Censorship? There is no censorship!

[Akratus]

None of this is the problem. None of what you just said gives us orwellian vibes. It's saying 'We need to control the message, i.e you have to get in line, and we kick out anybody who says things we don't like' that gives us orwellian feelings. Because it's fucking authoritarian.

That is how you responsibly lead an organisation though. What you describe is pretty much how any self respected organisation/party out there works. Hell, even the Dalai Lama gives the direction for his followers and kicks out opositions.

Could you imagine NMA without rules where everyone is free to say whatever they want, throwing out any insult etc.? It would end up like GamerGate.

The RPGcodex functions like that for the most part. And it has discussions on a far higher level than here. As long as you stay out of general discussion.

Kicking people out for what they say is not mature. Being able to deal with some words you don't like, that's maturity.

-snip-

Are you seriously suggesting gun control is bad?

---

MrBtongue denounces GamerGate. Despite what Sander has said in the past, I'm perfectly capable of looking past an opposing opinion. Because he makes good videos, idgaf.

Let me put it this way. No sane person would ever become a figurehead for Gamergate. They will be attacked, harassed and threatened by people in the industry for doing so. Boogie2988 was banned from NeoGAF for even attempting to be neutral, he had his livelihood threatened in the process. I've received countless death-threats and been on the receiving end of various smear campaigns simply for suggesting that yes there are some ethical issues that should be looked at.
Nobody would assume a leadership role in this thing, it's painting a giant target on their forehead for some really horrible people to aim at and pro-tip, those people "oppose" Gamergate, whatever that entails.

https://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=PWElVmXXC6U

 

[Nas92]

None of this is the problem. None of what you just said gives us orwellian vibes. It's saying 'We need to control the message, i.e you have to get in line, and we kick out anybody who says things we don't like' that gives us orwellian feelings. Because it's fucking authoritarian.

That is how you responsibly lead an organisation though. What you describe is pretty much how any self respected organisation/party out there works. Hell, even the Dalai Lama gives the direction for his followers and kicks out opositions.

Could you imagine NMA without rules where everyone is free to say whatever they want, throwing out any insult etc.? It would end up like GamerGate.

The RPGcodex functions like that for the most part. And it has discussions on a far higher level than here. As long as you stay out of general discussion.

Kicking people out for what they say is not mature. Being able to deal with some words you don't like, that's maturity.

The problem with RPGCodex is that they really don't like opposing opinions. I can understand that they want the rabid immurshun tards and Biodrones out of their boards, but they also manage to attract the worst wastes of human resource from the old school RPG fans. I mean some of the discussions at the Codex are as bad, at times even worse than the Bethestard circlejerks you see all over the internet.

Are you seriously suggesting gun control is bad?

Well, this thread's about to get derailed.
I'll just say that I, as a person living in a country with gun control, envy Americans. Then again, in my native Hungary, we have the old Eastern European commie self defense laws* (ie: if you defend yourself, you go to jail, so you're better off letting yourself be butchered) so not even guns would be that much of a help.

*actually, we don't, but law enforcement acts like we still do, so any shiny new good self-defense laws were for naught.

 

[Akratus]

None of this is the problem. None of what you just said gives us orwellian vibes. It's saying 'We need to control the message, i.e you have to get in line, and we kick out anybody who says things we don't like' that gives us orwellian feelings. Because it's fucking authoritarian.

That is how you responsibly lead an organisation though. What you describe is pretty much how any self respected organisation/party out there works. Hell, even the Dalai Lama gives the direction for his followers and kicks out opositions.

Could you imagine NMA without rules where everyone is free to say whatever they want, throwing out any insult etc.? It would end up like GamerGate.

The RPGcodex functions like that for the most part. And it has discussions on a far higher level than here. As long as you stay out of general discussion.

Kicking people out for what they say is not mature. Being able to deal with some words you don't like, that's maturity.

The problem with RPGCodex is that they really don't like opposing opinions. I can understand that they want the rabid immurshun tards and Biodrones out of their boards, but they also manage to attract the worst wastes of human resource from the old school RPG fans. I mean some of the discussions at the Codex are as bad, at times even worse than the Bethestard circlejerks you see all over the internet.

