|
Cingulate posted:They are not necessarily connected, but are they connected? Well they should be separate issues. They aren't because any criticism is met generally with the same response, that it's harrasment of women and destroying those who support women and minorities under the guise of causes like "ethics in game journalism". Since no matter what issue you take or care about, you get the same branding, that has largely pushed everything together and muddled it a fair bit. Cingulate posted:
Honestly I have no idea.
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 09:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 02:08 |
|
|
Shadoer posted:Well they should be separate issues. They aren't because any criticism is met generally with the same response, that it's harrasment of women and destroying those who support women and minorities under the guise of causes like "ethics in game journalism".
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 09:39
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Well that's what people have done. In fact, a very large portion of the gaming commentary on YouTube was created because of the disatisfaction with the mainstream reviewers. Then why won't you stop talking?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 09:50
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:And is it only your personal opinion that these two are not connected? Are there substantive voices within "gamergate" that connect those two? Or is there overwhelming consensus the two are disconnected, and just accidentally came together under the same banner? No I'd say it's really the heavy handed response that brought it together and the composition of the opposition. Basically it went as a chain of dominoes. Like if only people trying to doxx Zoe Quinn and actual misogynists were getting squashed, it would have only concerned people that follow the game industry and comment on it. When it was portrayed as a misogynist conspiracy to attack Zoe Quinn, as opposed to people trading sex for positive press and jobs in the industry, that brought in a portion of the right wing into it. When the mass deletions and copyright claiming bs hit on the grounds that any discussion of gamergate was harassment, all the anti-censorship advocates like myself got pulled in. Censorship, ethics, and political ideology while have some bit in common with each other are usually handled as separate. But since things kept getting framed as a "misogynist conspiracy" and acted on as such, it pulled it together. SedanChair posted:Then why won't you stop talking? Well a perception of "winning" doesn't mean I've won. As for why I'm still posting, I got a some scans I need to finish and I really have nothing better to do for the next 4 hours or so.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 09:52
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:No I'd say it's really the heavy handed response that brought it together and the composition of the opposition. Basically it went as a chain of dominoes. The video game industry is using feminists to deflect valid criticism by having the feminists group the valid criticism together with misogyny?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 09:56
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Okay so actually, ethics in video game journalism has nothing inherently to do with progressive values and political correctness in video game journalism, and the people concerned about one just hang out with the people concerned with the other because feminists consider them the same anyways? Pretty much, although I have to admit it's interesting how sociologically the communities have welded itself together because of it. Like take the whole thing of "Hatred". That game has nothing to do with feminism, the whole controversy over it was purely a debate over censorship and the effects of video game violence. Pretty much the entirety of Gamergate backed Hatred and took the anti-censorship position, regardless of their own views on censorship. Just as a whole swath of people that were primarily shilling for feminism took to wanting Hatred banned even though it had nothing to do with feminism at all. Heck even Anita Sarkessian has now started to argue that Feminism is also against violence in general. It's a wierd sociological effect that I don't understand completely myself, but Gamergate has definitely been showing. Cingulate posted:The video game industry is using feminists to deflect valid criticism by having the feminists group the valid criticism together with misogyny? I don't think that was the intent, but yeah the whole strategy of "anti" has been to group any and all criticism as misogyny.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:03
|
|
|
murphyslaw posted:So, in effect, it's all just stupid bullshit that means nothing?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:05
|
|
|
How many gamers main argument for not being misogynists consist of their lack of social contract with women?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:11
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Pretty much, although I have to admit it's interesting how sociologically the communities have welded itself together because of it. Shadoer posted:I don't think that was the intent, but yeah the whole strategy of "anti" has been to group any and all criticism as misogyny.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:12
|
|
|
sick trigger posted:what moron came up with the term 'social justice warrior' anyway? More recently some people use the term ironically to identify themselves, as if it were a good thing. Channers basically use it the way the used 'carefag' and right-wing reactionaries basically use it to describe anyone even slightly to the left of themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:15
