|
Please don't go calling people racist, misogynists, or any combination therein. Don't start throwing around words like "white Knight" or SJW, these words are at this point used in a derogatory manner regarding this debate. You can discuss that these terms exist, but do not attribute them to any individual user or group of users on this website.
Try to have a serious discussion about the topic at hand without resorting to personal attacks and we will all be the better for it. Breaking this rule will result in an automatic temp ban the length of which will depend on the comment you make.
This thread started not so bad. It is getting worse. If you want to have this discussion on TL be respectful of your fellow users, we all live in the same house.
Effective now: Page 21 October 18th 08:31 KST |
|
|
As someone who has come into this whole thing late, Its amazing to see how out of hand its gotten and how extreme both sides are.
|
Ugh.. Don't make me care about Zoe again. Today she sued internet aristocrat too. I just wanted to forget about her, why is she so obsessed with attention?
I mean she complains about the attention from "evil gamergate" but when they make a concerted effort to get people to stop talking about her, referring to her as "Literally Who" she changes her name to "Literally Boo."
EDIT: WOWWW Nick Riddle favorited the Gawker guy's bullying comments lol.
|
On October 17 2014 09:21 Xiphos wrote:
Here's the basics we know regarding Zoe Quinn: [...]
What does any of that have to do with the integrity of game journalism other than attempting to discredit someone? If the so called point of this shitfest is to point out a problem in the gaming press, this would correspond to someone trying to analyze the personal life and personality of someone at EA for being in contact with IGN, rather than focusing on discussing the ethics of the people doing the actual writing. I don't see what this is supposed to accomplish.
|
On October 17 2014 09:44 OhDearGod wrote:
As someone who has come into this whole thing late, Its amazing to see how out of hand its gotten and how extreme both sides are.
I came into it early and I feel the same way. Neither side is playing with the decency gloves on. But the sad part is that I understand both sides now and I really don't feel strongly either way.
|
On October 17 2014 10:11 sushiman wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2014 09:21 Xiphos wrote:
Here's the basics we know regarding Zoe Quinn: [...]
What does any of that have to do with the integrity of game journalism other than attempting to discredit someone?
Ben Kuchera works for Polygon. So he has an invested interest in Zoe's image and success rather than objective coverage revolved around her or her game.
Probably others, just noticed Ben's name.
|
On October 17 2014 10:11 sushiman wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2014 09:21 Xiphos wrote:
Here's the basics we know regarding Zoe Quinn: [...]
What does any of that have to do with the integrity of game journalism other than attempting to discredit someone? If the so called point of this shitfest is to point out a problem in the gaming press, this would correspond to someone trying to analyze the personal life and personality of someone at EA for being in contact with IGN, rather than focusing on discussing the ethics of the people doing the actual writing. I don't see what this is supposed to accomplish.
the list of articles decrying the death of their reader base and insisting that they're the terrible stereotype that they are bullied for is what its really about. before that it was just a werid SJW MRA shitfest.
|
From what I understand from what people who defend the gamergate movement, almost none of this should actually be relevant. Stop focusing on things like this is you want to be taken seriously, because to the outside world it looks bad, like real bad. Gamergate just looks like a movement that is antiwomen who have members extreme enough to severely harass certain female developers/journalists/critics in the game world.
So while Gamergate might have some good elements to it, it needs to clean its own house and clarify its position to the rest of the world before any actual change can go on.
|
On October 17 2014 10:15 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2014 09:44 OhDearGod wrote:
As someone who has come into this whole thing late, Its amazing to see how out of hand its gotten and how extreme both sides are. I came into it early and I feel the same way. Neither side is playing with the decency gloves on. But the sad part is that I understand both sides now and I really don't feel strongly either way.
I really have no sympathy for them. If they just made an ethics code of conduct like the Escapist (who got DDoS'd and attacked like crazy for it all over!) saying "Hey, uh. We won't be corrupt anymore. Ok?" it'd all be over. No, instead they radicalize themselves against the idea like it'd be negotiating with terrorists. Their consumers! Terrorists!
