Support NeoGAF

[Papa]

This was an apology to a long forgotten conversation.


Except its not a shtick, and im not pretending they made innocent mistakes.


That's what she said.

You’re right. No woman has ever lasted more than 2 minutes with me!

 

[Dr. Claus]

I believe your intentions, but it has effects beyond the intentions. I really don't think the nicknames are a good idea or have anywhere clos to the effect you desire.

A website that hosts right extremists' viewpoints is inacceptable as a source from my perspective. I sometimes read what you link from such a source anyway, but that's because I trust you to be careful with your choice. I cannot expect the same from people outside of NeoGAF who do have a negative preconception of the site.

I have explained them to you, but you are of course free to disagree.

A few things:

1.) The only "effects beyond the intentions" are ones you have been projecting onto it because you are being overly sensitive.

2.) KiwiFarms has plenty of left leaning and far left leaning folk as well. It isn't a "right extremist" site. I don't like the place, but it is clear as day with just a little bit of research.

Classy.

This is really the example GAF has to set in 2019.
.

I have to agree with Matt on this one, Red. Respect is earned and this child has not earned anything other than a hearty laugh at his stupidity.

 

[Corrik]

Why do you guys care what some nobody said on twitter. Who cares.

 

[SoulUnison]

The thing to me is that, I thought I somewhat understood and sympathized with the transgender acceptance movement, since a lot of it mirrors my experiences of growing up gay and "T" is even part of the "LGBT" initialism. When I was a teenager, which was the point in my life where, personally and culturally the most homophobia existed around me, I would have loved the idea of someone calling people out for shitty comments, but I also wouldn't have expected or felt I deserved to have complete control of the entire conversation. What constitutes "phobia?"

Like, if a person came up to me and said "I don't agree with homosexuality" I'd be like "Sucks to be you, then, cuz I'm still gonna do it," but I also don't know if I'd call that "homophobia." This gets fuzzy around the edges, but you can disagree with something without being "afraid" of it or working to actively oppress it.

ERA is confusing and alarming to me because it's something of an ideological kidnapping. GAF has always been, first and foremost, a video game discussion forum, but when the split happened, ERA tried to present itself as, kind of ironically, "ethics in video game message boards," but once everyone migrated the truth became clear: Everything over there seems to be forced through the political lens of trans individuals. It's not "that video game forum where you shouldn't be a dick," it's very specifically "That trans activist video game forum," and that's not what people were signing up for. Equality, yes. Representation, yes. Railroading of all other views an opinions in the service of a single, specific political movement? That's uncomfortable.

If ERA's big thing had been gay rights I would've been like "Is this really helping us? Helping me? Because it seems like all it does is perpetuate this idea that we can't handle ourselves and that we won't listen to anyone who doesn't share our traits. This doesn't strengthen the cause, it just makes people resent it. This is just about the worst long term political strategy possible - you're undermining all of our struggle up to this point so that you can feel momentarily empowered."

Also, if I hadn't come up against some degree of discrimination at various point in my life, I never would have learned to ignore and/or overcome it. People shouldn't be dicks, but some people will be, and if I'd locked myself in my room for all my teenage years and refused to come out because someone might potentially, maybe even unintentionally, be mean to me somewhere, I'd have absolutely no ability to cope and exist as an adult. You have to encounter the different to grow.

And now there's this bizarre atmosphere where your own identity is "discarded" if you don't fit their narrative. I'm bi-racial and gay, but neither of those viewpoints and the entire lifetime of experience I have behind them matter when i don't reach the same conclusions they want me to reach. Now there's this idea over there that, if someone says "as a gay person" or "as a black person" and if you don't like what they follow that up with, then you must be lying about who you are.

I once very, very briefly considered making my avatar a face photo just to head off the "You're just *pretending* to be bi-racial and gay" crowd, (not that a head shot would prove "gay," but... you know.) But... Can you even imagine giving some of those people that ammo? I'm sure I'd be told that I'm not dark enough to "really" be black or that I'm too comfortable to have ever struggled or known pain in my life. There are people over there who, with absolutely no hyperbole, would probably make it their life's mission to track me down and harass me, and they'd think they were doing so righteously. I could post a picture of myself at a Pride event holding up a notarized copy of my family geneology report, and some of these people would still claim I was some sort of message board alt-right sleeper cell. I would have posted a picture of my straight-ticket Democrat primary ballot if it wasn't a felony to document voting material.

In the end, I'll always choose an environment where people have the freedom to be asshole (and the audience has the freedom to rightfully call them out on it,) over one where people are instantly and permanently silenced over vaguely defined feelings.

 

[Papa]

Why do you guys care what some nobody said on twitter. Who cares.

Don’t confuse pointing and laughing with caring. I think Red is the only one who cares.

 

[Dr. Claus]

The thing to me is that, I thought I somewhat understood and sympathized with the transgender acceptance movement, since a lot of it mirrors my experiences of growing up gay and "T" is even part of the "LGBT" initialism. When I was a teenager, which was the point in my life where, personally and culturally the most homophobia existed around me, I would have loved the idea of someone calling people out for shitty comments, but I also wouldn't have expected or felt I deserved to have complete control of the entire conversation. What constitutes "phobia?"

Like, if a person came up to me and said "I don't agree with homosexuality" I'd be like "Sucks to be you, then, cuz I'm still gonna do it," but I also don't know if I'd call that "homophobia." This gets fuzzy around the edges, but you can disagree with something without being "afraid" of it or working to actively oppress it.

ERA is confusing and alarming to me because it's something of an ideological kidnapping. GAF has always been, first and foremost, a video game discussion forum, but when the split happened, ERA tried to present itself as, kind of ironically, "ethics in video game message boards," but once everyone migrated the truth became clear: Everything over there seems to be forced through the political lens of trans individuals. It's not "that video game forum where you shouldn't be a dick," it's very specifically "That trans activist video game forum," and that's not what people were signing up for. Equality, yes. Representation, yes. Railroading of all other views an opinions in the service of a single, specific political movement? That's uncomfortable.

If ERA's big thing had been gay rights I would've been like "Is this really helping us? Helping me? Because it seems like all it does is perpetuate this idea that we can't handle ourselves and that we won't listen to anyone who doesn't share our traits. This doesn't strengthen the cause, it just makes people resent it. This is just about the worst long term political strategy possible - you're undermining all of our struggle up to this point so that you can feel momentarily empowered."

Also, if I hadn't come up against some degree of discrimination at various point in my life, I never would have learned to ignore and/or overcome it. People shouldn't be dicks, but some people will be, and if I'd locked myself in my room for all my teenage years and refused to come out because someone might potentially, maybe even unintentionally, be mean to me somewhere, I'd have absolutely no ability to cope and exist as an adult. You have to encounter the different to grow.

And now there's this bizarre atmosphere where your own identity is "discarded" if you don't fit their narrative. I'm bi-racial and gay, but neither of those viewpoints and the entire lifetime of experience I have behind them matter when i don't reach the same conclusions they want me to reach. Now there's this idea over there that, if someone says "as a gay person" or "as a black person" and if you don't like what they follow that up with, then you must be lying about who you are.

I once very, very briefly considered making my avatar a face photo just to head off the "You're just *pretending* to be bi-racial and gay" crowd, (not that a head shot would prove "gay," but... you know.) But... Can you even imagine giving some of those people that ammo? I'm sure I'd be told that I'm not dark enough to "really" be black or that I'm too comfortable to have ever struggled or known pain in my life. There are people over there who, with absolutely no hyperbole, would probably make it their life's mission to track me down and harass me, and they'd think they were doing so righteously.

