Forums / Discussion / Meme Research

This is a thread for discussion of what should be included in the GamerGate entry.

Please mention date of the event, place it took place, source(links, archive.today, peeep.us, archive.org) and a reason of why it should be added.

Each petition will be debated and escrutinized to verify the legitimacy of it's content and if it should be added.

Here it will also be discussed the way the new info will be presented to ensure the veracity and neutrality of the entry isn't compromised.

Thanks ratalada. It is better to discuss the additions before putting them into the entry directly.
I'll also link this thread on the article as well. It can encourage others to fix wrong and uncleared infos and such…

Edit. Done

Btw.. I'll remind a little thing for possible newbies:
This thread's purpose is not to discuss the topic but to improve the entry. For the discussion please use the comment section or this thread instead.

Ratalada, there were a couple of things you weren't ok with when I removed them regarding the Wiki edit war. Anything you wish to re-add from that?

I'm sticking with that the header was too long, but I can agree as well that I might've removed too much. If you can summarize it I'm sure we can add a paragraph.

well, what u added it's ok, Adding a paragraph about the arbcom would also be nice. It shows that the entry is in dispute right now and in process of arbitration.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate

Who is the assclown who has deleted all my additions?!

And I want to add to that: the sections I added where about how the ''gamers are dead'' idea came to be, where it came from and who spread it.

you can check the entry history next to the edit button. feel free to look for the person that made the edit and ask the reason for it. Also if you can, link the url of the changelog.

Generallucas, I'm going to ask that you remain civil. Also, the forums have a half hour time limit to edit your post. If you feel the need to post again within that time span, then edit your post.

About 2 weeks ago we decided that the article had lost it's tone of neutrality and that some sections were not pervasively relevant or were far too long in length and detail, so some re-writing and pruning was done. This included the removal of over 20 YouTube embeds, as well as the shortening of some sections such as "The Wiki War."

The purpose of this thread is to further discuss any additions that might need to be made, or fixes from previous edits that might have made certain sections too short. You can discuss what ever you feel needs to be re-added here and, as ratalada mentioned, you may still review previous versions of the article by viewing the edit history and browsing changes that were made.

Said assclown reporting in.

Feel free to discuss why you think your edits should be re-added, but if you're already going to be hostile now then that's not going to help.

But you added DiGRA, so we can start from there:

I removed it because I felt the relation between DiGRA and GamerGate wasn't something of interest for a KYM entry. You can still read your latest edits. First of all, the header was titled to be about the association that is DiGRA, which already has little relation to Gamergate especially when you compare it to actual review sites GamerGate has beef with. Then you go into Operation #DiggingDiGRA, which is an entirely different thing. And then you suddenly mention ADA, which shares members but still isn't DiGRA, making their connection speculative at most.

Following this, you list us various articles written by ADA (which i assume were Operation #DiggingDiGRA discoveries). This is dandy and all, but all these articles were existant before GamerGate was ever a thing. This makes their relation to GamerGate non-existant. The mention of the round table discussion even felt completely out of place. The thing that was most related to GamerGate was Dan Golding's Tumblr post, but then that one was related to "The End of Gamers" which already had a header.

The last paragraphs mentions how DiGRA condemned GamerGate. What they think of GamerGate is their business, and not important for the entry. And you ended with leaked emails and a mention that professors are playing clips from Feminist Frequency during lectures, which is kinda unrelated to GamerGate.

The focus of the header felt too off from GamerGate, which led to my removal of it. I did try to save some information by relocating it, but it wouldn't work.

Also I personally felt that you let your personal hate towards feminism influence your additions. You might disagree. But reading the paragraph in its original state, it didn't feel objective. Please remember in the future that edits should be objective.

Okay,I can get behind that. But please, can someone give me a headsup of that next time? It's is odd seeing all my additions removed without explanation. (or maybe KYM needs a system like TVTropes, where you explain your edits)

Should GamerGate be included in the Gaming entry? The event really made a huge impact on the Gaming subculture.

Oh, and upvote for bringing up good points.

90% of the edits on the site are done by a small group of people (staff), so a system like that would be kinda redundant as we would mostly explain edits to ourselves.

There is an entry notes system but that one is then only accessible to the mods with entry powers. But I can see how that would be useful, so maybe we can get that one moved to make it accessible to everyone. Something to bring up for sure yeah, but not in this thread.

