• 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.

SXSW cancels a panel on "Overcoming Harassment in Games" due to threats of violence

C

crimsonheadGCN

Banned
crimsonheadGCN said:
The Open Gaming Society, which is run by the moderator of the pro-GG panel, released "The Doctrine of Gaming"

http://www.theopengamingsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/the-doctrine-of-gaming-4-0.pdf

smh
Click to expand...

In version 7 of this, there is a section about the president:

Subsection 1. Voting in a President

A president is voted in by both the board and the community. The candidates must receive a sixty percent [60%]
majority vote from the community and a three-fifths [3/5] majority vote from the board to become president. A
presidential candidate must possess the same qualifications as any board member (see Article 1. Section 3.
Subsection 1). The president may serve as many terms as they are re-elected for – there is no limit. The president
may step down at any time without reason, but must give a one month (30 day) notice.

Subsection 2. Impeaching a president

A president may be impeached when they has done one of the following: overreaching the powers ascribed in
this document, engaging in harassment of any sort for an extended period of time, breaking a law that would
result in a jail or prison sentence longer than one week (seven days), denying the legitimacy of this doctrine,
taking bribes, using the powers of the president to engage in overtly discriminatory behavior, or being deemed
incompetent by both the community and the board. The community vote eighty percent [80%] in favor of the
president’s removal from office, and the board must vote four-fifths [4/5] in favor.

When voting to impeach the president community and board members must present any evidence available
including, but not limited to, documents, archives, public records, electronic logs, imagery, video, and audio
recordings – all must have either a date or time (or both) present and legible.

Subsection 3. Veto

The president has the power to veto an amendment that has already been voted on by both the community
and the board. If an amendment is voted in by both the board and community the president will have 24 hours
to veto it or it becomes permanent. The president may also veto board appointments so long as they provide
credible, and substantial reasoning for their decision. They may not veto a board appointment based on gender,
race, religious beliefs or lack thereof, sexual orientation, or any other superficial descriptors.

The president may veto only 3 times during a single term. This is done to place greater weight on the power of the
veto and to ensure that its power is not abused or overused. If the president is re-elected the veto count will reset.
If any veto remains it is cast out and does not carry over across terms.
Click to expand...

http://www.theopengamingsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/the-doctrine-of-gaming-7-0.pdf
 
H

HP_Wuvcraft

Banned
crimsonheadGCN said:
Congresswoman Katherine Clark sent a letter to SXSW:

12191840_1668328650079333_3105409909628661304_n.jpg
Click to expand...

This is proof that gaming journos have deep pockets.

neshcom said:
You're gonna need a 3/5ths majority to make a declaration like that, bub
Click to expand...

You guys have really no idea how much I want them to start "hearings".
 
H

HP_Wuvcraft

Banned
Subsection 2. Impeaching a president

A president may be impeached when they has done one of the following: overreaching the powers ascribed in
this document, engaging in harassment of any sort for an extended period of time, breaking a law that would
result in a jail or prison sentence longer than one week (seven days)
Click to expand...

Wait, whut?

So the president can engage in online harassment as well as commit crimes.
 
O

Oersted

Member
HP_Wuvcraft said:
Yeah, there are really only two options here:

1) Someone on the SXSW scheduling committee is pro-GG.

2) SXSW knew exactly what they were doing and were hoping for some sort of confrontation at either panel.
Click to expand...

It does look like a publicity stunt, which is weird, to put it mildly.

crimsonheadGCN said:
The Open Gaming Society, which is run by the moderator of the pro-GG panel, released "The Doctrine of Gaming"

http://www.theopengamingsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/the-doctrine-of-gaming-4-0.pdf

smh
Click to expand...

Thats how crazy pills look like in written form. They just want control, don't they?
 
O

Oersted

Member
Harassment is an issue Vox Media takes extremely seriously. As a digital media company, our journalists often face online harassment and find themselves on the receiving end of threats. We support our staff when they encounter this kind of abuse while continuing to do the work that can result in it, and want to continue an open dialogue about how best to do so.
By approving the panels in question, SXSW assumed responsibility for related controversies and security threats. By canceling the panels, they have cut off an opportunity to discuss a real and urgent problem in media and technology today. We have reached out to SXSW organizers and ask that they host a safe and open discussion of these issues, rather than avoid them. Vox Media will not be participating in this year's festival unless its organizers take this issue seriously and take appropriate steps to correct. We will work to find an alternative forum for this conversation and invite others who feel the same to join us.
Click to expand...

http://www.theverge.com/2015/10/27/...t=chorus&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter
 
N

neshcom

Banned
backlot said:
Sounds like Vox and Buzzfeed want the GamerGate panel back in as well for some reason.
Click to expand...

