Support NeoGAF

[JesseEwiak]

On that note, Darksydephil has turned out to be anti-Gamergate. Kind of a pleasant surprise. Although, that said, he's really uninformed about it.

DSP strikes me as a dumb guy, not a bad guy. And he seems to have friends outside the "gamer" bubble from my memories of him from years ago, so that probably helped.

 

[PeakPointMatrix]

Ah, so gamergate turned out to be a vehicle for sexist repressed teens/manchildren to sling misogynistic garbage at female journalists and developers.

How exactly did this gain the attention of a 400 page thread on GAF? Is this a case of people accidentally buying into the "ethics in journalism" trojan horse of a movement? Did gaffers not quickly come to the conclusion that this entire movement was based on horseshit? What discussion was there to be had here that I'm posting in OT number two?

Forgive me if I've overly generalized, there is seemingly an atlas of events that don't conform into anything beyond 4channers orchestrating some next-level slut shaming.

 

[libregkd]

Right, DQ became free 2-3 months ago, the affairs took place when it first launched on steam.

It was free since it was first released.

 

[Uthred]

Only tangentially aware of those, I'd thought it was an outgrowth of the whole Rab Florence/Doritosgate/etc thing from a year or two ago but looking at those summaries its just its own (mental) thing?

 

[Canucked]

Promote inclusiveness. Best we can all do.

 

[partyphone]

Only tangentially aware of those, I'd thought it was an outgrowth of the whole Rab Florence/Doritosgate/etc thing from a year or two ago but looking at those summaries its just its own (mental) thing?

the first instance of #gamergate was from adam baldwin using it to harass zoe quinn. and it just snowballed from there.

 

[Shosai]

It was free since it was first released.

You're right, I'm dumb.

 

[L Thammy]

DSP strikes me as a dumb guy, not a bad guy. And he seems to have friends outside the "gamer" bubble from my memories of him from years ago, so that probably helped.

I don't entirely agree, but that's a discussion for elsewhere. His opinion seems to be "yeah, gaming journalism sucks. Just find someone with similar tastes to you, someone who isn't making a living off of this, and listen to them." Which totally misses what Gamergate is actually about, but it's far better than pitchfork wielding.

How exactly did this gain the attention of a 400 page thread on GAF? Is this a case of people accidentally buying into the "ethics in journalism" trojan horse of a movement? Did gaffers not quickly come to the conclusion that this entire movement was based on horseshit? What discussion was there to be had here that I'm posting in OT number two?

Part of it is Gamergate supporters popping in and making the same arguments we've heard a million times before. Beyond that, the harassment isn't stopping. I think the latest is that a private eye may have been hired to track Zoe Quinn.

 

[JC Sera]

Ah, so gamergate turned out to be a vehicle for sexist repressed teens/manchildren to sling misogynistic garbage at female journalists and developers.

How exactly did this gain the attention of a 400 page thread on GAF? Is this a case of people accidentally buying into the "ethics in journalism" trojan horse of a movement? Did gaffers not quickly come to the conclusion that this entire movement was based on horseshit? What discussion was there to be had here that I'm posting in OT number two?

Forgive me if I've overly generalized, there is seemingly an atlas of events that don't conform into anything beyond 4channers orchestrating some next-level slut shaming.

IIRC was the first 150-200 pages was discussing whether #GG was bad or not before the Massacre threat and then the second half was #GG is bad lets start archiving resources, #Stopgamergate2014 and stuff like that

Spoiler

The discussion is still going because #GG is still harassing people

//warning extreme simplification

Only tangentially aware of those, I'd thought it was an outgrowth of the whole Rab Florence/Doritosgate/etc thing from a year or two ago but looking at those summaries its just its own (mental) thing?

Its more an outgrowth of the "Quinnspiracy", the 2012 Anita Sarkeesian backlash, and Leigh Alexander's "Gamers are Dead" (not the actual title of the article, just the most mistaken one) article

 

[Zomba13]

Only tangentially aware of those, I'd thought it was an outgrowth of the whole Rab Florence/Doritosgate/etc thing from a year or two ago but looking at those summaries its just its own (mental) thing?

