Support NeoGAF

[SolidSnakex]

if anyone cares, here's Richard Lewis (the Breitbart guy) talking about this issue

For those that can't or haven't watched it, he said that it's absolutely wrong that there's only one woman on the panel. He brought up some poll that apparently only 11% of prominent members of game developers are women, so even if we went by that small figure there should still be more on that panel.

 

[Northeastmonk]

Geoff didn't select the judges, just which outlets would be represented

He's sorta tied to the name. Any outlier would want him to answer to this. I guess I associate it more with him. He is a big part of its marketing and we know he's the face behind the voice.

 

[benicillin]

For those that can't or haven't watched it, he said that it's absolutely wrong that there's only one woman on the site. He brought up some poll that apparently only 11% of prominent members of game developers are women, so even if we went by that small figure there should still be more on that panel.

And then goes on to talk about how people making a big deal out of this are mentally unstable like Brianna Wu. So, you know, he was almost there.

 

[Moonlight]

Didn't they just send their EIC, then why is this thread even a thing?

Atleast if it's only about shitting on the game awards when the real "problem" is that there's almost no women in the higher positions at these video game outlets.

The system is flawed. TGA has the position to set standards and curate the panel deciding who wins their awards. It exaggerates a problem within the critical community and if no one with the power to enforce these things make it happen, nothing changes.

 

[BajiBoxer]

With the gender imbalance in the industry as a whole, I can see how a selection process that doesn't specifically seek out women could end up with such an awful ratio. It's too bad :-(

 

[Gotdatmoney]

I dont care who you are I hire you based on your experience thats it.

You dont actually believe that's how it works in the real world do you?

 

[CryptiK]

I know you havent said it. I'm trying to get you to recognize your argumemt is saying the same thing. Things are inherently designed to pick white males even when merit is the same. So how do you solce that issue?

well you certainly dont do the same thing that is causing the problem. Someome earlier posted an article about blind auditions where the person couldnt actually be seen. Thats a fantastic idea and if it could be worked into other areas of work then that would be even better.

You dont actually believe that's how it works in the real world do you?

This is my opinion on how it SHOULD be done just like how everyone is sharing theirs.

 

[Sephiroth_VII]

I said affirmative action in regards to quotas. Quotas of women, of indegenous people etc.

But honestly this whole "its not the right way" is always followed by no legitimate solution to the issue. And it always ignores the fact that the way the system is right now is inherently designed to be unfair. These biases will forever remain unless you make an active stance to do it differently. So I ask you again, what is a legit solution, because quotas while not perfect do infact still achieve a better mix than nothing.

Maybe because it's not an easy problem to solve, and picking the easy "solutions" causes more problems than it solves? I would suggest letting actual experts come up with the solutions, instead of relying on random people with childish Final Fantasy-inspired usernames on the Internet. I don't know, it just seems a tad silly. It's frustrating, but admitting to your own incompetence is the first step to solving this kind of thing. You don't always have the necessary knowledge to solve every problem you come across.

I seem to be just repeating the same things over and over again, so I'll leave this thread for now. I might drop in again tomorrow if I see any new arguments, and I will certainly read and comment if anyone bothers to look up those sources I was hoping for.

if you had a fucking bucket full of mixed colored m&m's of equal taste, don't you think it would be a little fucking weird to JUST take the red ones?

Now make them people, and it's racism.

If 90% of the M&M's are red, is it not racist to pick out an even number of each colour?

Also, some of the M&M's are bigger than the others, and use higher quality chocolate. Obviously, most of the M&M's are red, just because there are more of them. You are only allowed to take 32, the rest will be discarded. There are 100 to choose from. Do you take an even number of each colour?

 

[HueyFreeman]

To all those proclaiming a meritocracy, how the fuck are you assessing the merit of the selected members vs. those who were not selected? Stop it - unless you're able to walk us through all 34 selected members and all those not selected. Just say what you really feel: you feel increasingly threatened by a world that wants the actual diversity of the human species to be reflected on a day to day basis, PARTICULARLY in a medium where diversity has been so historically restricted, and you're acting out.