I find that very ironic given how they demonize GamerGate which was also a group focused on ethics in gaming.

Fantastic post.

 

[SoulUnison]

I find that very ironic given how they demonize GamerGate which was also a group focused on ethics in gaming.

Fantastic post.

ERA is the other end of the horseshoe from GamerGate.

GamerGate said "I can't handle the idea that society and media is changing and I demand that things stay the same they've always been."

ERA says "I can't handle the idea that society and media are changing, but not as quickly as I want them to, and I demand that everyone care about the same things I care about."

 

[Papa]

The thing to me is that, I thought I somewhat understood and sympathized with the transgender acceptance movement, since a lot of it mirrors my experiences of growing up gay and "T" is even part of the "LGBT" initialism. When I was a teenager, which was the point in my life where, personally and culturally the most homophobia existed around me, I would have loved the idea of someone calling people out for shitty comments, but I also wouldn't have expected or felt I deserved to have complete control of the entire conversation. What constitutes "phobia?"

Like, if a person came up to me and said "I don't agree with homosexuality" I'd be like "Sucks to be you, then, cuz I'm still gonna do it," but I also don't know if I'd call that "homophobia." This gets fuzzy around the edges, but you can disagree with something without being "afraid" of it or working to actively oppress it.

ERA is confusing and alarming to me because it's something of an ideological kidnapping. GAF has always been, first and foremost, a video game discussion forum, but when the split happened, ERA tried to present itself as, kind of ironically, "ethics in video game message boards," but once everyone migrated the truth became clear: Everything over there seems to be forced through the political lens of trans individuals. It's not "that video game forum where you shouldn't be a dick," it's very specifically "That trans activist video game forum," and that's not what people were signing up for. Equality, yes. Representation, yes. Railroading of all other views an opinions in the service of a single, specific political movement? That's uncomfortable.

If ERA's big thing had been gay rights I would've been like "Is this really helping us? Helping me? Because it seems like all it does is perpetuate this idea that we can't handle ourselves and that we won't listen to anyone who doesn't share our traits. This doesn't strengthen the cause, it just makes people resent it. This is just about the worst long term political strategy possible - you're undermining all of our struggle up to this point so that you can feel momentarily empowered."

And now there's this bizarre atmosphere where your own identity is "discarded" if you don't fit their narrative. I'm bi-racial and gay, but neither of those viewpoints and the entire lifetime of experience I have behind them matter when i don't reach the same conclusions they want me to reach. Now there's this idea over there that, if someone says "as a gay person" or "as a black person" and if you don't like what they follow that up with, then you must be lying about who you are.

I once very, very briefly considered making my avatar a face photo just to head off the "You're just *pretending* to be bi-racial and gay" crowd, (not that a head shot would prove "gay," but... you know.) But... Can you even imagine giving some of those people that ammo? I'm sure I'd be told that I'm not dark enough to "really" be black or that I'm too comfortable to have ever struggled or known pain in my life. There are people over there who, with absolutely no hyperbole, would probably make it their life's mission to track me down and harass me, and they'd think they were doing so righteously.

I’m glad you’re having this awakening, mate. Truly, I am. You’ve previously come across as angry, hostile, and possibly depressed, but I think that will dissipate as you continue to untangle the web of lies and reveal the truth.

What is happening is exactly what the likes of Claus, myself, and many others here have been saying would happen for a long time. I feel like we were looking at where it was going rather than where it was, but it was difficult for anyone trapped in the bubble to see and think clearly. I know that you have said before that you miss your friends there, but it seems that it can’t be changed, and you have potential friends here who sympathize with you and won’t judge you for straying from groupthink in spite of your immutable characteristics.

These people are mentally and emotionally immature and have established a nihilistic cult of victimhood that cannot sustain itself in the long run as it is a closed feedback loop that is shielded from diverse (heh) opinions that act as a correcting mechanism (or a corrective tap, hey Redneckerz ?). They deserve to be mocked and ridiculed because they are being ridiculous. Some people get uncomfortable when they observe others being mocked because those behaviours have been pathologised in current_year, but there are other unforeseen, undesirable consequences if the mockery is silenced. It serves an important social purpose.

I suggest you join us in laughing from the sidelines as they continue to cannibalize themselves while we carry on being happy that we aren’t in the cult

 

[Papa]

ERA is the other end of the horseshoe from GamerGate.

GamerGate said "I can't handle the idea that society and media is changing and I demand that things stay the same they've always been."

ERA says "I can't handle the idea that society and media are changing, but not as quickly as I want them to, and I demand that everyone care about the same things I care about."

I don’t think that change for the sake of change is necessarily good. I wasn’t around for gamergate, but having read some post-mortems, it seems to me that it was pushing back against ideologically-motivated, forced change rather than organic change to meet evolving demographics as you seem to be suggesting.

 

[SoulUnison]

I don’t think that change for the sake of change is necessarily good. I wasn’t around for gamergate, but having read some post-mortems, it seems to me that it was pushing back against ideologically-motivated, forced change rather than organic change to meet evolving demographics as you seem to be suggesting.

Agree to disagree. There may have been some of that in the mix but, to me, GamerGate was an extremely used to being pandered to audience seeing that other people exist, and have money, and thus are deserving of equal time and consideration, and subsequently yelling "Things were fine when everything was just for me and I didn't hear anybody complaining and therefore no one was."

 

[Papa]

Agree to disagree. There may have been some of that in the mix but, to me, GamerGate was an extremely used to being pandered to audience seeing that other people exist, and have money, and thus are deserving of equal time and consideration, and subsequently yelling "Things were fine when everything was just for me and I didn't hear anybody complaining and therefore no one was."

I don’t see it that way, but that’s fine, I don’t think any less of you for disagreeing.

 

[Shmunter]

I don’t see it that way, but that’s fine, I don’t think any less of you for disagreeing.

I also wasn't around for gamergate, or at least paid no mind to it. But from a bit of digging; wasn't it sparked by boyfriend/girlfriend breakup with girlfriend having connections to gaming media resulting in a coordinated media campaign, which in turn exposed obvious collusion & corruption.

At it's core it was a public push back against media and ethics in journalism at large. A push-back that got ugly like any war does. No doubt, any nuance or truth would be buried by activists and eaten up by the gullible. Fill me if my basic interpretation is lacking.

 

[Dr. Claus]

I also wasn't around for gamergate, or at least paid no mind to it. But from a bit of digging; wasn't it sparked by boyfriend/girlfriend breakup with girlfriend having connections to gaming media resulting in a coordinated media campaign, which in turn exposed obvious collusion & corruption.

At it's core it was a public push back against media and ethics in journalism at large. A push-back that got ugly like any war does. No doubt, any nuance or truth would be buried by activists and eaten up by the gullible. Fill me if my basic interpretation is lacking.

I feel like strange headache 's post from early last year was a great overview of the whole debacle from an outsider's perspective:

I don't consider myself a GamerGater, but I don't think they are the monsters that game journalists and other opinion-makers want us make-believe. It largely serves as the go to boogeyman for all the general failures of mainstream gaming journalism. In physics, every reaction has an opposite and equal reaction. GG was a reaction to the radical politicization of the gaming community that was driven by fanatical ideologues and puritans striving on division and outrage. Instead of engaging with the criticism in a constructive manner, the media outlets decided to sidestep the issue by simply declaring all gamers misogynists, hastily burying it all and banning all discussion. But the discussion did not go away, essentially creating a very polarized 'us vs. them' situation that only made it much worse.

