Censorship? There is no censorship!

[Akratus]

Explicitly not what that study shows. As in, the author states you can't draw conclusions like that from the data. Rather obviously, given the data sample and methodology.

"The results of my network analysis is incompatible with the description of #Gamergate as a hate group. For one, a hate group would have a high degree of centrality, very often centered around a charismatic leader. Decentralised structures provide for more liberal organisational ideologies in the long run. The network analysis is also incompatible with the assertion that #Gamergate is regularly harassing particular personalities, since if that were the case, there would be clearly visible evidence in the form of numerous, highly weighted edges converging on the same handful of targets. Instead, the inner 'heart' of the network, which is the only area with high-weight edges, is almost exclusively populated by leading commentators supportive of #Gamergate. Of course, no mathematical examination can prove or disprove harassment, and even a single instance of it is unacceptable. However, mathematical analysis of social interactions can show whether the typical patterns of harassment, as described above, are present. In this case, they are not. Therefore, such allegations must bear the burden of proof of how the mathematical evidence of prolonged, intense, harassing conduct by a large number of members of a group is absent from a quite diligently gathered and relatively large number of tweets."

And ehm, not to be an ass, but none of your own experience there actually disagrees with the notion that early-childhood experiences have a profound impact on the development of human beings. In fact, I'd say it's exactly the opposite.

Exactly, I was arguing against your characterization of my argument as stating that there is no such thing as childhood beliefs affecting adulthood exist.

 

[Sander]

"Something I would like to point out is this. None of my findings state that #Gamergate is, or is not, a hate group. That would be a conclusion one can simply not draw from the data that I had. It is also not within the domain of network analysis, powerful as that area may be."

All he demonstrated was that #GamerGate tweets represent a decentralized network.

Exactly, I was arguing against your characterization of my argument as stating that there is no such thing as childhood beliefs affecting adulthood exist.

And yet you don't want to apply that to racism because for some reason, that specific thing is solved by education. Despite the fact that we have an ungodly amount of research on unconscious bias saying the exact opposite.

 

[Akratus]

Ok. I changed my mind, I agree with you. Doesn't mean videogames have a responsibility to cater to any ideology.

 

[Tagaziel]

And who is demanding that they cater to a specific ideology?

 

[Akratus]

The journalists who say there's something wrong with Bayonetta becasue of it's sexual elements, or that there's something wrong with assassin's creed for not having a female protagonist, or that there's something wrong with Kingdom Come for portraying a medieval period realistically etc. etc. I can list dozens more of these things. And it goes beyond mere opinions when it's so many websites doing it that it's more like pressuring developers.

I guess this is also relevant:
http://i.imgur.com/WbySwOa.png
http://i.imgur.com/SfFDR11.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Y4CulNs.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/fnBrPfs.png
http://i.imgur.com/vDLdhhT.png
http://i.imgur.com/XWfHUQb.png
http://i.imgur.com/l2CnQYh.png
http://i.imgur.com/XRDQ5AA.png
http://i.imgur.com/MZ4mAZQ.png
http://i.imgur.com/xFBJwQz.png
http://i.imgur.com/wyOAkId.png
http://i.imgur.com/E81DlDR.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/S3J1sgx.png
http://i.imgur.com/14kR6kV.png
http://i.imgur.com/RM6aLMP.png
http://i.imgur.com/Z1v8JHH.jpg

There's the people who signed the gta v petition, NeoGaf, Senran Kagura comes to mind, this new character in dead or alive which is making NeoGaf all uppity and contacting the developer over it, an avalanche of tweets pressuring developers, blogs about what games are good and what games aren't, NeoGaf, any of the thousands of people who complain about games that don't follow social justice ideals. I could go on for hours.

 

[TorontoReign]

When are you going to accept the fact that I and many other people do not hold the view that diversity in and of itself is a good thing?

At least you're honest.

