Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Bobboau on August 19, 2014, 09:45:07 pm
-
So apparently there is a bunch of **** going down in a number of places involving systematic suppression of information about an indie developer who allegedly has been using a lovely combination of nepotism, sex, intimidation and manipulation to gain favors in the press and industry and crush anyone or any thing she doesn't like. So many different aspects of wrongness, from the straightforward corruption in the gaming press to the use of feminist ideology to try to silence people talking about it, to the apparent wide spread censoring of the information across many different communitys from reddit to tumblr to 4chan, and an apparent media blackout about it in the gaming press (possibly connected? a "conspiracy"?).
http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/2dzc7x/rgaming_mods_are_deleting_every_comment_that_is
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1s4nmr1/?
the DMCAed vid reuploaded: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Equc1QnQ9rw
let the streisand winds blow...
-
Anyone who files a DMCA claim on a legitimate, perfectly legal video criticising them instantly loses all respect and credibility in my book.
Incidentally, I'm pretty sure it's illegal.
-
it is, it counts as perjury basically.
-
My only opinion here is that I really ****ing want a Five Guys burger right now.
-
that seems to be a common early reaction
-
it looks like there are a number of chain reactions going off with this. there is a bunch of apparent moderator corruption going on in reddit, all sorts of accusations of there being admins who are actively trying to bury/damage control the story. similarly there is a news blackout on a lot of major websites that would normally be expected to be reporting on this sort of thing (no evidence of this, I've just heard it repeated a bunch of times in a bunch of places). and it seems there is some connection to a continuation of hostilities between 4chan and tumblr from about a month and a half ago that are getting stured up with this, with all manner of accusations of cross-chan conspiracies.
(http://i.imgur.com/XkYMuOa.gif)
oh, it's a fun night to be on the internet. :)
-
My only opinion here is that I really ****ing want a Five Guys burger right now.
Also: "Quinn's ex boyfriend releases chat logs about her cheating on him with various men "
Because everything an ex has to say about their ex is legit right? And totally not subject to possible fabrication
In the end, I don't know what to think of all this. Most likely because I don't actually care who does what to gain what these days. Under the table favours of any kind aren't uncommon and there are certainly worse ones than this going on.
-
and that is just totally ok, we should just be totally cool with it, especially when it is uncovered before us.
also the supposedly chans caught her false flagging: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvZTc9SIAAAG9zw.png:large
fun fun fun
-
So apparently there is a bunch of **** going down in a number of places involving systematic suppression of information about an indie developer who allegedly has been using a lovely combination of nepotism, sex, intimidation and manipulation to gain favors in the press and industry and crush anyone or any thing she doesn't like. So many different aspects of wrongness, from the straightforward corruption in the gaming press to the use of feminist ideology to try to silence people talking about it, to the apparent wide spread censoring of the information across many different communitys from reddit to tumblr to 4chan, and an apparent media blackout about it in the gaming press (possibly connected? a "conspiracy"?).
This whole thing basically tells me that the hardcore gaming community just isn't ready to deal with the fact that sometimes games will be made that do not appeal to them, and yet get good reviews.
and that is just totally ok, we should just be totally cool with it, especially when it is uncovered before us.
also the supposedly chans caught her false flagging: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvZTc9SIAAAG9zw.png:large
fun fun fun
I'm having trouble comprehending that picture. What exactly is it pointing out? What's the problem there? And are we taking pictures on the internet, especially pictures that appear on 4chan, as evidence of anything now?
-
the fact that it has a delete icon, implying that the person who took the picture was logged into the account that made the post. granted it could easily be fake, hence the supposedly.
so you do not find the nepotism of this disturbing at all? nor the widespread censorship?
-
so you do not find the nepotism of this disturbing at all?
That's how things work in this world so no
Nepotism is just another word for "networking"
-
the fact that it has a delete icon, implying that the person who took the picture was logged into the account that made the post. granted it could easily be fake, hence the supposedly.
so you do not find the nepotism of this disturbing at all? nor the widespread censorship?
No, and no. I don't know about the nepotism factor at all. All I know is that Quinn was accused of sleeping with games journalists, and that those journalists in return supposedly gave her good reviews. Given that Quinn herself doesn't talk about her personal life (and, in my opinion, shouldn't have to), the only side of the story we hear are the enraged gamers who fan the flames here.
Also given that "making games while female" is still an unimaginable offense, and that those same people who are being censored are spreading around increasing amounts of ****, up to and including Doxxing, distribution of nude pictures and other private information about Quinn, I am all for seeing this **** censored.
Even if all of the accusations against her are completely, 100% true, the reaction is still completely overblown and out of proportion to the damage this has supposedly done.
-
...
so if a reporter who had been covering a presidential candidate and had been very positive of them and stonewalled any criticism turned out later to have been in an intimate relationship the whole while you would not blink at it? it's a different scale, but it's a similar issue.
...
The scale of the reaction is largely fueled by the censoring. People don't like it when they find out they have been manipulated, so this story hits several multipliers in that regard the censorship and the major conflicts of interest that are apparently allowed to run unchecked. I suppose with the apathy on display in this thread I can see how it could have come to this.
-
If she really cheated on the guy with 5 gaming journalists to gain favorable reviews (wtf? lol), then that is a ****ty thing to do, both from her and from the so called "journalists". It is not just networking.
-
so if a reporter who had been covering a presidential candidate and had been very positive of them and stonewalled any criticism turned out later to have been in an intimate relationship the whole while you would not blink at it? it's a different scale, but it's a similar issue.
Journalists these days aren't inherently objective anymore so no, I wouldn't blink at all (they're also human, subject to opinions which translate to their work). I'd just go "Ah well. They got caught big whoop"
If you like someone, you don't generally speak ill of them and you defend them if challenged. Bias is everywhere. It's also helpful
I just find it funny when people flip their ****s over it like this has never been done before
EDIT:
People don't like it when they find out they have been manipulated
Personally, my opinion of people like that are that they're... silly (in this case, manipulation from someone who was very close to you like your father is a different thing entirely). We live in a world where information is constantly being skewed to fit someone's view. By taking any sort of third party information without a grain of salt is basically just a silly thing to do. Experience it for yourself or find the data and interpret it for yourself.
-
yeah, she really isn't the story here.
-
...
it's BAD. it should STOP. journalists who get caught in this sort of professional misconduct should be FIRED. the fact that there doesn't seem to be any hope of that in general SHOULD make you uneasy to say the least.
-
It doesn't make me uneasy because I'm one of those folks that goes to the source instead of letting someone else tell me about it.
That and it is incredibly difficult to fire someone for something precedence has been set as being not an offense worth firing for.
Lawyers would eat that up immediately
EDIT: It's also very difficult to prove that what is written is because of that intimacy. It could very well have been two unrelated things
You can't prove that they're related. Money trails however (or "bribe" trail), are a different story.
If you just so happen to bump nasties and then so happen to write positive stuff, who's to say they are related? You can't prove it.
-
yeah, she really isn't the story here.
Then what, pray tell, is the story? Is it about "nepotism and favouritism in games journalism"? Because that's a story that can be told any day of the week, with much more acceptable targets on both sides than this one.
Or is it about some communities seeing the signs of an approaching nightmare, of yet another voice in the games industry about to be drowned out by hordes of ****-flinging monkeys with keyboards and taking action (misguided though it may be) to prevent it? I mean, god forbid we lose the ability to single out women and abuse them, that is, after all, what gaming is built on, isn't it? (No it isn't)
Again, even if every single thing said about Quinn, her game, and the journalists involved is true, what is happening right now is wrong, plain and simple. It's unwarranted and disgusting.
it's BAD. it should STOP. journalists who get caught in this sort of professional misconduct should be FIRED. the fact that there doesn't seem to be any hope of that in general SHOULD make you uneasy to say the least.
Was anyone actually caught in this instance? Is there any definitive proof of any of these allegations? Or is it just the internet hate machine?
Because, I gotta tell ya, at this time? It's looking pretty internet hate machine-y to me.
-
The original post, has an interesting vid at the bottom
http://thezoepost.wordpress.com
-
The most disturbing thing in this case is not the Zoey itself (one woman using sex to gain favors from men is not exactly news), its the widespread censorship attempts on major sites - sites who pose themselves as free speech spaces (4chan and reddit). And its by far not just "doxxing" posts that are being deleted (like you can even doxx someone who already uses her real identity on the internet, lol. The word is so abused lately it has basically lost its original meaning - revealing IRL information of anonymous/pseudonymous posters).
Nevermind, the Streisand effect is in full force, so censorship attempts are ultimately futile and counterproductive. You would think that the admins/mods of such major sites would already know how the internet tends to work in these matters.. :rolleyes:
-
Where is it... where did I see it... Here we are.
Depression quest made me figure out that I have a depression and encouraged me to actually do something about it, thus basically saving my life.
What other game can make that claim?
She'll do for me then if her game has had that kind of impact for even one person.
-
A privately-owned website refusing to publish something you wrote does not, in fact, constitute censorship.
-
"Censorship" is not strictly limited to government censorship.
And in this case, it's not simply "refusing to publish"; the posts went up, were visible to the Internets, and then were taken down.
-
Reddit's policy (http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/2dzrlv/on_zoe_quinn_censorship_doxxing_and_general/).
Nevermind, the Streisand effect is in full force, so censorship attempts are ultimately futile and counterproductive. You would think that the admins/mods of such major sites would already know how the internet tends to work in these matters.. :rolleyes:
There is another issue: How law enforcement works. Zoey Quinn is getting harassments thrown her way on, say, reddit which flatly break the law. There are things going on that are eerily similar to revenge porn and all that jazz. Those things definitely should be removed.
---
so if a reporter who had been covering a presidential candidate and had been very positive of them and stonewalled any criticism turned out later to have been in an intimate relationship the whole while you would not blink at it? it's a different scale, but it's a similar issue.
Honestly, I am rather surprised that the angry ravings of an angry ex warrant a post and a video, let alone the ****storm that now has followed.
There are also some issues with this:
It assumes that there is an intimate relationship. The only information we have on this are the words of an angry ex. Angry exes are by default not very reliable.
It assumes that the intimate relationship was there when the articles were being written. There are no such articles.
-
TBH I am rather angry about this. I am also angry about this appearing on Hard-Light, a place I did think above this sort of mindless drivel.
For some unspecified reason, the post of an angry ex that claimed that Quinn has been sleeping with, amongst some other people, a games journalist, has led to Zoey Quinn being paraded around as the symbol of everything that is wrong with the industry. Heck, the above video lists it as a conspiracy theory that blames her for being the driving force against the 'waves of feminism' we have been seeing in the games industry lately!
She is now facing levels of abuse which are worse then those seen by people like Jennifer Hepler, Anita Sarkeesian, and Zoey Qui... It involves her nudes being posted to friends' twitter accounts along with adresses (Who may not even be hers, but whatever, the intent is clear). It involves slut shaming, it involves...
Heck it's basically a bloody revenge porn campaign. Same start same results, except that this one is a bit more public. I am rather dissapointed in people at HLP taking this at face value.
-
"Censorship" is not strictly limited to government censorship.
And in this case, it's not simply "refusing to publish"; the posts went up, were visible to the Internets, and then were taken down.
A privately-owned website deleting posts that used to be visible is also not censorship.
-
I am also angry about this appearing on Hard-Light, a place I did think above this sort of mindless drivel.
It's a discussion about what's going on as of late. That's generally what Gen Disc is for here
-
...
it is censorship, what I think you are meaning is that it is within their rights. the word has a meaning and it is correct usage in this context.
-
...
it is censorship, what I think you are meaning is that it is within their rights. the word has a meaning and it is correct usage in this context.
No, it is not censorship. Just like getting banned from IRC is not censorship. Nobody is obliged to help you spread your message; failure to do so is not a form of censorship.
-
This is not failure to help spread, this is active obstruction of the message by deletion of messages, and therefore a form of censorship.
EDIT: As far as I can tell, this is done without there being any official policy with regards to messages about this issue, so it all really stinks of something trying to be swept under the rug.
-
Nobody is obliged to help you spread your message; failure to do so is not a form of censorship.
Huh? That's not the same thing as deleting posts, though. Deleting posts is actively censoring whatever was in the post. You're right that no one is obliged to help spread someone's message but there's a big ****ing difference between inaction and actively removing posted content.
As for the actual Zoey whatever stuff, I watched a couple minutes of the DMCA'd video. Is there anything at all to this aside from bogus DMCA takedowns and a bunch of reddit comments getting deleted? Gaming journalism drama doesn't count; it's already been a joke for as long as I can remember.
-
As far as I could tell Polp, it's all alleged stuff that has no merit
Also, censorship or not, it is wrong to take down personal attacks, unfounded allegations, harassing and what are essentially cyber bullying tactics towards *one* specific individual for something BENIGN and originating from an illegitimate source?
They should be taking that stuff down. While free speech is a right that the state cannot revoke under law, private institutions are exempt from having to abide by that since the law only prevents the *Government* from doing that.
-
This is not failure to help spread, this is active obstruction of the message by deletion of messages, and therefore a form of censorship.
EDIT: As far as I can tell, this is done without there being any official policy with regards to messages about this issue, so it all really stinks of something trying to be swept under the rug.
Once again, Reddit's policy (http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/2dzrlv/on_zoe_quinn_censorship_doxxing_and_general/).
-
This is not failure to help spread, this is active obstruction of the message by deletion of messages, and therefore a form of censorship.
No, it isn't.
Nobody is obliged to help you spread your message; failure to do so is not a form of censorship.
Huh? That's not the same thing as deleting posts, though. Deleting posts is actively censoring whatever was in the post. You're right that no one is obliged to help spread someone's message but there's a big ****ing difference between inaction and actively removing posted content.
Yes, it's the same thing, and no, there isn't a difference.