They claim "it's about ethics in journalism" but it's really about trying to run females and anyone who wants more diversity and equality in games or the industry at large out.

 

[Novel Mike]

I don't know if it was posted in the last thread but I really enjoyed this... rant (I guess) about GG from a few days ago...

https://medium.com/the-cauldron/why-gamergaters-piss-me-the-f-off-a7e4c7f6d8a6

the main reason being is that while it is very quick to jump on the anti-GG wagon I largely agree that nothing done by GG has been good for our industry and the way that outsiders are currently seeing gamers is terrible for EVERYONE not just those who support or don't support GG. I also I think its very noteworthy that while he posted a complete attack post on GG and challenged people to doxx him, he has not been doxxed. Yet when Felicia Day made a very moderate post about it and about her fears of speaking out, almost instantly someone had posted her private information online.

I am glad to see many people pull away from GG, Jontron, Boogie and others who previously were in support of or just moderate are largely backing away from it now. I'm just ready for people to let it go, when we look back on this in the future I don't see how any of this will be positive for gamers, our industry, or anyone else.

 

[Cybit]

Did you actually read this

Yeah; and Sullivan's point about how cultures that are opening up (and know it is what is best for the culture as a whole) still have resentment over the changes that occur. That's a really powerful point; just because something is good for you doesn't mean you will automatically like it.

In the modern world, where communication and transportation have dramatically both shrunken the world and shown that we have far more in common with each other than we initially believed, is it that surprising that people resent the loss of "uniqueness" and "identity"? The part that shocks me is the...vitriol that those who resent the inevitable change of demographics involved with gaming have lashed out with. Everyone has their "good ol' days" issues, but you don't lose your collective freaking minds and threaten people over it.

The Felicia Day one was just...wow. Like, I agree with damn well near everything she wrote and the sadness and paranoia that is being instilled in so many because of all of this. For her to get doxxed (be it by GG or some random troll) is...oof.

Note: His last line is referring to pre-mainstream acceptance of gaming. Meaning that he sympathizes with those who were bullied growing up when gaming was not the "in" thing, and saying that the bullying at that point was one-sided. He's not referring to the #GG bullying being one-sided. It is not the best written in terms of clarity, alas.

 

[GamerJM]

Ah, so gamergate turned out to be a vehicle for sexist repressed teens/manchildren to sling misogynistic garbage at female journalists and developers.

How exactly did this gain the attention of a 400 page thread on GAF? Is this a case of people accidentally buying into the "ethics in journalism" trojan horse of a movement? Did gaffers not quickly come to the conclusion that this entire movement was based on horseshit? What discussion was there to be had here that I'm posting in OT number two?

Forgive me if I've overly generalized, there is seemingly an atlas of events that don't conform into anything beyond 4channers orchestrating some next-level slut shaming.

It was mostly people arguing against it and discussing how awful it is. Occasionally someone would come in and disagree and we'd either prove them wrong or they'd get banned for saying something offensive (or both).

 

[dead souls]

There's also been some civil discussions going on with Andrew Sullivan's the Daily Beast, which would've killed this conflict had it taken place from the start

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/10/24/the-end-of-gamer-culture-2/

No, no, no. Andrew Sullivan is a misogynistic idiot that only sometimes arrives at a correct position after exhaustively defending every other wrong one first.

You're talking about the person who literally wrote the following after 9/11 "The decadent left in its enclaves on the coasts is not dead -and may well mount a fifth column."

He's a hack.

 

[zeldablue]

Meh, fuck him still. He knew it was never about ethics to begin with

Forgiveness. C: (Also Jontron never was a part of GG. GG-ers just worshipped him as a matyr.)

I was also really happy to see DSP say the obvious. When the big supporters back out people will be more open to reflect and forgive.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

Websites need to start having a dialog about it instead of the occasional "here's the bad thing that #gamersgate probably did" article. It's not a matter of giving in. It's a matter of changing the standoffish and pompous attitude that (partially) led to this bubbling over in the first place.