My guess is that they'd rather have both back than start a flamewar over why the pro-GG isn't worthy to come back. By making it about safety, they can protect themselves from the bombardment of WHY DO YOU GET TO EDITORIALIZE, IT'S NOT YOUR EVENT. YOU REALLY DO WANT TO SILENCE US, WHAT ARE YOU HIDING, THINK LOGICALLY.

Buzzfeed is probably a big loss, Vox a smaller one, but it'll take filmmakers and musicians in the festivals other (more popular) wings to speak up as well to get some real fire under SXSW's ass.
 
V

VibratingDonkey

Member
ElNarez said:
Arthur Chu has a piece showcasing SXSW's process going back to the panel submission process.

Just shows how irresponsible SXSW has been through the whole ordeal.
Click to expand...
Yeah, just comprehensively miserable, disappointing management of the whole situation.
The response to Caroline Sinders saying it'd make for a boring event if both sides, abusers and targets, weren't allowed a platform, is just absolutely absurd. SXSW is in severe need of reorganizing its priorities.

It's interesting that SXSW has opted not to reply to any of these articles.
 
N

Nanashrew

Banned
Only one needs to come back and it's the one on how to handle and overcome harassment. The panel was never about GamerGate, but the idea of two sides that pervades feeds into the narrative of equal opposition, that If Randi Harper or Zoe Quinn make a panel at some place, there are some that feel there needs to be a counterpoint. It's so bad that right now, since it wasn't about GamerGate, their existence alone triggered this line of thinking.

Their existence alone now makes some think there needs to be a counterpoint to them.

It needs to stop. There is no two sides to the story, there is no anti-, there is no equal opposition.
 
S

Slavik81

Member
Archurro said:
Buzzfeed is pulling out of SXSW in response to this. http://www.polygon.com/2015/10/27/9621692/buzzfeed-withdrawal-sxsw-gaming-panels-canceled

This is pretty huge. Possibly new thread worthy?
Click to expand...
Good. Without this sort of counterweight, you'd see controversial talks cancelled at the drop of a hat. There really does need to be some sort of consequence to giving in to violent threats, so they consider whether it's really worth letting jackasses dictate what can or cannot be said.
 
T

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
crimsonheadGCN said:
The Open Gaming Society, which is run by the moderator of the pro-GG panel, released "The Doctrine of Gaming"

http://www.theopengamingsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/the-doctrine-of-gaming-4-0.pdf

smh
Click to expand...

I just

oww

EDIT: I think you could write several essays about this piece alone

EDIT 2: Lordy
4. Must not [currently] be a member of the gaming “press”.
5. They should not have a political or personal agenda that conflicts with the views and goals of the Open
Gaming Society.
Click to expand...

EDIT 3:
Oh my god
This document awards protection to gamers in certain situations. Here we will outline the specific situations in
which the doctrine can protect [you].
1. When criticizing a public figure or product.
2. When falsely accused of harassment.
3. When creating a review of a product.
4. When publicly submitting your opinion.
5. When discriminated against by public bodies (E.g. Game developers, publishers, public figures).
6. When discriminated against by individuals within the community.
7. When levying small claims against developers and publishers.
8. Anonymous posting – we cannot determine the origin of a comment or threat if the poster is anonymous.
Click to expand...
 
C

Corronchilejano

Member
Sounds like "press" could be anything they deem press-like. You have a blog? Damn, must be a journalist.

Unless you're from Breitbart. That's just fiction.
 
F

Fantastapotamus

Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
crimsonheadGCN said:
The Open Gaming Society, which is run by the moderator of the pro-GG panel, released "The Doctrine of Gaming"

http://www.theopengamingsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/the-doctrine-of-gaming-4-0.pdf

smh
Click to expand...

That's hilarious. And sad.

The second [smaller] portion is the council. The council consists of five [5] members – members who are elected by the community. The author
of this document is to be counted among the five until otherwise deemed unfit for service by the community or
fellow council members. The council is a literal representation of the “unified voice” of the community. The system is organized so that the
council does not have absolute power and that it cannot create policies on its own. Each state of the system
needs the other – the community needs the council and vice versa.
Click to expand...

