#Gamergate, the war on nerds, and the corruption of the left and the free press

[MongGrel]

Just stopped in to see why this thread is still going.

Still see for no reason.

Later.

 

[Nebor]

That literally never happened. You're repeating lies that took hold because they were salacious, not based in reality. This is the biggest problem with Gamergate; their biggest talking points are all demonstrably false, and it makes it impossible to have an honest dialogue. We keep coming back to a lie that was disproved 7 months ago.

lol five guys burgers and fries.

 

[blake0812]

lol five guys burgers and fries.

This

 

[norseamd]

That literally never happened. You're repeating lies that took hold because they were salacious, not based in reality. This is the biggest problem with Gamergate; their biggest talking points are all demonstrably false, and it makes it impossible to have an honest dialogue. We keep coming back to a lie that was disproved 7 months ago.

Well we for one can say yo are lying and thus lack any type of ethical understanding or responsibility or any type of morality. You can not just prove none of that happened. Furthermore this occured earlier than GG and in fact GG rose because of this however you are probably going to try to paint this as some type of shit invented for GG as part of some evil conspiracy.

 

[0roo0roo]

Blockbot is the greatest thing, because it shows the Gamergate crowd how stupid and cowardly they all are. For some reason, not being able to harass people online is a huge problem for them.

Well, ask the gamergate crowd why women making games is such a problem for them. Or why making games that don't cater to the gamergate crowd is such a bad thing.

Poes law, its hard to tell if you are trolling at this point.

Gamergate has no problem with women in video games.

But I ask you a simple question, if you are so concerned about women in games, why are you defending a situation which effectively creating the danger of having a casting couch in gaming for women?


"ZOE QUINN THREATENS “DISMANTLING” OF OPEN INTERNET, HARPER CALLS SELF “SUPERHERO” IN ATTACK ON KERN"
http://theralphretort.com/zoe-quinn...lls-self-superhero-in-attack-on-kern-3023015/
"LEVELING UP? RICHARD DAWKINS GOES AFTER THE BLOCK BOT & TALKS ABOUT GAMERGATE"
http://theralphretort.com/leveling-...fter-block-bot-talks-about-gamergate-3022015/


http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/03/20/bbc-featured-block-bot-runs-into-legal-trouble/
http://www.inquisitr.com/1945627/richard-dawkins-addresses-blockbot/

The blockbot users and creators ARE the abusers. The greatest thing for a tyrant is to be able to unaccountably label people as heretics or subhuman monsters. This is the ultimate power these people seek, to be the arbiters of what people are acceptable based on their whims, and to quietly blacklist these people based on the smears they just make up.

When people are on the blockbot as "humanists", you know there is no legitimacy to the list.

You only have to watch Randi Harpers behavior from today alone where she was gleefully blocking people like Mark Kern, diablo II/starcraft producer.
Too obviously unjustifiable to block him directly anymore, instead something more underhanded will do the trick...block him by proxy, block anyone following him.

https://archive.today/3GQhC

https://archive.today/bxoyZ
This is a vicious person

https://archive.today/ZrYcW

But its always interesting to see how she used to be

 

[0roo0roo]

That literally never happened. You're repeating lies that took hold because they were salacious, not based in reality. This is the biggest problem with Gamergate; their biggest talking points are all demonstrably false, and it makes it impossible to have an honest dialogue. We keep coming back to a lie that was disproved 7 months ago.

Actually no, this is the problem, you take the word of Kotaku defending kotaku to mean anything? You can't even get the facts right about whether gamergate made that claim.

You just discredited yourself entirely.
Internet Aristocrat - Quinnspiracy Theory [Mirror]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zz--i3M4PVk

That is the video which kicked it off, show me where Internet Aristocrat said what you are claiming?

No in fact he dismisses her as being relevant within the first third of the video and doesn't claim what you say we did, and this is the video which kicked this off, and had almost a million views before it was removed.

The question is how you can be this ignorant on this issue after 8 months. That is the problem gamergate has revealed.
The only reason she was continuously pushed back into this discussion is because people with an agenda decided it had to be so.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollyw...gging-zoe-quinns-sex-life-into-the-spotlight/

This why Brianna Wu can literally fabricate a sarin gas threat against herself
http://theralphretort.com/infamous-...spread-sarin-gas-lie-about-gamergate-2021015/
and be proven to have lied about fleeing her home.
http://theralphretort.com/did-deceitful-brianna-wu-pull-biggest-con/

And still the CBC will invite her to speak about her threat narrative
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVAzfOS5F1c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na6dVqrbGPI
As will NPR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F87Us1iezXQ
As will CBS
CBS: Brianna Wu Leaves PAX East Due To Death Threats #GamerGate (yes, report about threats she literally made against herself)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmcPEla5Xew

So you citing kotaku defending kotaku 8 months down the line when the media is proven to be this deceitful at this point is laughable.