Unless you're referring to the harassment/death threats on both sides. Then yea, that sucks and both sides have my complete sympathy. Games aren't THAT serious.
|
On October 17 2014 10:19 Slaughter wrote:From what I understand from what people who defend the gamergate movement, almost none of this should actually be relevant. Stop focusing on things like this is you want to be taken seriously, because to the outside world it looks bad, like real bad. Gamergate just looks like a movement that is antiwomen who have members extreme enough to severely harass certain female developers/journalists/critics in the game world. So while Gamergate might have some good elements to it, it needs to clean its own house and clarify its position to the rest of the world before any actual change can go on.
Yea, if you go to more popular Gamergate areas they really restrict discussion of Zoe. Shaming users who talk about her going "Who? No, literally who?" because there's only a few aspects of her that are relevant. And they all involve someone else involved and the situation can be explained without mentioning her name at all because it isn't relevant.
Like on 8chan her name and renditions of her name are filtered.
OOH DAMN: http://theralphretort.com/internal-email-shows-guardian-mind-made-gamergate/
|
|
|
On October 17 2014 10:19 Slaughter wrote:From what I understand from what people who defend the gamergate movement, almost none of this should actually be relevant. Stop focusing on things like this is you want to be taken seriously, because to the outside world it looks bad, like real bad. Gamergate just looks like a movement that is antiwomen who have members extreme enough to severely harass certain female developers/journalists/critics in the game world. So while Gamergate might have some good elements to it, it needs to clean its own house and clarify its position to the rest of the world before any actual change can go on.
Expressing Zoe Quinn's misdemeanor != anti-women.
Unless you mean that all women are manipulators by elevating themselves through the ranks with sex and faking the victim role to garner sympathies.
|
On October 17 2014 10:34 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2014 10:19 Slaughter wrote:From what I understand from what people who defend the gamergate movement, almost none of this should actually be relevant. Stop focusing on things like this is you want to be taken seriously, because to the outside world it looks bad, like real bad. Gamergate just looks like a movement that is antiwomen who have members extreme enough to severely harass certain female developers/journalists/critics in the game world. So while Gamergate might have some good elements to it, it needs to clean its own house and clarify its position to the rest of the world before any actual change can go on. Expressing Zoe Quinn's misdemeanor != anti-women. Unless you mean that all women are manipulators by elevating themselves through the ranks with sex and faking the victim role to garner sympathies.
To be fair how awful a person she is isn't relevant and harping on it can be seen as anti women.
I mean yea, you can convince all the people in the world she's a terrible person. How does that help video games? Just focus on the nepotism, which is sourced from the journalists side. Make it about Zoe and you just give yourself a narrative hurdle before you can get to your point.
|
On October 17 2014 10:34 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2014 10:19 Slaughter wrote:From what I understand from what people who defend the gamergate movement, almost none of this should actually be relevant. Stop focusing on things like this is you want to be taken seriously, because to the outside world it looks bad, like real bad. Gamergate just looks like a movement that is antiwomen who have members extreme enough to severely harass certain female developers/journalists/critics in the game world. So while Gamergate might have some good elements to it, it needs to clean its own house and clarify its position to the rest of the world before any actual change can go on. Expressing Zoe Quinn's misdemeanor != anti-women. Unless you mean that all women are manipulators by elevating themselves through the ranks with sex and faking the victim role to garner sympathies.