This panel, as so many examples before it in the tech industry, highlights what we absolutely already know for sure: lack of women in game criticism. It may also suggest differential access to this panel for those that do exist, but that's unclear. But BOTH ARE THE SAME PROBLEM.

 

[Tomohawk]

if you had a fucking bucket full of mixed colored m&m's of equal taste, don't you think it would be a little fucking weird to JUST take the red ones?

Now make them people, and it's racism.

You just made me crave racism.

 

[Finale Fireworker]

Your right thats an awful analogy. Who should get the job as a head chef at a 5 star redtraunt

1. The woman with 10 years experience.
2. The guy with 1 year experience

Spoiler number one because she is more qualified. Now flip it

1. Guy with 10 years experience
2. Woman with 1 year.

Who now? Number 1 again more qualified.

This is an awful analogy. You are applying measurements based on tangible performance to abstract perspective-based skills. You think cooking a steak is at all related to how somebody judges the merits and shortcomings of a piece of art? It's also meaningless, because somebody can be a lousy cook for ten years and somebody can be an excellent cook for one. And don't say that this is unlikely, because virtually every jobfield has disparities like this.

Just because you've been doing it for longer doesn't mean you're doing it better. Just look at doctors for Christ's sake. Old doctors are notoriously out of the loop on advancements in medicine and their practice and patients suffer immensely from their outdated perceptions of medicine. In a field that moves as fast as medicine, somebody who has been practicing for five years is probably a better doctor than somebody who has been practicing for fifty.

Your black and white understanding of capability and skill is a fallacy you should stop humoring.

 

[vin-buc]

Are there any women who believed to be qualified but were denied the position because of their gender? Or can it be proven that women were willfully not selected because of their gender?

If not - WHY is this an issue??? I just don't get the purpose of this - there was no problem to begin with. It's not a problem when the gender that is supposedly getting effected by this doesn't give a s***. "We will only participate if it's a 50/50 split" or "please withdraw us if it's not 50/50" - they are the ones MAKING this an issue. In fact I think they should be blacklisted for this and future events.

Also - how can something be 50/50 split if the ratio of men:women working in this industry is not 1:1. That would be incredibly lop-sided.

 

[QuickSilverD]

if anyone cares, here's Richard Lewis (the Breitbart guy) talking about this issue

That guy really doesn't like Brianna Wu, but at least he agrees women should be better represented on the jury.

Edit: Also says he was asked not Breitbart.

to be fair she did criticized him first, without even knowing him, wouldn't that annoy you too?

 

[Shadoken]

I dont see how the solution to bias is "more bias".

Way to make it as binary as humanly possible.

While I agree his example was very extreme. Adding more numbers to it only makes it worse. And shows the flaws in putting in a quota system. Why dont you throw in races into the mix and you will see how stupid it becomes when hiring a person instead of just taking it based on merit/qualifications.

Male A of a certain minority race
Female B who isn't a minority
Male C who is a minority but his race isnt as well represented as Male A.
Female D who is a minority but there are already plenty of people of similar race/gender in the job already.

Where do you draw the line , should the perfect quota to exist everywhere?

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I was going to post something along these lines. Best person for the job, gender doesn't matter. Why make exceptions or stop a more qualified from having the job just to seem non-sexist.

Because the goal of the panel is not to get the opinion from a single person, but arrive at a consensus view for what games were the top in their respective areas over the course of the year. The best way to do that is to get a diverse group so you can increase your chances of getting a diverse array of opinions. It may turn out that video game journalists all like pretty much the same things, regardless of their gender, age, race, socioeconomic background, whatever. But you really don't know that until you've assembled the panel. And the best way to shield yourself from criticism of not getting a diverse set of opinions from the outset is to ensure that 95% of your panel isn't representative of a single demographic.

 

[igordennis]

Woooooow.