We would not have #gamersgate based on Zoe Quinn alone. Whether the slights are real or perceived or just opinion, it is the years of "offenses" by game journalists like lashing out against people criticizing ME3 ending and DMC. It was the

Spoiler

corporate shilling and

response from journalists trying to defend X1 DRM. Reviews being "paid for". IGN's wonderful ResolutionGate debacle. The list goes on and these are just recent items.

A great deal of people associated with #gamersgate feel very strongly about the above issues. A great deal of people associated with #gamersgate do not support the abuse and threats, if we take their words and actions at face value. But as long as journalists remain silent and refuse to engage with #gamersgate, it'll just grow. It does not matter if well-known gaming celebs back out. It does not matter how many witty comments and comics and videos are made to show the hypocrisy. It does not matter how many times you try to convince a #gamersgate-er that they are associating with a toxic hashtag.

Basically, journalists need to step up and take away the banner of "ethics in journalism" away from #gamersgate by .... SHOCK AND AWE ... discussing ethics in journalism, and not in the dismissive "we so ethics. no worries. nuthin behind dis curtain" rmanner we've seen so far.

 

[jetjevons]

Ah, so gamergate turned out to be a vehicle for sexist repressed teens/manchildren to sling misogynistic garbage at female journalists and developers.

How exactly did this gain the attention of a 400 page thread on GAF? Is this a case of people accidentally buying into the "ethics in journalism" trojan horse of a movement? Did gaffers not quickly come to the conclusion that this entire movement was based on horseshit? What discussion was there to be had here that I'm posting in OT number two?

Forgive me if I've overly generalized, there is seemingly an atlas of events that don't conform into anything beyond 4channers orchestrating some next-level slut shaming.

Because #GG's alleged 'legitimate grievances' had to be thoroughly debunked to expose the extremist core's rotten, actual intentions.

 

[Yagharek]

Hopefully the backlash against gamergate results in more awareness of inclusion and makes games more common that take into account people who are female, GLBTI, all races, as well as accessibility options for people who are disabled or colorblind or for whom fully customizable control options are necessary.

Inclusion in games needs to be not only focused on content and context, but also in terms of the mechanism of interaction.

Hopefully this environment can rise out of the ashes of this debacle.

 

[ibyea]

Ah, so gamergate turned out to be a vehicle for sexist repressed teens/manchildren to sling misogynistic garbage at female journalists and developers.

How exactly did this gain the attention of a 400 page thread on GAF? Is this a case of people accidentally buying into the "ethics in journalism" trojan horse of a movement? Did gaffers not quickly come to the conclusion that this entire movement was based on horseshit? What discussion was there to be had here that I'm posting in OT number two?

Forgive me if I've overly generalized, there is seemingly an atlas of events that don't conform into anything beyond 4channers orchestrating some next-level slut shaming.

Well, in part it is also because new developments are still happening. The gamergate people are still doing whatever thing they do.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

Only tangentially aware of those, I'd thought it was an outgrowth of the whole Rab Florence/Doritosgate/etc thing from a year or two ago but looking at those summaries its just its own (mental) thing?

Some of the general distrust towards games journalism may have subconsciously come from that entire fiasco, but nah, GG's mostly its own beast. Florence denounced GG pretty early on so as a result GG doesn't seem to bring up Doritosgate up much as you'd assume a movement for ethics would, or at least not much beyond the typical Doritos Pope memes.

 

[Zomba13]

Well, in part it is also because new developments are still happening. The gamergate people are still doing whatever thing they do.

Also it's good to have a topic here so that if anyone still doesn't know about GG and what they do and actually buy into their spiel about "ethics in journalism" they can see that GG doesn't care about that and then they won't get associated with them. It's like a PSA topic.

 

[Nekofrog]

Okay, which one of you guys wrote this? It's great.

 

[ibyea]

Websites need to start having a dialog about it instead of the occasional "here's the bad thing that #gamersgate probably did" article. It's not a matter of giving in. It's a matter of changing the standoffish and pompous attitude that (partially) led to this bubbling over in the first place.

We would not have #gamersgate based on Zoe Quinn alone. Whether the slights are real or perceived or just opinion, it is the years of "offenses" by game journalists like lashing out against people criticizing ME3 ending and DMC. It was the

Spoiler

corporate shilling and

response from journalists trying to defend X1 DRM. Reviews being "paid for". IGN's wonderful ResolutionGate debacle. The list goes on and these are just recent items.