They are really taking this shit serious, aren't they?
We hereby declare that all gamers shall be protected from discrimination and harassment and that it is the duty
of the Open Gaming Society to see this justice done. We will use whatever legal means necessary to achieve this
end.
Click to expand...
löl
 
L

Lime

Member
Nanashrew said:
Only one needs to come back and it's the one on how to handle and overcome harassment. The panel was never about GamerGate, but the idea of two sides that pervades feeds into the narrative of equal opposition, that If Randi Harper or Zoe Quinn make a panel at some place, there are some that feel there needs to be a counterpoint. It's so bad that right now, since it wasn't about GamerGate, their existence alone triggered this line of thinking.

Their existence alone now makes some think there needs to be a counterpoint to them.

It needs to stop. There is no two sides to the story, there is no anti-, there is no equal opposition.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. The worst thing about this whole hate movement is that people who do feminist work are being lumped in with them - I've seen Sarkeesian and others labelled as "anti-GG", as if they somehow exist by virtue of GG.
 
V

Vyse24

Member
joke of a doctrine said:
Section 6. “Gamer” vs “Casual Gamer”
A “Gamer” is defined by our organization as any person that exhibits any combination of the following: vigorously pursuing the hobby, devoting exorbitant amounts of time to playing a game or games and does so on a routine basis (regardless of genre), developing games or game content, attending large gaming conventions and events, playing competitively or professionally, or being sportsmanlike in both victory and defeat.

A “Casual Gamer” is defined by our organization as any person that exhibits any combination of the following:
casually pursuing the hobby, going long periods of time without playing a game or games (a week or longer)
and playing games infrequently, or expressing little to no interest in video games in general.
Click to expand...

Wanted to bold that part for the vagueness of it. What exactly qualifies as "vigorously" pursuing the hobby? And what amount of time is considered an "exorbitant" amount?

Also, if possible, can I cast a vote for Jim Sterling for this? I'm pretty sure he's more than qualified for this position.
 
F

Fantastapotamus

Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
Vyse24 said:
Wanted to bold that part for the vagueness of it. What exactly qualifies as "vigorously" pursuing the hobby? And what amount of time is considered an "exorbitant" amount?

Also, if possible, can I cast a vote for Jim Sterling for this? I'm pretty sure he's more than qualified for this position.
Click to expand...

May I refer you to Subsection 1, Article 4 which CLEARLY states that council members shall not be members of the gaming ""press""
Now, I'm not one of your big-city lawyers over here, but I believe that this "Sterling" runs his own website, which would very much make him a member of the gaming """press"""

Furthermore, Article 5 of subsection 1 states, that council member may not have views opposing to the views of the OGS (tm) which I believe is also not that case with Mr. Jim.
 
H

Hackworth

Member
Vyse24 said:
Wanted to bold that part for the vagueness of it. What exactly qualifies as "vigorously" pursuing the hobby? And what amount of time is considered an "exorbitant" amount?

Also, if possible, can I cast a vote for Jim Sterling for this? I'm pretty sure he's more than qualified for this position.
Click to expand...
Jim's an ess jay doubleyou, they're not gonna vote for him.
 
E

ElNarez

Banned
New statement from SXSW: SAFETY IS A TOP PRIORITY AND SO IS YOUR VOICE
We want the SXSW community to know that we hear and understand your frustrations and concerns about the recent cancellation of two SXSW Gaming panels.

The safety of our speakers, participants and staff is always our top priority. We are working with local law enforcement to assess the various threats received regarding these sessions.

Moving forward, we are also evaluating several programming solutions as we continue to plan for an event that will be safe, meaningful and enjoyable for all involved.

We will provide more information soon.
Click to expand...

Again, this says nothing. GOOD JOB, THE BIG TENT.
 
S

stupei

Member
truly amazing doctrine said:
Section 1. Court Usage

For the doctrine to be utilized in a court of law certain steps must be completed.
1. A formal request must be filed with the Open Gaming Society Council.
2. The council will put it to a vote in the community and it must receive a seventy percent [70%] affirmative
vote.
3. The council must then vote. There must be a four-fifths [4/5] majority (affirmative) vote.
4. Two [2] of the five [5] council members must be present at the court hearing, unless a physical presence
is impossible.
5. The original printed doctrine must be presented.
6. It must only be presented as evidence.
7. It may only be used once in a single court case.
a. An exception may be made in extreme cases.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but what?
 
K

Kamina777

Banned
I don't think they want any of the hopefully dying gamergate drama there in the first place in any way shape or form, the bickering and supposed threats ended up being an out for sxsw, killing two birds with one stone.
 