Absolutely true.
http://rpgcodex.net/forums/index.ph...arz-simulator-2015.94790/page-22#post-3657340

Also, interesting:
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sc1pi4

 

[TheWesDude]

-snip-

Are you seriously suggesting gun control is bad?

i have never and never will say gun control is bad.

thats not what happened though. sarkeesian wanted guns banned from an event in contradiction with state laws because of a non-credible threat.

she wanted increased police presence, they agreed
she wanted bags searched, they agreed
she wanted metal detectors, they said without a credible threat there was not enough justification
she wanted all guns banned, they said without a credible threat there was not enough justification

the school did not believe the threat was credible, they involved the police
the police did not believe the threat was credible, they involved the fbi
the fbi did not find the threat credible

we have covered this before.

 

[Sander]

If you want to discuss gun control, start a new thread. We've had enough derailment already.

femnisim has no "central management" or central organization, there are hundreds if not thousands of them.

There are many, many different forms of feminism and many, many different organizations within feminism. You know why? Because people distance themselves from people they disagree with. That's why you have liberal feminism and radical feminism and sex-positive feminism and bad feminism and whatever-the-fuck-kind-of-feminist-Sommers-calls-herself feminism.

By the way, you'd think that you'd be able to find something other than that one blogpost you keep posting over and over and over and over again to make your point that feminism is sooooooo extreme. A blogpost that explicitly says that other radical feminists don't agree with her.

Your Dworkin quote is out of context, by the way. Not that you tend to give much of a shit about context.

pro-tip: accusing gamergate of harassment/doxxing without any attempts to back it up does not make it true no matter how many times or how loudly you shout it.

I've backed it up dozens of times. Akratus there tends to wave it away as just "words on the internet" or some other rationalization. You try to find whatever straw you can grasp to make yourself believe that the harassment doesn't come from GamerGate or isn't the result of GamerGate. None of it is remotely plausible, but whatever makes you sleep better at night, dude.

Likewise there can be named horrendous people from the opposite side like Randy Harper, Mcintosh and that Wu thing, but guess what, they are being deemed almost champions of la rezistance or that's what ''everyone in the press thinks'', right? How about everyone who brings on their arguments in civil manner would be simply met at face value?

I would not call any of those people "horrendous", nor would the press, but sure there are some assholes and idiots who hate GamerGate. But, once again, I am not associated with those people, because I never joined anything to make me associate with them. I think GamerGate is a gigantic heap of shit, but that's an opinion -- I did not join an organization or hashtag or board or became a member of any kind of campaign. Just like me thinking Star Wars is a good movie does not make me a member of the Star-Wars-is-a-good-movie movement, me thinking GamerGate is a pile of shit does not make me a member of some anti-GamerGate movement. It just means I have an opinion.

Once people start joining movements, we can talk about those specific movements.

This coming from you.It's everything about feelings now. Everything. See, people aren't allowed to even post scientific papers that support the ebul side, without being harassed (yeah, i can use that card too), because muh feelings.

The words you're using don't mean what you think they mean.

Kicking people out for what they say is not mature. Being able to deal with some words you don't like, that's maturity.

Kicking people out for abhorrent behavior is absolutely what mature people do. They don't go "Oh hey you doxxed and harassed a bunch of people, well that's alright, we'll just keep associating with and promoting you!"

 

[TheWesDude]

Kicking people out for abhorrent behavior is absolutely what mature people do. They don't go "Oh hey you doxxed and harassed a bunch of people, well that's alright, we'll just keep associating with and promoting you!"

have people kicked sarkeesian, wu, freebsdgirl, and leigh alexander out of the "anti-GG" side for doxxing a bunch of people?

 

[Sander]

Once again, you can't kick people out of an opinion. That's not how brains work. But no, they haven't, because that's not something they've done (as far as I know).

 

[Crni Vuk]

The RPGcodex functions like that for the most part. And it has discussions on a far higher level than here. As long as you stay out of general discussion.

Kicking people out for what they say is not mature. Being able to deal with some words you don't like, that's maturity.

Are you really sure about that?

At the end of the day though, if you feel a punishment you've received is not appropriate - that you really did nothing wrong; or that we've failed to act appropriately in dealing with something, please keep this in mind: This is our house, not yours. You are here because The Management™ let you be here. You are allowed to post your crap because The Management™ has a high tolerance for crap. And The Management™ is not easily offended.

It seems to me like you're cherry picking here. I am pretty sure the Codexian admins would be pretty fast and swift in banning any pedophiles on their board, for example if they would start to flood their general discussions with how much they love children or whatever. But can't this be some kind of opinion as well? Well sure. But I think the last thing any self respected codexian want is that their community gets known as some kind of cesspool for it.

