Giant Bomb #8 | It's a Hit!

Status
Not open for further replies.
The issues and the discussion surrounding it can often be a prickly beast, but it's pretty benign in this thread at the moment. I actually like talking about this stuff (in lieu of another video to joke about which I am also looking forward to).

stump sock said:
Maybe I am a white, straight, cis-gendered male, but people don't know anything about me. If I say I'm male then end of story, that's how I would prefer to be treated/recognized. And I think that should go for anybody.
Click to expand...
I don't think that people are attempting to characterise you as something that you're not (correct me if I'm wrong) the term came about as others have stated in an academic context to describe a specific type of gender identity. Of course there is still valid criticism levelled at the terminology precisely for the feelings that it can invoke in people such as yourself.
 
Antiwhippy said:
I mean, if they're moderating them to the point of deleting posts, banning people and locking up the comments section of their podcast, it's probably safe to say that they are determined to excise that part of the community.
Click to expand...
Sure, but I was speaking about us, the community, not the site staff. We set the tone and inclusivity of the community in a lot of ways. It means more and says more if we gain a reputation as a welcoming, supportive community who doesn't abide assholes instead of solely having moderators enforce removal of the most vocally repugnant. Does that make sense? I may not be explaining my thoughts well.

Keyser Soze said:
This whole controversy, and how it keeps flaring up is getting on my nerves.

Both sides need to step back and cool down. There is a small section of the GB community that is toxic, sure, but there is a small section of every community (internet or not) that will always try to direct things into chaos.

I feel that when it is easy to lay blame at some members of the GB community for reacting the way they did, some members that sit on the other side of the argument are hardly without blame either. Some on that side are far too vocal about their current criticism of the site, and seem all to happy to pair community unrest with the supposed opinion of the whole staff of the site.
Click to expand...
I mean, can you define this other side? I keep seeing this idea of the other side pop up, as it did in the comments of the podcast or the thread about the hires, but it's rarely defined except as people espousing criticism. Are there specific people here you are speaking of? I just don't know who you're addressing.

Antiwhippy said:
I dunno, while I agree that I can see how people might see it the way you do, I mostly think that it's just a way for people to try to distance themselves from the homophobes/misogynists/transphobes, which I think is an indication that such things shouldn't be allowed in a community.
Click to expand...
Sure, I totally understand why people do it. I've done it too. I just don't think it's productive at anything but making us feel better when we acknowledge there's a problem but know we're not contributing towards it.

Chabbs0 said:
Every morning I am forced to flog myself in order to understand my white male cisgender privilege.
Click to expand...
That's another ten lashes.
 
daydreaming said:
If you're talking about two weeks ago, then yeah, we've already established that both sides were not without blame. This hardly applies to the Bombcast outrage, though, does it?
Click to expand...

Whilst nowhere near as bad as a few weeks back, as far as I can see on Twtter there is once again criticism of the site itself (and it supposed practices) flaring up around this topic.While there is problems in the GB community, It feels like some people are just poking at cracks to redirect everything to the whole site. That's starting to infuriate me, and when there are problems that need to be looked at, people are not helping their cause with their actions.
 
demidar said:
Err, did something happen that I'm not aware of? Everyone seems to be in a tizzy.
Click to expand...
Nah, not much (other than another case of intense moderation of contentious discussion on GB). We were just tangentially discussing the latest Bombcast and the use of the term cisgender.
 
Keyser Soze said:
Whilst nowhere near as bad as a few weeks back, as far as I can see on Twtter there is once again criticism of the site itself (and it supposed practices) flaring up around this topic.While there is problems in the GB community, It feels like some people are just poking at cracks to redirect everything to the whole site. That's starting to infuriate me, and when there are problems that need to be looked at, people are not helping their cause with their actions.
Click to expand...

