🎭 Dramacow Gamergate / Depression Quest Shitstorm

[Lord RainbowDash]

Basically, the term's ruined. (Or well, that would imply that it was good in the first place.) The small number of people with good intentions are putting stress on a structure that wasn't up to code to begin with.

It was always about putting an end to the corruption in video game journalism, which is obviously a good goal to strive for. There isn't a small number of good people here, there's only a tiny minority of bad apples attacking people under the gamergate hashtag. And honestly? I've seen FAR more harassment, doxxing, death threats, and shit from the anti-gamergate, the so called social "justice" warriors, than I have from anyone posting under the gamergate hashtag.

Not only that, but multiple times the professional victims that anti-gg practically worships have been proven on numerous occasions to be making up threats. And that's not talking about all the horrible things Zoe Quinn/Lock Valentine/Chelsea Van Valkenburg has been accused and confirmed to have done (doxxing of TYFC's charity comes to mind).

But nobody on anti-gg gives a damn, because they have vaginas. It's obvious to me you're severely uneducated on the subject at hand, or are purposefully ignoring the reality of the situation for whatever reason. If you're going to comment on this issue, than make sure you actually know what you're talking about first.

 

[QI 541]

In particular, gamergate being about journalism ethics and gamergate's focus on Zoe Quinn are at odds.

Also, Zoe Quinn's prominence in this shitstorm is because of sexism.

For the people interested in journalism ethics, they should stop using the term "gamergate", unless they're OK with including sexism in the fundamental base of their movement.

That's merely the narrative the media's trying to write, not what's actually happening.

 

[Marvin]

It was always about putting an end to the corruption in video game journalism, which is obviously a good goal to strive for.

Then why did Zoe Quinn precipitate it?

There isn't a small number of good people here, there's only a tiny minority of bad apples attacking people under the gamergate hashtag.

Ah, but they're the most prominent. They define gamergate.

This reminds me of people arguing over who are "real" nerds. Like, people claiming that if you didn't get beat up enough in high school, you aren't a "real" nerd. If you don't have enough stamps on your nerd card, you're not a real nerd. (This analogy's been on my mind recently because someone linked this video to me.)

Right now, no one controls "gamergate". Anyone can use the name, and if they're successful at getting the public to identify them with it, then that's the definition of gamergate. And not just in a theoretical sense, but the correct definition of the term is what people associate with it.

So, based on my experience dealing with internet neckbeards, the Zoe Quinn shit and Felicia Day getting doxed, I'm pretty comfortable with the idea that gamergate people are neckbeards and that their opinions probably aren't very important.

So, what's the person genuinely interested in journalistic ethics to do about this? Disassociate yourself from the actual label "gamergate". Setup standards for journalistic ethics. Sure, your supporters will come from a bunch of sexist gamergate dipshits, but as long as you put a solid line between yourself and your supporters, you can do a lot of good.

(Now, personally, I never take video game journalism seriously and the origins of gamergate sour me on the whole thing, but that's just my practical advice.)

And honestly? I've seen FAR more harassment, doxxing, death threats, and shit from the anti-gamergate, the so called social "justice" warriors, than I have from anyone posting under the gamergate hashtag.

Then they've done a good job keeping it quiet, and thus are successful.

It's obvious to me you're severely uneducated on the subject at hand, or are purposefully ignoring the reality of the situation for whatever reason. If you're going to comment on this issue, than make sure you actually know what you're talking about first.

C'mon, chill out a bit. I'm not uneducated. I knew what I was doing when I made my post.

Double post:

That's merely the narrative the media's trying to write, not what's actually happening.

There's no difference.

Edit: Actually, no, the Zoe Quinn origin of all this shit is super sexist, and I'm very familiar with that situation.

 

[QI 541]

Double post:

There's no difference.

Then let me put it this way: The media is outright lying.

 

[Marvin]

Then let me put it this way: The media is outright lying.

Well, my big issue is the sexism.

But even so, from my perspective, or anyone else's perspective, there's no difference. Until you're one of the people directly involved in the interaction, it all just becomes a question of how convincing someone is. You telling me "they're lying" isn't much more convincing from what you said before.

 

[Lord RainbowDash]

Then why did Zoe Quinn precipitate it?

Ah, but they're the most prominent. They define gamergate.

This reminds me of people arguing over who are "real" nerds. Like, people claiming that if you didn't get beat up enough in high school, you aren't a "real" nerd. If you don't have enough stamps on your nerd card, you're not a real nerd. (This analogy's been on my mind recently because someone linked this video to me.)

Right now, no one controls "gamergate". Anyone can use the name, and if they're successful at getting the public to identify them with it, then that's the definition of gamergate. And not just in a theoretical sense, but the correct definition of the term is what people associate with it.

