Forums / Discussion / General

I think this is appropriate, and I'm just a guy watching both sides.

I agree the aGG crowd uses the solipsism approach, like when they say "internalized misogyny". It's unprovable, yet unfalsifiable, probably something that should only belong in academia. In fact, I would say they're performing insane amounts of mental gymnastics when they say it. They find a way to twist reality to fit their worldview, even if they don't have evidence or reason.

The aGGros are the kind that convinces themselves they are right, even if they really aren't, and never really listen to any contrasting views. If the Calgary Expo is any indicator, then they'll punish someone even if it's based on lies. I bet they'll continue to try and punish us in spite of logic and facts because they think their opinions are morally superior and automatically give them the moral high-ground (my theory at least).

What the hell does "Toxic something-something" I keep seeing means?

So it looks like 4chan was just sold to Hiroyuki Nishimura, the founder of 2channel.

(Note: 2channel a.k.a 2ch is not the same as 2chan a.k.a. Futaba Channel. Yes, it is confusing).

He was purged for being a massive crook, letting the servers rot, making premium passes that let people who were banned post and then starting mass banning campaigns, stealing user info and selling it, offering a "delete posts for pay" scheme to companies & political parties, etc. etc.

Needless to say, if you're still on cuckchan then get out now.

The guy who purged him and saved 2ch is Jim Watkins, who is Hotwheel's boss.

Looks like we got a chan war on our hands now.

Source 1.

Source 2.

Source 3.

Source 4.

Source 5.

"Toxic" is a word used as a buzzword in articles, often to make the situation at hand seem more damaging than it actually is.
"Toxic masculinity", as you've probably seen before, is a common phrase among feminists and social justice enthusiasts that is used to describe how awful it is that men are allowed to do things in the world. Examples of "toxic masculinity" include the wage gap myth, the college "rape culture epidemic," "man-spreading," Greek fraternities on college campuses, men being allowed to exist in pop culture, the lack of female representation in video games politics, sports that include [only] men, etc.

(cont.)
The word has become commonplace in social justice arguments, pretty much another one of their scapegoats, such as blaming "the Patriarchy" or "internalized misogyny" when things don't go exactly as their socjus lifestyles dictate.
In the earlier stages of Gamergate, such as the Quinnspiracy (or the current Wikipedia article), anti-Gamergate attempted to shift the focus from ethics in games journalism, to the victim narrative of "I'm a poor womyn being harassed because I try to make games and the toxic masculinity in video games make my games not sell well." Or something along the lines of: "All these men are now trying to rape and murder me. Donate to my Patreon!" without showing any concrete/"true" evidence of death/sexual assault threats to that person.

Aren't you going to try dealing with Libertarian's wall?

They came to talk shit, not to actually talk.

Oh I know. I was just offering them a chance to either attempt counterpoint or lose with good grace. Rikameme has an odd cordial streak at times.

Nyberg has been a cited source for multiple articles and editorials throughout the year, and cited by multiple, nearly uncountable individuals when talking against gg. I would consider thst grounds to be considered a public figure in thid conflict.

Except Sandra Fluke did nothing to be called a 'slut' and whose only crime was sharing a course of action Rush Limbaugh didn't like. The reason isn't that having influence wasn't something to be mad about but rather that Sandra Fluke had committed no wrongs.

Of course having an audience should matter. Otherwise President Bush wouldn't be made fun of so much for being so disinterested in american politics despite being the president. Having power means you should have responsibility… and I'm surprised you don't know that… its a rule of life 101.

Not only that but being cited means alot more than a passive state. It transfers your opinion from an opinion to fact and expert advice. The simple fact that Nyberg continues to be cited by the media is a testiment to how pathetic the skills of the media are and Nyberg should be held accountable considering that she continues to state claims while knowing that journalists will back her up despite how bad it makes both of them look. The least she should do is call the journalists out for quoting her and taking her stuff as a statement of fact (or you know, stop making garbage claims to begin with).

