|
Lugaloco posted:Sometimes poo poo hits the fan in multiple ways and it amplifies everything as a result. I remember feeling similar back in 2011 when a lot of crap went down and wondering what the gently caress was happening to the world. That year you had the Arab Spring, the Japan earthquake and Fukushima, The Occupy movement, Gaddafi killed, Bin Laden killed and there were also some serious riots over here in the UK just to name a few. It certainly doesn't help that on one hand, we are probably going through more of the more important growing pains of the industry, but on the other hand it seems to insignificant compared to literally everything else happening that it seems so petty and backwards that we are where we are at. Also, dunno if anyone else has been keeping track, but I'm not sure if this is simply the next phase of this whole brouhaha or we've almost reached the ultimate ending but a few games critics and writers have started to call for the death of 'gamer' as a label or identity. This one is an odd one because to me, 'gamer' has a bunch of negative baggage associated with it (even if you remove all of this poo poo that's been going on). It's probably even more pronounced recently, but I've always found it odd people have made it their sole identity. I moved away from that years ago, because it is extremely odd to attach so much of your self-worth to what people perceive as a culture but one based moreso on consumption and commercialism than anything else a 'culture' should really provide. I think even Sean Vanaman pointed it out this week. Off the top of my head I can't seem to name any type of culture founded so much on consumption identity that the actual act of consumption is how this culture identities itself. Or maybe there is and I'm blanking on it right now, but it's likely taken the form of marginalized peoples but has probably since transcended it, which 'gamers' have yet to do. I still think the label 'gamer' has some use in identifying enthusiast/devoted hobbyists with no negative connotation. That would be the best of both worlds. It would be like calling someone a cinephile or a bookworm, in that the same way that a person called that might spend a disproportionate time consuming that form of media but is (hopefully) in no way slavishly devoted to it and identifies singularly with it.
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 09:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 13:08 |
|
|
Not to derail too far but has anyone ever checked out Up Up Down Down? It's put together by an old classmate of mine and his business partner and is another 'cast that has a strong developer angle, with a focused topic or theme each week. Allen (said classmate) is a former Apple employee and app developer and co-host Nigel is a veteran of Radical Entertainment (From the DOS days up to before Prototype 2 if I remember right), and each week they also bring in guests including David Baumgart of goon favorites Gaslamp Games. It's a fun show and gets into a bit more technical detail than most of what I've listened to. http://www.upup.fm/
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 10:15
|
|
|
Jippa posted:I agree with danielle that the internet has got really depressing in the last few months. Is it just that we are noticing this stuff more or has it actually got worse? quote:The fact that that woman actually had to leave her house over a few innocuous videos on gaming is mind numbing. Also that image is ridiculous. Has the definition of an "sjw" now increased to include anyone with half a brain?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 10:36
|
|
|
"Gamer" has been co-opted by people who only want homogenous, escapist power fantasies, to the exclusion of any diversity of experience or voice. I said it on Twitter last week, but I'll say it here too: If you think they're coming to take your games away, someone should take your games away. I can't say if this is the worst it's ever been, but there have been several time in the past couple of years where I've felt this way. Even if this week isn't the most severe, the increasing frequency of these global despair storms is worth noting. Realizing it now, I think my rant at the end of this week's Bonfireside Chat was really about the current state of things, except channeled through a stupid volcano elevator.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 12:56
|
|
|
Those two videos posted a few pages ago are incredible, particularly the second one about the "Sarkeesian Effect" documentary because one of the guys featured in it looks like Neil Strauss mixed with Kane from C&C. If you ever wanted to summarise the bizarre backlash to this with a single image, I'd just post his picture.
