/r/socialism has its weekly civil war, this time over Gamergate (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
45 ups - 0 downs = 45 votes
281 comments submitted at 20:16:55 on Oct 16, 2014 by Gandesa
/r/socialism has its weekly civil war, this time over Gamergate (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
45 ups - 0 downs = 45 votes
281 comments submitted at 20:16:55 on Oct 16, 2014 by Gandesa
i understand what he said, i just think its funny that they've done such mental exercise about pissy dudes threatening women because they have opinions about video games
Hi /u/YungSnuggie. I think #gamergate is a waste of time and do not support it.
>pissy dudes threatening women because they have opinions about video games
Do you really think this is a fair characterization of #gamergate?
yes
if its about "integrity in journalism" then why are the people being attacked the worst not journalists
I have a different narrative to yours and have been trying to summarise it succinctly and failing, but I've just found something that does a fairly good job of explaining most of it in the just released chat logs of an interview with Eron Gjoni (that was turned into a pretty shit article), it's a wall of text but pretty short considering.
>Eron Gjoni: Just a sec. I want to send an appraisal of why this personal thing became so cultural > >Eron Gjoni: while the other personal things made only small blips > > joseph_bernstein: okay > > Eron Gjoni: I haven’t published it anywhere yet, so do with it as you wish > >Eron Gjoni: Game Dev: ”Josh Mattingly was being a total fucking creeper on Facebook last >night.” >Games Journalists: “HOLY SHIT LET’S PUBLISH THE CHATLOGS THIS IS TOTALLY INDUSTRY RELATED.” > >Josh Mattingly: ”My bad, I was drunk. I’m gonna quit.” > >———- > >Someone Pseudonymously Known as Magz: “Max Temkin had not-entirely-consensual sex with me one time way back >in college. Well, it was more like, a crime of opportunity, but yeah.” > >Games Journalists: “HOLY SHIT WHAT THE FUCK LET’S SIGNAL BOOST THIS IT IS TOTALLY INDUSTRY RELATED.” > >Max Temkin: “I have no idea what’s going on but I’m sorry.” > >———- > >Former Employee of Stardock Entertainment: ”Brad Wardell sort of maybe sexually harassed me.” > >Games Journalists: ”HOLY SHIT LET’S PUBLISH THE COURT DOCUMENTS AND EVERY ALLEGATION YOUR LAWYER MADE >UP TO HOPE SOMETHING STICKS! THIS IS VERY INDUSTRY RELATED.” > >Former Employee of Stardock Entertainment: “Oh oops, no I made it up, deleted a bunch of his files. Sorry for that.” > >——— > >Me: “So uhhh, Zoe Quinn fired me to work for someone she was having an affair with. Also she doesn’t abide by like >any of the virtues she has marketed herself as an activist for. Also, by her own definition, she violated my sexual >consent. Also she claims to be a compulsive liar. Also (again quite contrary to her activist stances) she purposely >stigmatizes mental illness whenever it suits her interests. Basically be careful around her?” > >Games Journalists: “This isn’t industry related you’re such a shithead for airing dirty laundry these are all private >matters grow up you angry jilted ex.” > >Me: ” Wouldn’t ‘Jilted’ would require that she broke up with me? It was the other way around. Also, I don’t really get >angry because I kind of depersonalize in stressful sit—” > >Games Journalists: “Angry. Jilted. Ex.” > >Wolf Wozniak: “Oh shit. Zoe? She sexually harassed me at a wedding.” > >Games Journalists: “Sorry what? We couldn’t hear you over the sound of how private these matters are.” > >Chloe Van Keenan: “Wait — she said infidelity is a violation of consent? Doesn’t that mean she was complicit in >violating my consent when she was sleeping with my boyfriend?” > >Games Journalists: “Are you guys seeing all of this harassment Zoe is getting? This is totally uncalled for. I can’t believe how misogynistic this community is.” > >Abuse Survivors: “Uhh, guys? Has anyone read these chatlogs? She’s being like textbook psychologically abusive here. >Like, this is pages and pages of triggering.” > >Games Journalists: “RELATIONSHIP ABUSE IS A PRIVATE MATTER. THIS IS NOT INDUSTRY RELATED.” > >“Games Enthusiasts”: “Uhh, but we want to know these things because we don’t want to support people who do these >horrible sorts of things—” > >Games Journalists: “JESUS CHRIST HOW MISOGYNISTIC CAN YOU GET??” > >Zoe Quinn: “I’m still trying to come to terms with everything because I thought that false abuse / rape claims literally >never happened up until now. Also, uhhh, 4chan is spreading nudes of me on the internet” > >Games Journalists: “HOLY FUCK THEY’RE SPREADING NUDES OF YOU?? THIS IS OBSCENE WHY WOULD THEY BE SO >MAD AS TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT AFTER WE’VE COMPLETELY IGNORED EVERY SINGLE THING YOU’VE DONE >WRONG TO PROTECT YOU?? ARE YOU OKAY?? WE’RE COMING OVER TO MAKE SURE YOU’RE OKAY.” > >Mallorie Nasrallah: “Uh, hi. Those nudes were from a porn pay site. They were back from when Zoe was doing porn. >They’re not private or anything. I was her photographer at one point. Within an hour of meeting me she claimed she >murdered someone who tried to rape her. These sorts of claims were not out of the ordinary for her… like I’ve met her >and her ex is really right to have warned you. You guys should really be careful.” > >Games Journalists: “EXCUSE ME WE’RE TRYING TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT MISOGYNY HERE.”
