Plom Bar posted:

I am loving holding you to task here. What the gently caress is a "mccarthyism blacklist" and what does it have to do with blocking annoying people on Twitter? What is a credible source for Randi Harper operating a pedophilia board? Are you aware that Ian Miles Cheong and Arthur Chu are different people, and that while you contend that they're both nazis, only one of them "flipped sides", and it wasn't the one that you named?

And what the gently caress does any of this have to do with ethics in gaming journalism?

Wanderer posted:

One of the issues GamerGate's caused has actually been a rapid slowdown in the response of academia to video games. There was an article a few months ago that a couple of universities had actually funded archival projects for early software, but the argument over GamerGate had caused enough negative press that their funding got revoked. I got the feeling that the people with the purse strings on that were just looking for a reason to cut them off, and it could as easily have been a suggestively-shaped cloud or an unfortunate run-in with Uwe Boll, but it's still a setback for a potential scholarly approach. It could only be healthy for tomorrow's designers if they could go to a college campus and play old '80s games for free all day, for example.

NutritiousSnack posted:

Likewise devs have told how much they laugh at "SJWs" and how it's become more and more mainstream to mock someone using those terms.

Fluo posted:

Arthur Chu has anti-Semitic and pro rape views.

Wanderer posted:

The reason Gamergate is winning is because we have the prettier gay men @Nero



That's some Karl Rove levels of bubble inhabiting there, Cletus.

ImpAtom posted:

Could you provide examples of this? Because I've seen developers praise Anita Sarkeesan or say that they've rethought matters but I don't think I've seen developers mocking SJWs who were not already hard on the GG train.

NutritiousSnack posted:

Not all feminists agree with anything or everything.

Powercrazy posted:

Well you've already answered your own quesiton. If someone like brad wardell laughs at "sjws" then he is "hard on the GG train" so he doesn't count. Therefore there are zero people that could potentially mock sjws but not be on the GG train, as you've defined it. Congrats.

ImpAtom posted:

You're pretty dumb.

The 'gaming press' isn't dying. At best the current traditional standard of gaming press is changing to something else. Youtube reviewers and more independent sources are taking over from larger catch-all sites like IGN. The thing that you don't seem to get is that isn't going to change anything. You're going to get exactly the same thing you have right now and have had for years. Your Angry Joes and Pewdiepies and whathaveyou are already filling exactly the same niches and doing exactly the same things as 'traditional' games journalists.

ImpAtom posted:

Could you provide examples of this? Because I've seen developers praise Anita Sarkeesan or say that they've rethought matters but I don't think I've seen developers mocking SJWs who were not already hard on the GG train.

Fluo posted:

Well here is a little history lesson, during the 1950s there was a guy called McCarthy, Joseph McCarthy infact. Who served as a Republican US Senator from late 40s untill his death in the late 50s. He began a visible public peroid of cold war tensions with his paranoia of Communist subversion. He thought many hollywood actors were communists and hated homosexuals which he saw as communism. The Red Scare (look it up) was the main focus of his historical period of time. McCathyism is the practice of making accusations of subverison or treason without proper regard for evidence. The blacklist refers to the Hollywood blacklist he himself did hearings on by HUAC (house un-american activities committe) with help from the FBI under J. Edgar Hoover (this dude is important in history too don't you know *cough* Prohibition *cough*). They openly dismissed free speech laws because heh free speech more like peel peach (that's one for you twitter fellas). Well anyway mostly screenwriters and directors (one reason by the way the movie Planet of the Apes never won an Oscar because it's based off the Socialist science fiction novel by Pierre Boulle), with some actors like Charles Chaplin being banned from entering the US again.

You see the blocklist that the ex meth-head, IRS enemy, paedophile runs, has blocked such people as KFC, the Pope and Obama for being problematic. Now within this blocklist you have indie developers or writers like Burch who agrees with Harpers views of anyone on the list not being allowed to be employed in the games industry. So you have this group of people pro-actively stopping people from getting a job. Which is illegal in Europe. It is why when the construction industry in the 80s and 90s had a blacklist of anyone in construction who was thought to be involved with trade unions was default binned if ever looking for employment again in the construction industry. Have a fresh and tasty article http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/mar/27/mps-slam-construction-firms-over-compensation-for-blacklisted-workers

With regards to Randi Harper, well you know her best friend Sarah butts who runs the Ffshrine forum which is a mostly child porn downloads with actual posts admitting she is a paedophile. Well Randi Harper also posts and downloads there. Zeitgeust Harper is a good name rather than spoiling James Randi's name.