So, based on my experience dealing with internet neckbeards, the Zoe Quinn shit and Felicia Day getting doxed, I'm pretty comfortable with the idea that gamergate people are neckbeards and that their opinions probably aren't very important.

So, what's the person genuinely interested in journalistic ethics to do about this? Disassociate yourself from the actual label "gamergate". Setup standards for journalistic ethics. Sure, your supporters will come from a bunch of sexist gamergate dipshits, but as long as you put a solid line between yourself and your supporters, you can do a lot of good.

(Now, personally, I never take video game journalism seriously and the origins of gamergate sour me on the whole thing, but that's just my practical advice.)

Then they've done a good job keeping it quiet, and thus are successful.

C'mon, chill out a bit. I'm not uneducated. I knew what I was doing when I made my post.

No, there is literally zero reason to abandon the the hashtag, it would just weaken the movement. And honestly? I'm not going to take advice from the enemy.There's been a bunch of shilling from the opposition trying to steer the movement in the wrong direction in order to destroy it.

And no, the harassers are not the most prominent. All I've seen are some of blatantly obvious shills or trolls attempting to stir up shit on both sides, and hilariously bad attempts from people like Brianna Wu faking threats against themselves in order to paint the movement in a bad light. If they really were attacked by anyone, that's just the internet for you. Anyone accused of wrongdoing on the interwebs is at a high risk of having an internet lynch mob coming after them for vengeance.

If you want to see evidence of GG people being harassed/doxxed/threatened, here:

https://twitter.com/TheBattleAngel

This person has recently started documenting it. There's a whole massive list of far more somewhere, but I'd have to dredge through the EDF2 thread to find it.


And if you actually want to understand what gamergate is about, including why Zoe Quinn is involved at all:

 

[KingofManga420]

Well, my big issue is the sexism.

But even so, from my perspective, or anyone else's perspective, there's no difference. Until you're one of the people directly involved in the interaction, it all just becomes a question of how convincing someone is. You telling me "they're lying" isn't much more convincing from what you said before.

I am not the most versed in the beginnings. Can you tell me why it was sexism? Are you referring to the harassment she's gotten? I agree that's bullshit but over the course of this whole thing she continuously throws herself into the spotlight to remain relevant when those of us who are trying to move past her thing.

Personally I don't care what sex she is, and what she did is wrong, but harassment from neckbeards is something I think we all wouldn't wish on our worst enemies.

 

[Marvin]

No, there is literally zero reason to abandon the the hashtag, it would just weaken the movement.

You should abandon the hashtag if you don't want to be associated with sexism.

And honestly? I'm not going to take advice from the enemy.There's been a bunch of shilling from the opposition trying to steer the movement in the wrong direction in order to destroy it.

And if you actually want to understand what gamergate is about, including why Zoe Quinn is involved at all:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=IEMdf8D0lfw

No, I know why. I'm not uninformed. I'm saying that the base motivations for why Zoe Quinn is important are entirely sexist. Genderswap the situation and it wouldn't have exploded like this.

Perhaps there's problems with gaming journalism, but associating a movement like this with the original source of "gamergate" is really bad.

I am not the most versed in the beginnings. Can you tell me why it was sexism? Are you referring to the harassment she's gotten? I agree that's bullshit but over the course of this whole thing she continuously throws herself into the spotlight to remain relevant when those of us who are trying to move past her thing.

She's a huge dumbass, I'm sure. Sexism is a problem here because the whole thing exploded because Zoe Quinn fucked some guys. That's such a tiny thing. There's all sorts of issues about how women can't fuck guys because they like sex, they're just trying to get ahead. Genderswap the situation and it would've been a small news story. It certainly wouldn't have become a huge movement. Hell, I bet if some developer was fucking female game journalists, the game journalists would've been called whores.

So I'm suggesting for people who really believe in this, for their stated reasons, to work on an organized solution to the problem. You'd still have gamergaters supporting you, but if you publicly disassociate yourself from sexist motivations, you'll look way more legitimate and achieve some longtime success.

 

[Holdek]

It was always about putting an end to the corruption in video game journalism, which is obviously a good goal to strive for. There isn't a small number of good people here, there's only a tiny minority of bad apples attacking people under the gamergate hashtag. And honestly? I've seen FAR more harassment, doxxing, death threats, and shit from the anti-gamergate, the so called social "justice" warriors, than I have from anyone posting under the gamergate hashtag.

Not only that, but multiple times the professional victims that anti-gg practically worships have been proven on numerous occasions to be making up threats. And that's not talking about all the horrible things Zoe Quinn/Lock Valentine/Chelsea Van Valkenburg has been accused and confirmed to have done (doxxing of TYFC's charity comes to mind).