So I follow a decent amount of gaming news and I've never even heard of those first three incidents.
>if its about "integrity in journalism" then why are the people being attacked the worst not journalists
I think it goes like this:
The reasonable people in #gamergate (the majority) are concerned about journalistic ethics and recognize that while this is a problem, it doesn't warrant death threats and harassment.
The unreasonable people in #gamergate (a sizable minority) are concerned about conspiracy theories and women speaking on their behalf. Of this minority, some people feel it's fine to abuse and threaten people they disagree with.
Obviously the unreasonable minority is going to make more vulgar threats than the reasonable majority.
the sizable minority is so large and loud that if i was in the majority i'd stop associating with the sizable minority under the same umbrella. like it or not the misogynistic crazies are dictating the conversation.
and in terms of "journalistic integrity"...what? in regards to the zoe quinn thing, there's literally zero evidence to indicate that anything she did with a journalist resulted in preferential treatment.
what you're basically complaining about is networking. yes, developers and journalists collude. its a symbiotic relationship, just like any other business. You give me a good review, I give you pageviews and exclusive access. It's like that in music, movies, every single artistic medium there is that's reliant on professional critique. who you know always has been and always will be more important than what you know. this is not a "gaming" thing, this is a "real world" thing. those with personal connections will always get preferential treatment.
its fucking video game reviews not fucking congress jesus
the fact that anyone thinks this shit is a big deal is almost as stupid as the misogynistic rape threats. almost.
>those with personal connections will always get preferential treatment.
Whitebois are literally complaining about networking. Think about that.
Networking is only okay when we do it.
> its fucking video game reviews not fucking congress jesus
I love how most redditors miss this point.
Even if every terrible thing about Anita and Zoey Quinn are true and non-exaggerated... so what? How does this affect anything, at all?
But don't you understand? If a bad game gets good reviews I might buy it and be mildly disappointed! Think of all the money - oh wait, Quinn's game is free, never mind.
>the sizable minority is so large and loud that if i was in the majority i'd stop associating with the sizable minority under the same umbrella.
Bit hyperbolic. Too many pro-GG idiots are making threats and harassing people they disagree with. Too many anti-GG idiots are making threats and harassing people they disagree with. The smart move is to distance yourself from the vocal minority, not abandon the movement altogether.
>in regards to the zoe quinn thing
The Quinnspiracy nonsense and GG are distinct. One's about journalistic ethics and one's about a woman's sex life.
>what you're basically complaining about is networking.
No. GG most takes issue with [i] the inability of gaming journalists / bloggers to acknowledge conflicts of interests (which journalists are supposed to do), [ii] how easy it is to buy off high review scores, and [iii] how the media makes a conscious and concentrated effort to spin gaming narratives however they'd like and silence dissent. Not exactly "real world networking."
>the fact that anyone thinks this shit is a big deal
It's not a big deal. But hey, if this is something you care about, GG has some fair grievances.
When Breitbart is the only significant media outlet on your side, you can pretty much rest assured you're on the wrong side of history.
They can't even claim Breitbart any more. Milo knows a sinking ship when he sees one and he bailed. GG is now so toxic, even the bottom barrel rats are fleeing.
I don't think gamergate is significant enough to be on any side "of history."
You don't have to like Breitbart to appreciate Milo's good investigative journalism.
even in the hypothetical situation that everything you said was true, nobody is going to listen to you and all your efforts will be for naught because the people who matter associate gamergate with creeps and potential rapists now. and there's nothing you can do to turn that narrative around. it's on mainstream media now due to the sarkeesian threats. the name "gamergate" has officially and irrevocably been tarnished and overtaken by the lowest common denominator, and if you really cared about the actual issues, you'd run as far away as possible from them. to even willingly share space with them, knowing their true intentions, is just plain dumb.
>Too many anti-GG idiots are making threats and harassing people they disagree with.
nobody on the anti-GG side has threatened to bomb a school so I think yall still hold the crown on that one
>there's nothing you can do to turn that narrative around
Improving their image will be hard. Not impossible. Yesterday three women went on HuffPo Live and articulated what the movement was about and why they supported it. That's a good first step. #gamergate should do more of that.
>if you really cared about the actual issues, you'd run as far away as possible from them.
Every movement has a vocal minority of idiots. That's true for #gamergate and it'd be true for #gamergate2. Smart move is to distance yourself from the creeps, not let the creeps take over.
>nobody on the anti-GG side has threatened to bomb a school so I think yall still hold the crown on that one
No bomb threats, but plenty of death threats. Here's an example. And I'm not a part of GG so please stop saying I'm a part of GG.