Gorn Myson fucked around with this message at 14:41 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
doctorfrog posted:I once felt annoyed that Anita Sarkeesian didn't allow comments on her videos, because I thought that it would be useful and, I dunno, somehow brave to invite debate, but I think these guys just want to point a firehose of endless debate points at anything challenging until it goes away. There's just no communication coming through anyway. I think she even had them on when she released her first video? But that was quickly changed because, well, even for Youtube comments it was an alltime low.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
Gorn Myson posted:Those two videos posted a few pages ago are incredible, particularly the second one about the "Sarkeesian Effect" documentary because one of the guys featured in it looks like Neil Strauss mixed with Kane from C&C. If you ever wanted to summarise the bizarre backlash to this with a single image, I'd just post his picture.  That is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 16:50
|
|
|
Gorn Myson posted:Those two videos posted a few pages ago are incredible, particularly the second one about the "Sarkeesian Effect" documentary because one of the guys featured in it looks like Neil Strauss mixed with Kane from C&C. If you ever wanted to summarise the bizarre backlash to this with a single image, I'd just post his picture. I bet he buttoned all his buttons on that suit. Social awkwardness peasant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
I don't know what is more cringeworthy, the guy Idle Thumbs described was doing his whole diatribe intercut with Bane from TDKR or someone dressing up to pretend they are Kane from the C&C series.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
I like that Chris (I assume, he was talking the most) pointed out how weirdly fascist it all is, which is funny; they sound and frame their rhetoric like fascists because they literally are fascists for whom the ideal they swear allegiance to and are willing to kill for is a 15 year old games industry that never existed instead of a 50-1000 year old nation-state that never existed The sexism and homophobia based on "logic" and "nature" rather than spirituality, using violence and intimidation to bully their critics into submission while simultaneously claiming victimhood, belief in a conspiracy of minorities to undermine their otherwise perfect system, the desire to silence artists and dismiss them as degenerate or illegitimate if their work falls outside the range of what they consider acceptable to their idealized vision... Baku fucked around with this message at 17:19 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
I'm listening to the latest Idle Thumbs right now and reading through the last fourty posts in this thread and there is way too much time devoted to this stupid topic. "I want it to be ok to have a different opinion about someone else." But if you're not behind Anita / Zoe 100% your opinion is not worth listening to and we will devote an hour circling the issue. (I'm not saying anything about what I think of this, just that you can't say the first thing and then take a very one-sided position.) e: Everything you pointed out about the people making GBS threads on them or seriously harrassing them is true, but by only addressing the crazies you imply that there are only crazies and that other criticism is not legitimate. For the record everything I've seen from both groups is that there are some real wackos out there. And twitter is a terrible way for humans to communicate. Everything is hyperbolic and about drawing attention. Jordan7hm fucked around with this message at 17:20 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
What is the legitimate criticism of Zoe Quinn, other than "Depression Quest is a bad game which harmfully depicts the illness of depression"? The only other things I can come up with are "she's overweight" and "she cheated on her boyfriend", neither of which is really all that meaningful or relevant to anything unless you're crazy, and all the "she hosed people for positive coverage" stuff is made up On what level does any of it justify people showing up at her house to stalk and harass her?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:"I want it to be ok to have a different opinion about someone else." But if you're not behind Anita / Zoe 100% your opinion is not worth listening to and we will devote an hour circling the issue. But that said, sometimes the other side of an argument is just wrong. Not everything is a 50-50 split. poo poo, in this case, as far as I've seen at least, there is no argument, just vague accusations based on propositions that don't so much beg the question as stand in complete bewilderment at the idea that a question even exists. If there has actually been a legitimate argument put forward on the "not worth listening to" side, I would honestly like to hear it, because you can't learn from fuckups if you don't know you hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
Zombies' Downfall posted:What is the legitimate criticism of Zoe Quinn, other than "Depression Quest is a bad game which harmfully depicts the illness of depression"? It doesn't, and I never said it did. And address the crazies if you want, but there's nothing to say other than "these people are loving nuts what the hell is wrong with them, they should stop being assholes". I don't know near enough about Quinn to say if there is any legit criticism someone other than her ex can make (and he should have kept that poo poo to himself, though I can understand being bitter and lashing out in stupid ways). It's pretty much impossible to trust anything that the crazies say, and even the people who don't inititally seem crazy then turn out to be crazy (that kickstarter guy who punched a fridge). There is legit criticism to be made about Anita's video series though. There is also legit criticism to be made about how she sources material for her content. None of it justifies the response she gets, but that doesn't invalidate it. There's probably also the opportunity for a much better discussion of the ethics of games criticism than "critics aren't journalists and if we didn't have journalists building relationships we'd have a two term Nixon presidency". It kind of misses the point. I don't think anything they said was all that wrong, it was just retreads of the same argument you can read on twitter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:e: Everything you pointed out about the people making GBS threads on them or seriously harrassing them is true, but by only addressing the crazies you imply that there are only crazies and that other criticism is not legitimate. Did you really just say "not all crazies" in complete seriousness?! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
EC posted:Did you really just say "not all crazies" in complete seriousness?! No? e: please clarify what you mean, because that phrase is not in my post.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:There is legit criticism to be made about Anita's video series though. There is also legit criticism to be made about how she sources material for her content. None of it justifies the response she gets, but that doesn't invalidate it. There's probably also the opportunity for a much better discussion of the ethics of games criticism than "critics aren't journalists and if we didn't have journalists building relationships we'd have a two term Nixon presidency". It kind of misses the point. Also if you can't see why a bunch of guys who formed a small independent studio might be feeling a bit defensive when these people are out there saying independent game development, as well as games journalism, is corrupt and controlled by a cabal of Evil Soziale Gerechtigkeit Krieger, then I don't really know what to say.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
Nobody's saying Sarkeesian's unassailable just because most of the people assailing her are mouthbreathing misogynists. Nobody needs to append "but there's some people with valid points too" to their condemnation of harrassment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
The thing I don't get about the latest Idle Thumbs is Chris's argument suddenly taking the turn that people somehow don't want journalism that uses anonymous sources. What? They don't want stenography, and they don't want the use of anonymous sources to protect the powerful. That's as far as that goes...
