I had not followed GamerGate until today's New York Times article about it. Nor followed games, so the controversy is new to me. But not the issues involved, which are prevalent online and off. Particularly in testosterone-rich enterprises like military, spies, armaments, sports, weapons, ideology, religion, education, society, civilization, humanity, existence itself. In all of these, the stronger violently dominate the weaker and do so with the psychotic belief that this is the way it should be, natural. In war and peace, in human exploitation of animal and earthly domains, in climate degradation, in force-feeding "democracy," in cruel treatment of women's bodies and neglect of children, in just about every aspect of torturous "advancements in civilized peoples" in the course of inventing and applying ever greater and more vicious ways to kill, maim, starve and over-populate earthlings by male rape in all guises of wargames. Games are a reflection of the this much greater conceit of male dominance in all institutions, all of them, even those which spout diversity and affirmative action and grant minimal access to privileged male sanctuaries -- no matter the skin color, ethnicity, faith, location on earth. It is argued that male aggression inherent and can at best be somewhat controlled by law and social compact. That is a comfortable apologia by male supremacists in law and social compacts dominated by them with intellectual and economic arrogance. All institutions measure accomplishment by male-derived standards to tip the balance in favor of those rigged games. GameGate is too limited in scope, so much that it should be seen as a male-dominated diversion, a game, to avoid addressing the origin and sustaining influence of male way of thinking, doing, making, competing, surviving, by lying, cheating, killing, ruling in all aspects of existence, simulated in games, trained for in games, monetized by games designers and producers, applauded and lauded in halls of power and control, in prizes and awards, in cemetaries and statues, in art and science, in accumulation concentration and monopolization of wealth. No game this larger world, this wargame of "ballsy" potentates in military, policy, spying, media, sports, taxation, playing obsessively the "law of men enforced by lawmen." At 12:10 PM 10/25/2014, you wrote:
Hello John, what do you think about GamerGate?
cheers, George.
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 7:26 AM, John Young <jya@pipeline.com> wrote:
I had not followed GamerGate until today's New York Times article about it. Nor followed games, so the controversy is
One thing to keep in mind is that there is a strong incentive for journalists to misreport on this topic because the GamerGate people are extremely critical of journalists. This is one reason why journalists originally refused to report anything real about them. Here's an interesting take on the two sides of the topic: http://mangotron.com/pro-vs-anti-gamergate-two-interviews - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507
2014-10-26 14:26 GMT+02:00 John Young <jya@pipeline.com>:
I had not followed GamerGate until today's New York Times article about it. Nor followed games, so the controversy is new to me. But not the issues involved, which are prevalent online and off. Particularly in testosterone-rich enterprises like military, spies, armaments, sports, weapons, ideology, religion, education, society, civilization, humanity, existence itself. In all of these, the stronger violently dominate the weaker and do so with the psychotic belief that this is the way it should be, natural.
In war and peace, in human exploitation of animal and earthly domains, in climate degradation, in force-feeding "democracy," in cruel treatment of women's bodies and neglect of children, in just about every aspect of torturous "advancements in civilized peoples" in the course of inventing and applying ever greater and more vicious ways to kill, maim, starve and over-populate earthlings by male rape in all guises of wargames.
Games are a reflection of the this much greater conceit of male dominance in all institutions, all of them, even those which spout diversity and affirmative action and grant minimal access to privileged male sanctuaries -- no matter the skin color, ethnicity, faith, location on earth.
It is argued that male aggression inherent and can at best be somewhat controlled by law and social compact. That is a comfortable apologia by male supremacists in law and social compacts dominated by them with intellectual and economic arrogance. All institutions measure accomplishment by male-derived standards to tip the balance in favor of those rigged games.
GameGate is too limited in scope, so much that it should be seen as a male-dominated diversion, a game, to avoid addressing the origin and sustaining influence of male way of thinking, doing, making, competing, surviving, by lying, cheating, killing, ruling in all aspects of existence, simulated in games, trained for in games, monetized by games designers and producers, applauded and lauded in halls of power and control, in prizes and awards, in cemetaries and statues, in art and science, in accumulation concentration and monopolization of wealth.