Noun
censorship (countable and uncountable, plural censorships)
1. The use of state or group power to control freedom of expression or press, such as passing laws to prevent media from being published or propagated.
(source) (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/censorship)
In addition, even mentioning censorship in relation to this incident is laughable; clearly nobody's freedom of expression is being curtailed, as negative opinions of Ms. Quinn obviously aren't encountering difficulty being disseminated.
-
Perhaps the word "suppression" would be more appropriate?
-
nuke the internet!
-
ralwood, I honestly don't care about your hangup over semantics, you are flatly objectively wrong, and your response to me is going to be wrong, and honestly I don't care enough to say it again. you have a right to be wrong, have fun.
-
you are flatly objectively wrong
Wow, way to back up your assertion with any form of evidence whatsoever. I see you are interested in having an actual productive debate and not just ranting on the internet.
Oh, wait, no, the opposite of that.
-
ralwood, I honestly don't care about your hangup over semantics, you are flatly objectively wrong, and your response to me is going to be wrong, and honestly I don't care enough to say it again. you have a right to be wrong, have fun.
Good, finally someone with objectivity to seperate us from the ramblings of wailing hysterical women...
Really, when you post this:
So apparently there is a bunch of **** going down in a number of places involving systematic suppression of information about an indie developer who allegedly has been using a lovely combination of nepotism, sex, intimidation and manipulation to gain favors in the press and industry and crush anyone or any thing she doesn't like. So many different aspects of wrongness, from the straightforward corruption in the gaming press to the use of feminist ideology to try to silence people talking about it, to the apparent wide spread censoring of the information across many different communitys from reddit to tumblr to 4chan, and an apparent media blackout about it in the gaming press (possibly connected? a "conspiracy"?).
Without actually (http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/2dzrlv/on_zoe_quinn_censorship_doxxing_and_general/) checking what (http://kotaku.com/in-recent-days-ive-been-asked-several-times-about-a-pos-1624707346) is going on (http://t.co/gyv6uKepZ1), you then go on about people being objectivily wrong?
Seriously?
-
Thing is, I do kinda feel for the ex if what he wrote is genuinely what he had to go through, I've been through similar and it really does kick the stool out from under your feet psychologically speaking. Not sure I agree with spilling it all out over the Internet, it might be cathartic in the short term, but I doubt it does any real good in the long run.
As for the mess it's created, it seems it's just a non-researched knee-jerk reaction, the Internets favorite kind, personally, I'd be more concerned about impartiality from these magazines because of the growing habit of companies of adding caveats to review copies, and the high level of sponsorship these magazines get from advertizing by the companies that produce the games. THAT, to me, is a far more solid cause for concern than some girl who apparently confuses psychological abuse with feminism.
-
It is true that censorship when done by a private site is MUCH less serious than when done by government, reddit has a right to censor whatever they want. It may still not be very ethical, tough, especially for sites that were founded on free speech as major principle, such as reddit and 4chan.
-
It is true that censorship when done by a private site is MUCH less serious than when done by government, reddit has a right to censor whatever they want. It may still not be very ethical, tough, especially for sites that were founded on free speech as major principle, such as reddit and 4chan.
I'll just quote this:
"The right to speak without censorship or restraint by the government."
Government being the key thing here. Any website, private institution or company can come up with policies that keep what you say in check without breaking any laws. I don't find it particularly unethical either specially when what you're posting on these sites are attacks on an individual
As the reddit thing said: They don't care if you say you dislike someone. They do care if your acts of dislike compromise the ability for that person to live without fear of attacks
-
(like you can even doxx someone who already uses her real identity on the internet, lol. The word is so abused lately it has basically lost its original meaning - revealing IRL information of anonymous/pseudonymous posters).
So revealing Phone numbers belonging to Quinn and her family, cracking her various social media and paypal accounts, tracking down her address and other things doesn't count as doxxing because she uses her real name and not a pseudonym? What does it count as instead?
-
Noun
censorship (countable and uncountable, plural censorships)
1. The use of state or group power to control freedom of expression or press, such as passing laws to prevent media from being published or propagated.
(source) (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/censorship)
I was going to say "wow, you found one particular definition that says it has to be state"... but then I read it again, and that's not what it says. It says "state or group".
As the reddit thing said: They don't care if you say you dislike someone. They do care if your acts of dislike compromise the ability for that person to live without fear of attacks
And what of that one topic which contained nothing but deleted posts?
-
I posted this link 3 times already, the first occurance straight below your earlier post on this matter, and it explains that last question (http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/2dzrlv/on_zoe_quinn_censorship_doxxing_and_general/).
-
I posted this link 3 times already, the first occurance straight below your earlier post on this matter, and it explains that last question (http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/2dzrlv/on_zoe_quinn_censorship_doxxing_and_general/).
I'll help you out here
The top three are the most pertinent:
Keep Everyone Safe: You agree to not intentionally jeopardize the health and safety of others or yourself.
Keep Personal Information Off reddit: You agree to not post anyone's sensitive personal information that relates to that person's real world or online identity.
Do Not Incite Harm: You agree not to encourage harm against people.
The top three are the most pertinent:
Keep Everyone Safe: You agree to not intentionally jeopardize the health and safety of others or yourself.
Keep Personal Information Off reddit: You agree to not post anyone's sensitive personal information that relates to that person's real world or online identity.
Do Not Incite Harm: You agree not to encourage harm against people.
The top three are the most pertinent:
Keep Everyone Safe: You agree to not intentionally jeopardize the health and safety of others or yourself.
Keep Personal Information Off reddit: You agree to not post anyone's sensitive personal information that relates to that person's real world or online identity.
Do Not Incite Harm: You agree not to encourage harm against people.
-
So let me ask more in general: even if these allegations against her were true, why should any of us give a single **** about it? I certainly can't be assed to care if a few sites over-zealously delete posts, particularly sites which don't have a particularly strong reputation as places of rational discussion in the first place.
-
One thing to realize is that while reddit as a whole should be commited to free speech, individual subreddits are allowed to establish whatever rules they want.
-
To get back to the topic of game journalist's bribability: It seems that sex is one thing that doesn't actually work, given that Nathan Grayson (the journalist under discussion) never actually wrote a review of Depression Quest.
Huh. Interesting, isn't it.
-
Depression quest isn't even a game. It's a public awareness tool (in the form of an interactive fiction) funded by an anti-depression charity.
-
How rude.
How rude.
How rude.
The top three are the most pertinent:
Keep Everyone Safe: You agree to not intentionally jeopardize the health and safety of others or yourself.
Keep Personal Information Off reddit: You agree to not post anyone's sensitive personal information that relates to that person's real world or online identity.
Do Not Incite Harm: You agree not to encourage harm against people.
Every single post in an entire topic was deleted. Do you seriously mean to suggest, without having seen the actual content of those posts, that every single one of them was in violation? No ****ing way.
-
Aardwolf, this is now the fifth time I am posting this link which explains what happened, and the third time I am doing this in direct response to you. I am not sure how to continue further if you refuse to read it (http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/2dzrlv/on_zoe_quinn_censorship_doxxing_and_general/).
-
nuke the internet!
It's the only way to be sure.
Assuming the allegations are even true, what this Zoey person did to her ex is certainly pretty ****ty (cheating always is). However, the rabid response to the allegations by the internet horde is definitely ****tier. Hopefully the ex will think more carefully next time before airing dirty laundry all over the net.
-
And obviously I need to do this again
When Doxxing and witch hunts happen there is a set process we follow:
ONE: Remove all offending content and report users up to Admin for ToS violations. Create automated methods to remove further Doxxing and threats.
TWO: Contact the person at threat to make sure they realize the situation, what Reddit is doing to ensure their safety, and that they know to contact Moderators and/or Admin regarding this situation. This is why I reached out via twitter. This is a rule I hold myself to personally, and personally advocate for. Admin do not require this explicitly.
THREE: Assess the initial point of the Witch hunt. If it's a problem, lock the thread entirely so any further breaches aren't possible.
Currently we're having to remove a lot of posts and comments due to these three rules. We're getting throwaway accounts every few seconds, and those are hugely inflating the "deleted" numbers. We are doing our best to keep comments removed to only violations of these three rules (plus egregious violations of Rule 10). But they're happening at an alarming rate.[/i]
This meant that bullet point 3, "lock down the source" became a requirement. From that point on, any comment in that initial thread would be deleted by Reddit.
This meant that bullet point 3, "lock down the source" became a requirement. From that point on, any comment in that initial thread would be deleted by Reddit.
THREE: Assess the initial point of the Witch hunt. If it's a problem, lock the thread entirely so any further breaches aren't possible.
One thing to realize is that while reddit as a whole should be commited to free speech, individual subreddits are allowed to establish whatever rules they want.
Suppose you could say that it runs on a similar way to how Free Speech works in reality. While the main reddit creators won't interfere (ie the Government) it won't stop the individuals who created the subreddits (private institutions) from policing their own stuff
-
Aardwolf, this is now the fifth time I am posting this link which explains what happened, and the third time I am doing this in direct response to you. I am not sure how to continue further if you refuse to read it (http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/2dzrlv/on_zoe_quinn_censorship_doxxing_and_general/).
Have you read the comments underneath? People are complaining that suppression is taking place outside of those rules on a large scale.
-
Those are also the same people claiming that it's the fault of the mods that Ms. Quinn is being subjected to such attacks
There's some other stuff about it preventing civil discussion from happening, but by having to sift through 15000 legit comments that grow on a minute basis for that *one* guy who decides to go "Hey, this person deserves pain here's a whole bunch of info on them" basically makes a mods job extremely painful to do. That's where the overall "delete" button comes in
-
Well that quoted stuff is very different from what you posted earlier, deathfun.
@Joshua: sorry, I assumed the thing that I had repeated at me 3x in one post was the important part. Blame deathfun.
-
Noun
censorship (countable and uncountable, plural censorships)
1. The use of state or group power to control freedom of expression or press, such as passing laws to prevent media from being published or propagated.
(source) (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/censorship)
In addition, even mentioning censorship in relation to this incident is laughable; clearly nobody's freedom of expression is being curtailed, as negative opinions of Ms. Quinn obviously aren't encountering difficulty being disseminated.
Did reddit not actually delete posts or something? Reddit moderators deleting posts satisfies your definition. Bleeping swear words on television is a form of censorship, book burnings are a form of censorship, SLAPP cases are a form of censorship, redacting personal information from FOIA requests is a form of censorship, halting news distribution is a form of censorship, why would removing user's comments on the internet be any different? The fact that you can still express your ideas elsewhere doesn't make an act not censorship, and it doesn't matter if what you're saying is against the rules, it's still censorship. Whether or not this is a bad thing here is beyond my level of interest, I just don't see how we're fuddling what's normally a clear term.
-
I just don't see how we're fuddling what's normally a clear term.
I'd be interested too. The same thing happened in the paedophile thread, he was too wrapped up in locking horns with people over semantics to realise what was going on.
Anyway, I'm sure we can just bypass it by using the word "suppression".
-
A let's play from Sargon about the game in question. It's only incomplete, but it delivers on what the game is about
-
why would removing user's comments on the internet be any different?
Just for clarity's sake, do you consider sites that require moderator pre-approval a form of censorship as well?
he was too wrapped up in locking horns with people over semantics to realise what was going on
That is so far from an accurate description that it's not even laughable.
-
That is so far from an accurate description that it's not even laughable.
Well sorry if I misrepresented you.
I don't want to derail the thread, but you can feel free to correct me if you like. Or we can just leave that alone, it might be best.
-
why would removing user's comments on the internet be any different?
Just for clarity's sake, do you consider sites that require moderator pre-approval a form of censorship as well?
Sites that you can communicate with others on, yes, I would say that the moderators are obviously censoring anyone they do not approve. As far as I'm aware this is only really ever done to stop botspam so it's hardly a travesty. Even well respected free speech blogs (http://www.popehat.com/comment-policy/) have blatantly censor-laden comment policies. Is censoring botspam, irrelevancies, and stupidity bad for society? I doubt it. But it's easy to take online censorship less seriously than it is when 99% of who you're censoring are on the level of botnet handlers selling magic pills.
-
why would removing user's comments on the internet be any different?
Just for clarity's sake, do you consider sites that require moderator pre-approval a form of censorship as well?
Sites that you can communicate with others on, yes.
Okay, your definition of "controlling freedom of expression" is obviously a lot wider than mine. Because while
Bleeping swear words on television is a form of censorship
I don't really see this as analogous to that; I see it as analogous to not airing the show in the first place, which I do not see as a form of censorship.
Editing someone's post to remove a word is censorship; preventing them from posting at all is not, as far as I'm concerned. Deleting posts is just retroactive prevention; they didn't have to display the posts in the first place.
-
From what I'm getting from this, Ralwood is saying censorship is the process of seeing a piece beforehand, editing certain stuff, then giving it out to the public
While someone putting something out on public without edit, having it deemed inappropriate and then taking away the person's privilege to have that post posted by deletion, is just suppression of content that goes against certain policies
Everyone needs to remember the italicized bolded bit. You do not have a right to post on these sites. You only have the privilege to do so which can be revoked pending your breaking the agreement *that you willingly said yes to* when first joining the website
-
I played Depression Quest and was actually quite impressed by it, mainly for it's accuracy in depicting depression. And I have seen no hard evidence that indicates to me that this is anything more than an especially vicious attack from the usual misogynistic cretins in the gaming community, aided by a piece of **** jilted boyfriend willing to say or do anything to get back at her for whatever the hell he thinks she did to him. Seriously, reddit is home to some of the most vile scumbags on the internet this side of a Neo Nazi rally - trust me, they're getting what's coming to them. And Bobboau, you need to calm the **** down and not be so easily manipulated by serial liars.
The scale of the reaction is largely fueled by the censoring. People don't like it when they find out they have been manipulated, so this story hits several multipliers in that regard the censorship and the major conflicts of interest that are apparently allowed to run unchecked. I suppose with the apathy on display in this thread I can see how it could have come to this.