Yes I am fully aware Ian Miles Cheong and Arthur Chu are two different people. Ian Miles Cheong use to use IRC alot and called himself a banana and has far right views. Arthur Chu has anti-Semitic and pro rape views. Both are nazis, if you want to split hairs they are both fascist. You're clearly mistaken, both flipped sides, Cheong got poo poo and stayed, Chu got poo poo and switched back after an interview with a honeybadger.


Ethnics in gaming journalism?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOAJu4CrBUU

BarbarianElephant posted:

Some indie devs use it as a sort of self-mocking term - "I'm making an experimental text game about a transman coming of age in 1920s San Francisco. I am SUCH a SJW!"

NutritiousSnack posted:

Also we now have people unironically defending Chu and stupid rear end Salon articles that make Milo look reasonable.

Hulk Krogan posted:

Thirty seconds of research reveals that this stunningly dishonest and leaves sane people who are capable of critical thought pretty disinclined to believe anything else you're saying.

quote:

"I rigorously manage my own thinking and purge myself of dangerous "unthinkable" thoughts --"mindkill" myself -- on a regular basis[...] You have to recognize that thereis no neutral culture, neutrality is impossible, that culture is a cutthroat[...] You need to understand that the only way to be "rational" in this world is to be irrational, that the only way to be "fair" is to pick the right side and fight for it.

Nonsense posted:

That Cheong guy constantly shat on misogynists over twitter and started figvhts, and was pretty Pro Feminist, I don't see how he's a still a person with far right views. He was maybe, that's always a thing, but now?

circ dick soleil posted:

Blocking KFC on Twitter is the same as Charles Chaplin being banned from entering the United States.

Fluo posted:

Now within this blocklist you have indie developers or writers like Burch who agrees with Harpers views of anyone on the list not being allowed to be employed in the games industry. So you have this group of people pro-actively stopping people from getting a job

Powercrazy posted:

Well you've already answered your own quesiton. If someone like brad wardell laughs at "sjws" then he is "hard on the GG train" so he doesn't count. Therefore there are zero people that could potentially mock sjws but not be on the GG train, as you've defined it. Congrats.

NutritiousSnack posted:

This is exactly what I wrote outside of doing what traditional games journalists were "doing" because they aren't.

NutritiousSnack posted:

Who the gently caress was Ubisoft spiting when closed Kotaku out of their backstage poo poo? Who were they not spiting when Youtubers and Twitch people get exclusive time, demos, and interviews? This whole diatribes is against a straw man

Fluo posted:

You see the blocklist that the ex meth-head, IRS enemy, paedophile runs, has blocked such people as KFC, the Pope and Obama for being problematic. Now within this blocklist you have indie developers or writers like Burch who agrees with Harpers views of anyone on the list not being allowed to be employed in the games industry. So you have this group of people pro-actively stopping people from getting a job. Which is illegal in Europe.

Fluo posted:

Yes I am fully aware Ian Miles Cheong and Arthur Chu are two different people.

Fluo posted:

Good example, Arthur Chu former nazi, all round idiot. When he was AGG people would fall over themselves defending him. When he switched they brought up the same poo poo people did when he was on their side.

Fluo posted:

NutritiousSnack posted:

Outside of low rendered tits, that sounds actually like the previous Tomb Raider games.

NutritiousSnack posted:

Likewise devs have told how much they laugh at "SJWs" and how it's become more and more mainstream to mock someone using those terms.

Slanderer posted:

Tell me how Arthur Chu ruined your life, and also how he's related to ethics in video games journalism.

NutritiousSnack posted:

Lara Croft has been wearing a coat and pants for a decade now, with her breast size notable turned down.

This statement is so loving untrue it's easily the funniest post in this thread

From David Auerbach's twitter account because he got bored of writing about the idiots on both sides years ago.


