. so you want me to spend my money on this content but it's not good enough for you to spend yours?

 

[TommyT]

So what would do some good, then? Doing the opposite also means letting them win.

This is assuming doing the opposite means keeping the status quo, which I think isn't necessary to not have that happen (meaning we can have change in the industry and still have games being made as well as the list of events happen with both men and women).

What would exactly have to happen? I don't know particularly, especially since I've yet to come across a nice list to keep up with all the happenings of GG and SGG; but I would imagine it would start with many/most of gaming entities coming together to express their disdain for what's happening to members of their industry. Condemn the harassment, show that no good comes from doing this to people, that it's actually detrimental to gaming/people/society as a whole despite what (if any, some would argue) positive outcomes have happened from this mess.

edit: You've edited for more specificity - I don't think that particularly changes my answer as I'm not assuming we keep the status quo and/or driving women from the industry. As mentioned, I think the industry needs to show they're willing to help provide a positive environment for any person harassed and show they're not going to allow this to happen to it's members.

 

[shacklesmcgee]

Flawed as it might be GG stuff already led to changes:


But still, you know what? I'm gonna openly call out all instances of "well, YOU FAKED YOUR DEATH THREATS"/"they were false flags from anti-GGers!" coming from #GG from now on, so this thread did open my eyes to something. It's a fucking terrible idea in pretty much every way unless you have undeniable proof. It's just a deflection of legitimate criticism because you don't want to admit certain people on your side are really terrible. I think GG is a flawed group but not a "hate group". I'm still not going to associate with any group in this debate though.

At the same time, I still think those who are actively "anti-GG" constitute a "group" and there's some really bad things coming from that group.

Just as GG needs to criticize their own people for their "well, your death threats are false flags/you faked them yourself!" criticism-deflection, anti-GG needs to distance itself from horrible people like MovieBob. Well, if not distance, at least call him the fuck out. Victim-blaming is not ok.

That's a fake account by the way

https://twitter.com/nwjerseyliz/status/521299581746044929

 

[marrec]

I kinda think GG are slowly doing themselves in. Look at the news article on the BBC about massacre threats and it being tied to GG. So GG is making a name for itself but that name is misogyny and harassment.

GG did themselves in as soon as they allowed bigots like Baldwin and Milo and InternetAnarchist to lead them.

 

[Gutsy Frog]

yes. if someone is making death threats they should be condemned for it. i don't think anyone here is aguring anything to the contrary. bringing up a tit for tat doesn't mean that gamergate has any actual good arguments about anything.

the patreon change is a BAD change. it is the opposite of corruption. if you talk about a game or indie dev you like and you're not supporting their patreon that would be a little suspicious. so you want me to spend my money on this content but it's not good enough for you to spend yours?

...what? There's a huge difference between basically giving a PERSON a monthly salary and giving them a handful of money in exchange for a tangible product.

And are you saying Kotaku's new stance against plugging your friends' games (or at least admitting you're plugging a game made by a friend, as they had them do when they made them edit their past articles) isn't a good change?

 

[Orayn]

This is an utter strawman and you know it. Even ignoring the TFYC mass-donation I'm sure most people in GG have at least one female industry person that they look up to.

I meant the goals of the people sending threats, who admittedly make up a small minority of GGers.

GG on the whole is just anti-feminist and socially conservative. And no, please don't give me any bullcrap about how CH Sommers proves that "real feminism" is on their side. The vast majority of people who self-identify as feminists do not agree with Sommers on many issues at all. She doesn't represent the overall consensus of feminism any more than TERFs do.

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

This is an utter strawman and you know it. Even ignoring the TFYC mass-donation I'm sure most people in GG have at least one female industry person that they look up to.

yes. if someone is making death threats they should be condemned for it. i don't think anyone here is aguring anything to the contrary. bringing up a tit for tat doesn't mean that gamergate has any actual good arguments about anything.

the patreon change is a BAD change. it is the opposite of corruption. if you talk about a game or indie dev you like and you're not supporting their patreon that would be a little suspicious. so you want me to spend my money on this content but it's not good enough for you to spend yours?

The movement seems to be to much corrupted to be salvaged.

Maybe once a real problem with gaming journalism ethics surfaces like the few that already arised some time ago, maybe and only maybe, a honest one, not rooted on misogynistic ideas, can born. Meanwhile, GG should be erased from earth, is doing more bad than good.

