This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Anti-GamerGate Appreciation Thread (Daikun Free Zone)

1333436383964

Comments

  • Well that's kind of why I think the problem is unsolvable. The best you can is hope to mitigate the risk and disclosure. Which is a whole nother can of worms. When is something worth disclosing how to mitigate risks etc. And if the problem gets too bad people will leave your service thus the problem self-corrects
  • edited May 2015

    Well, it seems like Zoe Quinn actually was emotionally abusive in that relationship. The funny thing is that it never comes up due to GamerGate's inability to understand any kind of nuanced issue,

    Well, of course not. They don't give a shit about that, it's just another way of trying to score points on the feminist movement.
    Axel said:

    Except that's also how every form of media/journalism works, and it is delusional that some people think it is a "unique corruption" of game journalism. Just isn't.

    Can confirm, with caveats. As a journalist, you will inevitably build a network of people you know, pet experts, all sorts of things like that. Part of the job is making sure you're not giving them an easy ride just because you're friends, or to step off when necessary. Some people do a good job of it, some people don't, everybody fails to varying degrees from time to time. But just knowing and talking to people is fuck-all - in fact without it, it'd be almost impossible to do your job.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • Axel said:

    Except that's also how every form of media/journalism works, and it is delusional that some people think it is a "unique corruption" of game journalism. Just isn't.

  • The Counterstrike content maker "The Warowl" is pro GG, he doesn't seem to know about most of the positions but still acts like an idiot.

    I wonder if Valve will remove his sticker from the game if they realise that he is pro GG.
  • sK0pe said:

    The Counterstrike content maker "The Warowl" is pro GG, he doesn't seem to know about most of the positions but still acts like an idiot.

    I wonder if Valve will remove his sticker from the game if they realise that he is pro GG.

    Doubtful. They don't really seem to care that much.
  • Churba said:

    sK0pe said:

    The Counterstrike content maker "The Warowl" is pro GG, he doesn't seem to know about most of the positions but still acts like an idiot.

    I wonder if Valve will remove his sticker from the game if they realise that he is pro GG.

    Doubtful. They don't really seem to care that much.
    Valve at least made an effort to remove a homophobic/transphobic on Steam Greenlight after getting bombarded with requests to remove the damn game. These people are in the industry, but they believe the GamerGate audience is big enough to actually support these terrible games.



    The developer is a gator, makes no shame about it. The studio's official statement to the backlash is pants-on-head stupid and ignorant as expected: skaldicgames.com/statement.html

    tl;dr: "I released this as a joke to point out how biased and hate-filled the LGBT community is and show an example of how people waste their time complaining about these things."
  • So... why should people who are homophobic/transphobic/racist/etc be removed from markets like Steam, exactly?

    If customers want to boycott their games, well.. OK, but this feels a bit like banning books to me. Worse, maybe, because you're banning it based not on content but based on who the author is.

    You can find someone reprehensible and that's fine, but why should they be actively censored (yes, yes, Valve is a private entity and not a government etc etc blah blah.)

    Let the guy try to sell his fucking game unless it's got something illegal in it.
  • edited May 2015
    It's hatespeech? It's the same reason I'm not allowed to spraypaint "Faggot" on the local bridge, it's because that's hatespeech and it's not allowed. Private storefronts are especially allowed to enforce whatever rules they want.
    Post edited by Axel on
  • muppet said:

    So... why should people who are homophobic/transphobic/racist/etc be removed from markets like Steam, exactly?

    If customers want to boycott their games, well.. OK, but this feels a bit like banning books to me. Worse, maybe, because you're banning it based not on content but based on who the author is.

    You can find someone reprehensible and that's fine, but why should they be actively censored (yes, yes, Valve is a private entity and not a government etc etc blah blah.)

    Let the guy try to sell his fucking game unless it's got something illegal in it.

    It's a problem if a public library refuses to carry a book. It's a problem if a public school bans a book. It's a problem if someone is arrested for possessing a book (or game). But a private store is free to choose what goods it will and will not stock on its shelves, virtual though they may be.

    It is in Valve's best interest business wise to refuse to sell these goods. If they sell horrible games by horrible people it hurts their business. It gets them bad publicity instead of positive. It clutters their store with garbage. It helps the horrible people who make the game make more money which can be used to support their horrible cause. All around, it is better for Valve not to sell these games, so they shouldn't.

    As I said before, the tactics do not matter. Valve is on my side in this battle, and a powerful ally are they. Fuck 'em up Valve! If I was Valve I would go even further. I wouldn't just stop them from selling, I would stop them from buying and playing. Delete the Steam accounts of all confirmed GG-ers, give no refunds, and perma-ban. We don't want you shitheads as customers, and our EULA says we can fuck you, so we will.
  • Axel said:

    It's hatespeech? It's the same reason I'm not allowed to spraypaint "Faggot" on the local bridge, it's because that's hatespeech and it's not allowed. Private storefronts are especially allowed to enforce whatever rules they want.