1. Politics, politicization and propaganda

As Benjamin Constant once said, part of the individual needs to be independent from politics and collective power, "our freedom must consist of peaceful enjoyment and private independence". Many people consider gaming a hobby, a form of entertainment they enjoy in their private life, nothing more and nothing less. While it is fine to discuss political aspects of certain games and gaming culture, it is only understandable that people react strongly against any kind of politicization of their hobby as a whole.

There is a certain subset of games journalists and opinion-makers who demand that certain games must not only adhere to their political views, but also actively convey them (i.e. propaganda). When political views are creeping that deeply into something you enjoy privately as entertainment, people react. Politics is a highly divisive matter, and most hobbyists don't want that kind of rupture in their community. They want their common interest to be the one thing that unites them instead of riling everybody up against each other. Gaming as an interest is something that gives most gamers a sense of belonging, an interest they can share with other fellow gamers, no matter who they are. That's why they don't want their games to dictate their political beliefs and vice versa.

Coming from an outside perspective, the us vs. them mentality that's being cultivated in the gaming community is blatantly ridiculous. It's gotten to the point where if you don't agree with certain talking points, you are immediately labeled as 'far-right' or accused of being an 'SJW'. That's the american two-party system seeping into an overly politicized gaming community, leaving no wiggle room for the moderate people in between.

2. Gamers, sexism and social authoritarianism

GG is not 'alt-right', it happened as a push-back against leftist authoritarianism. In fact, many GamerGaters consider themselves liberal. Remember what happened, when Jack Thompson tried to infer that video games make people violent? Thompson is to the authoritarian right, what Anita and her politically charged ilk is to the authoritarian left. Co-opting a form of entertainment in order to spread the radical feminist message that "all games are sexist", inferring that games make you a misogynist. Suddenly she is revered by the gaming press like the second coming of Jesus and those critical of her were quickly labeled 'misogynistic basement-dwelling neck-beards', aka. gamers. Soon after, a flurry of 'gamers are dead' articles were published, mostly by journalists sharing the same political circles as Anita.

The problem was not that some people dared discuss the representation of women in video games. As with violence in video games, that's a good discussion to have. The problem was that her criticism was defective by nature and designed in such a way as to rile people up in order to gain notoriety. Much like Thompson, who worked his way backwards in order to prove that games cause violence, Anita critiqued games under the pre-established assumption that "everything is sexist". While Thompson was ridiculed, Anita was lauded simply because she had good ties to certain game journalists who swallowed her bait, hook, line and sinker. Valid criticism was quickly brushed aside as evidence that the gaming community was sexist, never-mind the fact that her point of view was quite radical and prone to hasty generalizations.

The problem was that her criticism was not constructive, but destructive. Unfortunately it was that kind of criticism that drove a wedge into the gaming community, bringing her fame and financial success. Her criticism was not designed to make the gaming community a more inclusive place, but to cultivate a fanatic fellowship willing to join her crusade for 'the grater good' by throwing money at her. Fast forward a couple of years later, and most people have grown sick and tired of her babbling and seen through her shtick. But the damage was done. Other people are trying to copy her methods or seek out other hobbies ripe for the taking.

3. GamerGate and the 'alt-right'

I'm a leftist, I value progressive and liberal ideals, but I've long stopped counting the times I've been called an 'alt-right Nazi bigot' every time I participated in a discussion like this. For those of you painting GamerGate with the same broad brush, have you considered how many people your narrow-mindedness has falsely attributed to the right? It's almost as if you need an enemy to defend your cause.

Let me tell you that I don't particularly like some of the more prominent GamerGate talking-heads, but those were the only ones willing to listen. What were people supposed to do, after being banned and ostracized by the political puritans and all the gaming journalists who simply refused to listen? I don't deny the sad fact, that some of them fell into the hands of the 'alt-right', but many of them still resisted the call of the pied piper, despite your contempt. Because gamers know better than to simply give up their values for somebody trying to capitalize on the current situation.

Years later, I see once striving multi-pluralistic gaming communities that were co-opted by these radical, political ideologues in nothing but shambles. It didn't take GAF very long to collapse under its own ideological weight and the sad state of affairs of the authoritarian left communities (like ResetERA and GamerGhazi) is proof in the pudding that any kind of political puritanism is far from the ideological utopia that people were hoping for.

I don't consider myself a GamerGater, but if I perceive someone being treated unfairly, I defend them, not matter if I agree or disagree with their opinions. The cause doesn't justify the means and I vehemently reject the assertion that "there are no bad tactics, only bad targets".

4. Harassment, victimization and criticism

Let me preface the following by stating the obvious, I do not condone harassment just like the vast majority of gamers and other people out there. The internet is a mind-boggingly vast place and the single user but a tiny speck in this immense network of interconnected people. Now imagine you're at the center of a vast internet controversy involving thousands upon thousands of people. Now if only 1% of all the people involved would be stupid dimwits, you would still receive hundreds of harassing messages. From your point of view it would seems as if the whole world would have turned against you. Now imagine that you would not only count violent messages as harassment, but also any kind of criticism and ridicule.

I don't deny that Anita and Co. received hateful messages, but to induce that all GamerGaters are violent misogynists is just plain wrong. Especially considering that the FBI closed its investigation into GamerGate stating that "no additional subjects or actionable leads were developed as the result of the investigation." The conclusion of the FBI report was evidently unsatisfactory to the political ideologues capitalizing on their victim status. While I do not wish to belittle any form of harassment, it is equally true that victimization not only garners sympathy, but indirectly validates your narrative by making an appeal to emotion. As a victim, you don't need to engage with valid criticism, which is a classical logical fallacy that most would describe nowadays as "facts over feelings". We are talking about a person who demands a 20.000$ speaking fee and started out as a frikkin' telemarketer for a guy touting the slogan "purpose... passion... profits".

5. Journalism, gamers and death

When you are young, it must be pretty cool to become a gaming journalist, essentially making a living out of your passion. But as you grow older, you seek meaning and slowly come to the realization that you spent 20 years writing about what is essentially a form of entertainment. When gaming becomes a burden you turn to a good cause, trying to make the world a better place, trying to educate other people. I don't think that game journalists are bad people, they've grown old and tired and fell for some kind of political snake-oil that gave their work purpose. Doesn't help that the written word is falling out of fashion, while a crop of fresh new reviewers are showing up on youtube.

Maybe it's just me, but over the course of the years, I've witnessed the writing of many game journalists become sour and bitter. The same people who used to hold up their gaming community and defended gamers, openly hate their customers nowadays. While I pity them, I must hold them responsible for the growing divide and mutual hostilities in the gaming community. They could have easily avoided GamerGate by simply listening to the pluralistic voices in their community, but no. By elevating themselves to arbiters of morality, they declared one part of the gaming community as good, while ostracizing the other part. I think many of them realize by now how much damage they have done to the community as a whole, but it's too late now, the only way forward is to stick your head into the sand and to double down.

I would have stood with you, I would have defended a worthwhile cause, but then you decided to paint my community with a broad brush, accusing me of all the evils under the sun, calling me a socially challenged basement dwelling neck-beard and worst of all, pronouncing me dead! Listen up you fools, my gamer friends and me are productive members of society, most of us have become caring parents, we have our heads on straight, we strive to be tolerant to people from all walks of life and everybody is welcomed to share our passion of gaming. We don't need some washed up gaming journalist to tell us the obvious, that discrimination/sexism/racism/harassment is bad. We don't need you to tell us what to think, who to vote for, what to like and how to behave. The gaming community is one of the most tolerant, liberal and accepting hobbyist community I've ever encountered and you do not get to drag us through the mud. Did you honestly expect the gaming community to bow down and take it to the chin after accusing and judging us all guilty?