I don't see much outrage about this to be honest. Some of the same people who went all in a couple of weeks ago are talking about it on Twitter, but that's to be expected. Nothing close to the level of a couple of weeks ago at least.

demidar said:
Err, did something happen that I'm not aware of? Everyone seems to be in a tizzy.
Click to expand...

Shitty comments under the new Bombcast because some people are dumb and awful.

edit: 1UP is finally dead :(
 
demidar said:
Err, did something happen that I'm not aware of? Everyone seems to be in a tizzy.
Click to expand...

image.php
 
on a happier note, Samantha's game whose name I can't remember sounds really freaking cool. Especially when she started talking about how it'll support stuff like 5/4 time. Prog-nerd time.
 
stump sock said:
on a happier note, Samantha's game whose name I can't remember sounds really freaking cool. Especially when she started talking about how it'll support stuff like 5/4 time. Prog-nerd time.
Click to expand...

Yeah, looking forward to the QL EX of it. I'm not a musician by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm always fascinated by these kinds of games.
 
I remember playing a demo for Sentris and, while interesting, it didn't seem like something I'd really get hooked on. I think it was the prototype they offered during their KS campaign. Seems to be down now.

Anyway, it's probably evolved a lot since, so I'll be eager to try out the new build once it's available.
 
ab.aeterno said:
Yes, not everyone on the Giant Bomb community is an asshole, and there are plenty of regular or good people in the community. I think most rational people would agree. The problem is that that's true of almost all communities, and pointing it out unduly minimizes the impact caused and too often dismisses that section as unimportant instead of determining to excise it. It ventures close to being #NotAllGiantBombFans, which isn't a productive thing to point out and absolves the community of its responsibility to make it known that assholes aren't welcome.

The Giant Bomb community, like the gaming community at large, has issues with inclusivity. We can either wring our hands about the fact that it's likely a small percent and it's unfair people paint us broadly, or we can start trying to fix the community by saying "knock it the fuck off" when we see people act shitty on our behalf. We're not responsible for what others say, but we are responsible for the attitude and tone the entire community projects. And the one that comes across when a thread gets locked for the premier content because a woman is on and talks about diversity for 15 minutes is not one I care for others to see. It's embarrassing.
Click to expand...

I don't think it minimizes the the impact at all. In fact, I think making blanket statements does much more harm to the community. Saying "The Giant bomb community is full of bigots" does two things: 1) You're attracting more bigots. 2) You've created a stigma that scares away everyone else, and that is a perception that they may never shake.

In this case Rorie and the mods were very diligent (probably going a tad over board) in deleting comments and banning people. There were also GB members engaging the negative posts and essentially telling them to "fuck off" because they dont agree. So I'm not sure what else they can do.
 
Myggen said:
I don't see much outrage about this to be honest. Some of the same people who went all in a couple of weeks ago are talking about it on Twitter, but that's to be expected. Nothing close to the level of a couple of weeks ago at least.



Shitty comments under the new Bombcast because some people are dumb and awful.
Click to expand...

There is unrest right now, sure, but I feel there is more at blame here than just the Giant Bomb users posting toxic comments.

A little under a year ago, Samantha Kalman appeared on a Dumptruck with Patrick. It garnered 260 comments. It was not without a few flare ups, and a few of the comments were uninformed, but there was very little perforative, inflammatory material in there. I don't even think it needed a high amount of moderation.

Now, 10 months later, the appearance of the same person seemingly causes hysteria. Why did sections of the Giant Bomb community react so vocally today when nothing like that occurred under similar circumstances a short time ago?
 
Keyser Soze said:
Whilst nowhere near as bad as a few weeks back, as far as I can see on Twtter there is once again criticism of the site itself (and it supposed practices) flaring up around this topic.While there is problems in the GB community, It feels like some people are just poking at cracks to redirect everything to the whole site. That's starting to infuriate me, and when there are problems that need to be looked at, people are not helping their cause with their actions.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately that's been happening for a while, and will continue to happen. I feel bad for GB, it's clear they're caught up in certain other community's 'war' (who think GB needs 'defending'), but they are also under scrutiny from a lot of people on twitter who see GB as a juicy target to criticise - the site is highly influential (and constantly referred to positively within the industry itself - which must fustrate them) but also seen as accessible and staffed by people who themselves can be influenced.