No need for gut feelings. It already happened with the new Canadian Prime Minister's gender-balanced cabinet. All of a sudden people were questioning the merits and qualifications of his cabinet, which they never did for past PMs, who mostly appointed their friends and shuffled ministers around from one unrelated department to another. Because, of course, they were white males, so no one questioned their "qualifications".

And this was for leading a country, not judging video game awards!


Ayup.

Of course, i only added the gut feeling part because otherwise i could feel a quote coming my way "how do you know this?". Unfortunately i also read that thread you speak of and if such a thing (50/50 split) happened in gaming the response would be the same. Worse even given how awful this industry is to women.

 

[NinjamicWZ]

It should be all women, because almost all the worst reviews and opinions in games media have come from men.

 

[diaspora]

Because then you are giving the jobs based on gender and skin colour. Which is one thing the world should be stopping, it should be flat out based on qualification and merits nothing more nothing less. Otherwise its discrimination.

Gender, skin colour, and qualifications, mandating a decision making body be more diverse doesn't degrade the performance of said body- in fact there is a positive relationship between their financial performance as well as the level of diversity.

 

[jmood88]

Are there any women who believed to be qualified but were denied the position because of their gender? Or can it be proven that women were willfully not selected because of their gender?

If not - WHY is this an issue??? I just don't get the purpose of this - there was no problem to begin with. It's not a problem when the gender that is supposedly getting effected by this doesn't give a s***. "We will only participate if it's a 50/50 split" or "please withdraw us if it's not 50/50" - they are the ones MAKING this an issue. In fact I think they should be blacklisted for this and future events.

Also - how can something be 50/50 split if the ratio of men:women working in this industry is not 1:1. That would be incredibly lop-sided.

Do you really want to know why or do you just want to be on record of showing incredulity at the thought of an industry full of women being excluded from an industry event once again?

 

[Gotdatmoney]

well you certainly dont do the same thing that is causing the problem. Someome earlier posted an article about blind auditions where the person couldnt actually be seen. Thats a fantastic idea and if it could be worked into other areas of work then that would be even better.

This is my opinion on how it SHOULD be done just like how everyone is sharing theirs.

Blind auditions is a great idea. Like I said, quotas are not perfect but they do help reach the ultimate goal especially for something like this where its a panel. But you can't get blind auditions for everything obviously. And I am challenging people to make suggestions as opposed to just criticize because the status quo is inherently bias and not based on merit to begin with and their is evidence that says this is not the case.

 

[Aaronrules380]

Something to consider: Is picking the 5 most qualified people for a task that needs 5 people always going to yield the most qualified group for that tast? The answer is honestly no. On an individual basis they might be the most qualified, but if the nature of what makes them qualified is too similar, the group as a whole might be left with a gap compared to a more balanced group with some slightly less qualified individuals. A group is more than the sum of it's parts. The expertise and background of each individual can play off those of others. Diversity is a proven thing that strengthens performance.

And this is ignoring that nobody has explained how a female would be less qualified than the people they chose. Especially since the reason the people going got it is more related to being in a high position, which has way more to do with things like time in the company, writing skill, other management abilities than anything to do with the only real qualification that matters for this situation: How many and how varied games the individual played.

In fact, I'd argue an EIC is probably way less qualified than many others in the staff, since they probably have more responsibilities and thus less time to devote to playing games.

 

[D4Danger]

I dont see how the solution to bias is "more bias".



Adding more numbers to it only makes it worse. And shows the flaws in putting in a quota system. Why dont you throw in races into the mix and you will see how stupid it becomes when hiring a person instead of just taking it based on merit/qualifications.

Male A of a certain minority race
Female B who isn't a minority
Male C who is a minority but not as much as Male A.

Where do you draw the line , should the perfect quota to exist everywhere?

Not exactly asking for a coca-cola advert by suggesting there should more than A woman on the judging panel.

Are there any women who believed to be qualified but were denied the position because of their gender? Or can it be proven that women were willfully not selected because of their gender?