    Er, I think that might actually be because it's vandalism, rather than hate speech.
  • Axel said:

    It's hatespeech? It's the same reason I'm not allowed to spraypaint "Faggot" on the local bridge, it's because that's hatespeech and it's not allowed. Private storefronts are especially allowed to enforce whatever rules they want.

    If there's hate speech in the game, then I can maybe see Valve taking it down from their private store. But if the author is just a douche... that's poor justification for excluding him from what's pretty much the single best channel for his product. You're effectively taking away his livelihood because he has opinions you don't like. That's fucked.
  • muppet said:

    Axel said:

    It's hatespeech? It's the same reason I'm not allowed to spraypaint "Faggot" on the local bridge, it's because that's hatespeech and it's not allowed. Private storefronts are especially allowed to enforce whatever rules they want.

    If there's hate speech in the game, then I can maybe see Valve taking it down from their private store.
    There's very clearly hate speech in the game.
  • It's the same as if someone had made a similar game and called it "jew killer" or "spic killer" or "nigger killer".
    Nobody would defend that bullshit.
    His intent isn't artistic or moral, it's to make and spew hateful bullshit, then hide behind the freedom of speech when people rightfully call him on it. Just because you CAN say just about anything doesn't mean you should, and if you choose to put that bullshit out there, don't bitch when people throw it back in your face.
  • I actually haven't seen the game, so now that I know it's just a bullshit hate rant, I fully support taking it down.
  • Just because you CAN say just about anything doesn't mean you should, and if you choose to put that bullshit out there, don't bitch when people throw it back in your face.

    As always, xkcd has an on point comic.
  • edited May 2015
    I don't really get how any part of that is supposed to show how "biased" the LGBT community is. It's not the community as a whole in any way and the funny part is that I bet a lot of what he thinks is "biased" or "hateful" is probably very similar to the way GG people feel like they're being discriminated against. The difference though is that LGBT people ACTUALLY ARE discriminated against, especially transgender individuals these days.

    When people have a negative view of who you are, its hard to not be negative yourself, which is where sometimes those individuals can tend to be somewhat clique-y.
    Post edited by MATATAT on
  • Churba said:

    Axel said:

    It's hatespeech? It's the same reason I'm not allowed to spraypaint "Faggot" on the local bridge, it's because that's hatespeech and it's not allowed. Private storefronts are especially allowed to enforce whatever rules they want.

    Er, I think that might actually be because it's vandalism, rather than hate speech.
    Fair enough, it was more a point about you not being allowed to put hatespeech on something that you don't personally and privately own (Whether it be a public bridge or a page on Steam's storefront), but you're definitely correct.

  • MATATAT said:

    I don't really get how any part of that is supposed to show how "biased" the LGBT community is. It's not the community as a whole in any way and the funny part is that I bet a lot of what he thinks is "biased" or "hateful" is probably very similar to the way GG people feel like they're being discriminated against. The difference though is that LGBT people ACTUALLY ARE discriminated against, especially transgender individuals these days.

    When people have a negative view of who you are, its hard to not be negative yourself, which is where sometimes those individuals can tend to be somewhat clique-y.

    It's weird to be at work even in a fairly liberal state when other people are talking about their kids, and prom, and boyfriends/girlfriends etc, and I'm not sure if it's "safe" to talk about my daughter's girlfriend, or whatever. She's out, but still.
  • edited May 2015
    Axel said:

    Fair enough, it was more a point about you not being allowed to put hatespeech on something that you don't personally and privately own (Whether it be a public bridge or a page on Steam's storefront), but you're definitely correct.

    You point still stands, though. To use a different example - You can't print hate speech in the paper, but a storefront is not a newspaper.
    muppet said:

    It's weird to be at work even in a fairly liberal state when other people are talking about their kids, and prom, and boyfriends/girlfriends etc, and I'm not sure if it's "safe" to talk about my daughter's girlfriend, or whatever. She's out, but still.

    Well, best person to ask would be your daughter. She probably knows better than anyone, after all. Gotta say, she's got some spine on her. I never bought a boyfriend along in front of my family, only ever girlfriends. Not even as "Here's my mate (name)", just out of sight, out of mind.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • She told me she was gay and I was like "OK cool, we're having meatloaf for dinner."

    And then we talked about it a bit, but not much. Enough that she knew I wasn't dismissing the importance she placed on telling me about it, but also made it clear that it's so not a thing in our house (except to understand and support her.)

