Complaining about two allegedly blocked comments, complaining about sex negativity and then asking to ignore the blog which supports your "point"... I have to admit, I´m amused.
Regarding the tweets, where are the actual points?
#GAMERGATE: The Threadening [Read the OP] -- #StopGamerGate2014
- Thread starter besada
- Start date
- Status
Complaining about two allegedly blocked comments, complaining about sex negativity and then asking to ignore the blog which supports your "point"... I have to admit, I´m amused.
Regarding the tweets, where are the actual points?
...okay.
Explain to me how this isn't basically, "I'm not saying that he did it, but I'm saying that he did it." She even updated it with a paragraph that says "hey now, this article basically says I think he did it, but that's not fair and I apologize."
http://kotaku.com/a-different-way-to-respond-to-a-rape-accusation-update-1605542083
REGARDLESS, it has nothing to do with GamerGate. But yes, I think this article is 1000 times worse than her not disclosing that she dated someone in the industry once or that she was someone else's roommate. I think this article is irresponsible.
Son of Cervantes
Member
At no point did I ever say this proved GamerGate was good or should exist. You're willfully misrepresenting everything I've said. This is nuts...
PHOENIXZERO
Member
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Aren't there some new corruption scoops to be found?
Steve Youngblood
Member
The issue has been acknowledged. Action has been taken by Kotaku. Reasonable people agree that there was a conflict of interest.
NoCryingUntilTheEnd
Banned
Well I mean, if that's what a GamerGater is saying is currently an issue, then I think it's understandable for it to still be discussed in the GamerGate thread.
That being said, I haven't seen GG folk bring that issue up in a long while, so I think they've all moved on.
eBay Huckster
Member
...and your position that this Hernandez story was an unaddressed issue currently facing game journalism is what, exactly?
Gutsy Frog
Banned
What do you mean?
A lot more than a few times. The one that sticks out to me is the Phil Fish hack because the time between rehashing was so short. At regular intervals someone would post an image "Hey did anyone see this? I think Phil Fish may have hacked himself." Replies explained how CDNs work and the image makes no sense. The thread flipped, some minutes go by, then the image is posted again
Then people get exasperated, "God we talked about this so many times already." and the poster (who may have legitimately wondering and not a troll) feels like they are being yelled at and tensions increase. Ugh. Sometimes the format of forums sucks.
Son of Cervantes
Member
You didn't actually read my posts, did you?
Hemi-PoweredDrone
Member
And of course there's the old "How can there be racism if we have a black president!" Then shit like GG or Ferguson (for the record, I am in no way equating the two, just using them as two completely separate examples) comes on and they keep trying to say it never was about race or gender. Bullshit. I may be a white male, but I can see when this shit happens it's wrong and that it is at the very least rooted in bigotry.
It seems like your mocking of it is keeping it going, at least to an extent.
eBay Huckster
Member
If you didn't think it was unaddressed and/or currently relevant, why were you bringing her up as if Kotaku didn't take any action?
I agree with you that she should've disclosed the information. I'm not a particular fan of her writing style. I see that they added a disclosure and don't see anyone from that time period complaining that harm was done or that they were mislead. So. Where do we take the conversation from here? Kotaku has updated guidelines from that time period about the expectations for their writers. Personally I don't read the site because in the past I didn't like the style of writing they did, so I'm not trying to defend them, I'm just wondering what the expected outcome of arguing about is.
Thought so, good for him.
Nope, it was a question. I hadn't heard of his turnaround and I thought it was strange for a guy who had promoted so much ignorance to be preaching to people about this. Two other users told me that he'd turned himself around though (without the attitude).
You brought up the point, Steve acknowledged that it was sketchy. What else, exactly, do you want? The problem with you devoting a ton of posts to it, is it looks remarkably like you're trying to create a mountain out of a tiny pile of dust on the ground. A reasonable response to Hernandez's writing ranges from not reading her anymore, to writing a stern letter to Kotaku and refusing to read them anymore.
So, given that there's general agreement regarding Hernandez and that she shouldn't have been hyping a game from someone she was involved with, what's left to discuss? I assume it's terribly important, given that you've just called a mod a jerk.
So let's hear it.
Lalalandia
Member
This, which is why I'm glad we have mods to step in and point out when a poster is stuck in a loop (guilty as charged). Repetition of points discussed over and over is thread poison, I was unaware of the PH stuff so I am now better informed but that was like 5 pages back ever since it's been in a loop. This a thread prone to passion I don't envy the mods job keeping it civil and on track.
Son of Cervantes
Member
You didn't actually read my posts, did you?
The Blackrose
Member
Like... I can't say anything further just because of how ridiculous it sounds.
Son of Cervantes
Member
Are you threatening to ban me for saying someone was being a jerk...? Really...?