But nobody on anti-gg gives a damn, because they have vaginas. It's obvious to me you're severely uneducated on the subject at hand, or are purposefully ignoring the reality of the situation for whatever reason. If you're going to comment on this issue, than make sure you actually know what you're talking about first.

It's all a bunch of stupid drama over video games. Video games. People need to get a grip.

 

[Enig]

I honestly stopped giving a fuck about any of this as soon as it went from reversing the tide of ethical corruption to shoving Intel and Scottrade logos in everyone's faces because ads were pulled from one site. It's become one big spastic circlejerk instead of the intended repair by the people.

 

[KingofManga420]

You should abandon the hashtag if you don't want to be associated with sexism.



No, I know why. I'm not uninformed. I'm saying that the base motivations for why Zoe Quinn is important are entirely sexist. Genderswap the situation and it wouldn't have exploded like this.

Perhaps there's problems with gaming journalism, but associating a movement like this with the original source of "gamergate" is really bad.

She's a huge dumbass, I'm sure. Sexism is a problem here because the whole thing exploded because Zoe Quinn fucked some guys. That's such a tiny thing. There's all sorts of issues about how women can't fuck guys because they like sex, they're just trying to get ahead. Genderswap the situation and it would've been a small news story. It certainly wouldn't have become a huge movement. Hell, I bet if some developer was fucking female game journalists, the game journalists would've been called whores.

So I'm suggesting for people who really believe in this, for their stated reasons, to work on an organized solution to the problem. You'd still have gamergaters supporting you, but if you publicly disassociate yourself from sexist motivations, you'll look way more legitimate and achieve some longtime success.

Women can fuck whoever they'd like. I'm cool with that, but as far as I know the issue is that people are angry is because it was for nepotism.

I do however think you're exactly right and that if it were a male developer this would not have exploded.

 

[QI 541]

Well, my big issue is the sexism.

Which Gamergate doesn't condone. In fact, they actively hunt down any harassers. They tracked down Brianna Wu's harasser, they found the person who sent Anita threats, they found the person who doxxed Felicia Day (Who posted under the handle "Gaimerg8", which is the most obvious false flag ever), and they actively report any twitter accounts made to harass people. But of course the media won't report any of that because it goes against their narrative.

But even so, from my perspective, or anyone else's perspective, there's no difference. Until you're one of the people directly involved in the interaction, it all just becomes a question of how convincing someone is. You telling me "they're lying" isn't much more convincing from what you said before.

Then I suggest actually observing what Gamergate is doing first-hand. I wouldn't be supporting Gamergate if I didn't actually go down there and see what it is for myself. You're not going to be able to understand what's going on unless you realize how the media works.

You should abandon the hashtag if you don't want to be associated with sexism.

You know how Chris claims a store was discriminating against LGBT because they banned him? That's exactly what's going on right now, only backed up by the media.

It's all a bunch of stupid drama over video games. Video games. People need to get a grip.

It's only video games on the surface. The fact that there's this much drama over it should be a clue that there's more to this than it looks.

 

[Marvin]

Women can fuck whoever they'd like. I'm cool with that, but as far as I know the issue is that people are angry is because it was for nepotism.
View attachment 8059

I do however think you're exactly right and that if it were a male developer this would not have exploded.

Well, it might've been for nepotism. As you start to probe the case deeper, that gets harder and harder to prove. And even when you do, you've only proved that one girl fucked some people for good reviews.

It's not a substantial piece of evidence for the "journalistic integrity" movement. It's focusing on something very unimportant.

 

[Lord RainbowDash]

Well, my big issue is the sexism.

But even so, from my perspective, or anyone else's perspective, there's no difference. Until you're one of the people directly involved in the interaction, it all just becomes a question of how convincing someone is. You telling me "they're lying" isn't much more convincing from what you said before.

You should abandon the hashtag if you don't want to be associated with sexism.



No, I know why. I'm not uninformed. I'm saying that the base motivations for why Zoe Quinn is important are entirely sexist. Genderswap the situation and it wouldn't have exploded like this.

Perhaps there's problems with gaming journalism, but associating a movement like this with the original source of "gamergate" is really bad.

No, you don't know why, or else you wouldn't be saying it's sexism. Nobody gives a fuck if women wanna play and or make games. The entire argument of gamergate being sexist is merely a deflection from the corrupt game devs and journalists to avoid legitimate criticism of their unethical activity. We don't need to give up the hashtag, that's what they want us to do, to weaken us. No, we've kicked their corrupt asses doing things the way we have this whole time, and we're gonna keep doing it, under the hashtag of GamerGate. I don't care what the SJW's and radfems think anymore, they're a combination of lunatics and sociopaths who are just using the fools who blindly believe whatever a woman says to their advantage.