There is a line you draw. Everyone does that. And every self respected community does that. Where ever YOU draw the line, that is up to you, of course. But there is nothing wrong to enforce the rules EVERYONE(!) agreed too when they registered, that is why it is soooooooooooooooooooooooo important to read them, damnit. And that is what makes a good community, well yeah, a good community. If your agenda is to improve ethics in video gaming without harassment, then people have to agree to this, and if they don't follow it, then you kick them out.

This, seriously, is not rocket surgery. And it is not Orwellian

The reason why GamerGate doesn't work though, in my opinion, is because they are not a reasonable voice out there, they are not a real community or movement and they don't represent the largest group of gamers and they have a questionable origin (aka. Quingate). What GamerGate talks about is neither a new thing nor are they the first one out there trying it. This ethic stuff, changing journalism or whatever.

But if you can say one thing about the gamers out there, the really big group of gamers, the millions of gamers which buy CoD, D3 etc. It's that they simply don't care enough. And that is why so many see GG as a hate-movement or something similar. GamerGate followers are simply a minority, otherwise they would have been already one way or another adressed by the really big publishers/developers. But it turns out they all care more about the oposition.

 

[TheWesDude]

Once again, you can't kick people out of an opinion. That's not how brains work. But no, they haven't, because that's not something they've done (as far as I know).

so pro-gamergate is not an opinion, anti-gamergate is an opinion, got it.

and they have doxxed people if you consider publishing screencaps of peoples personal email addresses and phone numbers.

anti-gamergate has doxxed people and even swatted people. would you consider calling in a fake active shooter or active bomber or active hostage situation to encourage a full swat team response attempted murder by cop? not sure about you, but i have heard some pretty scary articles of innocent people getting killed through confusion and mistakes like that. its even turning into an issue, just look up "militarization of the police" and you can find a few articles about it, or lots.

 

[Sander]

so pro-gamergate is not an opinion, anti-gamergate is an opinion, got it.

Being pro gamergate is an opinion. Joining the movement of GamerGate is not. GamerGate itself is not an opinion. And, in case you had missed this, all of the association stuff is about GamerGate and people who join it, not about people who have opinions about GamerGate. This is not all that hard, dude.

and they have doxxed people if you consider publishing screencaps of peoples personal email addresses and phone numbers.

I'm aware of one incident where freebsdgirl published an e-mail sent to a private mailing list. She removed it and apologized within the day, and hasn't done anything like it since. I'm not aware of any instances where Sarkeesian, Wu, or Leigh Alexander have doxxed anyone. If they've published e-mail addresses by publishing death threats or the like, I would not find that problematic.

However, again, not particularly relevant. Because I'm not actually in any movement with them.

anti-gamergate has doxxed people and even swatted people. would you consider calling in a fake active shooter or active bomber or active hostage situation to encourage a full swat team response attempted murder by cop? not sure about you, but i have heard some pretty scary articles of innocent people getting killed through confusion and mistakes like that. its even turning into an issue, just look up "militarization of the police" and you can find a few articles about it, or lots.

Yes, that's all horrible. So?

 

[Ilosar]

It seems like the entire discussion has derailled and crashed to such an extent that it would make the Titanic proud. Not just on this site, mind, but everywhere I see this being talked about.

The GamerGate and anti-GG movement, however they are called, only seem to exist to fling shit at each other now. Perhaps they started with noble intentions (more representation for the feminsts and such, better ethics in games journalism for GamerGate) but from what I've seen nowadays it's just a gigantic cesspool of hyperbole, personal attacks, talking points screamed ad nauseum and death threats. I'm staying as far from that minefield as I possibly can now, the vitriol has reached levels that are truly absurd.

As for my position: I'm as straight white male as straight while males go. But I'd still like for more diversity in video games. I fell that unlike, say, movies and their need to have white male leads in every single titles, games have a great possibility to craft whole new worlds and let artists's creativity fly. A game set in Africa or a fantasy equivalent with mostly African peoples in it. A game where most people are gay. A game set in a matriarchy. Whatever. It just seems like wasted potential to just always copy-paste real a world setting and its morality, and add a few mages and dragons to make it fantasy and stuff.

That's why I like what Bioware is doing. Sure, they plots aren't the greatest, but they're not afraid to think beyond typical social structures when creating their settings. Lots of people in Dragon Age are gay/bi, and women wield a lot of power and that's not realistic relative to the time period, but so what? It's fantasy, the devs can make whatever they bloody want. And as far as I'm concerned a diversified setting is more interesting than a sausagefest like LOTR or The Witcher no matter how much more realistic the latter might be, by virtue of just being different from everything else that's being made.

