I doubt they have. They mostly have nothing to say about it, they just copypaste other opinions.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Anita Sarkeesian has disclosed what she has done with the Kickstarter money
- Thread starter crimsonheadGCN
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
I doubt they have. They mostly have nothing to say about it, they just copypaste other opinions.
"Hate read"? It's just a critic. When Anita criticizes games is she "hate playing" them?I wouldn't even want to read a masters thesis on a subject I was super passionate about, how anyone could bother to hate read one is a little beyond me.
"Hate read"? It's just a critic. When Anita criticizes games is she "hate playing" them?
They don't just randomly critize that one single thesis. What makes it worse is that barely bring up criticisms.
CambriaRising
Member
Does she even have to do that? These kickstarters are essentially throwing your money at someone and hoping they do what you want with it. As far as I know, she could have taken all of the money and made a video of her burning it.
I am not arguing that kickstarters can't be very productive and push forward good causes, but they have always seemed far too shady for me to consider. People are just not informed enough to be giving money away, believing that what they are doing is an investment rather than a donation.
Of course, I could be wrong and maybe she is legally required to make the videos or return the money. This post would be kind of ironic then..
I don't think she is legally bound to finish the series. Plenty of kickstarters have gone belly-up.
I have no doubt that she will finish it though.
I'm talking about the specific post here. It sounds like an ordinary critic to me.They don't just randomly critize that one single thesis. What makes it worse is that barely bring up criticisms.
If you read the website link they say they are not going to attack her and want to keep it professional. The goal seems to be to show the other side if the story other than hers. I have no problem with this if it brings some balance to the story.
Yes, im sure that the guy with the skulls that looks like Joe Pantoliano on the Matrix and that said "women in our culture have become the most decadent sluts since the fall of Rome going out to gangbangs every weekend" will deliver a collected, measured response against a female literary critic.
HarryHengst
Member
Well, being the target of a hate mob for 3 years kinda messes with your ability to produce work in a timely manner, i would think.I don't think this discloses anything to be honest, according to the graph she pretty much pocketed a large portion of the money she got instead of investing it into her video production.
I hadn't realized it will soon be 3 years since this was funded, either. It's crazy she hasn't fulfilled even half of what the KS entailed.
Once you are raising a ton of money for anything, you are going to have your credibility in check. I don't find that unreasonable, and I find that a lack of diligence when putting together facts/figure for any kind of "movement" to be telling of the people in charge of said movement. Can we stop vilifying anyone who doesn't necessarily agree with this woman?
I understand the guy who just came in here and said called her "a cancer to the gaming world", that contributed nothing and was uncalled for. However, why should people with legitimate arguments against someone's credibility just be instantly shot down? Does this woman have some kind of golden halo that protects her from being held to the same standards as anyone else, because of what she's fighting for?
Anyways, I really haven't followed this whole thing very closely, so have no opinion one way or the other. Guess I'll have to do my research.
It's fine to disagree. I don't agree with everything in those videos. But we need to be honest and understand that people pulling out her masters thesis (many people have done this) and many other things are arguing out of bad faith. They are throwing everything at the wall and hoping something sticks. They are just regurgitating arguments made against her without actually watching her videos.
People grab a pitchfork when she does or says anything. It's hard to have a good faith debate when so many people are just looking to pile on and vilify.
More_Badass
Member
As well as the fact she now gives talks and has appeared on various news programs. She's much busier now than when she started the KSWell, being the target of a hate mob for 3 years kinda messes with your ability to produce work in a timely manner, i would think.
HarryHengst
Member
I'm talking about the specific post here. It sounds like an ordinary critic to me.
Yes. It sure is a normal thing to do to go troll for someones master's thesis and look for any errors just to go 'GOTCHA!', because you dislike that person.
I'm talking about the specific post here. It sounds like an ordinary critic to me.
The post was not just constructed, it was cut and pasted from somewhere else, so it starts out as being weird, and somewhat creepy like this guy was saving this the way a GAFer might save the "Its Happening" gif.
The post starts out by suggesting some sort of subterfuge "Wonder why" because the original post was removed. When there could be lots of reasons why it was removed, legal, quality, ect.
It then moves on to say that because some of the math may be wrong (I'm not bothering to check the math), and because some of the math is wrong the underlying thesis is completely wrong and implies things able the rest of her research. Never mind that the thesis is still spot on, in fact, if anything, the thesis is glaringly obvious.
