Forums / Discussion / General

With the comment section often misused, please use this thread as a social hub or to share simple info on anything GG related.

Please remain on topic.

If you wish to discuss entry additions instead, please make use of the other thread.

Super Loli Edit:

Don't double post unless you rant out of time to edit your post and you want to quote someone's post.

To quote a post use the following code: "bq. (quoted text)".

And this is how it looks.

Again, double posting is not allowed unless you rant out of time and you can't edit your post or if you hit the character limit you're allowed to split your message in two posts.

You think this will be a wise decision? I hope you can handle the chaos, unlike the mess on the comments.

Now for the actual in-topic content of this humble post: So can you give me a short description of GamerGate? I would read the article, but I find it a bit dragging reading the whole thing.

Well if rumors are true Gawker will be renamed tomorrow. I wonder what they'll go for. Probably something that sounds more professional than it's dictionary definition.

A scandal occurred when indie game dev Zoe Quinn was accused by her ex of sleeping with game reviewers (particularly some guy from kotaku whose name I can't remember) to get higher scores on her games. This was denied of course, and then a sort of pre-gamergate thing called "Quinnspiracy" launched to investigate these affairs.

However focus soon shifted away from Quinn and instead on the ethical parameters of Games Journalism as a whole, in concurrence with various articles declaring the "Death of the Gamer" identity. They seek to purge the percieved corruption and collusion occurring between Devs and Reviewers.

This is the main facet of the movement, which unfortunately holds a vocal minority of overzealous gamers, bigots and political extremists seeking to utilize the movement for their own agendas. This gave rise to a countermovement, who see GG as little more than a hotbed of bigotry seeking to harass those that don't agree with them.

So in its current iteration GG is a movement seeking journalistic integrity, AGG are largely people Against individuals and hate mobs harassing other gamers and devs, and both groups are heavily bogged down by juvenile mud slinging, libel, political bullshit and irrational hatred of each other.

So can you give me a short description of GamerGate?

A game developer named Zoey Quinn had a boyfriend named Eron Gjoni. They broke up due to their relationship not being faithful. Eron then later made a blog post detailing why their relationship went sour, which included that she was being unfaithful to him with a man named Nathan Grayson. Nathan Grayson worked at Kotaku and had made a couple of articles about Quinn's game without disclosing their relationship. A youtuber called MundaneMatt made a video about the blog post, which was taken down by a copyright claim from Quinn. Another youtuber called InternetAristocrat made another video about the blogpost, combining the ethical misconduct along with other misendeamors done by Quinn, including the DMCA for MundaneMatt's video, Quinn sabotaging a feminist project (Fine Young Capitalists), and Quinn framing a website called Wizardchan (NOT the same thing as 4chan/8chan) for harassing her. This video was posted all over the internet, with many sites initially banning all instances of it (including reddit and 4chan, the latter of which eventually gave up after the infuriated user base posted it more and more in response to it getting banned).

This event came to be known as the Quinnspiracy, but was later changed to be called GamerGate after Adam Baldwin made a tweet calling it that. After more events, it led to a bunch of gaming journalism websites (including Kotaku, Rock Paper Shotgun, and Polygon) to publish a bunch of very similar articles, all within 24 hours of each other, claiming that "Gamers were dead." This really ruffled a lot of feathers and got the movement skyrocketing in popularity to where it is now.

Here you go:

http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

So can you give me a short description of GamerGate? I would read the article, but I find it a bit dragging reading the whole thing.

This is kind of out of date, but it still gives a good overview:

Tenebris Marde Blackclan wrote:

You think this will be a wise decision? I hope you can handle the chaos, unlike the mess on the comments.

If I'm not mistaken, we have had GG discussion threads in the forums in the past that seemed to have gone fine. In the forums it is much easier to keep discussion under control. Forum threads do not tend to get as out of control and are easy to contain in the event that they get out of hand. Although with the possibility of comment section regulars coming here as an alternative to the locked comments section we will just have to wait and see.

We will just have to test our own civility that we spare no moment boasting about. I mean, it's our own demographic, how hard could it be not stabbing each other with cyber forks? :P

So is there a way we can get a bonafide rule list of what "stay on topic" means? Gamergate is rather nebulous so it can get very hard to define what being on topic actually means. Can we talk about Gawker? How about SJW stuff that isn't exactly related to gamergate? The comments section on that article have been a "stream of consciousness" for many of us. I get that we don't want to be going so far off topic as to be about teh doh shitposting but I guess my question is who defines what "on topic" means and lastly please let us know exactly what needs to be done to stay on topic.

I would think that discussions on "social justice warriors" and similar topics could be done in the social justice warrior entry, or at least taken there when the discussion gets rolling.

Also stuff like sharing non-gamergate events and such, or just general chit chatting, could be done right here on the forums in a topic about said topic.