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Again with Gone Home it was a suspicion. And yeah as you can suspect a bunch of things with statistics, Robert McNamara's career and the entire Freakanomic Series are filled with good examples of it. A reviewer doing their old buddy a favour might be unethical, likewise if Quinn gained some advantage by sleeping with a game journalist (something there's no evidence of, as far as I can tell?). But those two discrete events so obviously can't be replicated industry-wide in a calculated manner that they do the opposite to supporting a theory of widespread collusion, to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:21
|
|
|
Dapper Dan posted:Yes, tropes are tools. That is all they are. A trope is the shiny knew stainless steel hammer while a cliche is a rusty iron one. A tool in and of itself cannot be offensive. And you cannot avoid tropes. Everything good ever written contains many, many tropes. In and of itself, The 'Damsel in Distress' trope is neither misogynistic or not misogynistic. You need to analyze the context and content of the work. Analyzing the tool is not productive, because it is just that, a tool. If you want to criticize the trope, you are essentially saying you don't like to see women in danger at all. Or taking it a step further, you feel the trope is completely sexist no matter the content. Which means everything that contains this trope is sexist. There is no differentiation in the story structures, characterization and nuance is completely lost. It is a world of absolutes, no shades of grey. http://tropesversuswomen.tumblr.com/ is actually one of the best (and most overlooked) things to come out of the whole Tropes vs Women kickstarter, the sheer breadth of games is impressive.  Like I don't even know what "the full powers of the bushido" even means, but it's hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:26
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Okay so actually, ethics in video game journalism has nothing inherently to do with progressive values and political correctness in video game journalism It doesn't. GG is conspiracy thinking: "I don't like these people in my community. If we get rid of these people, things will go back to being good." The real problem GGers have is that video game journalism is liberal. But GGers are also liberals. They want the exact same thing as SJWs, to get rid of these people so things will go back to being good. Of course this would fix nothing. SJWs have my sympathy of being aware that there's something wrong, but as liberals, they're unable to address it. The Problem of course is that video game journalism is capitalistic. GGers and their sympathisers don't want to address actual problems, they just want to 'purify' the community so things are good again. e: like Anti-GG. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 10:47 on Jun 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:30
|
|
|
Patricia Hernandez didn't review Gone Home for Polygon and reviewers on polygon don't set the scores on their own reviews. But who cares, keep the narrative going.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:32
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:So do you think this is an inherent tendency of feminism, to do this thing? At least of contemporary internet feminism? I don't think it's a tendency of feminism to do it per say, but definitely part of internet feminism activism and generally progressive activism on the internet. Since internet debates are won in the realm of public opinion and things travel fast on the internet, it's to an activist and an opportunist's advantage to frame an opponent's view in the most heinous way possible. And as any internet debate will be between a diverse group of people, it's then easy to prove this heinous way is true by shining the spotlight on the worst individuals in that side of the debate. Cingulate posted:Now I'm a bit confused, because didn't you just give an example of feminists making a criticism? I assume you mean, only a certain form of criticism is automatically classified as misogynist. What kind? Nope even with Hatred, it was argued that Gamergate supported it because misogynists liked violence, and therefore more evidence that Gamergate was misogynist... and also seemed to begin the strange trend with Anita Sarkeesian and others trying to merge anti-violence with feminism. In fact, I half wonder if Fury Road hadn't been the success it would have, if that branch of feminism wouldn't have taken "anti-violence" as a part of itself.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:34
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:It doesn't. GG is conspiracy thinking: "I don't like these people in my community. If we get rid of these people, things will go back to being good." But what SJWs what to purify, needs purifying. They have real concerns, not pretend or reactionary ones.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:36
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:I don't think it's a tendency of feminism to do it per say, but definitely part of internet feminism activism and generally progressive activism on the internet. Shadoer posted:Nope even with Hatred, it was argued that Gamergate supported it because misogynists liked violence, and therefore more evidence that Gamergate was misogynist... and also seemed to begin the strange trend with Anita Sarkeesian and others trying to merge anti-violence with feminism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:37
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:But what SJWs what to purify, needs purifying. They have real concerns, not pretend or reactionary ones.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:38