Do you have any ****ing idea of the kind of harassment female gaming journalists get on a daily basis just for existing, much less for talking about women's issues? These guys need no fuel whatsoever to start a crusade against "feminist scum". I have no trouble whatsoever believing they'd spend hours of their day fabricating evidence in the hope of taking one of their already favorite targets down. Would you like me to present hard evidence of how far these pieces of **** are willing to go to attack someone they don't like? I can bury you in it.
Give me some harder than hard evidence that this is anything other than a harassed, slandered and very frightened woman engaging in some ill-advised tactics to defend herself (if she's even the actual source of these takedowns). I can't go anywhere on the ****ing internet now without pieces of **** crying out how they're being oppressed because someone has the gall to talk about the amount of crap women have to deal with on a daily basis, in between their paens to Elliot Rodgers for giving those *****es what they deserved. I will not tolerate this **** on HLP. Not here.
Again, do you have hard evidence of these corruption allegations that isn't manufactured hearsay? I'd like to see it. Now. Or I'm going to take you apart for wide-eyed naivety at best and, well, I don't need to say it at worst. You wanted something other than apathy? Congrats, you got it. And I'm waiting.
-
I played Depression Quest and was actually quite impressed by it, mainly for it's accuracy in depicting depression. And I have seen no hard evidence that indicates to me that this is anything more than an especially vicious attack from the usual misogynistic cretins in the gaming community, aided by a piece of **** jilted boyfriend willing to say or do anything to get back at her for whatever the hell he thinks she did to him. Seriously, reddit is home to some of the most vile scumbags on the internet this side of a Neo Nazi rally - trust me, they're getting what's coming to them. And Bobboau, you need to calm the **** down and not be so easily manipulated by serial liars.
The scale of the reaction is largely fueled by the censoring. People don't like it when they find out they have been manipulated, so this story hits several multipliers in that regard the censorship and the major conflicts of interest that are apparently allowed to run unchecked. I suppose with the apathy on display in this thread I can see how it could have come to this.
Do you have any ****ing idea of the kind of harassment female gaming journalists get on a daily basis just for existing, much less for talking about women's issues? These guys need no fuel whatsoever to start a crusade against "feminist scum". I have no trouble whatsoever believing they'd spend hours of their day fabricating evidence in the hope of taking one of their already favorite targets down. Would you like me to present hard evidence of how far these pieces of **** are willing to go to attack someone they don't like? I can bury you in it.
Give me some harder than hard evidence that this is anything other than a harassed, slandered and very frightened woman engaging in some ill-advised tactics to defend herself (if she's even the actual source of these takedowns). I can't go anywhere on the ****ing internet now without pieces of **** crying out how they're being oppressed because someone has the gall to talk about the amount of crap women have to deal with on a daily basis, in between their paens to Elliot Rodgers for giving those *****es what they deserved. I will not tolerate this **** on HLP. Not here.
Again, do you have hard evidence of these corruption allegations that isn't manufactured hearsay? I'd like to see it. Now. Or I'm going to take you apart for wide-eyed naivety at best and, well, I don't need to say it at worst. You wanted something other than apathy? Congrats, you got it. And I'm waiting.
Yes. This.
-
Blame deathfun.
Hell no.
This whole situation is being given extra fuel by people who do not take the time to read stuff and make overzealous assumptions and spread around allegations without checking if they are true. For the people who have an active interest in harming Quinn's reputation, this is all they need. As long as even one person with an unclear mind thinks there is merit in these claims, they have succeeded. If you jump into a complex and hot situation like this and just take things at face value without digging deeper (and considering the many posts that adressed your question before you asked it, you didn't need to dig deep), you are part of the problem.
-
In my posting of this thread I honestly was mainly bringing up the fact that a ****storm was going on, throwing up random bits I found, when people came at me with a confrontational tone I admit I backed into more of a position that I should have simply out of defensiveness. from my perspective I have seen evidence against her, it's weak but it's there. please bury me.
however, keep in mind...
... harassment female gaming journalists get on a daily basis just for existing ... they'd spend hours of their day fabricating evidence ... these pieces of **** ... slandered and very frightened woman ... pieces of **** crying out how they're being oppressed ... *****es <irony>
...you seem to be engaging in from my perspective very similar tactics you claim are leveled against her. glorifying your side as a victim and slandering your enemies. the accusations against her are corruption, the accusations leveled against her accusers is being lieing sacks of ****. That does color my impression.
In our culture being a victim does give you power, power in some cases to silence people with opinions you don't like and to deflect criticism, and power to manipulate people into becoming part of a personal army.
-
In our culture being a victim does give you power, power in some cases to silence people with opinions you don't like and to deflect criticism, and power to manipulate people into becoming part of a personal army.
This right here tells me that you have no experience being a victim of anything greater than perhaps being on the wrong side of an argument. Even leaving aside how this is the exact same ****ing thing as what the spurned boyfriend has been doing (if any side can be called a "personal army" right now, it's "his"), it's still complete and utter bull****. Being a victim in our culture means putting up with a wholly disgusting and inappropriate level of remarks including but not limited to:
"He/she deserved it"
"She/he is lying about it"
"He/she shouldn't have done it in the first place"
"She/he was abusing his/her position anyway"
"He/she could have done more to not do it/stop it"
As well as perhaps my favorite, and the one you just fell into the trap of thinking: "She/he is overreacting"
Being a victim in a case like this is a horrid, ****ty place to be, especially when the internet at large decides to make you its personal plaything for the duration.
-
I'm a member of an army now?
In my posting of this thread I honestly was mainly bringing up the fact that a ****storm was going on, throwing up random bits I found, when people came at me with a confrontational tone I admit I backed into more of a position that I should have simply out of defensiveness. from my perspective I have seen evidence against her, it's weak but it's there. please bury me.
however, keep in mind...
... harassment female gaming journalists get on a daily basis just for existing ... they'd spend hours of their day fabricating evidence ... these pieces of **** ... slandered and very frightened woman ... pieces of **** crying out how they're being oppressed ... *****es <irony>
...you seem to be engaging in from my perspective very similar tactics you claim are leveled against her. glorifying your side as a victim and slandering your enemies. the accusations against her are corruption, the accusations leveled against her accusers is being lieing sacks of ****. That does color my impression.
In our culture being a victim does give you power, power in some cases to silence people with opinions you don't like and to deflect criticism, and power to manipulate people into becoming part of a personal army.
https://twitter.com/hyerpes/status/501929960228274178
https://twitter.com/armabeast/status/502264934265536512
https://twitter.com/Bored_Cubed/status/501930068818808832
I'm going to leave this here for the night before I go to bed. Welcome to what actual harassment looks like Bobboau. I'll have a good and proper response tomorrow. In the meantime, I suggest you compile what actual evidence you have. "From my perspective" ain't gonna cut it.
-
I don't really have much, I didn't come in this with much of a horse and I don't have a particularly strong opinion about it now, I find the accusations alarming and serious, but as to if she is guilty of them or not I am more than willing to listen to evidence. note you are going to have to do something other than show me how much of a victim she is and how she has been harassed.
-
So she's guilty until proven innocent?
-
So she's guilty until proven innocent?
This is essentially what it comes down to, and why being the victim in all this is not a cushy, easily manipulated position. The other thing that really matters in this whole sordid affair is that even if every single allegation were true, this is still a wholly inappropriate and frankly disgusting response. Even if every single thing actually happened the way her accuser says it did, she has already paid far more than any reasonable punishment would have demanded.
That's why this is sick and wrong.
-
This right here tells me that you have no experience being a victim of anything greater than perhaps being on the wrong side of an argument. =
yeah except my entire childhood. you ever been in a school where you have basket balls drop kicked at you every 3rd day, or get pushed down into a sheet of ice and kicked by a group of 20 odd children, or had to change in a bathroom stall because of harassment, or has said bathroom stall ripped apart by a mob of people your age to get to you, had the **** beaten out of you on a regular basis, literally spend every second of every day listening and watching out of the corner of your eyes at all times, literally start hearing whispers talking about you, develop chronic illness once you subconsciously link being sick with escape. yeah I know nothing about being a victim.
-
So she's guilty until proven innocent?
well, you were all high and mighty about all of the hard evidence you had that all of the accusations against her were fake and just an angry mob of degenerate sexists. yeah, she's getting harassed, has nothing to do with if she did the alleged stuff or not, has nothing to do with if the evidence against her was faked. I was assuming you were going to come at me with something like chat logs or chan posts where people were conspiring. sorry if I misunderstood what you were claiming you were going to prove.
-
I don't really have much, I didn't come in this with much of a horse
it's BAD. it should STOP. journalists who get caught in this sort of professional misconduct should be FIRED. the fact that there doesn't seem to be any hope of that in general SHOULD make you uneasy to say the least.
the fact that it has a delete icon, implying that the person who took the picture was logged into the account that made the post. granted it could easily be fake, hence the supposedly.
so you do not find the nepotism of this disturbing at all? nor the widespread censorship?
So by "not having much of a horse," you mean you change your mind every 3 seconds, passionately defending each opinion before you switch?
Think about what you're doing, reach a conclusion that you're willing to stand by, and defend it and see if it holds up to outside scrutiny. Otherwise this is pointless, and I shouldn't take anything you say seriously at all.
So she's guilty until proven innocent?
well, you were all high and mighty about all of the hard evidence you had that all of the accusations against her were fake and just an angry mob of degenerate sexists. yeah, she's getting harassed, has nothing to do with if she did the alleged stuff or not. was assuming you were going to come at me with something like chat logs or chan posts where people were conspiring. sorry if I misunderstood what you were claiming you were going to prove.
I find the accusations alarming and serious, but as to if she is guilty of them or not I am more than willing to listen to evidence. note you are going to have to do something other than show me how much of a victim she is and how she has been harassed.
That was a response to that quote. I am going to make my case that there's nothing substantial, but are you saying that the onus is on her to prove her accusers false, not the other way around?
-
The accusations against her are bad and if true it paints a sorry picture of her and gaming journalists, while excusing the behavior of her ex-boyfriend. However we should not take them very seriously if there is not evidence to substantiate them except words. Presumption of innocence, people! This thing has exploded to ****storm of an unwarranted size, and online trolls are to blame for that. Some of the abusive messages she recieved are not OK no matter what happened.
I agree with Bobbau that supposed victimhood and accusations of mysogyny certainly can be used to gain sympathy and deflect genuine criticism. However there are a lot of ****ty people or just trolls out there and any drama involving women on the internet is pretty much guaranteed to have real mysogynistic and other abuse posted, either meant seriously or just coming from trolls.
-
This right here tells me that you have no experience being a victim of anything greater than perhaps being on the wrong side of an argument. =
yeah except my entire childhood. you ever been in a school where you have basket balls drop kicked at you every 3rd day, or get pushed down into a sheet of ice and kicked by a group of 20 odd children, or had to change in a bathroom stall because of harassment, or has said bathroom stall ripped apart by a mob of people your age to get to you, had the **** beaten out of you on a regular basis, literally spend every second of every day listening and watching out of the corner of your eyes at all times, literally start hearing whispers talking about you, develop chronic illness once you subconsciously link being sick with escape. yeah I know nothing about being a victim.
Look, dude, I just want to know if you're going to claim that there isn't a large number of gamers with misogynistic tendencies that harass, cyberstalk, and threaten women. If you want to deny this, if you want to deny my attribution of motive, go ahead. I dare you. Look at those twitter posts I put up for a little taste.
I agree with Bobbau that supposed victimhood and accusations of mysogyny certainly can be used to gain sympathy and deflect genuine criticism. However there are a lot of ****ty people or just trolls out there and any drama involving women on the internet is pretty much guaranteed to have real mysogynistic and other abuse posted, either meant seriously or just coming from trolls.
Judging from what female friends have encountered, the ratio of real to fake misogyny online is at least 100 to 1. But that's anecdotal evidence - why would you take my word for it?
-
it's BAD. it should STOP. journalists who get caught in this sort of professional misconduct should be FIRED. the fact that there doesn't seem to be any hope of that in general SHOULD make you uneasy to say the least.
in responce to someone asking why anyone should care about accusations ofprofessional misconduct in the press
the fact that it has a delete icon, implying that the person who took the picture was logged into the account that made the post. granted it could easily be fake, hence the supposedly.
so you do not find the nepotism of this disturbing at all? nor the widespread censorship?
explaining what the screen shot showed and it's significance, and again responding to someone who did not seem to understand why the accusations were bad. I do passionately think that the thing she is accused of is very very bad, if she is guilty of it not so much, remember the thing I said about getting backed into more of a position that I should have out of defensiveness, this is a perfect example
So by "not having much of a horse," you mean you change your mind every 3 seconds, passionately defending each opinion before you switch?
Think about what you're doing, reach a conclusion that you're willing to stand by, and defend it and see if it holds up to outside scrutiny. Otherwise this is pointless, and I shouldn't take anything you say seriously at all.
and no, I'm saying the onus is on you
do you have hard evidence of these corruption allegations that isn't manufactured hearsay?
I took this as you making the claim that all of the evidence against her was fabricated, and that you were more than ready to "bury me" in evidence to that effect. sorry if I misinterpreted that.
-
God, I can't believe I lost sleep for this ****. Ok, I'm going to bed now. But before I do:
Is there any other evidence of affairs and corruption other than her vengeful ex boyfriend? Someone who by already crossing every conceivable line has proven himself willing to do anything to hurt Ms. Quinn?
-
Look, dude, I just want to know if you're going to claim that there isn't a large number of gamers with misogynistic tendencies that harass, cyberstalk, and threaten women.
no, I am not going to make that claim
-
Judging from what my little sister and female friends have encountered, the ratio of real to fake misogyny online is at least 100 to 1. But that's anecdotal evidence - why would you take my word for it?