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:There's probably also the opportunity for a much better discussion of the ethics of games criticism than "critics aren't journalists and if we didn't have journalists building relationships we'd have a two term Nixon presidency". It kind of misses the point. I agree that it's silly to just throw up hands and be like "I guess we have to accept Jeff Gerstmann being fired because he reviewed Kane and Lynch honestly", but the Quinn thing bringing this up is crazy and ridiculous because she didn't actually get notable coverage or positive reviews from anyone in the mainstream business much less violate journalistic ethics to get them, and the reasons for it are obvious to anybody who isn't terrified of the minority boogeymen on Tumblr. I don't think the Thumbs were trying to say that games journalism/criticism is a fine and healthy business with no weirdness or untoward behavior or problems, but that for perspective: 1) It isn't as hopelessly compromised or different from other types of journalism as its critics think. 2) Journalistic ethics among game reviewers are massively less important than among people who cover political corruption or police brutality or basically any other issue under the sun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
HMS Boromir posted:Nobody's saying Sarkeesian's unassailable because most of the people assailing her are mouthbreathing misogynists. Nobody needs to append "but there's some people with valid points too" to their condemnation of harrassment. I just don't think it's an interesting take to spend 40 minutes talking about people who are shitheads. I had an idea to expect based on the thread, but I thought it would be better than what it was.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
doctorfrog posted:I was going to post something to the effect that, sometimes it seems like there's a legitimate query as to whether there's sort of a hipster indie game contingent that makes, critiques, and praises each others' games in a bit of an incestuous collective, and it seems sometimes that they're all pals and know each other, and maybe heap praise on each other on just a bit more than they deserve, and maybe that has some effects that make me a little concerned and annoyed... The video game industry is surprisingly small. Given that there's only a handful of trade shows it makes sense that everyone on a creator and journalist level will know everyone else. And the community for indie designers is understandably tight knit considering they largely use the same tools and resources. People succeed and fail based on networking. When its very possible the game you spent 2 years of your life designing won't make it past Steam's nebulous certification process, it's nice to have someone name dropping you for free advertisement or sending an email somewhere to get a favor done. And Youtube comments are absolutely poison, I don't know why they even exist. Watch any video with black people involved then scroll down to read commentary straight from Stormfront.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
I feel like your argument would have more weight if you were actually putting forward any of the discussion you claim exists. Not trying to shoot you down but simply saying that there is a legitimate discussion to be had without ever saying what the content of that discussion is a pretty weak stance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:I'm listening to the latest Idle Thumbs right now and reading through the last fourty posts in this thread and there is way too much time devoted to this stupid topic. I don't know if you realize this, but your framing is both hostile and dismissive. I find it ridiculous that there's a need for this discussion; however, that doesn't mean that it's not a discussion worth having. The whole thing is predicated around the fact that threats of physical violence has been to the go to response for people feeling threatened by a 30 minute youtube video or women having the audacity to work within the games industry. This isn't an episode of South Park; the truth isn't in the middle, both sides aren't equally as bad.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
Your way works too posted:I feel like your argument would have more weight if you were actually putting forward any of the discussion you claim exists. Not trying to shoot you down but simply saying that there is a legitimate discussion to be had without ever saying what the content of that discussion is a pretty weak stance. Yeah, I considered that. It's not really the place for it though. In terms of the criticism piece I think there was a real miss by the Idle Thumbs guys there. They were right in saying that criticism and journalism are different, but they went on to say how journalists need to build relationships to get stories. This is of course true... but criticism and journalism are different. Restaurant critics love food, think about it all the time, make it their living. They don't write reviews of restaurants owned by their friends, and they don't get the restaurant to pay for their meal. There's a place for the other type of review, where you don't pay for the game and develop a relationship with the creator, but when it's the only type of review on offer, and possible bias is rarely made explicit, that really cheapens the content. I think a lot of the reason the Zoe Quinn stuff struck people who aren't just total women-hating nutjobs is that nobody trusts the state of games criticism. It's not an end-point, because as stated nobody even officially reviewed her game (I think people posted positively about it? but that's basically just blogging, so whatever), but it could be a jumping off point for a more interesting discussion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:I think a lot of the reason the Zoe Quinn stuff struck people who aren't just total women-hating nutjobs is that there is literally no trust the state of games criticism. When I don't trust