A great deal of people associated with #gamersgate feel very strongly about the above issues. A great deal of people associated with #gamersgate do not support the abuse and threats, if we take their words and actions at face value. But as long as journalists remain silent and refuse to engage with #gamersgate, it'll just grow. It does not matter if well-known gaming celebs back out. It does not matter how many witty comments and comics and videos are made to show the hypocrisy. It does not matter how many times you try to convince a #gamersgate-er that they are associating with a toxic hashtag.

Basically, journalists need to step up and take away the banner of "ethics in journalism" away from #gamersgate by .... SHOCK AND AWE ... discussing ethics in journalism, and not in the dismissive "we so ethics. no worries. nuthin behind dis curtain" rmanner we've seen so far.

The gamergate thing bubbled up before the journalists had any response to this. Don't put the onus of gamergate behavior on the party that is not responsible.

 

[jstripes]

Well, in part it is also because new developments are still happening. The gamergate people are still doing whatever thing they do.

I was gonna say this.

Some stupid new thing happens each and every day. Sometimes multiple times a day.

#GG isn't an isolated event, it's like a slow motion train wreck involving a train of indeterminate length.

 

[Shosai]

No, no, no. Andrew Sullivan is a misogynistic idiot that only sometimes arrives at a correct position after exhaustively defending every other wrong one first.

You're talking about the person who literally wrote the following after 9/11 "The decadent left in its enclaves on the coasts is not dead -and may well mount a fifth column."

He's a hack.

You know, it's possible to vehemently disagree with certain positions and agree with others, even when they come from a single person. People are not neatly fit into black-and-white categorizations, even when it makes for easy dismissiveness. It's this "you're either with us or against us" mentality that creates marginalized groups, or at the very least the perception of being marginalized.

And I've linked to it mostly for the reader discussions, even though they've been filtered.

 

[BennyBlanco]

It was free since it was first released.

They were charging for the steam version initially, but it went free soon after IIRC.

 

[Simply Sarah]

Some of the general distrust towards games journalism may have subconsciously come from that entire fiasco, but nah, GG's mostly its own beast. Florence denounced GG pretty early on so as a result GG doesn't seem to bring up Doritosgate up much as you'd assume a movement for ethics would, or at least not much beyond the typical Doritos Pope memes.

Nah, a lot of it predates that by a long time. The Kane and Lynch debacle is almost ancient history at this point, for one example.

 

[jstripes]

Websites need to start having a dialog about it instead of the occasional "here's the bad thing that #gamersgate probably did" article. It's not a matter of giving in. It's a matter of changing the standoffish and pompous attitude that (partially) led to this bubbling over in the first place.

We would not have #gamersgate based on Zoe Quinn alone. Whether the slights are real or perceived or just opinion, it is the years of "offenses" by game journalists like lashing out against people criticizing ME3 ending and DMC. It was the

Spoiler

corporate shilling and

response from journalists trying to defend X1 DRM. Reviews being "paid for". IGN's wonderful ResolutionGate debacle. The list goes on and these are just recent items.

A great deal of people associated with #gamersgate feel very strongly about the above issues. A great deal of people associated with #gamersgate do not support the abuse and threats, if we take their words and actions at face value. But as long as journalists remain silent and refuse to engage with #gamersgate, it'll just grow. It does not matter if well-known gaming celebs back out. It does not matter how many witty comments and comics and videos are made to show the hypocrisy. It does not matter how many times you try to convince a #gamersgate-er that they are associating with a toxic hashtag.

Basically, journalists need to step up and take away the banner of "ethics in journalism" away from #gamersgate by .... SHOCK AND AWE ... discussing ethics in journalism, and not in the dismissive "we so ethics. no worries. nuthin behind dis curtain" rmanner we've seen so far.

Engaging with #GG frequently makes things worse.

