DIGITISER
  • MAIN PAGE
  • Features
  • Videos
  • Game Reviews
  • FAQ

A WHITE FLAG IN NO-MAN'S LAND: WHY I'M STEPPING OUT OF THE GAMERGATE DEBATE - by Mr Biffo

13/4/2016

156 Comments

 
Picture
Remember when Digitiser2000 used to have reviews, and lists, and stupid articles fronted by stupid characters? Yeah.

Well, bear with me. I need to get all this out of my system, and we'll get back to normal service as soon as I'm done here.

​Trust me. I'm sure we'll all need a palette cleanser.

I've noticed I tend to write these articles in threes. As with my sanctimonious Jim Sterling trilogy, this is going to be the last thing I intend to write about the confusing, sprawling, not-easy-to-define mess that is Gamergate.

Probably. You know what I'm like.

​I kind of feel I have to address it once again, because over the last couple of days, both sides in the ongoing "culture war" have wanted me to be one thing or the other. When I'm not certain I'm either. Or even what I believe anymore.

A disclaimer: as always with the think pieces I write on here, this is me working it out as I go along. You'll be with me as my brain almost literally trickles through my fingertips.

Picture
QUAGMIRE
​If you've been reading Digi this week, you'll know I once again stepped into the quagmire that is Gamergate, by suggesting that the anti-Gamergaters - one of many things I learned this week is that not every anti-Gamergater likes the term "Social Justice Warrior" - might not always help themselves.

That they can be too quick to support every declared victim, and take everything at face value, and how that risks devaluing their cause.

It's my own doing - I completely expected the response I got to it. It got me called a Gamergater by a few people, and on the whole I got flack from aGG-ers... who, I felt, were misinterpreting my words.

Then I wrote another piece about that response, entitled 'I'm a Gamergater Now, Apparently'. A couple of people took this literally - that I was coming out as a Gamergater. Albeit, mostly Gamergaters, who thought I was jumping aboard their cause. I wasn't, and I'm not. I was merely reporting being labelled as a Gamergater, in a sort of sarcastic way.

And yeah... much as it pains me to say, it's a fact that I had more of a negative response to that article from aGG-ers than GGers. But as I say... not unexpected.

What then happened is that KotakuInAction - the sub-Reddit forum that declares itself as close to an official Gamergate HQ as there is - picked up on the piece. The phrase that I heard again and again yesterday is that "people don't join Gamergate... they get thrown into the pit with the rest of us".

Apparently,
I'd been tossed into the pit.

MAD DAY
​It was a bit of a mad day. Clicks went through the ceiling, the piece got more comments than I think we've ever had before, my Twitter feed went insane, and we also received a ton of contact form entries (Which... I should add - I've only just rediscovered, as they were being sent to the wrong address for some reason; there are messages dating back months that I'd somehow missed... Apologies to everyone - I'll try and get back to you: or email us on digitiser2000@gmail.com).

Very kindly, I received messages of support from several of you yesterday. I appreciated all of them... but at no point did I feel I was under attack, or needed that support (as nice as it was to receive). It was overwhelming trying to keep up with everything - when I was also trying to keep on top of my day job and life. However, on the whole - while passionate - people were respectful and willing to engage.

There was a little snarkiness, and one bloke on KotakuInAction called me a "fucking asshole" and told me to "eat shit", but I kind of understood his anger. And I'm big enough to accept that I might be an asshole.

Someone else called my "intellect" into question, because I didn't do my due diligence and question everything that was presented to me by the media. And yeah... my bad, but I was busy with life, and kids, and a job, and eating crisps, and getting the car serviced, and that. But fair enough. We all have different priorities I suppose, and mine don't include dissecting literally everything I read in case it might be a lie.

And of course, I woke up this morning to more messages, and more notifications. I was going to write something stupid on here to just get past it, but I instead need to draw a line under it first.
Picture
NEVER GOING TO UNDERSTAND
​I want to understand Gamergate. I want to understand the culture war that's raging, with the games industry at the heart of it. But I don't think I'm going to be able to. Not fully. Frankly, I don't have the time.

That said, I think I gained at least some understanding of at least part of it, before my enthusiasm ran out, and I became buried under messages and notifications.

My perception, from the time I spent with it over the last couple of days, is that there are many people within Gamergate who are sincere. Yeah, I know - your knee-jerk response there might be one of horror... so imagine being me right now.

