#Gamergate

[WWWwombat]

I also don't really see their strategy as being that logical.  If they succeed in perpetuating negative stereotypes about hardcore gamers, then they will succeed in making gaming less mainstream, which could potentially slow the growth of non-hardcore gaming.  So overall, they might succeed in alienating part of the market and discouraging the rest.  Who's gonna read Kotaku then?

[Lanthirrhos]

@Nolder

 

You are missing my poorly articulated point. (See? Poor Articulation, already a problem)

 

You've mentioned big names. Those big names are not GG. They (debatably) support GG. Most have caveats, limits, and/or disagree with certain aspects of the movement, because the movement is NOT unified to a set of ideals or solutions. GG is the mass of "little" people. I talking about GG. The mass of little people. The leaderless mass of little people trying to make noise over twitter, while the corrupt end of things uses mass media tactics (you know, the stuff that the majority of the world listens too) to garner support through defamation.

 

I have not heard anyone espouse the Code of Ethics that you linked... certainly none of the major people that you mentioned. They could have, but I haven't seen it. Additionally, the Code of Ethics is not appropriate for the current state of affairs for most media sites. They do not have the revenue to have dedicated journalists... those people need to be able to perform other functions outside of journalism. Most of our gaming media personalities are glorified reporters/reviewers, not journalists. They may share a similar need of enhanced ethical standards, but I do not see your list doing much good why someone has to be a journalist one second, and is told to write a hype piece another second. Or a critique. Or a press release. Or an advertisement. Or a review. Should all those things ideally be written by separate people? Yeah. Of course. It will NOT happen. Regardless of how anyone feels, sites will still write hype pieces for unreleased games... and these pieces will as likely as not be written by the same people who write for the site... i.e. the journalists, reviewers, etc. One set of journalistic ethics is not going to solve any of the myriad of problems currently invested within gaming media. It is far more complicated than that.

 

Lets quickfire some of this in blue.

 

 

and add that most pro-GGers aren't actually informed enough to participate in an actual discussion (beyond saying "Journalistic Ethics good. Nepotism bad."

Have you spent much time in the Gamergate hashtag? /r/KIA? /gg/? Maybe /v/ or /pol/ before 4chan was kill? Have you visited the Burgers and Fries chatroom? Have you watched any of the livestreams? I think you're wrong. I think the average member of Gamergate understands exactly why they're there.

They're not misogynists.
They're not right wing conspiracy tea partiers.
They know that reviewing someone's game while they're your roommate (and romantic partner?) is wrong.
They know having a relationship with someone and promoting their game is wrong.
They know judging a game that you are financially invested in is wrong.
They know reporting on someone you are donating to on Patreon every month is wrong.

These things are not difficult to understand.
The conflicts of interest are very clear and simple disclosure would have been enough.
The Escapist knows it, that's why they changed their policy.
Kotaku knows it, even though they're still crap, which is why they changed their policy.
Polygon knows it, even though they refused to change their policy.

These things would not have happened if there wasn't a clear cut message.

 

Informed has nothing to do with knowing whether you are a misogynist or not. Or knowing what party you don't belong to. Being informed doesn't have anything to do with knowing something is wrong. Being informed means being able to cite corruptions within the industry, provide examples, explain why the practices are harmful, and present realistic ideas of how to fix them... which in turns means knowing how devs, games media, publishers, marketing, and the consumers interact with one another. It means understanding the needs of the consumers, the media outlets, and the game production side of things.

 

GGers are NOT informed on all of the issues involved in all of that. Your list above my text is entirely accurate--and it's not remotely "informed". People are finally becoming more informed... that's certainly true. Lets not kid ourselves however, we have a long way to go before we're "informed". And from the people on your list of big names, I'd say that only TotalBiscuit is actually informed on the ins and outs of the larger issues concerning gaming... and he would probably claim otherwise by saying that he is merely one of the "most informed".

 

Boogie could be too, I dunno. I've seen about 3 over his videos and none were about GG. Milo doesn't give a real rat's rear about GG, and one could argue that Sargon and Aristocrat think critically, but I'm not seeing any actual solutions from them. And Sommers is more concerned with her branch of Feminism than with gaming. All that is well and good, but it doesn't help us fix our media, it just helps GGers fight with Anti-GGers.

 

Do not misconstrue me, GG has accomplished a little bit, through the sole avenues of boycott and encouraging advertisers to pull out of certain sites. What they haven't done, is provided pressure to fix specific corruptions/questionable practices through informed debate and presentation. GG has made a few small gains--that some sites are only holding to publicly while ignoring inwardly. Media outlets are reacting to loss of advertising revenue, not reasoned discussion. That's the main problem that I was trying to point out in my post. Sure me for writing it at 3:30 am after being up for just short of 24 hours. (only been up for 20 hours this time :p )
 

Most of them are not displaying a knowledge of how their industry works,

This is true. It's been a learning experience for many and a lot of stuff had to be learned on the fly.
The fact of the matter is the consumers should have never have had to do the journalists job for them.

 

Fine and dandy. I say that they have a long way to go. Compared to what they (or we) SHOULD know as gaming enthusiasts, well... you know nothing Jon Snow.
 

or how it needs to change to support/enforce Journalistic Ethics.