 

[shacklesmcgee]

We would not have #gamersgate based on Zoe Quinn alone. Whether the slights are real or perceived or just opinion, it is the years of "offenses" by game journalists like lashing out against people criticizing ME3 ending and DMC. It was the

Spoiler

corporate shilling and

response from journalists trying to defend X1 DRM. Reviews being "paid for". IGN's wonderful ResolutionGate debacle. The list goes on and these are just recent items.

I don't believe I have seen any of these mentioned under the gamergate hashtag.

 

[udivision]

I don't believe I have seen any of these mentioned under the gamergate hashtag.

I think Nebraska's point is that Gamergate is born out of the "lol garme jurnalizm" view gamers seem to have adapted, which precedes all of this. But your point still stands, ha.

 

[zeldablue]

Wait...

Did we catch this IGN article?

I guess Gamergate has another enemy. :\

 

[Tegernako]

Chat logs show how 4chan users created #GamerGate controversy

"The 4channers express their hatred and disgust towards [Quinn]; they express their glee at the thought of ruining her career; they fantasize about her being raped and killed. They wonder if all the harassment will drive her to suicide, and only the thought of 4chan getting bad publicity convinces some of them that this isn’t something they should hope for."

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/...pushed-gamergate-into-the-national-spotlight/


jsingal sums up what "gamergate" is about.

https://archive.today/YKNn8

Giantbomb on Gamergate:

http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/letter-from-the-editor-10-17-2014/1100-5049/

Games are for Everyone:

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/09/08/videogames-are-for-everybody/

Cultural Icons fight back:

http://www.motherjones.com/media/2014/10/these-geek-icons-are-breaking-gamergates-heart

Remember, GG is about Journalistic ethics, which is why it's perfectly okay for to Aruini to say ""Women, in our culture, have become the most decadent sluts since the fall of Rome."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uobxyojUuMw

Dave Willis, a web cartoonist calls out GG

http://www.shortpacked.com/comics/1413519048-2014-10-17-silverbullet.png

How many times do we need to call you out?

http://deadspin.com/the-future-of-the-culture-wars-is-here-and-its-gamerga-1646145844

Yet another demonstration of what GG is really about

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=134387975&postcount=64

GG is designated as a "hate group"

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2014/10/16/hatewatch-headlines-101614/


"The actor hadn’t talked about gamergate due to fears of being ‘doxxed’ – and indeed she was, shortly after she spoke out"
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/23/felicia-days-public-details-online-gamergate

More images of how GG activists treat woman:

"I've got a K-Bar and I'm coming to your house so I can shove it up your ugly feminist -!-

http://i.imgur.com/F4OJrKF.jpg

 

[chaobreaker]

If there's been a better time to doubt GG's legitimacy, it's when DSP, a guy who couldn't figure out how to crouch jump in a video game, deduces that it's a load of crap.

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

Websites need to start having a dialog about it instead of the occasional "here's the bad thing that #gamersgate probably did" article. It's not a matter of giving in. It's a matter of changing the standoffish and pompous attitude that (partially) led to this bubbling over in the first place.

We would not have #gamersgate based on Zoe Quinn alone. Whether the slights are real or perceived or just opinion, it is the years of "offenses" by game journalists like lashing out against people criticizing ME3 ending and DMC. It was the

Spoiler

corporate shilling and

response from journalists trying to defend X1 DRM. Reviews being "paid for". IGN's wonderful ResolutionGate debacle. The list goes on and these are just recent items.

A great deal of people associated with #gamersgate feel very strongly about the above issues. A great deal of people associated with #gamersgate do not support the abuse and threats, if we take their words and actions at face value. But as long as journalists remain silent and refuse to engage with #gamersgate, it'll just grow. It does not matter if well-known gaming celebs back out. It does not matter how many witty comments and comics and videos are made to show the hypocrisy. It does not matter how many times you try to convince a #gamersgate-er that they are associating with a toxic hashtag.

Basically, journalists need to step up and take away the banner of "ethics in journalism" away from #gamersgate by .... SHOCK AND AWE ... discussing ethics in journalism, and not in the dismissive "we so ethics. no worries. nuthin behind dis curtain" rmanner we've seen so far.

Um, none of those issues listed are ethical violations, they are just having opinions you don't like.

