The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
#GamerGate: Stop Being Jerks on the Internet Edition
I don't really see this issue being so black and white. I do not pretend to excuse what happened to Zoe but at the same time I find it hard to just swallow that major players in the industry would side with gg without reason. No one is saying or at least I hope there not that both sides are blameless in this neither are. I think at some point though we are going to have to come to some kind of understanding. So far trying to demonize each other has only had the effect of both sides practicing scorched earth tactics.
The problem with the term gamer gate itself even from a games journalism ethics thing, is that it implies a sudden watershed moment of uncovered conspiracy alla watergate. When in reality there has been a long term awareness and criticism of actual ethics in games journalism problems for years, and it has nothing to do with small indie developers and everything to do with the big AAAS publishers. So the fact that the sudden "gate" moment was about a small indie developer sleeping with reviewers for positive press (even though that's been proven to be a lie), would still irretrievably connect the term and the movement with specifically WOMEN being corrupt, ie, it's fine when men and corporations use their power and position to dupe gamers or strong arm reviewers, but if a woman sleeps with a man to do the same, it's somehow the last straw, like somehow that's the most egregious example?
Gamergate is, even clued to within term itself, mysogonistic
Exactly. the link between the industry and games journalism has been known for quite some time. Look at the gamespot debacle a few years back.
But somehow when a woman may have done it(the information on her supposed cheating all came from an angry ex) then it's a huge capital case. never mind her game was freakin free nobody lost money because of a bad review.
This is utterly elided by the chat logs which show it began as a reaction against feminist encroachment in videogames by MRA-types on 4chan.
#NotYourShield was started by the trans person Alexander Wuori: http://the-eagle-atarian.tumblr.com/image/97968436413
Wuori's place of employment got a barrage of phone calls from angry anti-gg'ers and was subsequently fired. This is especially difficult for Wuori because Wuori is currently transitioning.
that is hardly good but it's not really running counter to the post you're responding to, I'm p.sure notyershield started after the gamergate hashtag and subsequent controversy blew up?
notyourshield didn't make sense on a basic level. the only argument it might have plausibly refuted was "we're right because men are terrible", which is not an argument that anyone anywhere has ever sincerely made. gamergate completely don't understand what the feminist position is even about and it causes them to do weird stuff like that
but
it was extremely obvious from the moment of its inception that there were women and people of colour in the gamergate ranks and just dismissing them out of hand is a pretty shitty thing to do, regardless of all the sockpuppets that there also were
it's fucked up that wuori got harassed. i could cast doubt on their story if i was so inclined, but i'm not going to, because my default response when minorities tell me about shit like this is to believe them
i actually didn't think sam biddle's was a great tweet
like making fun of nerds for being virgins or calling out actual women as being sockpuppets, i think it is an example of poor behaviour that gets swept under the rug because the people doing it are on the right side
in general i think you have to be suspicious of any argument that sounds exactly like a gamergate argument, of which "well i was OBVIOUSLY joking" is a prime example
i definitely don't care very much about it or think it's at all a big deal, though
While I agree with you, I can also guarantee that there's a lot of indirect context that probably incited him to make such a tweet, ill-advised as it was. Things like seeing people say how Zoe Quinn deserved being doxxed because she cheated on her boyfriend, or saying that Anita Sarkeesian deserves all the harassment she gets because she's being mean to games, or whatever. You can find stuff on twitter like that right now without much leg work. Journalists probably get stuff like that sent to them directly, though, ie "why aren't you driving this lying cunt out of the industry already you must be CORRUPT."
That doesn't change the fact that it was a dumb tweet to make.
"excuse my French
But fuck you — no, fuck y'all, that's as blunt as it gets"
- Kendrick Lamar, "The Blacker the Berry"
Regardless of how you feel about Eron's whole take on the situation, nowhere did he post any information that would constitute a doxxing.
He posted thousands of her private text messages and IMs. Maybe that doesnt' techincally count as "doxxing," but it's a heinous violation. The instigators of the movement now known as Gamergate used the information he posted as pretext to harass her, as the chat logs show.
Zoe Quinn is honestly not that important to GamerGate, but my primary concern is how she caused The Fine Young Capitalists to lose $10,000 and almost got it shut down because of false accusations of transphobia
Why should you be bothered that a pretty obvious scam is losing money?
i actually didn't think sam biddle's was a great tweet
like making fun of nerds for being virgins or calling out actual women as being sockpuppets, i think it is an example of poor behaviour that gets swept under the rug because the people doing it are on the right side
in general i think you have to be suspicious of any argument that sounds exactly like a gamergate argument, of which "well i was OBVIOUSLY joking" is a prime example
i definitely don't care very much about it or think it's at all a big deal, though
While I agree with you, I can also guarantee that there's a lot of indirect context that probably incited him to make such a tweet, ill-advised as it was. Things like seeing people say how Zoe Quinn deserved being doxxed because she cheated on her boyfriend, or saying that Anita Sarkeesian deserves all the harassment she gets because she's being mean to games, or whatever. You can find stuff on twitter like that right now without much leg work. Journalists probably get stuff like that sent to them directly, though, ie "why aren't you driving this lying cunt out of the industry already you must be CORRUPT."
That doesn't change the fact that it was a dumb tweet to make.
So why does that excuse him but not the other side? If this is to end we can not hold two different standards and expect it to go anywhere ? Mostly with game sites being burned to ashes.
i actually didn't think sam biddle's was a great tweet
like making fun of nerds for being virgins or calling out actual women as being sockpuppets, i think it is an example of poor behaviour that gets swept under the rug because the people doing it are on the right side
in general i think you have to be suspicious of any argument that sounds exactly like a gamergate argument, of which "well i was OBVIOUSLY joking" is a prime example
i definitely don't care very much about it or think it's at all a big deal, though
While I agree with you, I can also guarantee that there's a lot of indirect context that probably incited him to make such a tweet, ill-advised as it was. Things like seeing people say how Zoe Quinn deserved being doxxed because she cheated on her boyfriend, or saying that Anita Sarkeesian deserves all the harassment she gets because she's being mean to games, or whatever. You can find stuff on twitter like that right now without much leg work. Journalists probably get stuff like that sent to them directly, though, ie "why aren't you driving this lying cunt out of the industry already you must be CORRUPT."
That doesn't change the fact that it was a dumb tweet to make.
yeah, it's tone policing again
zoe can be as flippant as she likes, nobody on earth has the right to judge zoe for being flippant at this point. she is entitled to say that everyone who has ever looked at a video game is a warbling misogynist piss baby
sam biddle less so, because sam biddle hasn't, as far as i know, been directly affected by any of this
but i don't know enough about him
i certainly don't think he should be, like, fired from gawker
Thom, doxxes tend to get taken down because they are kind of illegal and a form of implicit intimidation ("We Know Where You Live") - so asking us to produce Zoe's personal information, such as her phone number which she has had to change, or her address which she has had to flee from... not gonna happen. They are gone. But the damage is done.
