Support NeoGAF

[prag16]

I hope you stick around you actually get it.

Does he? All I'm thinking about reading his post is the recent South Park episode with the mail away DNA tests to find out what percent victim you are.

 

[HStallion]

Does he? All I'm thinking about reading his post is the recent South Park episode with the mail away DNA tests to find out what percent victim you are.

You can refute my statement if you want.

 

[Ombra]

You can refute my statement if you want.

I'm gonna ignore him he sealed it with using southpark as a reference. Keep doing you man we may not always agree 100% all the time but its empathetic folks like yourself that help make this place.

 

[Kimawolf]

You can refute my statement if you want.

He cant.

 

[encephalon]

I hope that I can be a part of any inclusive, minority friendly gaming community in the future.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Or, trolls are going to do what they always do in under-moderated online communities: slowly shift the Overton Window to the right because someone questioning your humanity is always going to be able to be more rhetorically-"polite" than you are when facing it. Communities without heavy moderation and actual side-taking are always shitty; trolls who have no personal stake other than a desire to cause chaos and infighting always win. "Both sides" is always nonsense. If I'm a moderate and try to meet an extremist in the middle, it means I become more polarized. "Let the community decide" just means nonstop shitposting. You gotta have good moderation, and you gotta have strongly-held positions as an organization, or else it just gets shittier over time. Again, the problem with GAF is not "thought police," the problem is the toxicity that you face in all large online communities. Refusing to take a side on things like gamergate is not going to help that, it's only going to make it worse.

Right on.

 

[Uno Venova]

The content of this thread completely disproved that thread title, huh?

 

[prag16]

You can refute my statement if you want.

I'm gonna ignore him he sealed it with using southpark as a reference. Keep doing you man we may not always agree 100% all the time but its empathetic folks like yourself that help make this place.

He cant.

Eh. It's the same bullshit that people have been criticizing OT for... certain people are more "allowed" to be vitriolic and act like assholes in arguments than others. He's basically asserting that's more okay for certain people to shit up threads and berate and attack people than others. If someone decides you're privileged, everyone else is allowed a hair trigger. How can you have intellectually honest discourse if that's your starting point.

 

[TheExecutive]

It is clear that the ones requesting bans are the ones we want to stay. It will be interesting to see what comes of this place.

Well maybe not. Not saying those folks are bad but they sure do love their knee-jerk reactions. Personally I prefer people that are patient enough to allow all the facts to come out.

You have people posting about how they can't wait to finally speak their minds and it's gonna be great now that all the "SJWs" are gone, so I doubt it.

What are SJW’s?

 

[Damerman]

Doubt it. It's shitlords from here on out

Ban me

Daaaamn you were a friend that complemented me on my looks. I can’t belive this is happening.

 

[Freshmaker]

Honestly, I was just looking for an example of her defending her views in public. Literally I was just looking for a single example. I wasn't assuming anything -- not assuming something is why one poses a question. I was asking because I believe individuals who style themselves as public intellectuals should have the courage of their convictions and defend their views in public. Call that deriding her position if you want. So what? It's a discussion board, I should be able to respectfully deride her position.

Could've just googled that info.

 

[Ombra]

Eh. It's the same bullshit that people have been criticizing OT for... certain people are more "allowed" to be vitriolic and act like assholes in arguments than others. He's basically asserting that's more okay for certain people to shit up threads and berate and attack people than others. If someone decides you're privileged, everyone else is allowed a hair trigger. How can you have intellectually honest discourse if that's your starting point.

You have a bias that is making you misconstrue his point pretty hardcore.

 

[Glass Shark]

.

 

[prag16]

You have a bias that is making you misconstrue his point pretty hardcore.

Looks to me like he's excusing "the left" when they act like angry assholes (leaving aside that 'the left' on gaf is probably represented by a plurality if not majority of straight white guys), asserting that they should justifiably have a lot more leash than anyone more moderate. Help me out with what I'm misconstruing, and what point he's trying to make if not that. Any why his post deserved praise from multiple people.