You obviously missed the point of my post. Its about perception and legitimacy. Gamergate is so unfocused that everyone just zerod in on how much bad shit they have done to certain female figures in the industry. As was said above people in the Gamergate movement are trying to move past Zoe because they know its hurting their cause quite a bit. You can say the misogynistic origins of the massive outcry that made attention focus on the issue (the rant on Zoe Quinn that led to a bunch of stupid shit being done) has somewhat poisoned the well for any actual dialogue to come to fruition.
|
On October 17 2014 10:40 Dunnobro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2014 10:34 Xiphos wrote:On October 17 2014 10:19 Slaughter wrote:From what I understand from what people who defend the gamergate movement, almost none of this should actually be relevant. Stop focusing on things like this is you want to be taken seriously, because to the outside world it looks bad, like real bad. Gamergate just looks like a movement that is antiwomen who have members extreme enough to severely harass certain female developers/journalists/critics in the game world. So while Gamergate might have some good elements to it, it needs to clean its own house and clarify its position to the rest of the world before any actual change can go on. Expressing Zoe Quinn's misdemeanor != anti-women. Unless you mean that all women are manipulators by elevating themselves through the ranks with sex and faking the victim role to garner sympathies. To be fair how awful a person she is isn't relevant and harping on it can be seen as anti women. I mean yea, you can convince all the people in the world she's a terrible person. How does that help video games? Just focus on the nepotism, which is sourced from the journalists side. Make it about Zoe and you just give yourself a narrative hurdle before you can get to your point.
No, this is the perfect narrative.
GamerGate went viral because of Zoe Quinn. You don't start the discussion w/o knowing the context behind it.
|
So I tried to read up on this shit.
Can someone who is more into the topic inform if I got the gist of it?
It basically started with that Zoe Quinn girl, who did/did not sleep with journalists who wrote positive articles (not reviews?) for her. She also attacked some woman friendly company over a game jam?
Then the gaming press did not only not side with the accusers, but attacked them, by announcing this "gamers are dead"-stuff (hey I'm a gamer  )?
Then the whole story shifted more to journalist ethics, nepotism etc etc and now it's being pushed into mainstream media? And people who are pro gamergate support this notion, while they would like to forget the beginning (attack ZQ for sleeping with guys?). Anti-gg guys don't believe this and focus only on the attacks against people and ignore the rest?
And idiots on both sides (or 3rd parties) attack/threaten/doxx each other & mail each other syringes/dead rabbits?
So GamerGate is about 2 issues. Media being shit and people attacking people?
|
On October 17 2014 10:41 Slaughter wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2014 10:34 Xiphos wrote:On October 17 2014 10:19 Slaughter wrote:From what I understand from what people who defend the gamergate movement, almost none of this should actually be relevant. Stop focusing on things like this is you want to be taken seriously, because to the outside world it looks bad, like real bad. Gamergate just looks like a movement that is antiwomen who have members extreme enough to severely harass certain female developers/journalists/critics in the game world. So while Gamergate might have some good elements to it, it needs to clean its own house and clarify its position to the rest of the world before any actual change can go on. Expressing Zoe Quinn's misdemeanor != anti-women. Unless you mean that all women are manipulators by elevating themselves through the ranks with sex and faking the victim role to garner sympathies. You obviously missed the point of my post. Its about perception and legitimacy. Gamergate is so unfocused that everyone just zerod in on how much bad shit they have done to certain female figures in the industry. As was said above people in the Gamergate movement are trying to move past Zoe because they know its hurting their cause quite a bit. You can say the misogynistic origins of the massive outcry that made attention focus on the issue (the rant on Zoe Quinn that led to a bunch of stupid shit being done) has somewhat poisoned the well for any actual dialogue to come to fruition.
Like any diseases, there will be symptoms.
What has been posted are an autopsy of all the symptoms that lead to this point. Why? To prevent it from occurring the next time.
Next time similar stunt happens when a figure (female or otherwise) gains popularity w/ load of websites giving praise to the particular project. One have to examine whether or not the websites have some personal affiliation w/ the said figure. And that's why it is an utmost importance of having a blueprint for smell nepotism as early as possible.