One thing I'd like to talk about is some of the posts. I think random tweets from random people tend to get posted as entries for gg. I think a single tweet by a non-journalist, non-blogger, and basically a nobody with no power, shouldn't count as an entry. My reason is that random peoples posting could flood the image galleries of not just gg but other entries as well. The tumblr entry has similar problems and it tends to make it harder to find actually good contents relevant to gg in a larger degree the just talking about It.

Like, if its not exceptionally bad, like the lilian james uncle tom posts or the infamous geordie tait stuff, sure. But just a random guy on twitter making a single tweet on gg "I dont like GG they're poopie heads ):<" it's not worth an upload.

I don't think this will be a bad idea. We had a Cringeworthy thread when the Cringeworthy gallery / comments got locked, and we've also had a GG thread in the past that worked out fine as well. It's more getting users to post in the thread then the actual issue of it being a good or bad idea

This is probably the only time I'll purposely say anything on the subject (since my social suave is pretty much negligible, so entering the fray on this topic seems as scary to me as sticking my arm in a sack of weasels, since I'm such a pansy) but I think the biggest issue involved with the majority of people on both sides is a lack of good faith. I'm not saying that either side is a circle jerk, or you have to believe your opponents no matter what, or that other people aren't worse offenders (just look at U.S. politics today), or that I'm in any position to say anything, and there's a good chance J'm a hypocrite and/or wrong and/or a jerk.
Still, in my inexperienced, flawed, and probably biased opinion, it just seems lime a shouting match rather than a debate too often. And it makes me sad, because I feel like the goals of both sides aren't mutually exclusive. Like, why can't we promote both the idea of ethics in video game journalism and the idea of a greater diversity of games and in games?
I'm sure that I'm probably being idealistic and naieve, and I'm sure both sides have a valid argument as to why this is impossible. And I'm sure I don't know the whole story for both sides. Still, I just wish that the bomb threats and kicking people out and insults and death threats and other bad things didn't happen, from either side. Because I feel like video games are awesome and shouldn't be associated with stuff like this. Sometimes it feels like it's giving "ammo" to those people who act like they hate video games and think they are for the childish and violent, but I'm guessing I'm probably wrong here.
Well, that's about it. Thanks for reading this wall of text. Sorry for any and all accidental stupidity and/or rudeness. I apologize in advance for not reading any replies; like I said, I'm a huge wuss. Just putting my opinions on something so public out in the open is about as much as I can handle. And I hope despite what I said, I didn't get on anyone's bad side.

The root problem with any thread for GamerGate is that it will be a long-ass wall of text, anyone who wants to talk about it will require either waking up to "142 new e-mails" every day or just crawling through the thread to find the conversation you're in (and people will miss comments addressed to them).

The comment section on the article has the ability to make "threads" for conversations.

If we decided to make a new forum thread for every conversation that would result in taking over a decent chunk of the forum, which means people who want to use the forums fro other things will be annoyed having to scroll over our stuff.

The Escapist solved the issue by making a new sub-forum, I doubt that will go well here. (Although sticking a "Central Committee of the Glorious Ethicist Revolution" sub-forum next to Riff-Raff would cause some laughs)

This is probably the only time I’ll purposely say anything on the subject (since my social suave is pretty much negligible, so entering the fray on this topic seems as scary to me as sticking my arm in a sack of weasels, since I’m such a pansy) but I think the biggest issue involved with the majority of people on both sides is a lack of good faith. I’m not saying that either side is a circle jerk, or you have to believe your opponents no matter what, or that other people aren’t worse offenders (just look at U.S. politics today), or that I’m in any position to say anything, and there’s a good chance J’m a hypocrite and/or wrong and/or a jerk.

I'd say that's halfway correct. There isn't much debate going on, but I wouldn't say that the situation is necessarily one that calls for debate.

What you have is a collection of people who used to consume games journalism before getting fed up with it, and games journalism/devs and their friends who have been accused of corruption/agenda pushing. Here, the consumers (GG) don't have to debate the other side to win (though they have tried doing so), but merely have to stop consuming and start pressuring their advertisers. As a producer, game journalists/devs would have to respond to the wishes of their customers, which makes their responses seem even more baffling in comparison. Maybe some of them are just trying to anger as many people as possible for clicks, but I have to wonder how long that will keep them going for.

Thanks for discussing this.

> there’s a good chance J’m a hypocrite and/or wrong and/or a jerk.

Hypocrite?: No.

Jerk?: Hell no.

Wrong?: There's nothing morally bad about being wrong, nor is there shame in ignorance. It's the determination to both remain ignorant & still be treated as an authority on the subject in question that is the cause of so many of the world's problems.

> Like, why can’t we promote both the idea of ethics in video game journalism and the idea of a greater diversity of games and in games?

