Gamergate Hanger-Ons - 9_Volt88, 2dAmMuslim and friends

  • Thread starter Thread starter RK 672
  • Start date Start date
  • 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
I'm pretty sure the actual numbers are slightly off, but a survey conducted a few years back shows that SJWs account for a comparatively small amount - 5-10% at most - of many major Social Media platforms. They are not only not a majority, they never have been and don't have the numbers to ever be one. This is why every single piece of media that specifically caters to them fails outright if it doesn't have broad appeal, and even then it's likely to do poorly. Even if their mouthpieces flat-out tell them to buy it. There just isn't the numbers for them to be a market, no matter how much they like to play pretend.

What they are good at is being loud at once. Really, really loud. They can leverage their voices all at once and using that, wage sustained pressure on Social Media that a company likely just isn't used to. All it takes is a few dozen Autists accosting them via multiple angles and a company is likely to back down, completely unaware that if they just weather it a bit, eventually the outrage machine will get bored and move on.
 
There is a light at the end of the tunnel. In this situation, the book was highly rated after it was released which means the majority of the audience didn't listen to the crazies on twitter. The twitter cult had no impact on sales either. They are definitely the minority and mainstream people aren't buying into their garbage so it's perfectly reasonable to ignore them and let them reeeeeeeeee on twitter in their echo chamber.

I think the main issue there, is that usually the people with controlling positions in media are these types of people. Various Publishing firms, various media outlets, Google, Amazon, Twitter, Patreon, Facebook, reddit, wikipedia, youtube, etc...

They decide you are problematic enough, they can pull the plug on whatever you are doing. They are a minority, but they are also a controlling minority.
 
They decide you are problematic enough, they can pull the plug on whatever you are doing. They are a minority, but they are also a controlling minority.
That's not really true the heart of the issue; what the 'high ups' care about is just making money. Kicking off 'problematic' people is just safer for advertisement.
Patreon doesn't need ads though, and it kicks off people only when they're easy to kick and might damage the sit'es image. As we saw in the Shadman thread, patreon doesn't really care, and will just wash off any responsibility they have with a guy who draws pedo nazi junk
 
That's not really true the heart of the issue; what the 'high ups' care about is just making money.

Well you'd think so. But Twitters stock price keeps falling, and we are waiting for the supposed end of the Marvel Comics Diversity era. More new shows are coming out with the same premise. Websites are still peddling the same articles.

So I guess Economics must be taught by the same people as the Beyonce studies people.
 
Well you'd think so. But Twitters stock price keeps falling, and we are waiting for the supposed end of the Marvel Comics Diversity era. More new shows are coming out with the same premise. Websites are still peddling the same articles.

So I guess Economics must be taught by the same people as the Beyonce studies people.
Marvel's a weird case in that all Disney cares about is the film side of things, which has proven mostly resistant to the more ridiculous aspects of the current comics. The Comics division can tank itself because it's just an ideas farm - the few successful/marketable ideas are picked up by Marvel Studios and the failure of everything else is covered by the success of the films based on said ideas.

As for Twitter, the higher-ups are just as ideologically driven as the people who pushed for such things in the first place, if they weren't the people who pushed for the platform to become the way it is today. They don't care if they're tanking, because it's all in service of their ideology. I'd call them an edge case, but I think it's the same for most Silicon Valley tech companies today, so we may find ourselves with companies like Google and Facebook in a similar position in 5 years time.
 
As for Twitter, the higher-ups are just as ideologically driven as the people who pushed for such things in the first place, if they weren't the people who pushed for the platform to become the way it is today. They don't care if they're tanking, because it's all in service of their ideology. I'd call them an edge case, but I think it's the same for most Silicon Valley tech companies today, so we may find ourselves with companies like Google and Facebook in a similar position in 5 years time.

It's a leaking life-raft that they're desperately hoping someone takes off their hands before it takes on too much water.
 