6. "We don't want to take your games away"

There is a fine line between constructive criticism, fear-mongering and censorship. By now it should be evidently clear, that all those power-tripping political keyboard-warriors weaponize public pressure in order to make every developer bow to their narrow worldview. This has nothing to do with constructive criticism, but a culture war about the hegemony of your mind. Witcher 3, Yooka-Laylee, A Hat in Time, Kingdom Come, Subnautica... how many more incidents sparked by tribalism and public outrage do you need in order to recognize the authoritarian nature of their so-called 'criticism'?

They may use 'positive words' but their methods and goals are not much different from the religious, puritanical, conservative authoritarian right. Some of you are too young, but I still remember the times when AD&D was considered satanical and when Frank Zappa was accused of perverting the youth. Man, I love Zappa's music and it saddens me greatly that in our current climate, provoking content like that would be impossible without some crazy community or media outlet creating another shitstorm for clicks and notoriety.

7. Women, minorities and gaming

The moral crusaders of today tout themselves to represent all women and minorities, when in fact they are in no such position of authority at all. Those who disagree are simply ignored, like all those women speaking out in favor of Nolan Bushnell. Daniel Vavra, is a white supremacist, despite having suffered Nazi and communist occupation. All white people are privileged, all men are sexist, all minorities are oppressed, cultural appropriation is wrong... One of my gripes with all that nonsense is the purely americocentric view on the world. It's almost as if the American media discovered the existence of women and minorities in the last decade or so and most ideological activists are more preoccupied with recruiting these social groups for their own political reasons.

Has any of these moral crusaders ever taken the time to ask these people if they want to be politicized to such a degree? They gay people in my gaming community certainly do not wish to be reduced to their sexual orientation as their one single defining trait. The women in my community do not want to be reduced to their womanhood and the ethical minorities certainly do not wish to be reduced to the color of their skin. They want to be treated like everybody else, nothing more and nothing less. In the same vein, ComicGate is not about the rejection of diversity, it's about how women and minorities are reduced to a single trait in order to convey a political message.

The politicization of entertainment has gone too far. It's gotten to a point where a movie/game/book is automatically lauded for merely portraying a black/female/gay/whatever protagonist, and if you dare not like it, you're called a bigot. I grew up reading Hannah Arendt, watching Ripley shred aliens and listening to Tracy Chapman. If I end up not liking something, it's because I think it's shit, not because it features the flavor of the month minority.

8. Final words

The infamous words of Sam Biddle still ring in my ears "nerds should be constantly shamed and degraded into submission". As a somewhat nerdish gamer I'm used to being socially stigmatized, but let me remind you that women and minorities were always part of the community. Heck, back in the days, before gaming became mainstream, we would have been ecstatic if even more women were willing to share our passion. Back then, nobody gave a shit about your sexual orientation, the color of your skin or your gender, the only thing that mattered was your interest in the hobby.

Gaming allowed me to forge bonds with people from all walks of life and from all the different corners of the world. I love appropriating other cultures, engaging with their traditions, cooking exotic meals, listening to their music, sharing their views on the world, discussing their moral values. It made my own life richer and allowed me to take different perspectives on the world. Maybe, just maybe, it would be high time to celebrate that aspect of gaming and leave the moral crusaders trying to drive a wedge through the gaming community out in the dust, moping in their own little dark corner.

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/game...-other-about-it.1460965/page-5#post-253184020

 

[Shmunter]

I feel like strange headache 's post from early last year was a great overview of the whole debacle from an outsider's perspective:


https://www.neogaf.com/threads/game...-other-about-it.1460965/page-5#post-253184020

Thank you for quoting that post. Great write up, very insightful and straight to the heart of the matter.

It’s amazing how devs like Dice still use that playbook with the recent BFV. Seems it did not work for them and people are wising up to the manipulation and are rejecting it wholesale.

I also just found this easily digestible vid on YouTube explainin how it all began...

 

[Dr. Claus]

Thank you for quoting that post. Great write up, very insightful and straight to the heart of the matter.

It’s amazing how devs like Dice still use that playbook with the recent BFV. Seems it did not work for them and people are wising up to the manipulation and are rejecting it wholesale.

I also just found this easily digestible vid on YouTube explainin how it all began...

I love PSA Sitch. Dude is fantastic.

 

[Redneckerz]

You’re right. No woman has ever lasted more than 2 minutes with me!

Telling.

I have to agree with Matt on this one, Red. Respect is earned and this child has not earned anything other than a hearty laugh at his stupidity.

You become what you dislike by mimicking the same low level terminology and phrasing of the originator's end.

I think Nana's post is rather sad but then again i think that of everyone who throws unsubstantiated insult and no desire to actually converse.

Don’t confuse pointing and laughing with caring. I think Red is the only one who cares.

Perhaps because i tend not to ridicule people with disability by putting it in "brackets" like it is some made up thing.

Or calling them a Virgin and loser. Thats not even levelheaded criticism, thats just bushing around.

I don’t see it that way, but that’s fine, I don’t think any less of you for disagreeing.

Heh.

 

[LuvOfThaGame]

3 day "inflammatory drive-by" post for writing in the louis ck thread.
"George Carlin joked about child worship, shootings, and rape over 15-20 years ago. Louis C.K. has always been heavily influenced by Carlin. Alot of his bits are Carlin-esq taken to the even further extreme. Unfortunately, I don't believe comedians like Carlin, and even more extreme comedians like Sam Kinison, would be accepted today either and the world would have missed their brilliant satire."

WTF is Inflammatory or drive-by about it? I even had several more posts quoting my claim. Im sure some will disagree about how I see this point, but they should just say what they don't like about it.
If it said 'Lack of group think mentality and not automatically condemning OT like you're supposed to as a lemming', I'd just agree that they got me there.
I suppose a mod just disagreed with my opinion and it seems that's ban worthy there. Ah, well. Should've expected it.

 

[Saruhashi]

3 day "inflammatory drive-by" post for writing in the louis ck thread.
"George Carlin joked about child worship, shootings, and rape over 15-20 years ago. Louis C.K. has always been heavily influenced by Carlin. Alot of his bits are Carlin-esq taken to the even further extreme. Unfortunately, I don't believe comedians like Carlin, and even more extreme comedians like Sam Kinison, would be accepted today either and the world would have missed their brilliant satire."

WTF is Inflammatory or drive-by about it? I even had several more posts quoting my claim. Im sure some will disagree about how I see this point, but they should just say what they don't like about it.
If it said 'Lack of group think mentality and not automatically condemning OT like you're supposed to as a lemming', I'd just agree that they got me there.
I suppose a mod just disagreed with my opinion and it seems that's ban worthy there. Ah, well. Should've expected it.

It's just a 3 day ban though.

The way I read those kind of bans is "you are making a good point here but it goes against our narrative so here is a gentle reminder to you, and everyone else, to keep it in line".

The idea is that you'll come back in 3 days and keep a feckin lid on this sensible opposition thing going forward.

They can't permaban you because that damages the "integrity" of the site when other users see people taking permanent bans for decent talking points.

Then there is this...

Excelsiorlef: "I feel so fortunate that I got to see Carlin perform live in my lifetime. It is an insult to Carlin to even speak of CK as being in the same ballpark... especially now."

That right there is why you have taken a ban in that thread.