No. You're wrong.
Everyone agrees they need to adhere to this.
http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

 

I disagree. We have more immediate concerns if you want to enforce these Ethics... namely reworking the business models behind games media sites; as well as their internal structure to somehow support more jobs to better establish a hierarchy of writers that allows for actual journalistic content, reviews, reporting, OP-ED, opinion pieces, advertising pieces etc.
 

It also seems like most of them cannot point out a  breach of journalistic Ethics outside of a couple major headlines like Zoe Quinn and GerstmannGate.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!
Who, exactly, do you think found these breach of ethics in the first place?
Protip: it wasn't journalists.

 

Come on now. Read what I said. Did I say anything about Journalists finding out about a breach of ethics? Most GGers cannot participate in a productive discussion of corruption in Gaming Media. They can talk about how "sleeping with your boss/business peer/potential judges or reviewers is bad" all they want, but it doesn't bring much to the table. And as I've already discussed, MOST are not informed enough to take it beyond that level of conversation. They've gotten a little better... and that's it.
 

And this is where a lack of leadership kills them.

Kills?
HAHAHAHAHA

http://topsy.com/analytics?q1=%23gamergate&q2=%23notyourshield&via=Topsy

 

Yep. Kills. Laugh all you want, but you aren't making any headway with the mainstream because 1) Games media supported by certain individuals have successfully turned the discussion towards misogyny in gaming and GG (Those supporters of that message being the idiots actually sending death threats to women and exposing their private information... not that it's only happening to women. People on the internet get death threats all the time, male or female, game enthusiast or... not) 2) the chosen medium for GG is "The twitters" of all freaking places. 3) (Partially due to 2) GG hasn't put together an actual cohesive platform of what they want redressed and why.

 

And that is why we still have a crap storm out there concerning misogyny, feminism, hate crimes, and the like. Aside from the obviously disingenuous players, most people can't tell what GG is or about beyond what they are told by the media, mass media and game's media alike. There is no leader to present an ideal for GG. There is no place to find a clear message that GG wants to give. "There is corruption in gaming journalism" isn't a platform or a message. It's an obvious statement of fact. There is corruption in almost every (if not every) institution. The outside mass only sees what it is presented. It has been presented with People using GG to attack women. It has been shown death threats to women in the gaming industry. That is what it sees. You are being killed on the publicity front, because most GGers do not have a megaphone, or the knowledge to convey what GG actually is about. See my quoted line below.
 

They're a bunch of tiny repetitious voices

Totalbiscuit
1.8M subs on Youtube
360K followers on Twitter

Boogie2988
2M subs on Youtube
180k followers on Twitter

Christina Hoff Sommers
22.5k followers on Twitter

Internet Aristocrat
93K subs on Youtube
19.8k followers on Twitter

Sargon of Akkad
24K subs on Youtube

Milo Yiannpoulos
33.5k followers on Twitter

That's just the names I know.
There are others that I don't.
These people are not small voices, but even if they were it wouldn't matter.
This is the kind of thing where numbers and actions speak louder than words.

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/gamasutra.com

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/rockpapershotgun.com

 

Numbers reduced ad-revenue. Media sites made mild conciliatory gestures, but didn't fix underlying corruption issues. Numbers will return to sites. No great blow stuck against corrupt journalism. Call me cynical.
 

that decry, and proselytize, but they can't properly illustrate the problem with examples,

Bullshit.
That's just not true.
Who do you think is making the infographics, the youtube videos, etc?

A select few. You should see the number of BS info-graphics compared to real ones. Or the people claiming that women doxxed themselves just to discredit GG. There are far more nut-jobs, and uninformed people, than those actually producing useful content.
If we couldn't properly explain the issues with examples do you think we would have gotten so much traction?

Yes. Easily. All it takes is enough consumer pressure on advertisers, and they pull ads. You don't even have to explain anything. If the advertisers believe that they will be reflected upon negatively among their consumers, they will pull out regardless of how illiterate your opinions are. If enough people screamed "I hate youtube!" at *insert company name*, then *insert company name* would pull their ads from youtube. It doesn't matter why the consumers are upset, only that continuing to run ads on youtube would hurt *insert company name*'s business matters.
Hell didn't this all start from the awful example of Zoe Quinn and Nathan Grayson?

Yes. Yes it did. People were even more uninformed before that. Sad, huh?
Or do you want to go to the deeper matter of Stephen Totilo being A OK with that happening and denying it was even an issue?
What went down with Indiecade, IGF, Polytron, and FEZ wasn't clear enough for you?

Why is this thrown at me? Did I express any personal  ambiguity on the subject? If your point is to show your personal knowledge on the subject of gaming corruption, then well done. You know more than most GGers. Now go get a podium and explain in detail what the problems are in the industry, and how to fix them as discussed farther above. 

 

or support a method of progress because their individual voice is never heard over their peers... or the deafening uproar over the harassment shouting.

Ask anyone in Gamergate whether this is ok. Ask everyone you want. The answer will always be yes.

http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
 

Well, I asked myself, and I said no. The cogent argument of "Ask anyone" did not convince me. Copy pasting a vague set of Ethical standards doesn't address our industry very well... but I repeat myself.
 