    She's fine with me talking about it, what I mean by "safe" is that I never know what sort of ignorance or even hostility I'll run into by bringing it up (when it's in context) when talking to other parents. The fact that I have to stop and worry about this is bullshit.
  • muppet said:

    I actually haven't seen the game, so now that I know it's just a bullshit hate rant, I fully support taking it down.

    Once again Muppet finds himself arguing on side of a topic for a while, only to later admit that he hadn't read/seen/watched/played/spent any effort learning anything about the specific example at hand, revealing all the effort put in by others to argue on the other side to be a useless waste of time. How tedious for everyone involved.
  • edited May 2015

    muppet said:

    I actually haven't seen the game, so now that I know it's just a bullshit hate rant, I fully support taking it down.

    Once again Muppet finds himself arguing on side of a topic for a while, only to later admit that he hadn't read/seen/watched/played/spent any effort learning anything about the specific example at hand, revealing all the effort put in by others to argue on the other side to be a useless waste of time. How tedious for everyone involved.
    Heaven forbid a broader issue be discussed than simply the hot specific example of the day for four, heck, as many as FIVE comments in total! Lord knows your forum time is far too valuable for that.

    Give me a fucking break, Luke.
    Post edited by muppet on
  • muppet said:

    muppet said:

    I actually haven't seen the game, so now that I know it's just a bullshit hate rant, I fully support taking it down.

    Once again Muppet finds himself arguing on side of a topic for a while, only to later admit that he hadn't read/seen/watched/played/spent any effort learning anything about the specific example at hand, revealing all the effort put in by others to argue on the other side to be a useless waste of time. How tedious for everyone involved.
    Heaven forbid a broader issue be discussed than simply the hot specific example of the day for four, heck, as many as FIVE comments in total! Lord knows your forum time is far too valuable for that.

    Give me a fucking break, Luke.
    No, Luke is pretty much 100% dead on here. You started a discussion about something you knew almost nothing about and got shut down hard.
  • edited May 2015
    No, I didn't get "shut down hard". I asked why someone should have their game removed from Steam because they're an asshole. I qualified it with "Well, maybe if X." Then somebody confirmed X and I said "Well OK in that case I agree in this instance."

    Not sure where the smackdown is that you're seeing there. Seemed like a conversation, to me. Seems it was much more loaded for others.
    Post edited by muppet on
  • I think it's mostly that you may not have been closely reading the thread, because just from the thread's context it was pretty evident that the game in question was about murdering LGBT people...
  • If you watch the totalbiscuit video you'll understand in about 3 seconds :tongue:

    Completely unrelated but I like that this is a smiley :trollface:
  • Could be that I didn't go back enough pages and read. I still think there's some value in talking about whether people who are just hateful assholes should be barred from private, but very large marketplaces, which is really what I was talking about.

    I still think it's iffy. I understand the private/public distinction but once corporations and their venues are so large that they've effectively replaced the library and the public square, I think the grey area gets bigger and bigger.

    But yeah, "Homo Murderer 2015" or whatever doesn't seem like something that needs a place on the shelf, would be my gut reaction.

    I also think letting it through and letting it fail spectacularly might send an even bigger message than banning it, which becomes a rallying point for idiots, but if I were in Valve's place I'd probably not want that on my servers, either.
  • muppet said:

    No, I didn't get "shut down hard". I asked why someone should have their game removed from Steam because they're an asshole. I qualified it with "Well, maybe if X." Then somebody confirmed X and I said "Well OK in that case I agree in this instance."

    Not sure where the smackdown is that you're seeing there. Seemed like a conversation, to me. Seems it was much more loaded for others.

    Don't argue semantics. You were wrong about something. Therefore you got "shut down." It's only hard because you can't admit it.
  • I would give you some slack (Honestly, I'm surprised too), but the thing you were responding to was literally a few posts higher, not pages.

    We literally were saying "This game is called 'Kill All F*******' and we think it shouldn't be on Steam, good thing it was taken down," you responded with, "I dunno, free speech and everything, maybe not a big deal?" And then after we all went "????" you actually did your research and realized that the game was indefensible.

    Luke was definitely ruder than he needed to be, but pretty on point. Simply watching the linked video about the game that we were responding to probably would've given you the context you needed, but you talked first rather than waiting. And he called you out on it. Such is the way.
  • How is a game about killing gays any different than Call of Duty or any other violent game? If you're prepared to ban that game as being hate speech, what about everything else that depicts killing? No, most other games with killing don't explicitly promote genocide, but killing is killing, and life has the same value regardless of any factors other than humanity.
Sign In or Register to comment.