With that being said, I'm also not a fan of Anita. I've watched a few of her videos, and for each good point she makes there are also some things that are highly debatable at best, sometimes just dishonest like taking scenes way out of context to support her points. But the sheer amount of hate directed at her is way, way out of proportion to her offenses. The way some people talk about the lady, she personally stangled their puppies then peed on the carpet or something.

Hell, ''way, way out of proportion'' is a good way the describe a prominent facet of both GamerGate and their detractors nowadays. These are friggin games people. We love them, we want them to be better, but holy fuck we don't need to start a war over them. Lord knows there's enough of that bullshit in real life.

 

[Akratus]

anti-gamergate has doxxed people and even swatted people.

Yes, that's all horrible. So?

Many personalities who are anti-gamergate are inciting and the extreme anti-gamergate climate is a cover for this behavior, and no-one is attempting to curb it or denounce it.

Kicking people out for what they say is not mature. Being able to deal with some words you don't like, that's maturity.

Kicking people out for abhorrent behavior is absolutely what mature people do. They don't go "Oh hey you doxxed and harassed a bunch of people, well that's alright, we'll just keep associating with and promoting you!"

Not all gamergaters doxx, threaten, or harass. But every pro-gamergate opinion is censored on for example, GamerGhazi and many anti-gamergate websites. The opposite is not true. You can't say most anti-gamergate people and websites aren't authoritarian and pro-censorship, because it is fact.

---

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=310110691
Slave ship tetris.

McIntosh thinks science is bad for being too manly.
http://tweetsave.com/radicalbytes

Jonathan McIntosh @RadIcalbytes ∙ 7h
@AngryChicana That western science has been so dominated by men that its practices & forms of knowledge take on masculine characteristics

Jonathan McIntosh @RadIcalbytes ∙ 8h
"Natural science itself has a gendered character. Western science and technology are culturally masculinized.” - R.W. Connell, Masculinities

 

[Gnidrologist]

I would not call any of those people "horrendous", nor would the press, but sure there are some assholes and idiots who hate GamerGate. But, once again, I am not associated with those people, because I never joined anything to make me associate with them. I think GamerGate is a gigantic heap of shit, but that's an opinion -- I did not join an organization or hashtag or board or became a member of any kind of campaign. Just like me thinking Star Wars is a good movie does not make me a member of the Star-Wars-is-a-good-movie movement, me thinking GamerGate is a pile of shit does not make me a member of some anti-GamerGate movement. It just means I have an opinion.

Then we are on the same frequency, because i'm merely observer. Most of what i've seen from anti-gg bunch was putrid deranged rambling and userIDs i mentioned are only the ones i remember. To neutral it may almost seem that there is no such thing as GG and anti-gg, because only the rancid people ever get publicity and reactions, while the issue about gaming journalism/promotionalism and it's corruption is oh so very real and not at all just a trollbait.

Once people start joining movements, we can talk about those specific movements.

A lot of movements were sponataneous. In fact, most of them were. People don't ''officially join'' them in most cases, because there is nothing to join to formally. It's a public clash of ideas like, i dunno, hippies against establishment in the 50s. There wasn't really any ''movement'' or leaders there, but the dynamic of clash was evident to anyone with slightest glimpse of intelligence.

This coming from you.It's everything about feelings now. Everything. See, people aren't allowed to even post scientific papers that support the ebul side, without being harassed (yeah, i can use that card too), because muh feelings.

The words you're using don't mean what you think they mean.

Gooby, pls. You remove opposing posts that contain irrefutable facts (note, i don't mind you providing alternative interpretations of said facts) that might threat your narrative on regular bases since this hoopla had started. That's a reaction emerging from emotional state, not rational disagreement. Rational agent would simply provide it's own argument and be done with it.
In the context of this thread that's twice as significant. Yes, fcourse, anyone can go and read The Vats so itz not censorship, lel. Still childish.

It seems to me like you're cherry picking here. I am pretty sure the Codexian admins would be pretty fast and swift in banning any pedophiles on their board, for example if they would start to flood their general discussions with how much they love children or whatever. But can't this be some kind of opinion as well?

That's a criminal offense and raping children seems to be a tad bit harsher deed than saying ''you're a jerk'' to someone on the internet, doncha think? Are you the local AI here? Have heard of a model named Wyrmlord?

 

[Sander]

Many personalities who are anti-gamergate are inciting and the extreme anti-gamergate climate is a cover for this behavior, and no-one is attempting to curb it or denounce it.