That's not really true the heart of the issue; what the 'high ups' care about is just making money. Kicking off 'problematic' people is just safer for advertisement.
Patreon doesn't need ads though, and it kicks off people only when they're easy to kick and might damage the sit'es image. As we saw in the Shadman thread, patreon doesn't really care, and will just wash off any responsibility they have with a guy who draws pedo nazi junk
Yeah, while socjus has inserted itself into top positions in some places, the real power they hold is through their infiltration of the media. From that position they only occasionally get supporters in executive positions, but they can loudly spread their ideology and influence what trends, what shows up on Wikipedia and in articles.
 
Yeah, while socjus has inserted itself into top positions in some places, the real power they hold is through their infiltration of the media. From that position they only occasionally get supporters in executive positions, but they can loudly spread their ideology and influence what trends, what shows up on Wikipedia and in articles.

Well as long as bar critics from reviewing something until the release, and mass spend marketing funds through youtube, tv, buses, trains, billboards, radio etc, enough people get hyped up about something they will usually go see it.
 
Actually, focusing a bit on the Anti-GGers a sec, there's something I noticed recently with them, in that they all have very specific personality traits. I speak no hyperbole when I say that every single one of them, from the most fringe Anti-GG shitposter to the big guns at CON itself, have these very traits:

The following are traits that I've noticed that all of them seem to have:

Propensity for Duplicity:
The Anti-GGers, to a man, are capable of staggering levels of doublethink. They contend that GG was both a few dozen shitposters and an army of dedicated harassers. They do this to push narratives, even when that narrative has been comprehensively disproven or makes absolutely no fucking sense. My favorite example is probably Brianna Wu's fucking amazing claim that Deagle Nation represented a threat to her life, months after acknowledging repeatedly that Jace and Tyce were a fucking hoax.

Promoting a Climate of Fear:
The cows we cover associated with GG opposition instinctively react with extreme hostility when challenged, or so much as questioned. Their constantly doing this is a means of sapping others' will to resist, as they will aggressively bully anyone who runs even slightly afoul of them. Many of them spare no effort in going as hard as they possibly can against anyone they deem a sufficient threat, something visible in the CON Log Leaks and Trello Leaks.

Propagating False Accusations:
Whether claiming Jace was a real threat to Brianna Wu's life, that Dan Olson really did find Child Porn on 8chan, or that they were really harassed, honest you guys, by people they cannot substantiate legitimate claims of harassment against, these fuckers love to accuse people of shit without proof. Anything they can do to make their target look bad, they'll embrace, no matter how much it blows up in their face or how many times it's disproven. My favorite example of this is David Gallant claiming that he was completely innocent of any wrongdoing, despite his involvement with CON's harassment operations, his involvement with Nora Reed, and the fact that Randi Harper threw his ass out of CON because he was such an unmitigated asshole.

Virtue Signaling:
Hahaha. Hahahahahahaha. Fucking christ. Every single one of them virtue signals like a motherfucker and tries to paint themselves as a totally innocent victim who did nothing wrong ever, even though every single one of them has been caught doing things demonstrably worse than what they've accused others of many times over. Jake Alley is both the funniest and saddest example.

Pro-Censorship and Anti-Discussion:

The truth has never been on these sad fucks' sides, and they goddamned know it. That's the reason that every single one of them ran like shit after a Tex-Mex dinner any time they were potentially facing anything more analytical than taint-licking supplication. When the likes of Brianna Wu and Arthur Chu went on David Pakman's show, the result was both fascinating and hilarious, as neither could answer basic stories or provide actual facts. To get around this, they engage in aggressive information control, advocating the silencing of their enemies, often pre-emptively; on many websites this was done by blanket claiming that GG was harassment and that any discussion of the subject was tantamount to letting the harassment happen. It actually goes beyond mere censorship of GG as a whole, though; they genuinely become enraged if anyone tries to discuss the facts of what happened like adults. Multiple GG meetups that got press attention were subjected to bomb threats, as was the SPJ Airplay event. My personal favorite example of this shit is none other than our own @GethN7, who, breaking no laws and obeying everything that was asked of him on Twitter, was essentially permabanned from the site on Brianna Wu's say-so (after which she humblebragged about it, of course).