Also doesn't help that a lot of the critics were clearly unfamiliar with GB, both how it was founded and their content (frequently referring to just their podcast). Seeing someone rebuke the "maybe the most qualified person got the job" arguement by referencing their own years of experience writing at a print magazine was funny in a sad kind of way.

K.Sabot said:

Gamespot linked arm in arm with Activision to produce a 17 minute dedicated Call of Duty advertisement.

I kid, that's not what we're in a tizzy about, but it does make me feel iffy, and the internet seems to agree.
Click to expand...
That is pretty fucking terrible - it actually features their editorial staff. Other sites like The Verge do something similar, but they have a separate team for it.
 
Keyser Soze said:
There is unrest right now, sure, but I feel there is more at blame here than just the Giant Bomb users posting toxic comments.

A little under a year ago, Samantha Kalman appeared on a Dumptruck with Patrick. It garnered 260 comments. It was not without a few flare ups, and a few of the comments were uninformed, but there was very little perforative, inflammatory material in there. I don't even think it needed a high amount of moderation.

Now, 10 months later, the appearance of the same person seemingly causes hysteria. Why did sections of the Giant Bomb community react so vocally today when nothing like that occurred under similar circumstances a short time ago?
Click to expand...

My guess? Those people now feel that GB is "under attack" and lash out at all percieved threats. Also, I'm guessing a lot of those who feel this way care a lot more about the Bombcast than some Dumptruck Patrick does, and thus react more violently when they feel that "SJW" people they don't like "invade" that kind of content. The current mood, I think, makes both of the more extreme sides jump on anything they percieve as a threat. It's not healthy for anyone tbh.
 
Keyser Soze said:
This whole controversy, and how it keeps flaring up is getting on my nerves.
Click to expand...

It is any excuse at the moment for both sides to go at it. A guest who is both female and gay plus brief talk of a gay convention, will have been too tempting a target for many.

If I were Rorie, I would have locked comments from the start and left a message pointing people to a forum thread and promising the return of comments when certain people learnt to behave in a civil fashion.

The mods are over moderating atm, which is winding a bunch of other people up, but since they were criticised last time for letting shit go on too long, I can see how they might be struggling to find the right balance.
 
Were people upset that there was a woman on the podcast, that she was trans, or both? I stopped listening about half an hour in since i tend to get bored quickly of bombcasts without Jeff. I also found her voice to be unpleasant to listen to since it kept sounding "strained" to me, she seemed like a good guest though. Definitely not awkward or quiet like some can be.
 
TharpDaddy said:
Were people upset that there was a woman on the podcast, that she was trans, or both? I stopped listening about half an hour in since i tend to get bored quickly of bombcasts without Jeff. I also found her voice to be unpleasant to listen to since it kept sounding "strained" to me, she seemed like a good guest though. Definitely not awkward or quiet like some can be.
Click to expand...

Both, I guess. Some people wanted to lash out, and that they talked about GaymerX just made them more angry.

Anyways, QL of The Fall is up. The game looks fucking fantastic.
 
Myggen said:
My guess? Those people now feel that GB is "under attack" and lash out at all percieved threats. Also, I'm guessing a lot of those who feel this way care a lot more about the Bombcast than some Dumptruck Patrick does, and thus react more violently when they feel that "SJW" people they don't like "invade" that kind of content. The current mood, I think, makes both of the more extreme sides jump on anything they percieve as a threat.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is possible for a huge group of people to feel something they love is "under attack" without there been some truth to that. There is a difference between attacking and criticizing. Whilst people are right, and have the right to criticize GB, I feel some people are going in far too strong,

Some of GBs critics seem to believe their stance is 100% just and correct.. They are people criticizing that are leaving no room for debate, and any form of rebuttal is bluntly shot down. If these people do not engage in debate, even non toxic members of the community will fight back to try and get their end of the message heard.