 

[TumblingHippo]

I'm glad hardcore gamers are a minority. They can be pretty toxic.

 

[17 Seconds]

Well maybe not. Not saying those folks are bad but they sure do love their knee-jerk reactions. Personally I prefer people that are patient enough to allow all the facts to come out.


What are SJW’s?

lol, people still spouting the "wait for the facts to come out" nonsense. we have plenty of facts to know this dude is a predator.

nugaf will always be associated with alt-right-lite people who choose not to believe victims and willfully support a proven scumbag. have fun.

 

[TheExecutive]

Or, trolls are going to do what they always do in under-moderated online communities: slowly shift the Overton Window to the right because someone questioning your humanity is always going to be able to be more rhetorically-"polite" than you are when facing it. Communities without heavy moderation and actual side-taking are always shitty; trolls who have no personal stake other than a desire to cause chaos and infighting always win. "Both sides" is always nonsense. If I'm a moderate and try to meet an extremist in the middle, it means I become more polarized. "Let the community decide" just means nonstop shitposting. You gotta have good moderation, and you gotta have strongly-held positions as an organization, or else it just gets shittier over time. Again, the problem with GAF is not "thought police," the problem is the toxicity that you face in all large online communities. Refusing to take a side on things like gamergate is not going to help that, it's only going to make it worse.

Yes this is true

 

[TheExecutive]

lol, people still spouting the "wait for the facts to come out" nonsense. we have plenty of facts to know this dude is a predator.

nugaf will always be associated with alt-right-lite people who choose not to believe victims and willfully support a proven scumbag. have fun.

What facts are these as I may not be completely up to date.

Also I hope you aren’t saying I am alt-right-lite person for expecting due process and withholding judgement until due process is actually done.

 

[munchie64]

I think this sad thread is enough to say I'm leaving.

Cya GAF, love most of ya.

 

[TheExecutive]

Regardless of whether or not you believe the latest allegations against Tyler, there is a pretty clear breadcrumb trail of shitty behavior in his wake that he does not even bother to deny. And in his defense of the latest round, he decided to take the absolute lowest road possible. It's a pattern at this point. There's no reason to wait around for the facts because the facts have been here for a long time.

If it’s been around a long time why are people just now caring about it?

 

[17 Seconds]

What facts are these as I may not be completely up to date.

Also I hope you aren’t saying I am alt-right-lite person for expecting due process and withholding judgement until due process is actually done.

you've been making lots of posts about the subject, yet you can't do 5 minutes of research to see the extensive list of evilore doing heinous things?

 

[17 Seconds]

If it’s been around a long time why are people just now caring about it?

because most people didn't know. why do you keep playing naive and asking questions you know the answers to?

 

[TheExecutive]

you've been making lots of posts about the subject, yet you can't do 5 minutes of research to see the extensive list of evilore doing heinous things?

I have made a couple of posts about the present situation. I haven’t done a background check on the dude... no.

 

[17 Seconds]

I have made a couple of posts about the present situation. I haven't done a background check on the dude... no.

oh geez, sorry for expecting someone to know the most basic facts about a subject before they start accusing people of starting a witch hunt and other nonsense. like, why the fuck are you talking about something you admit you don't know anything about? you're that determined to cast doubt on an alleged victim?

 

[TheExecutive]

because most people didn't know. why do you keep playing naive and asking questions you know the answers to?

Well because I was one of the people who didn’t know and I didn’t read about it any further then a polygon article and wondering why the site was down on Sunday. Came on here today and it was up and functioning so decided to weigh in a bit. Is it so hard to comprehend that someone isn’t hanging off of every bit of news that is coming up?

I will just stop posting now.

 

[TheExecutive]

oh geez, sorry for expecting someone to know the most basic facts about a subject before they start accusing people of starting a witch hunt and other nonsense. like, why the fuck are you talking about something you admit you don't know anything about? you're that determined to cast doubt on an alleged victim?