 

[Jackpot]

Guardian sums up gamergate in their latest coverage.

As well as persistent low-level harassment for the past two years, the attacks stepped up a notch in August 2014 when Sarkeesian was identified as one of the key targets of “#gamergate”. Ostensibly a campaign against corruption in journalism but in practice a grassroots attack on feminist critics in gaming, Gamergate has led to at least three prominent women in gaming having to take action over threats of violence.

http://www.theguardian.com/technolo...sarkeesian-feminist-games-critic-cancels-talk

 

[Gutsy Frog]

That's a fake account by the way

https://twitter.com/nwjerseyliz/status/521299581746044929

I don't know. People who send death threats thinking it makes them good feminists are pretty unhinged, same goes for people who think death threats help GG.

 

[marrec]

Guardian sums up gamergate in their latest coverage.



http://www.theguardian.com/technolo...sarkeesian-feminist-games-critic-cancels-talk

"OH NO! More examples of how the Media has been taken over by SJWs! Time to hug my Milo doll and watch more Fox News for comfort." - Gamergate Supporter, probably

 

[Lalalandia]

...what? There's a huge difference between basically giving a PERSON a monthly salary and giving them a handful of money in exchange for a tangible product.

And are you saying Kotaku's new stance against plugging your friends' games (or at least admitting you're plugging a game made by a friend, as they had them do when they made them edit their past articles) isn't a good change?

If I employ somebody they produce goods for me that I can sell, I contribute to Patreon they produce content/games that I consume. The difference is important because as a Patreon contributer the success or failure of the person on Patreon results in no financial gain or loss to me. Thus the ethical implications are much lower and could easily have been dealt with by a simple disclosure.

 

[Gutsy Frog]

I meant the goals of the people sending threats, who admittedly make up a small minority of GGers.

GG on the whole is just anti-feminist and socially conservative. And no, please don't give me any bullcrap about how CH Sommers proves that "real feminism" is on their side. The vast majority of people who self-identify as feminists do not agree with Sommers on many issues at all. She doesn't represent the overall consensus of feminism any more than TERFs do.

I know people who support everything from gay marriage and adoption to trans rights who also support GG.

I don't think this stuff is as simple as 'right wing' and 'left wing'. I disagree with the great majority of what game journos see as 'progressive thought' and I'm as socially liberal as it gets. Then again I stopped calling myself "pro-GG" so w/e.

 

[Gutsy Frog]

"OH NO! More examples of how the Media has been taken over by SJWs! Time to hug my Milo doll and watch more Fox News for comfort." - Gamergate Supporter, probably

Do you really not see anything wrong with The Guardian's stance of "you're either with us or against us" (literally this wording, in an earlier article)? That kind of stuff is what leads to the bullying of GaymerX for having the nerve to say "we disagree with GamerGate, but there are some alright people in the movement here and there".

 

[TommyT]

"OH NO! More examples of how the Media has been taken over by SJWs! Time to hug my Milo doll and watch more Fox News for comfort." - Gamergate Supporter, probably

The OT in you is shining through. /notmeanttorhyme

 

[cabel]

By the way, it's interesting to ask Gamer Gaters, "What is the worst case scenario in which a perceived journalistic lack of integrity affects you? What has happened to you or what are you fighting to stop?"

Usually you'll never get an answer.

Because the answer is "I might buy a video game someone says was good and it was actually not good"

 

[FF Seraphim]

Guardian sums up gamergate in their latest coverage.



http://www.theguardian.com/technolo...sarkeesian-feminist-games-critic-cancels-talk

At least they are fucking calling it what it is, a god damn terror threat.

But this part:

“Forced to cancel my talk at USU after receiving death threats because police wouldn’t take steps to prevent concealed firearms at the event,” she tweeted. “Requested pat downs or metal detectors after mass shooting threat but because of Utah’s open carry laws police wouldn’t do firearm searches."

Yeah, this would of backed fired so badly if the Police did this just for her.

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

Do you really not see anything wrong with The Guardian's stance of "you're either with us or against us" (literally this wording, in an earlier article)? That kind of stuff is what leads to the bullying of GaymerX for having the nerve to say "we disagree with GamerGate, but there are some alright people in the movement here and there".

The Guardian is not taking an stance, it looks like a quite objective new coverage. They are just saying that GG is "a campaign against corruption in journalism but in practice a grassroots attack on feminist critics in gaming", which is not a lie.