|
On October 17 2014 10:45 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2014 10:40 Dunnobro wrote:On October 17 2014 10:34 Xiphos wrote:On October 17 2014 10:19 Slaughter wrote:From what I understand from what people who defend the gamergate movement, almost none of this should actually be relevant. Stop focusing on things like this is you want to be taken seriously, because to the outside world it looks bad, like real bad. Gamergate just looks like a movement that is antiwomen who have members extreme enough to severely harass certain female developers/journalists/critics in the game world. So while Gamergate might have some good elements to it, it needs to clean its own house and clarify its position to the rest of the world before any actual change can go on. Expressing Zoe Quinn's misdemeanor != anti-women. Unless you mean that all women are manipulators by elevating themselves through the ranks with sex and faking the victim role to garner sympathies. To be fair how awful a person she is isn't relevant and harping on it can be seen as anti women. I mean yea, you can convince all the people in the world she's a terrible person. How does that help video games? Just focus on the nepotism, which is sourced from the journalists side. Make it about Zoe and you just give yourself a narrative hurdle before you can get to your point. No, this is the perfect narrative. GamerGate went viral because of Zoe Quinn. You don't start the discussion w/o knowing the context behind it.
No it isn't. Zoe is irrelevant. It's what the media allowed her to do that is the issue. You can't penalize the media by proving how awful a person who doesn't work in the media is.
|
On October 17 2014 10:49 Zocat wrote:So I tried to read up on this shit. Can someone who is more into the topic inform if I got the gist of it? It basically started with that Zoe Quinn girl, who did/did not sleep with journalists who wrote positive articles (not reviews?) for her. She also attacked some woman friendly company over a game jam? Then the gaming press did not only not side with the accusers, but attacked them, by announcing this "gamers are dead"-stuff (hey I'm a gamer )? Then the whole story shifted more to journalist ethics, nepotism etc etc and now it's being pushed into mainstream media? And people who are pro gamergate support this notion, while they would like to forget the beginning (attack ZQ for sleeping with guys?). Anti-gg guys don't believe this and focus only on the attacks against people and ignore the rest? And idiots on both sides (or 3rd parties) attack/threaten/doxx each other & mail each other syringes/dead rabbits? So GamerGate is about 2 issues. Media being shit and people attacking people?
Gamergate can't really address the issue of people attacking people. Who can? It's just being pushed real hard now.
Ex. Anita said she canceled some university speech because of a bomb threat. Apparently the school gets these often and FBI, and experts told her it was a hoax. So, instead she canceled because people were allowed to bring guns on campus. And tried to blame #Gamergate for it being canceled.
http://www.usu.edu/ust/index.cfm?article=54179
The only issue is trying to dispel the narrative that gamergate is ABOUT attacking and silencing people before we can even discuss the corruption on a proper platform.
The 60 seconds GG video about covers it. (Notice how it doesn't mention Zoe fucking Quinn!)
|
Canada11310 Posts
On October 17 2014 10:45 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2014 10:40 Dunnobro wrote:On October 17 2014 10:34 Xiphos wrote:On October 17 2014 10:19 Slaughter wrote:From what I understand from what people who defend the gamergate movement, almost none of this should actually be relevant. Stop focusing on things like this is you want to be taken seriously, because to the outside world it looks bad, like real bad. Gamergate just looks like a movement that is antiwomen who have members extreme enough to severely harass certain female developers/journalists/critics in the game world. So while Gamergate might have some good elements to it, it needs to clean its own house and clarify its position to the rest of the world before any actual change can go on. Expressing Zoe Quinn's misdemeanor != anti-women. Unless you mean that all women are manipulators by elevating themselves through the ranks with sex and faking the victim role to garner sympathies. To be fair how awful a person she is isn't relevant and harping on it can be seen as anti women. I mean yea, you can convince all the people in the world she's a terrible person. How does that help video games? Just focus on the nepotism, which is sourced from the journalists side. Make it about Zoe and you just give yourself a narrative hurdle before you can get to your point. No, this is the perfect narrative. GamerGate went viral because of Zoe Quinn. You don't start the discussion w/o knowing the context behind it.
Except that Gamergate people keep trying to tell me that it had nothing to do with Zoe with first place. I think several post in this thread makes me lean towards that was simply GG going into damage control mode with a ret-con.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