My original point was that even though the GB community looks bad here, there are many good members of it. In a similar vein, the critics of GB have a point worth listening to, but there are some making that side look bad due to the aggressive nature of their critique.

Neither side of this is going to come away looking good if things continue the way they are going right now.
 
erawsd said:
I don't think it minimizes the the impact at all. In fact, I think making blanket statements does much more harm to the community. Saying "The Giant bomb community is full of bigots" does two things: 1) You're attracting more bigots. 2) You've created a stigma that scares away everyone else, and that is a perception that they may never shake.

In this case Rorie and the mods were very diligent (probably going a tad over board) in deleting comments and banning people. There were also GB members engaging the negative posts and essentially telling them to "fuck off" because they dont agree. So I'm not sure what else they can do.
Click to expand...
I'm not arguing nor defending a notion that the community is "full of bigots," but instead saying "the community has issues that need addressing." If we don't acknowledge that these are problems by instead acting like it's some fringe tiny minority that's not really a part of the community (as was said when the worst of the harassment was in full swing a few weeks ago), then we're not going to improve. Yes, not all members of the community are bad, and painting it broadly is a problem. No argument. But the problem with that as a response to criticism is that it doesn't actually address the underlying issue, it derails it.

Here's a couple articles that cover the issues with the Not All Men argument; the underlying principles apply to most Not All arguments. Hopefully this explains what I'm getting at better than I can:

Of course, these loathsome people represent a very small percentage of men out there. Over the weekend, as the discussion across Twitter turned to these horrible events, a lot of men started tweeting this, saying “not all men are like that.” It’s not an unexpected response. However, it’s also not a helpful one.

Why is it not helpful to say “not all men are like that”? For lots of reasons. For one, women know this. They already know not every man is a rapist, or a murderer, or violent. They don’t need you to tell them.

Second, it’s defensive. When people are defensive, they aren’t listening to the other person; they’re busy thinking of ways to defend themselves. I watched this happen on Twitter, over and again.

Third, the people saying it aren’t furthering the conversation, they’re sidetracking it. The discussion isn’t about the men who aren’t a problem. (Though, I’ll note, it can be. I’ll get back to that.) Instead of being defensive and distracting from the topic at hand, try staying quiet for a while and actually listening to what the thousands upon thousands of women discussing this are saying.
Click to expand...
From: Slate
Another article by Time
 
TharpDaddy said:
Were people upset that there was a woman on the podcast, that she was trans, or both? I stopped listening about half an hour in since i tend to get bored quickly of bombcasts without Jeff. I also found her voice to be unpleasant to listen to since it kept sounding "strained" to me, she seemed like a good guest though. Definitely not awkward or quiet like some can be.
Click to expand...

Probably didn't help that within the first two minutes of the bombcast they're already talking about change, Brad saying how 'different' this is, and the first thing the guest says is that she's a fan of the show but would like to see regular guests.

Like you, I'm not a fan of Bombcasts without Jeff (or Vinny, but he's permanently gone) so I haven't listened to the rest, but I absolutely think it's a bad idea to have regular guests and a similar feeling is probably what flared up a lot of the attacking comments (someone different suggesting more different). Unless it's one of the few people who gel very well with the crew thanks to an existing, long relationship, a guest Bombcast has a completely different feeling to a regular one and I wouldn't like to see it happen too often.
 
Patryn said:
In terms of the word "cis", unfortunately I feel that the anti-feminist/MRA groups have done a remarkable job demonizing that word. As with an earlier poster, for the longest time I thought it was a pejorative word. I suspect we're not the only ones. The result of that is that I think many see the word used in even an innocent context and feel that they are being attacked, and are thus inclined to immediately disagree with anything else the person is saying, even if they're using cis in a purely descriptive term.

