Support NeoGAF

[joshcryer]

Twitter is basically ground zero for harassment, it's like USENET, but you get harassing comments to your feed. This is partially why Twitter is so popular, because any random person can reply, and pow, at least the first few tweets get seen. For probably 98% of interactions it's fine. It's the 2% trolls who get hit (perhaps interestingly, there was a guy with my same name in the UK who made threatening tweets and got in serious trouble for it, no I'm not that guy!).

The problem is that Twitter literally empowers trolls and hatemongers, because it's super easy to set up an account, but the repercussions are minimal if non-existent if you abuse it. I look forward to the evolution beyond Twitter where people aren't literally exposed to harassment. The whole "anyone can talk to you and you see it" concept is asinine. IRL if someone says some nasty, hateful, speech to me, I can at least get them on harassment charges and make them take anger management classes.

Twitter, hiding behind corporate protections, just has to make a meager effort to take down accounts or messages, after the damage has been done. It bugs me that any side is blamed for literally internet hate speech on platforms that enable it, because it opens up the possibility that speech be regulated, and that's a serious slippery slope for me.

TL;DR Twitter enables hate speech and harassment.

 

[SwissLion]

Yeah the point of the block list is not having to be subjected to piles of abuse and pore over it all for hours at a time and relive it in order to block your abusers one by one.

This is a device for people who do not want to face the abuse GamerGate has provably levelled at people, and continues to deny and excuse and facilitate, and who do not consider "Oh I might miss out on a less shitty GamerGater's half-baked musings" to be too harsh a price to pay for that luxury.

Anyone who was looking to engage with the less toxic side of that movement would not use the blocklist, and will continue not to.

The people who actually want the surely valuable insights of people who are likely to be blinkered hangers-on to a misogynistic movement will still be perfectly able to receive that. This is entirely a tool for people who don't think that sounds like an experience worth having.

 

[joshcryer]

Yeah the point of the block list is not having to be subjected to piles of abuse and pore over it all for hours at a time and relive it in order to block your abusers one by one.

That does not stop original hate tweets. It only creates a list of people who may or may not be hatemongers. Anyone can simply make a twitter, populate it a bit with tweets if necessary, and start sending hate speech. I don't see any real use to the list except to create a purity test.

It's why guys like Pakman get blacklisted despite that he's literally been thrown into the GG controversy because he ... talked about it on a couple of shows, of literally a half dozen of shows he does a day. Pakman has since been removed, but it just shows the absurdity of the whole thing.

GG continues to be a mild amusement. I still can't get involved with it.

Twitter needs to evolve or it'll die if it continues to allow for such easy harassment and hate speech to be disseminated.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

That does not stop original hate tweets. It only creates a list of people who may or may not be hatemongers. Anyone can simply make a twitter, populate it a bit with tweets if necessary, and start sending hate speech. I don't see any real use to the list except to create a purity test.

It's why guys like Pakman get blacklisted despite that he's literally been thrown into the GG controversy because he ... talked about it on a couple of shows, of literally a half dozen of shows he does a day. Pakman has since been removed, but it just shows the absurdity of the whole thing.

GG continues to be a mild amusement. I still can't get involved with it.

Twitter needs to evolve or it'll die if it continues to allow for such easy harassment and hate speech to be disseminated.

Enjoy being amused and shifting the blame to Twitter and people who"d rather not be bothered

 

[joshcryer]

Enjoy being amused and shifting the blame to Twitter and people who"d rather not be bothered

Leave poor Twitter alone!!

How can anyone not be amused by the absolute absurdity of GG?

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Leave poor Twitter alone!!

How can anyone not be amused by the absolute absurdity of GG?

How about the people being fucking harassed all day every day

How about normal people who aren't down with misogynistic racist bullshit

fucking hell

 

[joshcryer]

How about the people being fucking harassed all day every day

How about normal people who aren't down with misogynistic racist bullshit

fucking hell

So Twitter, a platform that enables and even encourages harassment due to its ease of harassment, should be left alone? There is absolutely no culpability for that platform to literally allow any random person to harass people? Oh, and profit off of it, let's not forget that bit...