The problem is that AntiGamer doesn't give a shit about diversity, just complaining either for cash/ power, or whatever. "Diversity consultants" that operate like mob bosses (nice game you have here, be a shame if someone claimed it was misogynistic), "cultural critics" who don't understand the basics of games (actual slide from a DiGRA lecture), and a bunch of people who will call a game dev a racist full of white privilege without first checking if the dude is Black.

Hell, Solution 6 Months has probably done more for diversity since it started in February then AntiGamer has done in years of being the establishment.

And of course the reaction to NotYourShield shows just how much the SJWs of AntiGamer care for diversity. Airport put it best "The ongoing negative reaction to NotYourShield highlights the issue of SJW branding minorities as either obedient or disobedient property".

Because I feel like video games are awesome and shouldn’t be associated with stuff like this. Sometimes it feels like it’s giving “ammo” to those people who act like they hate video games and think they are for the childish and violent, but I’m guessing I’m probably wrong here.

Vidya is awesome;

I don't think anyone in GamerGate is proud this had to happen, but we're proud we fought where comics, sci-fi & fantasy, and atheism either rolled over or at best just managed to hold them off.

That was of course part of AntiGamer's goal, succeed in breaking vidya and turning into a hollow shell for their ideology. Do what Jack Thompson never dreamed of.

Good thing they're failing too.

Well, that’s about it. Thanks for reading this wall of text. Sorry for any and all accidental stupidity and/or rudeness. I apologize in advance for not reading any replies; like I said, I’m a huge wuss. Just putting my opinions on something so public out in the open is about as much as I can handle. And I hope despite what I said, I didn’t get on anyone’s bad side.

You got my respect, but honestly "wuss"?

If you were a wuss, you wouldn't have said anything, you wouldn't have payed any attention to this at all, you would have have run & hid instead of facing your fears & speaking your mind.

You're like boogie2988, you're a lot stronger then you think you are.

Here's what we need. How do we make a thread where the MOST RECENT posts are on top instead of at the end of the thread. My biggest problem is having to scroll all the way down to view new shit instead of it just being at the top.

Awhile back our unnoficial podcast had Don as one of out guest, one of the topics that came up was about our very own GG entry.
Basically heres what Don said on it, enjoy:

>We don't censor based on political reasons
>We never censored either side
>We're just a resource of internet culture
>We're totally neutral

OK, I'm going to try to make this clear.

That is why GamerGate is so big on this site, because KYM agrees with GG on pretty much every important thing.

"Don't censor for political reasons"? If GG did that GG wouldn't have survived September (the GJP leak would have been rejected because "icky conservative cooties").

"Don't censor either side"? How is GG supposed to make progress if GG just bans everyone GG disagrees with? There's a reason the "Questioning KIA vs. Questioning Ghazi" comparison resulted in so many people sharply moving towards GG's position.

"Make a resource of internet culture"? Given how "memory-hole everything" is one of AntiGamer's standard tactics, while "archive everything" is one of GamerGate's mottoes, I fail to see the contradiction.

And that's why AntiGamer insists this place is Gator heaven, and I say you're on GG's side.

The goals are compatible, the principles are compatible, GG likes KYM, and AntiGamer is always going to hate KYM because KYM isn't like them.

Because honestly, "The Escapist is being DDoSed for not shutting down the GamerGate thread, what do we do?" "We keep our article open." is something I'd expect from HotWheels himself.

On the topic, taken from twitter:

"one of these is a platinum seller played by millions, the other sucked so bad, it drove its company to bankrupcy"

Guess which is which? Which devs whined about paying reviewers for advertisment and getting no returns?

@Libertarian

Having similar morals in regards to online censorship does not mean KYM actively promotes or agrees with GG. Many places online are also in agreement that censoring based on political reasons is terrible. You don't need to be pro-GG to see that.

The goals of KYM and GG are still fundamentally different. One wants more fairness and balance in games journalism, the other just wants to record internet phenomenon happening. I don't quite see how these root causes are identical. Simply having comparable principles regarding censorship does not automatically convert KYM into supporters of the same cause as GG.

But KYM doesn't censor GG for the same reason that it doesn't censor other subcultures as well. Censoring anything is counter intuitive to it's own goal of documentation. This decision to allow online subcultures to speak freely doesn't necessarily mean we support the subculture, only the underlying philosophy of free speech

The day the KYM Admins supports GG is the day they openly say so with "we support GG". If the admins say they are neutral, they are neutral.

@Whatevso

Well done, super slueth. Your keen perception has truly exposed us all. But you are already too late! It is true; all the mods are SJW's. You thought you were safe but you have been surrounded by us all along; lurking, conspiring, stalking you from the shadows and making passive-aggressive tumblr posts about you. We are an elite team of covert specialist feminists that have infiltrated the upper ranks of KYM and now we control the entire mod team. Locking your article was only the beginning. Soon we will destroy your precious safe pro-GG KYM bastion and replace it with pro-feminism blogs. Soon GG will be crushed before the triggered might of the Social Justice Warriors! Ahahahahahah MUAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!! #monologue #evil #sjws #allyourggarebelongtous

He repeatedly says he's trolling and even says GG is 'as annoying as sjw people'.
You're reaching so far your arms are likely to drop off.