As to whom GG is trying to silence, see the above. But to be more specific, see this:
Not until Tuesday, though, did Ms. Sarkeesian feel compelled to cancel a speech, planned at Utah State University. The day before, members of the university administration received an email warning that a shooting massacre would be carried out at the event. And under Utah law, she was told, the campus police could not prevent people with weapons from entering her talk.
“This will be the deadliest school shooting in American history, and I’m giving you a chance to stop it,” said the email, which bore the moniker Marc Lépine, the name of a man who killed 14 women in a mass shooting in Montreal in 1989 before taking his own life.
What exactly is this, if not attempting to silence someone under the threat of indiscriminate violence?
If you actually cared about journalistic ethics, you would be running away from that crowd as fast as humanly possible.
How is that connected with GamerGate exactly? The guy never claimed any connection to GamerGate and connecting his actions to ours is dishonest.
Have you considered the possibility that guy was mentally ill and had a pathological hatred of women? And that a guy like that has absolutely nothing to do with a twitter hashtag campaign?
i actually didn't think sam biddle's was a great tweet
like making fun of nerds for being virgins or calling out actual women as being sockpuppets, i think it is an example of poor behaviour that gets swept under the rug because the people doing it are on the right side
in general i think you have to be suspicious of any argument that sounds exactly like a gamergate argument, of which "well i was OBVIOUSLY joking" is a prime example
i definitely don't care very much about it or think it's at all a big deal, though
While I agree with you, I can also guarantee that there's a lot of indirect context that probably incited him to make such a tweet, ill-advised as it was. Things like seeing people say how Zoe Quinn deserved being doxxed because she cheated on her boyfriend, or saying that Anita Sarkeesian deserves all the harassment she gets because she's being mean to games, or whatever. You can find stuff on twitter like that right now without much leg work. Journalists probably get stuff like that sent to them directly, though, ie "why aren't you driving this lying cunt out of the industry already you must be CORRUPT."
That doesn't change the fact that it was a dumb tweet to make.
So why does that excuse him but not the other side? If this is to end we can not hold two different standards and expect it to go anywhere ? Mostly with game sites being burned to ashes.
i actually didn't think sam biddle's was a great tweet
like making fun of nerds for being virgins or calling out actual women as being sockpuppets, i think it is an example of poor behaviour that gets swept under the rug because the people doing it are on the right side
in general i think you have to be suspicious of any argument that sounds exactly like a gamergate argument, of which "well i was OBVIOUSLY joking" is a prime example
i definitely don't care very much about it or think it's at all a big deal, though
While I agree with you, I can also guarantee that there's a lot of indirect context that probably incited him to make such a tweet, ill-advised as it was. Things like seeing people say how Zoe Quinn deserved being doxxed because she cheated on her boyfriend, or saying that Anita Sarkeesian deserves all the harassment she gets because she's being mean to games, or whatever. You can find stuff on twitter like that right now without much leg work. Journalists probably get stuff like that sent to them directly, though, ie "why aren't you driving this lying cunt out of the industry already you must be CORRUPT."
That doesn't change the fact that it was a dumb tweet to make.
yeah, it's tone policing again
zoe can be as flippant as she likes, nobody on earth has the right to judge zoe for being flippant at this point. she is entitled to say that everyone who has ever looked at a video game is a warbling misogynist piss baby
sam biddle less so, because sam biddle hasn't, as far as i know, been directly affected by any of this
but i don't know enough about him
i certainly don't think he should be, like, fired from gawker
Can you explain why?
The thing I find so hard in all of this is that it seems people only do things wrong if they are on the side you don't support.
Thom, doxxes tend to get taken down because they are kind of illegal and a form of implicit intimidation ("We Know Where You Live") - so asking us to produce Zoe's personal information, such as her phone number which she has had to change, or her address which she has had to flee from... not gonna happen. They are gone. But the damage is done.
As to whom GG is trying to silence, see the above. But to be more specific, see this:
Not until Tuesday, though, did Ms. Sarkeesian feel compelled to cancel a speech, planned at Utah State University. The day before, members of the university administration received an email warning that a shooting massacre would be carried out at the event. And under Utah law, she was told, the campus police could not prevent people with weapons from entering her talk.
“This will be the deadliest school shooting in American history, and I’m giving you a chance to stop it,” said the email, which bore the moniker Marc Lépine, the name of a man who killed 14 women in a mass shooting in Montreal in 1989 before taking his own life.
What exactly is this, if not attempting to silence someone under the threat of indiscriminate violence?
If you actually cared about journalistic ethics, you would be running away from that crowd as fast as humanly possible.
How is that connected with GamerGate exactly? The guy never claimed any connection to GamerGate and connecting his actions to ours is dishonest.
Have you considered the possibility that guy was mentally ill and had a pathological hatred of women? And that a guy like that has absolutely nothing to do with a twitter hashtag campaign?
Thom, doxxes tend to get taken down because they are kind of illegal and a form of implicit intimidation ("We Know Where You Live") - so asking us to produce Zoe's personal information, such as her phone number which she has had to change, or her address which she has had to flee from... not gonna happen. They are gone. But the damage is done.
As to whom GG is trying to silence, see the above. But to be more specific, see this:
Not until Tuesday, though, did Ms. Sarkeesian feel compelled to cancel a speech, planned at Utah State University. The day before, members of the university administration received an email warning that a shooting massacre would be carried out at the event. And under Utah law, she was told, the campus police could not prevent people with weapons from entering her talk.
“This will be the deadliest school shooting in American history, and I’m giving you a chance to stop it,” said the email, which bore the moniker Marc Lépine, the name of a man who killed 14 women in a mass shooting in Montreal in 1989 before taking his own life.
What exactly is this, if not attempting to silence someone under the threat of indiscriminate violence?
If you actually cared about journalistic ethics, you would be running away from that crowd as fast as humanly possible.
How is that connected with GamerGate exactly? The guy never claimed any connection to GamerGate and connecting his actions to ours is dishonest.
Have you considered the possibility that guy was mentally ill and had a pathological hatred of women? And that a guy like that has absolutely nothing to do with a twitter hashtag campaign?
i actually didn't think sam biddle's was a great tweet
like making fun of nerds for being virgins or calling out actual women as being sockpuppets, i think it is an example of poor behaviour that gets swept under the rug because the people doing it are on the right side
in general i think you have to be suspicious of any argument that sounds exactly like a gamergate argument, of which "well i was OBVIOUSLY joking" is a prime example
i definitely don't care very much about it or think it's at all a big deal, though
While I agree with you, I can also guarantee that there's a lot of indirect context that probably incited him to make such a tweet, ill-advised as it was. Things like seeing people say how Zoe Quinn deserved being doxxed because she cheated on her boyfriend, or saying that Anita Sarkeesian deserves all the harassment she gets because she's being mean to games, or whatever. You can find stuff on twitter like that right now without much leg work. Journalists probably get stuff like that sent to them directly, though, ie "why aren't you driving this lying cunt out of the industry already you must be CORRUPT."