Man I hope that’s not what you got out of my posts because that’s not what I meant. In any case, no I am not determined to cast doubt on alleged victims but I am searching the internet for further information now that I have an idea it may be out there so I appreciate the heads up.

 

[BamfMeat]

I was banned for saying people who've caught HIV have to take a small amount of personal responsibility for themselves, unless they were rape victims. That didn't mean there was no sympathy there, it just meant you can only blame the person who gave HIV to you.

The biggest things we're taught in the gay community - when you find a sex partner, just assume they're poz and go from there. If you choose to do something because the other guy told you he's "clean" and he lied to you? Guess what, you trusted a stranger - you got burned. You're partially to blame. Deal with it.

For the most part I did agree with the "over" moderation here but the problem was (is?), there has to be some common sense too.

 

[Vicetrailia]

Man I hope that’s not what you got out of my posts because that’s not what I meant. In any case, no I am not determined to cast doubt on alleged victims but I am searching the internet for further information now that I have an idea it may be out there so I appreciate the heads up.

You're the laziest person alive.

 

[TheExecutive]

You're the laziest person alive.

Not particularly. Until very recently I had no idea I should have been searching for anything else. When someone brought it up I started looking. Not sure what you guys expect but I am not going to do hours of research before posting on a single subject on an Internet forum. Sorry not going to happen. I have see a total of 3 sentences in articles briefly saying that he has been quoted as saying he grabbed people without their consent with absolutely no sources or anything else and absolutely NOTHING that wasn’t written within the last 4 days.

I have seen references on this forum regarding things but still no source information. Just trying to get the full picture here but whatever.

 

[Ombra]

Not particularly. Until very recently I had no idea I should have been searching for anything else. When someone brought it up I started looking. Not sure what you guys expect but I am not going to do hours of research before posting on a single subject on an Internet forum. Sorry not going to happen. I have see a total of 3 sentences in articles briefly saying that he has been quoted as saying he grabbed people without their consent with absolutely no sources or anything else and absolutely NOTHING that wasn’t written within the last 4 days.

I have seen references on this forum regarding things but still no source information. Just trying to get the full picture here but whatever.

They're trying to gaslight you, if you know about the nude posting and the ass grab then you are up to speed. They just want you to be outraged like they are.

 

[Saucestin_Roast]

Or, trolls are going to do what they always do in under-moderated online communities: slowly shift the Overton Window to the right because someone questioning your humanity is always going to be able to be more rhetorically-"polite" than you are when facing it. Communities without heavy moderation and actual side-taking are always shitty; trolls who have no personal stake other than a desire to cause chaos and infighting always win. "Both sides" is always nonsense. If I'm a moderate and try to meet an extremist in the middle, it means I become more polarized. "Let the community decide" just means nonstop shitposting. You gotta have good moderation, and you gotta have strongly-held positions as an organization, or else it just gets shittier over time. Again, the problem with GAF is not "thought police," the problem is the toxicity that you face in all large online communities. Refusing to take a side on things like gamergate is not going to help that, it's only going to make it worse.

Amen. Things have certainly changed.

 

[ZeoVGM]

They're trying to gaslight you, if you know about the nude posting and the ass grab then you are up to speed. They just want you to be outraged like they are.

Jesus Christ.

 

[Vicetrailia]

Just the other day between the site going down, then up, then down the rest of the weekend, I asked a poster "what happened" in reference to current events. That poster told me to google it, and I uncovered everything within 15 minutes. I have no idea why you are full of excuses, The Executive. It isn't convinving, just say that you don't have a problem with much of it.

 

[silveralen]

You have a bias that is making you misconstrue his point pretty hardcore.

I mean, he is describing the exact mentality you see throughout this forum? The sort of bias that has been obvious from mods? Certain people are allowed to treat others in an absolutely awful manner, others must be careful to not say a single thing that's even mildly rude. That's neogaf in a nutshell, a bunch of awful horrible people convinced their moral superiority gives them the right to treat everyone else like garbage.

 

[Mutagenic]

They're trying to gaslight you, if you know about the nude posting and the ass grab then you are up to speed. They just want you to be outraged like they are.