 

[mekes]

LuvOfThaGame yeah unfortunately you should have expected. There is no freedom in those threads for expression and rather sadly even trying to present an understanding of the event. Those type of threads exist only to rile a small crowd on the website who take absolute priority over any other user on the forum, it’s their forum and not yours. That’s no matter who you are and where you’re from. Era are championing Ricky Gervais in that thread, who was the subject of the angry mob himself a few years back after joking about Caitlin Jenner and refusing to apologise afterwards. How quickly they forget when they get triggered by every little thing they watch, see or hear. I found that hilarious.

And for what it’s worth, that Louie set as a whole was the best I’ve ever seen from him. 50 odd minutes, not the 2 minute clip doing the rounds. It was a masterful performance from a comedian who has always had shock comedy and repulsive bits in his acts. Now those offended want to say he’s an alt right commentator and liken him to Milo. It’s so misguided and lazy.

 

[fantomena]

Check out F fantomena in that thread. Like a completely different persona to here.

How so?

 

[IAmAnAgnostic]

Another ex-Era member here, except that I wasn't banned. But I haven't posted either almost at all since around the launch.

Why? Because what's the point of 'discussion' if you have to walk on eggshells and thus can't say what you even think regardless? I say there is no point indeed and thus I've been lurking and using the site as a News bulletin, but even that has become less efficient recently I feel like. Or more easy to replace by certain YouTube channels. (thank you YongYea!)

To do anything on the website you'd have to find a small sub community of non assholes in some OT. I learned very quickly what types of topics or threads are absolutely pointless to enter, since A) I already know what the opinion 'consensus' will be ("wokest" possible stance) and B) deviating from the consensus will get a person banned and piled anyways.

Since I can get the news elsewhere and actual discussion is banned, I figured to lurk only and even lurk less as time went on. I have my niche communities I follow within Era, but that's it.

I've been observing GAF's development for a while, as I was a member here before as well. It seems currently at least that you're allowed to deviate politically and discussion is allowed. If that continues, I believe GAF will continue to grow and even pass Era eventually. But if GAF goes back to the old ways that led to the collapse, this will not happen.

My 2c.

 

[Starlight Lotice]

They justify it by claiming those people are nazis/sexists/transphobes/racists/etc. They are the enemy and not worth tolerating a different lifestyle, because they believe those lifestyles are actively harming people. Years of mental coddling has weakened them to any sort of reality. Hence why we have infants screaming at someone for wearing a trump shirt/hat.

Would you say that this is a US/UK thing or is it spreading to Europe/S America?

I mean I have had protective parents myself but I have seen the harsh realities of life and came through mostly okay (I hope so).

Era reads like it is mostly ran by Americans who have one political view and are trying to get it into Games which isn't right. Like or Hate a game but don't add the politicalness of it all in a game.

If I hate a game it is due to some rubbish AI or difficulty spike....but at Era they would say something like "They made it hard for Minorities because Nazi's enjoy Punishments" or something (exaggerated but still).

I honestly hope it isn't due to coddling, imagine if they really had to enlist in a war where real terror is?

 

[Nobody_Important]

Another ex-Era member here, except that I wasn't banned. But I haven't posted either almost at all since around the launch.

Why? Because what's the point of 'discussion' if you have to walk on eggshells and thus can't say what you even think regardless? I say there is no point indeed and thus I've been lurking and using the site as a News bulletin, but even that has become less efficient recently I feel like. Or more easy to replace by certain YouTube channels. (thank you YongYea!)

To do anything on the website you'd have to find a small sub community of non assholes in some OT. I learned very quickly what types of topics or threads are absolutely pointless to enter, since A) I already know what the opinion 'consensus' will be ("wokest" possible stance) and B) deviating from the consensus will get a person banned and piled anyways.

Since I can get the news elsewhere and actual discussion is banned, I figured to lurk only and even lurk less as time went on. I have my niche communities I follow within Era, but that's it.

I've been observing GAF's development for a while, as I was a member here before as well. It seems currently at least that you're allowed to deviate politically and discussion is allowed. If that continues, I believe GAF will continue to grow and even pass Era eventually. But if GAF goes back to the old ways that led to the collapse, this will not happen.

My 2c.

Once again this is not true. You can say whatever you want as long as it doesn't violate the rules of the forum. If your opinion or take is offensive and breaks the rules then of course you are gonna get banned or get warned.

 

[IAmAnAgnostic]

Once again this is not true. You can say whatever you want as long as it doesn't violate the rules of the forum. If your opinion or take is offensive and breaks the rules then of course you are gonna get banned or get warned.

I believe this thread is full of examples to the contrary. Or the rules ask for allegiance to ultra progressive Dogma.

In either case, the end result is the same.

 

[Nobody_Important]

I believe this thread is full of examples to the contrary. Or the rules ask for allegiance to ultra progressive Dogma.

In either case, the end result is the same.

Then don't join a left leaning website and be surprised that your right wing viewpoints break the rules or are seen as offensive?

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Once again this is not true. You can say whatever you want as long as it doesn't violate the rules of the forum. If your opinion or take is offensive and breaks the rules then of course you are gonna get banned or get warned.

I see you're still here, trolling us with your propaganda.

You said it yourself: " If your opinion or take is offensive..." Nothing more needs to be said on the matter. The powers-that-be at ERA get to arbitrarily choose which opinions and takes are offensive and they ban accordingly. This is plainly true.

That is totalitarianism.

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

Then don't join a left leaning website and be surprised that your right wing opinions break the rules?

Can you bring us the FAQ and rule guidelines of the forum that declare that any center or right wing opinion is not accepted?

 

[Nobody_Important]

I see you're still here, trolling us with your propaganda.

You said it yourself: " If your opinion or take is offensive..." Nothing more needs to be said on the matter. The powers-that-be at ERA get to arbitrarily choose which opinions and takes are offensive and they ban accordingly. This is plainly true.

That is totalitarianism.

No that is called a forum that has rules. Welcome to the internet. If I say something that is against the rules of Gaf then guess what happens to me? I am banned. The idea of being banned for breaking rules is not unique to Era and I am constantly amazed you all pretend that it is.


Now you can argue that the rules are unfair and that would be fine, but acting appalled and shocked when people break the rules and are punished is frankly ridiculous to me and always has been since I discovered that this thread exists.


But I am not diving down this rabbit hole again. You guys can believe what you want. You will regardless of what I have to say anyway. I have learned that much by now.

 

[IAmAnAgnostic]

Then don't join a left leaning website and be surprised that your right wing viewpoints break the rules or are seen as offensive?

It isn't Left Leaning and I don't think their rules state that you have to be Hard Left to be allowed to post.

And as I said, I am leaving the 'community.'

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

No that is called a forum that has rules. Welcome to the internet. If I say something that is against the rules of Gaf then guess what happens to me? I am banned. The idea of being banned for breaking rules is not unique to Era and I am constantly amazed you all pretend that it is.

Nice trolling. You and I both know that isn't what I'm talking about. Bringing up George Carlin's comedic history is not a ban-worthy offense, nor is something like that written in their Terms of Service. This thread has dozens of other examples where bans were given for "offenses" that didn't follow any written pattern.

I'm not unfamiliar with forum rules nor the idea of Terms of Service. It's clear your only purpose on GAF is to still up nonsense and intentionally misdirect and misrepresent other posters on the forum.

 

[Nobody_Important]

Nice trolling. You and I both know that isn't what I'm talking about. Bringing up George Carlin's comedic history is not a ban-worthy offense, nor is something like that written in their Terms of Service. This thread has dozens of other examples where bans were given for "offenses" that didn't follow any written pattern.