I think a lot of the more vicious abuse is coming from trolls, and should not be taken too seriously. Zoey Quin has become a meme. There are LOTS of bored ****ty people online that jump up on any kind of potential drama to try to incite it further, no matter the specifics. And gender wars are some of the juiciest dramas of all.
-
Even though I dislike the accusations against her, I cannot find myself having sympathy for miss Quin, when she is known to have engaged in the very same practices of doxxing (and pretending to be doxxed) and accusing people without any sort of evidence amongst other shenanigans.
-
"It is known!"
(But that does not mean it is true)
-
The problem here is that both the strength and the weakness of the Internet is the ease with which you can avoid responsibility for what you do or say.
There's nothing wrong with these people having an opinion, that's fine, but when it goes beyond a simple, faceless voice on the tubes and starts to turn into actions or incitements to actions against the person involved, it's gone beyond opinion.
Whilst I don't actually agree that most gamers are misogynistic, far from it in fact, I think there is a portion of them who demand attention by being deliberately offensive, it's exactly the same people being racist as it is being sexist or adopting other extreme positions, not because they actually have those opinions but because of the attention it gets. Others are just people who love to rage, at anything or anyone. And lets not forget the masses of bandwagon jumpers who did it because their mates did.
Thing is, I'm all for Freedom of Speech, but there seems to be a new thing which I call 'Anarchy of Opinion', it looks like Freedom of Speech, ticks all the right boxes for it, but it is totally unproductive because the skills required to make Freedom of Speech a force for change, such as Diplomacy, have been removed from the equation, Freedom of Speech is a crowd chanting, the Internet often turns into a mob yelling, which isn't the same thing.
-
and again responding to someone who did not seem to understand why the accusations were bad
Difference in opinion does not mean "does not understand"
I understand your stance on it. I just don't care or find it all that deplorable and explained why when asked
-
"It is known!"
(But that does not mean it is true)
So which part do you want to dispute?
That she didn't fake being doxed/hacked to gather sympathy? (http://thespectacularspider-girl.tumblr.com/post/95179284529/zoe-quinn-fake-doxx-hack)
That she didn't accuse people without any sort of evidence? (http://imgur.com/a/4VOcx)
That she didn't dox anyone? (http://i.imgur.com/Gy2n50g.png)
-
"It is known!"
(But that does not mean it is true)
So which part do you want to dispute?
That she didn't fake being doxed/hacked to gather sympathy? (http://thespectacularspider-girl.tumblr.com/post/95179284529/zoe-quinn-fake-doxx-hack)
That she didn't accuse people without any sort of evidence? (http://imgur.com/a/4VOcx)
That she didn't dox anyone? (http://i.imgur.com/Gy2n50g.png)
You do know that none of those links are particularly trustworthy sources of information, right?
(Also, has noone in this entire discussion noticed that none of the alleged review-score-buying-with-sex stuff actually happened?)
-
(Also, has noone in this entire discussion noticed that none of the alleged review-score-buying-with-sex stuff actually happened?)
Lots of people have noticed, but as it happens they are all on the same side.
-
On the topic of censorship/freedom of speech. It does not give you the right to be a dick without repercussions, in real life or the internet.
I will not get on to the argument for either side as right now, everything is just too damn convoluted to figure out.
I just have to say tho that depression quest was... welp, an eye-opener and an explanation for some things happening to me. And hey, **** it, i like a game that makes me still think about it hours after i closed it.
-
Oh look, a topic involving feminism and the usual aggressive, insidious tactics, and manipulative attacks twisting everything someone says.
Why does every feminist I ever see have to be so ****ing aggressive, manipulative and elitist. Every. Single. Time. I'm going to say this clear. There needs to be a pushback against this, it needs pushing back and pushing back hard. Not in the way these trolls and abusers do, but it is NOT okay to treat people like this. It is not okay to use these tactics and to make people afraid to stand up to you. I'll start taking feminists seriously when they start behaving like civilised human beings and start treating people with a bit of common courtesy. Feminist is a dirty word to me, not because of what it is defined as being, but because of the actions of the people who stand under its banner.
You should not be allowed to get torn apart like this for posting a topic other people don't like. Bobboau doesn't even have a strong opinion on the topic and you're tearing him apart, twisting his words and making sweeping assumptions about him. You should be ashamed of yourselves, and you need to take a look at yourselves in the mirror, because you look like the trolls you supposedly despise right now to me.
-
Women had got their rights quite some time ago in the Western world, with exceptions being the military and some small, isolated areas where gender-based discrimination still happens. Of those, the military has some good arguments against women, owing to some very real physical differences (that said, I met women who'd fit into a grizzled Marine assault unit just fine, but that's an extreme minority). As such, a feminist who "fights" for anything these days usually is guilty of some sort of fallacy. Refusing to acknowledge the (very real and rather hard to dispute) differences, or "fighting" those differences is one of the more common ones. Demanding privileges under the guise of demanding equality is another, and perhaps the more frustrating of the lot. Indeed, this is generally why minorities sometimes face backlash after gaining rights. There will always be some who'll try to go further and demand privileges, or, failing that, try to exploit the fact they're minorities to get benefits (see "race card" sometimes played by people of color).
Since "moderate feminism" (a.k.a. basically not caring about gender whatsoever, in places where it's not relevant) are now the norm in most cases, only the extremists remain. Now, there are fundamental differences between how men and women view the world, and there is no denying or "fighting" that. There's no need to worry, or even think about that except when trying to get a complete picture of an individual's thoughts. Some feminists would like to see a world where 50% of babysitters are male, 50% bricklayers are female and so on. This isn't going to happen, no matter how much they agitate about that. If a woman wants to shoot a machinegun, lay bricks or load cargo onto freighters, that's fine, as long as she can bear the load. But most don't want to do this, and that's also perfectly fine. Some refuse to acknowledge this, and are frustrated that the world doesn't comply to them.
-
Dragon, you are completely, utterly, wrong. There is a lot of discrimination against women, or for that matter anyone not falling into the normal gender binary, in every facet of our society.
There are still completely unjustifiable wage gaps between men and women. There are still areas of human endeavour where women are not accepted. There are still idiots out there who will slander and abuse and harass women for the unforgiveable crime of being a person with opinions. If you honestly believe that the status quo as it exists now is good enough, you should do yourself a favour and talk to women you are not related to about their experiences in everyday life.
-
<snip>
I must say that this is not the vibe I have been getting from this topic at all. So far, the only way that "feminism" has come up in the topic is because many people believe that Zoey Quinn is being attacked mainly because she is a woman who had dared to make an interactive fiction novel about depression (yes this has happened before). You can take a look on her twitter account: Lots (https://twitter.com/ajmal0/status/502811692284522496) of tweets (https://twitter.com/The_Camera_Lady/status/502845212147077120) sent to her are accusing her of being a whore having ****ed her way into recognition, because she started a relationship with someone who happens to be a games journalist (who has, in fact, not written anything about her or her work for a professional outlet).
The problem, to me, and probably also the The E, is that the video that Bobbeau posted takes the post of Zoey's angry ex at face value, without any shred of critical thinking, and uses that post to put her at the center of the corruption in the video games industry via conjecture, claims made up by others, and various other things.
The worst thing is that none of this ****storm is backed up by any single shred of actual evidence. Sure, there are tumblr images and posts being taken for hard evidence, but text and photoshop is easy.
So, in response to you, lorric, what we see here is an Indie game dev who is being harrassed by the usual aggressive, insidious tactics, and manipulative attacks twisting everything someone says (and making things up). Any idea of "innocent until proven guilty" is thrown out of the window. Polytron has been hacked. ZQ has been hacked, and she is buried under claims that it has all been faked.
And here we have someone who, trough ignorance, is spreading that message. Spreading the message that ZQ has faked the previous attacks on her (when DQ hit steam greenlight), spreading the message that she has ****ed her way in the industry, all based on purely allegations, conjecture, and the words of an angry ex. Spreading the message of people who are ****ing aggressive, manipulative and elitist. Every. Single. Time. I'm going to say this clear. There needs to be a pushback against this, it needs pushing back and pushing back hard.
-
There are still completely unjustifiable wage gaps between men and women.
Doesnt the wage gap shrink to just a few % when accounted for differences in education, job type, hours and other legitimate factors?
Anyway, there are certainly areas where women are discriminated against, or face unjust societal pressures. There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for. Nowadays there really isnt any sex that has it overall worse, as was arguably the case in the past. But the point of feminism is also to deal with the women specific issues which still remain, no matter how small. Sure there are extreme feminazis but they are not the only face of feminism and you should not think that they represent it as a whole.
-
I don't agree with you at all, the_e. First of all, the wage gap is way smaller than promoted. All studies find that when you normalize for women's choices in their lives, their children, career preferences and hours worked, the gap almost disappears. The 77% figure going around is a basic average of all wages without taking anything to account which is really misleading. I am sad that everyone just keeps on repeating this thing without checking...
Also, this idea that women are barred from certain fields is a gross interpretation of data. What is blindingly obvious is that women do not choose STEM fields when they choose their universities' degree. Its a choice. They prefer biology and medicine, for example, and they are the majority of the workforce in such places. If you want women in STEM fields, the solution is not to wage war to this patriarchy dragon, but try and instill mathematical values to girls, etc. However, be prepared to be disappointed. It is well known that boys are way moee interested in mechanical stuff from their earlier ages, while women are more interested in social interactions.
Regarding "people with opinions", there was a study that claimed that women avatars get 25x more than men. If this is indeed the case, its really frightening. I do think the internet is this amazing place but oh boy when **** hits the fan it flies everywhere... Non stop!
-
From an abstract point of view, it's interesting because this kind of massive level of fury over an apparently tiny incident is often derided when it happens in other cultures.
-
Women had got their rights quite some time ago in the Western world, with exceptions being the military and some small, isolated areas where gender-based discrimination still happens. Of those, the military has some good arguments against women, owing to some very real physical differences (that said, I met women who'd fit into a grizzled Marine assault unit just fine, but that's an extreme minority). As such, a feminist who "fights" for anything these days usually is guilty of some sort of fallacy. Refusing to acknowledge the (very real and rather hard to dispute) differences, or "fighting" those differences is one of the more common ones. Demanding privileges under the guise of demanding equality is another, and perhaps the more frustrating of the lot. Indeed, this is generally why minorities sometimes face backlash after gaining rights. There will always be some who'll try to go further and demand privileges, or, failing that, try to exploit the fact they're minorities to get benefits (see "race card" sometimes played by people of color).
Since "moderate feminism" (a.k.a. basically not caring about gender whatsoever, in places where it's not relevant) are now the norm in most cases, only the extremists remain. Now, there are fundamental differences between how men and women view the world, and there is no denying or "fighting" that. There's no need to worry, or even think about that except when trying to get a complete picture of an individual's thoughts. Some feminists would like to see a world where 50% of babysitters are male, 50% bricklayers are female and so on. This isn't going to happen, no matter how much they agitate about that. If a woman wants to shoot a machinegun, lay bricks or load cargo onto freighters, that's fine, as long as she can bear the load. But most don't want to do this, and that's also perfectly fine. Some refuse to acknowledge this, and are frustrated that the world doesn't comply to them.
You've never worked in a Safe Haven shelter. You've never helped put together presentations for cases with your father for restraining orders for women whose boyfriends and husbands have threatened to kill them for wanting to leave or divorce them because of the constant threat of them or their children being beaten. You've never learned about a girl ending up in the ER or dead before the order could be obtained. These things aren't present in your world, therefore they must not exist. What we're condeming today is the tip of the iceberg as far as how we actually treat women, especially the invisible ones that don't have twitter accounts and post on forums for your education. Trust me, the point you're talking about, we're a long long way from reaching it. If that makes me an extremist, then welcome to our Orwellian world where calling for treating everyone like a human being is 'extremism'. Also, equal pay for equal work, mother****er.
As for Bobboau, he looked at a shoddy hackjob of evidence passionately and angrily presented and went with it. He does that sometimes. I don't want to accuse him of the same malice as much of the rest of her attackers. But i'm allowed to get angry about this ****, Lorric, believe it or not. I'm even allowed to go after someone who joined in with the shoddy accusations not because he enjoys attacking women, but because he thoughtlessly went along with a vicious attack campaign that, however much you may want to deny it, is fueled by misogyny. He added his mass to it and claimed the main source of the uproar was censorship. No, it is not.
-
Domestic abuse isn't what we're talking about. Oh, and FIY, women do that, too. You just don't hear about this, because men don't talk about such things. I'm not sitting in those things, but I assure you, this does happen. This is double standard as well, I assure you that women can be just as aggressive, mistreating or abusive as men. It's just that men won't admit that, due to fundamental differences in how the two genders think. Domestic abuse is a much, much greater problem than things we're talking about, and one only partially related to feminism. The woman isn't always the victim in those cases.
If you honestly believe that the status quo as it exists now is good enough, you should do yourself a favour and talk to women you are not related to about their experiences in everyday life.
I did talk to many women and this doesn't seem to be a problem. My female classmates are very successful and certainly not discriminated against like you seem to think. But then, it might vary across countries, classes and regions. There might still be bigotry on the "lower levels", so to speak, but for people I interact with, things seem pretty equal. Then again, I might be biased. I'm upper-middle class and mostly deal with people involved with academics in some way. I've seen some double standard in politics, but then again, Polish politicians are lower class in expensive (not always good-looking) suits. And even then, it's most about pushing women to power because they're (pretty) women and can distract from actual issues with a pretty face. Though they're just as incompetent as men, this being Poland. Law does not discriminate against women, and even the Polish military seems not to have many problems with them. The wage gap might still be there (again, mostly in lower, low-middle classes), but it's small and shrinking. This is to be expected, change generally flows from top. Rural people, uneducated laborers and such are always the last to accept any sort of changes, including treatment of women.