It doesn't help that many white cis hetero people are unused to being labeled, and don't like the feeling that comes with it. A further sign of privilege (another word that the MRA has effectively demonized, I think).
Click to expand...

Accurate on both accounts. Just another way of controlling the message is making it so harmless descriptive terms are now taboo.
 
I thought the Gummi Bears stuff was just vinny trolling alex. Shit, that was real? I watch rescue rangers and tail spin and ducktales and darkwing duck and there never was no damn gummi bears when i was growing up. huh.
 
Every time this happens, I always see the excuse of "It's not everyone!"

Which, sure? I would bet not everyone is like that. It is an uncomfortably large number of people, though, and the ratio to the totality of Giant Bomb users and viewers is pretty irrelevant.

You'd figure the excuse would stop coming up when things like this happen repeatedly, but they only get more vehement. The problem is, it's not really an excuse or defense of anything, it's just people wanting everyone to know how they're not the bad ones.

Hm. Let me put it a way this thread might now understand. In One Piece, when Arlong extended Nami's debt and she couldn't save her village and she fell to her knees and cried, Luffy didn't go up to her and go "Look, stop crying, not all pirates are like that."
 
Zaph said:
Probably didn't help that within the first two minutes of the bombcast they're already talking about change, Brad saying how 'different' this is, and the first thing the guest says is that she's a fan of the show but would like to see regular guests.

Like you, I'm not a fan of Bombcasts without Jeff (or Vinny, but he's permanently gone) so I haven't listened to the rest, but I absolutely think it's a bad idea to have regular guests and a similar feeling is probably what flared up a lot of the attacking comments (someone different suggesting more different). Unless it's one of the few people who gel very well with the crew thanks to an existing, long relationship, a guest Bombcast has a completely different feeling to a regular one and I wouldn't like to see it happen too often.
Click to expand...

At the same time, Jeff has clearly indicated that he's bored with the current incarnation of the Bombcast. He warned us that there would changes. I suspect this idea of bringing guests on is one test to see if something works or doesn't.
 
I... see. I can't tell what's true or not so I'll just respond to everything.

Cisgender is not a term I attach negativity to, even though I know other people use it derogatorily (though I've only ever seen it over the internet). Whether it should be used or not, I'm not really sure where I stand on that. Transgender as a term is becoming more prevalent, so using cisgender to mean the opposite seems alright to me. When it comes to small talk I don't think people will throw a hissy-fit over just saying gender, but it has applications in situations that require a fair amount of clarity, such as in academic discourse (or serious discourse in general). Of course, language and meaning is determined by the majority, so while I may not find offense in the term cisgender it's possible way more people do and the meaning will sway that way regardless.

Regarding judicious moderation of the Giant Bomb forums, I can't really say much about this specific situation since I don't know which messages got banned. I do think that running a moderation team that are on the same page when it comes to banning criteria is immensely hard (as is the case with every team on any subject in existence). It's easy enough to say "Just ban any post that has only ad hominems or only insults other posters", each person on the moderation team would have different ideas of jokes, different places where they draw the line, different shitty post/poster tolerances, etc. The average level of post quality drops when you let everyone with an email address in, so the mod team is pretty much playing hard mode, unlike proactively curbing shitty posters with the account approval process Neogaf uses. Unfortunately I can't really offer any solutions; as elitist as this sounds, the vast majority of people are not worth listening to, nor should they be given a voice. Perhaps they're thinking if they ban people with excessive force, it'll set an example to the others, but given the anonymous state of the internet and the ease at which you can make another account, it's not gonna do much (a Giant Bomb account, for the purposes of posting comments or posting in the forums, is worth little since circumventing a ban is very easy).