I'm not unfamiliar with forum rules nor the idea of Terms of Service. It's clear your only purpose on GAF is to still up nonsense and intentionally misdirect and misrepresent other posters on the forum.

Its not though. Thats just what you tryy and paint me as because you don't like what I have to say. I have come to accept that. No matter what I have to say or what point I try to make you will be against it just because its me.

 

[Ribi]

It isn't Left Leaning and I don't think their rules state that you have to be Hard Left to be allowed to post.

And as I said, I am leaving the 'community.'

They basically come out and state everyday on the forum agree with our left views or get called out and banned. Even the mods have said it. It's randy Johnson out there

 

[dionysus]

I feel like strange headache 's post from early last year was a great overview of the whole debacle from an outsider's perspective:


https://www.neogaf.com/threads/game...-other-about-it.1460965/page-5#post-253184020

That is a charitable view of it. Like most internet controversies, it is more just ideologues finding the most extreme 1% of the other sides argument and amplifying it to discredit the other side and make their own side look moral.

I am agree with the strange headache's assertions, but I think the mature reaction is to just ignore the offending games media and not buy the offending games. Not scream about it on the internet and drive traffic to the leaders of the movement on both sides. If the journalists on one side and the youtube stars on the other side couldn't make money off the controversy, gaming would be in a better place.

 

[Yoshi]

Then don't join a left leaning website and be surprised that your right wing viewpoints break the rules or are seen as offensive?

In some instances, it is not about being right / conservative though. Having a liberal stance on commedy is e.g. something that I, for the longest of times, have seen predominantly on the left, but arguing in favour of Carlin's commedy not being an act of hate is a bannable offense in Resetera.

 

[Dr. Claus]

Would you say that this is a US/UK thing or is it spreading to Europe/S America?

I mean I have had protective parents myself but I have seen the harsh realities of life and came through mostly okay (I hope so).

Era reads like it is mostly ran by Americans who have one political view and are trying to get it into Games which isn't right. Like or Hate a game but don't add the politicalness of it all in a game.

If I hate a game it is due to some rubbish AI or difficulty spike....but at Era they would say something like "They made it hard for Minorities because Nazi's enjoy Punishments" or something (exaggerated but still).

I honestly hope it isn't due to coddling, imagine if they really had to enlist in a war where real terror is?

This is primarily a US/UK thing - though I have seen attempts at it spreading in other countries like Australia with... poor results. Honestly, if there was a war, I would highly doubt even 50 of these kids would last more than a few days. They would probably do what they continuously blame Trump for - making up illnesses so they can get medically discharged.

No that is called a forum that has rules. Welcome to the internet. If I say something that is against the rules of Gaf then guess what happens to me? I am banned. The idea of being banned for breaking rules is not unique to Era and I am constantly amazed you all pretend that it is.


Now you can argue that the rules are unfair and that would be fine, but acting appalled and shocked when people break the rules and are punished is frankly ridiculous to me and always has been since I discovered that this thread exists.


But I am not diving down this rabbit hole again. You guys can believe what you want. You will regardless of what I have to say anyway. I have learned that much by now.

Wow. You aren't even hiding it anymore. Good on you! That makes it so much easier to call you out on your contradictory bullshit, N_I. The rules on ResetEra do not make any reference that conservative, left, or moderate opinions (which is what 90% of these bans really are) are more prone to bans. It is not written in its rules, terms of service, or otherwise.

First you say:

You can say whatever you want as long as it doesn't violate the rules of the forum.

This is a very reasonable idea. Of course if you break the rules, you would be dealt with by the moderation. However, then you show your real colours in the following two posts:

If your opinion or take is offensive and breaks the rules then of course you are gonna get banned or get warned.

Then don't join a left leaning website and be surprised that your right wing viewpoints break the rules or are seen as offensive?

As stated previously, nothing that LuvOfThaGame stated was a "right wing" opinion. Nor should that earn him a ban as it didn't break any rules. You openly admit that a difference in opinion is worthy of a ban, despite not breaking any rules.

Its not though. Thats just what you tryy and paint me as because you don't like what I have to say. I have come to accept that. No matter what I have to say or what point I try to make you will be against it just because its me.

Your "arguments" have been dismantled time and again in good faith, though (as Red and others have been so kind to remind you) you have not. You actively make false claims such as stating people were "harassing/spamming" you, you refuse to apologize or admit when you are proven wrong, and you keep contradicting yourself as shown in the earlier posts. So stop trying to play the "victim" and just own up to the BS you continuously spout.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Its not though. Thats just what you tryy and paint me as because you don't like what I have to say. I have come to accept that. No matter what I have to say or what point I try to make you will be against it just because its me.

This victim mentality contradicts your very long posting history.

I'm not trying to paint you as anything. I know that when people such as yourself view the world in emotional terms, it's only natural to think that people who disagree with you don't like you. But that's a non-argument. Unless you can prove that the reason why I'm painting you is because I don't like you, this is a deflection, an empty statement.

The crux of the matter is you are a troll who posts here only to stir things up. You are not persecuted. You haven't been banned from this place. You are free to speak your mind. And people are free to disagree with the things you say. My issue is that I don't believe there's a real person behind your keyboard who actually believes what is being typed.

 

[Yoshi]

Wow. You aren't even hiding it anymore. Good on you! That makes it so much easier to call you out on your contradictory bullshit, N_I. The rules on ResetEra do not make any reference that conservative, left, or moderate opinions (which is what 90% of these bans really are) are more prone to bans. It is not written in its rules, terms of service, or otherwise.

Nobody_Important did not state it is a formal statement by Resetera staff though. That Resetera is social justice oriented is pretty obvious e.g. by the descriptions of their subforums though, let's read what it has to say about the EtcetEra subforum: "Civil discourse triumphs.". The Terms of Services are a legal text made to protect them from lawsuits, not to explain what posting behaviour is allowed.

 

[Dr. Claus]

Nobody_Important did not state it is a formal statement by Resetera staff though. That Resetera is social justice oriented is pretty obvious e.g. by the descriptions of their subforums though, let's read what it has to say about the EtcetEra subforum: "Civil discourse triumphs.". The Terms of Services are a legal text made to protect them from lawsuits, not to explain what posting behaviour is allowed.

I know full well what the terms of service is, Yoshi. I was stating that there is nothing written anywhere on the site, especially no rules that would have been broken by LuvOfTheGame's post.

"Civil Discourse triumphs" is not a social justice orientated phrase, either.

 

[Fox Mulder]

They can have whatever rules and political moderation they want on their site.

They also have special members that will never get banned for attacking people because they're trans or oppressed women or whatever. They get to run around and derail threads with one sided protection and bait people to bans. What a fun community that doesn't really have potential to grow beyond what it is now.

 

[Redneckerz]

Once again this is not true. You can say whatever you want as long as it doesn't violate the rules of the forum. If your opinion or take is offensive and breaks the rules then of course you are gonna get banned or get warned.

I bet you a penny that the examples i was about to post would fall inbetween that. Its such a generic moniker too: ''You can say whatever if it does not violate the rules.'' Yet there are aplenty examples of regular things said that still people get banned for accumulated infractions, even when it was their first ban.

Hell, you even agreed with some of those examples, so are you understanding it is strange to amany to then drop the nuance and go into full defense again?

Then don't join a left leaning website and be surprised that your right wing viewpoints break the rules or are seen as offensive?

Agnostic has not even postulated his position yet here you are already making guesses. Not gonna lie, its a shtick that i am increasingly getting opposed over: Calling people out but when i address you multiple times now to take your responsibility for making BS claims you aren't giving home.