How the hell do you police the internet? You can only police the platform that the hate speech is on. The internet is the most vile creation of information exchange that exists. Without a Ministry of Truth literally confirming or denying every single comment entered in a text box on the internet, people will be totally evil and wrong.

Why does Twitter get a pass for allowing it? Twitter could require identity verification, for example, but Google tried that, and we all know how that turned out (G+ / YouTube- BTW, YouTube has the most evil comments on the internet in mass form, but there's no #HashTagYouTubeCommentsAreLiterallyTheWorstOfTheInternet).

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

So Twitter, a platform that enables and even encourages harassment due to its ease of harassment, should be left alone? There is absolutely no culpability for that platform to literally allow any random person to harass people? Oh, and profit off of it, let's not forget that bit...

How the hell do you police the internet? You can only police the platform that the hate speech is on. The internet is the most vile creation of information exchange that exists. Without a Ministry of Truth literally confirming or denying every single comment entered in a text box on the internet, people will be totally evil and wrong.

Why does Twitter get a pass for allowing it? Twitter could require identity verification, for example, but Google tried that, and we all know how that turned out (G+ / YouTube- BTW, YouTube has the most evil comments on the internet in mass form, but there's no #HashTagYouTubeCommentsAreLiterallyTheWorstOfTheInternet).

what does this have to do with the amusement factor of GG

Twitter doesn't get a pass, but people are also accountable for their own actions

keep your arguments organized

 

[joshcryer]

what does this have to do with the amusement factor of GG

Twitter doesn't get a pass, but people are also accountable for their own actions

keep your arguments organized

You said I was "shifting the blame to Twitter."

If you want someone to "keep their arguments organized" (your quote), then don't accuse me of some absurdity I didn't claim. I claimed that Twitter should do more to make people more accountable, such as, you know, making people verify their identity. I literally said that in the post you are responding to!

GG remains amusing because people insist, perhaps like you, on using a platform that literally enables harassment. GG remains amusing because people take it seriously. I'm already getting bored with replying to this absurdly low level argumentation tactic that goes no where... making up what other people are saying, then going off on some random tangent that is irrelevant to my original post.

Twitter is a haven for hatemongers and harassers. Objective fact whether you like it or not and whether you are saddened by "shifting the blame" to the multibillion dollar corporation who frankly makes its money pushing narratives that are nothing more than contrived internet dramas. Be it some idiotic pop culture thing or some more deeply rooted identity politics thing.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

You said I was "shifting the blame to Twitter."

If you want someone to "keep their arguments organized" (your quote), then don't accuse me of some absurdity I didn't claim. I claimed that Twitter should do more to make people more accountable, such as, you know, making people verify their identity. I literally said that in the post you are responding to!

GG remains amusing because people insist, perhaps like you, on using a platform that literally enables harassment. GG remains amusing because people take it seriously. I'm already getting bored with replying to this absurdly low level argumentation tactic that goes no where... making up what other people are saying, then going off on some random tangent that is irrelevant to my original post.

Twitter is a haven for hatemongers and harassers. Objective fact whether you like it or not and whether you are saddened by "shifting the blame" to the multibillion dollar corporation who frankly makes its money pushing narratives that are nothing more than contrived internet dramas. Be it some idiotic pop culture thing or some more deeply rooted identity politics thing.

ok

 

[NoblesseOblige]

Man, GamerGate is making me feel old because I'm totally not understanding the hubbub over these twitter blocklists. I've never really used social media so my response is always "so what?" when I hear someone complaining about being blocked on facebook or twitter or whatever. Is this just people feeling entitled to be heard? Or am I totally turning into one of those cane-wielding-get-off-my-lawn-yelling individuals of society.

 

[Baron von Loathsome]

Man, GamerGate is making me feel old because I'm totally not understanding the hubbub over these twitter blocklists. I've never really used social media so my response is always "so what?" when I hear someone complaining about being blocked on facebook or twitter or whatever. Is this just people feeling entitled to be heard? Or am I totally turning into one of those cane-wielding-get-off-my-lawn-yelling individuals of society.

Yep, that's exactly what it is. People thinking that free speech means you have to listen to them.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

Yep, that's exactly what it is. People thinking that free speech means you have to listen to them.