That doesn't change the fact that it was a dumb tweet to make.
yeah, it's tone policing again
zoe can be as flippant as she likes, nobody on earth has the right to judge zoe for being flippant at this point. she is entitled to say that everyone who has ever looked at a video game is a warbling misogynist piss baby
sam biddle less so, because sam biddle hasn't, as far as i know, been directly affected by any of this
but i don't know enough about him
i certainly don't think he should be, like, fired from gawker
Can you explain why?
The thing I find so hard in all of this is that it seems people only do things wrong if they are on the side you don't support.
i don't think anyone should be fired from gawker on the basis of what is, at the very worst, a poorly thought-out joke
if he had a long-term pattern of promoting violence against underprivileged kids that would be a different story
I don't really see this issue being so black and white. I do not pretend to excuse what happened to Zoe but at the same time I find it hard to just swallow that major players in the industry would side with gg without reason. No one is saying or at least I hope there not that both sides are blameless in this neither are. I think at some point though we are going to have to come to some kind of understanding. So far trying to demonize each other has only had the effect of both sides practicing scorched earth tactics.
There are not "sides."
GG is an attempt by the Men's Rights Activist movement to gain territory and recruits from videogame fans and attack feminists. The campaign was deliberately orchestrated to obfuscate its purpose, as the 4chan chat logs show.
The Southern Poverty Law Center classifies the MRA as a hate group.
If you insist on believing there are "sides," then one side is an anti-woman hate group, and the other side is ... the rest of society.
Have you considered the possibility that guy was mentally ill and had a pathological hatred of women? And that a guy like that has absolutely nothing to do with a twitter hashtag campaign?
Have you considered that the twitter hashtag campaign might have been started by a bunch of mentally ill guys with a pathological hatred of women?
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKERS
Thom, doxxes tend to get taken down because they are kind of illegal and a form of implicit intimidation ("We Know Where You Live") - so asking us to produce Zoe's personal information, such as her phone number which she has had to change, or her address which she has had to flee from... not gonna happen. They are gone. But the damage is done.
As to whom GG is trying to silence, see the above. But to be more specific, see this:
Not until Tuesday, though, did Ms. Sarkeesian feel compelled to cancel a speech, planned at Utah State University. The day before, members of the university administration received an email warning that a shooting massacre would be carried out at the event. And under Utah law, she was told, the campus police could not prevent people with weapons from entering her talk.
“This will be the deadliest school shooting in American history, and I’m giving you a chance to stop it,” said the email, which bore the moniker Marc Lépine, the name of a man who killed 14 women in a mass shooting in Montreal in 1989 before taking his own life.
What exactly is this, if not attempting to silence someone under the threat of indiscriminate violence?
If you actually cared about journalistic ethics, you would be running away from that crowd as fast as humanly possible.
How is that connected with GamerGate exactly? The guy never claimed any connection to GamerGate and connecting his actions to ours is dishonest.
Have you considered the possibility that guy was mentally ill and had a pathological hatred of women? And that a guy like that has absolutely nothing to do with a twitter hashtag campaign?
He used all of the GG lingo
It happened right in the middle of shit storm obsessed with her (even though she isnt a Journalist imagine that)
Its a thing GG forums and chats logs of GG irc channels have mentioned wanting to do so very very many times
Its obvious to anyone who isnt kidding themselves
Honestly dude, the only one who seems confused about what gamergate is actually about is you
To start off, Zoe Quinn wasn't doxxed. GamerGate's primary grievances with her stem from TheZoePost and her involvement with feminist charity The Fine Young Capitalists. The latter especially, since she threw around a lot of weight to get that charity shut down by falsely claiming it was transphobic. Upon learning about that injustice, the internet pooled together to donate $75,000 to it and got it funded on indiegogo.
The Fine Young Capitalists are not a charity under any circumstances, all of the money raised goes to them and then 74% of the profits goes to charity
and, well, that goes to a charity as chosen by donors so not even all of that will go to feminist causes
This is incredibly easy to find, it's on their website in fact
This is because you cannot run a charity that develops games. Trying to run a company that makes a product as a "charity" violates many laws both in Canada (where it is based) and the US. The whole idea of TFYC is that they wanted more female developers. So they put together a crack team of programmers who would hold a contest for women to pitch an idea for a game. The woman who won would get her game developed without any knowledge of coding whatsoever.
Because the winner would only contribute her idea to the project, TFYC reasoned they would give her 8% of the profits, which is comparable to Hollywood producers. The rest would go to the programmers who are doing the heavy lifting, as well as the art team doing the art assets. It is not a charity, but it is certainly a non-profit with noble intentions.
That's the big issue. EVERYONE knows games journalism has some fundamental ethical issues. AAA titles get AAA reviews. Game reviewers are dependent on early reviews to get pagehits, and if they give bad press, the deeply corrupt PR machines of major game companies will blacklist them and no longer send them preview copies etc.
I refuse to debate about the potential moral failings of tiny indie developers until a critic will give me a good reason why they are focusing their efforts on Zoe Quinn rather than Electronic Arts and IGN.
I think the fact that a lot of the most egregious vitriol comes from wizard threads and 4chan mysogonistic hotbeds is pretty telling, and the gawker guy was a goose but when so much of the hatred is gendered, when the rage is directed towards women, and their sexual behaviour, it's impossible not to feel like these guys are inexperienced with complex relationships. It's not a gamer or nerd thing, it's a male entitlement thing, it's the every prince deserves his princess stuff bleeding in. So the Virgin thing is super dumb, but these are blatantly juvenile PUA and MRA values being expressed.
The ethics stuff, it's like, even if these guys were right and these ethical breaches amount to SCANDALs instead of conflicts of interests and the messiness of real human life, they lose, go home, the tour is over, no chocolate factory for you. You act like a violent crazy person, and nobody is going to care if the government is really reading your thoughts
you know you could argue that radical feminists have taken over the video game industry while still acknowledging that harassment against women is real and terrible and has to be stopped
Have you considered the possibility that guy was mentally ill and had a pathological hatred of women? And that a guy like that has absolutely nothing to do with a twitter hashtag campaign?
Have you considered that the twitter hashtag campaign might have been started by a bunch of mentally ill guys with a pathological hatred of women?
If there where that many I honestly believe women would be in a much,much worse situation then there currently in.
Are you trying to say it is just as likely that there is one sick person in a group of millions as there is a well orginaized hate group that hates from the looks of it about half a dozen women and is completely fine with others?
GamerGate gives me $75,000 and an idea for a video game. Then I try to make a game from their idea and I promise to donate over 9000% of the profits to GamerGate.
Does that sound like a good deal to you? It's my way of showing my support for GamerGate.