This is seperate from the examples discussion, mind you. I am just referring to your apparent inability to own up to making baseless accusations. The failure to do so adds more insult to what would have been easily taken care of if you just went ahead and admitted it as such.

No that is called a forum that has rules. Welcome to the internet. If I say something that is against the rules of Gaf then guess what happens to me? I am banned.

The fact that you are still here makes this already weird.

Also that bolded is that exact smug people hold you accountable for. I have said this already in the past to you and i have a feeling you aren't listening. I gave you a lot of leeway for your alternative views, but you are skirting the unreasonable here.

The idea of being banned for breaking rules is not unique to Era and I am constantly amazed you all pretend that it is.

Alright, now i have had it. Ad Populums are terrible appeals in a discussion and you seem to do this on a consistent basis. Not everyone is like this on GAF. If you want to live in Lily Wonderland go right ahead but you aren't going to claim moral superiority and then when asked for evidence you would refute its a waste of your time.

I have learned that much by now.

Apologizing for making baseless accusations was not among one of the lessons you supposely learned.

Its not though. Thats just what you tryy and paint me as because you don't like what I have to say. I have come to accept that. No matter what I have to say or what point I try to make you will be against it just because its me.

People don't like it when they get accused of things they didn't do. People don't like it when you call everyone part of a grand scheme and you refuse yourself to provide any basis to your commentary, aside the lengthy post earlier on.

You still seem to think that its everybody else in the community that is wrong, when ERA's antics, the negative imagery, is generated by a part of the community there. They are doing this to themselves. And no, not everyone, just a group of people fucking it up for everyone else.

As long as you aren't understanding that nuance here, then you are essentially fighting for a belief system that will never be yours.

Your "arguments" have been dismantled time and again in good faith, though (as Red and others have been so kind to remind you) you have not. You actively make false claims such as stating people were "harassing/spamming" you, you refuse to apologize or admit when you are proven wrong, and you keep contradicting yourself as shown in the earlier posts. So stop trying to play the "victim" and just own up to the BS you continuously spout.

I am just legitimate upset by the utter lack of responsibility. I may dislike Papa , but i am not upset against him. I may dislike Dirtheads posts, but i am not upset against him. It reeks of cowardice, and that's a term i am not using lightly, to not own up to your words.

 

[Starlight Lotice]

This is primarily a US/UK thing - though I have seen attempts at it spreading in other countries like Australia with... poor results. Honestly, if there was a war, I would highly doubt even 50 of these kids would last more than a few days. They would probably do what they continuously blame Trump for - making up illnesses so they can get medically discharged.

I guess chopping your toe off is too PC in this modern world. (And probably would scare them senseless, haha)

I was told that to be discharged during the World War, a family member would have to chop off a toe so that their son couldn't go to war. If true, then they certainly were more hardy!

I thought Era wanted to kill Australia with Fire due to all those scary creatures? I am not a fan of poisonous animals either...but to nuke the country from the Planet as they say? Pretty brutal to even suggest.

For Era to try that though is pretty bad in itself. Why is everyone a Nazi to them? Is it some in-joke that no one else gets?

I know Trump isn't perfect, but comparing him to Hitler is beyond dumb. You could certainly say that Saddam is a better comparison given ehat he has done but even then his actions were based on Religious beliefs.

What is even worse is that they compare having a preference to colour (i.e: If I prefered Causation women to Asians or Africans) to nazism and racism, which I honestly don't understand either. (Unless you literally say that they are superior)

Throwing the word Nazi out like some new fad is pretty disgusting and disrespects the soldiers who died for our freedom, and insults Germans who were against it as well.

Sorry if I sound angry about it of course. It's just that for someone who doesn't see eye to eye with the right wing in most cases, I can still respect some of their political views and not use a word such as Nazi to broadly call all Right Wing Supporters. (Alt or otherwise)

It's just as bad to call all left wing supporters Communists because let's face it, Era are coming off like that at times, but I would never call anyone a Communist or a Nazi.

They are words with historical meaning to those who suffered and our generation have not suffered to that extent unless you really live in a Country that does this.

I see this thread as something to learn from and hopefully assist people who think the word Nazi can be used casually is not okay. There are stupid posts on Era but let us hope it doesn't influence too many people that anything Right Wing is the Devil and everything that doesn't align correctly is a Nazi idea.

I also saw their posts about hating White Straight Males and it did make my blood boil. (I am mixed)

They should learn to respect everyone and not single out something as narrow as this. (How the hell do you hate someone who fits this description?)

Coming back full circle, a majority of White Straight Males fought the Nazis and won. What does this say about their hypocrisy? (Of course Black and Asian straight/Bi/Gay men also contributed to the war as well, just in case I may have sounded racist then! XD)

Sorry for the long post! Just my thoughts on Era's political take these days. I am sure some of them are good people but they need to stop agreeing with the hatred of White Straight Men (as if being Gay makes you automatically a good person) and calling everything a Nazi!!! (Because someone said they would buy a game with Nathan Drake on it)

 

[Ivellios]

I’m glad you’re having this awakening, mate. Truly, I am. You’ve previously come across as angry, hostile, and possibly depressed, but I think that will dissipate as you continue to untangle the web of lies and reveal the truth.

What is happening is exactly what the likes of Claus, myself, and many others here have been saying would happen for a long time. I feel like we were looking at where it was going rather than where it was, but it was difficult for anyone trapped in the bubble to see and think clearly. I know that you have said before that you miss your friends there, but it seems that it can’t be changed, and you have potential friends here who sympathize with you and won’t judge you for straying from groupthink in spite of your immutable characteristics.

These people are mentally and emotionally immature and have established a nihilistic cult of victimhood that cannot sustain itself in the long run as it is a closed feedback loop that is shielded from diverse (heh) opinions that act as a correcting mechanism (or a corrective tap, hey Redneckerz ?). They deserve to be mocked and ridiculed because they are being ridiculous. Some people get uncomfortable when they observe others being mocked because those behaviours have been pathologised in current_year, but there are other unforeseen, undesirable consequences if the mockery is silenced. It serves an important social purpose.

I suggest you join us in laughing from the sidelines as they continue to cannibalize themselves while we carry on being happy that we aren’t in the cult

I thought this thread was supposed to exist to "remind everyone of past failures so it does not happen again" but now its just a place to personally ridicule and mock the people from the other forum? Even going as far as mocking them for having disabilities?

Sorry but posts like this this just turn this thread into a toxic cesspool, i disagree with everything the guy said or with the other forum politics, but there is a difference between attacking their point of view and attacking their person.

This thread is honestly going into a sad state

 

[12Goblins]

Did you guys see the George Carlin thread that popped up on Resetera? You might have missed it because it was lasted one page and devolved into george carlin being called alt-right and then getting closed.. Not to mention over the most tame shit ever. i think they quickly close these threads because it quickly becomes an uncontrollable account graveyard

 

[JordanN]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/which-generation-are-you-from-poll-millennials-gen-z-etc.90810/

See. I told you guys most of Resetera is made up of 30 year olds.

Which should be considered absolutely scary, since they behave worse than Toddlers.

And to the 4 people who identify as Boomers. what are you doing on such a crazy website? Unless you guys were hippies in your youth, Reset is bad for your health.

 

[Papa]

I thought this thread was supposed to exist to "remind everyone of past failures so it does not happen again" but now its just a place to personally ridicule and mock the people from the other forum? Even going as far as mocking them for having disabilities?

