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

[MagickMan]

Yep, keep on living down to the stereotype. You're doing an excellent job.

 

[Victorian Gray]

What's it like living the life of a cliche?

 

[Blue_Max]

Did you read your own link?
Nice self ownage there, btw.

Ohhhhhohohohohhreally? Hoping one carefully-picked line would mean no one else would read the report?
Here's all the stuff you skipped over BEFORE the line you carefully quoted:

Police-reported data show that the risk of violent victimization among adult males (aged 18 years of age and over) is comparable to that of adult females. Adult females accounted for 51% or about 152,000 of the 298,000 victims of violent incidents 1 reported to the police in 2008, while some 146,000 victims were male (Table 1, Table 2).
...
Police-reported data show that in 2008, the rate of violent victimization for female and male victims was comparable, at 1,155 and 1,150 per 100,000 population, respectively (Table 1, Table 2). Moreover, throughout the preceding 5-year period from 2004 to 2008, the rates of violent victimization for men and women remained relatively stable (Chart 1). 2
...

...
Even though for Canada as a whole the rates of violent victimization were virtually the same for both sexes, there were some notable differences in the rates of victimization for men and women in some provinces and territories. For instance, in 2008, female rates of violent victimization were higher than rates for males in 10 of the 13 provinces and territories, most notably Nunavut and Northwest Territories as well as Saskatchewan (Table 3). Conversely, male rates of violent victimization were higher than female rates in British Columbia, Quebec and Nova Scotia, 3 while for New Brunswick there was almost no difference in the rate of victimization between the sexes.
...
Gender differences in the rates of violent victimization against males and females were also observed in many of Canada's Census Metropolitan Areas (CMA). 4 For example, in 2008, Thunder Bay reported the greatest difference in the rate of violent victimization for women (1,780) compared to men (1,359) (Table 4). Also, in the CMAs of Peterborough, Kitchener, Brantford, Windsor, Greater Sudbury and Regina, female rates of violence were considerably higher than male rates. Conversely, in 2008, male rates of victimization were higher compared to female rates in the CMAs of Trois-Rivières, Victoria, Sherbrooke, Vancouver and Québec.

Overall in 2008, the highest rates of violent victimization against men were found in the CMAs of Saskatoon, Saint John and Halifax, while for women, Saskatoon, Thunder Bay and Regina were cities with the highest rates of violent victimization (Table 4).



Eskim-oh... Cherry-pickin' like a pro. :thumbsup:

 

[Blue_Max]

Everything he is posting here is showing the system is working just fine

Congratulations - you've earned the trophy for the nastiest insult in the thread.

First, you claim I'm autistic (which you insinuated was a bad thing, despite trying to backtrack on that one.)
Then you insinuate 2-3 times that "there must be very good reason you don't have access to your kids. Yep - system works fine! He doesn't deserve to see his kids."

Take the podium and stand tall, there is no greater asshole than you today.

[cheering]

 

[mindmajick]

Congratulations - you've earned the trophy for the nastiest insult in the thread.

First, you claim I'm autistic (which you insinuated was a bad thing, despite trying to backtrack on that one.)
Then you insinuate 2-3 times that "there must be very good reason you don't have access to your kids. Yep - system works fine! He doesn't deserve to see his kids."

Take the podium and stand tall, there is no greater asshole than you today.

[cheering]

Is this you taking the "higher ground" in the flame war. Because that's all you guys are doing.

 

[fskimospy]

Ohhhhhohohohohhreally? Hoping on carefully-picked line would mean no one else would read the report?
Here's all the stuff that came BEFORE you skipped over to get the line you carefully quoted:

Police-reported data show that the risk of violent victimization among adult males (aged 18 years of age and over) is comparable to that of adult females. Adult females accounted for 51% or about 152,000 of the 298,000 victims of violent incidents 1 reported to the police in 2008, while some 146,000 victims were male (Table 1, Table 2).
...
Police-reported data show that in 2008, the rate of violent victimization for female and male victims was comparable, at 1,155 and 1,150 per 100,000 population, respectively (Table 1, Table 2). Moreover, throughout the preceding 5-year period from 2004 to 2008, the rates of violent victimization for men and women remained relatively stable (Chart 1). 2
...