That is a sad, almost pathetic understanding of free speech. So they must also think that if I were to take a soapbox to the park to rant upon that every single person there must stop and listen to me.

 

[Trame]

David Pakman of all people

No, you didn't get banned for following David Pakman. ggautoblocker is an open source program and it's not possible to get blocked for following David Pakman.

Here is the list of Twitter accounts where following can get you blocked:

Nero
FartToContinue
PlayDangerously
roguestargamez
TheRalphRetort
RealVivianJames
CHOBITCOIN

You have to be following at least two of them to be blocked.

I just wonder about who is doing the approving and what standards they are setting for whitelisting someone is it those who actually are harassing or those who just have a different opinion. Just question the person setting the standard and why that persons standard are valid.

What would it look like for their standards to not be valid? Because I'm not sure how it's possible for someone's personal opinion about who to block to be "invalid," and because I'm still not sure if you know what you're arguing here.

 

[Lalalandia]

Man, GamerGate is making me feel old because I'm totally not understanding the hubbub over these twitter blocklists. I've never really used social media so my response is always "so what?" when I hear someone complaining about being blocked on facebook or twitter or whatever. Is this just people feeling entitled to be heard? Or am I totally turning into one of those cane-wielding-get-off-my-lawn-yelling individuals of society.

I honestly think this an outgrowth of the bb culture we've had on the internet where a sort of anarchic libertarian mindset slowly morphed into the toxic chan style 'all abuse, all of the time' posting style. IMO this slow morphing meant that some people began to develop the misconception that this was a normal and acceptable way to communicate. NeoGAF changed to a more robust moderation style a while back and it was only after that I personally became interested in joining/posting.

Some folks who have internalised 'chan style' cannot accept this and don't see that their style of posting is far from being honest, brave or non-'special butterfly' and was simply verbal abuse aimed at silencing critics. Having silenced critical voices in their own corner of the internet (even on 4chan there are many communities on there modded far more vigorously than the reputation suggests) they are genuinely shocked when the rest of the world goes 'Nope you're horrible and I'd rather lose contact with good folks than tolerate even one more post from your ilk'.

Block lists are always a crude tool but they're a reasonable response to an amorphous decentralised movement when the tools for a more accurate block list are simply beyond the reach of an open source project (ie analysis of tweets on a 'suspect' account and the server time necessary to do that).

 

[NoblesseOblige]

So I guess there's some internal GG drama abrewin'. RevueLabs (first time I heard about it) is some source site made and used by some gaters. Anyway, sounds like one of the creators only made it for monetary reasons (shocking!) and someone with admin privileges went and hijacked his site (which wouldn't happen if the owner had half a braincell when it comes to running a website). Anyway here's an archive of the article the hijacker left:

https://archive.today/cHYhL

 

[berzeli]

Item no 789 from the exhibition of the performance art collective gamergate:

Ignorance
Twitter post & digital image, 2014
Daddy Warpig

A sublime study in the failings of the educational system, showcasing both a lack of critical thinking and failure to recognize historical context. This piece is an equally playful and horrific look into the minds of people who fail to recognize how their own movement would react to a woman speaking up about structural injustice.

 

[stump sock]

Dunno what the point of the GG list is

Yeah, I dunno. Randi's list is to block out the abusive accounts. Their list is to... block the people they've been abusive to?

actually that kind of flawed logic is pretty much what should be expected at this point.

 

[crimsonheadGCN]

Milo did a response to the BusinessWeek article:

Since you have failed to perform a basic survey of the literature surrounding the GamerGate controversy, or, worse, purposefully elected to exclude it from your reporting, and since you have placed your critical faculties on ice in the manner the "listen and believe" feminists are always so insistent on—largely, it turns out, because their claims don't stack up—allow me to sketch out the real reasons Sarkeesian is controversial in the video games industry, and, to fill in the blanks in your writing, to explain why her ideas are so universally loathed among gamers.