That COD joint promotion is very distasteful to me, but just because I don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't happen or exist. But only with a caveat, full disclosure always, that way people can apply their own judgements, weightings, and scepticism to the aforementioned product. Otherwise it's just deception (not like that's not already happening anyway).
 
ShockingAlberto said:
Hm. Let me put it a way this thread might now understand. In One Piece, when Arlong extended Nami's debt and she couldn't save her village and she fell to her knees and cried, Luffy didn't go up to her and go "Look, stop crying, not all pirates are like that."
Click to expand...
You and I both know that no one understood that reference.
 
This is originally a reply I made to a user on GB that was concerned about what they viewed as recent overbearing moderation, but I guess I'll just say it here too.

First, the moderation team does appreciate all of the feedback. The recent ramp-up in moderation activity is largely just a response to the increased need for it. We've been dismissing these flashpoints as one-off things for far too long, and that's something that we can just no longer do.

Things need to change, but in a way, they're not really going to change at all. We have no intention of doing anything that would stifle the GB community. We're all heavily invested in Giant Bomb and have a personal connection to it, and we want to see it thrive and continue to be the great place that we all know it truly has been since the site was founded. The "don't be a jerk" rule has always been at the core of our moderation and has largely served us well, but what has become apparent is that we need to be a bit more explicit about some of our expectations about what constitutes being a jerk, especially with regards to discussions of race, gender, and sexual orientation, and we need to take action to prevent the negative elements that flock to these threads from hijacking the discussion.

While we work to develop our new rules, we maybe have been nipping things in the bud a bit quicker than we'd usually be apt to do, but with the current state of things, we just feel it would be best to not give the negative elements a place to be negative until we can clarify our position going forward.

We do appreciate the patience, and we hope you'll come along with us as we try to make things better.
 
Myggen said:
Both, I guess. Some people wanted to lash out, and that they talked about GaymerX just made them more angry.
Click to expand...

I'm just catching up with all of this now and I cannot comprehend what it is that's aggravating these people so much. What are they fundamentally so afraid of?
 
Keyser Soze said:
Now, 10 months later, the appearance of the same person seemingly causes hysteria. Why did sections of the Giant Bomb community react so vocally today when nothing like that occurred under similar circumstances a short time ago?
Click to expand...

Of course the jerks on the site are reacting to the reaction of the new hires. But just because some people faintly criticized (and I cannot emphasize how gentle 95% of the criticism was) the homogeneity of the hires that does not mean "both sides are at fault" when people are complaining loudly about having to listen to a trans woman speak and to a five minute conversation about the major gaming convention that happened this past weekend.
 
hamchan said:
GB community proves itself to be awful again.
Click to expand...

That's reductive and dismissive. The whole community is not to blame, as it is not one giant entity, and placing the blame on the community as a whole under one umbrella will get the argument anywhere.

It is like when people say "NeoGAF thought this game was bad." in regards to a game - like Watch Dogs for example. While there were many varied opinions on that game across the forums.

Anyway, time too look at The Fall QL, and reminisce about better times.
 
hamchan said:
GB community proves itself to be awful again.
Click to expand...
Goddamnit. Just goddamnit...We, as the Giant Bomb community, did not in any way, shape or form decide to be toxic or awful again. I'm really done with this shit. There are a lot of good people in the GB-community that actually are ashamed to have taken part in light of what happened and have left for good, because of comments exactly like these.

I just love how our community gets thrown under the bus because each time, for an unfortunate twitter happening that most of the community did not partake in. New moderation policy's are underway, mods are quick to react and most comments were just valid criticisms.
 
Patryn said:
At the same time, Jeff has clearly indicated that he's bored with the current incarnation of the Bombcast. He warned us that there would changes. I suspect this idea of bringing guests on is one test to see if something works or doesn't.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, and if it's a change Jeff wants to make he should make it and communicate so ("hey guys, expect more guests) so the audience can decide if this is something they should now expect (and act accordingly - e.g. stop listening) because what's happening is a small, vocal group saying "hey, I don't want this" thinking their voice might influence things.