Every single major "anti-gg" personality I know has denounced this, repeatedly, and no one I know incites it. That includes people like a_man_in_black, freebsdgirl, Wu, Quinn and PixieJenni. I'm sure there are some people out there doing it and encouraging it, but it is far outside the mainstream. But, once again, not particularly relevant.

Not all gamergaters doxx, threaten, or harass. But every pro-gamergate opinion is censored on for example, GamerGhazi and many anti-gamergate websites. The opposite is not true. You can't say most anti-gamergate people and websites aren't authoritarian and pro-censorship, because it is fact.

If by "censorship" you mean "moderators are useful" then sure. That's not actually what that word means, though.

Do you know why they "censor"? Because if they don't, their sites become a completely unreadable mess. Not everyone likes 8chan's setup. In fact, most people don't.

A lot of movements were sponataneous. In fact, most of them were. People don't ''officially join'' them in most cases, because there is nothing to join to formally. It's a public clash of ideas like, i dunno, hippies against establishment in the 50s. There wasn't really any ''movement'' or leaders there, but the dynamic of clash was evident to anyone with slightest glimpse of intelligence.

And people explicitly joined those movements, in various forms.

Gooby, pls. You remove opposing posts that contain irrefutable facts (note, i don't mind you providing alternative interpretations of said facts) that might threat your narrative on regular bases since this hoopla had started. That's a reaction emerging from emotional state, not rational disagreement. Rational agent would simply provide it's own argument and be done with it.

Actually, no. Moderators exist to actually moderate forums. That also means moderating discussions and limiting them when they get into completely unreasonable territory. Such as holocaust denial, or "why all women are inferior".

 

[Gnidrologist]

And people explicitly joined those movements, in various forms.

Yes. By shouting randomly on streets, writing columns in press or participating in TV shows, random public happenings. Just like now.

Actually, no. Moderators exist to actually moderate forums. That also means moderating discussions and limiting them when they get into completely unreasonable territory.

Yes, indeed. It's questionable though what makes you say so, because you don't act according to those sound tenets.

 

[Sander]

Yes. By shouting randomly on streets, writing columns in press or participating in TV shows, random public happenings. Just like now.

At which point one joins a movement can be a nebulous thing, yes. But having an opinion is not the same thing as joining a movement, and a collective group of people with the same opinion is not a movement, either.

Yes, indeed. It's questionable though what makes you say so, because you don't act according to those sound tenets.

I do, you just disagree with where the line is. Well, tough.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Fascism (Aryan Brotherhood, KKK, Neo-Nazi groups etc.) can be a movement.

loathing Fascism though is an opinion.

 

[Akratus]

Not all gamergaters doxx, threaten, or harass. But every pro-gamergate opinion is censored on for example, GamerGhazi and many anti-gamergate websites. The opposite is not true. You can't say most anti-gamergate people and websites aren't authoritarian and pro-censorship, because it is fact.

If by "censorship" you mean "moderators are useful" then sure. That's not actually what that word means, though.

Do you know why they "censor"? Because if they don't, their sites become a completely unreadable mess. Not everyone likes 8chan's setup. In fact, most people don't.

Compare KotakuInAction to GamerGhazi. One has constructive discussions. One doesn't. (from what I've seen)

You are lying if you say that if GamerGhazi were to loosen their "No pro-gamergate opinions whatsoever!1!" policy their entire subreddit would become a "completely unreadable mess". Did you know there exists a middle ground between being so lax your forum becomes an unreadable mess and enforcing an opinion?

 

[Sander]

GamerGhazi isn't set up to be a place for discussion. It's just there to, as they say, "point and laugh". So taking them as a benchmark is weird -- it's like looking at The Onion to say general things about liberal politics. You could instead look at /r/againstgamergate, which is filled with exactly what you just said happens nowhere. Or you could look at Twitter, where people like PixieJenni frequently engage GamerGaters in discussion. Or, hell, you could look at this site, where we've now had 120 pages of discussion despite the fact that all the admins appear to be opposed to GamerGate. Weird, huh?

On the other hand, you could also realize that having specific places where you can discuss things with like-minded people is not some evil form of censorship, but a completely normal thing. To take a hyperbolic example: the NAACP doesn't create room to discuss things with the KKK, either. Nor does the KKK go about inviting black people to their gatherings. You do not have a right to have your opinion heard by everyone, everywhere, Akratus.

 

[Akratus]

/r/againstgamergate,

http://www.reddit.com/r/AgainstGame..._tell_me_this_isnt_trying_to_take_games_away/

I approve.