I might be wrong about it applying to the Western world, one of the things the commies did right was to strongly promote female workers. Indeed, my grandmother was involved in building a foundry when she was in school. As in, carting sand around in wheelbarrows. Still, I think it would be pretty strange if Poland, or all countries, was better than, say, Germany about treatment of women. I didn't account for that, but if you're right, then I apologize for putting so much faith in civilized countries...
-
Gender inequality doesn't only mean verifiable individual cases a person is discriminated against or prevented from doing something solely because of their gender. Indeed those are relatively few in the western world now (and when they happen, generally condemned), internet trolling aside.
Gender inequality also means cases where no one involved thinks people should be treated differently based on gender, yet due to ingrained gender stereotypes and the like, they actually do. Or cases where you can statistically tell that discrimination has to be going on even though no individual instance is certain.
Obviously some people take discrimination to mean only the former, so when talking about discrimination one should clarify what they mean.
-
Domestic abuse isn't what we're talking about. Oh, and FIY, women do that, too. You just don't hear about this, because men don't talk about such things. I'm not sitting in those things, but I assure you, this does happen. This is double standard as well.
Talking about this is a double standard? Therefore, i should shut up about it happening to women? Yeah, lemme think about th-NO.
And you started the talk about equality, so i brought up my experiences witnessing domestic abuse as evidence of how it actually is. It's what we're talking about now. Are there any other discussion 'rules' you'd like to arbitrarily change for your own convenience?
-
There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for.
:banghead:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/
-
There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for.
:banghead:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/
I'm afraid it's very unclear what it is that you're saying with that url? It's a page berating MRAs posted as a response to someone saying what they should be for. Does not compute.
-
Well I, for one, only got involved in this discussion because of the censorship aspect.
Edit: Oops, apparently there was another half page or so between the post I thought was most recent and the actual most recent post ... meh.
-
There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for.
:banghead:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/
I'm afraid it's very unclear what it is that you're saying with that url? It's a page berating MRAs posted as a response to someone saying what they should be for. Does not compute.
The only "Men's Rights" "Activists" in this world are misogynists who have deluded themselves (or been brainwashed) into thinking that women are the source of all their problems. Perhaps you should try actually reading the linked page.
Anyone actually interested in gender equality is more accurately described as a "feminist".
-
@ Joshua
I can actually get behind much of what you say in your post. Because you're not attacking or twisting, and you make some very good points. And with the fact you might have the greatest cause of any of us to be angry at this, I praise you for that.
@ Mr. Vega
I'm glad you're not lumping Bobboau in with those others.
There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for.
:banghead:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/
I'm afraid it's very unclear what it is that you're saying with that url? It's a page berating MRAs posted as a response to someone saying what they should be for. Does not compute.
Because it's okay to post something that isn't rock solid 100% hard evidence as long as it's against the supposed enemies of feminism, but anything else gets dismissed. Or so it seems.
And it's okay to say things like this:
The only "Men's Rights" "Activists" in this world are misogynists who have deluded themselves (or been brainwashed) into thinking that women are the source of all their problems. Perhaps you should try actually reading the linked page.
-
There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for.
:banghead:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/
Your quite one-sided article takes its concent from /r/redpill subreddit, which is the more extreme and anti-feminist wing of mens right movement on reddit. Its like someone linking to some feminazi site and trying to paint feminism as that. The movement for male rights is much broader than that, some of it even pro-feminist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_movement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fathers%27_rights_movement
-
Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.
-
The only "Men's Rights" "Activists" in this world are misogynists who have deluded themselves (or been brainwashed) into thinking that women are the source of all their problems.
Well, that's just silly, I'm sure there's a few good ones.
Anyway, I had to ask for clarification because I wasn't sure if you agreed or disagreed with 666maslo666, but it sounds like you at least don't disagree. Enough clarification for me.
-
Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.
**** people who make false accusations of rape-all five percent of them. They're condemning others who a were raped to have their cases ignored. There. You may now continue the attempt at distraction.
-
Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.
It would be interesting what the reaction here would have been if Quinn had accused her ex-boyfriend of raping her. I'd be surprised if it was dismissed in the same way as her ex-boyfriend is being dismissed now.
-
Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.
It would be interesting what the reaction here would have been if Quinn had accused her ex-boyfriend of raping her. I'd be surprised if it was dismissed in the same way as her ex-boyfriend is being dismissed now.
Did she rape him, or is this another rediculous attempt at introducing a strawman?
-
There are areas where men are at a disadvantage, too (sentencing, family court issues, showing feelings, homelessness, male rape, more violence against men and who knows what else), thats what mens rights groups should be for.
:banghead:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/
Your quite one-sided article takes its concent from /r/redpill subreddit, which is the more extreme and anti-feminist wing of mens right movement on reddit. Its like someone linking to some feminazi site and trying to paint feminism as that. The movement for male rights is much broader than that, some of it even pro-feminist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_movement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fathers%27_rights_movement
Ah yes, the "Fathers' Rights Movement", who seem to think that men are incapable of getting custody of their children, even though when men actually ask for custody, they get it in the vast majority of cases (http://amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm). Yeah, that's sure some anti-male bias, huh?
Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.
Pray tell, link to some facts that show that false rape accusations are somehow a bigger problem than actual ****ing rape.
-
Men's rights are a bit of a silly idea. Yes, there are times when men are at a disadvantage, but one should not fight for "someone's rights" exclusively. They should all go towards gender equality. Extremists aside
Domestic abuse isn't what we're talking about. Oh, and FIY, women do that, too. You just don't hear about this, because men don't talk about such things. I'm not sitting in those things, but I assure you, this does happen. This is double standard as well.
Talking about this is a double standard? Therefore, i should shut up about it happening to women? Yeah, lemme think about th-NO.
Yes, talking about it like you do is double standard. Therefore, you should talk about it happening to men, too. That's my take on it. In this particular case, I mentioned it because it's not a good example of a place women are discriminated. It is an example, but there's another side to that coin you should have mentioned. It is related to feminism, but domestic abuse is not exclusively linked to discrimination of women and is a separate, if partially related problem. You also can't talk about domestic abuse without mentioning male examples, because it'd be a very incomplete picture. I wouldn't open that can of worms in here, TBH. If anything, it deserves a separate thread. I'm not saying it isn't a serious issue, or that it's completely irrelevant, or that it shouldn't be talked about. It should. But it doesn't contribute to this discussion that much, and runs the risk of hijacking it because it's so bloody complex and difficult.
Gender inequality doesn't only mean verifiable individual cases a person is discriminated against or prevented from doing something solely because of their gender. Indeed those are relatively few in the western world now (and when they happen, generally condemned), internet trolling aside.
Gender inequality also means cases where no one involved thinks people should be treated differently based on gender, yet due to ingrained gender stereotypes and the like, they actually do. Or cases where you can statistically tell that discrimination has to be going on even though no individual instance is certain.
Obviously some people take discrimination to mean only the former, so when talking about discrimination one should clarify what they mean.
The problem is, to put it bluntly, only the former can be "fought" in any meaningful way. That's what I meant. The latter is the result of literally millennia of conditioning. People tend to subconsciously "play their roles", those who don't become detached from "normal" people (and are incredibly valuable because of that). The second type of discrimination is something that could only be removed with time, and with help of exceptional, independent people. We need to have TV shows in which women and men are not only perfectly equal, but no attention is drawn to it. We need "casual" feminism that doesn't consist of white knights and trolls arguing about women, but of women going about their business like it was nothing. This isn't going to be a fast process, either. We're trying to dislodge something deeply entrenched in human culture, and culture isn't quick to change. The only chance to consciously influence that is through art, and it needs to be subtle, so that it's not a message or anything. It should just be.
-
I believe the discussion about the difference between real feminism and what most people are told is feminism has already taken place in this Forum at some point.
Though, I will admit, I'm still a little confused how this got to be so feminism-centric, she's being attacked for being a feminist this is true, but that's not really why people are attacking her, it seems to be being used more as a method of attack than a reason for it.
The thing that is really confusing me is that, of all the times people choose to get up in arms about the possible lack of objectivity in the gaming press, it is over the coital habits of a single indie developer who produced a game that wasn't even reviewed by the person she slept with, whether she is a manipulative ***** or not, I would have thought the increasing reliance on advertising income from the companies whose games they are reviewing are far more likely to have a policy-wide impact on impartiality than sex is and would be a far more pressing concern in that area.
-
Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.
It would be interesting what the reaction here would have been if Quinn had accused her ex-boyfriend of raping her. I'd be surprised if it was dismissed in the same way as her ex-boyfriend is being dismissed now.
Did she rape him, or is this another rediculous attempt at introducing a strawman?
I am saying I do not think people would have applied the same arguments to Quinn in a reverse situation. That I don't think they would say that she must be lying because there is no 100% concrete evidence, and because there is motive. Under those conditions we would dismiss anyone making accusations from a broken relationship without concrete proof, going so far as to dismiss evidence if that evidence could potentially be faked.
-
I am saying I do not think people would have applied the same arguments to Quinn in a reverse situation.
The "reverse situation" would be her accusing her boyfriend of cheating on her in order to gain favourable reviews of a game he had made, even though the person in question never actually wrote a review of that game.
If you don't think the vast majority of responses would have been "instant dismissal", you're living in a fantasy world (actually, based on your posting history, you're living in a fantasy world regardless).
-
I am saying I do not think people would have applied the same arguments to Quinn in a reverse situation.
The "reverse situation" would be her accusing her boyfriend of cheating on her in order to gain favourable reviews of a game he had made, even though the person in question never actually wrote a review of that game.
If you don't think the vast majority of responses would have been "instant dismissal", you're living in a fantasy world (actually, based on your posting history, you're living in a fantasy world regardless).
Don't twist it, of course the conditions for that scenario would be absurd.
I mean a reverse situation that's believable. Where Quinn is the accuser.
-
Ah yes, the "Fathers' Rights Movement", who seem to think that men are incapable of getting custody of their children, even though when men actually ask for custody, they get it in the vast majority of cases (http://amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm). Yeah, that's sure some anti-male bias, huh
From your own link:
Fathers who actively seek custody obtain either primary or joint physical custody over 70% of the time.
Which does seem low, I see no reason to not give custody unless there is history of serious abuse or two parents live far from each other and you have to choose one. And there are lots more Fathers rights issues mentioned on the wiki, many seem legitimate. Men are disadvantaged when compared to women in criminal courts so I would not be surprised if the same is true in family law, especially as the mother is seen as the traditional caretaker of kids. You should not dismiss the possibility of certain anti male bias in courts so fast, various gender biases, no matter how small, permeate most areas of society.
-
Don't twist it, of course the conditions for that scenario would be absurd.
I mean a reverse situation that's believable. Where Quinn is the accuser.
She would be accusing her ex-boyfriend of cheating on her in order to get good reviews for his game. How is that not believable? How is she not the accuser in that situation?
-
I am saying I do not think people would have applied the same arguments to Quinn in a reverse situation.
The "reverse situation" would be her accusing her boyfriend of cheating on her in order to gain favourable reviews of a game he had made, even though the person in question never actually wrote a review of that game.
If you don't think the vast majority of responses would have been "instant dismissal", you're living in a fantasy world (actually, based on your posting history, you're living in a fantasy world regardless).
Don't twist it, of course the conditions for that scenario would be absurd.
I mean a reverse situation that's believable. Where Quinn is the accuser.
Welcome to Arbitrary Scenario Theatre 3000. I don't find the idea of an indie developer seducing a few prominent games journalists to add a couple points to reviews for a very niche game, then outdoing the capabilities of the Church of Scientology of supressing any discussion of it very believable. Would you like me to come up with my own more believable scenario?
-
I mean a reverse situation that's believable. Where Quinn is the accuser.
So in other words, you don't think this current situation is believable? Or you just don't think it's believable when a man is the accused?
-
I'm not playing your petty games.
-
I do feel kinda bad for those wizardchan guys. Just because some asshole makes a couple of ****ty posts on their forum doesn't mean they all deserve to be told they should just go die.
[edit] As for the alleged phone calls, I see no evidence that the calls actually came from wizardchan members or that they even occurred in the first place... but I'm more than willing to review any evidence presented supporting that claim. [/edit]
-
From your own link:
Fathers who actively seek custody obtain either primary or joint physical custody over 70% of the time.
Which does seem low
You think 70% of the time is low? What would be high, then?
-
I mean a reverse situation that's believable. Where Quinn is the accuser.
So in other words, you don't think this current situation is believable? Or you just don't think it's believable when a man is the accused?
BOOM.
-
Don't twist it, of course the conditions for that scenario would be absurd.
I mean a reverse situation that's believable. Where Quinn is the accuser.
She would be accusing her ex-boyfriend of cheating on her in order to get good reviews for his game. How is that not believable? How is she not the accuser in that situation?
The ex-boyfriend did not even accuse her of that, actually. That's just what the video at the start of this made out of it.
-
From your own link:
Fathers who actively seek custody obtain either primary or joint physical custody over 70% of the time.
Which does seem low
You think 70% of the time is low? What would be high, then?
90+% would be quite high. As written on the wiki, I agree with their stance that joint custody should be the default unless there are serious reasons to the contrary. If a parent (of either gender) wants custody, they should highly likely get it.
-
I'm not playing your petty games.
You called a straight reversal of the situation "unbelievable". We've asked you to explain why. Please do so.
-
I'm not playing your petty games.
You called a straight reversal of the situation "unbelievable". We've asked you to explain why. Please do so.
You've got him.
-
I'm not playing your petty games.
You called a straight reversal of the situation "unbelievable". We've asked you to explain why. Please do so.
Alright, if you take out this stuff about cheating to get a better review on a game, and just call it cheating, then the playing field is level.
Would you treat that scenario with the same scorn as this one?
-
I'm not playing your petty games.
You called a straight reversal of the situation "unbelievable". We've asked you to explain why. Please do so.
Alright, if you take out this stuff about cheating to get a better review on a game, and just call it cheating, then the playing field is level.
Would you treat that scenario with the same scorn as this one?
Nope, what you called unbelievable was the EXACT same scenario with the genders reversed. Why did the reversal make it unbelievable?
-
I'm not playing your petty games.
You called a straight reversal of the situation "unbelievable". We've asked you to explain why. Please do so.
Alright, if you take out this stuff about cheating to get a better review on a game, and just call it cheating, then the playing field is level.
Would you treat that scenario with the same scorn as this one?
Nope, what you called unbelievable was the EXACT same scenario with the genders reversed. Why did the reversal make it unbelievable?
The idea of a male sleeping his way to the top in a male dominated industry. It's all too easy to say you'd apply the same standards when that reversal takes place.
Now it's your turn to answer my question.
-
I would have thought the increasing reliance on advertising income from the companies whose games they are reviewing are far more likely to have a policy-wide impact on impartiality than sex is and would be a far more pressing concern in that area.
QFT. Sure we have a massive systemic conflict of interest, buOMG UNAPPROVED USE OF VAGINA WHERE MY PITCHFORK
-
I'm not playing your petty games.
You called a straight reversal of the situation "unbelievable". We've asked you to explain why. Please do so.
Alright, if you take out this stuff about cheating to get a better review on a game, and just call it cheating, then the playing field is level.
Would you treat that scenario with the same scorn as this one?
Nope, what you called unbelievable was the EXACT same scenario with the genders reversed. Why did the reversal make it unbelievable?
The idea of a male sleeping his way to the top in a male dominated industry. It's all too easy to say you'd apply the same standards when that reversal takes place.
Now it's your turn to answer my question.
To the top? Scenario was for one good review. Whether the industry is male dominated means much less in this particular scenario. I ask again, what about the man doing this is so unbelievable?
-
I'm not playing your petty games.
You called a straight reversal of the situation "unbelievable". We've asked you to explain why. Please do so.
Alright, if you take out this stuff about cheating to get a better review on a game, and just call it cheating, then the playing field is level.
Would you treat that scenario with the same scorn as this one?
Nope, what you called unbelievable was the EXACT same scenario with the genders reversed. Why did the reversal make it unbelievable?
The idea of a male sleeping his way to the top in a male dominated industry. It's all too easy to say you'd apply the same standards when that reversal takes place.
Now it's your turn to answer my question.
To the top? Scenario was for one good review. Whether the industry is male dominated means much less in this particular scenario. I ask again, what about the man doing this is so unbelievable?
It's an expression.
And I'll admit here before Joshua came in with his correction, I thought it was for multiple reviews as it had been said multiple partners. Finding multiple female partners would be a lot harder than finding multiple male partners. But if it's just one, I can go with it being equal.
-
Smart answer.
-
You know, i think, the fact that ad hominem and generally angry or frustrated posts are up far higher than GenDisc norms (even higher than they were in the Israel/Gaza thread) is a good demonstration of why the internet is a ****storm over this.
I was already a bit suspicious of any conspiracy claims given that the game is currently being released for free (making it one of the least productive conspiracies ever) and the firespark for all of this is an ex-boyfriend post. So I came here to see what HLP thinks, since usually, even when we disagree, I get a better than reddit approximation of what the good arguments for each side are.
This... I don't know. Started out with some discussion of events then rapidly degenerated into people that supports one leaning or the other (wary of misogynists vs wary of SJW) continuing on that path going back and forth throwing the traditional talking points for each respective path, tons of dismissal-ism with a healthy dash of anger. Thanks for the MA study, since I actually need stuff like that to use in another ongoing argument, but other than that, geez. Can't we discuss what is really a not so big incident without all the fireballs?
-
You know, i think, the fact that ad hominem and generally angry or frustrated posts are up far higher than GenDisc norms (even higher than they were in the Israel/Gaza thread) is a good demonstration of why the internet is a ****storm over this.
I was already a bit suspicious of any conspiracy claims given that the game is currently being released for free (making it one of the least productive conspiracies ever) and the firespark for all of this is an ex-boyfriend post. So I came here to see what HLP thinks, since usually, even when we disagree, I get a better than reddit approximation of what the good arguments for each side are.
This... I don't know. Started out with some discussion of events then rapidly degenerated into people that supports one leaning or the other (wary of misogynists vs wary of SJW) continuing on that past going back and forth throwing the traditional talking points for each respective path, tons of dismissal-ism with a healthy dash of anger. Thanks for the MA study, since I actually need stuff like that to use in another ongoing argument, but other than that, geez. Can't we discuss what is really a not so big incident without all the fireballs?
Well I've been told I'm against equality because I can see with my own two eyes how unjustly a woman is being treated and am speaking out against those who think she's getting what's coming to her or at least think that we need to look patiently and benevolently upon the worst of humanity in the name of being fair and balanced. I don't need anyone's approval to denounce something hideous.
You want us to try to reconcile our passion with our need for civility, fine. Just make sure when you're asking me to hold back the "fireballs", you're not really asking me to care less about others. Because I'm not going to err on the side of apathy.
-
Thanks for the MA study, since I actually need stuff like that to use in another ongoing argument
What is MA?
-
Because I'm not going to err on the side of apathy.
I will. How else does one ensure complete objectivity?
-
Thanks for the MA study, since I actually need stuff like that to use in another ongoing argument
What is MA?
The standard abbreviation for Massachusetts.
Just make sure when you're asking me to hold back the "fireballs", you're not really asking me to care less about others. Because I'm not going to err on the side of apathy.
I'm not entirely sure when I implied anything that could be construed as that.
-
You didn't. But requests for civility have a tendency to become calls for apathy in a short period of time.
-
It appears incontrovertible proof of corruption has surfaced involving RPS' John Walker. I.....I don't know what to believe anymore. (http://imgur.com/xGdoptr)
-
It appears incontrovertible proof of corruption has surfaced involving RPS' John Walker. I.....I don't know what to believe anymore. (http://imgur.com/xGdoptr)
So RPS publishes from their secret office on the moon that has been staffed by cows, since their human staff came back to Earth to lobby the Reptillians in Congress to convince them to fake the moon landings in '60's and '70's, in order to minimize the disruption in said office.
Am I close?
-
AND THEN ZOE QUINN SLEPT WITH JOURNALISTS WHO HAD LEARNED THE TRUTH TO KEEP THEM SILENT
-
GAMING JOURNALISM IS PEOPLE
-
I just got permabanned on the Escapist for posting articles of government sites getting hacked and claiming they were false flag operations started by the Quinnspiracy. Meanwhile, they're letting through posts arguing that women who "stay in their place are fine." Welcome to our gaming community.
Well, I'm going to keep being a little fly in the ointment.
-
I think everyone should stay in their place
Makes it easier to hit them with a bullet
-
I wonder how much this is a case of 'Anyone but England'...
I've spent ages trying to explain to football fans who get annoyed over Scotland supporting 'anyone but England' during the World Cup that this is why they do it.
-
I love the face of reason on display here.
-
I just got permabanned on the Escapist for posting articles of government sites getting hacked and claiming they were false flag operations started by the Quinnspiracy. Meanwhile, they're letting through posts arguing that women who "stay in their place are fine." Welcome to our gaming community.
Arouet? If so, then what exactly does it tell about the gaming community that repeating all-caps troll posting results in a ban, but non-trollishly (and without caps!) expressing an opinion, no matter how unsavoury/stupid/misguided/whatever, doesn't?
-
Funnily enough, the ex now said this:
There was a typo up for a while that made it seem like Zoe and I were on break between March and June. This has apparently led some people to infer that her infidelity with Nathan Grayson began in early March. I want to clarify that I have no reason to believe or evidence to imply she was sleeping with him prior to late March or early April (though I believe they’d been friends for a while before that). This typo has since been corrected to make it clear we were on break between May and June. To be clear, if there was any conflict of interest between Zoe and Nathan regarding coverage of Depression Quest prior to April, I have no reason to believe that it was sexual in nature.
So even Quinn's angry ex does not agree with the first video. Hmmm.
-
I just got permabanned on the Escapist for posting articles of government sites getting hacked and claiming they were false flag operations started by the Quinnspiracy. Meanwhile, they're letting through posts arguing that women who "stay in their place are fine." Welcome to our gaming community.
Arouet? If so, then what exactly does it tell about the gaming community that repeating all-caps troll posting results in a ban, but non-trollishly (and without caps!) expressing an opinion, no matter how unsavoury/stupid/misguided/whatever, doesn't?
And who exactly gets to determine the criteria for that? That's a very slippery slope, and highly abusable. Very easy for the hammer to fall on people who the staff don't like. You shouldn't be able to get banned for expressing an opinion. And even if we assume the opinion is a form of unsavoury/stupid/misguided that just about everyone would agree on, they won't learn anything if they get banned.
No, I would contend that this is a very good thing, not a bad thing.
-
Arouet? If so, then what exactly does it tell about the gaming community that repeating all-caps troll posting results in a ban, but non-trollishly (and without caps!) expressing an opinion, no matter how unsavoury/stupid/misguided/whatever, doesn't?
And who exactly gets to determine the criteria for that? That's a very slippery slope, and highly abusable. Very easy for the hammer to fall on people who the staff don't like. You shouldn't be able to get banned for expressing an opinion. And even if we assume the opinion is a form of unsavoury/stupid/misguided that just about everyone would agree on, they won't learn anything if they get banned.
No, I would contend that this is a very good thing, not a bad thing.
Yes, that was kinda my point. The former getting banned but the latter not getting banned is exactly correct.
Of course if the latter persists on expressing insulting opinions in an obnoxious way and is being harmful to the community then they can be banned too, but that's a different matter entirely.
-
My Internet died, therefore delayed response to stuff two pages ago:
Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.
**** people who make false accusations of rape-all five percent of them. They're condemning others who a were raped to have their cases ignored. There. You may now continue the attempt at distraction.
You know what's worse than snark? Wrong snark.
Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.
Pray tell, link to some facts that show that false rape accusations are somehow a bigger problem than actual ****ing rape.
What is this "bigger problem" nonsense? Discrimination is not some "race to the bottom", where only the category of people who have it worst get to claim "discrimination".
-
My Internet died, therefore delayed response to stuff two pages ago:
Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.
**** people who make false accusations of rape-all five percent of them. They're condemning others who a were raped to have their cases ignored. There. You may now continue the attempt at distraction.
You know what's worse than snark? Wrong snark.
Yes, it's probably much lower than 5%; it's hard to get an exact number due to wildly inconsistent record-keeping (and bias) among police departments.
Relevant to "discrimination against men": I've noticed that there are lot of reactionary anti-"rape culture" types (at least on the Internets), who pretty much assume that all accusations of rape are true.
Pray tell, link to some facts that show that false rape accusations are somehow a bigger problem than actual ****ing rape.
What is this "bigger problem" nonsense? Discrimination is not some "race to the bottom", where only the category of people who have it worst get to claim "discrimination".
No, only people actually discriminated against get to claim "discrimination".
-
Being merely accused of a crime should not ruin your life or anything like that. The fact that it may do so is undeniable proof that those accused of crimes are discriminated against, and it is especially true for sex crimes due to more moral panic, and doubly so for men (sentencing gap).
Discrimination is absolutely not a zero sum game, it has many aspects that intersect in various ways and situations and it affects both genders.
Also, judicial crimes should be taken a lot more seriously than other crime. "Better let hundred criminals go than convict one innocent" rings a bell? Well, its true for rapists, too. So while false rape allegations are statistically much smaller issue than rape, it should not be needlesly trivialised.
-
Being merely accused of a crime should not ruin your life or anything like that. The fact that it may do so is undeniable proof that those accused of crimes are discriminated against, and it is especially true for sex crimes due to more moral panic, and doubly so for men (sentencing gap).
Discrimination is absolutely not a zero sum game, it has many aspects that intersect in various ways and situations and it affects both genders.
Also, judicial crimes should be taken a lot more seriously than other crime. "Better let hundred criminals go than convict one innocent" rings a bell? Well, its true for rapists, too. So while false rape allegations are statistically much smaller issue than rape, it should not be needlesly trivialised.
My sentiments exactly! I even contemplated using the "zero sum game" terminology earlier.
"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer" - William Blackstone
I'm glad I looked that up. I was about to attribute it to Ben Franklin!
Edit: apparently Franklin said the version with 100. 'k
Small caveat: there are more kinds of justice than putting people in jail. Restraining orders are a thing, for example.
**** people who make false accusations of rape-all five percent of them. They're condemning others who a were raped to have their cases ignored. There. You may now continue the attempt at distraction.
You know what's worse than snark? Wrong snark.
Yes, it's probably much lower than 5%; it's hard to get an exact number due to wildly inconsistent record-keeping (and bias) among police departments.
Did you really think his 5% statistic is what I was calling "wrong", rather than his ascription of a motive to my post, which I put in bold, or are you willfully misinterpreting me as an excuse to add more snark?
No, only people actually discriminated against get to claim "discrimination".
Are you seriously saying that this is not a thing?
I can think of one very prominent example, where a lot of people, who I must assume are reactionary anti-"rape culture" types, pretty much assumed the guy was guilty without evidence, and where law enforcement was ready to deprive him of liberty without charge and without the request (and seemingly against the wishes of) the women involved. Do I need to say who, or can you guess? Initials are JA.
Look, guy, all I'm saying is that some people go from "rape victims too often don't get justice" to "if someone is accused of rape, certainly they must have done it". Fine, maybe it isn't "discrimination" against men; I should have called it what it is: "prejudice".
-
How did we get from a girl accused of cheating on people to rape?
-
How did we get from a girl accused of cheating on people to rape?
Check page 6 for where this came up.
-
Did you really think his 5% statistic is what I was calling "wrong", rather than his ascription of a motive to my post, which I put in bold, or are you willfully misinterpreting me as an excuse to add more snark?