As soon as firm statements are made, it sets an expectation that people can point to - just like Jeff's letter a couple weeks back.
 
Kelas said:
I'm just catching up with all of this now and I cannot comprehend what it is that's aggravating these people so much. What are they fundamentally so afraid of?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be shocked if a lot of people who weren't necessarily fans of GB or even knew of it have staked it out as a battlefield and a line to be held after the hiring brouhaha.
 
ShockingAlberto said:
Every time this happens, I always see the excuse of "It's not everyone!"

Which, sure? I would bet not everyone is like that. It is an uncomfortably large number of people, though, and the ratio to the totality of Giant Bomb users and viewers is pretty irrelevant.

You'd figure the excuse would stop coming up when things like this happen repeatedly, but they only get more vehement. The problem is, it's not really an excuse or defense of anything, it's just people wanting everyone to know how they're not the bad ones.

Hm. Let me put it a way this thread might now understand. In One Piece, when Arlong extended Nami's debt and she couldn't save her village and she fell to her knees and cried, Luffy didn't go up to her and go "Look, stop crying, not all pirates are like that."
Click to expand...

Problem is, as far as the community is concerned, isn't that mostly what they can do? I think that as long as a person acknowledges that they do not accept such behaviour and distance themselves away from it, and the best way to ostracise them imo. Arguing and trying to get such people to see the other way is usually next to impossible because such people are usually far too set in their own ways. Not letting people know that they're not the bad ones is good because it sets the ground rules on what is actually bad in the community.

The rest is just a matter of moderation in order to reinforce what is ok and what isn't.
 
Antiwhippy said:
Problem is, as far as the community is concerned, isn't that mostly what they can do? I think that as long as a person acknowledges that they do not accept such behaviour and distance themselves away from it, and the best way to ostracise them imo. Arguing and trying to get such people to see the other way is usually next to impossible because such people are usually far too set in their own ways. Not letting people know that they're not the bad ones is good because it sets the ground rules on what is actually bad in the community.

The rest is just a matter of moderation in order to reinforce what is ok and what isn't.
Click to expand...
Then, again, I still don't see the relevancy of going "It's not all of them/us, it's just a small group of people!"
 
Kelas said:
I'm just catching up with all of this now and I cannot comprehend what it is that's aggravating these people so much. What are they fundamentally so afraid of?
Click to expand...

A lot of people really identify with Giant Bomb and are very defensive about criticism of the site. Worse, too many people seem to have misconstrued critics saying "it would be nice if Giant Bomb was more diverse" with "Giant Bomb is racist and sexist" and that's led them to lash out at both the critics and any appearance that the crew is appeasing them.
 
ShockingAlberto said:
Then, again, I still don't see the relevancy of going "It's not all of them/us, it's just a small group of people!"
Click to expand...

Yeah that's fair enough, I guess I can see it as a community trying to save face in a way.

I still think that as long as the community by itself tries to set the line of what is ok or not, it's not a bad thing for them to go "hey those people are bad, we don't like that they represent us and we're not like them".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Remastered Steam CCU hits 150k in five hours after reveal/drop
Sales-Age  2 3 4
183
184
PeteBull replied
Displacement-looks like a spiritual successor of Condemned
4
5
TerribleAtThisGame replied
  • Featured
Lunar Remastered Collection |OT| GungHo's New Working Designs for a Classic JRPG
|OT|  2 3 4
163
8K
bender replied
Skyblivion Mod Makers were all given free Oblivion Remastered keys by Bethesda | Mods cracked within a couple hours
News Game Dev 
11
12
Hawk The Slayer replied
Michael Bay And Sydney Sweeney Team On Movie Adaptation Of ‘OutRun’ Video Game At Universal
News Business  2
50
70
marjo replied
Top Bottom