At the moment, GGers, outside of the industry itself, sound like they are spouting harsh, repetitive, unsubstantiated rhetoric... when in actuality, they DO have something to shout about, but the masses will never articulate it intelligibly.
 
Which would lead the mass of uninitiated outsiders to look upon the movement less favorably, even without the help of media to perpetuate the misogyny stereotype.

Well, you know, it would be a little easier to explain to people what we are all about if the press would stop smearing us.

Of course it would. That's half the point of what I've said. Except you need to explain it NOW to get people to stop smearing you. You cannot wait for the Status Quo to change, GG needs to change it. Mostly by explaining themselves intelligibly, with good examples, proof, and possible solutions--not just an Ethics Code that doesn't address more systemic problems in gaming media.
Honestly it seems like you read about Gamergate on some publication like The Verge or NYT or something and took what they said as what's going on.

Lol. Like I read the news. No, I have not read anything from mass media. I haven't subscribed to the Gaming Media's slant of Gamers being dead, or misogynistic, or racist, or even ISIS. What I have done, is looked around at the players on my own, kept up with the various links here, and a few other places. 

 

 

With the way you've argued against me, You'll probably be surprised to know that I too think "Corruption is bad" and that "Gaming Journalism is full of corruption" of various forms. You may yet be surprised that I would like to see these problems addressed.

 

What I am concerned with is how we present ourselves. As children screaming on twitter (in under 140 characters). Or as legitimate, rational adults, who understand that the situation is complicated, but have a goal and a plan to make it better. People who ARE inclusive, accepting, thinking gamers who care about our industry, its media, and our fellow gamers/game makers/journalists/personalities. Right now, I see bickering children, opportunists, and close minded people on all sides, who think the answer is so simple as that they are correct and all those other people are wrong. I want gamers to be a bit more forward thinking, and a bit more helpful to their own ideals, because it would go a long way towards actually stopping the misogyny crap, and starting a discussion of our concerns... even if only through outward presentation; though it would be much more than that.

[Nolder]

BMW pulled it's advertising campaign from Gawker today.

[Nolder]

Lanth I'm not reading or responding to anything nested inside quotes.

You want it addressed take your words outside of my quotebox.

[Nolder]

With the way you've argued against me, You'll probably be surprised to know that I too think "Corruption is bad" and that "Gaming Journalism is full of corruption" of various forms. You may yet be surprised that I would like to see these problems addressed.

Why would that surprise me?

I would hope anyone would have such views.

I think you're just not as well informed on the issue as you think you are is all.

You're swallowing the smear campaign that the media is throwing at Gamergate.

 

What I am concerned with is how we present ourselves. As children screaming on twitter (in under 140 characters).

Perfect example of what I mean.

Children screaming? This is just smear.

People are angry and rightfully so.

It's the internet, no one is "screaming".

 

Or as legitimate, rational adults, who understand that the situation is complicated, but have a goal and a plan to make it better.

The plan is known and it's simple and it has been in effect from day 1.

Force Kotaku, Polygon, Rockpapershotgun, Gamasutra, and maybe a few others to adopt and adhere to a clear code of ethics...or we burn their sites to the ground and raise new ones in their place that will.

 

People who ARE inclusive, accepting, thinking gamers who care about our industry, its media, and our fellow gamers/game makers/journalists/personalities. Right now, I see bickering children, opportunists, and close minded people on all sides, who think the answer is so simple as that they are correct and all those other people are wrong. I want gamers to be a bit more forward thinking, and a bit more helpful to their own ideals, because it would go a long way towards actually stopping the misogyny crap, and starting a discussion of our concerns... even if only through outward presentation; though it would be much more than that.

This is dumb.

Seriously it is.

 

First of all the "misogyny crap" should never have been an issue in the first place.

It's a generalization, a stereotype. It's a way to demonize an entire group of people.

A PERSON is a misogynist, gamers are not. Gamer is just a demographic like anything else.

19-25 year olds, Asians, people that live in Atlanta, etc. They're just people.

 

Secondly Gamergate has gone above and beyond to show the world at every single turn that they're not about sexism or exclusion or whathaveyou. They're reporting harassment of Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian, and Brianna Wu (among others) every single damn day on twitter because trolls think it would be funny if this blew up. I've reported 3 myself and I've made it pretty clear over the past year or so that I do not like Anita Sarkeesian but that doesn't mean she needs to be harassed on twitter. They've raised over $70,000 to promote female game devs (this was before Gamergate was even an actual hashtag mind you), they've raised over $10,000 to prevent bullying. Hell the other day they intervened to help someone in an apparent suicide attempt.

 

The media can lie all they want. Spend some time on the hashtag and you'll see what kind of people you're dealing with.

Pro tip: it's not cis white male misogynerd crybabies who hate women and inclusion in their boys club.

[Nolder]

[Nolder]

Ooops. Didn't see the top half of your post after I cut the quote, must've cut that out too.

One sec I'll respond to that next.

