🎭 Dramacow Gamergate / Depression Quest Shitstorm

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Status
Not open for further replies.
Whether she actually is irrelevant or not will depend on if people can stop talking about her.

She's relevant in a different way. She constantly tries to make herself the center of attention in big, bold ways that we can't ignore. She was slated to be part of a large debate only to withdraw when she learned that it was a debate, not an interview biased towards her. Then she makes random ass tweets like herself holding a custom Trophy likely paid for by her patreon sponsors 'for driving #GamerGate out of 4chan' (someone post that again please). She goes on and on about being harassed but she keeps doing silly things to keep the spotlight on her.

You'd think if the harassment bothered her she'd stop clamoring for more.
 
Well, I just want to point out that I'm not proposing a leader. Pretty much just a group, with a single, controlled name. They can publish a list of standards for gaming journalism and point out when publications violate them. And then gamergate people or whoever can boycott based on this groups recommendations. Hell, it could be just a subreddit, so long as it's not something like a hashtag that could be co-opted by dipshits. If something like that becomes popular, it has all the benefits of existing boycotts without accusations of sexism.
Protip: There already is one. Don't worry about it being coopted: doxxing and harassment are bannable offenses and conspiracy theorists usually get laughed out of the door.
 
Yeah well, when you accuse a big group of people of being sexists, burden of proof lies with the accuser.
Not if you can't define the group cleanly enough.

Edit: Or, to be more specific, the burden of proof is a lot lower, because it's easy to get evidence that applies to the group, if you're not defining the group strictly enough.
Protip: There already is one. Don't worry about it being coopted: doxxing and harassment are bannable offenses and conspiracy theorists usually get laughed out of the door.
Well there you go. These guys seem pretty cool.
 
Well, I just want to point out that I'm not proposing a leader. Pretty much just a group, with a single, controlled name. They can publish a list of standards for gaming journalism and point out when publications violate them. And then gamergate people or whoever can boycott based on this groups recommendations. Hell, it could be just a subreddit, so long as it's not something like a hashtag that could be co-opted by dipshits. If something like that becomes popular, it has all the benefits of existing boycotts without accusations of sexism.
We already have a site with a list of approved/disapproved putlets that is evolving. Http://gamergate.me

The thing is, love it or hate it, gamergate is not being ignored. Change that name, and it immediately will be. And if it isn't, the same allegations of sexism will immediately follow, because it benefits the journos to do so. Every time we bring it up, they will cunter with 'misogyny' because they have learned that it works. It is designed to scare off fence sitters by appealing to emotion rather than reason, exactly as it has done to you. It is ad hominem plain and simple. Te fact that gamergate has donated tens of thousands of dollars to charities and funds benefitting females gets swept under the rug, because it benefits the journos to simply yell sexist. The fact that gamergate stepped up en masse to report and disavow those who would harass or doxx either side is ignored because if you judge us on our actions, it doesn't enforce the narrative they need to maintain to avoid the consequences of their actions. It is much more expedient for them that you judge us on the information THEY provide.
 
Not if you can't define the group cleanly enough.

Edit: Or, to be more specific, the burden of proof is a lot lower, because it's easy to get evidence that applies to the group, if you're not defining the group strictly enough.

Christorians are just a bunch of trolls and bullies who repeatedly toy with the emotions of an autistic man for some laughs. They even tricked him into filming himself masturbating and posted it on the internet! Prove me wrong.
Note that if Chris actually gets the attention of the media, that's what's the average person is going to believe about us.
 
We already have a site with a list of approved/disapproved putlets that is evolving. Http://gamergate.me
"In no way are we an official GamerGate website."
Christorians are just a bunch of trolls and bullies who repeatedly toy with the emotions of an autistic man for some laughs. They even tricked him into filming himself masturbating and posted it on the internet! Prove me wrong.
Note that if Chris actually gets the attention of the media, that's what's the average person is going to believe about us.
Yeah, probably.
 
Now, let's do some genderbending.

Zack is a game dev.
Zack and Emily are dating.
Emily finds out that Zack has been lying to her and has cheated on her with five girls.
One of the girls is Zack's married boss.
Another girl was a judge on a competition that Zack's submission won. (entrance fee $95, cash prize)
The third girl is a journalist. While she did not review Zack's game, she has promoted it in her articles, and has a history of promoting the works of her other friends and not disclosing it.

So does Zack being a man change anything?

Awesome, thanks!

