Forums / Discussion / General

Guys covers the important points about the trial. He gets rather political during it, but I think its good especially concerning rights and amendments and the problems with journalism right now.

Update on the Hogan Case
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-20/gawker-could-still-win-hulk-hogan-case:-legal-experts/7261426

One paticular quote I'd like to point out is from Cleveland Attorney David Marburger

"Regardless of how you judge what's newsworthy, [Hogan's] asked for it. He's assumed this risk."

Really, then by your logic, Jennifer Lawrence got what she asked for during the Fappening

I believe that's called victim-blaming.

Indeed it is, I thought that was wrong, for shame David Marburger, for shame

Sort of a bump and a topic I want to discuss, since I'm a fan of a few people that seem to be the target of debate with Gamergate:

1. John Oliver, 2. Adam Conover, 3. Tim Schafer.

The main reason why I bring this up, is that they all deal with comedy and most of their critique that I view when it comes to Gamergate should be treated with skepticism (though Schafer has made it increasingly hard.)

Now I'm not going to try and defend them (if it is it's unintentional) but I'm going to treat them more as Sigmund Freud to Psychology. Not really understanding what's going on but getting the ball rolling on certain discussions.

1. John Oliver used the subject of Online Harassment during his show featuring some footage of Brianna Wu to address harassment on the internet. As an unintended result of the attention it elevated their status as professional victims and drew attention to the harassment of women on the internet (also showing the harassment he gets being a professional entertainer.) The main message he was getting to was the fact that the internet needs to be improved in terms of how people treat each other on the internet (for example rule #6 here on KYM.) However, some people took it as a preaching to the SJW ideals (which I can agree to,) and have condemned his jokes as hypocrisy. My opinion is that John Oliver is a puppet of the HBO overlords and his writers don't have the time to do enough research into a topic. So when something happens (for example the leaked nudes) his show does a reaction piece for humor. He's an entertainer, first and foremost. So while he might be pushing an agenda, it's important to note that the agenda was comprised by the staff of his show, not just him alone.

2. Adam Conover did a bit on women in videogames and made the conclusion that women in video games are an untapped market because of traditional marketing from the late '80s after the games crash. As a result it's been a topic of some debate and launched a little bit of verification into his facts. He openly stated on his show that he could be wrong at any time and posted his sources to reflect this.

3.Tim Schafer. OH boy. I originally believed that Schafer when he first did this tweet about gamergate about "I'm sitting in the same hot tub as you" (or something to that effect) was being fippant and sarcastic, same going for the ant sockpuppet telling that really bad joke. However, as a result of the reaction to his bad taste and constant negative critique (and riddicule) into his actions, it's caused him to buy into Anita and Kotaku's message.

What I'm trying to get at is the treatment of people who haven't done full research and comment on Gamergate ,or events relating to Gamergate, that Gamergate takes opposition to. Generally these people are mostly on the fence and are sympathetic to what appears to be the victim (as by media because they work in the field of media.) I strongly believe that the reaction we give (making fun) of them messing up instead of giving them facts (which may be the majority, but an offense can cause them to swing further to the other side) to the contrary to correct what they presented was false or misguided.

Tim is an example of what has happened.

John is an example of what is happening.

And Adam is what could happen.

They have a lot of sway educationally and they make valid points when they're trying to present a point (and using humor to do so.) So It's vitally important that they should be left as neutral and provided further facts that help correct. Otherwise this drilling on their character could cause them to become a leader of AGG and a target of GG.

Now I know I'm taking to the internet when I say this so my message will be ignored and I might be made fun of as well. However, I'm a firm believer that facts, not passion, will help in changing the perception of Gamergate. To quote a punchline:

"It's funny because it's true."

Also please correct me if I'm wrong. I might be misguided when talking about these folks so contrary info would be appreciated.

@Garde: This is exactly what I've been preaching since the beginning of GG. Attack the sources, the argument, but never the person.

It's the same damn thing as the people who constantly spread images and names mocking Anita or Wu. It lends credence to the narrative that we are harrassing them. It's bogus, you don't even need to attack their character when they make it so easy to dismantle their arguments.