[Nolder]

@Nolder

 

You are missing my poorly articulated point. (See? Poor Articulation, already a problem)

 

You've mentioned big names. Those big names are not GG. They (debatably) support GG. Most have caveats, limits, and/or disagree with certain aspects of the movement, because the movement is NOT unified to a set of ideals or solutions. GG is the mass of "little" people. I talking about GG. The mass of little people. The leaderless mass of little people trying to make noise over twitter, while the corrupt end of things uses mass media tactics (you know, the stuff that the majority of the world listens too) to garner support through defamation.

Let's be clear then. Of those names I listed on Milo is not directly involved in GG because he is a reporter. He's said on a livestream he may have to recuse himself from reporting soon because he's feeling too involved and invested in what GG is doing. He is definitely friendly but you're right he is not technically part of GG. The rest are as GG as it comes. Boogie was involved way before the hashtag was created. TB signed the thunderclap and signaled his support. Sommers did the same. Etc, etc. They are Gamergaters. You're dismissing them because they have a platform and fans but they're just as vocal in the hashtag as anyone else. Other than Milo there is no "debatable" about it and I can prove it with each name I listed.

 

And yes there is an agreed upon solution.

I can say it as many times as you need me to.

The games media need to adopt and adhere to a code of ethics or we burn their corrupt sites down.

 

I have not heard anyone espouse the Code of Ethics that you linked... certainly none of the major people that you mentioned.

Wtf?? Do you even follow them? On twitter, youtube, anywhere?

Again have you visited /gg/ on 8chan or /r/kotakuinaction on reddit or the burger and fries chatroom?

This is why I feel like you don't know what you're talking about because the Society of Professional Journalists link is thrown around all the time when I'm on the hashtag. So I really don't get how you're NOT seeing it...unless you're not spending any time around these people and are just getting your info second hand.

 

They could have, but I haven't seen it. Additionally, the Code of Ethics is not appropriate for the current state of affairs for most media sites. They do not have the revenue to have dedicated journalists... those people need to be able to perform other functions outside of journalism. Most of our gaming media personalities are glorified reporters/reviewers, not journalists.

I agree with you 100% and that's part of the problem because yes they do have the money to hire dedicated journalists.

Look at the advertisers for these sites. Best Buy, Amazon, State Farm, Scottstrade, Intel, etc. These aren't small companies.

This is a $100B dollar industry and it's time to start acting like it and get some professionalism in the ranks.

 

I wouldn't even call most of the people working at Kotaku or Polygon glorified reporters/reviewers. They're bloggers. Few if any of them even have journalism degrees.

 

They may share a similar need of enhanced ethical standards, but I do not see your list doing much good why someone has to be a journalist one second, and is told to write a hype piece another second. Or a critique. Or a press release. Or an advertisement. Or a review. Should all those things ideally be written by separate people? Yeah. Of course. It will NOT happen. Regardless of how anyone feels, sites will still write hype pieces for unreleased games... and these pieces will as likely as not be written by the same people who write for the site... i.e. the journalists, reviewers, etc. One set of journalistic ethics is not going to solve any of the myriad of problems currently invested within gaming media. It is far more complicated than that.

We're not going to patron sites that do this.

If they want to report on this industry they're going to have to meet our standards.

Or not, hey that's their choice. We're just not going to go to their crappy sites.

[Nolder]

http://theralphretort.com/nissan-cuts-ties-gawker/

 

[Nolder]

And this is why they're losing advertisers: https://archive.today/dGjSA

 

Let's go through this piece by piece.

 

 

On October 1, the computing giant Intel pulled its ads from Gamasutra, a trade website for game developers, over an essay called "'Gamers' don't have to be your audience. 'Gamers' are over" by a journalist named Leigh Alexander. Intel had been successfully harassed by a small, contemptible crusade called "Gamergate"—a campaign of dedicated anti-feminist internet trolls using an ill-informed mob of alienated and resentful video game-playing teenagers and young men to harass and intimidate female activists, journalists, and critics.

1. We didn't harass Intel we sent them emails through publicly available channels. That's not harassment.

 

2. We are not a "small crusade". But even if we were that makes your failure to contain and control this all the more pathetic.

 

3. Dedicated anti feminist trolls? I think not. We have many feminists with us and have donated tens of thousands of dollars to a feminist campaign. There are anti feminists in our ranks but that doesn't make us any more anti feminist than having the feminists makes us feminist. This is continued smear and just sad at this point.

 

4. Harass and intimidate female activists, journalists, and "critics"? Who is Nathan Grayson. Who is Stephin Totilo. Who is the author of this, Max Read. Who is James Fudge. Who is Kyle Orland. Who is Phil Fish. Who is Greg Tito. These are not females. This is not gendered you liar.

 

 

Unable to run Alexander out of game writing, as they had with the writer Jenn Frank, or force her from her home, as they did to the developer Brianna Wu, or threaten her from public engagements, as they did the following week to the critic and activist Anita Sarkeesian, Gamergate went after her publisher. And, in an unbelievable and embarrassing act of ignorance and cowardice, Intel capitulated. The company's laughable "apology," released late on that Friday afternoon, didn't cover up the fact of Gamergate's victory: Intel was not replacing its ads.

 

1. Jenn Frank had a clear bias she failed to disclose. Sorry but donating to the patreon account of someone you're writing about makes you biased. Lrn2journalism.