I think you'll enjoy the Deadspin article about it - it's long but comprehensive and really thoughtful.
>anything she did with a journalist resulted in preferential treatment.
That really doesn't matter. It's still a conflict og interest, which is unacceptable in all walks of work life. Especially journalism
thats not what "conflict of interest" means at all
if your relationship doesn't extend into your work, then its not a conflict of interest. do you really think game developers and journalists aren't supposed to look at each other even though they work in the same industry? do you have a job?
You're wrong. A CoI only requires there to be a potential conflict. Maintaining a personal relationship and giving an unbiased review of something made by the aforementioned person could conflict, and thus it's a CoI.
conflicts of interest only have to be disclosed if you've been assigned to write something on someone you have a relationship with. that's when you'd be like "i cant do this, conflict of interest". the bar is higher than "potential" for conflict. im sorry dude, journalists and devs are gonna hang out. get over it.
Get over what?
A person had an undisclosed personal and sexual relationship with a developer, and gave favorable mentions og said person's product during the course of the relationship. That's the purest form of a CoI, and that's what sparked the controversy that in turn turned into gamergate.
More Comments - Click Here
You might have a point if someone Quinn had a relationship with had reviewed her game, but that didn't happen so you don't.
There was no review, but there was a spotlight of some sort. Assuming what was said about Quinn is true, something I don't really vare about. It's the principle behind that's important, the fact that journalisme should be without any CoIs, which I assume we can all agree on.
More Comments - Click Here
I haven't seen any evidence of a reasonable majority. Or even a reasonable minority.
No one in the entire "movement" is actually doing anything about journalistic ethics. They had the Shadows of Mordor story literally fall into their lap and they didn't care.
Journalistic ethics to them seems to be attacking any journalist who had the gall to point out that gaming culture has severe problems.
Anytime I hear gamergate, its either the digital store gamers gate that comes to mind or the reports of doxxing, harassment and threats.
>No one in the entire "movement" is actually doing anything about journalistic ethics.
This is the biggest problem with GG. What are they doing, exactly? They fancy themselves consciousness raisers, but
>in practice, raising awareness is often combined with other activities, such as fundraising, membership drives, or advocacy, in order to harness and/or sustain the motivation of new supporters
So great, they're raising awareness about a corrupt and nepotistic gaming press. And? For their movement to matter, they need to
grow
do things
[1] will be easier if they distance themselves from the conspiracy nuts and misogynists and trolls. [2] probably means large, concentrated boycotts which they aren't even close to pulling off.
Because a couple trolls don't define all of GG
yea lol its more than "a couple of trolls" b
I guess if the only sources you get are biased then it would seem like its a majority of trolls.
Also I don't think this is the path you want to go down when a lot of public figures (as in not random nobodies) who are against GG have been saying some pretty shit stuff (for three quick examples: Brianna Wu insulting someone's autism, a Gawker writer supporting bullying, a Dell exec comparing GG to ISIS). If some random trolls define a movement then how bad would those against GG be when not just random nobodies on the internet but also public figures acting horrible?
Edit: oh shit forgot about mentioning Ian Miles Cheong is a literal neonazi. I'm not trying to list all the public figures being shit but I think that's a pretty glaring one. Even I would have thought a neonazi would be more likely to side with GG just to be contrarian to the SJWs but nope he hates GG.
I have a large mouth and therefore must speak: the real issue is that there's a poisonous culture surrounding gaming, and there has been more of a light shining on it recently -outside of #gamergate- making people go "eww". For the #gamergate movement, it's about reforming journalism. But the methods which are employed are the spotlight for everyone else. Gaming journalism is shitty, and it'd be really cool to see it reformed, but Zoe Quinn does not need to be threatened in the process.
So, really, it's a matter of perspectives. For my own part, I agree with /u/YungSnuggie. The movement is packed full of pissy dudes (and this isn't everyone, but they're enough to be an important part of the movement.) who are angry that females are pointing out that the culture around gaming is atrocious, especially towards women, and their reaction has become the story. But I can understand why someone would say it's about reforming game journalism. My problem is I just don't see that happening, but I do see Anita Sarkeesian being threatened with bombs. I hear about Zoe Quinn being threatened to the point where she has to leave her home. And I'm not defending Quinn. As far as I can tell, she's a resoundingly shitty person, but that doesn't matter. #gamersgate, for the people involved, is about reforming gaming journalism, even if their actions do not reflect it. For everyone else, it's a floodlight on the creatures that dwell in the community and their prevalence.
Quick edit: I'm not defending the people who are anti-gamergate (what a dumb fucking name), either. They've done some shitty things as well. This is an internet issue, but the spotlight has been on gaming recently.
This thread has been linked to from elsewhere on reddit.
^If ^you ^follow ^any ^of ^the ^above ^links, ^respect ^the ^rules ^of ^reddit ^and ^don't ^vote ^or ^comment. ^Questions? ^Abuse? ^Message ^me ^here.