Have you considered the possibility that guy was mentally ill and had a pathological hatred of women? And that a guy like that has absolutely nothing to do with a twitter hashtag campaign?
Have you considered that the twitter hashtag campaign might have been started by a bunch of mentally ill guys with a pathological hatred of women?
See, this is a problem I keep seeing. Generalizing is dangerous, and I'd advise against it. This is the kind of thinking that lead to the WC harassment, something that Gawker has tried to perpetuate.
Instead of making light of mental illness, could we maybe discuss the actual ethical issues that GG has brought to light? Regardless of whether you agree with the tag or don't, I think most of us can at least see that the conduct in the GJP group showcased some alarming things wrong with the industry (Kuchera bullying Tito for not censoring discussion, for example).
Thom, doxxes tend to get taken down because they are kind of illegal and a form of implicit intimidation ("We Know Where You Live") - so asking us to produce Zoe's personal information, such as her phone number which she has had to change, or her address which she has had to flee from... not gonna happen. They are gone. But the damage is done.
As to whom GG is trying to silence, see the above. But to be more specific, see this:
Not until Tuesday, though, did Ms. Sarkeesian feel compelled to cancel a speech, planned at Utah State University. The day before, members of the university administration received an email warning that a shooting massacre would be carried out at the event. And under Utah law, she was told, the campus police could not prevent people with weapons from entering her talk.
“This will be the deadliest school shooting in American history, and I’m giving you a chance to stop it,” said the email, which bore the moniker Marc Lépine, the name of a man who killed 14 women in a mass shooting in Montreal in 1989 before taking his own life.
What exactly is this, if not attempting to silence someone under the threat of indiscriminate violence?
If you actually cared about journalistic ethics, you would be running away from that crowd as fast as humanly possible.
How is that connected with GamerGate exactly? The guy never claimed any connection to GamerGate and connecting his actions to ours is dishonest.
Have you considered the possibility that guy was mentally ill and had a pathological hatred of women? And that a guy like that has absolutely nothing to do with a twitter hashtag campaign?
He used all of the GG lingo
It happened right in the middle of shit storm obsessed with her (even though she isnt a Journalist imagine that)
Its a thing GG forums and chats logs of GG irc channels have mentioned wanting to do so very very many times
Its obvious to anyone who isnt kidding themselves
Honestly dude, the only one who seems confused about what gamergate is actually about is you
That's a serious accusation. Do you remember when they blamed the Columbine shootings on gamers because they played Doom right before committing that massacre? You're committing the same logical fallacy, except this is even worse because he has NO connection whatsoever to GamerGate.
0
KalnaurI See Rain . . .Centralia, WARegistered Userregular
edited October 2014
OK, so something to help this discussion along (I'm only at page 5 for god's sake): if a government stops free speech through law, then it's censorship. If, however, a group of people use shame, condemnation and other social tools that is censuring. It's not a breach of free speech, and it's an essential part of any society's social contract. In addition, yes, if a forum has a mod delete a post or ban a user that is censorship, but it is not state sponsored censorship, which is the only thing the First Amendment disables, and even then, regardless of the location of the server the exact rights of an individual on an internet forum are murky at best. Companies and other public and private bodies independent of the government are free to censure or even censor others actions provided it happens under their purview (i.e. on their own public forums).
So, for example, Anita Sarkeesian is attempting, through her academic, not journalistic, videos to censure people for using tropes that denigrate women. Meanwhile, visiting a forum and being told you can't talk about GamerGate-based ideas is individual or private sector censorship and is fully allowed under law.
The interesting thing is that while the first amendment exists, hate speech laws, laws against things such as slander and libel and more exist.
You have the right to say what you want but you don't get to not get punished for saying things that are either sociopathic (e.g. hate speech) nor do private organizations or individuals have listen to or publish what you want to say, and can even ban, mute or otherwise censor you. And you don't have the right to just say anything without expectation of having the world around you try to shame you for your opinions.
So, when folks are talking about "censor this" or "censor that", first note that you might not be using the right word, and that even if you are, it is not only allowable but justifiable to use censorship in some cases. And those cases are what allows us to have an amiable society; when we either take our fellow human beings to task, or just shut them down as they are not helping the conversation.
Kalnaur on
I make art things! deviantART:Kalnaur ::: Origin: Kalnaur ::: UPlay: Kalnaur
you know you could argue that radical feminists have taken over the video game industry while still acknowledging that harassment against women is real and terrible and has to be stopped
i wonder why they never do that
Not going to lie I am from the 8chan camp coming to take a look at the other side. Decrying it is pretty much 80% of what we do besides emails.
0
augustwhere you come from is goneRegistered Userregular
To start off, Zoe Quinn wasn't doxxed. GamerGate's primary grievances with her stem from TheZoePost and her involvement with feminist charity The Fine Young Capitalists. The latter especially, since she threw around a lot of weight to get that charity shut down by falsely claiming it was transphobic. Upon learning about that injustice, the internet pooled together to donate $75,000 to it and got it funded on indiegogo.
The Fine Young Capitalists are not a charity under any circumstances, all of the money raised goes to them and then 74% of the profits goes to charity
and, well, that goes to a charity as chosen by donors so not even all of that will go to feminist causes
This is incredibly easy to find, it's on their website in fact
This is because you cannot run a charity that develops games. Trying to run a company that makes a product as a "charity" violates many laws both in Canada (where it is based) and the US. The whole idea of TFYC is that they wanted more female developers. So they put together a crack team of programmers who would hold a contest for women to pitch an idea for a game. The woman who won would get her game developed without any knowledge of coding whatsoever.
Because the winner would only contribute her idea to the project, TFYC reasoned they would give her 8% of the profits, which is comparable to Hollywood producers. The rest would go to the programmers who are doing the heavy lifting, as well as the art team doing the art assets. It is not a charity, but it is certainly a non-profit with noble intentions.
If they want more female developers shouldn't they be supporting actual female developers or teaching women development skills rather than taking an abstract idea of a game from a woman and making it for her?
+3
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products, Transition Teamregular
To start off, Zoe Quinn wasn't doxxed. GamerGate's primary grievances with her stem from TheZoePost and her involvement with feminist charity The Fine Young Capitalists. The latter especially, since she threw around a lot of weight to get that charity shut down by falsely claiming it was transphobic. Upon learning about that injustice, the internet pooled together to donate $75,000 to it and got it funded on indiegogo.
The Fine Young Capitalists are not a charity under any circumstances, all of the money raised goes to them and then 74% of the profits goes to charity
and, well, that goes to a charity as chosen by donors so not even all of that will go to feminist causes
This is incredibly easy to find, it's on their website in fact
This is because you cannot run a charity that develops games. Trying to run a company that makes a product as a "charity" violates many laws both in Canada (where it is based) and the US. The whole idea of TFYC is that they wanted more female developers. So they put together a crack team of programmers who would hold a contest for women to pitch an idea for a game. The woman who won would get her game developed without any knowledge of coding whatsoever.