You couldn’t possibly be a worse poster.

 

[a.wd]

I mean, he is describing the exact mentality you see throughout this forum? The sort of bias that has been obvious from mods? Certain people are allowed to treat others in an absolutely awful manner, others must be careful to not say a single thing that's even mildly rude. That's neogaf in a nutshell, a bunch of awful horrible people convinced their moral superiority gives them the right to treat everyone else like garbage.

I have not come across this, the only people who I have seen banned are people being rude, derogatory or insulting to minorities. Could you point out examples of this behaviour please?

 

[mabec]

I'm glad hardcore gamers are a minority. They can be pretty toxic.

I consider myself a "hardcore gamer" since I been playing for 30+ years but I don't consider myself toxic in online forums, so I guess you are wrong?

 

[Dacon]

I have not come across this, the only people who I have seen banned are people being rude, derogatory or insulting to minorities. Could you point out examples of this behaviour please?

From what I've read, I think a prevailing issue many people had is how liberal some individuals are with their definition of rude and derogatory commentary. There are quite a few members who have posted some examples of some wildly over the top bans over some pretty mild discussion. Personally I've avoided many discussions over certain topics simply because the nature of said discourse seems more often than not to become quite heated and sour. I don't think that kind of environment is conducive to any kind of civil or mature discourse.

Many people carry their own ideas about what constitutes an offense on the net these days, and some have very low tolerance for even the suggestion that their ideas may be false or flawed ( not specifically a gaf thing, that's just the nature of social media these days).

 

[Agent Gibbs]

From what I've read, I think a prevailing issue many people had is how liberal some individuals are with their definition of rude and derogatory commentary. There are quite a few members who have posted some examples of some wildly over the top bans over some pretty mild discussion. Personally I've avoided many discussions over certain topics simply because the nature of said discourse seems more often than not to become quite heated and sour. I don't think that kind of environment is conducive to any kind of civil or mature discourse.

Many people carry their own ideas about what constitutes an offense on the net these days, and some have very low tolerance for even the suggestion that their ideas may be false or flawed ( not specifically a gaf thing, that's just the nature of social media these days).

I was banned for a month for asking that people not jump to extreme conclusions and automatically go with some reports over the whole warm food Jeremy Clarkson steakgate incident, where one report said it was a sustained attack over 30 seconds and people started saying he had hit him over and over for 30 seconds which was far from what the truth turned out to be. But at the time I was banned for tolerating/condoning violence. I remember at the time people in the thread were surprised I had been caught up in a Modbot banning spree on people who were defending Clarkson, I just wanted people to calm down and be rational.

that said I cannot see how Gaf will recover, sure some mods had extreme double standards and blind spots when it came to certain users and issues, with no way to effectively appeal any ban, but what is going on now is people openly being rude and acting like Gaf will go the way of 4Chan

this isn't the Gaf I know and love/hate and I'm not sure if I will stay right now, i'll give it a short amount of time and see what occurs

I'm really sad the likes of Excelsiorlef, Blamespace and many others have gone, whilst I didn't agree with them on everything and even clashed at times, I respected them and their opinions immensely

 

[PsihoPerihelion]

Well maybe not. Not saying those folks are bad but they sure do love their knee-jerk reactions. Personally I prefer people that are patient enough to allow all the facts to come out.


What are SJW’s?

Socialists, Jews and Women.

Spoiler

Considering the kind of people who use the term SJW, I'm not that far off.

 

[TumblingHippo]

I consider myself a "hardcore gamer" since I been playing for 30+ years but I don't consider myself toxic in online forums, so I guess you are wrong?

#NotAllGamers

Being a gamer is a choice, so businesses should be able to discriminate against gamers and jobs shouldn't be forced to hire them. The last thing I want to do is see a gamer in the real world and have to explain to my children what a gamer is.