No game this larger world, this wargame of "ballsy" potentates in military, policy, spying, media, sports, taxation, playing obsessively the "law of men enforced by lawmen."
At 12:10 PM 10/25/2014, you wrote:
Hello John, what do you think about GamerGate?
cheers, George.
It looks like you don't really understand GamerGate at all. Nothing you said is even remotely related to GamerGate. For me it looks like you're just slamming your own views on it without realizing it's not even related. I just read that New York Times article and you can clearly see it's written by anti-GamerGate like most mainstream media does so. This is actually exactly why GamerGate is such big movement and it's best described with this quote: The issue GamerGate is attempting to address is that the majority of games publications take an unbalanced view of the industry, injecting their political beliefs into stories they then report on as fact. It's like if Fox, MSNBC and CNN were all ultra right (or left) wing and that was the only news you were able to get.
I'm sure we all know that media/press is fourth power (Fourth Estate) and it's bad when it starts pushing it's own agenda. And it's actually happening not only with just gaming journalists but everywhere. It used to be just government which could influence us in bad ways, but now, media have such power that it can also influence our life. If you won't be careful, you can easily fall for this. For example there was published atleast *34* different articles with titles such as "Gamers are dead" within couple of day span. No, I'm not joking, you can see list of these articles here http://goo.gl/Uu2QxC And those articles were published from various gaming and review sites with more than just a few readers (well, now fewer :D) and in such short timespan that there's no much doubt it was coordinated and that they know each other somewhat and are trying to push same views. But this is not, how you should treat your audience. I'm a gamer, I enjoy gaming, but it's such a diverse group that you can't really tell anything about them individually. Only thing that's common is that they all love to play games and are interested in them. Anyway GamerGate is really complex issue and it's not only about journalism. My suggestion would be, look here http://www.historyofgamergate.com/volume-1.html for full story. And note, that, it's not only gamers who support GamerGate, but also game developers, including females (see #NotYourShield).
Dāvis Mosāns wrote:
Anyway GamerGate is really complex issue and it's not only about journalism. My suggestion would be, look here
If gamergaters spent half as much time trying to fix systemic problems that they claim to care about as they do correcting "misconceptions" about gamergate, I *might* start to take them seriously. Want to fix games journalism? Why not start with the large corporations that bribe their way into getting good reviews at large publications that lead to millions of dollars in sales. Target EA, who just this week went to court to defend against a class-action lawsuit filed by gamers. While the court found in their favor, they *also* determined that the statements put out by EA were "puffery" and did not reflect reality. How will this impact the industry going forward? Does #GamerGate bother having an opinion on this? Targeting female indie developers is complete weaksauce. And the fact that this comprises the vast majority of #GamerGate's "activism" proves the allegation that it's filled with whiny man-babies.
And note, that, it's not only gamers who support GamerGate, but also game developers, including females (see #NotYourShield).
You know what I *don't* care about? People I don't know who supposedly shagged other people I don't know. No one whose opinion matters cares about this hypothetical scandal. It's all a pseudo-intellectual circlejerk. You either care about journalistic ethics enough to target large corporations and key players, or you're just fucking around. Seriously. This is as true for you (yes, you personally) as it is for the #NSA #GCHQ crowd. ~Griffin
Targeting female indie developers is complete weaksauce. And the fact that this comprises the vast majority of #GamerGate's "activism" proves the allegation that it's filled with whiny man-babies.
Not only man-babies, but principally man-babies.
And note, that, it's not only gamers who support GamerGate, but also game developers, including females (see #NotYourShield).
You know what I *don't* care about? People I don't know who supposedly shagged other people I don't know.