Most of the GGers I spoke to had slightly different intentions and objectives, but the same message kept coming through; they wanted the media to stop misrepresenting them. It's a bit of a chicken-and-an-egg situation, admittedly... but they believe that Gamergate started long before The Zoe Post... even before Doritogate and Gerstmanngate... They stated that, for them, it is not about harassment. And - hold onto your prejudice - all I can do is take them at their word.

Some of this might sound familiar to you if you've followed Gamergate closely; you'll likely be fearing I've bought into the usual GG "smokescreen" stuff. For me, though, it's new; that's how little I actually knew about Gamergate. Which is weird, because there was a lot that I felt about Gamergate.


When somebody keeps repeating the same thing, it means something. It's worth trying to listen to the message behind it. I, like many, applied a blanket label of "women-hating harassers" to all Gamergaters, without really having first-hand experience of that, or trying to engage with them.

Obviously, because I'm not a woman... but also, in part, because I just bought the media and social media line, without doing any first-hand research myself. And because there are harassers out there, who use the blanket of Gamergate to be wholly unpleasant. And because Gamergaters - feeling misrepresented - sometimes lash out. It's easy to paint someone as "mad" or "bad" when they're backed into a corner. God knows, it has happened to me.

Again... I didn't look into it, because I had better things to do. I still do. But I also get why those on KotakuInAction, for whom this really matters, would be angered by what they might perceive as a flippant attitude to their misrepresentation. I dismissed anyone with anything to do with Gamergate as "boogeymen", to be feared. You might not like hearing it, but there's clearly far more to it than that.

Picture
NO IDEA
I've no idea if this is true, or accurate, but here's what I think I understand: there's a solid core of Gamergate - certainly on KotakuInAction - who truly believe in their cause.

Some of those people are fighting for an honest games media, some of them are fighting to be left alone to play the games, and say the things that they want to say. It's about free speech and transparency for them.

​From browsing on KotakuInAction over the last couple of days, and talking to people on Twitter, I'm surprised by the diversity of the community. I have had my preconceptions challenged. This corner of Gamergate, at least, isn't all white, straight, women-hating males, or sock puppets.

I get that this might shock you, that I risk getting put into a box by saying it. But I know what it feels like to be misrepresented, or labelled as something that I feel I'm not, and it presses my buttons. 

I can predict now that some of you will want to tell me that KiA were playing nice, and playing the PR game. Yet, the guy who called me a "fucking asshole" for my casual use of the word homophobia, told me more than any of them.

That said, some of the language used on KotakuInAction, or by other Gamergate supporters on Twitter, still sits uncomfortably with me. I don't like Feminazi, for one thing, and that's a label which seems to get tossed around far too easily. My instinct when I see, or hear, about abuse is to want to protect the alleged abusee.

CULTURE WARS
Unfortunately for those who are coming from a sincere place, whether it's Gamergate or not - I don't know - but KotakuInAction aren't the only ones fighting this "culture war".

Recently we had the wet and ineffectual nothing that was The Triggering - a campaign for free speech, couched in the language of offence and abuse. People going after Alison Rapp with a sort of fervour and glee that I find deeply unpleasant - and revelling in her downfall. And there are other sites - you might be aware of some of them - where the stereotype that the likes of me bought into simply runs rampant, and promotes a culture of harassment (whether overtly or with more subtle language).

The fact remains, that women who work in the games industry are far too often targets for abuse, even if those I spoke to on KiA wanted no part of it. Is that Gamergate? Are the people who abuse women online part of the movement? I actually don't know. To look at GamerGhazi - the part of Reddit that's the anti-GG flip side of KiA - all Gamergaters are as bad as one another in their eyes. To look at KiA, everyone on GamerGhazi is a knee-jerk feminist. 

It feels reductive to me to dismiss a huge group of people as being one amorphous mass, rather than a collection of individuals. But I've given up hope that these two big, amorphous masses are ever going to bridge the gulf between them. There's simply too much hurt, damage, and bitterness on both sides. The back-and-forth has become a continuous feedback loop.

NO CONCLUSION
My conclusion to all of this is... I don't have one. Bear with me, while I take at face value everything I've been told.

Gamergate is fighting for an ethical games media.
Okay... but I don't really care. I think there are more important things to worry about. Certainly in my own life. I try to have an open mind, but I'm not going to become a posterboy for any movement. Sorry.

Gamergate has been misrepresented by the media.
Yes... I do think the media has probably been guilty of misrepresenting some sections of Gamergate, and understand how frustrating that must be. But I don't really blame them.

Rightly or wrong, the likes of myself don't want to be seen as lacking in compassion, or accused of supporting a movement that has been reported as populated by right-wing, women-hating, extremists. You only have to look at the response to my pieces this week to know how difficult it is to talk about the subject in a neutral way without it blowing up in your face.