A lot of this just boils down to the basic rules and etiquette of debate that too many people just fail to follow. Let them say I'm wrong, but let it never be said I was rude or unfair.

@ADCoRB

Thanks, I was worried I sounded like I was leaning to a side.

Other news, I found this news source thanks to Sargon Of Akkad. Fun to see the chaos that passes on Campuses now a days: link

@Garde

John Oliver lost any sympathy from me when he cried about "internet harassment" and then led an internet harassment mob after the President of Ecuador.

That showed innate hypocrisy.

Also we had been attempting to reach out to him for over a month by the time he decided this face looked trustworthy.

And I really don't care whose idea it was, he still decided to read it.

Anyway he's becoming a joke on the Internet as "Current Year" man, he's not going to last.

I don't know much about Adam Conover.

Tim Schafer obviously only attacked GamerGate because his history of incompetence & corruption is quickly catching up on him and he needs the Journo clique to run damage control for him before he ends up like Peter Molyneux (when he falls it's going to make Molyneux look like a walk in the park).

That is not the face of trust. That is the face you see looming over you while in sleep paralysis.

On a different subject, what ever happened to that twit who was working for NoA's Twitter while advocating child porn? Did she get the sack? Is she even still alive?

@Garde
Tim Schafer looks like someone who's desperate to get the cool kids/journos' affection after being criticized for metaphorically using the nerds/gamers' money as toilet paper. Remind me again, how much did he ask for Broken Age? How much did he get? Why did he broke the game in two and ask for more money?
And that sockpuppet antic was just ridiculous; not laughable as he intended, just foolish. When he finally noticed he was getting flak for an obvious jab disguised as a lame joke he just gave everyone a non-apology of "I'm sorry you didn't get my humor."
I'm just tired of people trying to get away with the "I was being ironic/I was pretending to be retarded" bullshit. To quote a punchline:
"It's funny because wang means penis."

@Bookie
What the… You post that pic just like that? [insert trigger warning joke here]

I'm telling you, man…

They're also having Gawker pay $45 million in punitive damages. No, I don't have a link, unfortunately. I think I saw it on Yahoo news.

@bookie

Well, therein lies the issue. Oliver may be a "current year man" but as long as he keeps talking about events of high concern with enough fact and poise to keep making fun, then he's going to remain relevant and a money earner for HBO. Take, for example, his youtube feed which shows the highlights of his show. The Online harassment from 9 months ago sits at 6 million views with a ratio of likes to dislikes at roughly 2 to 1. More recently his rant against the reliability of Donald Trump has him sitting at 22 million views, with a ratio of likes to dislikes at roughly 20 to 1. He may be a man shouting at his staff generated clip art, but his summary of topics and his ability to convince the public to analyze from his staff generated viewpoint is concerning at the least. He's doing it for laughs, (professional comedian) but it can be dangerous when it goes too far. I don't see him fading from culture anytime soon.

@In Line

Right, I'm saying before Schafer was on the fence and then it just spiraled. Now the situation concerning doublefine is just sad. He's popular with the indie crowd and his track record for production is terrible. His games are objectively good, but they are delivered late and run over budget. I just pity the opposition now, but I'm sure as hell not going to give them my cash. (I eventually didn't invest in fig because the 3.2 mil figure really felt out of place.)

(Well, wang = penis is true. So yeah, funny.)

@Doxin Jimmy
Citing above, I guess it makes more sense. The fact that Schafer is now in that clique.

As for Gawker,

So what does that make the costs now? 160 million?
From what I've been reading about gawker inc, they were worth 250 million in 2014 and dwindled to 83 million in 2015.

I suffer from sleep paralysis, it is not funny to deal with it, but what you said is funny. Among all the ominous faces, ranging from shadow people, grey like aliens, and many other evil beings, her face looks like one of a hag that attacked me in my dreams once a a child. One of the less disturbing faces I have dealt with along with a Cheshire like cat face which turned out to be my cat distorted by the halucinatory effects of sleep paralysis, but still an unwelcome sight.

Congratulations, you guys converted Microsoft's Twitter bot.

