#1 in the OP: If you're not willing to actually discuss things, don't post.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
#GAMERGATE: The Threadening [Read the OP] -- #StopGamerGate2014
- Thread starter besada
- Start date
- Status
#1 in the OP: If you're not willing to actually discuss things, don't post.
SirPainsalot
Banned
Not to OT here, but why are you being so passive-aggressive? Dude broke a rule sure, but kindly pointing that out would have been a better solution compared to just being rude.
Darkmakaimura
Can You Imagine What SureAI Is Going To Do With Garfield?
He's right. He was just quoting the actual post so I understand.
SirPainsalot
Banned
Yeah he's right, but that doesn't mean he wasn't rude (imo) in his posts.
Well it's best not to be dismissive. I'll probably end up listening to the whole thing. They're usually nice enough.
I don't think there is anything weird about a lot of women ganging up and shaming another woman. It happens all the time. :\
It blows my mind that people think women never show hatred or attack other women. That's like saying guys never project their social fears of being gay or weak onto other guys. Of course this is going to happen. It gives men and women a huge boost in confidence to project their hatred onto people who encapsulate their own fear of social isolation. By knocking them down, they rise themselves up.
>___>
It's all very unfortunate.
This is at least the third time in this thread that someone's posted the same tired pro-GG arguments from a link they couldn't be bothered to summarize or defend themselves, so know, I'm not going to apologize for being annoyed.
SirPainsalot
Banned
I get where you're coming from. No need to be so wound up about it though.
I don't think it's weird for women to shame another woman. I'm just frustrated that apparently we're supposed to find these statements insightful if women are making them? Milo is ample proof that people who aren't straight white men can be just as reactionary as anyone else.
Noted.
Thanks for sharing this. She's amazing, I don't know where she gets the energy to constantly politely engage in debate on this subject. The article in her pinned tweet criticising the way some on her "side" engage in debate is a great read too: http://geekessays.wordpress.com/2014/09/02/you-cant-build-inclusion-on-exclusionary-language/
axisofweevils
Holy crap! Today's real megaton is that more than two people can have the same first name.
So, in a worrying development, the GGers apparently managed to convince Intel to pull their advertising from Gamasutra...
https://twitter.com/gamasutra/status/517415198492467202
https://twitter.com/gamasutra/status/517415198492467202
Riposte
Member
I'm sure this is a huge morale booster for them. It's seems like just enough, no matter how small that really is, keeps materializing to keep this train going.
I hope intel rethinks there decision and looks at everything related to the movement.
I've just done so via this form: https://www-ssl.intel.com/content/www/us/en/forms/corporate-responsibility-contact-us.html
axisofweevils
Holy crap! Today's real megaton is that more than two people can have the same first name.
This email is being shared around twitter right now. Apparently, Intel's response to the GGers.
MHWilliams
Member
That is the system working as intended.
Replying to Intel via this form in a civil manner would be the correct course of action.
For the most part, Intel is a neutral advertiser in the video game space. Surely, I wouldn't expect many opinion pieces about Intel products on a site like Gamasutra. How does this move enhance journalistic integrity, exactly?
This is true, but it's rich coming from people so quick to see "censorship" in every critique of their viewpoint.
This email is being shared around twitter right now. Apparently, Intel's response to the GGers.
::Whistle::
This isn't going to go well for them.
Edit: Just shot Intel an email.
Same here. Tried to give a brief summary and point out why it's not a good idea to align themselves with that group.
Intel gives Gamasutra money to host those ads. Gamasutra is the target because that's where the Leigh Alexander article was.
This email is being shared around twitter right now. Apparently, Intel's response to the GGers.
I can see where Intel is coming from here. They do market to gamers among other groups, and a place you advertise at then publishes a piece that talks about the "death of gamers" (and is not a particularly well-written or kind article IMO) is probably not going to make them happy.
Add in that we are in a very risk averse business environment when it comes to sponsorships (see: NFL, etc); makes sense for them as a business to err on the side of caution for the time being.
APZonerunner
Member
Except they've just endorsed one side of an argument which really doesn't have a plain right or wrong; it's all subjective. As such, they've taken a side and, as this thread is demonstrating, pissed off a lot of other people in the process. It's not like Gama or Leigh killed somebody or did something that is flat-out reprehensible and inexcusable - she expressed an opinion and the publication backed her up by publishing it.
In instances like this, the only way to win is not to play, to act and make decisions as if this entire debate isn't happening at all. Intel's about to get a massive backlash, except instead of people trying their luck to get something pulled, people are now actually going to be mad at them.
It's an extremely common strategy in the world of social media campaigns. It's often quite effective, and can be important for sound movements. Of course, since the #gamergate folk are insane, it can also be used for evil as we can see.
I was just thinking the same thing. Not only could it kick things off again, but it adds an unearned and unintentional legitimacy to the GG bullshit.
I'm really hoping it doesn't spark another round of hateful abuse.
I'm sure this was their intent from a business perspective, but they've effectively taken a side by doing this. They would have been better advised to stay neutral altogether.