I'll try to remember to shoot a PM as well the next time, so my apologies there.

Oh, and upvote for bringing up good points.

Thanks for that I guess, but please do try to remember to use the edit button the next time. Bob just pointed it out in an earlier reply to you. This is the forum, you can edit your posts here.

See this thread. I was basically considering that, but I still haven't got around to actually executing any of my plans. If you want to go ahead and add a section on that page for now, that would be fine.

I want to expand the blocklist header to add raspberry_pi and GamejobsBot.

On October 15, Raspberry_pi showed it's dissaproval of #Gamergate :

https://archive.today/WR5tk :
@raspberry_pi: Let us be clear, you few loud angry folks. We're not under/misinformed or blinkered: we think you’re WRONG. End of. #StopGamerGate2014

@raspberry_pi: We want to encourage girls in this industry. Being horrified by #GamerGate does not “taint” us as one follower suggested (cont…)

https://archive.today/CqEcc
@raspberry_pi: …and if, as another suggested, we “alienate people” – well, they’re ppl we weren’t too keen on having in our community in the first place.

On November 25, IGDA_Puerto_Rico chairman tweeted to Raspberry_pi talking about it also using the blocklist, blocking him in the process.

https://archive.today/hk5V7:
@siloraptor: Congratulations @Raspberry_Pi you just turned a block list into a black list #gamergate #notyourshield

GamejobsBot also adopted the blocklist

This was confirmed by Roberto Rosario on nov 26, http://archive.today/YSCoe
@siloraptor: Yes blocked too by @GamejobsBot

A twitter user using the hastag #Gamergate made a video proving that not only @GamejobsBot was blocking people in masses but also the creator @JanDavelHassel was using the blocklist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPkVHnkfjN4&feature=youtu.be
later that day @siloraptor was unblocked by @GamejobsBot but the rest of the people in the blocklist were still being blocked.

https://archive.today/3WJ3P

I don't have the exact date when these 2 companies adopted the blocklist since they haven't declared openly when they started using it but they're still using it until this date (nov 08 2014).

@Generaallucas: If you want your research to remain up, just make a "Digital Games Research Association" subculture entry. You can do an "h2. Criticism" section for the Gamergate crap.

@Ratalada

Nice finds I guess, but you're not really telling us what actually happened yet. You list some tweets, some chairman got blocked (and unblocked), and then you suddenly mention 2 companies who adopted the blacklist.

We already have a part of the IGDA chairman being blocked by the original blocklist under the header, but there's no mention of other blocklists. You can probably mention this quickly within one line in the form of "Similar twitter blocklists, such as the ones by x and y, faced likewise issues, including the blocking of Rosario." Add one or two external references in there, and that should do it. Make something nice of it.

@RandomMan
It's the same blocklist IGDA was using and endorsing: "ggautoblocker" https://github.com/freebsdgirl/ggautoblocker. I guess I missed to mention that.

1. Chairman gets blocked (already mentioned in the first paragraph of the header).
2. Blocklist is used by 2 big twitter accounts related to the tech/videogame industry (raspberri_pi and Gamejobsbot).
2. Chairman and many other developers are blocked from both.
5. Chairman gets unblocked by Gamejobsbot
4. Another user in the blocklist shows that GamerjobsBot and creator of the bot are both still blocking him due to the blocklist.

I can make it fit in one paragraph np. I was giving proper background so I linked all relevant archives to the case. The IGDA_PR chairman was the one that made mainstream that those 2 twitter accounts related to the tech and videogame industry were using the blocklist, he was also the only guy people using the blocklist made an exception due to his position so I made it orbit around him.

On November 25, Roberto Rosario highlights Raspberri_pi[1] and GamejobsBot[2] are also using the blocklist. Rosario was later allowed to follow GamejobsBot as an exception[3] but other users remained blocked.[4].

References:

[1] Twitter – @siloraptor:Congratulations @Raspberry_Pi you just turned a block list into a black list #gamergate #notyourshield

[2] Twitter – @siloraptor:Yes blocked too by @GamejobsBot

[3] Twitter – @siloraptor:"Thank you @GameJobsBot #gamergate"https://archive.today/3WJ3P

[4] Youtube – Blocked by GameJobsBot

I think it a way to bypass overloading the references could be to make hyperlinks to screencaps of tweets hosted in the kym image gallery and make it obligatory that they have the sources (url or archive) in the description so they can be verified. This would involve some extra work for the sake of making the entry lighter. (this idea would take 3 references from my example and make them hyperlinks to the gallery).