ME3 ending: basically an argument over artistic merit of an ending. It wasn't just the media talking about this, it spawned god knows how many forum flamewars, and heck, even webcomics like penny arcade got into this. No ethical violations here.

X1 DRM: again, argument over the merits of a policy. Some hated it, some actually liked it. Even now, you see some pro-xbox folks arguing that it would have been a good thing in the end. No ethical violations here.

Resolutiongate: basically an argument about graphics and if resolution should be a major selling point or not. Plenty of folks on both sides here. No ethical violations here.

Reviews being paid for: a common complaint, but one with little actual evidence to back it up. Without said proof, it's little more then a conspiracy theory.

 

[jstripes]

Wait...

Did we catch this IGN article?

I guess Gamergate has another enemy. :\

I wonder if they'll ever reach this conclusion:

 

[Cybit]

You know, it's possible to vehemently disagree with certain positions and agree with others, even when they come from a single person. People are not neatly fit into black-and-white categorizations, even when it makes for easy dismissiveness. It's this "you're either with us or against us" mentality that creates marginalized groups, or at the very least the perception of being marginalized.

And I've linked to it mostly for the reader discussions, even though they've been filtered.

You mean sharing a drink with Anita @ GGC even though I don't like the politicization of video games (and am somewhat skeptical of the timing right before a mid-term election; which is why I think breitbart and right-wing organizations have jumped in) and not agreeing with the feminist theory she subscribes to, yet agreeing with the belief that the tropes are overused and would be better served being less used isn't possible?

Awwwww.

EDIT: As much as I vehemently disagree with much of Anita's analysis, she's a pretty cool person all in all. One aspect of someone's life (critiquing video games) does not a full person make.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

I don't believe I have seen any of these mentioned under the gamergate hashtag.

Didn't say they were. What I'm pointing out is that the disdain between journalists and their readers has been growing for years. If the Zoe Quinn non-scandal occured in a vacuum, #gamersgate would not exists.

But because it occurred in a community already ticked-off or apathetic about the journalistic coverage of their favorite hobby, it was a catalyst. Ignoring it and writing it off as "sexists trolls are the beginning and end of this whole thing" is why #gamersgate continues to exist.

Engaging with #GG frequently makes things worse.

I don't propose they "talk to #gamersgate" as if they're a singular entity. And of course that'll just engender complaints of "you're giving in to their demands!!!!".

I'm saying that journalists can de-claw #gamersgate by addressing some of their concerns head-on while still ostracizing the awful and illegal behavior being done by some people within #gamersgate

The gamergate thing bubbled up before the journalists had any response to this. Don't put the onus of gamergate behavior on the party that is not responsible.

The original "Gate", Watergate, became such a big thing because Nixon and his campaign crew refused to engage on the topic for so long and they spent a great deal of effort trying to cover it up. Historical theorists (I'm sorry if that's not even a real term) believe that since Nixon was so freakin' far ahead in the polls that if he'd simply come out and said "yes, some members of my staff were involved in that and they have been removed from my staff. I am truly sorry that this happened" then we wouldn't have had the gigantic scandal that it became.

Same logic applies here.

 

[dead souls]

You know, it's possible to vehemently disagree with certain positions and agree with others, even when they come from a single person. People are not neatly fit into black-and-white categorizations, even when it makes for easy dismissiveness. It's this "you're either with us or against us" mentality that creates marginalized groups, or at the very least the perception of being marginalized.

And I've linked to it mostly for the reader discussions, even though they've been filtered.

Sorry but you're talking about the guy who still defends The Bell Curve.

Some opinions are so odious that they invalidate everything else you do, and Andrew Sullivan has a bunch of those type. Writing him off completely is the only sensible thing to do.

 

[jstripes]

I'm saying that journalists can de-claw #gamersgate by addressing some of their concerns head-on while still ostracizing the awful and illegal behavior being done by some people within #gamersgate

Umm, some outlets have tried addressing their concerns head on.

It's either not good enough, or simply can't be heard over #GG's own rage.

 

[Bold One]

it's actually always been going on this is just the first time it's been so heavily focused on a single hashtag.

and since their main goal is to silence people who don't think like them it's important that we keep talking about this.