He was implying (well, basically outright stating) that I was saying "this Hernandez thing from two years ago proves GamerGate is right and we should all join it." I thought it was a very mild rebuke on my part, since I find GamerGate repugnant and hated the idea that I was being associated with it.Whereas what I said (and if you look at my previous posts in this thread, you'll see I even mentioned this) that this is yet another in a long line of screw-ups by Hernandez (I also mentioned the Cards Against Humanity article she wrote, which she actually was ordered to rewrite by Stephen Totilo), and that I don't understand how she seems to do these things constantly with no repercussions to her. Like I said, it's like she's made of teflon.
Lalalandia
Member
NeoGAF is apparently the issue because we close down 'debate' by not turning everything into the hateful slur Olympics like the home of GG 8chan. If only those poor souls were allowed to spew half baked ill informed opinions with a dash of bigotry until everyone sensible leaves then we could reach a consensus.
Like... I can't say anything further just because of how ridiculous it sounds.
RicoTheMad
Banned
This. Honestly as consumers we need to keep our eyes open. At the end of the day the media will try to do what gets them the most money, whether as a company, or as an individual writer/entity.
It's our job as consumers to hold them accountable. I personally curb my game site readership based on my views of their staff, and I know others do the same. The problem is that sometimes people get too attached to personalities and often will take a defensive attitude, as if someone saying "this writer did X bad thing" somehow makes their fan a bad person.
I think transparency is a worthy goal and that whatever noise is coming out of #gamergate at this point is only vitriol. I originally thought the tag could be saved and turned to some better purpose (like improving the gamedev community), but its obvious to me that just like the thing they wanted to fight, there are people with agendas using it to push their own message to the masses and it is corrupt or pretty much not a good pedestal to get any discussion heard, despite any good intentions.
Sadly though, the problem is that there is no other unifying group or watchdogs keeping tabs on the stuff they claim to want to do. I wonder, is there a need for a regulatory body or something? The game industry is quite big these days, yet the infrastructure it was built on dates as far back as to when games were something a small percentage of people played.
*shrug* Maybe we need to ditch game sites completely and use Steam Reviews and Curation. "ate a banana and it gave me herpes. 11/10"
Anton Sugar
Member
Such a joke.
Fitting that #GAMERGATE supporters are trying to rally behind the video and people like Jennie Bharaj.
FF Seraphim
Member
So I took a break from this thread and started to watch some Mr. Rogers, because every once in a while you need some Mr. Rogers in your life. I think that is what #GG members need, they need to watch some Mr. Rogers, then hopefully they will understand that:
NeoGAF is a journalism site?
I have no idea why Neogaf was mentioned.
Son of Cervantes
Member
Pretty much. I avoid Polygon since I dislike Kuchera and Gies. Kuchera for his weird Erik Kain meltdown, Gies for his acerbic Twitter persona and what I consider to be generally poor reviews.
PumpkinSpice
Banned
It's a conspiracy! #Benghazi
plagiarize
Banned
The disclosures have been added. The issue has been addressed. If you want them to have been added earlier than months ago then go build a time machine.
Seriously try to find an issue with game journalism that doesn't involve a woman and who she might have slept with. It won't be hard at all. There are plenty of much more worrying things going on. If you looked past the gender wars and truly focused on issues with gaming coverage you'd see problems much more worthy of your time and focus than an already addressed issue with a story from years ago about an obscure indie game.
Still can't get into e3
Gutsy Frog
Banned
The recent trend of people making Youtube videos analyzing games in-depth resulted in some pretty fantastic commentary (admittedly I'm pretty biased towards the /v/-spawn channels (conflict of interest))
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkhDrngAQZ0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uL7u8uFwa8I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOHxJ4gGnIc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dNPxhvCAWg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZV1u8FMsb5I
Zuhzuhzombie!!
Member
Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but last I read (possibly a year or so ago?) he was doing some kind of book/speaking tour where he lamented about how he was unfairly bullied.
If that is not the case then good for him I suppose.
I bet there are people who feel that, if 8-chan is GG's headquarters, NeoGAF is Anti-GG's headquarters.
Calling members jerks is a violation of the ToS, something for which I frequently ban, including posters who I think are fantastic posters generally.
But I'm more than happy to let Steve address you on the issue.
To be fair, it seemed like several people were downplaying the issue, which is why the discussion went on for so long.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Are you threatening to ban me for saying someone was being a jerk...? Really...?
Whereas what I said (and if you look at my previous posts in this thread, you'll see I even mentioned this) that this is yet another in a long line of screw-ups by Hernandez (I also mentioned the Cards Against Humanity article she wrote, which she actually was ordered to rewrite by Stephen Totilo), and that I don't understand how she seems to do these things constantly with no repercussions to her. Like I said, it's like she's made of teflon.
My sarcastic tone is merely employed to denote a loss of patience. And those responses weren't directed at you. I was earnestly reading the posts that you and RicoTheMad were making about your concerns with Hernandez. I'm happy to concede your points. There was a conflict of interest. That was bad. We had a conversation about it. It reached a point where everything that really needed to be said was said. If people want to focus on unethical behavior, I was noting that now would be the time to move on to another topic, as the Hernandez discussion had been exhausted.