Sorry but posts like this this just turn this thread into a toxic cesspool, i disagree with everything the guy said or with the other forum politics, but there is a difference between attacking their point of view and attacking their person.

This thread is honestly going into a sad state

Why do you think I was talking about disabilities?

 

[LuvOfThaGame]

Now that I'm off work since early this morning, I can address this issue more. In my next posts, I explain further my point that it has been a staple of modern comedy to push past the line of the social issues of the current time. Every top comedian does this unless you are into completely non-offensive comedy such as Seinfeld. I also make it clear that it's up to each individual on whether or not crossing those lines is acceptable to them, as comedy can get very personal depending on the viewer. No where did I support the statements, said the jokes were funny, or 'white knight' for Louis CK. I never broke TOS. I never ignored the mod warning on posting a drive-by saying "I think it's funny" like they asked. I backed up my statements with quotes. I addressed other posters that responded. I was banned for nothing but refusing to join group think, IMO. it's funny how they label people. Im far from right wing thinking, but I'm not ridiculously left either. I just believe in what's right or wrong. It was the most tame way I could say my point of view because of the eggshell walking that is required over there, which is just nonsense. It's not a discussion board, at least not on social and political issues.
If that's how they want their board, fine, but put it in your TOS. Be honest to what you are. Don't say people are free to discuss as long as it doesn't support hate when that's clearly not true. It depends on the brand of hate. There is plenty of hate speech on era, which is why they was banned on twitter. They pick and choose who gets to say what by whatever agenda they push. That TOS is a joke.
Sorry for the novel. Lol.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

One thing I would agree about with Resetera is they just need to make their rules clearer given how they moderate.

I mean there's stuff like the below in the FAQ that makes it pretty clear that it's a strong left forum on social issues and some of the other things they ban people for:

ResetEra as a forum and as a community values inclusivity and seeks to provide a welcoming space for all members to come together to discuss video games and more. ResetEra does not tolerate behavior or language that is racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, or otherwise maliciously exclusionary with regard to identity. Our mission is to foster an environment that brings people together in open dialogue. We might not see each other face to face, but behind each username is another human being who may have a different background. Accordingly, the Cardinal Rule for using ResetEra’s website and services is to be mindful of the above and to enter dialogue in good faith.

That hit's on a lot of the social stuff, the "not arguing in good faith" and so on that they list as ban reasons. But they should be more explicit and just be clear that members who express agreement, or even defend, things viewed as racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic will be banned.

I still wouldn't agree with a lot of what catches bans, but at last make the rules more specific and clear so that people know exactly what they are getting into and can steer clear if they don't want to participate in that type of community. It's a private site, they can have whatever rules and cultivate whatever type of community they want--just like the right wing sites and anyone else can. They just need to be less coy about it and clear in their mission and rules.

I think the big issue is the site admins are probably torn between people who just started the site for business reasons--saw opportunity to steal NeoGAFs membership and monetize it with ads and subscriptions--and the SJW types who wanted an even safer space than old GAF. The two struggle to find a balance of keeping that safe space and maximizing income.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Now that I'm off work since early this morning, I can address this issue more. In my next posts, I explain further my point that it has been a staple of modern comedy to push past the line of the social issues of the current time. Every top comedian does this unless you are into completely non-offensive comedy such as Seinfeld. I also make it clear that it's up to each individual on whether or not crossing those lines is acceptable to them, as comedy can get very personal depending on the viewer. No where did I support the statements, said the jokes were funny, or 'white knight' for Louis CK. I never broke TOS. I never ignored the mod warning on posting a drive-by saying "I think it's funny" like they asked. I backed up my statements with quotes. I addressed other posters that responded. I was banned for nothing but refusing to join group think, IMO. it's funny how they label people. Im far from right wing thinking, but I'm not ridiculously left either. I just believe in what's right or wrong. It was the most tame way I could say my point of view because of the eggshell walking that is required over there, which is just nonsense. It's not a discussion board, at least not on social and political issues.
If that's how they want their board, fine, but put it in your TOS. Be honest to what you are. Don't say people are free to discuss as long as it doesn't support hate when that's clearly not true. It depends on the brand of hate. There is plenty of hate speech on era, which is why they was banned on twitter. They pick and choose who gets to say what by whatever agenda they push. That TOS is a joke.
Sorry for the novel. Lol.

No apology needed. Unlike ERA, GAF encourages people to speak up about their opinions and offer clarity when needed.

 

[Redneckerz]

Why do you think I was talking about disabilities?

Disregarding that but the mocking or the being blunt (Insulting someone is being blunt, i guess? I should remember that one. ''Sorry girl, i was just being blunt.'') certainly does not help people who are already living impaired and (personal recollection) depressed. (But you could not know that, obviously.)

I thought this thread was supposed to exist to "remind everyone of past failures so it does not happen again" but now its just a place to personally ridicule and mock the people from the other forum? Even going as far as mocking them for having disabilities?

Sorry but posts like this this just turn this thread into a toxic cesspool, i disagree with everything the guy said or with the other forum politics, but there is a difference between attacking their point of view and attacking their person.

This thread is honestly going into a sad state

Matt was not mocking about disabilities however did attack the tweeter stating he is a virgin and a loser, which is classy.

Interesting that others like Claus agree with this stance even when its literally the same circular insult-argument ERAdians use when they come here. If GAF wants to get away from that, then imo the first thing is not to stoop to their level.

 

[Papa]

I bet you a penny that the examples i was about to post would fall inbetween that. Its such a generic moniker too: ''You can say whatever if it does not violate the rules.'' Yet there are aplenty examples of regular things said that still people get banned for accumulated infractions, even when it was their first ban.

Hell, you even agreed with some of those examples, so are you understanding it is strange to amany to then drop the nuance and go into full defense again?


Agnostic has not even postulated his position yet here you are already making guesses. Not gonna lie, its a shtick that i am increasingly getting opposed over: Calling people out but when i address you multiple times now to take your responsibility for making BS claims you aren't giving home.

This is seperate from the examples discussion, mind you. I am just referring to your apparent inability to own up to making baseless accusations. The failure to do so adds more insult to what would have been easily taken care of if you just went ahead and admitted it as such.


The fact that you are still here makes this already weird.

Also that bolded is that exact smug people hold you accountable for. I have said this already in the past to you and i have a feeling you aren't listening. I gave you a lot of leeway for your alternative views, but you are skirting the unreasonable here.


Alright, now i have had it. Ad Populums are terrible appeals in a discussion and you seem to do this on a consistent basis. Not everyone is like this on GAF. If you want to live in Lily Wonderland go right ahead but you aren't going to claim moral superiority and then when asked for evidence you would refute its a waste of your time.


Apologizing for making baseless accusations was not among one of the lessons you supposely learned.


People don't like it when they get accused of things they didn't do. People don't like it when you call everyone part of a grand scheme and you refuse yourself to provide any basis to your commentary, aside the lengthy post earlier on.

You still seem to think that its everybody else in the community that is wrong, when ERA's antics, the negative imagery, is generated by a part of the community there. They are doing this to themselves. And no, not everyone, just a group of people fucking it up for everyone else.

As long as you aren't understanding that nuance here, then you are essentially fighting for a belief system that will never be yours.


I am just legitimate upset by the utter lack of responsibility. I may dislike Papa , but i am not upset against him. I may dislike Dirtheads posts, but i am not upset against him. It reeks of cowardice, and that's a term i am not using lightly, to not own up to your words.

Oh no, you’re definitely upset with me. You’re a sensitive soul, aren’t you, Red?