 

[fantomena]

Probably already posted, but anyway:

https://twitter.com/jonrosenberg/status/522158764536119296

 

[marrec]

Do you really not see anything wrong with The Guardian's stance of "you're either with us or against us" (literally this wording, in an earlier article)? That kind of stuff is what leads to the bullying of GaymerX for having the nerve to say "we disagree with GamerGate, but there are some alright people in the movement here and there".

I really don't.

This entire thing has just been used as a cover for those who want to silence progressive voices. From the very beginning. It was never about journalistic ethics because it was never about targeting anyone but little tiny game devs or journalists who also just so happened to have progressive ideas and voices.

NeoGAF has, for as long as I've been here, been vehemently against the corruption that is obvious and widespread in our enthusiast press. That opposition never needed a faux-revolutionary hashtag movement to prop it up because everyone already agrees. Corruption is bad and there have been major shifts in the world of games journalism to correct this corruption when it gets too unstable. What gamersgate was and has been since it's inception is a way to root out 'SJW' corruption from video gaming. The problem is that it's not corruption, it's a move to the left. Public opinion in the US has had a major shift and the journalism you're seeing is reflective of that shift.

Of course, there are people who disagree with the public opinion shift. People like Adam Baldwin, for instance, hate the idea of social progress and use rhetorical speech to rally against it. So it's no wonder that a movement ostensibly started by Mr. Baldwin is dripping with hate and malice toward what everyone else sees as a good thing.

So no, I don't think there's anything wrong with what The Guardian is saying.

 

[Gutsy Frog]

The Guardian is not taking an stance, it looks like a quite objective new coverage. They are just saying that GG is "a campaign against corruption in journalism but in practice a grassroots attack on feminist critics in gaming", which is not a lie.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/13/gamergate-right-wing-no-neutral-stance

That’s the real reason why they want to spin this as an apolitical consumer movement, rather than a swelling of vicious right-wing sentiment. And there is no neutral stance to take on that – we are either with them or against them.

Hear that, centrists? You are literally worse than harassers. Also made of slime, which is nice I guess.

 

[Corto]

...what? There's a huge difference between basically giving a PERSON a monthly salary and giving them a handful of money in exchange for a tangible product.

And are you saying Kotaku's new stance against plugging your friends' games (or at least admitting you're plugging a game made by a friend, as they had them do when they made them edit their past articles) isn't a good change?

Having Patreon banned doesn't prevent any conflict of interest. A journalist funding a developer through Patreon or Kickstarter does not represent a conflict of interest, it's proof of interest. Preventing that act doesn't ensure detachment and objectivity from the journalist if there was already previous interest in funding that specific developer.

 

[Larsen B]

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/13/gamergate-right-wing-no-neutral-stance

Hear that, centrists? You are literally worse than harassers. Also made of slime, which is nice I guess.

Slimy typically means covered in slime. A film of slime.

 

[marrec]

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/13/gamergate-right-wing-no-neutral-stance

Hear that, centrists? You are literally worse than harassers. Also made of slime, which is nice I guess.

This bullshit is the kind of rhetoric that makes these hate movements THRIVE.

She is not saying that centrists are worse than harassers and you fucking know that. I get being facetious, I just did the same above. But I'm not targeting SPECIFIC PEOPLE. The same people every time and twisting their words in order to make them into some element of destruction is what has made Gamergate a pile of bullshit having sweating writhing sex with a pile of pisswater since the very beginning. Disgusting.

 

[Neuromancer]

Probably already posted, but anyway:

https://twitter.com/jonrosenberg/status/522158764536119296

Can someone make a new thread? New news and all that. I would but I'm on mobile, it's tricky to do. Here's another source:

"Feminist [Anita Sarkeesian] cancels talk at USU after guns allowed despite shooting threat"

"Prospect of guns being allowed at event deter speaker, who is critical of video games and portrayal of women."

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58521856-78/video-feminist-sarkeesian-women.html.csp

 

[RicoTheMad]

I'm pretty flabbergasted to be honest.

Here we are, a collection of people who has fought the media on the idea that a single lunatic does not have the right to represent us. When someone puts out a bomb threat or commits a terrorist act, as a group, we say "That's not right, you can't take the actions of this crazy person to be representative of a whole group of people"

Yet here we are, seeing some of the same people, using that very same tactic against people who they disagree with.