To be fair they are neutral now. They aren't advertising in 8chan as far as I know. I really don't really see it as an endorsement though, they cater to gamers, saw the article and decided to pull out.
I just finished listening to the Raph Koster livestream. He pointed out how attacking Gamasutra is also attacking Developers. Gamasutra was made for developers and many have blogs there. Basically, all the GGers are doing is scaring developers away and making sure they never engage with them.
lazorexplosion
Member
Good, screw Gamasutra.
They took a stupid niche issue and tried to turn it into a sweeping, generalizing, nasty attack on all gamers for click-bait. They were downright insulting about gamers for attention. They poured fuel onto an insubstantial issue by making it an us vs. them battle between their straw-man of gamers and the self-righteous. Look at all this "hurr, gamers are basement dwellers" bullshit.
Why would you ever put up advertising for gaming hardware on a site that's making nasty, insulting generalizations of the demographic you're advertising to.
They took a stupid niche issue and tried to turn it into a sweeping, generalizing, nasty attack on all gamers for click-bait. They were downright insulting about gamers for attention. They poured fuel onto an insubstantial issue by making it an us vs. them battle between their straw-man of gamers and the self-righteous. Look at all this "hurr, gamers are basement dwellers" bullshit.
Why would you ever put up advertising for gaming hardware on a site that's making nasty, insulting generalizations of the demographic you're advertising to.
I don't particularly see them as taking a side. GG is desperately trying to spin this as them "taking a side", but I don't feel that's particularly accurate or fair. That seems like a group that is about to lose a battle desperately looking for any signs of hope, rational or not. (Personal Note: I think the entire GG thing is stupid. They should be concerned about the recent issues with YT streamers and Shadows of Mordor if they really cared about journalistic ethics. This indie stuff is dumb.)
I mean, to quote Leigh's article directly
"‘Games culture’ is a petri dish of people who know so little about how human social interaction and professional life works that they can concoct online ‘wars’ about social justice or ‘game journalism ethics,’ straight-faced, and cause genuine human consequences. Because of video games. "
If someone at Sports Illustrated had written that statement about the crazed sports fans that frequent talk radio and do really dumb things (see Auburn, tree poisoning)...they would get fired. Because it's unprofessional as hell; even as an opinion piece.
"When you decline to create or to curate a culture in your spaces, you’re responsible for what spawns in the vacuum. That’s what’s been happening to games. "
So, if someone said that about, say, crazed religious extremists. Let's change that to be a little more topical.
"When you decline to create or to curate a culture in your religion, you’re responsible for what spawns in the vacuum. That’s what’s been happening to Islam."
Yeah, gonna bet that doesn't sound so good when you change the group of people from "gamers" to "members of a religion". I feel like if someone wrote that (and I'm sure people have), they would rightfully get destroyed.
I think GG is stupid, but what Intel is doing makes a ton of sense. Everyone wants to talk about how gaming culture needs to grow up. Well, that's true for our entire industry, from developers to writers to critics to fans. We also have to raise the level of our discourse - everywhere.
MHWilliams
Member
In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really affect Gamasutra, which is why their EiC was rather open about it. Gamasutra is just one brand of UBM Tech, who also runs GDC, GDC Next, GameCareerGuide, and IGF. If you honestly think Intel won't have a large presence at GDC...
Yeah.
What disappoints some is the intent of the action, not that it will have a material effect on Gamasutra.
lazorexplosion
Member
The whole thing was something that could and should have been discussed reasonably and briefly and then died. But instead, they made vastly more people angry with insulting generalizations about a much larger group, riling more people up and fanning the flames. They trolled for attention, flat out and unsubtly. And that sort of anger-fanning insulting bullshit is textbook trolling.
LiegeWaffle
Member
Uh-oh, this is not a smart move. Because now that they have actually done something, this might backfire if people end up interpreting that as a support of a misogynist harassment campaign (which is a bigger deal for Valley companies than you would think).
Well, isn't Gamasutra's target audience actually game developers? I don't think any of them are actually happy about this turn of events.
DragonSworne
Banned
Do people here actually support Leigh's article?
Just have to point out that Leigh Alexander's views do NOT represent Gamasutra, only her own. Attacking the site as a whole for the opinions of one person is hardly a reasonable course of action.
lazorexplosion
Member
Gamasutra were one of the outlets that spread anger, flames and us vs. them mentality further and wider than any misogynist anonymous troll ever could.
Mr_Antimatter
Member
now? The entire movement was basically an attempt to censor all 'sjw' talk in the videogame industry. They just call it 'bias' or 'politicization' or 'agenda' stuff.
They should have just mumbled "Guys, be nice" after two consecutive campaigns of harassment and death threats instead of suggesting that there's something fucked up when this keeps happening.
lazorexplosion
Member
Yes, they should have. That would have been an infinitely more reasonable, productive and helpful contribution than the 'gamers are angry basement dwellers, screw anyone who calls themselves gamers' bullshit that they threw up.
- Status