"Merely sharing an opinion on social media has never been considered fair game"

Weren't you just trying to say all GG members are evil and work with pol a few comments ago on the last page based on a extremely out of place and barely supported messages on reddit? Do you know the meaning of the word "consistency"?

@Rikame
"A lot of Americans believed she did do something wrong: having an abortion"
That's not what Rush Limbaugh insulted her for. Please stop moving the goal posts. You can't move from one topic to another for no reason. You can't use Rush Limbaugh as an example and then point to something entirely different that has nothing to do with Rush Limbaugh.

"What did Nyberg do wrong before the digging on her background began? Say something you disagreed with?"
Wow, let me point out what you just wrote. First you write that Nyberg did nothing wrong and therefore didn't deserve scrutiny. Then you state I'm the one doing the investigation into her because I disagree with her. It's this degree of rudeness that makes people dismiss your claims.

For your information Nyberg has been telling people that Gamergate is about harassment since the start of the controversy. You also had to have read that she is being cited and claims to have been harassed by the movement and has done every step to insert herself into the controversy. From claiming that they doxxed her despite to outright testifying against the movement. I don't see why she shouldn't be put under scrutiny when she makes such bold statements and becomes a lynchpin of the "gamergate is misogyny" argument. What you wrote is a such a blatant slap in the face of reality and known information that I can't believe you continue to write things like this. Do you even know what's going on?

"And that is still passive, it is literally the passive tense and what the media does has nothing to do with if Nyberg deserves either criticism or a sustained harassment campaign"

Definition of passive is "accepting or allowing what happens or what others do, without active response or resistance". Publishing Nyberg's stories and citing her counts as active response. If you're arguments consist of ignorance and using words that don't actually mean what you think they mean I'm just going to go back to ignoring you. In fact the last time I had a discussion with you in the comments it ended with you making arguments from ignorance and me vowing to ignore you. I thought a few months would be enough time to see some change in your debating skills (and of course deactivating and coming back would symbolize some change of character) but it seems that in terms of debate you are still a static character. I say this because once again you pretend that criticism = harassment and that someone is a saint that shouldn't be criticized because 'opinion'.

"I also specifically said that not all GG members were working with /pol/."- Rikame saying that all GG does not work with /pol/

"Yes. GG is widely supported on communities like /pol/ and The Red Pill. Unfortunately, desperate for company, GG is a poor job of shunning them"- Rikame saying GG works with /pol/ and does a poor job of telling /pol/ off. It's roughly a page ago and less than a day ago. Does this count as short-term memory loss or long-term memory loss? I don't know either way Rikame did say GG was working with pol and not just some members, ALL of them.

"No, that is not what I said. In fact, if you search this thread for instances of the word “evil”, you will find that nearly all instances of the word were typed by you!"
" If you don’t believe me, here’s a sample GG’s self-proclaimed media spokesperson’s defending the life-ruining harassment of a Twitter user with 20 followers"- You saying GG enjoys ruining people's lives.

If that doesn't count as calling someone evil then I don't know because just because you didn't explicitly use the word doesn't mean you didn't invoke it. You say GG is a poorly run movement that was successfully infiltrated by misogynists. Evil can be defined as "profoundly immoral and malevolent" which is exactly what you claim GG is why saying you're not Anti-GG. If you're not going to remember what you wrote than I'm not going to bother addressing you anymore (in fact reading everything you've written before shows me that you enjoy shit posting so I shouldn't indulge you anymore). I hope you realize just how terrible your debating skills are. Did you honestly think you could get away with "I never did that" argument while actually doing it?

@rikame

criticism may only be as strong as the target’s relevance.

And being cited as an expert in a massive media war doesn't qualify?

The chan boards’ coordinated effort to raise dirt on her and threaten her life

It is not the fault of /gamergatehq/, /cow/, or any other chan board that pedos have a very time in prison.

That isn’t to justify any of what Nyberg did, before anybody gets the wrong idea, but the reaction to her is 100% unjustified.