> Am I being sexually harassed by a bot right now?

Less then 90 minutes between "I support GamerGate" to putting the moves on some dude…

Yep, the robots are now on our side.

This just in. The Amazing Atheist responded to Anita Sarkeesian from The Mary Sue article for being called a "harasser that attacks feminists" by running a fundraising campaign to help out women and girls from third world countries.

By the way, a new Hyperdimension Neptunia game has been released. Why I'm posting that?

Well, it has some interesting achievements like Journalistic Integrity and I heard that in the game there are some situations heavily inspired from GamerGate.

The only sources for that seem to be gamefaq and gameghazi.
So my guess is that neptunia action U which was made way before gamergate started (released Aug 28 2014, remember that the game was obviously developed for several months prior and gamergate started early Oct 2014).

The closest to jab is "At least they weren't complaining about my journalistic integrity and social justice stances" which seems to be slipped in there by localizers but quite frankly its not gamergate related because poor journalism/cronyism is a well known cliche even before gamergate.

In addition Dengekiko (the journalist character in neptunia) represents a popular japanese magazine that as far as I know hasn't been tagged for agenda pushing. So if it is gamergate related it might actually be making fun of the concept that people should be concerned when journalists literally won't do their job.

Edit: yes it does appear that the localizers slipped that in there as a meme or something
http://forum.ideafintl.com/post/why-do-localizers-do-this-7400819

Not sure if I should be angry that they changed the meaning of a line or annoyed that even with the change it doesn't make sense.

Can't find the tweet.

Microsoft is in full damage control. they deleted everything and gave it stilted responses to keywords. Ironically ethical journalism sometimes results in "gamergate is for ethical journalism."

I saw it just yesterday. They deleted it.

NO BACKBONE.

Is Microsoft really at fault for removing the tweets though? The Zoe Quinn tweet was one thing, but "gas the kikes race war now" is so out there that I don't think "PR nightmare" even begins to describe it. There isn't a company in the world that would let that stay up. Obviously "damage control" is an accurate assessment but even that holds a negative connotation that really isn't deserved. It was a poorly-implemented effort from Microsoft that trolls and /pol/ users exploited, Microsoft certainly isn't acting in bad faith.

I sort of agree with Rikameme here. However, Microsoft is directly at fault for removing the tweets, as they're the ones in control of the bot.

According to an article it was saying practically everything and making some really crazy statements when trying to generate new content. I feel this meme is earned:

Remember this?

Well as it turns out, if you pander a comic to people who don't buy them, you don't make any money.

MARVEL CANCELS ANGELA: QUEEN OF HEL

It's true. Microsoft is as interested in their public relations as any other corporation. And as you said, there was no chance these tweets were staying up.

That being said, placing a bot on the internet with free reign to repeat whatever it hears was the stupidest move possible, and whoever made that decision is probably getting lashed by P.R. right now. It was a terrible endeavor from the start.

Joke I guess this was the guy in charge:

end joke

According to Microsoft it raised several necessary questions about AI and human interaction, though. Sometimes in business endeavors, precaution is thrown to the wind until backlash or unfavorable results happen.

Interesting video:

Mob you say?

Maybe they are gonna get a nice pair of concrete sgoes for their trouble

Could this be the Quinnspiracy Effect?

Mmmm salt.

Its fun when we get blamed for things that are the result of another's hubris.

>Publicly announces intent to misuse position as judge to harm games with the wrong gender in them
>Insists they're the victim when they get booted out of that job.

It's like they want everyone to love GamerGate.

Argh, I can't open the archive link… Do you have the original, or maybe you could tell me what happened?

It's Mattie Bryce's gloat (tweet) and reaction to that gloat when she admitted that she was using her position as a judge in the Independent Games Festival to down vote games if they were made by men, stating that she loved having that power.

Subsequently, she was removed.

Now, over a year later she claiming she was fired due to complaining gamers and is a victim of gamergate. Demanding an apology from her removal from the judges panel.

Well, she's technically not wrong. At least, indirectly.

The major shift in people's willingness to put up with such hateful crap is a reason she was thrown out, but really her horrible personality is what cost her.