What that tells me is that I've been right not to "pick a side" this whole time. Because both "sides" are made up of crazy people who will stop at nothing to gain influence, even if it means throwing their me/you/their own under the train.

I despise the vile people who would threaten terrorism to keep people form speaking up. I also have a deep dislike for hypocrites and the people who would try to further their agenda by trying to engender hate against a group of people based on unfounded generalizations.

Color me disgusted all around.

 

[Vlade]

Do you really not see anything wrong with The Guardian's stance of "you're either with us or against us" (literally this wording, in an earlier article)? That kind of stuff is what leads to the bullying of GaymerX for having the nerve to say "we disagree with GamerGate, but there are some alright people in the movement here and there".

You read the article about the terrorism, right? That was none of your concern?

 

[FoneBone]

anti-GG needs to distance itself from horrible people like MovieBob. Well, if not distance, at least call him the fuck out. Victim-blaming is not ok.

You completely ignored this. I wonder why.

Also, fairly certain that Moviebob one is misrepresented. If you look at the posts, he says that at the exact same time he's asked about doxxing (10:34 for both). Giving he's having a large conversation with the person (and the person doesn't freak out on him) I think he may have been replying to something else.

I think so too: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.862790.21500709 (not my post.)

GaymerX were harassed into apologizing for taking a stance that was basically "we disagree with #GG but we don't think they're all irredeemable people".

This is bullshit GG spin from people who can't believe that they might have decided that fence-sitting on a hate movement was misguided without the mean SJW feminazi bullies forcing them into it.
EDIT: Ha, and he repeated that while I was writing that post.

 

[Gutsy Frog]

I really don't.

This entire thing has just been used as a cover for those who want to silence progressive voices. From the very beginning. It was never about journalistic ethics because it was never about targeting anyone but little tiny game devs or journalists who also just so happened to have progressive ideas and voices.

NeoGAF has, for as long as I've been here, been vehemently against the corruption that is obvious and widespread in our enthusiast press. That opposition never needed a faux-revolutionary hashtag movement to prop it up because everyone already agrees. Corruption is bad and there have been major shifts in the world of games journalism to correct this corruption when it gets too unstable. What gamersgate was and has been since it's inception is a way to root out 'SJW' corruption from video gaming. The problem is that it's not corruption, it's a move to the left. Public opinion in the US has had a major shift and the journalism you're seeing is reflective of that shift.

Of course, there are people who disagree with the public opinion shift. People like Adam Baldwin, for instance, hate the idea of social progress and use rhetorical speech to rally against it. So it's no wonder that a movement ostensibly started by Mr. Baldwin is dripping with hate and malice toward what everyone else sees as a good thing.

So no, I don't think there's anything wrong with what The Guardian is saying.

First of all: what you said is completely left-of-field. I'm simply saying that "you're either with us or against us" is a horrible thing to say. Is it really impossible to say that "the answer is somewhere in the middle" in this case or does that make you a "South Park republican" and thus inherently wrong?

Second: I disagree with what you're saying; I think it's a mix of the two. I think Instig8iveJournalism was dead on when he said that GGers need to stop bullshitting and saying "THIS IS NOT ABOUT POLITICS!!!!!" because it is, to an extent. But it's also not about politics. GG types clearly dislike Anita Sarkeesian-type media critics, but I think it's very wrong to say that it's ONLY about that or else the media favoritism towards people like Phil Fish wouldn't have been talked about. #GG started on /v/ and after using /v/ for nearly a decade now I can confirm that they've been hugely against game media corruption since forever. The DmC shitstorm that got Erik Kain involved in this whole thing is a recent thing and that one had nothing to do with feminism.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

Hear that, centrists? You are literally worse than harassers. Also made of slime, which is nice I guess.

She didn't say they ARE worse. She said they are more offensive TO HER. There's a major significant difference in this wording. She's saying she personally feels those who don't condemn the group (or are silently supporting it) are giving it power to do terrible things.

 

[FlyinJ]

Hear that, centrists? You are literally worse than harassers. Also made of slime, which is nice I guess.

"Hear that centrists in a hate group? You're being called out for rallying behind the flag of a hate group!"

If you don't want to be associated with a hate group, and "victimized" by choosing to do so, start a new hash tag which addresses the concerns you have that isn't full of hateful bigots.

It's that simple.