Fanaticism:
The Anti-GGs hold a borderline-religious certainty in the purity of their mission. They constantly crow about the superiority of their cause (or how it will lead to their "superior culture;" thinking of you, Bob Chipman), and react with the certainty of fanatics. Even when they've been absolutely ass-fucked on social media, even when their talking points are all refuted, their mentions are a fucking joke, and the shitlords have clearly won the field, they remain defiant. If you can say anything good about them, it's that they've got conviction. The humorous part is that sometimes this blows up in their face.

Distrust of Others:
The humorous side-effect of all the other issues on this list (as well as the hubris and arrogance many GG opponents exhibit) is that every single one of them has absolutely zero trust in their fellows beyond a very basic level - and with good reason. We know from Based Blue that many of CON's nutters maintain giant lists of dirt on many of their associates, as well as their enemies, just in case one of their number gets deemed an apostate and thus they go full Halal thread on 'em. No one can maintain loyalty in the face of such unremitting contempt of their fellows, which might have a lot to do with just how often they fall apart. Many of them show hilarious levels of projection, and in several cases can be easily provoked to the point where the others in their group turn on 'em. As we saw with 9volt in this very thread, all it took for all of his buddies to turn on him was the hint that he was some kind of sexual deviant that had flirted with Mombot, and he wound up condemned by the others en masse within hours.

A lot of these traits go hand-in-hand with Sociopathy, especially because a lot of them engage in a behavior where they have a pathological need to hurt other people, and so rationalizes it to themselves by claiming their opponents are evil incarnate.

Draw your own conclusions as to what the fuck that suggests.
 
I can't believe this 9 volt guy looks like a diseased elf. It's amazing. I was expecting some kind of damaged individual but this is a victory for true believers. Props to the analysts who helped with this thread.
 
Actually, focusing a bit on the Anti-GGers a sec, there's something I noticed recently with them, in that they all have very specific personality traits. I speak no hyperbole when I say that every single one of them, from the most fringe Anti-GG shitposter to the big guns at CON itself, have these very traits:

The following are traits that I've noticed that all of them seem to have:

Propensity for Duplicity:
The Anti-GGers, to a man, are capable of staggering levels of doublethink. They contend that GG was both a few dozen shitposters and an army of dedicated harassers. They do this to push narratives, even when that narrative has been comprehensively disproven or makes absolutely no fucking sense. My favorite example is probably Brianna Wu's fucking amazing claim that Deagle Nation represented a threat to her life, months after acknowledging repeatedly that Jace and Tyce were a fucking hoax.

Promoting a Climate of Fear:
The cows we cover associated with GG opposition instinctively react with extreme hostility when challenged, or so much as questioned. Their constantly doing this is a means of sapping others' will to resist, as they will aggressively bully anyone who runs even slightly afoul of them. Many of them spare no effort in going as hard as they possibly can against anyone they deem a sufficient threat, something visible in the CON Log Leaks and Trello Leaks.

Propagating False Accusations:
Whether claiming Jace was a real threat to Brianna Wu's life, that Dan Olson really did find Child Porn on 8chan, or that they were really harassed, honest you guys, by people they cannot substantiate legitimate claims of harassment against, these fuckers love to accuse people of shit without proof. Anything they can do to make their target look bad, they'll embrace, no matter how much it blows up in their face or how many times it's disproven. My favorite example of this is David Gallant claiming that he was completely innocent of any wrongdoing, despite his involvement with CON's harassment operations, his involvement with Nora Reed, and the fact that Randi Harper threw his ass out of CON because he was such an unmitigated asshole.