Boom. So, a 'movement' that claims to want "journalistic integrity", which absent press censorship means "self regulation", can't be bothered policing its own ranks to stop misogynistic slander and death-threats. How many "Gamergaters" spend time chasing others for doxxing, threatening and slandering women in technology? As many as actually take part in these acts? I doubt it, and I see no evidence of such self-policing at a meaningful scale. I'm sure there are honest, decent people using the "Gamergate" flag to call for something-something, but the fact that they're using that flag after it's been so thoroughly dragged through the muck *by other gamergaters* shows that they are content to accept misogyny in exchange for trending status on Twitter, rather than forking what's become more of a *bowel* movement into something with a measure of the integrity they claim to demand of others. As often, Chris Straub summed it up well (Warning: Allegory): http://chainsawsuit.com/comic/2014/10/15/the-perfect-crime/ On 27/10/14 02:48, Griffin Boyce wrote:
Dāvis Mosāns wrote:
Anyway GamerGate is really complex issue and it's not only about journalism. My suggestion would be, look here
If gamergaters spent half as much time trying to fix systemic problems that they claim to care about as they do correcting "misconceptions" about gamergate, I *might* start to take them seriously.
Want to fix games journalism? Why not start with the large corporations that bribe their way into getting good reviews at large publications that lead to millions of dollars in sales. Target EA, who just this week went to court to defend against a class-action lawsuit filed by gamers. While the court found in their favor, they *also* determined that the statements put out by EA were "puffery" and did not reflect reality. How will this impact the industry going forward? Does #GamerGate bother having an opinion on this?
Targeting female indie developers is complete weaksauce. And the fact that this comprises the vast majority of #GamerGate's "activism" proves the allegation that it's filled with whiny man-babies.
And note, that, it's not only gamers who support GamerGate, but also game developers, including females (see #NotYourShield).
You know what I *don't* care about? People I don't know who supposedly shagged other people I don't know. No one whose opinion matters cares about this hypothetical scandal. It's all a pseudo-intellectual circlejerk.
You either care about journalistic ethics enough to target large corporations and key players, or you're just fucking around. Seriously. This is as true for you (yes, you personally) as it is for the #NSA #GCHQ crowd.
~Griffin
2014-10-27 4:48 GMT+02:00 Griffin Boyce <griffin@cryptolab.net>:
Dāvis Mosāns wrote:
Anyway GamerGate is really complex issue and it's not only about journalism. My suggestion would be, look here
If gamergaters spent half as much time trying to fix systemic problems that they claim to care about as they do correcting "misconceptions" about gamergate, I *might* start to take them seriously.
Want to fix games journalism? Why not start with the large corporations that bribe their way into getting good reviews at large publications that lead to millions of dollars in sales. Target EA, who just this week went to court to defend against a class-action lawsuit filed by gamers. While the court found in their favor, they *also* determined that the statements put out by EA were "puffery" and did not reflect reality. How will this impact the industry going forward? Does #GamerGate bother having an opinion on this?
Targeting female indie developers is complete weaksauce. And the fact that this comprises the vast majority of #GamerGate's "activism" proves the allegation that it's filled with whiny man-babies.
GamerGate is not about that, you've read too much into some propaganda. I know only single such case about 1 game. And I haven't seen any harassers admitting that they do it for GamerGate or journalism, but IMO they're just
I don't really see how anything could be fixed or like what steps gamers should take to fix it? Also I haven't seen any bribing accusations and if someone would have a proof, I'm sure there would huge backslash and probably lawsuit. Of course gamers know that EA is 2nd worst game company, right after Ubisoft, but there's nothing really changeable about it as a lot of people still buy their games and will continue to do so, because they've some good games and others just don't care about it. Anyway people talk most about what other's share and talk about so that's exactly why there's nothing much about anything else, people just don't talk about it. So you really need some controversially otherwise that story won't be talked about, because there's nothing more to say than - "that's bad". trolls who like to use this opportunity. They like publicity (even if it's bad) and that's what they're getting. I'm not sure if you can imagine this mindset, but I can't deny that it must be exciting to read news story about death threats you wrote. It actually encourages to do it again. There's well know internet Rule 14 "Do not argue with trolls — it means that they win." so as usual - Don't feed the trolls.
And note, that, it's not only gamers who support GamerGate, but
also game developers, including females (see #NotYourShield).
You know what I *don't* care about? People I don't know who supposedly shagged other people I don't know. No one whose opinion matters cares about this hypothetical scandal. It's all a pseudo-intellectual circlejerk.
You either care about journalistic ethics enough to target large corporations and key players, or you're just fucking around. Seriously. This is as true for you (yes, you personally) as it is for the #NSA #GCHQ crowd.