And as for my take...no, it doesn't change anything. Quite frankly, my own personal opinion is that the "Zoe Post" or whatever it's called was not where GamerGate really started, it was the gaming journalist group as a whole refusing to immediately address this possible breach of ethics that pissed everybody off. The near-simultaneous posting of those "Gamers are over" OPeds across those same sites merely made the situation worse. When GameJournoPros was revealed, the whole debacle involving Quinn stopped being merely about the situation with her altogether, as the "Quinspiracy" (so many names to remember...) at this point is only one of a handful of examples that are coming to light about similar ethics breaches and the entire social group that had some control over the flow of information across the board.

Christorians are just a bunch of trolls and bullies who repeatedly toy with the emotions of an autistic man for some laughs. They even tricked him into filming himself masturbating and posted it on the internet! Prove me wrong.
Note that if Chris actually gets the attention of the media, that's what's the average person is going to believe about us.
They had the chance to actually do that back when his house caught fire since that made the news, but no mention was made of its inhabitants. And for good reason, because Chris's tomgirl lesbian bullshit really does not make for good TV.
 
However, Zoe Quinn, not long before this happened, fled to the UK with her boyfriend.

If this is true, then Zoe is fucked as soon as she opens her gob.

Libel laws are really strict in the UK, all she has to do is call someone high ranking and/or litigious a misogynist and she will be sued back to the Stone Age.

Although I hope she's appearing on Question Time or Newsnight, so she can get her face metaphorically smashed in.
 
Zoe Quinn kicked this off through her own practices, but Gamergate didn't gain speed because of her - she was a symptom of the greater problem, not the source. It was the complete lack of any effort to look into the scandal, when just months previous, the same individuals now conducting a blackout of it, had done extensive coverage of a similar story in which a male dev sexually harassed some people - that led people to ask a very simple question:

"Why aren't they covering it? This is pretty much a similar scenario, with the only difference being who's involved."

This led Internet detectives to look into it. Because those involved weren't very careful and weren't exactly secretive in their dealings, we quickly learned about Zoe having financial support from several people in the industry. This is unusual, but not exactly an earth-shattering revelation. It was what was to follow that got eyebrows raised - the IGF/Indiecade scandals and people directly associated with this whole scandal financially supporting people through essentially rubber-stamping their way through the selection process. This happened, again, because those involved made no effort to cover their tracks. When the entire Game Journos Pros reveal happened later, which indicated that not only was the fix in to not cover the story due to a series of rote conflicts of interest, with several people openly involved in the development of Zoe's game and actively going out of their way to quash discussion of it - that Gamergate actually took off.

What's happened outside of it, however, has been amazing. We had the "Gamer is Dead" barrage hit, where 12+ articles with the same content - arguing that the gamer identity was dead - hit from the same source on the same day. The response, unsurprisingly, was overwhelmingly negative, since this was a huge group of journalistic publications who we all knew to be in an incestuous relationship with each other essentially declaring their readerbase to be irrelevant. Fittingly enough, this was found eventually to have come, in part, from Silverstring Media, a PR company, with ties to - you guessed it - Games Journos Pro - and one Zoe Quinn.

The #Notyourshield hashtag got started because those attempting to demonize Gamergate supporters kept screaming at them that Gamergate was entirely about misogyny and harassment. There's a lot of gamers who are women, who are non-whites, and who really aren't cool with being used as the verbal equivalent of a bludgeon, and this hashtag allowed tweeters to show that Gamergate had broad multi-cultural support. For starting the hashtag, Anti-GGers managed to get him fired after Anti-GGers called his place of business. This was a herald of things to come, as Anti-GGers have been repeatedly going after neutral parties for remaining neutral as well. Boogie, in an emotionally-charged and phenomenally touching video, goes on about how he was threatened by other Games Journalists with Blacklisting if he didn't side against Gamergate, and how he was Doxxed by Anti-GGers. I want you to remember that first part - because it'll be relevant in about 2 paragraphs or so.

This synopsis is starting to drag, so I'll try banging out the rest of it rapid-fire. Apologies in advance for anything I miss:

A non-Gamergater did research and quickly learned that a lot of the harassment that had allegedly come from Gamergate during this process were false flag operations - this included Anita Sarkeesian's threatener (who turned out to be clickbaiting Brazilian journalist from a site called Celebrinando), SomethingAwful's FYAD being responsible for a chunk of the Brianna Wu harassment. It revealed that a sizable part of the harassment claims being made against Gamergate are being done by provocateurs.

After the Guardian did a seriously Anti-GG article, it was revealed later via the Ralph Retort that the fix was in on it from the start, indicating a genuine desire to skew the narrative and strongly suggesting collusion. For the rest of the mainstream press, them treating gamers like head lice wasn't anything new, considering they already said we were responsible for the Virginia Tech Shooting, Sandy Hook, and Columbine, but it was extremely jarring for this to come from a fairly respected platform otherwise.