It isn't real criticism and any opportunities at real criticism are lost as a result.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Yeah its frustrating. But she's the best figure we have right now. Hell she's still speaking at all after that massacre threat, that's goodI like her and her vision, but to be honest, I've found her videos a tad disappointing.
It's not copied from anywhere else. Glad that there's 0 trust because I brought it up.The post was not just constructed, it was cut and pasted from somewhere else, so it starts out as being weird, and somewhat creepy like this guy was saving this the way a GAFer might save the "Its Happening" gif.
The post starts out by suggesting some sort of subterfuge "Wonder why" because the original post was removed. When there could be lots of reasons why it was removed, legal, quality, ect.
It then moves on to say that because some of the math may be wrong (I'm not bothering to check the math), and because some of the math is wrong the underlying thesis is completely wrong and implies things able the rest of her research. Never mind that the thesis is still spot on, in fact, if anything, the thesis is glaringly obvious.
It isn't real criticism and any opportunities at real criticism are lost as a result.
It's not copied from anywhere else. Glad that there's 0 trust because I brought it up.
You're not the first person to post her theisis in a thread about her. In fact, it was kinda random when people where talking about kickstarted production values and salaries. It derailed the thread.
So you just found her paper lying in the street.
It's not copied from anywhere else. Glad that there's 0 trust because I brought it up.
You are asking us to believe that during the existence of this thread you went surfing the Wayback machine, found this missing post, downloaded the PDF, read it, ran some numbers on the appendix, found a discrepancy, typed it up, and shared it in the thread?
Please forgive me if I apply Occam's razor.
Yeah its frustrating. But she's the best figure we have right now. Hell she's still speaking at all after that massacre threat, that's good
I don't envy her at all. I don't know what I would do when faced with the realization that if I continue to push the cause I believe in I will be endangering my own life. Even if she did keep roughly 80k of that money for herself, it wouldn't be worth the stress.
Well, being the target of a hate mob for 3 years kinda messes with your ability to produce work in a timely manner, i would think.
There are people on youtube who regularly get death threats that produce dozens of videos a year. It's just a thing people deal with when you get internet famous. Anita makes her harassment part of her brand.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
How many have had a public speaking engagement threatened with mass murder?There are people on youtube who regularly get death threats that produce dozens of videos a year. It's just a thing people deal with when you get internet famous. Anita makes her harassment part of her brand.
More_Badass
Member
Those people probably don't have to deal with a threat of mass shooting or bombing when they go speak somewhereThere are people on youtube who regularly get death threats that produce dozens of videos a year. It's just a thing people deal with when you get internet famous. Anita makes her harassment part of her brand.
There are people on youtube who regularly get death threats that produce dozens of videos a year. It's just a thing people deal with when you get internet famous. Anita makes her harassment part of her brand.
They get bomb threats and people threatening to shoot up the speaking arrangements they go to?
Let's face it. People fucking hate her to no end. It is at a whole other level.
Edit: so instead of giving an ounce of empathy, we should talk about how she probably is just profiting from it and therefore no big deal.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
You know what? Scratch that point. Threats directed at anyone are the problem and the fact that we've kind of acclimated to them is fucked up
Do you know why she got on the Colbert Report? Because the rest of the world that doesn't live in internet subcultures sees these death threats about YouTube videos and rightfully thinks that that's insane
Do you know why she got on the Colbert Report? Because the rest of the world that doesn't live in internet subcultures sees these death threats about YouTube videos and rightfully thinks that that's insane
Does she even have to do that? These kickstarters are essentially throwing your money at someone and hoping they do what you want with it. As far as I know, she could have taken all of the money and made a video of her burning it.
I am not arguing that kickstarters can't be very productive and push forward good causes, but they have always seemed far too shady for me to consider. People are just not informed enough to be giving money away, believing that what they are doing is an investment rather than a donation.
Of course, I could be wrong and maybe she is legally required to make the videos or return the money. This post would be kind of ironic then..
No legally, you are right. But ethically she should. KS campaign owners should at the very least, release what they promised people if they are capable of doing so.
So when I say she's obligated, I mean on a moral/ethical level.
How many have had a public speaking engagement threatened with mass murder?
That has nothing to do with her making videos. Also, it was investigated and found to be an empty threat, yet she cancelled anyway.
If you say "I don't like person X's work" you usually look at the work from person X. I'm not sure why a master thesis should be out of bounds. Especially when it's kind of her qualification.Yes. It sure is a normal thing to do to go troll for someones master's thesis and look for any errors just to go 'GOTCHA!', because you dislike that person.
Actually googling various sentences from his post just lead me back to this thread. So I'm not sure if it's just copy pasted.The post was not just constructed, it was cut and pasted from somewhere else, so it starts out as being weird, and somewhat creepy like this guy was saving this the way a GAFer might save the "Its Happening" gif.
The post starts out by suggesting some sort of subterfuge "Wonder why" because the original post was removed. When there could be lots of reasons why it was removed, legal, quality, ect.
It then moves on to say that because some of the math may be wrong (I'm not bothering to check the math), and because some of the math is wrong the underlying thesis is completely wrong and implies things able the rest of her research. Never mind that the thesis is still spot on, in fact, if anything, the thesis is glaringly obvious.
It isn't real criticism and any opportunities at real criticism are lost as a result.
Also, I don't think he really said that the underlying thesis is wrong. Just that it's not sourced. I guess you can argue how relevant this stuff is to the overall subject, but to harp on it in a "how dare you post this" sort of way seems also strange to me.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Would you say that it wasn't a...credible threat?That has nothing to do with her making videos. Also, it was investigated and found to be an empty threat, yet she cancelled anyway.
You know what? Scratch that point. Threats directed at anyone are the problem and the fact that we've kind of acclimated to them is fucked up
Do you know why she got on the Colbert Report? Because the rest of the world that doesn't live in internet subcultures sees these death threats about YouTube videos and rightfully thinks that that's insane
Yep, people are utterly desentized. And hell, I can recall any Youtubers getting death threats combined with their adress or where they will show up.
Would you say that it wasn't a...credible threat?
Uh, yeah? That was the finding of the campus police and federal law enforcement.
Again, what does this have to do with her having time to produce videos?
Would you say that it wasn't a...credible threat?
The majority of anon death threats online are prob BS. But that's not on the person being threatened to take that risk or find out. Even if someone is a coward and typing out threats millions of miles away with no intent to actually do anything (which I again imagine is a lot of the threats people get)...why is that on her to take that risk.
Empty threat or not, it's still a threat.
Uh, yeah? That was the finding of the campus police and federal law enforcement.
Again, what does this have to do with her having time to produce videos?
Hmm can't speak for this incident as I know nothing about it. But assuming the cops and the campus 100% cleared it with a reasonable amount of time before the speaking gig was had, I have no idea why she still cancelled. But I still feel like a person shouldn't take a risk of their life regardless if the threat is real or not. All it takes is a cop clearing it and then someone actually doing it.
That has nothing to do with her making videos. Also, it was investigated and found to be an empty threat, yet she cancelled anyway.
It has everything to do with her videos. Stop talking out of your ass.
Could you provide a link to this that is dated before the event was canceled?That has nothing to do with her making videos. Also, it was investigated and found to be an empty threat, yet she cancelled anyway.
Glad to see a breakdown. 150k over two years isn't too much money for a multi-person group so I can see it going fast. I wonder if the complaints about the series not focusing on men will end now that they've essentially announced Tropes vs Men.
That has nothing to do with her making videos. Also, it was investigated and found to be an empty threat, yet she cancelled anyway.
It has everything to do with someone wanting to silence the message found in her videos and other things she's worked on.
And oh yeah, what a coward she is for exercising caution when someone threatens mass murder because of her. Despicable!
That has nothing to do with her making videos. Also, it was investigated and found to be an empty threat, yet she cancelled anyway.
There was no way to know beforehand that it was an empty threat. And your claims that the university and law enforcement determined beforehand that it was an empty threat is absolutely false.
Sarkeesian canceled the event because even after a CREDIBLE threat was made, Utah law would not have permitted screening for weapons and refusing admittance to those carrying them.
Here's the statement the university made:
Anita Sarkeesian has canceled her scheduled speech for tomorrow following a discussion with Utah State University police regarding an email threat that was sent to Utah State University. During the discussion, Sarkeesian asked if weapons will be permitted at the speaking venue. Sarkeesian was informed that, in accordance with the State of Utah law regarding the carrying of firearms, if a person has a valid concealed firearm permit and is carrying a weapon, they are permitted to have it at the venue.
i don't see what is so offensive about the idea of making money on this. it's her job and clearly enough people are willing to pay for her to do it. should she be maintaining herself right at the poverty line?
There's absolutely nothing offensive about this. The only people demanding to see "salary breakdowns" are ones looking to make some kind of value judgment based on it. Turns out her "salary" is meager by any definition and makes further criticism look even more shallow and discriminatory.