I think it's as an example of reviewers promoting topics over story or gameplay. And though I'm not sure IGN was involved several other sites were paid to promote it and gave it good reviews.

If you are interested, one of the Sunset devs/founders threw a huge twitter tantrum about how he paid various journalists for "advertisment" and got no returns.

Y'know

Ethics
in
game journalism

Butterscotch (of Death)

OK fine, if you're so hung up on words the site is neutral (by that standard 8chan is neutral).

Just pointing out somethings:

1. Being willing to eat a DDoS to keep us here is going to cause some rather fanatical loyalty.

2. Saying "we didn't it for you, we did it because it was the right thing to do" is just going to make us like you more.

You bring this up every time. We all know why GG comes here.

It's their behaviour people are pissed off about.

And for the last time, just because KYM tolerates and accepts GG discussion, does not mean that it is pro-gg. GamerGate is insignificant to the sites purpose and goals.

And for every time you say Anti-GG thinks this is a pro-GG spot. *It does not matter. It is 1 confirmed entry out of hundreds. Just because idiots who are blinded by idiotic beliefs (AKA GG and Anti-GG) claim this site as with or against them is irrelevant.

Tim Wee , one of the journalists is found to have corruption associated with known game developers, Vlambeer, Antichamber developer and of course, Darkest Dungeon developer.

Fighting corruption is an endless battle but one which must be fought.

A bit off topic, but Riff-Raff seems to be having a lot of fun now that GamerGate's comments are closed and that it's no longer trending. Should we just ignore them?

Ignore it.

Wasn't that already the smarter option before recent events?

Good point. You should know all about that, considering that you saw what happened when I…(ahem) had that freak out.

Looks like the shoe is on the other foot: "Fired Gawker Writer Goes on Tirade, Compares Site to ISIS and Charleston Shooter"

http://www.mediaite.com/online/fired-gawker-writer-goes-on-tirade-compares-site-to-isis-and-charleston-shooter/

I'm drowning in irony right now

Might be a little off topic, but why did the comment section get locked in the first place? I'm a bit out of the loop. PM me if you wish, but while there are always uncivil comments there it surely wasn't the majority.

Basically TehDoh came back and made long winded posts ranting about GG and instead of reporting them everyone cluttered the comments with mockery. I'm not sure fi this is a let it cool off situation or a straw that broke the camel's back one.

RandomMan already explained that the locking of the gallery/comments should be discussed on this thread.

Sorry to be a pain in the ass but I want to keep both discussions in their respective threads.

If you want to shit on GG make a thread in Riff-Raff. Otherwise don't try to de-rail this one.

Gamergate in a nutshell:

The shortest I can compress a summary of this happening is this:

Gamergate is an internet controversy born from multiple long standing frustrations and tensions including but not limited to cronyism and transparency in gaming press, the extent to which politics play in games and the materials in which games are discussed, and the problem of anonymous harassment in the digital age, especially the harassment of female pundits, reviewers, and developers.

@Kourosh Kabir
An addendum to the last problem you mentioned is pretty self-explanatory from this:

Criticizing Gamergate still counts as on-topic, so long as the person isn't shitposting or trolling or something like that. We organize the forums by topic, not by allegiance. So if someone makes a legitimate effort to engage with the pro-GG people and be productive, it is not necessary that they also be on GG's side.

What we're asking for here is good posting etiquette – stay on topic, don't derail, don't be an asshole. It's possible to achieve that in this thread without turning it into an echo-chamber for just one side.

@A Real Libertarian
Keep in mind this is a large site and the GG article had the same 15 or so people posting to it, the fact that in the 'pro vs anti' stakes there are seemingly more pros here than antis does not mean the entire site is pro.

@ImmaSynge

Well fair enough. I just figured someone should state the situation unambiguously.

The whole point of GG was (supposedly) for gaming sites to have more transparency in their reviews. Well guess what, they added those ethics guidelines.

Some added ethics guidelines, some promised to follow their original ethical guidelines, but few apologized for their previous fuckups and some continued their unethical practices in spite of those guidelines.

Since then it’s become about yelling at SJWs. And I’ll be damned if that sure doesn’t look like gamers yelling at women. You think the whole “Gamergate is harassing women” narrative has no basis. Yet, to any outsider looking in, that’s exactly what it appears to be.

Funny, considering half or more of these SJWs 'being yelled at' tend to be fat, balding white men (ex Jim Sterling, Moviebob, McIntosh, etc…). Maybe you should try looking a bit harder.