The proverbial smoking gun was later involved when it was discovered that Destructoid had been actively involved in suppressing the story before it went active, and went out of their way to Blacklist the journalist involved to keep him from talking - something highly illegal in the state Destructoid's headquartered in, and providing the largest scandal broken thus far. It also painted comments like Boogie's and several others in an entirely new light - the threats of blacklisting hadn't been limited to this one Journalist, and we now know all too well now just how deep this goes.

Zoe Quinn isn't the cause of Gamergate, nor is she the crux of it. She is, however, irrevocably tied with it - it got started because of her, and it worsened because people simply followed the obvious trail she had left in her dealings. It's also worth noting that Quinn herself thanked Gamergaters for fighting attempts to doxx her personal information thus far.

That's a general synopsis, without getting bogged down by the rest of the details. There's a lot more about Gamergate and I urge you to look into it - stuff like the infamous Sam Biddle pro-bullying tweets that Gamergate then used relentlessly against Gawker's advertisers, and how Leigh Alexander's racist comments were used in the same fashion. Above all else, use your own judgment. No one here's going to attack you for being neutral or even against GG - this is a shitstorm after all - but it's definitely worth looking into and getting some knowledge about.
 
Now, let's do some genderbending.

Zack is a game dev.
Zack and Emily are dating.
Emily finds out that Zack has been lying to her and has cheated on her with five girls.
One of the girls is Zack's married boss.
Another girl was a judge on a competition that Zack's submission won. (entrance fee $95, cash prize)
The third girl is a journalist. While she did not review Zack's game, she has promoted it in her articles, and has a history of promoting the works of her other friends and not disclosing it.

So does Zack being a man change anything?
Yeah, definitely. I mean, the way you portray it, on an interpersonal level? No, it obviously doesn't. All the people involved should be pissed.

But society at large doesn't freak out about the male version. People think women fuck to gain things, not that they fuck because it's fun.
But you know it's mostly false.
Yeah, because I was there when it happened. I wouldn't expect outsiders to know otherwise. I'd have to work my ass off to persuade them otherwise.
 
B008TP7CMAAa4DM.jpg:large
 
Yeah, because I was there when it happened. I wouldn't expect outsiders to know otherwise. I'd have to work my ass off to persuade them of things.

You wouldn't be able to. They'd dismiss you as a bully immediately. The media's voice is much louder than yours.
 
,
Yeah, definitely. I mean, the way you portray it, on an interpersonal level? No, it obviously doesn't. All the people involved should be pissed.

But society at large doesn't freak out about the male version. People think women fuck to gain things, not that they fuck because it's fun.

Yeah, because I was there when it happened. I wouldn't expect outsiders to know otherwise. I'd have to work my ass off to persuade them otherwise.

And because you're fighting against the people responsible for informing outsiders about your stance,and their echo chamber, it wouldn't matter what you did or said, they'd just keep yelling 'troll' and 'cyberbully'. And because they are the institution people are going to get the story from first, and there is a massive 'hear and believe' culture online, means that nobody looks further than the very surface, you would be forever labeled as such. And by your argument, it would therefore be the truth. Your actions were for nothing, only their narrative.
 
You wouldn't be able to. They'd dismiss you as a bully immediately. The media's voice is much louder than yours.
As it has always been, at first to to be honest I thought people were just blowing smoke about the media. I see now they were right.
They twist things to their own agenda and the uninformed just lap it up, this is society now. We have never advocated harassment and death threats, but you wouldn't think so according to the media.

I'm tired of this movement being painted as something evil, but at the same time it pushes me to soldier on, because I know if something isn't done it will turn into a huge mess.
 
You wouldn't be able to. They'd dismiss you as a bully immediately. The media's voice is much louder than yours.
And because you're fighting against the people responsible for informing outsiders about your stance,and their echo chamber, it wouldn't matter what you did or said, they'd just keep yelling 'troll' and 'cyberbully'. And because they are the institution people are going to get the story from first, and there is a massive 'hear and believe' culture online, means that nobody looks further than the very surface, you would be forever labeled as such. And by your argument, it would therefore be the truth. Your actions were for nothing, only their narrative.
Then I'll have lost.
 
Then I'll have lost.
Because trying to perform damage control on that front is a losing proposition. The guy who started #notyourshield was harassed and fired. The winning move is to make it advantageous for the parent companies to fire or retrain the offenders, and to that effect, gamergate is targeting their advertisers. The uninformed will be told what to think by the media, that is a reality. But once the higher ups feel their pockets getting shallower, that's when change will happen. And then, when less biased people are writing for less biased outlets, the tone will change. Suddenly their customers will not be the utter monsters they've been calling us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom