[Luis Dias]

But once again you've decided that they all must be.

This is always the problem when you adopt an extremist position, you'll be hard pressed to defend the very impossible all-encompassing arguments.

I'm much more inclined to understand where this rage coms from rather than swipe it all away in my head as "mysoginist rednecks coming out of their mom's basement to tell us how wymen r here to oppress them".

[Mr. Vega]

But once again you've decided that they all must be.

Nope, I never said that about notyourshield. I have proof that some were faked, and there are IRC logs where ongoing astroturfing was being discussed. How large the percentage of astroturfers is, I can't say. But it's not exactly hard to do on twitter.

[Phantom Hoover]

Which, when both sides are frantically accusing the other of astroturfing, doesn't really say much one way or the other.

[Mr. Vega]

Which, when both sides are frantically accusing the other of astroturfing, doesn't really say much one way or the other.

What do you actually think is going on? I'm not talking about the arguments here, I'm talking about the issues themselves.

[Luis Dias]

Except it's a bit awkward whenever certain gamergaters are accused of being mysoginists and then they reply with a selfie of them portraying themselves accurately as, for instance, black women, etc. It becomes especially awkward when the accusers are the usual white cis male righteous moral teachers of the internet.

[Grizzly]

But that's why I mentioned other groups with extremists in them. Or do you think Christians and Muslims deserve to be blamed for the actions of ISIS or Westbro Baptist?

No. I would say that that is not the reading I got out of that "'gamers' are over" article.

It becomes especially awkward when the accusers are the usual white cis male righteous moral teachers of the internet.

It is perhaps not the best of ideas to accuse one side of broadstroking too much and then immeaditily afterwards go and broadstroke.
I agree with the overal sentiment though. Although there has been some proven astroturfing, this does not immeaditily discount the point of notyourshield. Denying that, say, women exist in gamergate would be denying that women exist - which feminists happen to dislike, and with good reason.

Which, when both sides are frantically accusing the other of astroturfing, doesn't really say much one way or the other.

Hmm. I do wonder: How can anti-gg astoturf exactly? They don't have anything like #notyourshield that requires people to post their identities en masse, for example.

[Bobboau]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRaAJBKmi5I&t=105

[zookeeper]

... mysoginy ...

... mysoginy ...

... mysoginy ...

... mysoginy ...

... mysoginy ...

When one sees the word written correctly as frequently as anyone partaking in this thread does, I'd expect that to have rubbed off on them by now.

[karajorma]

But that's why I mentioned other groups with extremists in them. Or do you think Christians and Muslims deserve to be blamed for the actions of ISIS or Westbro Baptist?

No. I would say that that is not the reading I got out of that "'gamers' are over" article.

Who says I was talking about that particular example? You only need to look at this thread to see example after example of people claiming that because there are extremists in Gamergate you can write off the entire movement.

My basic issue is that both sides are full of complete idiots who refuse to listen to anyone else's point of view while simultaneously claiming the high ground. The entire situation would be far more quickly resolved if we gagged both sides and had a reasonable discussion without them. But since that isn't going to happen, what needs to be done is for people to start slagging off both of them at the same time so that they realise they've BOTH lost and that no one is interested in what either of them have to say because they've completely lost sight of the issues in favour of arguing with each other.

When a movement supposedly based on ethical behaviour often ignores the behaviour of those who feel the need to harass people or a movement based on women's rights feels the need to denigrate anyone who opposes their point of view whether or not they are a woman then it is clear that both movements have lost their way.

[Grizzly]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRaAJBKmi5I&t=105

Can you explain what that video is about? Sargon of Akkad is someone who claims that DiGRA is using their research to push a feminist agenda in gaming, using Anita Sarkeesian as a proxy (heck, he now has a video called "The War on Men Hits the Mainstream Media"). Not sure if I want to watch a video by someone like that.

[Luis Dias]

Why? Afraid to get a different perspective on things? I find that kind of self-censorship bizarre, to be frank. I watched many femfreq videos and have read and listened to most of the feminist most aggressive writings, always taking them seriously, trying to get the gist of what they are saying in good faith.

I actually enjoy listening to some less... ahhh... middle-ground voices, those who stick out of the gaussian curve of things. You never know, they might have some curve balls for you. And Sargon strikes me as a slightly paranoid guy (thus the conspiracies and so on), but he's really fun and well-meaning, good-spirited english chap. He has a very bad opinion on Anita, etc.

As for that video, it's about a request that Sargon made on twitter if women on #gamergate could give him some selfies of themselves to prove they are not sockpuppets. He lists a few dozens that replied to him in a matter of a few minutes. Kinda gives you pause whenever someone still tries to make the idiotic point that these are all sockpuppets. Fortunately, it seems that this accusation has died off recently. And well it should.

[Flipside]

@Kara

I do understand exactly what you are saying here with regards to Gamergate's goals over the gaming media, I even agree with those.

The problem is, to my mind the act of 'Gamergate' didn't happen, there was no huge conspiracy no embarrassing revelations for the either the gaming industry or the game reporting industry.

The ironic part is that 'Gerstmanngate' did happen, he even openly admitted that he was sacked because his review of Kane and Lynch didn't sit well with the marketing department at Gamespot, who had done a deal with the Kane and Lynch producers for advertising.

It's that which sits so uncomfortably with me, there is a problem with media, but the whole word 'Gamergate' just serves as an unpleasant reminder of this whole atrocious, and pretty much unrelated mess.

As I've said before, I think that is why the Media is focussing so hard on the actions of these people, because the more people talk about Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian, who are nothing to do with the problems in game publications, the less they are talking about the real problems, which suits their marketing departments fine.

[Grizzly]

Why? Afraid to get a different perspective on things?

No.

I find that kind of self-censorship bizarre, to be frank. I watched many femfreq videos and have read and listened to most of the feminist most aggressive writings, always taking them seriously, trying to get the gist of what they are saying in good faith.

I actually enjoy listening to some less... ahhh... middle-ground voices, those who stick out of the gaussian curve of things. You never know, they might have some curve balls for you. And Sargon strikes me as a slightly paranoid guy (thus the conspiracies and so on), but he's really fun and well-meaning, good-spirited english chap.

You have got to explain to me what you mean with "self-censorship".

I listened to the debate between Sargon of Akkad and PixieJenni on Gamergate (Sargon now calls it a baitfest, for some reason)... However, I completely disagree with your assessment of Sargon of Akkad - attacking someone because she happens to be asexual does not seem all that well adjusted to me, hence me not liking to watch more videos.

As for that video, it's about a request that Sargon made on twitter if women on #gamergate could give him some selfies of themselves to prove they are not sockpuppets. He lists a few dozens that replied to him in a matter of a few minutes. Kinda gives you pause whenever someone still tries to make the idiotic point that these are all sockpuppets. Fortunately, it seems that this accusation has died off recently. And well it should.

Oh, I never considered the whole sockpuppet thing. As you wish, I shall watch the video in due course (currently can't since my internet connection is really wonky)

EDIT: Edits removed since somebody else already posted and I don't want to break stuff.

[AtomicClucker]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRaAJBKmi5I&t=105

Can you explain what that video is about? Sargon of Akkad is someone who claims that DiGRA is using their research to push a feminist agenda in gaming, using Anita Sarkeesian as a proxy (heck, he now has a video called "The War on Men Hits the Mainstream Media"). Not sure if I want to watch a video by someone like that.

Yeah, it's the Conspiracy about Feminists infiltrating the various organizations to spread Feminism! Yeah a lot of the crap that Sargon and a few others spout leaves my weary. Considering for a few hours of day at home, I have to listen to Alex Jones flailing his cheeks like a walrus. It's this sorta "woo" stuff that makes it so I can't take some of the spokespeople for the movement seriously.

My basic issue is that both sides are full of complete idiots who refuse to listen to anyone else's point of view while simultaneously claiming the high ground. The entire situation would be far more quickly resolved if we gagged both sides and had a reasonable discussion without them. But since that isn't going to happen, what needs to be done is for people to start slagging off both of them at the same time so that they realise they've BOTH lost and that no one is interested in what either of them have to say because they've completely lost sight of the issues in favour of arguing with each other.