If not - WHY is this an issue??? I just don't get the purpose of this - there was no problem to begin with. It's not a problem when the gender that is supposedly getting effected by this doesn't give a s***. "We will only participate if it's a 50/50 split" or "please withdraw us if it's not 50/50" - they are the ones MAKING this an issue. In fact I think they should be blacklisted for this and future events.

Also - how can something be 50/50 split if the ratio of men:women working in this industry is not 1:1. That would be incredibly lop-sided.

what you're thinking of is more like the GDC awards. This is very much a public/critics award show and the audience IS 50/50

 

[autoduelist]

This was some time ago, but the general response was, It was weird being the only girls in the class. Which you know, makes sense, they're 18/19...I wanna be where the people are, right?

For what it's worth, the course was taught by a woman.

No, it makes no sense. If you're driven to succeed or love what you're doing, that shouldn't stop you. Something like that should not stop you from achieving your dreams. Unless they weren't your dreams in the first place, of course. If you're not ready for something and looking for a reason to quit, then sure, it's a nice excuse.

I'm not saying there aren't issues. Just that being a minority in a given situation should not be reason unto itself to quit.


As for being on topic, how exactly does one force independently chosen people to be gender equal? You can't control who any given site wants to send to represent them. Sorry, sitedotcom, there were already X males chosen, you must pick a female! That's... not good.

 

[Vlitra]

The more I think about it the more I believe that Giant Bomb should have chosen Austin Walker to be their representative over Jeff Gerstmann.

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for Jeff and his work in the industry but he kind of represents an old status quo. Pretty much like most of the other judges.

It's important to have veteran opinions but if they make up the majority we will see the same kinds of games win every year.

Spelling edit.

 

[CryptiK]

This is an awful analogy. You are applying measurements based on tangible performance to abstract perspective-based skills. You think cooking a steak is at all related to how somebody judges the merits and shortcomings of a piece of art? It's also meaningless, because somebody can be a lousy cook for ten years and somebody can be an excellent cook for one. And don't say that this is unlikely, because virtually every jobfield has disparities like this.

Just because you've been doing it for longer doesn't mean you're doing it better. Just look at doctors for Christ's sake. Old doctors are notoriously out of the loop on advancements in medicine and their practice and patients suffer immensely from their outdated perceptions of medicine. In a field that moved as fast as medicine, somebody who has been practicing for five years is probably a better doctor than somebody who has been practicing for fifty.

Your black and white understanding of capability and skill is a fallacy you should stop humoring.

You could throw in more skills to back each person in that scenario. In the end it should come down to who is better at the job. Throwing in years of experience instead of listing skills and what they are good at was just so I could type it out quicker on the phone.

 

[diaspora]

I mean, you people understand that mandating that a group be more diverse doesn't mean that less qualified people get in right? If nothing else, you'll probably get a better performing group by breaking up the homogeneity of the body.

You could throw in more skills to back each person in that scenario. In the end it should come down to who is better at the job. Throwing in years of experience instead of listing skills and what they are good at was just so I could type it out quicker on the phone.

You understand that you can get more qualified people by forcing it to be more diverse right?

 

[Ninja Scooter]

People missing the point. The reason this should be brought up and discussed isn't because Geoff or TGA people are sexist. It speaks to a greater issue of gender inequality in the industry. Why is there seemingly only 2 women out of 32 people in games media available? Here's a chance to have a meaningful discussion on it rather than try and shut down discourse because people are afraid of change. Some of the responses here remind me of that "there are more women gamers than men" thread. Fucking embarrassing show by the "gaming community".

 

[Messofanego]

Fuck me, lol that's embarrassing.

For those that can't or haven't watched it, he said that it's absolutely wrong that there's only one woman on the panel. He brought up some poll that apparently only 11% of prominent members of game developers are women, so even if we went by that small figure there should still be more on that panel.

Shit, even the Breitbart dude recognises this is a problem. So...

The people in this thread who don't think this is a problem could be seen as more conservative than flippin' Breitbart?! haha

 

[Hubb]

It should be all women, because almost all the worst reviews and opinions in games media have come from men.

That's why all the judges should be Paul. After all, everything shitty is caused by humans, and cats.