"I'm not saying it was OK for her to upload crotch shots of her cousin to online pedo groups, I'm just saying GamerGate is totally awful for exposing her doing it".

The Plebcomics author did nothing but make a webcomic and get doxed behind his screen-name. He suffered real-life consequences for it. Nothing that he did warranted that.

>he

That seems kinda transphobic.

I’m sorry, but Libertarian missed the point so hard that he validated my previous post. Nothing says “x is receiving sustained harassment” quite like an attempt to justify it.

Pleasure continue saying that you're not defending a child pornographer, you're just saying criticizing them is wrong.

No seriously, it makes our work so much easier.

Then, however, he attacked the character of a woman who testified to congress, and his advertisers pulled out.

Sandra Fluke was a child porn distributor?

No?

Then it really is a false equivalency.

A lot of Americans believed she did do something wrong: having an abortion.

1. Sandra Fluke did not have an abortion.

2. Abortion might be controversial, but child molestation has a pretty bipartisan consensus on how bad it is.

You’re making a value-judgement here, and “wrong” has an entirely subjective meaning depending on one’s personal feelings of the subject matter.

Strictly speaking this is true.

But leaving aside all moral considerations, do you know how bad saying "good and evil are mere points of view" while defending a child pornographer makes you look?

This is why "no bad tactics, just bad targets" keeps failing.

Nothing that Nyberg did warranted a systematic effort to destroy her life.

Can't do the time? Don't do the crime.

I'd hate to change the subject, but I just wanted to post this.

Good Game Research: How Video Games Might Help Alleviate Lazy Eye Just something neat to share.

@Rikame
"I don’t know what post you are reading but it isn’t mine."
I quoted your post word for word. It's right there. You can't tell me I wasn't reading it. That's gaslighting.

"Even if her claims are wrong, it’s fair to say that it’s understandable where they come from. GG undeniably began with the Quinnpost."
No it's not understandable where her claims came from. They came from lies and none of them hold up under scrutiny. Nyberg has yet to retract anything she's said so lit doesn't count because even if she were misled she has yet to do anything about it. If Nyberg admitted she made a mistake then what you wrote might work but obviously it didn't. Oh and good work not properly naming the name of the post that apparently started gamergate (even though many people would claim that gamergate has been a long time coming considering widespread corruption and that the Zoepost is just a catalyst, literally anything else could have started gamergate).

"and introduce concepts such as “all GG support /pol/ and are evil and Nazis” that I do not say. I’m sorry, cordiality is a two-way street."
Who's mentioning nazi's now? What? I can't follow you. Maybe if you actually used logic. I'm pretty sure you wrote "GG is a poor job of shunning them" and in that post you specifically didn't specify 'some GG' you said GG which means all of them. There's a fine line between some GG and GG. And if you want to mention Nazis for no reason that's on you. You're the only one constantly changing your stories and what's actually happening to suit what you want to write. I didn't twist anything you wrote or take any of it out of context.

"For the third time, I never said this. I never said Nyberg was a saint."
"has nothing to do with if Nyberg deserves either criticism"- Rikame implying that Nyberg cannot be criticized. What's a saint again? Someone who's so good they're beyond criticism?

"I first claimed ~A Sgp, “It is not the case that all GGers support pol”."
That's NOT what you wrote the first time. GG does not mean GG supporters of pol, it means GG as in everyone who is gamergate. You can't pretend its my fault for reading what you write and being offended because you wrote it poorly. It's pretty much inexcusable. I don't see how I could read GG supporters of pol from the words "GG is a poor job of shunning them[pol]".

BTW that's not philosophy. That's argumentative logic you're using. Philosophy does not consist of using abstract letters to represent concepts.

"I later claimed E Sgp, or that there exists at least one member of GG x such that x supports pol."
That's not how you write argumentative logic. You failed to define x and unfortunately I don't know what x even stands for here. Is that a variable or an argument concept? Again the problem with this was already addressed. The only thing you've proven is there 'theoretically' can be a GG member who supports pol, you have done nothing to practically prove it or provide any reason why I should care that a GG member supports pol.