Gamergate, regardless of whatever its real intent is, has come to represent something in the wider psyche. Remember that the swastika used to be a sacred symbol for good fortune?

Like it or not, truthful or not, Gamergate is perceived as something ugly, whether it is or not. I think it has gone too far now for that to ever be reversed. The word itself comes pre-loaded.

So good luck getting the media to ignore all of that... 

Gamergate doesn't harass women.
Maybe the people in KotakuInAction don't, and I'm pretty certain that there are many who identify as Gamergaters who would never do it, and more female Gamergaters than I ever realised... but, again, it's unrealistic to think that women aren't being harassed, and that some people aren't doing that as part of the culture war that Gamergate is a part of.

Whether that makes them Gamergaters or "Gamergaters"... I dunno. But it has to be considered as a problem, if what you're fighting for is to have Gamergate's real message be heard.

Whether you're a GGer or an aGGer, swallowing your pride and saying sorry would go a long way. And already I feel the hairs standing up on the back of my neck...

"You want us to apologise to them, when they're the ones who've been abusing/misreprenting/lying?!"
Picture
TWO TRIBES
Ultimately, it's pretty apparent that both sides view the other without any sort of nuance.

I can understand that; one side feels harassed, abused and attacked - that Gamergate tries to ruin the lives of women - the other feels misunderstood or misrepresented, attacked, and lied about.

Each thinks the other is deceitful and wrong. People I've spoken to on both sides talk about never backing down (not to mention those who just want to ruin people, get them sacked, expose perceived hypocrisy, and dick around).

I guess it's hard not to come out fighting when you feel backed into a corner, persecuted, abused, harassed, misrepresented, misunderstood. And that applies to people on both sides - everyone I spoke to, Gamergate and anti-Gamergate, said the same thing.

That's why people involved are so touchy, and why it's impossible to discuss the topic without upsetting someone. People want allies to join their ranks - not somebody like me wandering around No-Man's Land with a football under my arm, trying to organise a kick about. The more I discuss it, the more I appear to be getting drawn into it. 

Alas, Gamergate - or the culture war that it has come to represent - is never going away. The KiA Gamergaters tell me they want to fight for an honest and transparent gaming media, a world where political correctness doesn't run rampant. However, the media isn't going anywhere, so Gamergate is unlikely to go anywhere. People on the other side want to protect women from the abuse that they feel Gamergate targets at them. Sadly, abuse of women doesn't look like it's going to just stop overnight either.

All I can offer is that I only know that there's much I don't know, or understand. At every turn, all I've succeeded in doing is offending people by talking about Gamergate, because there's so much more to it than I can wrap my head around. So, again, sorry about that.

I can't debate the morality of the broader goals of Gamergate, because I simply don't care, or get why it should matter to me. All I can offer is that if people are being misrepresented then that sits uncomfortably with me... and that the harassment of women is morally abhorrent - because they're both things that do matter to me.

​And with that I think I'm done.

Now press reveal to see what my father, Father Christmas, thinks of you:

REVEAL:
Picture
FROM THE ARCHIVE:
ALISON RAPP, NINTENDO... AND THE ENDLESSLY REPEATING CYCLE OF ABUSE - BY MR BIFFO

DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE: I'M A GAMERGATER NOW, APPARENTLY - BY MR BIFFO
156 Comments
The Green Spurt
13/4/2016 11:56:10 am

You wrote what was basically a pro-GG article. You shouldn't really be surprised that most of the objection came from anti-GG-minded people.

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 11:59:30 am

Man alive, Green Spurt... Were you sat here waiting for this to go up? I've not even properly proof-read it yet!

Reply
Damien
13/4/2016 01:13:06 pm

I'd also read it by this point :p

Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 01:13:54 pm

Jesus. You speed-readers.

tehy
14/4/2016 12:49:34 am

you know i could do a long protracted piece about how anti-GG people have this type of problem where tehy see 'neutral' and assume it's against them

but then I realised that it's not really a problem, because any neutral article really is a direct assault on anti-GG because they are factually incorrect. so of course, writing anything neutral will get you attacked - why wouldn't it?

Reply
The Green Spurt
13/4/2016 12:06:34 pm

Actually, I'd spent the last 30 minutes writing a really long and, in retrospect, boring, reply to yesterday's article.
it covered a whole load of stuff which, just before I hit "submit", I then found you had answered in this post. So I deleted it all apart from one important point which you hadn't covered, and posted it here!

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 12:09:37 pm

Huzzah!