Despite what my more recent sarcastic posts might suggest, I was trying to be reasonable earlier. But I became less so when people took my suggestion to move on as a sign of trying to silence legitimate points being raised by the movement instead of trying to move on from what had become an unproductive, circular dialogue. We had practically devoted pages now to a weeks-old #GG issue that was related to a years old transgression. Yes, Hernandez fucked up. Kotaku acknowledged that. If their response wasn't satisfactory to you, then so be it. But it doesn't seem like there's much left to discuss when it's agreed that there was an ethical violation there.
I understand that you don't align with #GG. I'm not accusing you of doing so. If you have other concerns, by all means, talk about them. I just think that the conversation about Hernandez and Love has been exhausted.
The only dog I have in this fight was apprehension to a moderator pushing people off an example that supports a side of the argument he was against. As I only rose up to stand up against the bully pulpit I felt was being asserted I will not slink back down to my comfortable 0.00001 post per day average.
Son of Cervantes
Member
This issue had absolutely zero to do with gender wars, it was about conflicts of interest, disclosure, etc.
At any rate, as has been mentioned numerous times now by other posters, everyone considers the issue resolved with the added disclosures, so I guess we can move on. I think most every reasonable person agrees with me that there was a breach of ethics but we just differ on the level of egregiousness, and I can understand that.
Thanks. I'm sorry, I misunderstood and thought the post was being aimed at me and saying I was trying to use the Hernandez thing to justify GamerGate's existence. I apologize for saying you were being a jerk.
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.
Haha, I realize this thread moves at breakneck speeds and I'm late for this, but I find it hilarious that someone would actually believe that's a real twitter account. A nameless 'girl' whose description is "Just a girl who believes in TRUE social justice." with zero actual humans in follow list and only ever tweeted about gamergate. I got a bridge and a monorail to sell to you folks...
Yeah it's weird. And it's just this thread talking about this stuff. Like what?
I love stuff like this, my favorite being the Extra Credits guys. This is why I support them, and Tropes vs Women, and others, so we get more of this type of content about games. The days where most of what you'd read about games were: Sound: 4/5, Controls 4/5, etc, those were the dark ages of gaming journalism IMO. That gamergate seems to push reviewers more and more in that direction is one reason I really dislike it.
Seeing as bigot and racist in the US are generally tied to KKK / White Power / the folks who lynched black men for having the "audacity" to be seen in public with a white woman - it's pretty saddening to me that we throw those words around towards people who disagree with us. While people still do get riled up (and rightfully so); it's a far cry from where those terms originally got their connotations from.
Eh, I have a much longer spiel for this, but the tl;dr version is that
a) I think it is safe to say that those words are thrown around for damn well near anything when it comes to online discussions. Because scoring points is more important than anything else, and the slurs can be used to try to shut down an argument by forcing the other person to have to defend the assertion made rather than talking about the substance of their argument. I don't find that really OK in many ways, and frankly, those of us that are arguing against GG don't really need to even go there. I think we have ample enough valid points and criticism that we don't need to drop to using insults to make ourselves feel better about our own damn righteousness.
b) young men 18-49 are sort of freaking out that they will not be the dominant economic force in this country within 15 years (women are on-pace to control the majority of wealth in the world by 2030, and 2025ish for the USA) and thus are wholly unprepared to no longer be catered to.
It makes all the damn economic sense in the world to start taking a young middle-upper class (primarily white) woman's perspective into consideration and hell, even make it the main consideration. They're going to be the single biggest source of disposable income in 10-20 years. As a guy, I can't exactly decry them; they've been catering to me for most of my life. Who the hell am I to get all upset that they get their time in the sun?
I would also like some clarification on why people would put Neogaf on that list. Is Neogaf the headquarter of anti-gg? How does that even work with it being an open forum?
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
This is actually the only video game forum I frequent that is anti-GG.
These are the kinds of things people were against before this GamerGate hate movement shouted down everyone else.
I just made a thread about the Games Media Awards. Criticism of this will soon be grabbed, packaged, and manufactured with hyperbole and viciousness to suit a negative cause.
I wish people still talked about the real problems people have with the system that gaming journalists operate in.
Why is the Games Media Awards still a thing?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=912923
I just made a thread about the Games Media Awards. Criticism of this will soon be grabbed, packaged, and manufactured with hyperbole and viciousness to suit a negative cause.
I wish people still talked about the real problems people have with the system that gaming journalists operate in.
Why is the Games Media Awards still a thing?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=912923
I would love these three women to sit down and be read every single post that caused a user to get banned on this thread and give their opinion on it.
Then I'd like them to explain why it's "not right" what NeoGAF is doing.
Lalalandia
Member
You just don't know about all the secret cabals, I just lowered Ireland's income tax in the OT IRC, we control all.........Who makes Steve Guttenberg a star?
How well can this fill out my "Women Against Feminism" bingo card?
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Is this the same guy who made the arrogant and obnoxious remarks about the Xbox One's original always-online policies?
It is. People can change?
I have seen threads on gamergate places that are just full of people trashing neogaf, and someone posted earlier they saw an 8chan talking about attacking the site. It is really odd I don't get it either.
- Status