 

[Cloyster]

So, here are the two possibilities as dictated by people in the thread.

1.The person in charge of choosing judges for this award show contacting every person who they deemed to be of the highest possibly quality for judges, filtering out people who they did not like or people who they did not have the contact information to. They started with the absolute TOP CALIBER HIGHEST QUALITY POSSIBLE JOURNALISTS, and slowly culled the list down, removing each person who said no, or would be busy. And in the end, the list was down to only 50 men, and two women.

2. Network, favoritism, and other such phenomena led to quite a few people being picked, or at least considered first through friendships and coworkers. Most of these people were men, and men who have other male friends and liked ones, and because they are men, because the gender inequality in this and many industries makes them live in their bubble, and they did not even consider the idea that maybe some women might like to be involved.

I'm willing to bet which it was.

Best qualified my fucking ass. Get a dose of reality.

 

[Mesoian]

No, it makes no sense. If you're driven to succeed or love what you're doing, that shouldn't stop you. Something like that should not stop you from achieving your dreams. Unless they weren't your dreams in the first place, of course. If you're not ready for something and looking for a reason to quit, then sure, it's a nice excuse.

I'm not saying there aren't issues. Just that being a minority in a given situation should not be reason unto itself to quit.

Perhaps.

But I understand.

 

[Aaronrules380]

And beyond all else, for an awards show judging panel, diversity is an incredibly important thing because the audience is diverse. So given that most people in these companies should be qualified from the perspective of games played, diversity is honestly THE MOST IMPORTANT remaining qualification

 

[Shadoken]

Not exactly asking for a coca-cola advert by suggesting there should more than A woman on the judging panel.

Yea I wasn't disagreeing with that. Its just I hate this whole idea that there NEEDS to be a quota with some kind of arbitrary split.

I mean what do you tell a site?
"Hey we have already filled up out male quota , please send us a female from your site"

I understand there is an inherent problem , but all I'll say is that the quota is just an illusionary fix that doesn't really solve anything. If anything it might even make matters worse with how things work. You will start having people exploit the system , because they know they can get in on the race/gender card and not really work.

 

[Weltall Zero]

I believe there's a study somewhere where white men were put in a room that was 50/50 men and women and when asked thought that women vastly outnumbered the men. What a phenomena.

That's at the same time amazing, sad and entirely unsurprising. I wonder what the women's perspectives were (accurate, more men or more women).

Come on, man.

Try to imagine what it must to constantly be overruled and overwritten by a dominating perspective other than your own.

Asking for empathy from people that went through their entire lives without stopping to think what would it be like not to be white, a guy or heterosexual is probably less fruitful than trying to get water from a rock. :/

 

[CryptiK]

I mean, you people understand that mandating that a group be more diverse doesn't mean that less qualified people get in right? If nothing else, you'll probably get a better performing group by breaking up the homogeneity of the body.



You understand that you can get more qualified people by forcing it to be more diverse right?

of course you can but in the end if you are basing your decision on race and gender your are wrong.

 

[AlimNassor]

Haven't you guys learned this industry is a backwards place where only white straight men are represented. Fuck it's embarrassing that in 2015 we don't have a 50/50 split. Women aren't in the industry because, they're run out of the industry. Video games are still very much a male only hobby. This industry is so fucking toxic. What can we do to solve it? The fact that nobody sees issue with the GA jury being mostly men is just pathetic.

 

[igordennis]

Something to consider: Is picking the 5 most qualified people for a task that needs 5 people always going to yield the most qualified group for that tast? The answer is honestly no. On an individual basis they might be the most qualified, but if the nature of what makes them qualified is too similar, the group as a whole might be left with a gap compared to a more balanced group with some slightly less qualified individuals. A group is more than the sum of it's parts. The expertise and background of each individual can play off those of others. Diversity is a proven thing that strengthens performance.

And this is ignoring that nobody has explained how a female would be less qualified than the people they chose. Especially since the reason the people going got it is more related to being in a high position, which has way more to do with things like time in the company, writing skill, other management abilities than anything to do with the only real qualification that matters for this situation: How many and how varied games the individual played.