 

2. Brianna Wu is discredited. She's been proven to be false flagging herself on 8chan and twitter. It's possible she's received real threats but she shot her credibility in the foot and is unreliable. In my opinion she fabricated threats against herself and left her home without ever being in danger.

 

3. First of all the "threat" to Anita was either non existent or not credible as both the police and university were not concerned. There's also nothing tying it to Gamergate but keep up the associative smear tactics I'm sure they work on some people.

 

4. I love when people interpret Intel's apology as being directed at Gamergate. I read it as a condemnation of Gamasutra.

 

 

Failing to adequately cover this act of spinelessness was the first big fuck-up we at Gawker committed. Intel surrendered to the worst kind of dishonesty, and we allowed it to do so without ever calling it out. So let's say it now: Intel is run by craven idiots. It employs pusillanimous morons. It lacks integrity. It folded to misogynists and bigots who objected to a woman who had done nothing more than write a piece claiming a place in the world of video games. And even when confronted with its own thoughtlessness and irresponsibility, it could not properly right its wrongs.

 

1. Max if you think that was the first "big fuck-up" Gawker made during this whole ordeal it's no wonder you're in this position now.

 

2. Insulting advertisers. Surely that will stop the flood of advertisers jumping ship! Brilliant idea Max!

 

3. Let's be clear. We don't like Leigh Alexander. We don't like Gamasutra. We'd rather they just went away. But she has a right to say whatever she wants and no one tried to stop that. All we did was leave her crappy site and email advertisers to tell them why. We have that right just like she has her right to say awful racist things.

 

 

Last week, a Gawker writer tweeted "bring back bullying." He, and later I, made the tactical mistake of publicly treating Gamergate with the contempt and flippancy that it deserves. As a consequence, our advertisers were quickly inundated with the same kinds of emails that spooked Intel. Gamergaters were passing around a sample letter ("DO NOT COPY AND PASTE") and list of advertiser contacts to coordinate the campaign; the Washington Post's Caitlin Dewey wrote an excellent breakdown of the efficient mechanism by which the relatively small group of Gamergaters was able to make itself immediately annoying to advertisers:

 

1. See, this is why you're losing Max. Treat us with the contempt and flippancy we deserve? Normal people don't do that. If they think something is wrong they say so but they aren't jerks to people. You're comparing us to the KKK, to nazis, etc but when people come to talk to us they find normal people. They may not agree with us but they know we aren't literally Hitler like you and others are telling them we are.

 

2. Well, in point of fact, most of your advertisers don't appear to actually be advertisers. Most of them say they're not partners or currently advertising with Gawker. What you're doing by listing them is technically illegal but we all know you'll remove them when asked so it's not a big deal.

 

 

Step 4: Plug all of your choices into one of the many form e-mails that leaders of Disrespectful Nod have helpfully written already. [...]

Step 5: Keep it up, even when you get no response, and be — to quote the operation's guide! — "an annoying little s—." A representative for a high-profile communications company that advertises on Polygon confirmed that he'd received "dozens" of e-mails from Gamergate supporters over a period of several weeks.

Operation Disrespectful Nod also encourages Gamergaters to reach out to the bosses and managers of journalists who have written "negative" stories, demanding the reporter in question be fired or asked to resign. Topping their most-wanted list, at present, is Gawker Media's Biddle, who tweeted a string of jokes about Gamergate on Thursday. In context, at least, the jokes were an obvious — if tongue-in-cheek — commentary on the movement's well-documented, often hateful, idiocy. Critics construed them as an endorsement for bullying. (Biddle later apologized for the tweets.)

1. Are you implying that people aren't writing personal emails? I don't see any of that going on myself and the google doc you're citing tells people to use their own words so...

 

2. Be an annoying little shit, yes. We don't want to be ignored. This is how boycotting/letter campaigns work.

 

3. Operation Disrespectful Nod doesn't call for people to be fired for writing "negative" stories. That's a lie.

 

4. Biddle only apologized after advertisers dropped. It's clear he was serious and the apology was insincere and forced for PR. I personally have no interest in seeing Sam fired I'd rather he stay at Gawker and keep saying such awful things so we can show advertisers exactly what kind of people you employ Max.

 

5. Just to be clear for those who may be reading, I'm talking to Max but this quoted bit above is actually by Caitlin Dewey of the Washington Post.

 

 

Transparent and documented though it was, the obsessive campaign worked. Mercedes-Benz—listed on the site as a former partner, and therefore a target—briefly paused its ads on a network that serves ads to Gawker. I've been told that we've lost thousands of dollars already, and could potentially lose thousands more, if not millions. Consequently, the editorial director of Gawker Media, Joel Johnson, took to the front page of Gawker to clarify that Sam Biddle does not want to bully anyone, and that Gawker Media as a company and institution is not pro-bullying.

1. I'm going to say here exactly what I said on Twitter: Your corrupt tears give us all hope for a better future. Please tell us more. #GamerGate #notyourshield #TheFireRises

 

 

If this seems bizarre to you, you're not alone. I feel like I went to sleep in the regular world and woke up in an insane new one where "bullying" is something that it's possible to be seriously and sincerely "for." Yesterday, Adobe wrote to one Gamergater on Twitter that it had asked Gawker to remove its logo from the advertising site because it did not support bullying; a few confused hours later, Adobe was forced to clarify to the world: We are vehemently opposed to bullying of any kind and would never support any group that bullies.