I don't really care either, but look at this thread, we're still here writing our opinions about it. Also if you've some recent examples of you're named large gaming corporation wrongdoings then tell them and I'll gladly share them with others.
2014-10-27 12:11 GMT+02:00 Cathal Garvey <cathalgarvey@cathalgarvey.me>:
So, a 'movement' that claims to want "journalistic integrity", which absent press censorship means "self regulation", can't be bothered policing its own ranks to stop misogynistic slander and death-threats. How many "Gamergaters" spend time chasing others for doxxing, threatening and slandering women in technology? As many as actually take part in these acts? I doubt it, and I see no evidence of such self-policing at a meaningful scale.
like that would be possible. GamerGate is anonymous, leaderless movement
I'm sure there are honest, decent people using the "Gamergate" flag to call for something-something, but the fact that they're using that flag after it's been so thoroughly dragged through the muck *by other gamergaters* shows that they are content to accept misogyny in exchange for trending status on Twitter, rather than forking what's become more of a *bowel* movement into something with a measure of the integrity they claim to demand of others.
It was media and new stories who smeared it all and they are not admitting that they made mistake by presenting it as just a hate movement, if that would be case, it would have ended a long time ago. Also about accepting misogyny - I just don't see it. Some people have concentrated on
without precisely defined goal and means how to acquire it. It's somewhat similar to Anonymous. Also why anti-GamerGate people can't be bothered policing their own ranks? There are a lot of examples how they harass GamerGate supporters, eg. https://twitter.com/QueenyMartha/status/522531549393076224 and for a lot more look http://gamergateharassment.tumblr.com/ Like I said, trolls are everywhere. And actually you're wrong about this, there are so called "#GamerGate Harassment Patrol" where they report any harassment they see, look at this http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2014/10/25/While-the-Media-Slanders-G... while anti-GamerGate just keep claiming how misogynistic GamerGate is without doing anything else. To be honest, I don't see their point at all. Let's assume that GamerGate indeed is all misogynists and so what? It's not like anything will change because some feminists are offended. that so much that they don't see anything else. Anyway I've too different opinion about this and IMO this discussion is pointless timewaste. I would even say it could be classified as spam for this list as I don't really see what's here related to Cyberpunk.
Dāvis Mosāns wrote:
GamerGate is not about that, you've read too much into some propaganda. I know only single such case about 1 game. And I haven't seen any harassers admitting that they do it for GamerGate or journalism, but IMO they're just trolls who like to use this opportunity. They like publicity (even if it's bad) and that's what they're getting. I'm not sure if you can imagine this mindset, but I can't deny that it must be exciting to read news story about death threats you wrote. It actually encourages to do it again. There's well know internet Rule 14 "Do not argue with trolls — it means that they win." so as usual - Don't feed the trolls.
First of all, it is never *ever* someone's fault when random internet creeps stalk and harass them. If continuing to have an opinion and be in an industry is "feeding the trolls" then you should seriously consider changing your views on the subject. As for the rest, I'd like to quote Meredith Patterson: "A person was cruelly emotionally abused. That person called out their abuser, and in overwhelming majority, a community which claims as one of its defining characteristics an opposition to gaslighting, siloing and all other forms of abuse rallied around the *perpetrator*. Why did that happen?" By Newsweek's count, Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian got nearly 80'000 twitter comments in response to their views on GamerGate itself. Eighty thousand -- that's more than all journalists and news outlets combined (including Kotaku). Tell me this isn't about the ongoing harassment of women who have an opinion. I don't watch AS's videos and find her conclusions to be quite thin at times. Doesn't matter -- she has the fundamental right to voice an opinion. My favorite part of this whole gamergate shitstorm was when Marcia Hofmann pointed out inconsistencies and someone immediately said that it was the game devs' faults for having opinions. They said it non-jokingly and completely without irony. The underlying message is: "Censor yourself or be prepared to go into hiding." That's no way to live and I won't support it. If you're serious about journalistic ethics, then you should be prepared to send letters and form protest around large companies. If 0.5% of EA's customers sent emails asking them to change policies or correct errors in their sales materials, their policies would change very quickly.
Also if you've some recent examples of you're named large gaming corporation wrongdoings then tell them and I'll gladly share them with others.