This is why the anti GG side relies on censorship, they literally do not have a genuine argument.

https://twitter.com/LibertarianBlue/status/580074338700922880

We CAN Fix Videogames
http://techraptor.net/content/we-can-fix-videogames
http://techraptor.net/content/video-games-not-need-approval-old-media



Δ #GamerGate Update Rollup - 03/22/2015 Δ
Bonn Ortloff
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paRfOAV53WY


GamerGate 34.0
TheAndredal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVJoaG3TvH4


No BS! #GamerGate stream with NEUTRAL Stephanie(hitbox rehost)
Maguel83
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtxOmih7LtA

TNV: What is "Progressivism"? What is "Social Justice"?
New Versailles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-ALwrFmXQ0

On The Genealogy of Social Justice Warriors (Remastered)
Groundwork For The Metaphysics of MGTOW
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikMo3Tgjrmk


Everything's Awesome and Camille Paglia is Unhappy!
ReasonTV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88_3AhU0-B0


Iam8bit Responds to Email about Hateful Shirts
Ceara McCord
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=popzmZFdCDE

Why I May Not Renew My LootCrate Subscription
Video Culture Replay Blog
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tm1PvL1R5TY


Another reason why these blocklists are so insidious

Due to the changes of the twitter rules, she can eventually block you off the service.

http://www.reaxxion.com/6446/how-ra...r-executive-del-harvey-to-silence-other-women


Has Britain become hostile to blokes? (The Big Questions, 15/3/15) (only related because of milo of breitbart)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97k8SNnQkgY&app=desktop#_=_

I heard about the whole thing with Sky Williams when I woke up, and I was watching some of the broadcast this morning. I haven't gotten through it all yet, but I saw a comment from Jesse Cox, one of the streamers/YouTube personalities that I follow, that sort of made me raise a brow. He essentially tried to equate a female's breasts to his comedy in that both are used as part of their shtick. My issue with that is that I see a big difference between someone being humorous and someone putting on a push-up bra. One requires talent... the other requires a trip to Victoria's Secret.

Personally, I don't really care if someone wants to go the full gambit with a push-up bra, a low-cut shirt and a MySpace angle on their webcam. It doesn't hurt anyone at all, but it isn't exactly a very classy/professional way of attracting potential viewers.



I'm not disagreeing with your post, but I would like to point out that while the allegations were false, it did start the ball rolling to get people and sites to be more clear about potential conflicts of interest. The latest example is how Valve is forcing Steam Curators to be very explicit about any sort of paid endorsement (article).

The most unfortunate thing about this whole issue is that rather than be civil over disagreeing with potential bias with Zoe Quinn and the game editors, they overreacted and treated all parties poorly. People need to use civil discourse, and actually talk to the parties involved. Imagine how much different this situation would be if interested parties simply stated, "We saw that some of your editors might have had an undisclosed relationship with a game creator that they covered. This seems like a conflict of interest." Although, let's be honest... that's expecting way too much from the loudmouthed denizens of the Internet.

Main issue is that he's a homosexual who is getting judgmental and moralistic over something as frivolous as streaming a video game, when his sexual orientation would have been reason enough for others to attack him not that long ago.

If people want to see t&a on a stream, let the market decide. He's overrating the value of his own content, he's not giving a dissertation on video games with each stream, people are just watching him dick around.

There is no talking to these people, its why they produce and promote things like blacklists, and every time they lose an argument we've seen them resort to blocking people. Recently its funny watching how these people over the batgirl comic cover, one of these people will make an ignorant statement like "batman would never be depicted like that", and then people will reply with examples, and the answer to that is a block.

 

[CitizenKain]

Poes law, its hard to tell if you are trolling at this point.

You think blocking harassers is a bad thing. Why do you think you should be able to harass someone at whim? Maybe instead of posting a wall of garbage no sane person is going to read, maybe answer that question.

 

[MongGrel]

*Tries valiantly to nuke the whole thread out of existence, but knows he will fail*

I've had gamer gate type of things happen more real than this back in DAOC long ago, and the forums were hot there then.

This is more like nerd rage from some woman making money off it.

 

[brycejones]

*Tries valiantly to nuke the whole thread out of existence, but knows he will fail*

This is more like nerd rage from some woman making money off it.

Dude its about ethics in games journalism and preventing the womens from coming to chop off the penis.