...
Even though for Canada as a whole the rates of violent victimization were virtually the same for both sexes, there were some notable differences in the rates of victimization for men and women in some provinces and territories. For instance, in 2008, female rates of violent victimization were higher than rates for males in 10 of the 13 provinces and territories, most notably Nunavut and Northwest Territories as well as Saskatchewan (Table 3). Conversely, male rates of violent victimization were higher than female rates in British Columbia, Quebec and Nova Scotia, 3 while for New Brunswick there was almost no difference in the rate of victimization between the sexes.
...
Gender differences in the rates of violent victimization against males and females were also observed in many of Canada's Census Metropolitan Areas (CMA). 4 For example, in 2008, Thunder Bay reported the greatest difference in the rate of violent victimization for women (1,780) compared to men (1,359) (Table 4). Also, in the CMAs of Peterborough, Kitchener, Brantford, Windsor, Greater Sudbury and Regina, female rates of violence were considerably higher than male rates. Conversely, in 2008, male rates of victimization were higher compared to female rates in the CMAs of Trois-Rivières, Victoria, Sherbrooke, Vancouver and Québec.

Overall in 2008, the highest rates of violent victimization against men were found in the CMAs of Saskatoon, Saint John and Halifax, while for women, Saskatoon, Thunder Bay and Regina were cities with the highest rates of violent victimization (Table 4).



Eskim-oh... Cherry-pickin' like a pro. :thumbsup:

You said 'men do not commit many more acts of violence towards women, when your own link shows that men in fact commit acts of violence towards women much more often than women do to men.

It's not my fault you don't bother to read your own links. If you had you wouldn't have owned yourself.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Congratulations - you've earned the trophy for the nastiest insult in the thread.

First, you claim I'm autistic (which you insinuated was a bad thing, despite trying to backtrack on that one.)
Then you insinuate 2-3 times that "there must be very good reason you don't have access to your kids. Yep - system works fine! He doesn't deserve to see his kids."

Take the podium and stand tall, there is no greater asshole than you today.

[cheering]

I can totally understand a judge worried about your influence on a child
Hopefully one day you will be able to see yourself as others do, then admit you have a problem, and finally get to work on fixing it

 

[Blue_Max]

It's not my fault you don't bother to read your own links. If you had you wouldn't have owned yourself.

I can totally understand a judge worried about your influence on a child

I already said the judge gave me fair time. You're just doing what SJW's do best - counting "wins" by how mad you make people, not by proving a point.

"It takes a lot to get under my skin. Well, congratulations - you just won the solid gold cupie doll!"

 

[Orignal Earl]

"It takes a lot to get under my skin. "

No, it don't

 

[fskimospy]

Being unable to admit when you said something wrong is also not an attractive trait.

 

[Victorian Gray]

I already said the judge gave me fair time. You're just doing what SJW's do best - counting "wins" by how mad you make people, not by proving a point.
"It takes a lot to get under my skin. Well, congratulations - you just won the solid gold cupie doll!"

 

[Blue_Max]

...and you say others are a "cliche"... I wonder how many more sheeple will jump on the "insulting his kids makes him mad trolololo" bandwagon?

 

[mindmajick]

...and you say others are a "cliche"... I wonder how many more sheeple will jump on the "insulting his kids makes him mad trolololo" bandwagon?

Haven't you been doing the same thing?

 

[Victorian Gray]

...and you say others are a "cliche"... I wonder how many more sheeple will jump on the "insulting his kids makes him mad trolololo" bandwagon?

 

[Orignal Earl]

...and you say others are a "cliche"... I wonder how many more sheeple will jump on the "insulting his kids makes him mad trolololo" bandwagon?

Nobody insulted your kids
You did insult my kids moms though

 

[norseamd]

What's it like living the life of a cliche?

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AcceptableTargets

 

[Victorian Gray]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AcceptableTargets

That's nice.