"It's like if all the movie reviews in the local newspaper were written by film studies professors who only like Atom Egoyan and stuff like that but were paid to pretend to be excited for the new Transformers movie." --TheHuss

The "indie" press (for lack of a better term: Kotaku, Polygon, Gamasutra, and a slew of lesser outfits) have been unhappy with the E3. Gamergate hasn't been quite the focus, but it's been an undercurrent. Christian Nutt's focus on Gamergate in the E3 coverage (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/246125/The_ESA_clarifies_its_antiharassment_stance_future_of_E3.php) may seem perplexing. Why badger the ESA head now, ten months after Gamergate began, about why the ESA won't speak about GG? Especially when he clearly is Not Going to Say Anything?

There has been an undercurrent of rage from the non-mainstream gaming press toward the AAAs and the AAA press over the AAA refusal to rail against Gamergate and demonize its members. The adoption of ethics policies by IGN also smacked of appeasement to them. Over the months of coverage, there's been repeated sniping from all the journalists and many indie devs that the AAAs are just standing back and letting Gamergate happen, they're enabling the harassment, etc. (I'll just use "journos" to refer to that particular unhappy segment of the "indie" gaming press so I can stop typing "indie" in quotes.")

This rage is mostly impotent frustration. The journos wanted to use Gamergate as a lever for greater influence over the AAAs and to be included at the table for industry discussions. And given that the journos and their allies were increasingly out of sync with the majority of gamers, AAA support was their best bet for pushing their vision of what gaming should be, and, more baldly, for gaining influence. So if the AAAs were to say, "Gamergate is terrible, what can we do?", the journos could pipe up and say, "Glad you asked! Listen to us! Change your games like we say! Become art!" But the AAAs never asked. Despite the attempts of the journos to spin every AAA mention of harassment as a specific condemnation of Gamergate, the journos have continued to complain that the AAAs don't care about Gamergate.

The thing is, the journos are pretty much right. The AAAs *are* supporting Gamergate, at least tacitly. They don't want the journos to gain any more influence (or to stop losing influence), and they loathe this pseudo-academic "critique" stuff just as much as your average gamer. The thought of having to kiss the rear end of some PhD in order to gain an Indie or Social Justice imprimatur is insulting to them. They've got money to make. So by remaining silent on Gamergate and having IGN do the pageantry of adopting an ethics policy (no skin off their nose), the AAAs signalled that they were not in alignment with the journos. And they aren't. They are happy to see Gamergate take these people on--and that enrages the journos all the more. This wasn't a planned strategy on behalf of the AAAs, but it was an easy call to make once Gamergate was in play.

It's also important to understand the difference between amateur and professional corruption. If you talk to service workers at restaurants, they'll generally tell you that the worst treatment usually comes from small independent restaurants. Corporate chains and franchises tend to establish standards in order to ameliorate the possibility of lawsuits and to keep the corporate name's reputation intact. While treatment may not be great, there's an HR department ready to crack down if any one person gets out of hand. In a small restaurant, however, some crazy chef can be as much of a jerk as he wants, and no one can stop him as long as the place is successful. I can tell you horror stories. Capitalism is venal and heartless but it does tend to exert a smoothing effect with scale; excesses both positive and negative get ironed out and professionalized in the pursuit of making money efficiently. Albert O. Hirschman's The Passions and the Interests: Political Arguments for Capitalism Before Its Triumph is a fantastic little book about the early theorizing of capitalism and how its proponents argued that financial interest was a much more predictable and much less harmful motive than most other motives that people ever acted on. Hirschman was pretty left and very smart: http://www.waggish.org/2005/albert-o-hirschman-the-passions-and-the-interests/

And it is fortunate for men to be in a situation in which, though their passions may prompt them to be wicked, they have nevertheless an interest in not being so.
--Montesquieu

Which is to say, corporate corruption is *professional*. The journos and their favored devs made such easy targets for Gamergate because their corruption was absurdly inept. The AAAs and mouthpieces like IGN and GameInformer and PCGamer run a professional outfit: sure, it's all a big PR con job, but they aren't going to have journalists reviewing games by people they're publicly friends with (or if called out on it, they'll apologize, add disclosures, blah blah), and they eventually realize to cut out the Doritos nonsense, even if a bit too late. Moreover, they aren't going to be dumb enough to run a bunch of articles on the death of gamers. (That would be the "passions" trumping the "interests.") As far as incompetent corruption goes, the journos were the low-hanging fruit. Investigation into AAA corruption would take boots on the ground that Gamergate doesn't have. The journos made it easy. Indie scenes have always celebrated themselves, but they usually don't make themselves targets to quite this extent.