Because the winner would only contribute her idea to the project, TFYC reasoned they would give her 8% of the profits, which is comparable to Hollywood producers. The rest would go to the programmers who are doing the heavy lifting, as well as the art team doing the art assets. It is not a charity, but it is certainly a non-profit with noble intentions.
Do you not see the pandering awfulness of their vision? We will make the woman's game for them because they cannot.
A better charity, if they really wanted to be a charity and not a vehicle to get their fiscal beaks wet, would be to use that money to fund Comp Sci / programming scholarships for women interested in getting into the industry.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
1. Is Zoe Quinn being harassed?
1a. If Zoe Quinn is being harassed, did she do anything to bring the harassment upon herself?
1b. If she is not being harassed, are specific threats on her health and safety sent to her twitter or made as public comments justified based on her actions?
1c. Same as 1b, but, given the demonstrable fallout, was Eron Gjoni justified in writing a blog that details extremely intimate personal events with another person without their consent?
1d. If you were Mr. Gjoni, how would you feel about your actions and the results right now?
2. Do specific threats on the health and safety of people sent to twitter constitute harassment?
3. Should Social Justice Warriors have to stand up for their beliefs using their real names and addresses rather than hiding behind internet handles?
4. Do you believe that there are people who call themselves members of your group that could be defined as stalkers/harassers/abusers?
4a. Do you believe that it is the duty of the rest of the people in the movement denounce them if they exist?
4b. Do you care for the health and safety of Zoe Quinn, Leigh Alexander, Anita Sarkeesian, Brianna Wu, Phil Fish, and Felicia Day?
4c. Do you believe it is possible for there to be members of your group that anonymously harass opponents of your group unilaterally to help justify your ends?
4c2. Please state your opinion on those who would do the events in 4c.
4c3. Please state any actions you are undertaking to limit and prevent the events in 4c.
6. If you don't mind, please give a statement on your measure of your own self worth. I am not making fun of you. For reference, a previous member of your group said that "if I got in a car accident, the movement would not miss me." Comment if you are so inclined.
Paladin on
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
can we not blame things on the mentally ill or accuse people of that unless they are actually mentally ill
perfectly healthy folks are capable of being absolute garbage and seeing it get lobbed at anyone as an excuse or dismissal for their behavior is kind of troubling, thanks
To start off, Zoe Quinn wasn't doxxed. GamerGate's primary grievances with her stem from TheZoePost and her involvement with feminist charity The Fine Young Capitalists. The latter especially, since she threw around a lot of weight to get that charity shut down by falsely claiming it was transphobic. Upon learning about that injustice, the internet pooled together to donate $75,000 to it and got it funded on indiegogo.
The Fine Young Capitalists are not a charity under any circumstances, all of the money raised goes to them and then 74% of the profits goes to charity
and, well, that goes to a charity as chosen by donors so not even all of that will go to feminist causes
This is incredibly easy to find, it's on their website in fact
This is because you cannot run a charity that develops games. Trying to run a company that makes a product as a "charity" violates many laws both in Canada (where it is based) and the US. The whole idea of TFYC is that they wanted more female developers. So they put together a crack team of programmers who would hold a contest for women to pitch an idea for a game. The woman who won would get her game developed without any knowledge of coding whatsoever.
Because the winner would only contribute her idea to the project, TFYC reasoned they would give her 8% of the profits, which is comparable to Hollywood producers. The rest would go to the programmers who are doing the heavy lifting, as well as the art team doing the art assets. It is not a charity, but it is certainly a non-profit with noble intentions.
was raising money to set up a scholarship not an option? genuine question, would it be against the law in Canada and the US to set up a charity that paid the tuition of students, as well as providing assistance in getting them contacts within and jobs in the games industry? why pay someone else to do the heavy lifting as you put it, when you could help teach women how to do it themselves?
also, do we know how many of this 'crack team of programmers' are women? surely hiring a few women would be something to boast about.
+4
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
i actually didn't think sam biddle's was a great tweet
like making fun of nerds for being virgins or calling out actual women as being sockpuppets, i think it is an example of poor behaviour that gets swept under the rug because the people doing it are on the right side
in general i think you have to be suspicious of any argument that sounds exactly like a gamergate argument, of which "well i was OBVIOUSLY joking" is a prime example
i definitely don't care very much about it or think it's at all a big deal, though
While I agree with you, I can also guarantee that there's a lot of indirect context that probably incited him to make such a tweet, ill-advised as it was. Things like seeing people say how Zoe Quinn deserved being doxxed because she cheated on her boyfriend, or saying that Anita Sarkeesian deserves all the harassment she gets because she's being mean to games, or whatever. You can find stuff on twitter like that right now without much leg work. Journalists probably get stuff like that sent to them directly, though, ie "why aren't you driving this lying cunt out of the industry already you must be CORRUPT."
That doesn't change the fact that it was a dumb tweet to make.
yeah, it's tone policing again
zoe can be as flippant as she likes, nobody on earth has the right to judge zoe for being flippant at this point. she is entitled to say that everyone who has ever looked at a video game is a warbling misogynist piss baby
sam biddle less so, because sam biddle hasn't, as far as i know, been directly affected by any of this
but i don't know enough about him
i certainly don't think he should be, like, fired from gawker
Can you explain why?
The thing I find so hard in all of this is that it seems people only do things wrong if they are on the side you don't support.
Well mainly because there aren't "two sides" here. There's GamerGate, and there's the rest of the world.
GamerGate, by design, has no leadership, which means anyone who wants to can join in the crowd and say "I am GamerGate" and no one else can say a damn thing about it, because there's no platform and no leadership.
But people opposed to GamerGate are a both a random assortment of people AND people who don't necessarily associate as a group.
For example, I'm against GamerGate because I don't like women being driven out of the industry. But a super anti-feminist MRA guy could hate gamergate because he thinks they're "Betas." Me and Fedoraman have nothing in common, except that we both hate gamergate (For very different reasons). Since I believe in social justice, I'm going to make efforts not to be an asshole to people on twitter about it. Because Fedoraman thinks Betas need to be told what's what, he might threaten GG people for the fun of it. I can say outright that Fedoraman, whoever he is, is a shitlord who I do not associate with in any way, and it's absolutely true.
But while I can't be held responsible for Fedoraman's actions, someone in GG does have a certain amount of responsibility for people taking their banner and using it for hate reasons. Because the people under that banner both willingly associate and refuse leadership. Which is a pretty toxic combination as we've found out. The hostile faction gets a free smokescreen from the nice people.
"excuse my French
But fuck you — no, fuck y'all, that's as blunt as it gets"
- Kendrick Lamar, "The Blacker the Berry"
Except you've yet to reveal any problems that a normal human being would believe is an ethics violation. The "scandals" you point to are fake.