Virtue Signaling:
Hahaha. Hahahahahahaha. Fucking christ. Every single one of them virtue signals like a motherfucker and tries to paint themselves as a totally innocent victim who did nothing wrong ever, even though every single one of them has been caught doing things demonstrably worse than what they've accused others of many times over. Jake Alley is both the funniest and saddest example.

Pro-Censorship and Anti-Discussion:

The truth has never been on these sad fucks' sides, and they goddamned know it. That's the reason that every single one of them ran like shit after a Tex-Mex dinner any time they were potentially facing anything more analytical than taint-licking supplication. When the likes of Brianna Wu and Arthur Chu went on David Pakman's show, the result was both fascinating and hilarious, as neither could answer basic stories or provide actual facts. To get around this, they engage in aggressive information control, advocating the silencing of their enemies, often pre-emptively; on many websites this was done by blanket claiming that GG was harassment and that any discussion of the subject was tantamount to letting the harassment happen. It actually goes beyond mere censorship of GG as a whole, though; they genuinely become enraged if anyone tries to discuss the facts of what happened like adults. Multiple GG meetups that got press attention were subjected to bomb threats, as was the SPJ Airplay event. My personal favorite example of this shit is none other than our own @GethN7, who, breaking no laws and obeying everything that was asked of him on Twitter, was essentially permabanned from the site on Brianna Wu's say-so (after which she humblebragged about it, of course).

Fanaticism:
The Anti-GGs hold a borderline-religious certainty in the purity of their mission. They constantly crow about the superiority of their cause (or how it will lead to their "superior culture;" thinking of you, Bob Chipman), and react with the certainty of fanatics. Even when they've been absolutely ass-fucked on social media, even when their talking points are all refuted, their mentions are a fucking joke, and the shitlords have clearly won the field, they remain defiant. If you can say anything good about them, it's that they've got conviction. The humorous part is that sometimes this blows up in their face.

Distrust of Others:
The humorous side-effect of all the other issues on this list (as well as the hubris and arrogance many GG opponents exhibit) is that every single one of them has absolutely zero trust in their fellows beyond a very basic level - and with good reason. We know from Based Blue that many of CON's nutters maintain giant lists of dirt on many of their associates, as well as their enemies, just in case one of their number gets deemed an apostate and thus they go full Halal thread on 'em. No one can maintain loyalty in the face of such unremitting contempt of their fellows, which might have a lot to do with just how often they fall apart. Many of them show hilarious levels of projection, and in several cases can be easily provoked to the point where the others in their group turn on 'em. As we saw with 9volt in this very thread, all it took for all of his buddies to turn on him was the hint that he was some kind of sexual deviant that had flirted with Mombot, and he wound up condemned by the others en masse within hours.

A lot of these traits go hand-in-hand with Sociopathy, especially because a lot of them engage in a behavior where they have a pathological need to hurt other people, and so rationalizes it to themselves by claiming their opponents are evil incarnate.

Draw your own conclusions as to what the fuck that suggests.

So there are more sociopaths around than we thought? And they are just good and pretending they aren't sociopaths?
 
So there are more sociopaths around than we thought? And they are just good and pretending they aren't sociopaths?

There is that old saying about Sociopaths: The successful ones are very much so, and the unsuccessful ones tend to be in prison (Or are similarly laughable failures).
 
2017-08-13-20:01:49.png

2017-08-13-19:59:11.png

2017-08-13-20:02:59.png
headshot.jpeg


I get a Jake Alley vibe from this guy right down to the deer in headlights stare

Nazis aren't interested in killing a fat white man.
 
DHHC9lEWsAEA1ij.jpg

Zinnia here, is a blogger over at Huffpost (aren't all these days) and is (in)famous as being a trans activist.
 
They really believe that GamerGate put Trump in teh white house? You got to have a special brand of :autism: to believe that.
 
Back
Top Bottom