 

[Blue_Max]

You think blocking harassers is a bad thing. Why do you think you should be able to harass someone at whim? Maybe instead of posting a wall of [garbage] [no sane person is going to read], maybe answer that question.

As usual, it's far easier to attack the person saying something than to debate what he has to say.

 

[KMFJD]

Dude its about ethics in games journalism and preventing the womens from coming to chop off the penis.

 

[QuantumPion]

Dude its about ethics in games journalism and preventing the feminazis from coming to chop off the penis.

FTFY, also: http://youtu.be/9tQSOlF9ZZM

 

[CitizenKain]

As usual, it's far easier to attack the person saying something than to debate what he has to say.

This person doesn't debate. I guess I can go paste a wall of youtube videos about unrelated shit if it makes you feel better.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

As usual, it's far easier to attack the person saying something than to debate what he has to say.

We've already covered this. Let's recap:

It has nothing to do with free speech, it has to do with the entire point of a discussion forum. It's a place where someone can espouse their point of view, someone else can respond, and a dialogue takes place. There is no dialogue when someone posts a list of links and doesn't respond to anyone. Look at his posting history; he makes a post talking about dozens of different subjects, comes back a few days later, makes a similar post... and that's it. He hasn't responded to a single person in months. Refusing to engage with other posters is antithetical to the very nature of this medium. If he wants to continue posting long lists of links and ignoring the response, let him start a blog.

Atomic Playboy makes a good, valid point. If the OP isn't discussing anything it may as well be a bot. There can always be another thread on the same subject... after all, Sarkeesian isn't stepping out of the spotlight and just netted almost a $half-mil for her evil bullshit. She's keeping the topic hot and fresh for herself - why is it wrong to have an opposing view while the topic (and problem) is still very much alive?

So, yeah. There's no point engaging in a debate with a poster who is monologuing.

 

[jhbball]

lol, gamergate. so many neckbeard trolls angry at women.

 

[QuantumPion]

lol, gamergate. so many neckbeard trolls angry at women.

You got that right.

 

[blake0812]

We've already covered this. Let's recap:





So, yeah. There's no point engaging in a debate with a poster who is monologuing.

Maybe because when he tries to have a discussion people start flinging shit everywhere.

 

[Exophase]

0roo0roo's posts in this thread aren't conducive of discussion or debate but neither or most of the posts in this threads, largely drive by ridicule. Posts by me or Aikouka that try to seriously talk about this are mostly ignored.

 

[blake0812]

0roo0roo's posts in this thread aren't conducive of discussion or debate but neither or most of the posts in this threads, largely drive by ridicule. Posts by me or Aikouka that try to seriously talk about this are mostly ignored.

I'm guilty of that, can you quote some of your posts? I'd hate to search through this long thread.

 

[Aikouka]

Main issue is that he's a homosexual who is getting judgmental and moralistic over something as frivolous as streaming a video game, when his sexual orientation would have been reason enough for others to attack him not that long ago.

After having a discussion with TotalBiscuit, he ended up posting a follow-up video to better explain his point. From what I got, he's mainly displeased with people that attempt to mislead their viewers by doing things like saying, "Donate and you can send me a boyfriend application." Personally, I've never seen that, but I don't watch that many Twitch streams. However, no one seemed surprised when he mentioned it. He also mentioned disliking it when people are supposedly streaming a game, but they have their camera taking up the majority of their screen or a full-screen view (i.e. no game at all).

You think blocking harassers is a bad thing. Why do you think you should be able to harass someone at whim? Maybe instead of posting a wall of garbage no sane person is going to read, maybe answer that question.

At least from what I have ascertained, I don't think anyone is supporting harassment. From what I've seen posted above, the complaints about this BlockBot is that it adds people for frivolous reasons. Wasn't there that article about the guy that lost 2000 followers (via BlockBot) after following some GamerGate guy? Now, I haven't looked at either of those people's tweets, but I'm assuming that the guy that lost 2000 followers didn't harass anyone.

Honestly, the overall tone of your post kind of bothers me. The reason is that you seemed to assume that his intent was negative ("You think blocking harassers is a bad thing?") rather than actually asking what his intent is. I see this a lot in "debates" on the Internet, and it's an incredibly toxic approach. I saw something similar in a video on whether Link (from The Legend of Zelda) could be a female. Someone in the comments stated that they preferred if Link stayed a male, and unsurprisingly, the responses were not favorable. It didn't matter that the person also remarked that they wouldn't want Samus Aran to be made into a male.

 

[Exophase]

I'm guilty of that, can you quote some of your posts? I'd hate to search through this long thread.