A few journalists being sympathetic to feminists and indie developers offering free games for causes associated with social justice is only a "scandal" if you belong to the manosphere.
Depends on which scandal you're talking about, but are you referring to the fact that the Indie Games Fund, which backed Fez, voted to have Fez win the Indiecade award (and the monetary prize along with it)?
I'm curious about this one. Anyone have any details/rebuttals?
It's pretty much nonsense. (Kellee Santiago, whose financial involvement in Fez was only publicly known due to the theft of Polytron's financials, was the chair of the Indiecade awards jury in 2012. Indiecade's rules explicitly say anyone with a financial interest in a game will be required to recuse themselves from discussion of that game. There is no indication that she did not do so.)
Thom, doxxes tend to get taken down because they are kind of illegal and a form of implicit intimidation ("We Know Where You Live") - so asking us to produce Zoe's personal information, such as her phone number which she has had to change, or her address which she has had to flee from... not gonna happen. They are gone. But the damage is done.
As to whom GG is trying to silence, see the above. But to be more specific, see this:
Not until Tuesday, though, did Ms. Sarkeesian feel compelled to cancel a speech, planned at Utah State University. The day before, members of the university administration received an email warning that a shooting massacre would be carried out at the event. And under Utah law, she was told, the campus police could not prevent people with weapons from entering her talk.
“This will be the deadliest school shooting in American history, and I’m giving you a chance to stop it,” said the email, which bore the moniker Marc Lépine, the name of a man who killed 14 women in a mass shooting in Montreal in 1989 before taking his own life.
What exactly is this, if not attempting to silence someone under the threat of indiscriminate violence?
If you actually cared about journalistic ethics, you would be running away from that crowd as fast as humanly possible.
How is that connected with GamerGate exactly? The guy never claimed any connection to GamerGate and connecting his actions to ours is dishonest.
Have you considered the possibility that guy was mentally ill and had a pathological hatred of women? And that a guy like that has absolutely nothing to do with a twitter hashtag campaign?
He used all of the GG lingo
It happened right in the middle of shit storm obsessed with her (even though she isnt a Journalist imagine that)
Its a thing GG forums and chats logs of GG irc channels have mentioned wanting to do so very very many times
Its obvious to anyone who isnt kidding themselves
Honestly dude, the only one who seems confused about what gamergate is actually about is you
That's a serious accusation. Do you remember when they blamed the Columbine shootings on gamers because they played Doom right before committing that massacre? You're committing the same logical fallacy, except this is even worse because he has NO connection whatsoever to GamerGate.
The twitter handle of the perpetrator was "gaimerg8'.
My apologies, that handle was attributed to the person who doxxed Felicia Day. My fault for getting that information crossed.
That's the big issue. EVERYONE knows games journalism has some fundamental ethical issues. AAA titles get AAA reviews. Game reviewers are dependent on early reviews to get pagehits, and if they give bad press, the deeply corrupt PR machines of major game companies will blacklist them and no longer send them preview copies etc.
I refuse to debate about the potential moral failings of tiny indie developers until a critic will give me a good reason why they are focusing their efforts on Zoe Quinn rather than Electronic Arts and IGN.
they're big and therefore can fight back. the first part has been openly admitted, the second is just the only understandable reasoning i can come up with.
can we not blame things on the mentally ill or accuse people of that unless they are actually mentally ill
perfectly healthy folks are capable of being absolute garbage and seeing it get lobbed at anyone as an excuse or dismissal for their behavior is kind of troubling, thanks
It is the trouble with faceless threats we can not know who or even what did them. For all we know the death threat could of been generated off a program from a troll that auto sends them.
To start off, Zoe Quinn wasn't doxxed. GamerGate's primary grievances with her stem from TheZoePost and her involvement with feminist charity The Fine Young Capitalists. The latter especially, since she threw around a lot of weight to get that charity shut down by falsely claiming it was transphobic. Upon learning about that injustice, the internet pooled together to donate $75,000 to it and got it funded on indiegogo.
The Fine Young Capitalists are not a charity under any circumstances, all of the money raised goes to them and then 74% of the profits goes to charity
and, well, that goes to a charity as chosen by donors so not even all of that will go to feminist causes
This is incredibly easy to find, it's on their website in fact
This is because you cannot run a charity that develops games. Trying to run a company that makes a product as a "charity" violates many laws both in Canada (where it is based) and the US. The whole idea of TFYC is that they wanted more female developers. So they put together a crack team of programmers who would hold a contest for women to pitch an idea for a game. The woman who won would get her game developed without any knowledge of coding whatsoever.
Because the winner would only contribute her idea to the project, TFYC reasoned they would give her 8% of the profits, which is comparable to Hollywood producers. The rest would go to the programmers who are doing the heavy lifting, as well as the art team doing the art assets. It is not a charity, but it is certainly a non-profit with noble intentions.
Do you not see the pandering awfulness of their vision? We will make the woman's game for them because they cannot.
A better charity, if they really wanted to be a charity and not a vehicle to get their fiscal beaks wet, would be to use that money to fund Comp Sci / programming scholarships for women interested in getting into the industry.
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
+5
HakkekageSpace Whore Academysumma cum laudeRegistered Userregular
i actually didn't think sam biddle's was a great tweet
like making fun of nerds for being virgins or calling out actual women as being sockpuppets, i think it is an example of poor behaviour that gets swept under the rug because the people doing it are on the right side
in general i think you have to be suspicious of any argument that sounds exactly like a gamergate argument, of which "well i was OBVIOUSLY joking" is a prime example
i definitely don't care very much about it or think it's at all a big deal, though
While I agree with you, I can also guarantee that there's a lot of indirect context that probably incited him to make such a tweet, ill-advised as it was. Things like seeing people say how Zoe Quinn deserved being doxxed because she cheated on her boyfriend, or saying that Anita Sarkeesian deserves all the harassment she gets because she's being mean to games, or whatever. You can find stuff on twitter like that right now without much leg work. Journalists probably get stuff like that sent to them directly, though, ie "why aren't you driving this lying cunt out of the industry already you must be CORRUPT."
That doesn't change the fact that it was a dumb tweet to make.
yeah, it's tone policing again
zoe can be as flippant as she likes, nobody on earth has the right to judge zoe for being flippant at this point. she is entitled to say that everyone who has ever looked at a video game is a warbling misogynist piss baby
sam biddle less so, because sam biddle hasn't, as far as i know, been directly affected by any of this
but i don't know enough about him
i certainly don't think he should be, like, fired from gawker
Can you explain why?
The thing I find so hard in all of this is that it seems people only do things wrong if they are on the side you don't support.