Amen. Problem is both sides are engaged in professional self-victimhood and denial. Anti-GG professes a moral superiority that reminds me the Leftists Champions in Britain and Conservative Blowhards in Britain who pushed for the stupid Porn filter on all ISPs, and smaller branch movements that made possessing drawings a crime, seeks to remove all porn mags from stores and push the country back into a Victorian era of prudish paradise. (Note Sarcasm). GG is just honest about being dumb, flatulent, and willing to tell everyone evil Feminists are hiding under their beds.

But aside from sarcasm, it's the "For the Children" mindset that really boggles me about the Anti-GG faction. The point is their belief in "protecting" women supposedly makes them immune to any and all criticism, where as GG comes off as a chaotic spasm attack of various ideologies and conspiracy theories.

[AdmiralRalwood]

I keep seeing the phrase "both sides" tossed around; some people need to read up on false balance.

[Grizzly]

RE, that video.

I don't like it. It goes on to talk about how Zoe Quinn slept with her boss (even though she's self employed), and it goes on about how the main point MSNBC makes (that Zoe Quinn never got any positive reviews) doesn't matter because her actions against TFYC are indefensible. It ghen goes on to talk about how people dogpiled TFYC by her command. Hmm. Alright. there's another side to this story.
It also claims that the entire gaming press colluded with Zoe Quinn for her benefit - not going to swallow that one - and then it goes on to say how ZQ is not relevant.

Particularely noteworthy: "I have not seen any proof that Zoe Quinn needed to go into hiding".
That's just an awfull comment.

It states that Milo Younnapilous of Breitbart has displayed no lack of integrity (breitbart 0_o)
It states that Brienna Wu was *lying about the threats made against her*.

And at that point it goes on to compare stuff like "Suck my dick, choke on it" to Brianna wu's original retweets and goes on to claim how "You insulted them first!" and "You have to prove that gamergate threatened you!" and...

Yeah.

Okay. Not a nice vid. Not really a good idea to claim "LIES!" when someone is being threatened. Also not a good idea to connect 'Your actions in the video game industry!" (Posting a few tweets) to someone having to flee their house.

And then, when Brienna Wu talks about people being threatened and leaving their jobs, Sargon of Akkad goes on about how these people are manhaters and deserved it.

I do *not* consider this to be a well meaning chap. Stopped watching at around 13 minutes in.
I do encourage everyone else to watch it just to get an idea about what this is all about.

[Lorric]

I keep seeing the phrase "both sides" tossed around; some people need to read up on false balance.

Well how would you term it? People wouldn't be fighting if there weren't two sides. Unless you're talking about the fact it's not so clear cut as two distinct sides with distinct goals.

[Flipside]

In a way, the situation has become a rehash of my own pet political hate of claiming one party deserves a vote because the other one doesn't.

The whole situation seems to revolve around attacking the other side, rather than promoting the agenda of your own, and this is speaking for both sides, it's not really a question of false balance, it's a question of no balance whatsoever because everyone is so busy attacking the other view, rather than representing their own.

The more vocal section of Gamergate is far too obsessed with the actions of a few individuals, and many of the people attacking them are the same, using up so much time and energy disproving people who are clearly obsessed with one tiny incident that really didn't matter, and I'm certain that energy could be better spent talking to people who are prepared to listen in the first place.

There are no magic words, there's nothing either side can say that will suddenly produce a revelation that makes the other side suddenly 'see the light', and yet tens of hours and thousands of words are being wasted searching for this Holy Grail of arguments.

So it's all boiled down to a battle of public perception, one which is being won by the Feminists, and that is a good thing in one way, and a bad thing in another. It's a good thing because, to put it bluntly, most of the people who attacked them were morons who deserved to be humiliated, it's a bad thing because it has dragged a lot of people into the 'neckbeard' stereotype who were genuinely concerned about the Media and mistakenly signed onboard with Gamergate before it got this reputation.

As Mr. Vega has stated before, this is largely why independents get annoyed at the Gamergate trolls, because they took something that could have been a genuinely positive movement and created a stereotype of them that the Media happily perpetuates, and this makes it much harder to make actual progress.

Will admit though, I did find it confusing to find publications using stereotypes to describe people in order to defend a group that is fighting desperately against the fact that stereotypes are constantly used to describe them...