I think it a way to bypass overloading the references could be to make hyperlinks to screencaps of tweets hosted in the kym image gallery and make it obligatory that they have the sources (url or archive) in the description so they can be verified. This would involve some extra work for the sake of making the entry lighter. (this idea would take 3 references from my example and make them hyperlinks to the gallery).

References require hyperlinks as well, so it won't make much difference. Just keeping them as references is fine.

I have a suggestion: why don't we create a "Gaming Scandals" page? We can store stuff not directly related to GamerGate there. We can have GamerGate, Quinnspiracy, Doritosgate, and other stuff as sub-entries.

I already answered you in your seperate thread, but I'm sticking with no.

A placeholder for stuff that already have entries is no excuse. We can already link entries through other methods, like has been done with your examples already.

Given how much of the discussion relates to particular individuals, perhaps we should make some sort of 'dramatis personae' subpage.

i have a few questions:

1: why was the #opSKYNET part removed?
If you do some research, you can see that it had some impact.
if #gameovergate and #stopgamergate2014 are notable enough for the entry, then #OPskynet sure is.

2: Is it a good idea to put a link to gamergate.me?
it is one of the biggest info depots about gamergate.

further i have some stuff that might be a good idea to add to the entry:

roguestargamez and #solution6
the debate that happened lately
the "e-celeb" problem
the e-mail campaign to ftc

1: was brought up in a seperate mod conversation:

- #opSkynet was removed. It was just one project out of the billions Gamergate launches weekly, and not one that stood out explosively.

and I'm willing to agree with that. Gamergate launches multitudes of "operations" on a regular basis; it's not necessary to document every single one. Besides, #gameovergate and #stopgamergate2014 are the most prevalent anti-GG hashtags. Why are they not important?

2: Gamergate.me is extremely pro-gamergate. If it is brought up in the article this must be addressed. remember, objectivity is the most important part of writing an article. We're a documentation site. Officially, we have no stance towards either party.

As for the rest, you haven't justified why any of it should be added, and a lot of it is extremely vague and doesn't even explain what you're talking about.

i see, thank you for answering something that has been bugging me for weeks

i shall now give my arguments:
i edited a link to the most important info about solution 6 in my previous post

on further notice, it seems that the e-celeb problem and the debate might be not as usable as i thought, so i drop those ones

the emailing campaign to ftc, or also called Operation UV has caused this:
update 1
update 2
update 3
update 4

ps: sorry for suddenly editing the previous post, i didn't expect an answer that fast
i want you to know that i only updated my previous comment because i noticed i didn't wrote it well

new requests for the entry:

>adding gamergate caused gawker to lose one million dollars
(i am giving this source as an example, if this source isn't a good one, there are dozens of other sites with the same topic)
>adding something about charities gamergate has donated to ( like the WWF and pacer center )
there was also someone accusing us of weaponizing charities
and there was also ablegamers who rejected the money from a gamergate fundraiser campaign, because it lacked transparency

correction: i shouldn't have said "accusing us", i meant "accusing gamergate"

i also forgot to include the reasons for my request

i thought the part about gawker would be a good update on operation disrespectful nod

and we can't deny that the charities aren't an important part of gamergate

sorry if i am talking too much

Updated the Gaming entry to mention GamerGate. Any input would be of great help.

Is this the kind of place to suggest where potential sub-articles (or general articles tangentially related to the subject) could be made? Because if that were the case, let me throw a couple out there (in no particular order):

- #NotYourShield
- Punished /v/
- Phil Fish
- The Fine Young Capitalists
- Gawker Media
- MundaneMatt

@Kun Fu Cthulhu

-TFYC: I think there's already an article about them. It needs updating tho.

- Punished /v/: My opinion is that an entry talking about him before and after the exodus to 8chan would be more appropiate, it would also provide more content for his entry. I noticed there's no page about the board-tan's so making one to fit him and other notables -tans from chan culture would be great.

- Phil Fish: I'm surprised he doesn't have an entry. He's a lolcow and pretty popular for his tantrums ("suck my d*ck, choke on it!", "I'm done", "I take money and run away", "No more fez2!"), he was also part of the indie game movie, won some prizes and somewhere in 2012(?) he insulted japanese games.