In fact, I'd argue an EIC is probably way less qualified than many others in the staff, since they probably have more responsibilities and thus less time to devote to playing games.

Yep. This qualification shit is a blatantly transparent excuse to hide behind so you can criticize a call for better representation in this industry. Its really obvious guys.

 

[diaspora]

of course you can but in the end if you are basing your decision on race and gender your are wrong.

Race, gender, and qualifications. Fact of the matter is, going by "qualifications" alone and ending up with a homogeneous group is proven worse. Mandating that a group be more diverse by having gender and racial balances will yield better performance.

 

[Mesoian]

So, here are the two possibilities as dictated by people in the thread.

1.The person in charge of choosing judges for this award show contacting every person who they deemed to be of the highest possibly quality for judges, filtering out people who they did not like or people who they did not have the contact information to. They started with the absolute TOP CALIBER HIGHEST QUALITY POSSIBLE JOURNALISTS, and slowly culled the list down, removing each person who said no, or would be busy. And in the end, the list was down to only 50 men, and two women.

2. Network, favoritism, and other such phenomena led to quite a few people being picked, or at least considered first through friendships and coworkers. Most of these people were men, and men who have other male friends and liked ones, and because they are men, because the gender inequality in this and many industries makes them live in their bubble, and they did not even consider the idea that maybe some women might like to be involved.

I'm willing to bet which it was.

Best qualified my fucking ass. Get a dose of reality.

I mean, real talk, looking at the venues, it was probably 1. If you want to take the esports panel into consideration, I'd give you more leverage there, but...yeah, there's no sinister plottings going on here.

You overestimate the importance of this award show.

 

[Moonlight]

Are there any women who believed to be qualified but were denied the position because of their gender? Or can it be proven that women were willfully not selected because of their gender?

If not - WHY is this an issue??? I just don't get the purpose of this - there was no problem to begin with. It's not a problem when the gender that is supposedly getting effected by this doesn't give a s***. "We will only participate if it's a 50/50 split" or "please withdraw us if it's not 50/50" - they are the ones MAKING this an issue. In fact I think they should be blacklisted for this and future events.

Also - how can something be 50/50 split if the ratio of men:women working in this industry is not 1:1. That would be incredibly lop-sided.

Because half of the human population and the people who play and consume games are women? This isn't really complex.

TGA's juror selection method isn't actively malicious, but it is very poorly thought out. It exists to point out a larger issue and they had the power to curate and dictate the standards their panel for their show had to meet.

And again, measuring who is the most qualified to talk about video games is an inane concept in general, given that a critic is validated by their ability to argue their perspective for or against something. New writers emerge to eclipse old guard frequently - it's the nature of critical discussion, and even stuff in general. A group of people with a pretty singular shared background homogenize a perspective meant to collectively decide something.

EDIT: Also, journalism is a completely different thing from being a critic? The games media conflates the two but they are by definition separate things.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Maybe because it's not an easy problem to solve, and picking the easy "solutions" causes more problems than it solves? I would suggest letting actual experts come up with the solutions, instead of relying on random people with childish Final Fantasy-inspired usernames on the Internet. I don't know, it just seems a tad silly. It's frustrating, but admitting to your own incompetence is the first step to solving this kind of thing. You don't always have the necessary knowledge to solve every problem you come across.

I seem to be just repeating the same things over and over again, so I'll leave this thread for now. I might drop in again tomorrow if I see any new arguments, and I will certainly read and comment if anyone bothers to look up those sources I was hoping for.

I'm all for a more complex solution if someone woupd actually suggest one. We had blind auditions. That's a solid start.

But the implied idea that people on a forum don't know better about a panel of 93% males than the journalists is misguided. Its fine if you accept that. I certainly dont.

 

[Cloyster]

I mean, real talk, looking at the venues, it was probably 1. If you want to take the esports panel into consideration, I'd give you more leverage there, but...yeah, there's no sinister plottings going on here.