Whether it was an intentional attempt at a distraction or an unintentional one is irrelevant; it is a distraction. My mistake for assuming you were taking issue with the only part of the sentence that didn't border on the tautological. If you desire, I shall henceforth cease assuming good-faith debate intent on your part.
No, only people actually discriminated against get to claim "discrimination".
Are you seriously saying that this is not a thing?
Not a statistically-significant thing, no.
I can think of one very prominent example, where a lot of people, who I must assume are reactionary anti-"rape culture" types, pretty much assumed the guy was guilty without evidence, and where law enforcement was ready to deprive him of liberty without charge and without the request (and seemingly against the wishes of) the women involved. Do I need to say who, or can you guess? Initials are JA.
No, I can't guess; I'm not a mind-reader, those initials don't mean anything to me, and googling them is unhelpful. I am not responsible for citing your own sources. You'll also have to explain how anecdotal evidence is meaningful in any way.
Look, guy, all I'm saying is that some people go from "rape victims too often don't get justice" to "if someone is accused of rape, certainly they must have done it".
"Some people" do just about anything; what "some people" do or do not do is irrelevant unless you're saying they're participating in this thread, in which case you should cite specifics.
Fine, maybe it isn't "discrimination" against men; I should have called it what it is: "prejudice".
The two words are synonymous in this context; it's still not happening.
-
You know what, **** this. Since you can't even read my posts without completely misinterpreting them in a way that no other person would misinterpret them, respond to 666maslo666's post instead.
Being merely accused of a crime should not ruin your life or anything like that. The fact that it may do so is undeniable proof that those accused of crimes are discriminated against, and it is especially true for sex crimes due to more moral panic, and doubly so for men (sentencing gap).
Discrimination is absolutely not a zero sum game, it has many aspects that intersect in various ways and situations and it affects both genders.
Also, judicial crimes should be taken a lot more seriously than other crime. "Better let hundred criminals go than convict one innocent" rings a bell? Well, its true for rapists, too. So while false rape allegations are statistically much smaller issue than rape, it should not be needlesly trivialised.
-
Since you can't even read my posts without completely misinterpreting them in a way that no other person would misinterpret them.
Point out exactly where I have misinterpreted what you said, or I will default to the assumption that the reason you're not going into specifics is because you have no specifics to take issue with; if you want to have a productive debate, then actually debate. If you want to rant on the internet and have every random stranger agree with everything you say, then get out.
Being merely accused of a crime should not ruin your life or anything like that.
You're right, it shouldn't.
The fact that it may do so is undeniable proof that those accused of crimes are discriminated against
...No. The "fact that something may happen" is proof of absolutely nothing (except itself, in the usual tautological fashion). It is a fact that asteroids my strike the earth. This fact is proof of nothing. It is a fact that the sun may explode tomorrow (or have already exploded a few minutes ago!). This fact is proof of nothing. It is a fact that purple elephants may cause cancer just by looking at them. This fact is proof of nothing.
We have a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. We also have a moral responsibility to provisionally assume that any accusation may be true. Accusing someone of rape is an invitation for everyone to publicly vilify you: victim-blaming is still the primary response to any rape accusation. It's rather surprising how many people seem to think the vast majority of rape-accusers must really want to undergo public humiliation in exchange for possibly maybe potentially getting somebody else convicted (but then, the conviction rate is still astonishingly low). If you want to ponder un-researchable numbers, ponder this: what percentage of "false" rape accusations are actually the person involved decided to say it was a false accusation just to get it over with?
Also, judicial crimes should be taken a lot more seriously than other crime. "Better let hundred criminals go than convict one innocent" rings a bell? Well, its true for rapists, too. So while false rape allegations are statistically much smaller issue than rape, it should not be needlesly trivialised.
You'll have to point out where anybody trivialized false rape accusations. They've been referred to as a distraction from the topic at hand (and boy howdy have they ever been!) and as less significant than actual rape. Neither of those are saying that they are trivial. If you take issue with either of those statements, explain how.
Lest we forget, the topic at hand is that someone's ex-boyfriend publicly aired some dirty laundry and it erupted into a gigantic internet ****storm alleging corruption and trading sex for favourable reviews despite the indicated game journalist not ever actually writing a review of the game in question, the game in question being free, and there being no evidence for anything aside from the ex-boyfriend's say-so. Somehow this topic has now become about some people trying to talk about how horribly discriminated against men are.
-
and there being no evidence for anything aside from the ex-boyfriend's say-so
THe ex-boyfriend has even specifically denied the aforementioned ffs.
-
I just got permabanned on the Escapist for posting articles of government sites getting hacked and claiming they were false flag operations started by the Quinnspiracy. Meanwhile, they're letting through posts arguing that women who "stay in their place are fine." Welcome to our gaming community.
Arouet? If so, then what exactly does it tell about the gaming community that repeating all-caps troll posting results in a ban, but non-trollishly (and without caps!) expressing an opinion, no matter how unsavoury/stupid/misguided/whatever, doesn't?
Oh come on, only one post did I use caps. Mockery and ridicule is not the same as trolling. And my point was sound: the Pentagon can get hacked, but the 4channers are really claiming it's absurd Polytron could get hammered? By a community known to be super hacker friendly?
-
And here's a cutting question for ya: if this is really about going after corruption among journalists, why has the overwhelming majority of the attention and harassment been directed towards Quinn? Why not go after the male journalists that supposedly gave her preferential treatment? Why has 99% of the rage been pointed at her and anyone who specifically defends her? Why not aim the guns of reddit and 4chan mainly at Nathan Grayson, or whoever else supposedly engaged in actual journalistic dishonesty? Why the lopsidedness?
-
two reasons. one) they get more of a response going after Zoe. it brings people like you out of the woodwork who would not defend the reporter and that is more entertaining to people like /b/ and /v/. so there is a feedback loop reinforcing going after Zoe. two) it seems as though she was the instigator, and she is at the center of it. If the reporter had slept with 5 other people in exchange for good reviews and she was but one of them, yeah she would be getting a disproportionate amount of flack simply because she would likely be the highest profile person involved (and for reason #1) but I would imagine the center of mass of the response would be much more in his direction than it is now.
I do agree with you in that the reporters involved should get more blame than Zoe if the allegations are true. you don't get mad at the multinational corporation when the politician accepts their bribe.
-
Because there's probably some deep seeded issues that the initial folks need resolved. The rest are just a whole bunch of sheep following the crowd
-
two reasons. one) they get more of a response going after Zoe. it brings people like you out of the woodwork who would not defend the reporter and that is more entertaining to people like /b/ and /v/. so there is a feedback loop reinforcing going after Zoe. two) it seems as though she was the instigator, and she is at the center of it. If the reporter had slept with 5 other people in exchange for good reviews and she was but one of them, yeah she would be getting a disproportionate amount of flack simply because she would likely be the highest profile person involved (and for reason #1) but I would imagine the center of mass of the response would be much more in his direction than it is now.
https://twitter.com/hyerpes/status/501929960228274178
https://twitter.com/armabeast/status/502264934265536512
https://twitter.com/Bored_Cubed/status/501930068818808832
Or you can go with the much simpler conclusion, backed up by the words of the "investigators" themselves.
-
oh, look at that people saying hurtful things on the internet, is it Tuesday already?
I mean because there is an angry mob doing all sorts of horrible things, everyone not opposed to them, not specific actions they take but "them" meaning anyone not defending the focus of their rage, must be just as horrible as them by association. right?
-
The Escapist thread I cited was filled with posts who treated the word feminist as a slur. If I had to make an serious estimate of the fraction that were of that type, I'd say it was between 1 in 5 to 1 in 3. Barely a word was spoken against this by almost all of the other posters. Reddit was far worse. I refuse to look at what's being said on 4chan. I was accused of white knighting for sex after tweeting in support of Quinn by multiple people within 10 minutes of posting it. This is far from the first crusade against a female developer featuring a preponderance of slurs and rape threats (see Jennifer Hepler, who actually had her family and children threatened). Combine this with the exclusive attention Quinn is getting compared to the male reporters supposedly involved in this affair, I'm going to make a very reasonable leap of judgement, based upon the limited amount of information at my disposal, to conclude that there is no ****ing way that this is really about censorship or corruption, and that hatred of prominent women, by a significant portion of the male gaming demographic, who make games that don't appeal to them, thus invading 'their' space, is the primary driving force behind this witch hunt.
Is this going to be one of those things where as long as you can find 3 people who aren't saying anything horrible you're going to automatically discount the presence of these people as a numerically significant fraction of Quinn's attackers? "See, look at this guy who isn't saying that! Don't you dare generalize!" I am generalizing, because I believe I have reasonable grounds to do so. And by reasonable, I mean standards much higher than what you are current requiring of your own opinion. To which I am adding my personal hatred of misogyny, acquired from years of experience and by being an actual ****ing human being with a conscience.
And when people are persisting in making increasingly ridiculous claims with no actual remotely trustworthy evidence to support it (which has been pretty well discussed here), the next step is to start looking for what prejudice is fueling the sentiments.
Let's see if I can get you to admit this has happened before. Can you please attempt to defend the Jennifer Hepler affair, Bobboau?
-
hatred of prominent women, by a significant portion of the male gaming demographic, who make games that don't appeal to them, thus invading 'their' space, is the primary driving force behind this witch hunt.
There are other important driving forces:
1. The fear that game reviewers will push bad games made by women in the name of being progressive or due to sexual favors, even tough said games dont have much merit on their own. Which could arguably be a legitimate concern. The original video plays right into that fear.
2. Trolling. Do not underestimate its influence on this. This is a charged topic with great internet drama potential. Your own angry first post on this topic is evidence of that. If I was a troll, I would be truly delighted by it.
In other news, 4chan has decided to give money to women game jam, so at least something good has come out of this:
https://i.imgur.com/E7XZaKz.png
-
hatred of prominent women, by a significant portion of the male gaming demographic, who make games that don't appeal to them, thus invading 'their' space, is the primary driving force behind this witch hunt.
There are other important driving forces:
1. The fear that game reviewers will push bad games made by women in the name of being progressive or due to sexual favors, even tough said games dont have much merit on their own. Which could arguably be a legitimate concern. The original video plays right into that fear.
So.....you're worried that if we don't do something about it a number of female developers will start literally whoring for good reviews. I'll save you the trouble of trying to think any more.
It's not going to happen.
Here's a more likely scenario (and by more likely, I mean a probability above 0.00%). This scene is going to embolden the bottom of the barrel to organize and launch concerted attacks at any female developer who draws their attention, with the goal of keeping their pastime free of the taint. The results could be long lasting harm to the industry, the indie scene in particular, a further blackening of the gaming community in the eyes of the public, and a push for real censorship of online discussion just to make gaming forums liveable again. There is a very real risk that displays like this will in the long run alienate people from the idea of widespread free speech on the internet.
I played Depression Quest a month ago and liked it quite a bit, by the way. Zoe Quinn didn't even screw me for that last sentence. As far as you know. There could be terrible consequences if you don't keep your guard up, no?
-
I still really don't understand why this has become an issue on the level that it has. Not only have most of the original assumptions been proved wrong, even if they were true, this is nothing, really really nothing compared to the massive conflict of interest that can rise from the fact that these magazines review games made by companies whose advertising revenue they count on, that's a far more insidious problem than the (incorrect) accusation that one female developer had sex with a reviewer to get a good review.
There is no real outcome from this that actually achieves anything, because people are shooting at a tiny little target and ignoring the elephant in the room.
That's why I always rely on Metascores and never buy a new release, you're likely to get a far more accurate rating if you look at averages over specifics.
-
There is no real outcome from this that actually achieves anything, because people are shooting at a tiny little target and ignoring the elephant in the room.
This
Although I feel like I should now play the game simply because well, then I'll have some sort of idea what the hell she actually made for a game
-
I still really don't understand why this has become an issue on the level that it has. Not only have most of the original assumptions been proved wrong, even if they were true, this is nothing, really really nothing compared to the massive conflict of interest that can rise from the fact that these magazines review games made by companies whose advertising revenue they count on, that's a far more insidious problem than the (incorrect) accusation that one female developer had sex with a reviewer to get a good review.
There is no real outcome from this that actually achieves anything, because people are shooting at a tiny little target and ignoring the elephant in the room.
That's why I always rely on Metascores and never buy a new release, you're likely to get a far more accurate rating if you look at averages over specifics.
Hence my argument that this has little to do with actual concern over corruption.
-
Wow, I just spent three hours reading pretty much all of this.
I'm not sure what's more saddening. The whole story or the immeasurable amount of time that has been put into blowing it up like a balloon.
There's tens of thousands of people and situations like that. Every single day. This is not even a drop a water in the sun, it's a single molecule in a whole sea of water.
-
Well, there's the actual monsters who will seize any opportunity to bully people they don't like, and then then there's all the idiots who think that if there's enough people shouting angrily about something, then it must be true no matter how made up the accusation actually are.
-
In my opinion the truth bears no relevance in regard to this thing. True or not, this is a witchhunt. There are pitchforkes raised and it makes no difference whether any of this is true or not for this whole thing to be a quite drastic cut into the private life of someone. The world is full of scumbag people. Let's say all of this was true, making an example out of anyone never really helped anything, changed anyone or stopped stuff like this from repeating.
Even if I assumed all of this to be true, I still can't see the merit of people dedicating dozens of hours of their lives to this. There have been voiced concerns about false journalism, corruption, pulling favours and all those really concerning things, but guess what, those things are a part of human society. We don't like them and they usually happen in secret, but never have they stopped happening and never will they. Not even in the most dystopian Orwellian future where literally everything is policed stuff like this happening could ever be stopped.