That is not so hard to understand
But if you must have a distinction, it is the obvious one that Sam Biddle' tongue was planted firmly in cheek
Much like Stephen Colbert when he made a joke about the Washington Redskins that got hijacked by Suey Park and used as evidence that Colbert hates Asians (view #CancelColbert). The language of her campaign was steeped in standard social justice language but her whole self aggrandizing non movement was--after a few stupid days--laughed out of the room for being exceptionally myopic. Similarly, only someone intentionally seeking to misunderstand Biddle's tweet in pursuit of an existing agenda could have attribued wholehearted sincerity to him, and pay him back for his folly in spades by inducing major corporation Adobe to pull its ads in a blind panic and rush to proclaim how so no pro bullying they are in a goofy manner reminiscent of Blackadder
O look I may have unwittingly uncovered the novel thought that context is important
If they want more female developers shouldn't they be supporting actual female developers or teaching women development skills rather than taking an abstract idea of a game from a woman and making it for her?
Honestly, I don't see how a project like this hurts the women involved. It'll get their foot in the door of the gaming industry, which can directly help their careers and bolster their resume.
You can do both, you know. You can fund computer science education for women as well as helping existing women get into the industry. The latter is what TFYC was trying to accomplish.
Posts
Exactly. the link between the industry and games journalism has been known for quite some time. Look at the gamespot debacle a few years back.
But somehow when a woman may have done it(the information on her supposed cheating all came from an angry ex) then it's a huge capital case. never mind her game was freakin free nobody lost money because of a bad review.
BUT OH NO A GIRL DID IT
notyourshield didn't make sense on a basic level. the only argument it might have plausibly refuted was "we're right because men are terrible", which is not an argument that anyone anywhere has ever sincerely made. gamergate completely don't understand what the feminist position is even about and it causes them to do weird stuff like that
but
it was extremely obvious from the moment of its inception that there were women and people of colour in the gamergate ranks and just dismissing them out of hand is a pretty shitty thing to do, regardless of all the sockpuppets that there also were
it's fucked up that wuori got harassed. i could cast doubt on their story if i was so inclined, but i'm not going to, because my default response when minorities tell me about shit like this is to believe them
While I agree with you, I can also guarantee that there's a lot of indirect context that probably incited him to make such a tweet, ill-advised as it was. Things like seeing people say how Zoe Quinn deserved being doxxed because she cheated on her boyfriend, or saying that Anita Sarkeesian deserves all the harassment she gets because she's being mean to games, or whatever. You can find stuff on twitter like that right now without much leg work. Journalists probably get stuff like that sent to them directly, though, ie "why aren't you driving this lying cunt out of the industry already you must be CORRUPT."
That doesn't change the fact that it was a dumb tweet to make.
But fuck you — no, fuck y'all, that's as blunt as it gets"
- Kendrick Lamar, "The Blacker the Berry"
Why should you be bothered that a pretty obvious scam is losing money?
So why does that excuse him but not the other side? If this is to end we can not hold two different standards and expect it to go anywhere ? Mostly with game sites being burned to ashes.
yeah, it's tone policing again
zoe can be as flippant as she likes, nobody on earth has the right to judge zoe for being flippant at this point. she is entitled to say that everyone who has ever looked at a video game is a warbling misogynist piss baby
sam biddle less so, because sam biddle hasn't, as far as i know, been directly affected by any of this
but i don't know enough about him
i certainly don't think he should be, like, fired from gawker
How is that connected with GamerGate exactly? The guy never claimed any connection to GamerGate and connecting his actions to ours is dishonest.
Have you considered the possibility that guy was mentally ill and had a pathological hatred of women? And that a guy like that has absolutely nothing to do with a twitter hashtag campaign?
again where we you before?
Can you explain why?
The thing I find so hard in all of this is that it seems people only do things wrong if they are on the side you don't support.
the first, yes
the second... you've lost me
Ladies and gentlemen No True Gamergater
NNID: Hakkekage
i don't think anyone should be fired from gawker on the basis of what is, at the very worst, a poorly thought-out joke
if he had a long-term pattern of promoting violence against underprivileged kids that would be a different story
GG is an attempt by the Men's Rights Activist movement to gain territory and recruits from videogame fans and attack feminists. The campaign was deliberately orchestrated to obfuscate its purpose, as the 4chan chat logs show.
The Southern Poverty Law Center classifies the MRA as a hate group.
If you insist on believing there are "sides," then one side is an anti-woman hate group, and the other side is ... the rest of society.
Have you considered that the twitter hashtag campaign might have been started by a bunch of mentally ill guys with a pathological hatred of women?
It happened right in the middle of shit storm obsessed with her (even though she isnt a Journalist imagine that)
Its a thing GG forums and chats logs of GG irc channels have mentioned wanting to do so very very many times
Its obvious to anyone who isnt kidding themselves
Honestly dude, the only one who seems confused about what gamergate is actually about is you
This is because you cannot run a charity that develops games. Trying to run a company that makes a product as a "charity" violates many laws both in Canada (where it is based) and the US. The whole idea of TFYC is that they wanted more female developers. So they put together a crack team of programmers who would hold a contest for women to pitch an idea for a game. The woman who won would get her game developed without any knowledge of coding whatsoever.
Because the winner would only contribute her idea to the project, TFYC reasoned they would give her 8% of the profits, which is comparable to Hollywood producers. The rest would go to the programmers who are doing the heavy lifting, as well as the art team doing the art assets. It is not a charity, but it is certainly a non-profit with noble intentions.
I refuse to debate about the potential moral failings of tiny indie developers until a critic will give me a good reason why they are focusing their efforts on Zoe Quinn rather than Electronic Arts and IGN.
The ethics stuff, it's like, even if these guys were right and these ethical breaches amount to SCANDALs instead of conflicts of interests and the messiness of real human life, they lose, go home, the tour is over, no chocolate factory for you. You act like a violent crazy person, and nobody is going to care if the government is really reading your thoughts
i wonder why they never do that
If there where that many I honestly believe women would be in a much,much worse situation then there currently in.
Are you trying to say it is just as likely that there is one sick person in a group of millions as there is a well orginaized hate group that hates from the looks of it about half a dozen women and is completely fine with others?
GamerGate gives me $75,000 and an idea for a video game. Then I try to make a game from their idea and I promise to donate over 9000% of the profits to GamerGate.
Does that sound like a good deal to you? It's my way of showing my support for GamerGate.
See, this is a problem I keep seeing. Generalizing is dangerous, and I'd advise against it. This is the kind of thinking that lead to the WC harassment, something that Gawker has tried to perpetuate.
Instead of making light of mental illness, could we maybe discuss the actual ethical issues that GG has brought to light? Regardless of whether you agree with the tag or don't, I think most of us can at least see that the conduct in the GJP group showcased some alarming things wrong with the industry (Kuchera bullying Tito for not censoring discussion, for example).
That's a serious accusation. Do you remember when they blamed the Columbine shootings on gamers because they played Doom right before committing that massacre? You're committing the same logical fallacy, except this is even worse because he has NO connection whatsoever to GamerGate.