|
|
|
Sandweed posted:Patricia Hernandez didn't review Gone Home for Polygon and reviewers on polygon don't set the scores on their own reviews. But who cares, keep the narrative going. Wow, that really seems like something that people who are into #gamergate should know. http://kotaku.com/gone-home-the-kotaku-review-1118218265 http://www.polygon.com/2013/8/15/4620172/gone-home-review-if-these-walls-could-talk
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:39
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:A reviewer doing their old buddy a favour might be unethical, likewise if Quinn gained some advantage by sleeping with a game journalist (something there's no evidence of, as far as I can tell?). But those two discrete events so obviously can't be replicated industry-wide in a calculated manner that they do the opposite to supporting a theory of widespread collusion, to me. Probably because I'm citing examples, as opposed to writing a post of "The Case for Gamergate" listing every single piece of evidence or strange event. However if you do want to read that work, there's an incredibly long and rambling dossier that was done up which you could read through. http://press.gamergate.me/dossier/ If you actually manage to finish it, let me know. I myself wasn't able to get halfway through Sandweed posted:Patricia Hernandez didn't review Gone Home for Polygon and reviewers on polygon don't set the scores on their own reviews. But who cares, keep the narrative going. Okay am I thinking of something else then? Exclamation Marx posted:Wow, that really seems like something that people who are into #gamergate should know. When you've been marathon posting for over 6 hours, memory gets foggy and you make some mistakes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:39
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:But what SJWs what to purify, needs purifying. They have real concerns, not pretend or reactionary ones. Cingulate posted:But to a socialist interpretation, you can't ever cure the system's symptoms, and liberalism is stabilizing the system. Correct. The socialist interpretation is correct, because the two liberal stances demand you to examine the situation from inside the system. The socialist interpetation looks at it outside the system.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:41
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:But to a socialist interpretation, you can't ever cure the system's symptoms, and liberalism is stabilizing the system. Sure if by socialism you mean communism or anarcho-syndicalism or something, which hardly anybody does.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:42
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:When you've been marathon posting for over 6 hours, memory gets foggy and you make some mistakes. Your mistakes started with sympathising with GG. It excludes an objective look at the system, because GG is about group identity and does not have viable political ideology.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:43
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:But isn't it then so that internet feminism and "gamergate" are actually natural enemies? Well yes, but it doesn't have to be. Of course that would be to live in a world where people were somewhat mature and wouldn't jump on the first bandwagon that drives by. Like there's nothing inherent in feminism that makes it enemies with gamergate, just the tactics activists use. Cingulate posted:... you're saying you consider it possible that the success of Mad Max Fury Road fundamentally influenced internet feminism, specifically so that internet feminism had to change its position on pacifism? Or the other way around? I think so, but that's more speculation and my pet theory than anything else.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:43
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Sure if by socialism you mean communism or anarcho-syndicalism or something, which hardly anybody does.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:44
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Well yes, but it doesn't have to be. Of course that would be to live in a world where people were somewhat mature and wouldn't jump on the first bandwagon that drives by. GG is actively harmful and fundamentally unable to fix anything, so it cannot claim moral supremacy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:46
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Your mistakes started with sympathising with GG. It excludes an objective look at the system, because GG is about group identity and does not have viable political ideology. Well it is giving a look at the system and members of it are giving criticism. Why does GG having a pseudo group identity and not having a political ideology make it's criticism invalid? BravestOfTheLamps posted:GG is actively harmful and fundamentally unable to fix anything, so it cannot claim moral supremacy. Well considering it's effectively tanked the readership of the corrupt game review sites and helped build a thriving YouTube commentary community for gaming, and has defeated the attempts at censorship of games like Hatred... it seems to have fixed things, or are in the process of doing so.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:46
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Bravest and I use the original meaning of socialism, not the silly one by the US right where socialism means "anything vaguely to the left of the center, such as left-liberalism and social democracy". How about as used by European politicians?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:47