 

[HStallion]

Eh. It's the same bullshit that people have been criticizing OT for... certain people are more "allowed" to be vitriolic and act like assholes in arguments than others. He's basically asserting that's more okay for certain people to shit up threads and berate and attack people than others. If someone decides you're privileged, everyone else is allowed a hair trigger. How can you have intellectually honest discourse if that's your starting point.

So you don't want to or can't refute my statement. I'm not attacking you and in fact you criticized me first. So feel free to back it up.

 

[Paracelsus]

#NotAllGamers

Being a gamer is a choice, so businesses should be able to discriminate against gamers and jobs shouldn't be forced to hire them. The last thing I want to do is see a gamer in the real world and have to explain to my children what a gamer is.

Kinda worked yourself into a strawman because spoilers: they do discriminate gamers. Try asking people who put "gaming" in their resume how well that worked for them.

 

[eKongDiddy]

I no longer hold these views. They came from a place of ignorance. Apologies to anyone who was hurt or offended by these posts.

 

[HStallion]

#NotAllGamers

Being a gamer is a choice, so businesses should be able to discriminate against gamers and jobs shouldn't be forced to hire them. The last thing I want to do is see a gamer in the real world and have to explain to my children what a gamer is.

You want to show your kid what a gamer is? Just open up any thread related to GamerGate when it first started and that should give them a good idea.

 

[prag16]

So you don't want to or can't refute my statement. I'm not attacking you and in fact you criticized me first. So feel free to back it up.

??? Not sure what you're getting at. I'm not trying to "refute" anything. I already explained the issue I have with your post.

Looks to me like he's excusing "the left" when they act like angry assholes (leaving aside that 'the left' on gaf is probably represented by a plurality if not majority of straight white guys), asserting that they should justifiably have a lot more leash than anyone more moderate. Help me out with what I'm misconstruing, and what point he's trying to make if not that. Any why his post deserved praise from multiple people.

I mean, is that not what you're doing? You're making excuses for "the angry left" acting like assholes, because they have reason to be angry. The idea that they have reason to be angry isn't even something I am trying to refute. The issue is with seemingly excusing the behavior of these angry people. That's certainly what seems to be happening based on the line of discussion that led to that post. I'll ask again, if that was not your implication, then what what was your point in describing how angry they are, and should be? I asked somebody to help me out with what I'm misconstruing, and nobody has, not you, or the other two posters who got on my case about this.

I mean, he is describing the exact mentality you see throughout this forum? The sort of bias that has been obvious from mods? Certain people are allowed to treat others in an absolutely awful manner, others must be careful to not say a single thing that's even mildly rude. That's neogaf in a nutshell, a bunch of awful horrible people convinced their moral superiority gives them the right to treat everyone else like garbage.

Pretty much. I'll stop short of calling everyone "awful horrible people", but this post otherwise nails the dynamic I'm talking about.

 

[GrizzleBoy]

So can we actually elaborate on who the "certain people" are and who are the "others" they treat so horribly?

I mean it's all well and good repeating this page after page, but I'm pretty sure that even.after hundreds of pages of debate on this since the forum came back up, nobody is saying who they're actually talking about?

"The people kept on saying the thing to them and it wasn't nice imo" can only advance this debate so far.

 

[Cloud7]

As a transwoman, I've felt that GAF has treated me well for years and doesn't put up with the "all sides" BS that's becoming more popular online. I don't feel right for being here because of EvilLore and I'm still weighing my options but I do enjoy the community itself. I hope GAF can be repaired because I do like it here and it's brought me some of my favorite memories like the Sony E3 2015 thread.

 

[Pai Pai Master]

Does he? All I'm thinking about reading his post is the recent South Park episode with the mail away DNA tests to find out what percent victim you are.

Or he just has empathy for other people.

 

[Saya]

Well I don't know. There's many testimonies of ex-gays and those who turned from the community and ”became" straight. A lot of people say it's a spectrum where there's no totally straight/gay/whatever so it makes sense. There's people in my life that I know/have heard of who turned to Hod and are no longer gay. For me, I'm more reliant on that old book and their testimonies.

So respectful.