He mad: https://archive.today/leVzh

 

[Lalalandia]

Milo did a response to the BusinessWeek article:



He mad: https://archive.today/leVzh

Yup

...It would behove journalists writing in an organ as esteemed as yours to acknowledge some of these considerations before publishing such gushing prose tributes, and to recognise, too, that the other individuals you uncritically report as having received death and rape threats—Zoe Quinn and Brianna Wu—have long, chequered histories of deception, manipulation and trolling, facts that you could perfectly easily have uncovered with the most cursory examination of the material in front of you....

Aww poor diddums seems surprised that actual journalists research things and are not impressed by cheap rhetorical tactics like ad-hominem. He sure does like to type too, I lost interest by paragraph two when he starts with the sly insinuation that she is a sock puppet for her partner and descends into declarations like 'cultural studies is rightly mocked as a junk degree'. I particularly love his attempt to represent JT as some kind of misunderstood liberal while ignoring the fact that if he had succeeded in his quest it would have been a de facto censorship regime as most retailers won't even carry a game rated 18+ (which is partly why we don't see 'hard R' action movies any more).

In short Milo proves he is a person devoid of both empathy and talent, again

 

[Devil's advocate]

From Milos response:

Sarkeesian is often compared to the conservative anti-game crusader Jack Thompson, but he only ever wanted to restrict the sale of violent video games to children. He did not argue that the content of games should be changed and believed adults should have the full range of options available to them.

Jack Thompson tried to force retailers to stop selling violent games completely, Anita Sarkesian talks about how videogames could be less sexist, without arguing for banning anything.
And yet to this guy Jack is preferable. Amazing.

 

[Tye The Czar]

To any Law experts: Given all the evidence Zoe Quinn has, would she be able to sue the perpetrators for slander (her butthurt ex and TFYC) and win?

 

[Lalalandia]

To any Law experts: Given all the evidence Zoe Quinn has, would she be able to sue the perpetrators for slander (her butthurt ex and TFYC) and win?

From my limited knowledge of US law (largely gained from reading loweringthebar.net, popehat.com and Marco Randazza's blog) this would be an uphill task. Under US law defamation must be proven and the standard is that the person who published was 'knowingly' publishing a falsehood. That's a pretty high bar to clear and to prevent the lamentable consequences of defamation actions on protected speech is probably rightly so.

If you compare the libel regimes of the UK and Ireland to the US system you can see that there is a real problem with the rich and famous silencing critics by means of legal action. Famously UK libel judgments are unenforcable in the US after a Saudi man sued and won in the UK for defamation despite the book accurately describing his funding of terrorist linked organisations. Hell the Rab Florence scandal was entirely caused by legal threats and the cost of defending them even if your arguments are sound. It's also why celebrities are starting to file defamation actions here in Ireland as our laws are equally fucked on libel.

In short No they probably don't and you don't want the laws changed to make it easier either.

 

[RionaaM]

From Milos response:

Jack Thompson tried to force retailers to stop selling violent games completely, Anita Sarkesian talks about how videogames could be less sexist, without arguing for banning anything.
And yet to this guy Jack is preferable. Amazing.

Didn't this clown used to criticize video games before, and mocked (or insulted) people who play them? (I refuse to use the word "gamer" anymore). If so, it's no surprise that he sides with the person that tried to ban them.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

I just got replied to by Milo personally.

I feel like the prettiest girl at the ball.

 

[crimsonheadGCN]

GamerGate is in cnet's Tech's biggest flops and gaffes in 2014:

6. Ugly, ugly GamerGate
It's debatable what GamerGate really stands for. Opinions range from an effort to expose bias in gaming journalism to a pushback against critics who question the portrayal of women in video games. But what's clear-cut is the vile, ugly harassment that’s become a hallmark of the movement.

Feminist media critic Anita Sarkeesian (pictured above) pulled out of a speaking engagement at Utah State University because an anonymous email threatened "the deadliest school shooting in American history" if she didn't cancel her speech. Independent game developer Brianna Wu was driven from her home after receiving threats and having her address posted online. Zoe Quinn, the developer at the center of GamerGate, also had her information leaked and was forced to leave her home.