Well I mentioned EA's case, and that doesn't seem particularly thrilling to you. There was the huge fiasco a few years ago around Kane and Lynch, and I would hazard a guess that GameSpot's editorial practices haven't changed. And if you don't want to be associated with abject harassment, then don't hitch your wagon to a cause that harasses people. Form a group of sane people and pick a different hashtag. I have literally *no* sympathy for sane people who aren't willing to use a different hashtag. They're sacrificing integrity in order to ride a wave of abjectly shitty publicity. ~Griffin [1] http://chainsawsuit.com/comic/2014/10/15/the-perfect-crime/ [2] https://twitter.com/abditum/status/525624080826122241 [3] http://www.newsweek.com/gamergate-about-media-ethics-or-harassing-women-hara...
Dnia poniedziałek, 27 października 2014 19:51:18 Griffin Boyce pisze:
Dāvis Mosāns wrote:
GamerGate is not about that, you've read too much into some propaganda. I know only single such case about 1 game. And I haven't seen any harassers admitting that they do it for GamerGate or journalism, but IMO they're just trolls who like to use this opportunity. They like publicity (even if it's bad) and that's what they're getting. I'm not sure if you can imagine this mindset, but I can't deny that it must be exciting to read news story about death threats you wrote. It actually encourages to do it again. There's well know internet Rule 14 "Do not argue with trolls — it means that they win." so as usual - Don't feed the trolls.
First of all, it is never *ever* someone's fault when random internet creeps stalk and harass them. If continuing to have an opinion and be in an industry is "feeding the trolls" then you should seriously consider changing your views on the subject.
As for the rest, I'd like to quote Meredith Patterson:
"A person was cruelly emotionally abused. That person called out their abuser, and in overwhelming majority, a community which claims as one of its defining characteristics an opposition to gaslighting, siloing and all other forms of abuse rallied around the *perpetrator*. Why did that happen?"
By Newsweek's count, Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian got nearly 80'000 twitter comments in response to their views on GamerGate itself. Eighty thousand -- that's more than all journalists and news outlets combined (including Kotaku). Tell me this isn't about the ongoing harassment of women who have an opinion. I don't watch AS's videos and find her conclusions to be quite thin at times. Doesn't matter -- she has the fundamental right to voice an opinion.
Also, this: http://hackthepatriarchy.tumblr.com/post/101088838567/egalitariste-pepperoni... -- Pozdr rysiek
Dāvis Mosāns wrote:
GamerGate is not about that, you've read too much into some propaganda. I know only single such case about 1 game. And I haven't seen any harassers admitting that they do it for GamerGate or journalism, but IMO they're just trolls who like to use this opportunity. They like publicity (even if it's bad) and that's what they're getting. I'm not sure if you can imagine this mindset, but I can't deny that it must be exciting to read news story about death threats you wrote. It actually encourages to do it again. There's well know internet Rule 14 "Do not argue with trolls — it means that they win." so as usual - Don't feed the trolls.
First of all, it is never *ever* someone's fault when random internet creeps stalk and harass them. If continuing to have an opinion and be in an industry is "feeding the trolls" then you should seriously consider changing your views on the subject.
That's not what I said nor meant. Media and those gaming "journalists" are feeding the trolls, they can't stop writing about how many death threats and harassers someone have acquired. I understand if it would be just one time, but they just keep writing about it. They want more views and know
By Newsweek's count, Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian got nearly 80'000 twitter comments in response to their views on GamerGate itself. Eighty thousand -- that's more than all journalists and news outlets combined (including Kotaku). Tell me this isn't about the ongoing harassment of women who have an opinion. I don't watch AS's videos and find her conclusions to be quite thin at times. Doesn't matter -- she has the fundamental right to voice an opinion.