V

Vincent Grayson

Member
I hope both panels are back. The only thing that happens if GG speaks at SXSW is that they'll continue to embarrass themselves with the same kind of goofy bullshit that's in OGS's pdf posted earlier. The more we let them expose themselves to the public, the sooner everyone laughs GG out of the legitimate world and they're left sticking to r/KiA and their other haunts.

It won't stop them, but the best way to delegitimize the movement is to let the world see how fucking deluded these people are.
 
P

plufim

Member
Kamina777 said:
I don't think they want any of the hopefully dying gamergate drama there in the first place in any way shape or form, the bickering and supposed threats ended up being an out for sxsw, killing two birds with one stone.
Click to expand...
Except that one of the cancelled talks was not gamergate related, just targeted by them for harassment. Because Randi was to be there and they despise her for creating GGautoblocker.

And there is another talk still scheduled by Chris Kluwe which is all about how shit Gamergate is.

So no, this is not them cancelling two gamergate panels.
 
A

Alex_Mexico

Member
Kamina777 said:
I don't think they want any of the hopefully dying gamergate drama there in the first place in any way shape or form, the bickering and supposed threats ended up being an out for sxsw, killing two birds with one stone.
Click to expand...
Oh you're not seriously suggesting that, are you?
 
H

HP_Wuvcraft

Banned
The Technomancer said:
EDIT 3:
Oh my god
Click to expand...

So.... let me get this straight.

"Gamers" can give their opinion about a game made by someone. The author of said work isn't allowed to criticize that opinion.

I also love how they seem to believe this Gaming Court will have any real world application.

"Excuse me, sir, but you can't hire her."
"Why?"
"She was found guilty by the Open Gaming Court and as such cannot take a tech-related job for two years."
"...."

I can't wait for one of them to cry foul if and when one of their "rulings" goes to actual court.
 
A

aeolist

Banned
Hackworth said:
Man I wish there was a cute game conspiracy.

Gamergate's a fucking perfect example of sun tzu's "exhaust your targets by being formless" strategy, what with the fact that they've totally got a group consensus and strategy but whenever anyone tries to pin them down they're totally just a group of individuals who etc and that one person who did wrong shouldn't stain the whole group.
Click to expand...

my favorite thing was that gamergate is totally a unified directed movement when it came to "charitable" donations (noting that most of what they refer to here aren't actually charitable causes), and a totally open leaderless hashtag when it came to abuse
 
H

Hylian7

Member
ElBoxyBrown said:
I thought SXSW was only a film festival. Was this their first time trying to expand?
Click to expand...

Film, music, and there is a gaming expo that lasts one of the weekends there. Tons of big name and small name developers show up to the gaming expo.

I worked for a game developer and was a shoutcaster at the booth for the game they were showing.
 
H

HP_Wuvcraft

Banned
I mean, will they actually have a physical place for court hearings?

How will they get people they deem criminal to appear? I honestly hope to God we're not talking kidnappings.
 
B

Bronx-Man

Banned
SolicitorPirate said:
W-what the fuck is a gaming court?
Click to expand...
There's a Wrestler's Court where if a wrassler fucks up, he's gotta buy everyone else some cold ones if found guilty. So I assume Gaming Court is where you have to buy the gamers some Doritos, Hot Pockets, and refeshing Mountain Dew (Do It by the Dew).
 
C

crimsonheadGCN

Banned
SXSW festival organizers are considering an all-day event that focuses primarily on combatting online harassment, sources told Re/code. An announcement could come before the end of the week.
Click to expand...

Our sources add that SXSW has talked with BuzzFeed and Vox Media about including them in the event. One of the panels, “Level Up: Overcoming Harassment in Games,” has been reinstated. It is unclear whether the other panel, which is affiliated with the online misogyny movement Gamergate, will be brought back.
Click to expand...

http://recode.net/2015/10/27/exclus...ighing-an-all-day-forum-on-online-harassment/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Nintendo cancels Nintendo Live 2024 TOKYO and postpones Splatoon Koshien 2023 National Finals due to threats targeting employees & spectators
News
13
1K
Saber replied
Stellar Blade’s uncensored release in Japan prompts criticism | GM of EA Japan thinks the game's CERO D rating is indicative of double standards
News Drama 2
59
6K
SmokedMeat replied
  • Locked
Rolling Stone: They Fought for Diversity in Gaming. Then the Abuse Began
2 3
142
8K
AeonGaidenRaiden replied
Bungie says it’s reduced communication with players due to ‘real threats’ towards staff
News Drama Game Dev 2
94
6K
StreetsofBeige replied
Every “chronically online” conversation is the same [Vox]
Social Opinion Drama
47
4K
Lord Panda replied
Top Bottom