So instead of raising pitchforks, the only proper thing to do is to sharpen one's own sences so that we don't suffer similar fates in our own personal lives. And just as many people will see this story as a hands-on-guide on how to **** over people most successfully. Manipulation is an art form and there's more than enough willing and interested practicioners on this planet.
This whole balloon on the internet about this is just another stern example why I stopped concerning myself with public media altogether. The way media works right now is either reporting someothing which serves someones purpose or not reporting the very same thing out of the very same reason. Nothing of this is about actual information anymore. It's basically just monkeys throwing with excrements, really. Personally I don't want any part in this and although the read was partially interesting, I feel like I wasted three hours of my life.
-
I'd like to think it was useful in one way: it revealed just how serious a certain social problem is within the gaming community. Cat's out of the bag now.
-
Wow, I just spent three hours reading pretty much all of this.
I wonder how long it would take to read the Quinn thread on the Escapist forum. Mr. Vega got banned at page 140. It's ballooned up to 208 pages in that short time since then, and I'm not sure, but just by looking at it, I think they have more posts to a page than we do here at Hard Light as well.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.858347-Zoe-Quinn-and-the-surrounding-controversy
It boggles my mind too, how this incident has spawned such a thing.
-
To me, it seems like holding female devs up and saying "hey, look at this person, she made a game, didn't she do well? Lets all give her a big clap" is more demeaning, sexist and condescending than leaving them alone and judging them on the same merits as everyone else.
Not only that but the flood of males rushing to a female dev/reporter/whatevers defense when the face any criticism or harassment online has always struck me as incredibly sexist"
Snippet from Escapist
Yes, because we're all defending women because they're women and not because we might think that their whatever was good and worthy of defense
-
Haven't you heard? The anti-Quinn crowd isn't driven by misogyny and only wants to expose corruption, while her defenders are white knighting because they think the ugly-ass **** of a whore will give them sex if they do.
-
Can you please attempt to defend the Jennifer Hepler affair, Bobboau?
had never heard of it, or rather, I remember people complaining about dragon age 2 (I remember it being a bit of a let down personally) and I remember someone saying something to the effect of "I wish games could let you skip the game part" didn't remember they were related until I googled her name. she was the lead writer for DA2 and there was a hate campaign put out against her because people really really didn't like her work. in the maybe five minutes I researched this I saw mention of this (http://metro.co.uk/2013/07/24/death-threats-for-call-of-duty-developer-after-weapon-tweak-3897051/) which was a similar incident. I'm not really sure what you are trying to get at here, the internet is filled with people who have insane levels of rage over the minorest of slights. I posted a thread a few months ago reveling in the CEO of cartoon network getting fired cause I had an absurd hatred for the guy. was the hate campaign against her "bad"? yeah. I would also call it unimpressive. so again, not sure what you are getting at, as this doesn't seem related in any way other than maybe the fact there was an internet lynch mob involved and she works in games and of course because she was a woman which I mention only because it seems to be of keen interest to you. Hepler was not accused of basically bribery, and I do not recall wide spread suppression of it, she was just not liked, a bunch of people made juvenile internet threats against her she quit. seems like you are just trying to throw up some random other controversy to divert from the main discussion.
BTW, can we take this (https://twitter.com/stephentotilo/status/501818736480092160) as evidence that indeed there is/was a relationship between Zoe and Nathan?
-
white knighting
you know that term has other meanings right? like someone claiming to be doing something out of virtue when in reality they are just going after their agenda and using supposed virtue as a tool to accomplish it.
though it is used for that meaning as well... but you've brought it up a few times.
and you guys are defending women because they are women, this sort of **** is endemic across the whole game industry (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=game+developer+death+threats) and you only seem to care when the target is a woman. it is nothing special, it is not misogyny.
-
I had forgotten about the term before it was used repeatedly to describe me and others who defended Quinn on other sites over the past few days. Also, it's all the same meaning!
-
and you guys are defending women because they are women, this sort of **** is endemic across the whole game industry and you only seem to care when the target is a woman. it is nothing special, it is not misogyny.
Again, you're doing the same old switcheroo. Random death threats get thrown around all the time, but no evidence you've sighted conflicts with my argument that there are also organized harassment campaigns like this one of a volume and intensity that is quite rare, and that they target prominent women to a disproportionate extent.
You're trying to claim that my argument is that they all target women, something you can disprove in your sleep, rather than try to disprove what I am actually saying.
-
and you guys are defending women because they are women, this sort of **** is endemic across the whole game industry (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=game+developer+death+threats) and you only seem to care when the target is a woman. it is nothing special, it is not misogyny.
Well, if you can find me a situation where the harrassment was on a similar scale as this one, with just as a big a lack of proof, with this many slut shaming and similar effects going on, where a topic was created on HLP where people went along with the accusations, I'd be happy to concede that point.
-
and you guys are defending women because they are women, this sort of **** is endemic across the whole game industry (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=game+developer+death+threats) and you only seem to care when the target is a woman. it is nothing special, it is not misogyny.
I'd say death threats are actually endemic across the internet towards any sort of industry/person/company/writer/whatever
You're also presuming to know what's going on inside our heads.
You're also presuming that we don't care about death threats happening to other devs
You're also forgetting that the topic at hand right now isn't about those other devs, it's about one dev who just so happens to be female getting into a ****storm over false and irrelevant bull**** which became a topic of conversation regarding women devs in general
If you want to change the topic to include death threats to males, then by all means make that topic change. Just don't pull that sort of B.S. in that particular phrasing
Try "So what about all the male devs that get death threats and **** like this happening to them? Why aren't there ever topics that blow up into proportions like this over them? Where are their threads and conversations and defensemen?"
Well, to be fair, I haven't seen you make any topics about those game devs so...
EDIT: Josh seems to have already pointed that out
-
I had forgotten about the term before it was used repeatedly to describe me and others who defended Quinn on other sites over the past few days. Also, it's all the same meaning!
I can believe that someone would say that with that intention, when you say unkind things to people you try to say the thing which will hurt them the most, and it does seem like that one really got to you. so... mission accomplished there.
or I could also see someone saying that to you, trying to imply that the only difference between you and 4chan is 4chan doesn't try to pretend to be the good guy. many people not on your side are being harassed in a similar fashion by people on your side. thanks to google's asinine (recently abandoned) real name policy you probably would have little difficulty in finding my boss's contact info at the woman owned business I work at.and telling her all about how I'm a horrible misogynist who needs to be fired. If you truly are not tempted can you say there is no one fighting the same fight you are who would not find such a temptation irresistible? what about rather than me it was one of those "actual monsters"? would you feel bad about it happening? are you better than 4chan?
Again, you're doing the same old switcheroo. Random death threats get thrown around all the time, but no evidence you've sighted conflicts with my argument that there are also organized harassment campaigns like this one of a volume and intensity that is quite rare, and that they target prominent women to a disproportionate extent.
You're trying to claim that my argument is that they all target women, something you can disprove in your sleep, rather than try to disprove what I am actually saying.
There are organized harassment campaigns. this one is of a volume and intensity that is rare. but the fact that they are so rare means you cannot really make a claim about there being some sort of ulterior motive behind them. it could be that it has nothing to do with them being women and everything to do with them being a SJW. /*shrug*/ I can't make that claim either. though you might argue that it's the same thing (it's not). I'm not sure how you are going to prove that "major" harassment campaigns happen "disproportionately" to "prominent" women. I mean there are so many subjective qualifiers there would be no way to disprove it. I mean I could bring up things like what happened to Mac Walters and it'd just be a single datapoint. I could bring up every death threat to every game dev in history and you'd just say they weren't 'major' enough.
I happen to be an animation buff. one of my favorite people in the industry is Rebecca Sugar. She got her own show about two years ago and I remember there was a whole bunch of talk about her being the first woman to create a show on Cartoon Network. I was really annoyed by that talk because it overshadowed her actual accomplishments, and her actual skill as a writer, story boarder, and animator.
-
I happen to be an animation buff. one of my favorite people in the industry is Rebecca Sugar. She got her own show about two years ago and I remember there was a whole bunch of talk about her being the first woman to create a show on Cartoon Network. I was really annoyed by that talk because it overshadowed her actual accomplishments, and her actual skill as a writer, story boarder, and animator.
You realize that's like saying "I have a black friend therefore I'm not racist" right?
and you'd just say they weren't 'major' enough.
Stop assuming actions that you have no basis for
Unless of course you have a basis for it then by all means lay it on us.
-
are you better than 4chan?
Yes.
-
What's the argument here? Obviously a lot of people attack whoever they attack largely because they're women or feminists or part of whichever group they have an axe to grind with, and similarly obviously a lot of people are more interested in defending members of those groups than some other groups.
If there's a disagreement on whether internet lynchmobs against women are more abusive and hateful than those against men or not, then duh, the evidence for that will be right there online for you to link to.
-
I'd say death threats are actually endemic across the internet towards any sort of industry/person/company/writer/whatever
yeah, I would not disagree with this
You're also presuming to know what's going on inside our heads.
You're also presuming that we don't care about death threats happening to other devs
I'm commenting on your actions
You're also forgetting that the topic at hand right now isn't about those other devs, it's about one dev who just so happens to be female getting into a ****storm over false and irrelevant bull**** which became a topic of conversation regarding women devs in general
the point being made was that no one cares about them, even though they experience the same form of harassment as this one particular woman. I mean why are you assuming that all of this is fueled by misogyny when the same thing happens to men all of the time?
If you want to change the topic to include death threats to males, then by all means make that topic change. Just don't pull that sort of B.S. in that particular phrasing
Try "So what about all the male devs that get death threats and **** like this happening to them? Why aren't there ever topics that blow up into proportions like this over them? Where are their threads and conversations and defensemen?"
that is in fact a good question. though I am prety sure I have mentioned my beleif that the reason this one exploded like it did was due to the streisand effect. I know that's the reason I posted it "holy **** it's getting shut down even on 4chan! that's nuts!"
Well, to be fair, I haven't seen you make any topics about those game devs so...
I made this topic because of the severity of the ****storm, that was the story. "whoa guys! look at this mess. look at all of this crazy **** getting flung all over the place"
EDIT: Josh seems to have already pointed that out
this does seem to be the largest ****storm gaming related that I can recall period so I cannot meet Js challange
-
I happen to be an animation buff. one of my favorite people in the industry is Rebecca Sugar. She got her own show about two years ago and I remember there was a whole bunch of talk about her being the first woman to create a show on Cartoon Network. I was really annoyed by that talk because it overshadowed her actual accomplishments, and her actual skill as a writer, story boarder, and animator.
You realize that's like saying "I have a black friend therefore I'm not racist" right?
I am rally trying to wrap my mind around this one and all I can think is you are an asshole
and you'd just say they weren't 'major' enough.
Stop assuming actions that you have no basis for
Unless of course you have a basis for it then by all means lay it on us.
well, I really felt like that was what he was saying in the response that I was quoting. so... I guess that might be a basis for me thinking that
-
I mean why are you assuming that all of this is fueled by misogyny when the same thing happens to men all of the time?
*Whistles*
Hey you, you there
Yeah Bobb, looking at you
Quote me on something where I'm saying it's fueled by misogny
I'm commenting on your actions
Yes, my actions that were and always will be "Who the **** gives a ****"
Or did you forget our conversations on the first page? Hmm?
that is in fact a good question. though I am prety sure I have mentioned my beleif that the reason this one exploded like it did was due to the streisand effect. I know that's the reason I posted it "holy **** it's getting shut down even on 4chan! that's nuts!"
That is a fair point. Also that question was a rephrase of your sentence
I made this topic because of the severity of the ****storm, that was the story. "whoa guys! look at this mess. look at all of this crazy **** getting flung all over the place"
To which was initially seen as you getting caught up in it (as seen by your early responses on the topic) and possibly believing it (that was the impression given by your stance)
Funny part though, is this article which has this from Hepler
http://www.polygon.com/2013/8/15/4622252/plague-of-game-dev-harassment-erodes-industry-spurs-support-groups
Women represent over 50 percent of the population, tend to be in charge of household finances, and are the majority purchasers of games (when factoring in games bought by women as gifts for husbands, children, friends, etc.). To indulge a community that is actively trying to alienate this powerful market segment (not to mention gay men, casual gamers of all types and anyone new to the hobby), is suicidal.
EDIT: And yes I am an asshole. That's my job. I am an asshole to pretty well everyone in varying degrees and not just on the internet
-
I have a feeling I'm not going to enjoy it when I end up in an argument against you, deathfun. Take that in a ......good way.
-
I have just read this entire thread, start to finish.
I have one conclusion.
The entire thing should be purged with fiery prejudice from HLP and never be spoke of again. Pretty much *all* of you should be ashamed of yourselves for your behaviour (and for those not behaving badly, just your participation) here. How it has not been locked and purged before this point I do not know. And if this counts as backseat moderation, I'll plead guilty as charged, because someone has to ****ing say it. There are personal attacks, [attempted] strawmen, failures to argue in good faith, and broad-based group disparagement on nearly every page.
I am now going to attempt to report my own post to draw moderator attention to this atrocity.
EDIT: And just so nobody goes 'wtf, you're in here too and why aren't you responding to me now!' I won't be responding further in it, either.
-
Am I allowed to argue that the problem I am talking about exists? Or is that automatically group based disparagement?
-
Am I allowed to argue that the problem I am talking about exists? Or is that automatically group based disparagement?
It's probably better to create a new thread for that. That would allow the discussion to take place without the baggage of this thread.
In other respects, I agree with MP-Ryan; this thread deserves to be closed. I've done some Internet ResearchTM and there is significant evidence that some shenanigans did take place, but harassment and flamethrowing is a poor way to respond to it. In any event, this thread is heavy on emotion and light on the facts, and we at HLP are not going to solve things ourselves. The best that can be said about this thread is that it made people aware of the entire situation.
I'm closing this thread without prejudice. People can weigh the available evidence and draw their own conclusions. Let's all take a deep breath and do something else for a while.