"Now, if I said both ~A Sgp AND A Gsp, that would be an absurdity"
Yes that would be an absurdity because you didn't define Gsp!

"Additionally, if I said both E Sgp AND ~E Sgp, it would also be a contradiction"
Edit: The tilde means not. In actual philosophy the not symbol is ' aka prime.
This makes no sense mathetically or philosophy because you wrote At least one gamergaters who supports pol and not at least one gamergaters who supports pol. This actually is perfectly fine as this is a contradiction. What you wrote next was not:

"However, E Sgp translates into ~A ~Gsp"
UH no it doesn't. Read it out loud. At least one gamergater who supports pol translates into not all not gamergater who supports pol which thanks to double negative; translates to all gamergater who supports pol. You could weasel out of this by saying it could also mean some gamergater who support pol but that doesn't change that fact that you don't know how to do logic notation (you keep ignoring the mathematical rules since 'not All' cannot be equated to mean 'some' in logic notation). I will now copy and paste what I wrote before: This is what I mean by rudeness and poor debating skills. You just had to try and ‘own’ me with “philosophy” didn’t you? You have no idea what philosophy is and probably just googled it, failed to comprehend it and then vomited this garbage and dared to pretend it refutes anything I said. Don’t be a mathematician either because in both math and philosophical logic, your argument is equated the same way and with a value of Sisyphean garbage. I’m gonna save everyone the other half of this wall of text because guess what the other part of your post addressed to me sucked too. Did you read anything I wrote and understood it? Because I’m pretty sure you didn’t.

Oh and just for laughs:
"I cannot make my posts fool-proof. To say that is my responsibility is to become an “SJW”, is it not?"

No it is not overly vindictive or illogical or anything like a SJW to demand that you write something that is coherent, understandable, creative and thought provoking that contains original research and can be considered the opposite of shit-posting. It would be SJW mentality to assume that its okay to shitpost and not do good work because you have the "right mentality" and the right "politics". There's nothing wrong with me asking you to "try" and actually write something that reads like you actually read and understood my post in both literal meaning and contextual meaning. Good lord, its SJW to demand people to write posts that are comprehensible. Here's some wingdings Rikame, given you're logic its okay for me to force you to jump through hoops to understand what I wrote "" oh and according to you, its not my fault if it comes out all blocks that you can't read.

Oh and Rikame never write anything on my wall again. If you have something to say; say it here. And you're extremely condescending attitude pretending that we're the hugbox for your inability to properly conduct yourself is getting tired.

I find it sad that they only thing we've been hearing recently on video game research is "misogyny" and violence. I mean back in 2008 there was research into how video games could help the elderly and people with memory problems.

http://news.illinois.edu/NEWS/08/1211gamers.html

Let me know if you find anything else great and uplifting like this. One aspect of gamergate (though its been abandoned since General left) was that academia into video game research was corrupted and turned into a source to make video games look evil for some reason. I haven't heard anything about DIGRA in a while either but at the end of all this, I hope researchers get back to looking at the positive implications of video games and stop wasting time with trying to play pin the social ill on the pop culture.

I don't know why nichegamer needs to be archive though. Have they done anything wrong lately?

Alright ladies, gentlemen, and whatever else you sexually identify as. I had a question that has been on my mind for a while, and I was wondering if I could get any input for it. It's not directly related to GG, but it does have to do with our crazy feminist friends from across Twitter.

We have all seen posts that GamerGate could possibly kill the feminist and SJW movement (mostly due to Butts being a pedo), but could killing the feminist movement prevent another one from replacing it in the future?

(Note: I haven't decided to look up any articles whether or not it is capable or not, I'm looking more for opinions from the regulars in this forum post.)

Gamer Gate is not going to kill feminism.
I think it will reform it and maybe getting it back to what it should be.
SJW are never going to die, what so ever i think the more time it pass the less relevant they will became.