[Mr. Vega]

Kay, I'm going to make one last attempt to restate our position and see if I don't get the point across better this time. GamerGate is a movement founded on harassment and still attracts a significant number of individuals who are in it to harrass and attack prominent women in the industry. Among the members interviewed by the Escapist for "their side" was RogueStar, who is pretty much a professional troll and doxxer (his interview was pulled when his history was brought to the attention of the E's editors). Mixed in with these cretins are, to what extent we can't tell because we don't know the extent of the astroturfing, some people who are genuinely concerned about ethical issues in the press. Now GG hasn't exposed much of anything real, but undoubtedly some were sincerely attracted to that platform. Maybe they're a small minority amidst the hate mob, maybe they're a more substantial component, I'm not sure.

But we have to deal right now with the class of individuals who are using the tag with the specific intent of hurting people. The death threats to GG critics haven't been tied directly to GG yet (unconfirmed report one of several threats to Anita in Utah mentioned Gamergate- unconfirmed!), but given the open doxxing and spreading of nude photos of Quinn on 4chan and 8chan, and the horrific language being that's been used on those boards, it isn't much of a stretch to think the threats are coming from individuals who have found a home there, and regardless there's enough horrible **** being done in GG's name above ground to begin with. We need to call out these people publicly for what they are doing and deny them any pretense at legitimacy. The Huffington Post tried to ambush Quinn by asking her to do a live interview for them, only for her to discover on the GG subreddit she was actually going to be on a 'panel' with members of GG on 8chan, including some who had openly doxxed her. That **** it is completely unacceptable, and every effort must be made to make it very clear to the media that you don't entertain the actual crazies of GG. To do so is to legitimize harrassment.

The problem: the crazies and the supposedly reasonable people use the same umbrella. We can hold off on condemning GG and give legitimacy to people who are using it to actually try to push prominent women out of the industry, or we can condemn them and bring down the wrath of public opinion upon them, but in doing so possibly alienate the poorly informed but decently-adjusted people who'd walked into their tent. As our first priority was to protect people, we decided to go with the burn-it-to-the-ground strategy. And well, it worked. Took a while for the gaming press to grow a pair, but it worked. Yeah, we pissed some people off, but noone's going to give the likes of RogueStar a chance to use the Escapist to slander Quinn again. Not with the public giving the whole thing the stinkeye. We can extend the olive branch once the noncrazies have left their umbrella and Quinn and Wu can go home again.

Oh look, the branch is being extended already.

[Mr. Vega]

RE, that video.

I don't like it. It goes on to talk about how Zoe Quinn slept with her boss (even though she's self employed), and it goes on about how the main point MSNBC makes (that Zoe Quinn never got any positive reviews) doesn't matter because her actions against TFYC are indefensible. It ghen goes on to talk about how people dogpiled TFYC by her command. Hmm. Alright. there's another side to this story.
It also claims that the entire gaming press colluded with Zoe Quinn for her benefit - not going to swallow that one - and then it goes on to say how ZQ is not relevant.

Particularely noteworthy: "I have not seen any proof that Zoe Quinn needed to go into hiding".
That's just an awfull comment.

It states that Milo Younnapilous of Breitbart has displayed no lack of integrity (breitbart 0_o)
It states that Brienna Wu was *lying about the threats made against her*.

And at that point it goes on to compare stuff like "Suck my dick, choke on it" to Brianna wu's original retweets and goes on to claim how "You insulted them first!" and "You have to prove that gamergate threatened you!" and...

Yeah.

Okay. Not a nice vid. Not really a good idea to claim "LIES!" when someone is being threatened. Also not a good idea to connect 'Your actions in the video game industry!" (Posting a few tweets) to someone having to flee their house.

And then, when Brienna Wu talks about people being threatened and leaving their jobs, Sargon of Akkad goes on about how these people are manhaters and deserved it.

I do *not* consider this to be a well meaning chap. Stopped watching at around 13 minutes in.
I do encourage everyone else to watch it just to get an idea about what this is all about.

Those are the crazies we're trying to strip of any pretense of legitimacy. Because they're encouraging the hate mob. If we erred, if we got too aggressive, we did so to protect others from real threats. Are we going to compare that to a vague concern for 'ethics' or not offending people who were quite frankly insecure and looking to be offended?