- #notyourshield: I think making an entry about the hashtag is a good idea since it is pretty notable, It could also include it's counterpart #Tweetlikenotyourshield to expand it.

-Gawker media: I think this entry should be made by people that are willing to put the time on it, gawker has also lots of sites under its wing so it would also need it's own sub-entries

-MundaneMatt: As far as I know, he got in a fight with angryjoe last year because he was quoted as one of the 'mean' critics of Anita Sarkeesian, his video was pretty moderate (like most of his) but angryjoe never issued a clarification or apology. This is the only thing I remember of him before #GamerGate, he steadily was gaining subscribers, he was like 10k followers before GG and now his close to 40k.

Well, I think I gave enough keywords to start reasearching some of those entries :3.

@SuperJumpman
Thanks for presenting those sources, but Twilitlord is right, There are lots of 'pro-GG''s OP and some are pretty short lived. I suggest that the header of OP Disrespectful Nod gets changed to Gamergate's boycott Operations. And it should remain the same except a small new paragraph talking about OP Baby seal: An operation solely focused on Gawker, which is what caused them to lose so many advertisers. Those 2 have been alive since their creations and are still going.

OP Baby Seal,a variant of OPDisNod, was created to focus solely on Gawker media, the result of this Operation was the withdrawal of many advertisers (ones being Adobe and Intel). On xx of 'month' is announced Gawker lost millions due to gamergate[sauce]
----
About OPUV, I've read the archives you linked and from them it seems Gamergate is responsable for the FTC improvements regarding undisclosed affiliate links , but the info is quite extensive, plz try to resume all this in a paragraph and post it here :b.

Remember the entry must be the most compact as possible while having the most vital information of the event. I've been having troubles loading the page due to how big it has become, it even froze my browser more than once due to how many things it had to load ;-;

@Twilitlord how about adding wiki.GamerGate.me as a source for the operations? the site is pro-gg as you said so it would be safe to use it as source for Operations and alike since they're described in full detail in there.

I would suggest to make a site entry for gamergate.me but I don't know what level of relevance is needed for a site to have his own site entry.

@ratalada I see, thank you for explaining.
i will post the paragraph as soon as possible.

And what about the charities?
Can someone tell me if it is a good idea or not to add something about it to the entry?
and if not, why? Like i said previously, it is a notable part of gamergate, but easely to forget about

@Ratalada
Phil Fish
We do have fez 2 cancellation entry. Detailed information and seperated entry for Phil doesnt seem to be necessary. Though that entry can be updated instead.
Gawker
We have that already
MundaneMatt
Yeah sure. If you think this is notable enough, you can create an entry. Still not exactly related to GG, but got involved just like Angry joe? Yes.
Gamergate.me
I am still not sure how variable source is that. Sourcing Op's seems fair if different news sites are also covering those. Thats why "Op disrespectful nod" is notable. But honestly, it doesnt seem to be necessary to add every Op GG has ever launched.

>#NotYourShield
I already brought up this one in the comment sections a few times. So yeah go ahead, that thing is notable enough by itself.

>Punished /v/
Ehhhhhh. I dunno. 4chan boards all have personas, some are just more common (/a/, /v/, /pol/). And Punished /v/ isn't the first creation, there's also Neo /v/ and the regular /v/. As an alternative, I would just add a header about them in the /v/ entry.

>Phil Fish
He is worthy of an entry. There's Fez II, "Suck my dick! Choke on it!", and some of his other fuckups. Just remember, if you're gonna write an entry about it, you must also mention some positive things he did (awards he won, etc.).

>TFYC
I'm gonna go with no for now. The most notable things about them are their Game Jam and Vivian James, both which have seperate articles.

>Gawker Media
Already exists. Fairly complete, but can do with some updates. Volunteers are welcome.

>MundaneMatt
Eh, sure. Notable enough.

@superjumpman
The charities are a frequent activity from #GameGate supporters to the point that the total donations is near 111k dollars, outside of the controversies regarding ablegamers and Unicef I haven't seem anything specially controversial or negative about it.

The only problem I find is that I can't see any existant header where it could fit so it would need a new one just for charities. I dunno if the entry can hold more headers, so I guess the decision rests on the mods.

For now I think updating the pakman header to include his newest GG related videos(one them being about Mercedes Carrera's charity and ablegamers) should give some highlight on charities.

@Alex Mercer
About new entries:
I won't be making any of them :b. I just gave some friendly info tips for anyone willing to make any of them.