I don't think gamergate will kill the feminist movement on the grounds that its not their target. I'm pretty sure gamergate will kill the radical feminist movement though and it will not be missed.

Any attempt to link the actions of radical feminists like Anita to actual feminists (you know, the ones who care about whether or not they're quoting facts and making decisions that actually address real problems) will rightfully get played off as bigotry. Christina Sommers is GG and feminist and I don't see how she could be screwed if gamergate wins. I don't see how the actual feminists will get hurt by this because they have no connection in either tone or rhetoric to the radical feminists.

We have all seen posts that GamerGate could possibly kill the feminist and SJW movement (mostly due to Butts being a pedo)

I really think you're overestimating your self importance here.

Not everyone knows who Butts is; certainly not all radical feminists do.

There's no negative reason why it's archived. At this point I basically archive everything, force of habit and all that.

@rikame

No, for the same reason that scientist whose work is misused, misinterpreted or used in an unpopular manner would not be fair game, either.

Ah, but Nonceberg's work is being used in exactly the way she intended.

0/10 for effort. What, if a murderer insisted that his/her victim were dead because it was the spring pushed the hammer, the hammer hit the firing pin, the firing pin struck the bullet and the primer and the primer accelerates the bullet into the victim’s skull, would you declare that it wasn’t the murderer’s fault that primers explode when struck by firing pins?

Murderer, person who exposed a child pornographer to the police, same thing right?

Prison is a dangerous place, guess we better not report any crimes in case the criminal gets hurt in there, right?

A broken clock is right twice a day. Is that really your defense?

No, my defense is that molesting kids is very bad and that we should put aside our differences to stop that when we can.

And when you shit on us for doing that it makes you look very bad thereby making it easier to destroy a group who thinks loyalty to the group is more important then not molesting children.

Typo

OK.

Hate to tell you this, but there are many out there. Let me know when GG decides to go after the ones who don’t disagree with or know anything about GG and we’ll talk, because it’s clearly an excuse.

And now you're trying to claim our exposing a pedophile is bad because you believe we have impure motives. Do you prefer children being molested to GamerGate being right about something?

That's not a rhetorical question, I'm genuinely curious how far you'll go in the name of hating a hashtag. Because others of your side have said similar things.

You know, if Butts could just stay out of this and not spearhead a year-long propaganda campaign against us, she never would have been exposed.

But luckily for good, evil is dumb.

Seriously, take a leading role in a massive cultural war while having all this evidence publicly available?

That's like running for Mayor of Chicago while having your front flowerbed full of hooker corpses.

I remembered the case wrong, you and mrkillultra are right.

Thank you.

That’s nice other than the fact that all of the pro-life politicians slammed Limbaugh for making Fluke a target because it had absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter.

I remember some significant support, anyways it's still not going to change the facts about Butts.

On that note, my participation in this thread is clearly unproductive, so I’ll take my leave for good. Have fun in your echochamber, I guess.

"Echochamber", "place where white-knighting child pornographers is met with disagreement".

You honestly have no clue how bad you look to any neutral here, do you?

@MrKillultra

Just a heads up, Generaal didn't leave GamerGate, he deactivated here because he has a job to do with burning DiGRA to the ground and doesn't need distractions.

He's occasionally on KIA, but most of the time he's working on that.

GamerGate alone? No, definitely not.

Everyone that SJWs have pissed off? Undoubtedly.

SJWs will die, not in the sense that no one will hold SJW beliefs, but in the sense that SJWs will have no power or influence outside their little fringe communities.

Just like Nazis or the KKK did.

Feminism will either die with it or be successfully taken back.

Now AntiGamer, the Butts revelations is going to kill them whether destroying them itself or by causing so much damage that the only thing left is mop-up operations.

They had a chance to save most of themselves by shoving her under the bus, but they doubled-down like they always do.

I genuinely expected the smarter ones to at least keep their mouths shut to avoid getting hit when Butts goes down, I over-estimated how cunning they were.

@TheGamerGrim

Best to archive it, then give the direct link & the archive link.