Reason why journalists don't get so many tweets are because it's just not controversial enough. Only GamerGate supporters care about that. But with Brianna and Anita everyone talks about it - GamerGate, Anti-GamerGate, others and trolls. That's why there's way more tweets, because it's back and forth talk. You provoke one side and get support from other and then vice-versa. And only small percentage of those tweets are negative. Some
2014-10-28 1:51 GMT+02:00 Griffin Boyce <griffin@cryptolab.net>: that this will gain them, but in same time it is also increasing amount of trolls and other haters who participate in it and thus they can write about it again :D people really can't stand them because of bullshit they say and that have nothing to do with that they're women, but that other's don't like their opinion and them as a persons. Amplify this by media coverage. Do you really think that if this wouldn't have been so publicized, all over media, that it would still happen? I doubt that, not much people would care if journalists wouldn't write so much about it. Also I truly believe and could bet that if we would swap genders, they claiming how misandrists Gamers/GamerGate are then nothing would be different and probably would get even more threats. Anyway I fully agree that everyone has right to say their opinion, no matter who you are. But you can't expect that there won't be people who won't agree with it or won't get angry over it. But that's not what GamerGate is about and that's not the problem (regarding GamerGate), problem is that their opinions are published on a lot of gaming and news sites. When I'm reading news about latest game releases or game reviews, I don't want to hear what Anita thinks about games. But currently large part of gaming sites publish such very opinionated articles which cover only one side of it - article writers side. This is also one of GamerGate issues, that gaming sites publish such trash articles which goes against some gamers beliefs and journalists don't do any research or ask what's gamers opinion about it. And if you don't want to be associated with abject harassment, then don't
hitch your wagon to a cause that harasses people. Form a group of sane people and pick a different hashtag. I have literally *no* sympathy for sane people who aren't willing to use a different hashtag. They're sacrificing integrity in order to ride a wave of abjectly shitty publicity.
Again, GamerGate is not about harassment, it's not a hate movement. I really suggest everyone interested to read https://medium.com/@aquapendulum/my-letter-to-jason-schreier-about-gamergate... it's best article I've read on this topic.
No matter how many times you say this you will never erase the massive amount of harassment done in the name of GamerGate. You are the moderate fringe justifying extremists. You are the Sinn Fein to their PIRA. When one of these extremists inevitably turns violent, the blood will be on your hands. On Tue, 2014-10-28 at 20:12 +0200, Dāvis Mosāns wrote:
Again, GamerGate is not about harassment, it's not a hate movement
-- Sent from Ubuntu
On 10/29/2014 05:20 PM, Ted Smith wrote:> No matter how many times you say this you will never erase the massive
amount of harassment done in the name of GamerGate.
Implying anti-gamer gate idiots didn't harass and dox people too. Hell, feminists are known to have harassed people (most well known yet forgotten Erin Pizzey ) lied and made threats against themselves for attention. And yet you are not dismissing feminism/SJW because "few" of them did something bad? Also, prove that harassment was done not by trolls working for anti-gamer gate. (And FYI criticism of Anita is not harassment. She provably misrepresented and lied about few games.)
You are the moderate fringe justifying extremists. You are the Sinn Fein to their PIRA.
When one of these extremists inevitably turns violent, the blood will be on your hands.
From the way GG is going I am betting on anti-gg idiots spilling first blood.
On Tue, 2014-10-28 at 20:12 +0200, Dāvis Mosāns wrote:
Again, GamerGate is not about harassment, it's not a hate movement
Let me sum up gg in a way that I expect cpunks to understand (but then again, I expected cpunks to have more brain and do better research rather than just go white knighting): "Anti-prism people are not pro privacy. They are pro terrorism and paeodofilia! Snowden is just a racist! He could not cope with changing times and the fact that new president is black so he sold out his country and ran away to homophobic and racist RUSSIA!" (For those too stupid - It's play on "GG is not about journalist integrity! It's about white male racist/sexist males not going with times!" bullshit ) Oh, and to genius that suggested to stop trying to fix journalist bs about GG and better go against eg. EA - If company bribes judge(journos) punishing company will just make others more careful in bribing. YOU HAVE TO GET NEW JUDGE. GG is about journalist integrity. Quin shagging just made people look under right rocks and harassment against women is BS (3 possibilities - 1. gg is harassing women. 2. anti-gg is trying to make gg look bad. 3. someone wants some more attention) I am out of this list.
On 10/29/2014 12:24 PM, RKN the_PORTABLE wrote:
On 10/29/2014 05:20 PM, Ted Smith wrote:> No matter how many times you say this you will never erase the massive
amount of harassment done in the name of GamerGate.