"them" being the misogynists and anti-feminists who want to maintain the status quo in the gaming world. "we" being the decent humans beings who believe that video games are for everyone and that the more people making, playing and talking about video games the better. "this" being a concentrated hate campaign hell bent on harassing women and people who defend women in gaming.

so its no longer about that female dev who allegedly had sex?

its about misogyny now? I haven't been keeping track.....Destiny

 

[Shosai]

You mean sharing a drink with Anita @ GGC even though I don't like the politicization of video games (and am somewhat skeptical of the timing right before a mid-term election; which is why I think breitbart and right-wing organizations have jumped in) and not agreeing with the feminist theory she subscribes to, yet agreeing with the belief that the tropes are overused and would be better served being less used isn't possible?

Awwwww.

EDIT: As much as I vehemently disagree with much of Anita's analysis, she's a pretty cool person all in all. One aspect of someone's life (critiquing video games) does not a full person make.

I know, mind-blowing isn't it! Though, I don't think the mid-term elections have anything to do with internet conservatives jumping on the GG bandwagon. They're pandering to an audience that's feeling suddenly (for whatever reason) disenfranchised by the more mainstream media outlets, which is what conservative punditry has always been adept at doing

 

[kick51]

Might as well get this out of the way:

Awesome summary. It's amazing how there are facts and evidence vs. "it's about ethics in game journalism. I have to go return some video tapes."

but unless something has changed, aren't they gathered at 8chan now, since 4chan deemed it to be a raiding/doxxing trash masquerading as a "movement". If that's still the case, then the post sort of throws 4chan under the bus when they actually did something positive.

 

[partyphone]

so its no longer about that female dev who allegedly had sex?

its about misogyny now? I haven't been keeping track.....Destiny

those two things are the same

 

[Bold One]

wait wait wait....that Adam Baldwin? wtf is he doing?!!!

 

[shacklesmcgee]

I'm saying that journalists can de-claw #gamersgate by addressing some of their concerns head-on while still ostracizing the awful and illegal behavior being done by some people within #gamersgate

Besides the Patreon thing, as that has already been covered, what other concerns does GG have that these sites should address?

 

[Gentleman Jack]

so its no longer about that female dev who allegedly had sex?

its about misogyny now? I haven't been keeping track.....Destiny

The inability for GG to move the discussion away from the former has inevitably made it about the latter.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

Okay, which one of you guys wrote this? It's great.

Is the premise of the initial statement "let sexists be sexist"?

wait wait wait....that Adam Baldwin? wtf is he doing?!!!

He's a right-wing, sexist, racist nutbar.

so its no longer about that female dev who allegedly had sex?

its about misogyny now?

Reread your first sentence in relation to your second.

 

[Foffy]

Websites need to start having a dialog about it instead of the occasional "here's the bad thing that #gamersgate probably did" article. It's not a matter of giving in. It's a matter of changing the standoffish and pompous attitude that (partially) led to this bubbling over in the first place.

We would not have #gamersgate based on Zoe Quinn alone. Whether the slights are real or perceived or just opinion, it is the years of "offenses" by game journalists like lashing out against people criticizing ME3 ending and DMC. It was the

Spoiler

corporate shilling and

response from journalists trying to defend X1 DRM. Reviews being "paid for". IGN's wonderful ResolutionGate debacle. The list goes on and these are just recent items.

A great deal of people associated with #gamersgate feel very strongly about the above issues. A great deal of people associated with #gamersgate do not support the abuse and threats, if we take their words and actions at face value. But as long as journalists remain silent and refuse to engage with #gamersgate, it'll just grow. It does not matter if well-known gaming celebs back out. It does not matter how many witty comments and comics and videos are made to show the hypocrisy. It does not matter how many times you try to convince a #gamersgate-er that they are associating with a toxic hashtag.

Basically, journalists need to step up and take away the banner of "ethics in journalism" away from #gamersgate by .... SHOCK AND AWE ... discussing ethics in journalism, and not in the dismissive "we so ethics. no worries. nuthin behind dis curtain" rmanner we've seen so far.