The gaming industry is starting to pay attention. Mike Morhaime, head of Activision's Blizzard Entertainment unit, said the harassment was "tarnishing our reputation as gamers." Adobe outright said it doesn’t stand with GamerGate.

http://www.cnet.com/pictures/techs-biggest-flops-and-gaffes-in-2014-pictures/12/

 

[Tye The Czar]

From my limited knowledge of US law (largely gained from reading loweringthebar.net, popehat.com and Marco Randazza's blog) this would be an uphill task. Under US law defamation must be proven and the standard is that the person who published was 'knowingly' publishing a falsehood. That's a pretty high bar to clear and to prevent the lamentable consequences of defamation actions on protected speech is probably rightly so.

If you compare the libel regimes of the UK and Ireland to the US system you can see that there is a real problem with the rich and famous silencing critics by means of legal action. Famously UK libel judgments are unenforcable in the US after a Saudi man sued and won in the UK for defamation despite the book accurately describing his funding of terrorist linked organisations. Hell the Rab Florence scandal was entirely caused by legal threats and the cost of defending them even if your arguments are sound. It's also why celebrities are starting to file defamation actions here in Ireland as our laws are equally fucked on libel.

In short No they probably don't and you don't want the laws changed to make it easier either.

If that's so, then we should instead find other solutions. For one, we need to search for all the perpetrators who doxxed the LWs and have them arrested.

Second, we need to smear the assholes who started this mess. The public must know who started this fire.

Third, we need to make an organized, non-toxic, gamer-driven movement that encourages debate and reform within all parts of the game industry. Not just journalism.
If anything, we can start this sort of group on GAF.

GamerGate is in cnet's Tech's biggest flops and gaffes in 2014:

This, along with the many, many condemnations of #GamerGate's activity by celebrities, news outlets and THE GAME INDUSTRY is proof that they have already lost without knowing it.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

This, along with the many, many condemnations of #GamerGate's activity by celebrities, news outlets and THE GAME INDUSTRY is proof that they have already lost without knowing it.

No, it's just proof that women are witches and cast spells.

 

[jstripes]

This, along with the many, many condemnations of #GamerGate's activity by celebrities, news outlets and THE GAME INDUSTRY is proof that they have already lost without knowing it.

But the cnet article is actually on #GamerGate's side!

Spoiler

I wonder how long it will take for someone to make that logical leap.

 

[jstripes]

I saw this over at reddit:

Like the title says, anti-gamergate scares me. Not in the way of who they are, because they are crying babies. But what scares me the most is that they believe what they are told, have no critical thought, have no desire to read up beyond what they are told to believe, want everyone to believe what they believe, and can never accept being wrong. These people are perfect anti-gamergate to it's core. They believe what they are told and will not let themselves listen to what other has to say, even when what they're saying makes no sense. So what do they do once they back them selves into a corner? They whip out the misogyny card and say that anyone who disagrees with them is a sexist bigot. I'm worried about how many there seems to be in modern day and the media knows full well about these people and takes advantage of these people to push an agenda and if we don't have more critical thinkers that aren't afraid of their stupid bigot labels we are going to wind up in 1984 where we are all force fed one belief.

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

It's your basic far right projection at work. Toss int he historical revisionism, and self declared 'we represent everyone' and there you have it.

 

[zeldablue]

Between this and Ferguson.

It's been a rough few months being black and female. :/

 

[jstripes]

This part amuses me the most:

But what scares me the most is that they believe what they are told, have no critical thought, have no desire to read up beyond what they are told to believe...

Coming from a board that is literally nothing but talking points and daily orders to follow. ("Here's what Milo has to say!" "Here's a list of companies to email today!")

 

[RawNuts]

Kotaku has been retroactively adding affiliate disclosure notices to their "#__ best games on ______" lists that use affiliate links, due to the FTC's revised guidelines.
The notices that I've seen read, which now appear on several articles, is as follows:

Note: While all of these games are available through some digital service or other, if you buy any of them through the retail links in this post, our parent company may get a small share of the sale through the retailers' affiliates program.

Purchasing games from the provided affiliate links in an article that tell the reader what games they should purchase is of course considered a conflict of interest when a share of the sales would go to Gawker Media, so it helps with transparency when Kotaku is forced into including these disclosure notices.
More info here: http://techraptor.net/content/ftc-forces-gawker-make-disclosures-affiliate-links

These revised guidelines will influence disclosure notices for YouTube personalities as well.