Implying anti-gamer gate idiots didn't harass and dox people too. Hell, feminists are known to have harassed people (most well known yet forgotten Erin Pizzey ) lied and made threats against themselves for attention. And yet you are not dismissing feminism/SJW because "few" of them did something bad?
That's Erin Pizzey, the MRA and writer for A Voice for Men?
Also, prove that harassment was done not by trolls working for anti-gamer gate. (And FYI criticism of Anita is not harassment. She provably misrepresented and lied about few games.)
You are the moderate fringe justifying extremists. You are the Sinn Fein to their PIRA.
When one of these extremists inevitably turns violent, the blood will be on your hands.
From the way GG is going I am betting on anti-gg idiots spilling first blood.
On Tue, 2014-10-28 at 20:12 +0200, Dāvis Mosāns wrote:
Again, GamerGate is not about harassment, it's not a hate movement
Let me sum up gg in a way that I expect cpunks to understand (but then again, I expected cpunks to have more brain and do better research rather than just go white knighting): "Anti-prism people are not pro privacy. They are pro terrorism and paeodofilia! Snowden is just a racist! He could not cope with changing times and the fact that new president is black so he sold out his country and ran away to homophobic and racist RUSSIA!"
This analogy is not very useful as USA is also homophobic and racist.
(For those too stupid - It's play on "GG is not about journalist integrity! It's about white male racist/sexist males not going with times!" bullshit )
Oh, and to genius that suggested to stop trying to fix journalist bs about GG and better go against eg. EA - If company bribes judge(journos) punishing company will just make others more careful in bribing. YOU HAVE TO GET NEW JUDGE.
GG is about journalist integrity. Quin shagging just made people look under right rocks and harassment against women is BS (3 possibilities - 1. gg is harassing women. 2. anti-gg is trying to make gg look bad. 3. someone wants some more attention)
I am out of this list.
Great! You won't be missed.
On 10/29/14, 11:02 AM, Hashem Nasarat wrote:
On 10/29/2014 12:24 PM, RKN the_PORTABLE wrote:
... Let me sum up gg in a way that I expect cpunks to understand (but then again, I expected cpunks to have more brain and do better research rather than just go white knighting): "Anti-prism people are not pro privacy. They are pro terrorism and paeodofilia! Snowden is just a racist! He could not cope with changing times and the fact that new president is black so he sold out his country and ran away to homophobic and racist RUSSIA!" This analogy is not very useful as USA is also homophobic and racist.
Not really the same at all. Russia's government is still actively oppressing people in these ways while the US is: A) Far less homophobic and racist than it used to be. In some areas, hardly at all. B) Has gone from the government homophobia hunting people to fire from government jobs in the 1950's to complete legality and usually legal protection now. C) The Millennials as a group are not homophobic or racist to any measurable degree. Remaining pockets are becoming more isolated and their youth are changing too, as far as anyone can tell. The whole culture is rapidly changing in many ways. Music, Internet, Hollywood, legal cases, politicians (because many have been voted out), etc. have all been changing people's opinions. The rate of evolution, or at least the rate of maturation of active cycles has been apparently increasing each year. Pervasive cell phone video, major cases of corruption and overstepping bounds and tragedy have caused major pull back of longstanding troublesome trends. This is how all of this ties into cypherpunks: Observing how opinions, public sentiment, then enforcement, regulations, and market options evolve in each of these cycles should be instructive when trying to induce important change. How can you position things to improve better outcomes when inflection points happen? sdw
GamersGate is what happens when a large group is guided by guides that don't care about them. #GG is a totally different animal. The result of confusing social media activity. Activism is not the same as picking a hashtag and tweeting about it. Last I checked.. I think columns in newspapers were probably the height of verbal contemplation of policy. For every mayor belief there's a mayor newspaper, so all parties attend and present their most persuasive arguments. Leading only to radicalization. Hmmm... Maybe publishing always sucked? This new hivemind school of thought will never have serious repercussions and actively weakens interest in things like legal system critique.