Spoiler

Tagz, you win the Godwin's Law award. Frequently you resort to referencing Hitler. Enough times to where I wonder if you think about Hitler on a daily basis. It's not healthy.

 

[1fps-warlock]

http://i.imgur.com/S3J1sgx.png
http://i.imgur.com/14kR6kV.png

What if I'm offended by the stripper hologram and want her to dance the jig instead?
Does this mean I can complain directly to Mr. Browder and make him change it?
Obviously not, but only because I happen to lack a shitty blog site with a sorry ass bunch of mindless followers.
If I were writing for that kind of site, she'd be dancing a jig right now, I guarantee it.
So it's extortion, plain and simple.

 

[Sander]

Yes, god forbid people express their opinions about diversity and commercial cultural products online. Because that's pressuring them. That's extortion. Something those companies surely listen to, instead of the production and marketing directives they receive. Because that's the world we live in. You can see that by the fact that all that pressuring and extortion has led to a massive under-representation of women, people of color and other minorities in cultural products. Totally corrupted those movies and games and books that don't really feature non-white-dudes.

Doesn't count when GamerGate does it, though. Then it's just countering the unnatural pressure of social justice, right?

 

[1fps-warlock]

Yes, god forbid people express their opinions about diversity and commercial cultural products online. Because that's pressuring them. That's extortion. Something those companies surely listen to, instead of the production and marketing directives they receive. Because that's the world we live in. You can see that by the fact that all that pressuring and extortion has led to a massive under-representation of women, people of color and other minorities in cultural products. Totally corrupted those movies and games and books that don't really feature non-white-dudes.

Doesn't count when GamerGate does it, though. Then it's just countering the unnatural pressure of social justice, right?

It's not extortion because they express opinions man, it's because they're in a position to directly affect development.
No end-user is in that position, and they've got opinions too. I'm a starcraft player, and I happen to like Kerrigan.
Do I get a refund if they change something I had no problem with? No.

As for the rest, I really don't identify as 'gamer' and I don't support any side.
I hate everyone equally, and that's my problem.

 

[Hassknecht]

If a large percentage of a community wants something, why shouldn't they be heard? If many people do want more diversity in video games, should they just be ignored because of traditions?
They have just as much leverage on the developers as everyone else that can form a large enough group.
Free market.

 

[Sander]

It's not extortion because they express opinions man, it's because they're in a position to directly affect development.
No end-user is in that position, and they've got opinions too. I'm a starcraft player, and I happen to like Kerrigan.
Do I get a refund if they change something I had no problem with? No.

Press sites are not in a position to directly affect development. They can publish opinion pieces, which developers may or may not listen to -- but which they will generally listen to based either on their own agreement with the issues raised (in which case, what's the problem?) or because marketing/production tells them that not listening to that will affect the bottom line. That's it. And not to turn the market into a moral arbiter, because they're not, but it's hardly "extortion" if the market agrees with your critique.

Again: women, people of color and other minorities are massively under-represented in every cultural product. And you think complaining about representation is too effective? That's ludicrous.

 

[1fps-warlock]

or marketing/production tells them that not listening to that will affect the bottom line.

Precisely. In other words: "Do what rock paper shite wants, else they ruin sales via social media."
A consumer has no leverage, RPS and the like have more than enough. That's why I call it extortion.

I sincerely doubt that the authors even played the game in question, yet they complain about her arse like their life depends on it.
If they ever got past the mission selection scene, they would've seen she looks nothing like that in the actual game.
That kind of journalism makes me hate the media even more than I already do.
So I don't read, I don't click, and I keep it shut. Until they force their preference upon me through extortion.
After that line is crossed, I boycott. That's the only way, and accidently, a gamergate strategy that I agree with.

And that's all I had to say on this subject.

 

[Sander]

How is RPS giving their opinion extortion, but you and others actually boycotting games not?

You seem to view yourself and others like you as the real people who deserve to be the target audience, while viewing those who agree with Rock Paper Shotgun as interlopers, rather than other consumers with tastes that differ from yours.