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Well it is giving a look at the system and members of it are giving criticism. It's not looking at the system. GGers will never acknowledge that the problem is capitalism. Their activism amounts to praying for the market to "correct" itself. GG simply wants the favour of the system, not to address inequality of the system. The same applies to anti-GG. That GG is a group identity is bad because it's a consumer identity. It's purpose is to buffet up consumerism. And they do have a political ideology, it's simply self-defeating and impossible (if we get rid of these people, things will be good again). e: Shadoer posted:Well considering it's effectively tanked the readership of the corrupt game review sites and helped build a thriving YouTube commentary community for gaming, and has defeated the attempts at censorship of games like Hatred... it seems to have fixed things, or are in the process of doing so. "Helped build a thriving YouTube commmunity" Do you actually read what you're saying? It's like a parody of First World Problems. First World Achievements, if you will.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:51
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:It's not looking at the system. GGers will never acknowledge that the problem is capitalism. Their activism amounts to praying for the market to "correct" itself. GG simply wants the favour of the system, not to address inequality of the system. The same applies to anti-GG. Alright, Gamergate doesn't look at things in the lens of economics. In fact, the entire debate of Gamergate has had nothing to do with economics and I can't understand how censorship, feminism, doxxing, and game journalism is due to economic factors. BravestOfTheLamps posted:That GG is a group identity is bad because it's a consumer identity. It's purpose is to buffet up consumerism. And they do have a political ideology, it's simply self-defeating and impossible (if we get rid of these people, things will be good again). But how's that different then from the SJWs, they aren't exactly decrying capitalism either. In fact team SJW and the game review sites seem to be pretty big proponents on pure capitalism. BravestOfTheLamps posted:"Helped build a thriving YouTube commmunity" Yeah an alternate source of review and commentary. Like what do you want here? If the cause is ethics in journalism, why shouldn't the solution be to create and support other avenues of journalism? Like what are you expecting, gamergate to line everyone it disagrees with up against a wall and shoot them? Shadoer fucked around with this message at 10:59 on Jun 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:56
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:"Helped build a thriving YouTube commmunity" I can't get over how trivial it is. It's like a cargo cult applied terms of community and activism to issues that are of no consequence to people's quality of life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 10:57
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I can't get over how trivial it is. It's like a cargo cult applied terms of community and activism to issues that are of no consequence to people's quality of life. Really what are you guys expecting? Usually the sensible solutions to a problem aren't super dramatic and flashy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 11:00
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Alright, Gamergate doesn't look at things in the lens of economics. This is in fact a problem. Shadoer posted:In fact, the entire debate of Gamergate has had nothing to do with economics It has had everything to do with economics. Liberals simply do not want to admit it. The argument has always been about consumer products, and the media surrounding them. It is a socio-economic question. SJWs and GGers simply do not want to speak about the socio-economic dimension of it. Like how SJWs will never, ever, talk about class as the primary motive of human existence. quote:But how's that different then from the SJWs, they aren't exactly decrying capitalism either. In fact team SJW and the game review sites seem to be pretty big proponents on pure capitalism. Yes, all of my criticisms towards GG are applicable to SJWs. I have stated this repeatedly. It is good that you have read my posts. e: Shadoer posted:Really what are you guys expecting? What problem? What solution?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 11:01
|
|
|
Personally I find it astounding that anyone thought video games journalism was anything other than a cesspool of 9/10 scores with a press release from the publisher attached with a few first person pronouns added in and a byline scrawled in crayon at the bottom. The only arguable 'corruption' element is that many of the indie game events/awards that the press pay attention to are heavily influenced or organised by the same clique of indie devs who take the ideology of a game as an important concern so indie games that want press attention have an informal 'purity test'. But that's really more a byproduct of the industry being so small and people with an agenda being the kind of people that are motivated to try and organise things to push their agenda. Also of video games journalism being utterly unprofessional and incompetent. There are no good people involved in this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 11:03
|
|
|