You know what? Scratch that point. Threats directed at anyone are the problem and the fact that we've kind of acclimated to them is fucked up
Do you know why she got on the Colbert Report? Because the rest of the world that doesn't live in internet subcultures sees these death threats about YouTube videos and rightfully thinks that that's insane
Well, yeah. The fact that people get threats like that is a shame. But it's going to be an issue as long as you can be anonymous online. The problem I see is her reaction to it by framing it as misogyny and using it to shield herself form all criticism.
More_Badass
Member
Exactly. The problem isn't that it was an empty threat or that no one died. It's that someone threatened mass murder because of a talk on video games and Anita's opinions. That's what's fucked up.It has everything to do with someone wanting to silence the message found in her videos and other things she's worked on.
And oh yeah, what a coward she is for exercising caution when someone threatens mass murder because of her. Despicable!
If you say "I don't like person X's work" you usually look at the work from person X. I'm not sure why a master thesis should be out of bounds. Especially when it's kind of her qualification.
Actually googling various sentences from his post just lead me back to this thread. So I'm not sure if it's just copy pasted.
Also, I don't think he really said that the underlying thesis is wrong. Just that it's not sourced. I guess you can argue how relevant this stuff is to the overall subject, but to harp on it "how dare you post this" seems also strange to me.
It not relevant and is an attempt to derail a thread. It was kinda of a random thing to do. The reason folks are suspicious is because trolls have randomly posted some critique of her thesis in a thread and it was clear that they did not read the whole thing and were just copy/pasting some argument they saw elsewhere.
It's been a bit of a hallmark for people looking to discredit her and it's clearly being done so in an intellectually dishonest manner.
Well, yeah. The fact that people get threats like that is a shame. But it's going to be an issue as long as you can be anonymous online. The problem I see is her reaction to it by framing it as misogyny and using it to shield herself form all criticism.
Threatening to kill a woman and a lot of other people because she criticized sexism in video games strikes me as pretty misogynistic.
Anita is going to be scrutinize for her entire career from misogynist men and or people who are to adapt to the current beliefs of equality in society.
I really dislike Anita because her information tends to come up as man shamming, matriarchal, and knit picking. Very rarely she has a point, but overall her vision is to have zero sexist comments towards women even when it's used appropriately in terms of reenactments or examples of sexism in a video game set in a specific timeline of world history.
I'm a male feminist and egalitarian. The goal of feminism in my view is to reach Egalitarianism, but I find female feminists who are man hatting and I feel as though that defeats to purpose of the goal of feminism to have women be equal to man because it just creates the problem of Misandry.
If Anita wasn't as hypocritical and raises a double standard towards men in her videos she'd probably have a much stronger point and iconic viewpoint. And if she didn't denounce a game's world for being misogynist rather then the creators themselves, then we will be going places in terms of actually having a point.
I really dislike Anita because her information tends to come up as man shamming, matriarchal, and knit picking. Very rarely she has a point, but overall her vision is to have zero sexist comments towards women even when it's used appropriately in terms of reenactments or examples of sexism in a video game set in a specific timeline of world history.
I'm a male feminist and egalitarian. The goal of feminism in my view is to reach Egalitarianism, but I find female feminists who are man hatting and I feel as though that defeats to purpose of the goal of feminism to have women be equal to man because it just creates the problem of Misandry.
If Anita wasn't as hypocritical and raises a double standard towards men in her videos she'd probably have a much stronger point and iconic viewpoint. And if she didn't denounce a game's world for being misogynist rather then the creators themselves, then we will be going places in terms of actually having a point.
It has everything to do with her videos. Stop talking out of your ass.
This is why these threads always ending up being a shit show. People just ignore context and attack attack attack. My first post in this thread was a response to someone saying that getting harassed makes it difficult to produce videos in a timely manner. It is a fact that there are many popular Youtube personalities that regularly get harassed and receive death threats yet still produce dozens of videos a year. My point is that she really doesn't have a good excuse to be taking so long to make her videos, and everyone is pointing to harassment because she's taken all the anonymous BS thrown at her and wearing it as a shield from criticism.
She receive a consistent stream of gendered insults and threats because of a handful of 10 minute Youtube videos about the most entry level feminist critiques over video games. That would suggest those threatening her have a problem with feminists, women or both.Well, yeah. The fact that people get threats like that is a shame. But it's going to be an issue as long as you can be anonymous online. The problem I see is her reaction to it by framing it as misogyny and using it to shield herself form all criticism.
Anita is going to be scrutinize for her entire career from misogynist men and or people who are to adapt to the current beliefs of equality in society.