 

[Hassknecht]

So basically Breitbart with their newfound Gamer-God Milo need to start a gaming subsite to counter all the evil progressive gaming sites that want to ruin good video games with their cooties.

 

[Akratus]

Yes, god forbid people express their opinions about diversity and commercial cultural products online. Because that's pressuring them. That's extortion. Something those companies surely listen to, instead of the production and marketing directives they receive. Because that's the world we live in. You can see that by the fact that all that pressuring and extortion has led to a massive under-representation of women, people of color and other minorities in cultural products. Totally corrupted those movies and games and books that don't really feature non-white-dudes.

Doesn't count when GamerGate does it, though. Then it's just countering the unnatural pressure of social justice, right?

Obviously it's the choice of the companies to comply with feminist demands or not, but the PR pressure put on the companies, and the logic behind the arguments, and the politically correct nature makes me disagree vehemently. It's a perfectly fine opinion to have.

Also yes bladebla I'm a racist etc.

So basically Breitbart with their newfound Gamer-God Milo need to start a gaming subsite to counter all the evil progressive gaming sites that want to ruin good video games with their cooties.

It's a pretty crazy world, where freaking conservatives step up to be a voice of (some) reason. Of course, I don't know much about breitbart/Milo outside of gamergate, and Milo is obviously intentionally provocative on twitter. I guess his existance as a big voice in gamergate is merely because he happened to be one of the few willing to present gamergate's story. Beggars can't be choosers.

How is RPS giving their opinion extortion, but you and others actually boycotting games not?

You seem to view yourself and others like you as the real people who deserve to be the target audience, while viewing those who agree with Rock Paper Shotgun as interlopers, rather than other consumers with tastes that differ from yours.

Are you saying that a journalist is no different from a consumer? That's not true at all.

 

[BigBoss]

Just like there are some individuals who are GamerGate's largest voices in the twittersphere, Akratus represents our majority here at NMA, with other's occasionally chiming in with their thoughts. Akratus and Alec are probably my favorite posters here.

 

[Akratus]

Akratus and Alec are probably my favorite posters here.

I'm extremely critical of my own posts/argumentation/etc. so that's very nice to hear.

You're one of my favorites too.

 

[1fps-warlock]

How is RPS giving their opinion extortion, but you and others actually boycotting games not?

You seem to view yourself and others like you as the real people who deserve to be the target audience, while viewing those who agree with Rock Paper Shotgun as interlopers, rather than other consumers with tastes that differ from yours.

Are you saying that a journalist is no different from a consumer? That's not true at all.

It's my fault because I had failed to explain the difference properly.

When you play a 1v1 match, the last thing you need is distraction, human induced or otherwise.
You are consumed by APM and if someone interrupts the flow, you'll probably snap and tell him to gtfo.
That's basically the starcraft target audience, antisocial individuals, sometimes called starcraft players.

Let's move on to journalist with ~10k followers who wants a more realistic image of a woman in starcraft.
That's not a problem for the player who just wants to play the bloody game. How does it affect the flow? It doesn't.
It's a matter of principle, because if a journalist can force his wishes on the developer, why can't the player do the same?
Well, you can't really expect average player to have 10k followers, they care more for APM than social networks.
Hence, they are a minority in their game, while media gets a special treatment.
They're still the target audience, but because the media is flooded by irrelevant shite, they don't have a say.
I have several examples of actual players requesting features and getting none. While these few sites get everything they want.

This is why I would rather read articles written by actual players, than some clueless RPS writers.
And boycott is actually a consumer right, while extortion is illegal.
You can't just blackmail someone to make him do what you want, yet it appears that it's not an issue for some.