 

[jstripes]

Kotaku has been retroactively adding affiliate disclosure notices to their "#__ best games on ______" lists that use affiliate links, due to the FTC's revised guidelines.
The notices that I've seen read, which now appear on several articles, is as follows:


Purchasing games from the provided affiliate links in an article that tell the reader what games they should purchase is of course considered a conflict of interest when a share of the sales would go to Gawker Media, so it helps with transparency when Kotaku is forced into including these disclosure notices.
More info here: http://techraptor.net/content/ftc-forces-gawker-make-disclosures-affiliate-links

These revised guidelines will influence disclosure notices for YouTube personalities as well.

Hey, as long as there's a disclaimer, it completely legit to me.

Gotta make money to keep the servers online.

 

[Zaph]

Hey, as long as there's a disclaimer, it completely legit to me.

Gotta make money to keep the servers online.

Yup. At least with retailer kickbacks they're free to attach the affiliate to anything they choose. Much less egregious to publisher funded campaigns plastering a specific game all over the site IMO.

 

[Toxi]

So, Gamergate and Ferguson, looks like they are a bad mix: http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2014/11/25/gamergate-meet-ferguson-ferguson-meet-gamergate/

Good God, fuck these people. I shouldn't be surprised they lack any perspective, but it still pisses me off.

 

[Myggen]

Yup. At least with retailer kickbacks they're free to attach the affiliate to anything they choose. Much less egregious to publisher funded campaigns plastering a specific game all over the site IMO.

Have you seen that (some of) the Yogscast people have begun posting proper disclaimers in the title of their videos now?: http://i.imgur.com/ZSefkzm.png

Seems like this decision in the UK will have some real impact on YT. The timing is hilarious for Yogscast, with one of the main guys whining on Reddit a couple of weeks ago about their disclosure policy being good enough. Turns out it wasn't.

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Good God, fuck these people. I shouldn't be surprised they lack any perspective, but it still pisses me off.

I can't help but to just roll my eyes. People who seriously think that video games were under some sinister attack because a lady tried to make some videos about tropes on youtube are likely not going to understand the racial dynamics surrounding the situation in Ferguson.

 

[Zaph]

Have you seen that (some of) the Yogscast people have begun posting proper disclaimers in the title of their videos now?: http://i.imgur.com/ZSefkzm.png

Seems like this decision in the UK will have some real impact on YT. The timing is hilarious for Yogscast, with one of the main guys whining on Reddit a couple of weeks ago about their disclosure policy being good enough. Turns out it wasn't.

Hah, little bit of crow will do them good.

Great thing about the ruling is that it puts the onus on the sponsors, not just the partners/content creators. Some random youtuber might not care about a UK judgement but the legal dept at Disney damn well will and won't cut a check until they see compliance.

 

[RawNuts]

Hey, as long as there's a disclaimer, it completely legit to me.

Gotta make money to keep the servers online.

The point of the FTC guidelines is to disclose this connection to the readers, not block any revenue resulting from it. These disclaimers are wonderful measures for keeping dealings transparent (and it look nothing short of legal pressure for Kotaku to start including them, apparently).

Have you seen that (some of) the Yogscast people have begun posting proper disclaimers in the title of their videos now?: http://i.imgur.com/ZSefkzm.png

Seems like this decision in the UK will have some real impact on YT. The timing is hilarious for Yogscast, with one of the main guys whining on Reddit a couple of weeks ago about their disclosure policy being good enough. Turns out it wasn't.

That is pretty damn awesome.
Does this apply retroactively to any previous videos that would still generate income, or just new ones?



EDIT: PCGamer also including disclosure notices:

A note on affiliates: some of our stories, like this one, include affiliate links to stores like Amazon. These online stores share a small amount of revenue with us if you buy something through one of these links, which helps support our work evaluating PC components.

 

[Myggen]

That is pretty damn awesome.
Does this apply retroactively to any previous videos that would still generate income, or just new ones?

I'm not sure about that. I would think that it applies retroactively since the decision was just about interpreting existing rules and not making new ones.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

This part amuses me the most:



Coming from a board that is literally nothing but talking points and daily orders to follow. ("Here's what Milo has to say!" "Here's a list of companies to email today!")