Sure, here's some posts I made that weren't really responded to:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36926818&postcount=204
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36931268&postcount=222
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36959521&postcount=323
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36967339&postcount=348
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37077850&postcount=477

Maybe they're just TL;DR regardless of content, I dunno. I stopped really bothering around then. At least it's better to be ignored than to be insulted.

I did have a back and forth early on with Atomic Playboy on review scores and RogueStar's desire to get Polygon blacklisted by Nintendo for having a crappy Bayonetta 2 review (I don't agree with pretty much anything RogueStar says or does). And after this I had a back and forth with blankslate about 8chan. So it wasn't all ignored.

Looking through the thread I think Atomic Playboy and blankslate have in general been more receptive to discussion (not just with me) than a lot of the other posters.

 

[CitizenKain]

Honestly, the overall tone of your post kind of bothers me. The reason is that you seemed to assume that his intent was negative ("You think blocking harassers is a bad thing?") rather than actually asking what his intent is. I see this a lot in "debates" on the Internet, and it's an incredibly toxic approach. I saw something similar in a video on whether Link (from The Legend of Zelda) could be a female. Someone in the comments stated that they preferred if Link stayed a male, and unsurprisingly, the responses were not favorable. It didn't matter that the person also remarked that they wouldn't want Samus Aran to be made into a male.

The reason I assume his intent is negative is because there is no other way to take it. People run blockbot simply because they are tired of a group of people constantly filling their feeds with anything from pointless spam to threats, and Twitter hasn't stepped up in developing tools on their side to handle it.
Look at this:

The blockbot users and creators ARE the abusers. The greatest thing for a tyrant is to be able to unaccountably label people as heretics or subhuman monsters. This is the ultimate power these people seek, to be the arbiters of what people are acceptable based on their whims, and to quietly blacklist these people based on the smears they just make up.

When people are on the blockbot as "humanists", you know there is no legitimacy to the list.

You only have to watch Randi Harpers behavior from today alone where she was gleefully blocking people like Mark Kern, diablo II/starcraft producer.
Too obviously unjustifiable to block him directly anymore, instead something more underhanded will do the trick...block him by proxy, block anyone following him.

He is accusing the people who are being harassed as being the abusers, simply because they are tired of seeing their garbage. There is nothing out there that says Brianna Wu, Randi Harper and so on must see someone's twitter posts. It isn't a 1st Amendment issue, it isn't a human rights issue, its simply they are tired of garbage. Its a toxic approach because there is no other way to expressing things to many gamergaters.

 

[Blue_Max]

You keep calling every opposing point of view "garbage", as if having an objection is the same thing as abuse.

It's not. And blocking all opposing points of view is a cowardly bully attack typical of a propagandist; no dissent shall be tolerated.

 

[Exophase]

He is accusing the people who are being harassed as being the abusers, simply because they are tired of seeing their garbage. There is nothing out there that says Brianna Wu, Randi Harper and so on must see someone's twitter posts. It isn't a 1st Amendment issue, it isn't a human rights issue, its simply they are tired of garbage. Its a toxic approach because there is no other way to expressing things to many gamergaters.

He's accusing Randi Harper of being a harasser because there are known incidents of her (quite recently) stalking people on social media for months, filling their feeds with invective, and encouraging her followers to do the same. Not because of any harassment she's experienced, not because she made ggautoblocker.

I can understand people wanting to block broad groups based on whatever affiliation they have, just to try to reduce the risk of getting badgered online, even if it means blocking the wrong people (and GGAB resulted in some pretty absurd blocks, most notability the head of the Peurto Rican chapter of IGDA, given that the block list was endorsed by IGDA). Where it bothers me is when organizations like Raspberry Pi use it. They use tweets to send out news to their customers, and now some of their customers can no longer follow them just because of who they chose to follow. No it's not a first amendment issue, but in my opinion it's an awful way to run a business and because of that I will never purchase anything from them. Similar story with a jobs listing bot using it.

And when promotional tools and bots use it, the claim that it only serves to filter people overwhelming your feed with nonsense doesn't hold up. A PR account shouldn't care about that. A bot account definitely shouldn't care about that. It makes it seem more like they want to exclude people from benefits than protect themselves. In other words, punishment.

Maybe if Twitter would try harder to improve options we could have things like one-way blocks where their mentions aren't in your feed but they can still follow you. This would solve some of the problems I have. But I get the feeling Twitter would rather cry about how they've failed everyone than actually do anything useful.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

And blocking all opposing points of view is a cowardly bully attack typical of a propagandist; no dissent shall be tolerated.

How exactly is blocking someone a "bully attack"?