 

[Skel]

True, she didn't achieve her stated goal of changing games... yet. (That crusade is still being fought.) As seen in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhDTtO_lDTs
But one less-said goal was also to rub dirt in the face of all men who play those "stupid games" instead of paying attention to the princess under their own roof. It was all over TV about how eeeeevil these games are, and how BAD it makes the men who play them - so even the average guy who plays the occasional game has to think twice before picking up the controller under the hateful glare of his girlfirend or wife.

Perception. They've altered perception and tried to make "gaming is only for losers" again.



Case in point...



No... we're not quite in a feminist utopia where all men are bound by severe law to never offend a woman. ALMOST.... but not quite.
[pats pocket voice recorder] This little baby has saved my ass from female office bullshit twice now.

Once again I have to question if you're trolling.. no one can believe this level of stupidity. If you really "the average guy who plays the occasional game has to think twice before picking up the controller under the hateful glare of his girlfriend or wife" then you really don't understand how relationships work.

It amounted to grants and support going to them instead of more qualified, talented developers. They're parasites, nothing more.



Listen and Believe! HAHAHAHA!!!

When did they start giving grants out to game developers?

 

[DrDoug]

/childish bullshit

Are you a fucking child where you have to use stupid fucking images in your lame-assed attempts at communication with others? WTF do your stupid images prove, that you know how to copy and paste so... TAKE THAT!? They don't prove anything else, that's for damned sure. Damn, you act like a special little fucking snowflake where you are absolutely right and the rest of the world can fuck off, no matter how wrong you are about something. If you did indeed lose access to your kids I can understand why. You're a raging childish asshole who refuses to grow up, thinks that you are right and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong and thinks that the world is out to get you.

I wouldn't want any kids around that kind of person, that's for damned sure.

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Are you a fucking child where you have to use stupid fucking images in your lame-assed attempts at communication with others? WTF do your stupid images prove, that you know how to copy and paste so... TAKE THAT!? They don't prove anything else, that's for damned sure. Damn, you act like a special little fucking snowflake where you are absolutely right and the rest of the world can fuck off, no matter how wrong you are about something. If you did indeed lose access to your kids I can understand why. You're a raging childish asshole who refuses to grow up, thinks that you are right and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong and thinks that the world is out to get you.

I wouldn't want any kids around that kind of person, that's for damned sure.

Posts by Blue_Max: 164
Posts by Blue_Max that are only a picture: 7

Posts by Victorian Gray: 66
Posts by Victorian Gray that are only a picture: 9

From the outside looking in DrDoug, I'm kind of surprised you can post the above with the references back to his children, not to mention just being a post of insults, and not feel the smack across your face from your own blatant bias.. D:

 

[norseamd]

From the outside looking in DrDoug, I'm kind of surprised you can post the above with the references back to his children, not to mention just being a post of insults, and not feel the smack across your face from your own blatant bias..

Want to play guess that magical logical fallacy?

 

[fskimospy]

Posts by Blue_Max: 164
Posts by Blue_Max that are only a picture: 7

Posts by Victorian Gray: 66
Posts by Victorian Gray that are only a picture: 9

From the outside looking in DrDoug, I'm kind of surprised you can post the above with the references back to his children, not to mention just being a post of insults, and not feel the smack across your face from your own blatant bias.. D:

Did you really go through and count those? That's weird.

Also, where did he say that posts with only a picture are notable?

Blue_Max has shown pretty clearly that if he behaves anything like how he behaves here in real life his kids are very unfortunate.

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Want to play guess that magical logical fallacy?

Nope.

 

[norseamd]

Nope.

You sure?

You could probably bank of hundreds of examples of fallacies from him in all his comments here.

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Did you really go through and count those? That's weird.

Nope.

Also, where did he say that posts with only a picture are notable?

He didn't. Where did I say that he did?

Blue_Max has shown pretty clearly that if he behaves anything like how he behaves here in real life his kids are very unfortunate.

That's always a possibility.

That being said:

Are you a fucking child where you have to use stupid fucking images in your lame-assed attempts at communication with others?

If I see one person who's percentage of image-only based replies is far higher than another's, I'd be inclined to think a statement like above is relevant to both groups.