Regarding OPs:
I'm not saying to add every Op GG has launched, I'm just saying that it would be good to add mention of the ones that have made notable results against their targets regarding boycott and mail campaigns (OP baby seal and UV have similar levels of acomplishment compared to disrespectful nod).

It seems that we are reaching the point where we can't add anything to the entry anymore because it has gotten too big.
but the event keeps going on.
what will happen if important stuff keeps popping up?
did we have an entry that had gotten too big before?
if so, can the solution of that entry be applied to this entry?

Splitting it into subpages?

new request: update the wikipedia wars part, i reccomend to check jimmie wales' tweets in the image section
long story short, he takes the gamergate-is-about-harassment-side

look what happened to the gamergate article at wikipedia, zero citations at the first sentences
i mean, come on

@superjumpman
I think the only relevant bits are what is currently on the entry, things that should be added should be:
*Mention of the Arbcom, reason for it and veredict(when its out).
*Wales defends the removal of a wikia article copiling wikieditors's wrong doing (collected from wikipedia's Talk pages) calling it a 'hitlist and the complete migration of gg research from gamergate.wikia to wiki.gamergate.me in response to this.

Also, the account you linked is suspended. but I went to the article and took a screenshot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_controversy
http://a.pomf.se/tyzqxw.PNG

3 big paragraphs, 0 citations at all. It's very sad indeed.

Okay, as we've has several happenings over the past few weeks I would like to suggest the Medium/8chan CP incident to be added in January.

I believe that is a good time period to update the article accordingly.

@Getpills
I believe if that happening gets bigger, it would be more fitting for the 8chan entry or an event entry related to it. It may affect GG but the event revolves around 8chan and false CP claims.

time to make a recap of what needs to be done:

>file the ftc info, and see if it can fit in the entry

>add the OPbabyseal part

>mention arbcom

>update the wikipedia part

Who is going to do what?

Alright, I'm here to propose an extension to the KYM page.

A section for the Federal Trade Commission.

People within #GamerGate created OperationUV, which was about contacting the FTC regarding the actions of the publishers. The FTC intervened after a lot of emails from GG, edited the ways they could be communicated to (and acknowledged that GG was behind that)

The following Reddit posts – which have been verified – talk into detail about the subject matter.

Important Update: The FTC Heard Our Complaints. They Are Going to Issue Revised Disclosure Guidelines for Affiliate Links and You Tubers. We've Been Instrumental in Making Real, Lasting Positive Changes to Online Journalism

Important FTC Update #2: Yes, the FTC is Going to Address the Specific Complaints of Operation UV. And Sorry, Gamasutra, You Did NOT Write About Them.

Important FTC Update #4: FTC Confirms that, Yes, #OperationUV is Responsible for the New Guidance on Hidden Affiliate Links. Be Proud GamerGate.

Can I go write a section about this?

@Generaallucas

Perhaps it would be more relevant in a summary in a header of Gamergate "achievements" (can't really call the header that). Gamergate actions did bring in results, as various ad companies stopped supporting specific websites following Gamergate emails. You can then make your FTC thing a part of it.

This is also a thing I noticed in the GG entry when I edited it but forgot mentioning:

Use the actual hyperlinks. I noticed various editors stick to donotlink websites once the external references link to websites GG has beef with, under the motto of "don't give them pageviews".

KYM doesn't care if they get pageviews or not, they're just running their site just like us and your personal beef isn't giving us an objective entry. Use the actual hyperlink to the article, and don't stick with donotlink sites or archived versions. You can replace the original link with an archived version if they notably edited it, but as long as the original content still exists you just use the original link.

Okay I wnat to know if we should add the ABC backlash into this?

i made a header for gamergate's actions,
shall i add it? (i left the ftc part open, if generaallucas still wants to write the ftc part)
i know i used gamergate.me as a source, but it was the most complete list of charities i could find.
the alternative is giving examples of charities

seems that everybody is ok with it.

i shall add it tomorrow

It seems as if you want do an Anti Achievement Section….

I'd be in favor of at least trying to write the article from a more neutral POV. As it is now, most of the editors are rabidly pro-GG, so the article tends to be less objective reporting and more "GAMURGATE IS THE BEST THING EVUR, SJWS SHULD DIE!!!1!1"

My previous attempts at making the article more neutral were met with insults and accusations of "censorship"/being an SJW, so you'll understand if I'm just a bit hostile.