someone, I avoid them. I don't turn half my life into a crusade to expose or save them. The elephant in the room is that way too many people give way too much of a poo poo about a specific kind of videogames that don't give a poo poo about them and never have. It's why they thrash against the posts when Anita gets a detail about Metroid wrong, why they create conspiracy theory corkboards with photos of game developers linked to Adam Sessler by string, why they take personal umbrage when notable foot-in-mouth disease victim Phil Fish says something stupid about glorious Nippon. Too much of their identity and self-worth is mixed up in mass-produced commercial entertainment products that they've spent more time with than they have any real living person, and it makes them act loving crazy. It is uncool to say this, though, because of course there's no difference in passion and manic obsession and it hits uncomfortably close to home for some of the people on the side that doesn't want to murder a woman too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:Yeah, I considered that. It's not really the place for it though. Setting aside agreeing with your points or not, what do any of them actually have to do with Zoe Quinn at all? Your opinions on criticism and journalism have no bearing since the Kotaku writer in question never put together a piece which addressed depression quest at all. He was following the standards that you put forward as the ones that games critics should be held to in your own post. This may come off as a little condescending but I thin you have fallen for the rhetoric that is being put out by those who are attacking Quinn in order to reframe themselves as the good guys. But it's never actually been about games journalism or even criticism. It's just about misogyny and/or those who feel like games like Quinn makes are somehow undermining their hobby. Sam Sanskrit fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
Phone posted:I don't know if you realize this, but your framing is both hostile and dismissive. This a thousand times. I get the frustration that people are feeling about the situation. People are frustrated because they feel like they can't engage the argument without being dismissed as misogynistic. This is not the time for that. Someone making a critique you don't care for isn't as important as these "crazies" disclosing a woman's home address and phone number, making vulgar threats on her life, constantly harassing on social media. That's the reason it's being talked about, because it's incredibly important, more important than someone using let's play footage in a video. It's also dangerous to simply call them "crazies" and be done with it. The numbers are not insignificant. Maybe only one guy made death threats but hundreds of guys are being vanilla abusive all the time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 18:39
|
|
|
Your way works too posted:This may come off as a little condescending but I thin you have fallen for the rhetoric that is being put out by those who are attacking Quinn in order to reframe themselves as the good guys. But it's never actually been about games journalism or even criticism. It's just about misogyny and/or those who feel like games like Quinn makes are somehow undermining their hobby. I don't disagree that the people attacking Quinn in particular basically have no point. Basically the whole thing is he-said she-said stuff about her sex life, driven by a bitter ex. Rereading my first post about this I did come off more hostile than I meant to. e: ^ so what is the answer to that? You're not going to get the crazy people off of twitter. The medium is perfect for that kind of crap. If you frame the discussion in such a way that you only give time to the extreme viewpoint you give them the attention they desire and just encourage them further. Jordan7hm fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:I just don't think it's an interesting take to spend 40 minutes talking about people who are shitheads. Also, not to be an rear end in a top hat, but while it's fine you don't think it was worth it, this thing has been blowing up the games part of the Internet for a couple of weeks now, as well as breaking into actual mainstream media, so clearly a lot of people would disagree. sub supau fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:They were right in saying that criticism and journalism are different, but they went on to say how journalists need to build relationships to get stories. This is of course true... but criticism and journalism are different. Restaurant critics love food, think about it all the time, make it their living. They don't write reviews of restaurants owned by their friends, and they don't get the restaurant to pay for their meal. First, do you want criticism or do you want product reviews? Because restaurant reviewers don't do criticism. Second, if we cut through the bullshit metaphor, how many incidents do you actually know of where a games outlet was bought off? IIRC even in the Gerstmann case the review stood. e: Some more: Jordan7hm posted:If you frame the discussion in such a way that you only give time to the extreme viewpoint you give them the attention they desire and just encourage them further. sub supau fucked around with this message at 18:55 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:e: ^ so what is the answer to that? You're not going to get the crazy people off of twitter. The medium is perfect for that kind of crap. If you frame the discussion in such a way that you only give time to the extreme viewpoint you give them the attention they desire and just encourage them further. Well, on a personal level, talking about it helps me feel less lovely about the situation. Having like minded peers with their hearts in the right place makes me feel like the hobby has a less garbage community than it actually does. But on an action level- 1) Talking about it clues people in. I made a statement about this on the duckfeed facebook pages and I was surprised by how many people had no idea what was going on. 2) I think that some of these crazies are emboldened by the idea that they're speaking for most