1. I don't know who you think you're lying to. You run the publication that owns Jezebel. You're Gawker. You say nasty things about people for clicks/money. You're bullies that run an internet tabloid. Own it.

 

 

Brands like Adobe and Intel, willing to distance themselves from independent publishers over the spurious claims of a limited but dedicated group of misogynists and trolls, share an important core value with Gamergate: Misogyny. Kidding! Kidding. The value that defines both Gamergate and brand response is cynicism. A brand that honestly believes it needs to clarify that it is "vehemently opposed to bullying of any kind"—as though there are or have ever been genuine corporate supporters of bullying, and as though anyone was ever in danger of thinking the makers of Photoshop might be among their number—passes on to its adult customers the same corroding cynicism that the opportunistic reactionaries running Gamergate imbue in their maladjusted teenage followers. Releasing into the world a statement as vacuous as Adobe's tweet, or as inane as Intel's "apology," demonstrates not that those brands stand against something (how else can anyone possibly feel about bullying?) but that they stand for nothing.

1. See, you say "kidding" but we all know you're saying exactly what you want to say. Saying mean and hurtful things and then going "LOL JK JK!" doesn't make it ok. People know this and it's why they aren't listening to your excuses anymore.

 

2. You're basically saying "anyone who would believe these 'misogynistic maladjusted teenagers' that we're bullies is an idiot." I mean really that pretty much sums it up. You're throwing insults left and right and trying to convince people you're the good guy. I'm not sure if it's funny or sad you thought this would work.

 

 

Maybe that's too much to expect from a brand. But it seems like the bare minimum to expect from ourselves. Gawker is rarely perfect, but it strives to be honest and fearless. For us to have apologized for a joke—to have even clarified—in the face of such breathtaking cynicism and dishonesty, from both "ad partners" and the admitted enemies who leverage those brands' fearfulness to silence opposing voices, feels like an utter abdication of those responsibilities. Frankly, that sucks. If anyone is owed an apology, it's our readers. So: Sorry.

1. Forced insincere apology is forced and insincere. This was fun but I have emails to send, see ya around Max.

 

[SinisterDeath]

http://thisfeliciaday.tumblr.com/post/100700417809/the-only-thing-i-have-to-say-about-gamer-gate
She was doxxed within an hour of posting that...

#gamergate might deny it was one of them, or that they don't condone it.. But this is the danger of using the Anonymous system of governing a movement. 

Set up an official place, with an official membership system, with an official charter, and kick out people who don't follow it. This is why #gamergate is getting its ass handed to itself by the media/feminist groups. 

[WWWwombat]

Have to agree with Lanth and SD on this.  Passion without organization can be very dangerous.  Doxxing Felicia Day?  Seriously?

[SinisterDeath]

Have to agree with Lanth and SD on this.  Passion without organization can be very dangerous.  Doxxing Felicia Day?  Seriously?

Yea.. That alone is going to kill a lot of there support.

[Leelou]

Have to agree with Lanth and SD on this.  Passion without organization can be very dangerous.  Doxxing Felicia Day?  Seriously?

 

That made me sad yesterday when I read what she wrote. :( 

[WWWwombat]

Yeah.  It's not surprising though.  Nor is it surprising that she got doxxed.  It looks like she expected it.  There are a ton of hateful trolls out there.  Any movement that wants to effect real change needs to distance itself from those idiots.

[Nolder]

http://thisfeliciaday.tumblr.com/post/100700417809/the-only-thing-i-have-to-say-about-gamer-gate

She was doxxed within an hour of posting that...

#gamergate might deny it was one of them, or that they don't condone it.. But this is the danger of using the Anonymous system of governing a movement. 

Set up an official place, with an official membership system, with an official charter, and kick out people who don't follow it. This is why #gamergate is getting its ass handed to itself by the media/feminist groups. 

First of all, as I understand it, she wasn't doxxed. Someone posted the address of her talent agency.

Secondly, there isn't any evidence it was Gamergate that did it. A user with the name Internet Aristocat posted the address.

Think about that. Does it really make sense for a Gamergate supporter to implicate Gamergate in a doxxing? How does that help?

The obvious answer is that it doesn't. It's either false flag or third party troll. These people are grasping at straws to demonize Gamergate because they can't win an open debate on the issues raised. Gamergate is bad. It's misogynistic. It's angry. It doxxes people. They're extremists. It's all deflection so they don't have to address the real issues. After all terrorists are not to be negotiated with, right?

Third, Gamergate is just as vulnerable to guilt by association as any other group/movement. Feminists for example like to say "not all feminists are like that" when confronted with one they don't like such as someone who wants to commit genocide and cull the male population to 10% or some other psychopathic nonsense. The fact of the matter is you can't disassociate your movement from your crazies, you can only condone them and point to your majority. RINO is a term for a reason after all. Are the majority of people in  Gamergate bad? Does the majority dox and harass? I'd say no and that means Gamergate can only be dismissed the same way feminism or the Republican party can be. And we tend to agree that someone who generalizes and says X group is all bad is usually ideologically driven and full of it.