It's far behind "we're a consumer revolt to make sure 50% of video game consumers don't have their voices heard or desires considered" and "using slurs against minorities is okay since words can't break bones, but Gamasutra should really shut down and lose all their employees because of the Gamers are Dead article" but this #GG trait is also pretty fascinating.

 

[Zaph]

That is pretty damn awesome.
Does this apply retroactively to any previous videos that would still generate income, or just new ones?

The rules will most likely be tied to revenue. So it only works retroactively if the views for a specific old video currently generates income (eg via CPM or timed duration still in effect).

 

[lotsofotherstuff]

Have you seen that (some of) the Yogscast people have begun posting proper disclaimers in the title of their videos now?: http://i.imgur.com/ZSefkzm.png

Seems like this decision in the UK will have some real impact on YT. The timing is hilarious for Yogscast, with one of the main guys whining on Reddit a couple of weeks ago about their disclosure policy being good enough. Turns out it wasn't.

I think its awesome that (at least) Hannah is doing it. But I've always felt that Hannah has always been the most reasonable and most "honest" one out of the Yogscast, and she said the only reason she did it was because of the UK ruling.
She is the only one (except Zoey) that I haven't unsubscribed from at some time. So while she has started doing it, I'm not going to hold my breath for a wide spread Yogscast "lets be extremely open about everything" stance.

But to tie it in with GamerGate, the "official" talk about more disclosure from media is something I agree with.
Its the way that they have gone about expressing and trying to get the change going that makes why sick and wonder how anyone could look at it and see anything positive.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

Today in "it's about ethics" we have GamerGator @gogman proclaiming his wife discontinuing a valuable educational tool at a school district because the tool's manufacturer uses a twitter block list:

As a public school IT employee (being groomed to be tech director) myself this would utterly disgust me if not for the fact I seriously doubt his wife has done such a thing. That position isn't usually deciding curriculum.

 

[Myggen]

I think its awesome that (at least) Hannah is doing it. But I've always felt that Hannah has always been the most reasonable and most "honest" one out of the Yogscast, and she said the only reason she did it was because of the UK ruling.
She is the only one (except Zoey) that I haven't unsubscribed from at some time. So while she has started doing it, I'm not going to hold my breath for a wide spread Yogscast "lets be extremely open about everything" stance.

It ends the "we're only entertainers" bullshit argument that Yogscast and a number of other Youtubers have used for years now, which can only be a good thing. There's a reason why Yogscast have hid disclosure in the description and at the very end of their videos, and that's because they know that putting a real disclosure in the name of the video will lead to fewer views.

Today in "it's about ethics" we have GamerGator @gogman proclaiming his wife discontinuing a valuable educational tool at a school district because the tool's manufacturer uses a twitter block list:

As a public school IT employee (being groomed to be tech director) myself this would utterly disgust me if not for the fact I seriously doubt his wife has done such a thing. That position isn't usually deciding curriculum.

That whole tweet just smells of bullshit to me. No way that is real.

 

[Nanashrew]

Between this and Ferguson.

It's been a rough few months being black and female. :/

I wanna hug you :<

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

If you block too many people Twitter bans your account, they're basically terrible on harassment.

Poor Kamiya.

 

[lotsofotherstuff]

It ends the "we're only entertainers" bullshit argument that Yogscast and a number of other Youtubers have used for years now, which can only be a good thing. There's a reason why Yogscast have hid disclosure in the description and at the very end of their videos, and that's because they know that putting a real disclosure in the name of the video will lead to fewer views.

Oh I agree with that entirely, and it will be really hard for them to argue them self out of doing this.

But for example, Kim and Duncan uploaded a Mario Kart 8 DLC video on Yogscast special "Conquest" channel, sponsored by Nintendo, on the same day that Hannah uploaded her Disney Infinity video.
The Mario Kart video doesn't have the disclosure in the title or in the video. The only thing it has is a small "Thanks to Nintendo for sponsoring this video" hidden under the show more tab.
So I'd wait until we see that they actually follow the guidelines as a company.