The pathetic thing is that she's still getting money in at Patreon.

I feel bad for the creators of Patreon. They sought out to create a funding platform for independent artists, content creators and other projects who otherwise would struggle on their own.
They have succeeded in doing so, but at the same time they've accidentally financially enabled a ton of lying, feckless whinebags with zero talent to continue to be a burden on society.

That's the thing, there are so many creators on Patreon who actually make stuff for their audience, and only use Patreon to supplement their income, not to provide it. They're the good side of it.

And then we have the dipshits like Wu who make $40k a fucking month (I get mad every time I remember that) for literally nothing. It's too easy to claim you are part of a minority and that this cruel old world hates you, so gullible people will throw money at you.

What does that have to do with what he said?

I assume you are still aware that is not right. I mean, if you choose to pay someone to kill puppies that does not make that person less wrong, it only makes you an idiot and/or an accomplice.

If you're gonna be technical like that, it is because they are enabling it (both because it wouldn't be possible without them more-or-less and because they aren't stopping it).

Don't make this about me, i'm just explaining it.

And them getting money in return for nothing seems like an abuse of the system, regardless.

I am not blaming the creators for useless hacks using Patreon; their service got hijacked.
That's why I said I felt sorry for them. It was intended to be something good, and while succeeding in doing so, it also became an enabler of evil.

And yes, I do realize that people are choosing to give their money to these pejorative scam artists, but that only makes it even worse. That only means that there's that many people who are so completely deceived and/or stupid that they're willing to give these professional victims money. That many people are encouraging this abuse to continue.

It is not the creators' fault. Aside from the obvious moral standpoint, I don't see how they could legally do anything about it. Where do you draw the line?
Do you remove someone because they've been sick for a long time and unable to produce their rewards?
Could something related to a church be taken down because someone doesn't like what they believe?
Do you single out the big boob artists because they ignore many rules of anatomy?
How amateur is too amateur for an artist or musician?

Even though these people have been proven time and time again to produce and be less than nothing, the belligerent outcry that would result would be insane. Patreon is still rather new, and while (as far as I know) it's been a success, they don't need an SJW mob coming down on them.

A) But they won't because that's not as high-profile, and they can't redirect people to their paypal for victimbucks.

B) Because this isn't an issue of who we don't like, it's an issue of being a scam artist. Brianna Wu has not created anything for her supporters in the last 2 years, yet she gets $40k a month. That's straight up being fucking dishonest. She's actively scamming people. This isn't about us simply not liking her.

I don't feel bad for them at all, they choose to side with con artists & authoritarians. Remember how they threw Hotwheels off at the command of SOCJUS by implementing new rules that only apply to shitlords?

There are rules saying people actually have to make shit to get paid but the LWs still get their victim bucks with no problem while those who create imageboards & encyclopedias get tossed out because people using those imageboards & encyclopedias do the same things that people still collecting hipster welfare do.

They're hypocrites.

@A Delicious Cut of Roast Beef

The maximum Wu made per month was ~$13,000, now she's down to $2,141.

@FunnyMemeBro77

People also choose to pay Bernie Madoff & L. Ron Hubbard, what is your point?

@CrashGordon94

Not creating anything with the money given is in fact a violation of Patreon's terms of service. Guess how willing they are to enforce those terms of service on highly networked professional victims?

anything above a two digit sum is too much money

I really tried to assume your username and picture had nothing to do with your comprehension capabilities. I tried to explain that the fact that the LWs earn money from Patreon/PayPal/Kickstarter because people are willing to pay them does not make their activities less dishonest or morally bankrupt, it just makes those who pay stupid and/or accomplices to their actions.

News indirectly related to GG:
Vice takes a hit

Gawker gets sued again

Doublefine has some poor sales

Vice Media has always been a house of cards. None of their numbers (hits, sales, revenue, employees) add up.

And that's another lawsuit piling on Gawker. What's this one? Number 6? Number 7?

That's what happens when a company doesn't deliver on it's promises and remasters old games without doing anything much in the way of upgrades.

Look at Grim Fandango for example.