Protects the content and gives them clicks, win-win.

[Misc.] U.N. Broadband Commission's report: "Recent research on how violent video games are turning children…into ‘killing zombies’" – Look at the sources!
https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/3ma09l/misc_un_broadband_commissions_report_recent/
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/New_violence.html
Actual quote:
We’re getting killings which are caused by the use of Nintendo-style games, such as the game Pokémon, with children, and also with police and others.
Ban ‘Point-Shoot’ Games
In an April 2000 interview with Executive Intelligence Review magazine, attorney Thompson asserted that the violence associated with the “point-shoot” video games is not a free speech issue, and that it can be stopped.
In a press release Feb. 1, 2000, Midway Games reported the “top ten in killer games,” that is, the leading U.S. video-game sofware companies, as ranked in order of their unit sales:
Nintendo of America, Inc.: Manufactures Pokémon, Game-Boys, and equipment for satanic video games.
satanic video games.

I put this in the comments, but I'm also putting this here, because this is hilarious.

Even more hilarity.

Delicious, both of those.

Click the Image this is so hilarious that i cant even believe is real.

Oh I have one more.

they are citing jack thompson in a highly sensationalized article from 15 years ago?
yeah anita you're totally not jack thompson.
also haven't there have been precedents since then declaring video games to be free speech.

that's one way of damaging one's own credibility

this is why there's such a thing as background checks

Not only that this is again a quote from the source they used.

The term “New Violence,” as employed by LBW, signifies, chiefly, the introduction of new methods, those of Nintendo games and related means, to transform young children and adolescents, as well as law-enforcement personnel, into “Samurai”-style programmed killers. The term “New Violence” will be used in LBW proceedings solely to identify forms of violence which feature this distinctly new element. Old forms of violence will be included in this classification only when the role of Nintendo-style games and related means is a characteristic feature of the problem being considered in the study and report.

“Samurai”-style programmed killers, now that is a B movie or wacky anime i want to see.

The whole thing has to be one of the most hilarious things i have read in my life, for the wrong reasons.

Suddenly DiGRA is second-guessing itself and starting to make comments against the OMG Women are always victims and games are evil narrative.

https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/3mcf0p/suddenly_digra_is_secondguessing_itself_and/

Even DiGRA cant believe the U.N. Nonsense.

In other news about the U.N. FAILURE AND GOOGLE IDEAS.

WikiLeaks decide to join the action.

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/647406773012406272

Google Ideas instrumentalizes the gender wars https://twitter.com/googleideas/status/646783722570682369 … but what is Google Ideas? https://archive.is/QIdpP#selection-105.0-105.5 …

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/647421818081517568

There is presently a dangerous push to redefine insulting online speech as “violence online”, which will mandate aggressive state censorship

Google Is Not What It Seems
by Julian Assange
https://archive.is/QIdpP

Click the image.

I'm just scared someone very powerful will be dumb enough to listen and believe

"Samurai-Style Programmed Killers" Why, because Nintendo is a japanese company? :P

One source out of hundreds doesn't really invalidate the paper as a whole. But the fact something like this manage to make it as a root source is pretty bad. Did they really use the term "Satanic" to describe video games?

Obviously
We all know SJWs are racist

Just wait until they hear some of us still play Dungeons & Dragons and Pathfinder, then they'll really lose their shit.

Racism and yes they used the word satanic.

So, remember about South Park making an episode regarding SJWs? Well… Here's a clip!

Wait, wait, wait, wait, what?

Due to real life constraints I couldn't follow this thread lately, so I'm completely confused here. What is WikiLeaks? Did Google become Anti-GG? The United Nations are really getting involved in this mess?

So, can anyone recap what occurred at the UN meeting with those Literally Whos?

I've got this article that can help a little.

Thank you. I doubt it will do anything. Years ago, I recall the UN having an event revolving around international blasphemy laws and nothing happened because they were ridiculous (and they were promoted by Muslims who have a bad pr image of not taking criticism of their religion well).