And finally, there is no need to organize. Switch tactics? Hell no, we're winning. Only an idiot does what his enemies tell him he should. Maybe at some point a group will have to be formed to do something but right now we're weather the negative PR that the entire weight of media (old and new) can throw at us and we're making ground. Every single day is better than the last. What we're doing is working and it would be idiotic to do something different now. The media can run it's smear campaign all it wants to, it isn't working.

[WWWwombat]

It doesn't make any sense for GamerGate to do actually, but the behavior of certain elements of the gaming community have never made sense to me.  I witnessed some pretty dumb stuff back when I paid more attention to the scene.  I find it likely that whoever doxxed or attempted to doxx Ms. Day (really immaterial as to whether the address posted was actually her home or not as it was obviously intended as an invasion of privacy) is probably some hateful troll with a nominal association to GamerGate rather than someone truly committed to the "cause."  That doesn't really matter though because the cause is rather amorphous and I have a feeling that at least a significant minority portion of the movement could be described as trolls.  When you rely on crazies for support, you end up paying for their craziness as if it were your own.  Especially if the movement isn't cohesive or organized, so you can't convince people that said person's actions are anathema to the movement.

 

As for whether or not GamerGate is working, I haven't seen much meaningful reform yet and very little old media coverage.  Getting advertisers to pull sponsorships is a good start, but it's just a start.  And this incident with Felicia Day is now going to justifiably bring the misogyny discussion even further into the forefront.  She's one of the biggest and most respected female figures on the scene and some idiot just doxxed her for a pretty reasonable and compelling blog post.  GamerGate will have to spend a lot of time playing defense because of this.  And frankly, given the documented instances of sexism in the industry itself, the kind of vitriol that gets flung in the various video game boards around the internet, and prevailing stereotypes, I think it's going to be a tough row to hoe.

 

I wish you the best though.

[Nolder]

That doesn't really matter though because the cause is rather amorphous

It's not.

 

The cause is to establish ethics within gaming journalism.

Either by pressuring current sites to adopt them or establish new ones that will.

Harassment, bullying, doxxing, etc is clearly not condoned and Gamergate has put it's money where it's mouth is to show the world that they may be mostly anonymous nobodies on the internet but there are more of them than trolls and they do care about these issues. I think we're getting close to $100,000 raised for various charities and causes related to Gamergate. Do misogynists protecting their "boys club" donate to support female game developers? Do bullies and harassers donate to anti bullying charities? The answer is no.

 

When you rely on crazies for support, you end up paying for their craziness as if it were your own.  Especially if the movement isn't cohesive or organized, so you can't convince people that said person's actions are anathema to the movement.

We aren't relying on crazies. We condemn and report them. Every single day we report twitter accounts harassing people like Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu in our name. I can't tell you the amount of retweets I see floating around saying hey this guy is trolling Zoe Quinn using the Gamergate hashtag report him now. We own our shit. Does the other side? Has anyone bothered to condemn whoever sent the syringe to Milo? Has anyone condemned whoever sent the knife to King of pol? Did anyone say how shitty it was that the Escapist was DDOS'd merely for allowing a thread about Gamergate? You wont see Zoe Quinn talk about that shit. You wont hear about it on MSNBC or read about it on The Verge.

 

We don't support harassment, death threats, doxxing, or anything like that. If you're a reasonable and objective person that is very easy to see by spending some time on the hashtag and really involving yourself in the discussion. Again, it's why we're winning. We speak calm rational truth while our opponents lie and call us literally Hitler all the while they're in the company of a former Neo Nazi. People see that and they say "hey this isn't what I was told, these guys are actually not bad at all" and then they join our cause.

 

As for whether or not GamerGate is working, I haven't seen much meaningful reform yet and very little old media coverage.

Policy changes have been made on..3 sites already.

Twitch and Youtube also changed their ToS some think in response to Gamergate.

The hashtag soars to new heights every day. Thousands of dollars have been spent on charities.

Advertisers are leaving by the dozens.

 

I...don't know what you define as success but that fits my definition. It's not over but it's working.

We are facing dozens of companies that have millions of dollars, PR teams, old media connections...and we're making progress.

It's kind of amazing actually.

 

Getting advertisers to pull sponsorships is a good start, but it's just a start.

Remember that it wouldn't be necessary if sites like Polygon and Kotaku hadn't censored us.

We came to their table and they banned us from it so no we're setting the table on fire.

We didn't have the goal of hurting these sites from the outset.

 

And this incident with Felicia Day is now going to justifiably bring the misogyny discussion even further into the forefront.  She's one of the biggest and most respected female figures on the scene and some idiot just doxxed her for a pretty reasonable and compelling blog post.  GamerGate will have to spend a lot of time playing defense because of this.  And frankly, given the documented instances of sexism in the industry itself, the kind of vitriol that gets flung in the various video game boards around the internet, and prevailing stereotypes, I think it's going to be a tough row to hoe.

 

I wish you the best though.

It's deflection.

If people want to waste their time defending that's their business but I'm not going to.

Zero proof has been provided that Gamergate has done wrong it's just being associated with the incident in a smear attempt.