Why don't you do that?

 

[Son of Cervantes]

...what? There's a huge difference between basically giving a PERSON a monthly salary and giving them a handful of money in exchange for a tangible product.

And are you saying Kotaku's new stance against plugging your friends' games (or at least admitting you're plugging a game made by a friend, as they had them do when they made them edit their past articles) isn't a good change?

I'm still pretty pissed about Patricia Hernandez writing all those glowing articles about her friend Christine Love's games, urging people to buy them, only for Totillo to go back like a year later to add "btw she is friends and was roomies with the dev."

I don't understand how Hernandez still has a job.

 

[The Technomancer]

Where was the GG outrage at the Shadows of Mordor situation?

This is important. In the middle of this whole fiasco we had something like an ACTUAL ethical problem

 

[plufim]

So um... why are gamergaters on twitter saying that the stopgamergate hashtag supports ISIS financially? Like.... how can anyone believe something that insane.

 

[FF Seraphim]

Can someone make a new thread? New news and all that. I would but I'm on mobile, it's tricky to do. Here's another source:

"Feminist [Anita Sarkeesian] cancels talk at USU after guns allowed despite shooting threat"

"Prospect of guns being allowed at event deter speaker, who is critical of video games and portrayal of women."

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58521856-78/video-feminist-sarkeesian-women.html.csp

I am going to say this again, do not make this Utah issue a gun issue. It is not something people will win. Utah loves their gun.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

Where was the GG outrage at the Shadows of Mordor situation?

This is important. In the middle of this whole fiasco we had something like an ACTUAL ethical problem

Too busy harassing their hit list of women and women supporters. They even managed to add new names to that list such as Jim Sterling who did an actual piece on the whole Shadows of Mordor thing.

 

[Gutsy Frog]

You completely ignored this. I wonder why.


I think so too: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.862790.21500709 (not my post.)



This is bullshit GG spin from people who can't believe that they might have decided that fence-sitting on a hate movement was misguided without the mean SJW feminazi bullies forcing them into it.

https://twitter.com/the_moviebob/status/521504215114727424 this tweet

https://twitter.com/the_moviebob/status/521504287915270144 is immediately followed by this tweet. The one about "don't associate yourself with GG" came after that.

Twitter shows you exactly which tweet he was responding to. There's no way to misunderstand this. He responded to a tweet bringing up GG harassment saying that you 'don't get to complain'.

 

[tonysidaway]

At the same time, I still think those who are actively "anti-GG" constitute a "group" and there's some really bad things coming from that group.

That account is two days old and, to me at least, reads like an obvious parody. "Oh, good for you. cis prick."

I don't doubt that there are genuinely fucked up people who also hate Gamergate. They do not speak for me, even if I also hate and fear Gamergate as I believe all reasonable people must.

 

[The Technomancer]

Too busy harassing their hit list of women and women supporters. They even managed to add new names to that list such as Jon Sterling who did an actual piece on the whole Shadows of Mordor thing.

I mean, I know that, I want people who believe that GG is "about more than harassment" to respond

 

[marrec]

Too busy harassing their hit list of women and women supporters. They even managed to add new names to that list such as Jon Sterling who did an actual piece on the whole Shadows of Mordor thing.

Jim Sterling and it's hilarious that they've actively harassed the most vocal journalist against corruption. Well, I mean, hilarious in the sad clown kind of way.

 

[outunderthestars]

"Hear that centrists in a hate group? You're being called out for rallying behind the flag of a hate group!"

If you don't want to be associated with a hate group, and "victimized" by choosing to do so, start a new hash tag which addresses the concerns you have that isn't full of hateful bigots.

It's that simple.

Why don't you do that?

Or, I dunno, just follow sites and writers who share your ethical beliefs, and ignore those who don't. Why the need for a hashtag campaign?

 

[Orayn]

Where was the GG outrage at the Shadows of Mordor situation?

This is important. In the middle of this whole fiasco we had something like an ACTUAL ethical problem

The vast majority of the attention GG paid to Shadow of Mordor was directed at a Polygon article pointing out how it was weird for the game to introduce the stealth kill mechanic by having you sneak up on your wife and kiss her.

They didn't care about the WB stuff because YouTubers would never lie to us. They're our friends! Well, unless of course they're fuckin' SJWs in which case they're a bitter enemy and we need to ruin their lives and credibility however we can.