While all of what you said has weight to it from your point of view, it seems better to speak of those things of themselves. The message from this movement - whether it's the majority or a vocal minority is honestly irrelevant - has poisoned any basis for such arguments, even if some have sincerely supported the movement and prodding into such topics. I'm sure such people do exist and are really about this for ethics and the pervasive nepotism we see with games media and publishers, but the reality is any arguments of that are undermined by the public image of this movement, which is one rooted in attacking women. I am not saying the public image is myth, but the reality is there are those are behind such a movement and seem to be pretty hellbent on pressing down the words of others and that has taken over any other argument one can make of the movement.

One does not need a movement to raise these issues, and one really does not need to do so with a movement that has a very major reception to be about everything but such issues. We didn't need a GamerGate for the Doritogate nonsense that happened a year or so ago.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

Um, none of those issues listed are ethical violations, they are just having opinions you don't like.

ME3 ending: basically an argument over artistic merit of an ending. It wasn't just the media talking about this, it spawned god knows how many forum flamewars, and heck, even webcomics like penny arcade got into this. No ethical violations here.

X1 DRM: again, argument over the merits of a policy. Some hated it, some actually liked it. Even now, you see some pro-xbox folks arguing that it would have been a good thing in the end. No ethical violations here.

Resolutiongate: basically an argument about graphics and if resolution should be a major selling point or not. Plenty of folks on both sides here. No ethical violations here.

Reviews being paid for: a common complaint, but one with little actual evidence to back it up. Without said proof, it's little more then a conspiracy theory.

You missed where I said

Whether the slights are real or perceived or just opinion, it is the years of "offenses"

This is basic, basic shit, people. We're talking "go read True Believer from the '50s because a lot of you clearly don't get it" sort of stuff. I'm not trying to give credence for #gamergate's actions or even their philosophy on the matter. I am simply trying to point out that these things are out there and #gamersgate has teeth because its supporters believe they are true. It's not logical, but it doesn't have to be.

It isn't about "Oh, #gamersgate said they are about ethics, but look at THIS ahaha! Laid my trap card. hashtag gamersgatedismantled". That hasn't worked, won't work, and will never work. If it did, Christianity would've died out after about 75 years. So would've Islam. Most religions. Most political movements and social movements too.

Yet.

The vast majority of those wishing to stop #gamersgate are being about as naive as a counter-movement can be. "Hey! If we start a different hashtag, badmouth them on forums, and ... stuff, maybe it'll go away!"

Meanwhile, #gamersgate is getting advertising pulled from websites, getting events cancelled (like Anita's recent university visit), doxxing, and making endless threats. Great job, anti-GGers! Slacktivism at its finest. What has actually been accomplished to slow down #gamersgate since it started

months

ago? Mind you, it is the main talking point of anti-GGers that

gamersgate started off as an abusive, sexist movement and has remained that way since the beginning

. If the #gamersgate message, behavior, and "true motive" has been the same for so long, how incompetent can people be, since nothing has really slowed it down at all.

That's why I advocate for journalists taking a head-on approach and addressing the years of underlying distrust that gives #gamersgate its teeth. It will be messy. But shouting "gamersgate is really bad and sexist" is going to do nothing, literally nothing.

 

[Kazerei]

Didn't say they were. What I'm pointing out is that the disdain between journalists and their readers has been growing for years. If the Zoe Quinn non-scandal occured in a vacuum, #gamersgate would not exists.

But because it occurred in a community already ticked-off or apathetic about the journalistic coverage of their favorite hobby, it was a catalyst. Ignoring it and writing it off as "sexists trolls are the beginning and end of this whole thing" is why #gamersgate continues to exist.

Honestly, I think the state of games journalism has very, very little to do with why GamerGate exists. Because it's not about games journalism at all, it's a campaign of harassment against women in gaming.

People blew up over Anita Sarkeesian, and people blew up over the "Quinnspiracy" thing before it transformed into GamerGate. So if there was no disdain between journalists and readers, Quinnspiracy/GamerGate would still be a thing. Only difference would be they wouldn't be trying to use games journalism as a shield.