Gamergate supporters have funded multiple charities (even fully funding TFYC after Zoe and her buttbuddy Maya ruined it), gone out of their way to report incidents of harassment and doxxing and threats on both sides, and the anti-gg side doesn't care, the media doesn't care. They just want to label us as a bunch of misogynistic trolls, based on the actions of a few (and opportunistic cunts like Brianna Wu and Zoe who are taking advantage of the situation to get attention and or personal profit). Let the irrational people think what they want, nothing will change their minds at this point, because reason, facts and logic are things they reject in place of their feelings. In the end, we're going to win this, and the world will see the truth about gamergate once and for all.

 

[QI 541]

Well, it might've been for nepotism. As you start to probe the case deeper, that gets harder and harder to prove. And even when you do, you've only proved that one girl fucked some people for good reviews.

It's not a substantial piece of evidence for the "journalistic integrity" movement. It's focusing on something very unimportant.

We don't focus on ZQ. Again, that's simply the narrative the media is trying to write. To us, if the accusations are true, then it's simply another example of corruption.

 

[KingofManga420]

We don't focus on ZQ. Again, that's simply the narrative the media is trying to write. To us, if the accusations are true, then it's simply another example of corruption.

What he said. Zoe is only a thing still because she constantly throws herself in the spotlight to bring her 15 minutes of fame just a little bit more time.

 

[teheviltwin]

It isn't sexist. It started with Quinn because when her ex wrote his post the names he mentioned were all work related. Journo, Indecade judge and her boss. There were other reasons why people were angry at her though.

1) Because she had been getting support as a "feminist" but seemed to be fucking her way to a career.
2) Because she loudly advocated that cheating on someone and not disclosing it meant that future sex with them was rape. Then she cheated on her boyfriend with at least 5 people.
3) When discussing the wife of her married boss she had slept with she was more concerned with her career than the woman being, by her definition, raped.
4) Exposing a partner to that many possible STD risks is fucking appaling.
5) Sex between work colleagues can lead to sex discrimination.

As well as other things like falsely accusing Wizardchan of doxxing her. Wizards aren't exactly the most sympathetic of people but not cool Quinn, not cool.

None of that excuses Quinn's harassment and threats but it is why it all exploded at once. Then when people started scrutinising these relationships they found that Quinn and Grayson wasn't much of a thing but that there were much worse things going on.

And all through this Quinn sits on a public soapbox blaming misogyny. Yelling that everyone wants wimmin out of gaming. So yeah, it exploded from the "Zoe Post" and no it isn't about sexism. I don't give a fuck about her vagina or anyone else's dangly parts.

A lot of people are angry at Quinn and tbh just do the analytics yourself: http://topsy.com/analytics?q1=#Gamergate&q2=@femfreq&q3=@TheQuinnspiracy&via=Topsy

The reason they even show up that much is because they wont stop soapboxing about how victimised they are.

 

[Marvin]

Which Gamergate doesn't condone.

If I say "I'm gamergate and I condone this harassment" and I can get people to believe me, then it's true. (It's true proportionally to the percentage of people I can convince.)

No, you don't know why, or else you wouldn't be saying it's sexism. Nobody gives a fuck if women wanna play and or make games. The entire argument of gamergate being sexist is merely a deflection from the corrupt game devs and journalists to avoid legitimate criticism of their unethical activity.

The furor over Zoe Quinn was not justified by what she actually did. That huge explosion was because of sexism.

It isn't sexist. It started with Quinn because when her ex wrote his post the names he mentioned were all work related. Journo, Indecade judge and her boss.

How does that prove nepotism? Those relationships would be questionable with a man, I'll admit, but with a woman, gamergate people regard it as proven nepotism. (Because women don't like sex.)

 

[Damocles_Sword]

If I say "I'm gamergate and I condone this harassment" and I can get people to believe me, then it's true. (It's true proportionally to the percentage of people I can convince.)

[/QUOTE]

By that logic all someone on the opposing side has to do is cry "sexism and harassment" and whatever hashtag would replace gamergate would have to be abandoned as well, it would be eternal capitulation.

 

[Marvin]

By that logic all someone on the opposing side has to do is cry "sexism and harassment" and whatever hashtag would replace gamergate would have to be abandoned as well, it would be eternal capitulation.

Oh, you're correct. It's sort of a "tragedy of the commons" sort of thing. That's why I don't suggest just making another twitter movement, because those are largely defined by whatever dipshits contribute. Make some sort of concrete organization, where you control the name.