So, for example, Anita Sarkeesian is attempting, through her academic, not journalistic, videos to censure people for using tropes that denigrate women. Meanwhile, visiting a forum and being told you can't talk about GamerGate-based ideas is individual or private sector censorship and is fully allowed under law.
The interesting thing is that while the first amendment exists, hate speech laws, laws against things such as slander and libel and more exist.
You have the right to say what you want but you don't get to not get punished for saying things that are either sociopathic (e.g. hate speech) nor do private organizations or individuals have listen to or publish what you want to say, and can even ban, mute or otherwise censor you. And you don't have the right to just say anything without expectation of having the world around you try to shame you for your opinions.
So, when folks are talking about "censor this" or "censor that", first note that you might not be using the right word, and that even if you are, it is not only allowable but justifiable to use censorship in some cases. And those cases are what allows us to have an amiable society; when we either take our fellow human beings to task, or just shut them down as they are not helping the conversation.
Not going to lie I am from the 8chan camp coming to take a look at the other side. Decrying it is pretty much 80% of what we do besides emails.
If they want more female developers shouldn't they be supporting actual female developers or teaching women development skills rather than taking an abstract idea of a game from a woman and making it for her?
Do you not see the pandering awfulness of their vision? We will make the woman's game for them because they cannot.
A better charity, if they really wanted to be a charity and not a vehicle to get their fiscal beaks wet, would be to use that money to fund Comp Sci / programming scholarships for women interested in getting into the industry.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
1. Is Zoe Quinn being harassed?
1a. If Zoe Quinn is being harassed, did she do anything to bring the harassment upon herself?
1b. If she is not being harassed, are specific threats on her health and safety sent to her twitter or made as public comments justified based on her actions?
1c. Same as 1b, but, given the demonstrable fallout, was Eron Gjoni justified in writing a blog that details extremely intimate personal events with another person without their consent?
1d. If you were Mr. Gjoni, how would you feel about your actions and the results right now?
2. Do specific threats on the health and safety of people sent to twitter constitute harassment?
3. Should Social Justice Warriors have to stand up for their beliefs using their real names and addresses rather than hiding behind internet handles?
4. Do you believe that there are people who call themselves members of your group that could be defined as stalkers/harassers/abusers?
4a. Do you believe that it is the duty of the rest of the people in the movement denounce them if they exist?
4b. Do you care for the health and safety of Zoe Quinn, Leigh Alexander, Anita Sarkeesian, Brianna Wu, Phil Fish, and Felicia Day?
4c. Do you believe it is possible for there to be members of your group that anonymously harass opponents of your group unilaterally to help justify your ends?
4c2. Please state your opinion on those who would do the events in 4c.
4c3. Please state any actions you are undertaking to limit and prevent the events in 4c.
5. Please give a stance on this document.
6. If you don't mind, please give a statement on your measure of your own self worth. I am not making fun of you. For reference, a previous member of your group said that "if I got in a car accident, the movement would not miss me." Comment if you are so inclined.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
perfectly healthy folks are capable of being absolute garbage and seeing it get lobbed at anyone as an excuse or dismissal for their behavior is kind of troubling, thanks
was raising money to set up a scholarship not an option? genuine question, would it be against the law in Canada and the US to set up a charity that paid the tuition of students, as well as providing assistance in getting them contacts within and jobs in the games industry? why pay someone else to do the heavy lifting as you put it, when you could help teach women how to do it themselves?
also, do we know how many of this 'crack team of programmers' are women? surely hiring a few women would be something to boast about.
Well mainly because there aren't "two sides" here. There's GamerGate, and there's the rest of the world.
GamerGate, by design, has no leadership, which means anyone who wants to can join in the crowd and say "I am GamerGate" and no one else can say a damn thing about it, because there's no platform and no leadership.
But people opposed to GamerGate are a both a random assortment of people AND people who don't necessarily associate as a group.
For example, I'm against GamerGate because I don't like women being driven out of the industry. But a super anti-feminist MRA guy could hate gamergate because he thinks they're "Betas." Me and Fedoraman have nothing in common, except that we both hate gamergate (For very different reasons). Since I believe in social justice, I'm going to make efforts not to be an asshole to people on twitter about it. Because Fedoraman thinks Betas need to be told what's what, he might threaten GG people for the fun of it. I can say outright that Fedoraman, whoever he is, is a shitlord who I do not associate with in any way, and it's absolutely true.
But while I can't be held responsible for Fedoraman's actions, someone in GG does have a certain amount of responsibility for people taking their banner and using it for hate reasons. Because the people under that banner both willingly associate and refuse leadership. Which is a pretty toxic combination as we've found out. The hostile faction gets a free smokescreen from the nice people.
But fuck you — no, fuck y'all, that's as blunt as it gets"
- Kendrick Lamar, "The Blacker the Berry"
https://storify.com/strictmachine/gameovergate
Chat logs of people planning gamergate weeks in advance
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS595US595&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=brianna wu death threats
Brianna wus account of being chased from her home, screen captures included
The fact that the only people who get doxxed when they come out against gamergate are woman
Felicia Day getting doxxed within a hour of coming out against gamergate
gamergate getting classified as a hate group
The fact that 90% of redditors who use the main GG sub are also subbed to redpill (proven!)
The fact that GG is full on in suppourt of these guys
The fact that the New York Times can to the same comclusion after their own research
That fact that even though its about Ethics in Games Journalism half the people they go after arent even journalist
Need I continue?
Because I can
The twitter handle of the perpetrator was "gaimerg8'.
My apologies, that handle was attributed to the person who doxxed Felicia Day. My fault for getting that information crossed.
they're big and therefore can fight back. the first part has been openly admitted, the second is just the only understandable reasoning i can come up with.
It is the trouble with faceless threats we can not know who or even what did them. For all we know the death threat could of been generated off a program from a troll that auto sends them.
Specifically, it would be this.
That is not so hard to understand
But if you must have a distinction, it is the obvious one that Sam Biddle' tongue was planted firmly in cheek
Much like Stephen Colbert when he made a joke about the Washington Redskins that got hijacked by Suey Park and used as evidence that Colbert hates Asians (view #CancelColbert). The language of her campaign was steeped in standard social justice language but her whole self aggrandizing non movement was--after a few stupid days--laughed out of the room for being exceptionally myopic. Similarly, only someone intentionally seeking to misunderstand Biddle's tweet in pursuit of an existing agenda could have attribued wholehearted sincerity to him, and pay him back for his folly in spades by inducing major corporation Adobe to pull its ads in a blind panic and rush to proclaim how so no pro bullying they are in a goofy manner reminiscent of Blackadder
O look I may have unwittingly uncovered the novel thought that context is important
NNID: Hakkekage
Honestly, I don't see how a project like this hurts the women involved. It'll get their foot in the door of the gaming industry, which can directly help their careers and bolster their resume.
You can do both, you know. You can fund computer science education for women as well as helping existing women get into the industry. The latter is what TFYC was trying to accomplish.