I'm not going to accept responsibility for something without proof.

[Nolder]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2014/10/25/While-the-Media-Slanders-Gamers-as-Terrorists-GamerGate-Is-Hunting-Trolls-and-Abusers

[Nolder]

https://soundcloud.com/totalbiscuit/whose-side-am-i-on

[Nolder]

A good timeline of the things Gamergate is talking about stretching back years before the hashtag was born.

 

http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/343871/Corruption-consumer-hate-and-bad-journalism-in-games-journalism/

 

 

Edit: I feel like I'm getting a bit spammy so I'll edit this post for awhile instead of making a new one.

 

Here's a nice article by Techraptor going over Gamergate's origins and why there can't be a dialogue if a certain people are allowed to just poison the well of discussion.

[Nolder]

http://imgur.com/l2fqjOk

 

http://theralphretort.com/evidence-gamergate-isnt-behind-doxxings/

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2014/10/25/While-the-Media-Slanders-Gamers-as-Terrorists-GamerGate-Is-Hunting-Trolls-and-Abusers

 

https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/526240698493054978

 

In the future if anyone wants to discuss this with me don't talk about harassment.

I don't want to hear it. It's a non starter and avoids the real issues at hand.

90% of it is being done by 3rd party trolls and it's hitting both sides.

Gamergate is doing all it can to remove doxxers and harassers.

It's all anyone can do. I'm tired of this guilt by association crap.

[Barmacral]

Until Gamergate is willing to get itself together and take responsibility for the "movement" (a term I use very loosely) a) there isn't much else to talk about but harassment and b) Gamergate is NOT doing all it can to remove doxxers and harassers. Your attitude of "I'm not the bad guy I'm the victim" is entirely self-serving and getting you nowhere. Take control of your movement and turn it into something more than people whining on twitter and having no control over "membership" of the "movement" and then you'll have grounds to talk. In the meantime I will continue supporting all the women who are being targeted by people who associate themselves with you very very effectively since whining and reporting people on twitter (oh and creating blog posts) is clearly not enough.

 

But if you're going to ignore what I just said, I'd rather you completely ignore my post instead of respond to it, since that is how you're dealing with the harassment issues with Gamergate.

[Nolder]

Until Gamergate is willing to get itself together and take responsibility for the "movement" (a term I use very loosely) a) there isn't much else to talk about but harassment and b) Gamergate is NOT doing all it can to remove doxxers and harassers.

This is complete crap.

First of all, there's plenty to talk about. Take your pick. This is literally the problem with Anti GG people. Instead of talking about Ben  Kuchera or Patricia Hernandez or the EA scandal or any of that you'd rather talk about harassment. We aren't doing it and we're damn tired of talking about it instead of what we really care about, the ethics.

 

Secondly yes, yes they are. You're flat out wrong.

 

Your attitude of "I'm not the bad guy I'm the victim" is entirely self-serving and getting you nowhere.

1. I am not a bad guy.

2. I am not a victim. I don't play that game.

 

Take control of your movement and turn it into something more than people whining on twitter and having no control over "membership" of the "movement" and then you'll have grounds to talk.

Well we'd be more than happy to "whine" on Kotaku, Polygon, Gamasutra, NeoGaf, etc but they banned discussion early on. We weren't the ones that left the table of discussion. Also lol, no we wont be getting a leader and a membership list to doxx. Not that that's stopped anyone so far but I think we're doing just fine. Kellogg's dropped Gawker today. 

 

In the meantime I will continue supporting all the women who are being targeted by people who associate themselves with you very very effectively since whining and reporting people on twitter (oh and creating blog posts) is clearly not enough.

You don't understand do you?

Gamergate isn't targeting people. We're not the doxxers.

You can say it as many times as you like but that doesn't make it true.

We are literally the opposite of everything that's being said about us.

Misogynists? Donated to radical feminists to support women in gaming.

Bullies? Donated to anti bullying and suicide prevention charities.

Doxxers? Literally a group of people that watch the Gamergate tag daily for that crap and signal everyone to report bomb accounts. I have personally done this four times now. It's the same people every time. Bill Waggon or something like that.

 

We were faster at reporting than Brianna Wu. We were thanked by both Jason Schrier and Leigh Alexander, two game journalists we supposedly hate.

Do you know about that? Probably not.

 

But if you're going to ignore what I just said, I'd rather you completely ignore my post instead of respond to it, since that is how you're dealing with the harassment issues with Gamergate.

I couldn't ignore it because of how dumb it was.

Do a little research. Spend some time on the hashtag.

Don't just blindly follow what Gawker and Vox tell you.

[WWWwombat]

Nolder, I'm not highly informed on this, but I think it's hard for a lot of people to believe that sexism doesn't play a role to some degree when the thing came to prominence over the unsupported accusations against Quinn and Grayson.  Even if the vast majority of you are working against the harassment, I know from personal experience that there are a lot of racists/sexists/trolls who play video games, so you have to work extra hard to combat them, and decentralizing and running your movement almost entirely through Twitter (a medium highly susceptible to trolls) doesn't seem like a good idea in that regard.  Even a little more reliance on coordination through internet forums would help imo.