So Gamergate has been pretty convenient for the AAAs. Gamergate is doing the dirty work of distracting, annoying, and quieting a chronic irritation for the AAAs, and the AAAs just have to sit back and keep quiet. This drives the journos crazy, but there's not much they can do about it, short of politely griping in articles like Nutt's (or impolitely griping on Twitter). Meanwhile, the AAAs are cutting off Kotaku and Polygon even as gamers stop paying attention to them. The journos' strategy has backfired. There must have been some collective delusion that they thought their influence could actually pull some weight with the AAAs, even with Gamergate as a potential lever. As I've said before, I don't know what they were thinking. They ragequit their audience.

"We really did wind up on an elitist 'strategy' for whatever strategy existed, which was none. What makes it elitist? Well, we never actually bothered to try and convince the gaming public along the way. The end result was this split we can now see: Most gamers hated all this poo poo."
--LoadingReadyRun poster

And another.

https://medium.com/@adrianchm/the-truth-about-e3-2015-and-female-protagonists-b006094e44b1


There were less female protagonists then last years E3, AAA doesn't give a poo poo about the press and actively snubbed them this year, and the push towards lack of sexualized women was here for around the better part of a decade but the sale of things like the Witcher 3 shows the market is still extremely friendly towards it.

gently caress I can point out towards stupid poo poo like SJW is now becoming more of insult towards among devs among devs and idiots on twitter they don't like, even after the whole "Social Justice Paladian LULZ!" thing they tried earlier. GamerGate has a lovely rep but that's inconsequential towards their opponents developing one of their own.

Fluo posted:

Fluo posted:

Twitter McCarthyism

Fluo posted:

NutritiousSnack posted:

Tell me how watching gay porn to "experience what a women feels every day" or screaming at yourself in your head isn't both extremely funny and makes you a person not worth taking seriously.

Slanderer posted:

Tell me how Arthur Chu ruined your life, and also how he's related to ethics in video games journalism.

Fluo posted:

*both sides are poo poo* holy moly no!!! only one side is poo poo this is no mud wrestle with a pig

Fluo posted:

Unconditional love, Arthur Chu doesn't care if you say "No".

Fluo posted:

You could have saved yourself 30 seconds by clicking the video I posted

Fluo posted:

You could have saved yourself 30 seconds by clicking the video I posted

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZLjm2w8RfE




Unconditional love, Arthur Chu doesn't care if you say "No".

https://archive.is/kA0K5


Totally rational stable human right here.


*both sides are poo poo* holy moly no!!! only one side is poo poo this is no mud wrestle with a pig

ImpAtom posted:

... Well, yes. If your example is Brad Wardell then I'm finding it hard to take it particularly seriously.

Scrub-Niggurath posted:

The underlying assumption that much of this is based on is that the best interests of the corporations and the consumers are aligned, which is in no way true.

Nonsense posted:

Also it is a verifiable good thing if you lose your employment for shredding one's own sanity, and threatening fellow employees with this internet cult of the yellow turban.

Fluo posted:

Slanderer posted:

Let's try again. Remember that this is the Gamergate thread, not the creepy "let's stalk people online for mentioning gamergate" thread

NutritiousSnack posted:

He WROTE ARTICLES about this. It's a literal Salon article he wrote, not something on a twitter timeline three years ago.

NutritiousSnack posted:

The underlying assumption is spelled out in the article itself in a very unflattering light that mocks outright mocks GG but is too subtle for people here to read. Consumers (this case GamerGate) and the press are busy fighting each other while AAA companies laugh, while a more corporate friendly media/ad outlet takes it's place.. Nothing is about that is mildly unreasonable.