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
Zombies' Downfall posted:I like that Chris (I assume, he was talking the most) pointed out how weirdly fascist it all is, which is funny; they sound and frame their rhetoric like fascists because they literally are fascists for whom the ideal they swear allegiance to and are willing to kill for is a 15 year old games industry that never existed instead of a 50-1000 year old nation-state that never existed Lmao congrats on being just as petty and dumb as the horrible retards you're wringing your hands over.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
When it comes to a minority group arguing about their perception of their environment, it doesn't need to become a discussion. Some people need platforms to vent or criticize things that aren't noticed by the majority. It gets really destructive when that majority, who doesn't experience these things from the unique perspective that only the minority experiences, begins to criticize them even if the criticism is valid from their point of view. It sounds ridiculous and dumb to say "don't criticize certain people" but if you don't share that perspective then on what grounds can you make that argument? It's like Jon Jafari posted a picture of loving Conan as an example of men being objectified without realizing that there are faceless nude women on their knees in the background and Frank Howard was pretty clear that Conan was his idealized male. There's certainly an argument to be had about the hyper-masculine beefcake heroes that generally dominate video games but not in the same loving breath as the hyper-sexualization of women in the same space. If you don't like Sarkeesian or Quinn, you don't like what they stand for or the Tumblr crowd or whatever the best option is to loving ignore them. I certainly wouldn't waste my time arguing on a Neo-Nazi forum, why the gently caress would any rational person who values their time argue on someone's Youtube video about an issue that has a decades long history?
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Woffle posted:Well, on a personal level, talking about it helps me feel less lovely about the situation. Having like minded peers with their hearts in the right place makes me feel like the hobby has a less garbage community than it actually does. But on an action level- The people who think they're speaking for gamers probably are, at least as far as who they think are gamers. You're not shattering their ideas, you're encouraging them even further. When you engage with morons you don't improve the quality of the conversation. (haha joke about arguing with me goes here)
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
Butt Frosted Cake posted:Lmao congrats on being just as petty and dumb as the horrible retards you're wringing your hands over. Actually, i'm right... Jordan7hm posted:When you engage with morons you don't improve the quality of the conversation. That's the trick behind what they do. If you engage them they barrage you with retarded poo poo and if you don't their perspective is unchallenged. Better to engage and lol when something you say gets past their Irony Shields and they get worked up. Baku fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Aug 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
Calling out lovely behavior is a good thing. We shouldn't let these weird jerks be the only ones talking.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:The people who think they're speaking for gamers probably are, at least as far as who they think are gamers. You're not shattering their ideas, you're encouraging them even further. When you engage with morons you don't improve the quality of the conversation. (haha joke about arguing with me goes here) Engaging the people in question in a constructive manner doesn't necessarily have the goal of changing that person's mind about the situation. It's more for the people watching/reading/listening on the sidelines who have not decided to engage in a public manner. A perfect analogue for this is calling out a racist on Facebook for saying vile stuff. You might not be able to change that particular person's mind on being a racist; however, you may be able to influence people passively reading the engagement. I do agree that directly responding to people does toss fuel on the fire and there is a nonzero chance that they'll double down or dig their heels in even further, but letting things like this go unchecked passively normalizes abhorrent behavior. It's cheesy as hell, but I used to play TF2 regularly for a while, and when the name tags/description rags came out, one of the guys on the LCs named his Pyro weapons. The name was "Don't use gay as a pejorative!" and the description was something like "Casual or ironic homophobia normalizes violent homophobia". It's goofy and it's from a few years ago, but it actually made me think about why it's not exactly good behavior to describe stuff as "gay" or call disagreeable people "fags". Personally I find it brilliant with the killcam functionality and seeing "You've been killed by $Person, he's carrying the DON'T USE GAY AS A PEJORATIVE!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:The people who think they're speaking for gamers probably are, at least as far as who they think are gamers. You're not shattering their ideas, you're encouraging them even further. When you engage with morons you don't improve the quality of the conversation. (haha joke about arguing with me goes here)
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 13:08 |
|
|
Here's what it sounds like to someone on the sidelines of it all. Nerds are upset at other nerds over gay baby games drama, time to completely trash whatever point I had by calling any kind of rhetoric literally fascist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2014 19:53
|
|