MrNemo posted:Personally I find it astounding that anyone thought video games journalism was anything other than a cesspool of 9/10 scores with a press release from the publisher attached with a few first person pronouns added in and a byline scrawled in crayon at the bottom. The only arguable 'corruption' element is that many of the indie game events/awards that the press pay attention to are heavily influenced or organised by the same clique of indie devs who take the ideology of a game as an important concern so indie games that want press attention have an informal 'purity test'. The current development is for "gamers" to organise advertisement. Like Shadoer's colossally moronic post admits: "the thriving YouTube community" is a marketing machine. They produce endless amounts of Let's Plays and sundry advertisement material.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 11:05
|
|
|
The socialist critique is one I kind of agree with but it's ultimately not going to influence this discussion in any way shape or form as it seeks to bring down and replace the current system in a far broader social sense than anyone involved in this is probably even willing to think of. The GGers do not want this as they like the current system for games and replacing the capitalist publishing system with some currently theoretical socialist alternative is more work than any of them would be willing to put in. They want an honest an accurate source of information on which to base their purchases of entertainment. The failing of the original source of information, you're correct, is being incorrectly placed on some sort of 'corruption' in games journalism rather than the industry's total co-option of the supposed outside analysis. Of course I don't think a socialist non-capitalist replacement is the only possible alternative. Many of these people want a cultural shift in journalism back to a non-existent past ideal of the profession where journalists had a sense of professional pride that ensured a level of honesty in their commentary. This is a thing in actual journalism, even if not a universal one and something that I think has been pushed back more and more by financial pressures but it is possible to have non-capital pressures and motivations within a capitalist system which prevents it devolving into some form of anarcho-capitalist Sudan. These people want that, not to overthrow the system and bring about the revolution. They just want to know if this thing that they're going to drop some loose change on is poo poo or will keep them entertained for a few hours. Also some of them just want to call all women sluts and make death threats because they don't want to drop loose change on lovely games.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 11:25
|
|
|
MrNemo posted:The socialist critique is one I kind of agree with but it's ultimately not going to influence this discussion in any way shape or form as it seeks to bring down and replace the current system in a far broader social sense than anyone involved in this is probably even willing to think of. That is the burden of being right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 11:28
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Probably because I'm citing examples, as opposed to writing a post of "The Case for Gamergate" listing every single piece of evidence or strange event. Shadoer posted:Well considering it's effectively tanked the readership of the corrupt game review sites and helped build a thriving YouTube commentary community for gaming, and has defeated the attempts at censorship of games like Hatred... it seems to have fixed things, or are in the process of doing so. 
Assepoester fucked around with this message at 11:41 on Jun 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 11:38
|
|
|
Is someone who went full-on twitter crusader really in a position to start talking about kool aid, CBA. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 11:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 02:08 |
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:It has had everything to do with economics. Liberals simply do not want to admit it. Alright I've looked a bit back into your posts, but I cannot find the part how issues like censorship, have to do with economics. Now I believe there's a valid debate between a capitalist and socialist system, but even a socialist system would also have it's own debate about censorship. Like arguably the collapse of the Soviet economy was, in part, brought down by the censorship policies pushed by the state which prevented the various committees from having accurate data to plot the nation's economy. BravestOfTheLamps posted:Yes, all of my criticisms towards GG are applicable to SJWs. I have stated this repeatedly. It is good that you have read my posts. Well I've been posting straight for some time, sorry I missed those posts. BravestOfTheLamps posted:e: Well the problem that gamergate defined was a corrupt gaming journalist sector, with the solution of supporting an alternative. BravestOfTheLamps posted:The current development is for "gamers" to organise advertisement. Like Shadoer's colossally moronic post admits: "the thriving YouTube community" is a marketing machine. They produce endless amounts of Let's Plays and sundry advertisement material. Cardboard Box A posted:This appears to be a heady mixture of naive idealism (that a "thriving youtube commentary commuity" can possibly escape the same corrupting influences that ensnared the gaming blogsites) and straight up drinking the gamergate.me koolaid. Yeah you're right, that will probably become corrupted as well or possibly is already corrupted. Just as even if a bunch of game review sites like Kotaku cleaned up their act, it's very likely the same entropic forces which made it corrupt in the first place would succeed again. See when dealing with corruption, there's no "final victory". It's cleaning up what you can or build something new, then probably repeat the process again a few decades down the road.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 11:44
|
|