I really dislike Anita because her information tends to come up as man shamming, matriarchal, and knit picking. Very rarely she has a point, but overall her vision is to have zero sexist comments towards women even when it's used appropriately in terms of reenactments or examples of sexism in a video game set in a specific timeline of world history.
I'm a male feminist and egalitarian. The goal of feminism in my view is to reach Egalitarianism, but I find female feminists who are man hatting and I feel as though that defeats to purpose of the goal of feminism to have women be equal to man because it just creates the problem of Misandry.
If Anita wasn't as hypocritical and raises a double standard towards men in her videos she'd probably have a much stronger point and iconic viewpoint. And if she didn't denounce a game's world for being misogynist rather then the creators themselves, then we will be going places in terms of actually having a point.
She is planning on creating a series based on how men are portrayed.
And, it has never been her goal to get rid of sexist views through her TvW series from what I know.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
From a financial standpoint I think it's important that those who back her do not allow the vitriol of others to in turn cause them to ignore accountability and transparency when it comes to use of funds. This is a good step forward in that regard.
To me, there's not much difference between a kickstarter donation and buying stock. There should be a standard set that you will receive timely, thorough, and consistent reports. It should also be done independently or verified independently to ensure investors that their money is being used properly.
To me, there's not much difference between a kickstarter donation and buying stock. There should be a standard set that you will receive timely, thorough, and consistent reports. It should also be done independently or verified independently to ensure investors that their money is being used properly.
More_Badass
Member
Do those YouTube personalities also travel to give talks and appear on national news programs? I'd imagine it's probably pretty hard to research and produce videos while also doing those other things. But obviously those aren't good excusesThis is why these threads always ending up being a shit show. People just ignore context and attack attack attack. My first post in this thread was a response to someone saying that getting harassed makes it difficult to produce videos in a timely manner. It is a fact that there are many popular Youtube personalities that regularly get harassed and receive death threats yet still produce dozens of videos a year. My point is that she really doesn't have a good excuse to be taking so long to make her videos, and everyone is pointing to harassment because she's taken all the anonymous BS thrown at her and wearing it as a shield from criticism.
My first reaction was "nobody can be this obtuse" and then I remembered that I've read Sarkeesian threads before.Well, yeah. The fact that people get threats like that is a shame. But it's going to be an issue as long as you can be anonymous online. The problem I see is her reaction to it by framing it as misogyny and using it to shield herself form all criticism.
From a financial standpoint I think it's important that those who back her do not allow the vitriol of others to in turn cause them to ignore accountability and transparency when it comes to use of funds. This is a good step forward in that regard.
To me, there's not much difference between a kickstarter donation and buying stock. There should be a standard set that you will receive timely, thorough, and consistent reports. It should also be done independently or verified independently to ensure investors that their money is being used properly.
It's nothing like a stock, it's a donation. People who donate money often want to see that it's been going to good use. A monetary investment implies monetary return.
It seemed sort of appropriate to me because if I recall correctly he was responding to someone else talking about her general work. Anyway, the mods deleted the post, so I guess it's best to not discuss it any further.It not relevant and is an attempt to derail a thread. It was kinda of a random thing to do. The reason folks are suspicious is because trolls have randomly posted some critique of her thesis in a thread and it was clear that they did not read the whole thing and were just copy/pasting some argument they saw elsewhere.
It's been a bit of a hallmark for people looking to discredit her and it's clearly being done so in an intellectually dishonest manner.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
From a financial standpoint I think it's important that those who back her do not allow the vitriol of others to in turn cause them to ignore accountability and transparency when it comes to use of funds. This is a good step forward in that regard.
To me, there's not much difference between a kickstarter donation and buying stock. There should be a standard set that you will receive timely, thorough, and consistent reports. It should also be done independently or verified independently to ensure investors that their money is being used properly.
Just to add to this I just finished looking over the PDF and there's only one page for the financial section? This page is just 3 pie graphs. Seems a bit light to be honest.
My first reaction was "nobody can be this obtuse" and then I remembered that I've read Sarkeesian threads before.
lol
Why else would anyone be threatening her, if it wasn't rooted in misogyny. Even if you don't agree with her, she should be able to discuss her view points without the reaction being harassment and threats.
That it escalates to that, I don't know how it couldn't be misogyny. Because again, even if someone were to disagree with her examples (not everyone agrees with what is sexist or misogynistic in our media), disagreeing with her (and having that discussion) is a far cry from the leap of people harassing and giving her death threats.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.