 

[TheWesDude]

i like how you keep keep saying my mom's experience is nothing more than anecdotal.

if 20+ years of looking at wage/pay studies in the GS system where she saw 2-3 a year is only to the level of anecdotes, then i would really hate to see what your requirements would be to be considered well-informed or educated or expert level. this is only in regards to the GS system study you linked that several of you said was due to sexism/racism and had nothing to do with productivity/work-ethic metrics.


now, the problem is you guys appear to be so biased to the explanation is always sexism or racism it blinds you to any other potential causes. otherwise known as confirmation bias.

to be truthful, the point i knew you guys were so biased towards sexism/racism is when sander said that studies that use more than a few control factors were only controlling/correcting for sexism/racism bias. the problem is when you eliminate all other factors and provide an answer of sexism/racism you absolve every individual of responsibility by turning it into being someone elses "fault".

or you reinforce the point by saying something like "even women can perpetuate sexist ideals", and then continue to say there is a problem that needs to be "fixed" with a straight face. if women only make 15-20% of STEM fields majors, and then after they get their degree they do not stay in those fields. and based on the links you provided, the main complaint is "quality of life-work balance". when i look that up it leads to discussions about tele-commuting and flexible schedules and more time off.

so what you are saying is companies that do not offer that and want overtime even regular/fixed overtime, then those jobs are sexist against women and discriminatory for not offering what women want. then lets say a company goes ahead and offers these positions for women keeping the men in their current regular/fixed overtime and schedules, would that be fair in any way for the men unless those "female" positions offered less pay? oh, and just in case you did not know, that is exactly what some companies do and it is legal. all they have to do is call it a "shift differential" and those positions that men flock to would in effect get paid more.

how many of your wage/pay studies would take that into account?

if women are taking lower pay jobs because they value "quality of life-work balance" over pay and opportunity, it would be sexist to NOT take that into account. it would artificially inflate male pay in comparison to female pay.

not all companies are equal
not all jobs are equal
not all employees are equal

if women have different priorities than men, whichever sets of priorities that more "favors" companies would be those the companies would reward. to think otherwise is idiotic.

thats the problem, you discount all these factors. because sexism/racism are easy scapegoats. if wage/pay gaps were as large as you keep making the claim, companies would be embroiled in pay/wage lawsuits 24/7.

 

[Sander]

Are you saying that a journalist is no different from a consumer? That's not true at all.

No, but a journalist exists by virtue of his audience, not the other way around. 1fps-warlock continues that odd framing where somehow, Rock Paper Shotgun is creating this audience that doesn't play games, but somehow manages to force their views on the gaming industry because the people who "just play games" aren't organized. Those people still buy games, right? That's the only power RPS has: through people who buy games. It's the same damn power everyone else has.

What sets RPS apart from a gamer is that they have an audience. But that audience isn't artificial. It's there because they like what RPS has to say. It consists of gamers. It is not separate from other people. There is one thing they can do that gamers can't do as easily, though: they can reach game developers and convince them of their point of view. But what's wrong with that?

i like how you keep keep saying my mom's experience is nothing more than anecdotal.

Yes, from my perspective. Because I've learned not to trust a single "fact" you cite, simply because you've been wrong so often. I mean I've asked you to give sources for the data you keep citing over and over and over and over again and you never do. Never! And every time I've gone and checked on something you've claimed, it's been bullshit. So again: I never trust you when you cite something or someone, because you've shown yourself to be completely untrustworthy. And when your source is, literally, your mom -- that doesn't make me feel any better about what you're saying.

One of your problems is that you keep seeing sexism as a blame game, rather than a widespread societal issue. You want to blame women, and somehow show that men or specific companies are not to blame for unequal pay. I don't really care who's to blame: I'm just seeing a societal system that produces fundamental inequalities through a variety of factors. And yes, those factors include women's choices -- as I keep saying, though, those choices are not made in a vacuum. Work/life-balance is more important to women than men specifically because of how our society is set up. Similarly, their choice not to enter certain male-dominated professions is heavily influenced by the culture at large, and the work culture in those industries that is often hostile to women. I've given specific examples of these things. Blaming women is much too simplistic for my tastes, and going "yeah well that's just their choice" is a cop-out, to me.