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 23:30:03 -0700 Stephen Williams <sdw@lig.net> wrote:
On 10/29/14, 11:02 AM, Hashem Nasarat wrote:
On 10/29/2014 12:24 PM, RKN the_PORTABLE wrote:
... Let me sum up gg in a way that I expect cpunks to understand (but then again, I expected cpunks to have more brain and do better research rather than just go white knighting): "Anti-prism people are not pro privacy. They are pro terrorism and paeodofilia! Snowden is just a racist! He could not cope with changing times and the fact that new president is black so he sold out his country and ran away to homophobic and racist RUSSIA!" This analogy is not very useful as USA is also homophobic and racist.
Not really the same at all. Russia's government is still actively oppressing people in these ways while the US is:
A) Far less homophobic and racist than it used to be.
LMAO! self-parody never ends. In some areas,
hardly at all. B) Has gone from the government homophobia hunting people to fire from government jobs in the 1950's to complete legality and usually legal protection now. C) The Millennials as a group are not homophobic or racist to any measurable degree. Remaining pockets are becoming more isolated and their youth are changing too, as far as anyone can tell.
The whole culture is rapidly changing in many ways. Music, Internet, Hollywood, legal cases, politicians (because many have been voted out), etc. have all been changing people's opinions. The rate of evolution, or at least the rate of maturation of active cycles has been apparently increasing each year.
Pervasive cell phone video, major cases of corruption and overstepping bounds and tragedy have caused major pull back of longstanding troublesome trends.
This is how all of this ties into cypherpunks: Observing how opinions, public sentiment, then enforcement, regulations, and market options evolve in each of these cycles should be instructive when trying to induce important change. How can you position things to improve better outcomes when inflection points happen?
sdw
John, that was a beautiful email. I sincerely hope it is both the introduction and the coda to this intersection of cpunks and GamerGate. Let's just move on from here. On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 8:26 AM, John Young <jya@pipeline.com> wrote:
I had not followed GamerGate until today's New York Times article about it. Nor followed games, so the controversy is new to me. But not the issues involved, which are prevalent online and off. Particularly in testosterone-rich enterprises like military, spies, armaments, sports, weapons, ideology, religion, education, society, civilization, humanity, existence itself. In all of these, the stronger violently dominate the weaker and do so with the psychotic belief that this is the way it should be, natural.
In war and peace, in human exploitation of animal and earthly domains, in climate degradation, in force-feeding "democracy," in cruel treatment of women's bodies and neglect of children, in just about every aspect of torturous "advancements in civilized peoples" in the course of inventing and applying ever greater and more vicious ways to kill, maim, starve and over-populate earthlings by male rape in all guises of wargames.
Games are a reflection of the this much greater conceit of male dominance in all institutions, all of them, even those which spout diversity and affirmative action and grant minimal access to privileged male sanctuaries -- no matter the skin color, ethnicity, faith, location on earth.
It is argued that male aggression inherent and can at best be somewhat controlled by law and social compact. That is a comfortable apologia by male supremacists in law and social compacts dominated by them with intellectual and economic arrogance. All institutions measure accomplishment by male-derived standards to tip the balance in favor of those rigged games.
GameGate is too limited in scope, so much that it should be seen as a male-dominated diversion, a game, to avoid addressing the origin and sustaining influence of male way of thinking, doing, making, competing, surviving, by lying, cheating, killing, ruling in all aspects of existence, simulated in games, trained for in games, monetized by games designers and producers, applauded and lauded in halls of power and control, in prizes and awards, in cemetaries and statues, in art and science, in accumulation concentration and monopolization of wealth.
No game this larger world, this wargame of "ballsy" potentates in military, policy, spying, media, sports, taxation, playing obsessively the "law of men enforced by lawmen."
At 12:10 PM 10/25/2014, you wrote:
Hello John, what do you think about GamerGate?
cheers, George.
-- konklone.com | @konklone <https://twitter.com/konklone>
participants (13)
-
Bryan Bishop -
Cathal Garvey -
Dāvis Mosāns -
Eric Mill -
Griffin Boyce -
Hashem Nasarat -
John Young -
Juan -
Lodewijk andré de la porte -
RKN the_PORTABLE -
rysiek -
Stephen Williams -
Ted Smith