You overestimate the importance of this award show.

You missed my point if you got "sinister plotting" from that. It isn't an intentional "Let's NOT include any women because we don't want to."

 

[NinjamicWZ]

The more I think about it the more I believe that Giant Bomb should have chosen Austin Walker to be their representative over Jeff Gerstmann.

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for Jeff and his work in the industry but he kind of represents an old status quo. Pretty much like most of the other judges.

It's important to have veteran opinions but if they make up the majority we will see the same kinds of games when every year.

More like Jeff Worstmann.

 

[Finale Fireworker]

Gender, skin colour, and qualifications, mandating a decision making body be more diverse doesn't degrade the performance of said body- in fact there is a positive relationship between their financial performance as well as the level of diversity.

"All this stuff about making everything "equal..." it's not that simple. Now you've got this book "Native Son." What happened to the other books in the course? They're not good anymore because Mr. Two Ph.Ds says so? Now you got to trade great books for black books? Does that make sense? You gotta question these things, Der. You gotta look at the whole picture. We're talking about books...but we're also talking about my job. I've got two black guys on my squad now who got their job over a couple of white guys who actually scored higher on the test. Does that make sense? Everything's "equal" now, but I've got two guys watching my back...responsible for my life...who aren't as good. They only got the job because they were black, not because they were the best."

This is a racist rant from American History X, a film everybody should have watched by the time they graduated high school. It's a monologue by William Russ' character, who plays Edward Norton's father, that informs how he influenced his son to become a violent white supremacist.

It is chillingly familiar to some of the posts in this thread. Which is not at all to insinuate anybody here is a white supremacist But, rather, I hope it might give people some perspective on why this argument is being had.

 

[Aaronrules380]

Yea I wasn't disagreeing with that. Its just I hate this whole idea that there NEEDS to be a quota with some kind of arbitrary split.

It's not arbitrary though. It'd be a split chosen to represent the population of gamers, which is pretty much even

And in the first place, what other qualification is there that wouldn't be pretty much equal among most people in the industry? Representing the audience is an important criteria for something trying to be an industry standard awards show.

Stuff like you're journalistic abilties and writing skills aren't exactly relevant to judging an awards show

 

[Dice//]

of course you can but in the end if you are basing your decision on race and gender your are wrong.

Even when, historically, there is bias towards white men that reifies itself and makes history repeat so ta\hat (by this logic of yours) gender and race can't earn that position because they're kept out/down?

 

[Ninja Scooter]

I don't get it anymore.

Why is this even relevant to a videogame ?

The show is about games award not some fashion/talent show ( never mind )

*sigh*

Edit: haha sorry about the confusion. The things you (people ) replied to me never crossed my mind.

I'm saying it doesn't matter who the judge is. Just pick the suitable judge and that's it.

The pic from kieth about 1 women is absurd. Who cares if all the judges are women ? or men? If they are suited for the job, it's done. That's what I'm trying to say

This post is just fedorable.

 

[Stinkles]

If they're qualified critics, I see little issue. There could be 32 women and that would be fine.

Every rational person with an opinion is a qualified critic.

 

[Mesoian]

You missed my point if you got "sinister plotting" from that. It isn't an intentional "Let's NOT include any women because we don't want to."

Alright, that last line sort of made that post skew towards the crazy.

We're on the same page.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Fuck me, lol that's embarrassing.



Shit, even the Breitbart dude recognises this is a problem. So...

The people in this thread who don't think this is a problem could be seen as more conservative than flippin' Breitbart?! haha

That's another thing he brought up. He's on there because his knowledge of eSports is pretty deep. That's why he was chosen, not because of who he works for. So he doesn't think it's fair that people are trying to get him pulled from the panel just because who he works with now. He's only been with Breitbart for a little over a month. Before that he worked for Daily Dot. He also points out that even if he was pulled his main contributions would still stand as they're asked to submit suggestions for the top 5 games of each category and then they figure out which games of those five have the most votes and that's how the games are determined.