Reply
Zod
13/4/2016 12:13:11 pm

I literally couldn't give a tinkers cuss cuss cuss about any of this Gamergate nonsense. I fondly look forward to 14 Invertebrates In Swimming Shorts or an actual game review in the none too distant future.....

Reply
Voodoo76
13/4/2016 01:00:25 pm

I'm with you Zod, i have no interest in this GG stuff (whatever it is).

Reply
Kamille
13/4/2016 02:54:56 pm

yet here you guys are feeling so upset about something no one's forcing you to read. ;/

Zod
13/4/2016 03:13:34 pm

who said I've read any of the associated articles and where do I say I'm upset?

I've just got no interest in anything to do with Gamergate.

Wicked Eric
13/4/2016 12:24:14 pm

Listen, that's all fine, man. But what does Chart Cat have to say about all this?

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 12:31:49 pm

He'll be along very soon...

Reply
Chris
13/4/2016 01:02:40 pm

Hooray! I'll prepare the oils.

Dr Kank
13/4/2016 12:30:15 pm

I remember when I was a GG supporter I started getting really cynical and disillusioned, feeling that I couldn't believe anything anything I read and everybody was pushing their own agenda. I went on Wikipedia to read the entry on Digitiser to remind myself of the good old days, and noticed the link for Digitiser 2000 which I followed, and found the review for a game which I think was called Don't Shit Yourself. And it was the best game ever.

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 12:32:08 pm

You may well be right about that...

Reply
RG
13/4/2016 12:33:22 pm

For your next project - Which religion is best, and why?

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 12:36:47 pm

Hahahahahahahahahaha...! <SHOOTS SELF IN BRAIN>

Reply
Ridiculous Human
13/4/2016 12:39:54 pm

People have been calling for a more honest gaming media for years. Remember Rab Florence's Eurogamer post? He managed to do that without being the slightest bit scummy.

Meanwhile, Gamergate, whether you're one of "good" or "bad" ones, is a movement that started with Adam Baldwin reacting to Zoe Quinn having a sex life, and went on to make many people's lives hell. That's just how it is - if people don't want to be associated with that, they have to stop associating with the label.

That's why I can't blame anyone for being resolutely anti-Gamergate, and find the "maybe they're not ALL bad" sentiments hard to sympathise with in the face of the damage they're doing. Whatever an individual's good intentions may be, if they're voluntarily taking part in what started as, and continues to be, a rabidly anti-women hate movement, then they've tied their own noose.

But beyond that, I agree that the abuse of women in the industry isn't going to end anytime soon - it didn't start with Gamergate, and it won't end with it. Which is sad condemnation of the culture we've all created for ourselves.

Reply
Gumbo
13/4/2016 01:05:34 pm

"That's just how it is"

Well, no. That isn't how it is. That's not actually what happened, that's merely what you've been TOLD happened.

You don't actually know what happened because you've been lied to relentlessly. That's the entire damn point.

Reply
amazingmikeyc
13/4/2016 01:10:26 pm

What happened, then? Like what was the whole Zoe Quinn thing about? And what does that have to do with, I dunno, video games?

MT Head
13/4/2016 01:39:57 pm

"That's not actually what happened, that's merely what you've been TOLD happened."

True enough that's not how it happened - I watched it all go down. He missed quite a bit - the Zoe Post, her being accused of sleeping with 5 journalists to get good reviews (then changed to 1 journalist for good reviews, then 1 journalist for good coverage, then 1 journalist for coverage...). Zoe's Tumblr getting hacked, abuse and her dox posted on that same Tumblr. The backlash from the media, GamerGate getting coined by the worst Baldwin, ethics in journalism as PR smokescreen...

Need I continue?

Oakreef link
13/4/2016 02:16:29 pm

@MT Head you forgot Phil Fish's personal and bank details being leaked and

(though technically Zoe's Tumblr account wasn't actually compromised, IIRC it was that the email address that posts to the blog when emailed to got leaked, so the blog was flooded with sewage but she was able to lock it down fairly quickly)

Gumbo
13/4/2016 06:31:44 pm

The Zoe Quinn thing was a different hashtag - FiveGuysBurgersAndFries or something, I don't really remember.

Gamergate was coined as a result of the blatantly coordinated backlash in the media and the equally blatant lockdown on forums and sites across the Internet. GG was nothing more or less than a reaction to the really obvious corruption of the media, as was later shown very clearly by the GameJournoPros leaks.

When practically every gaming site publishes the same article with the same wording within 24 hours of one another in support of an abusive doxxing piece of crap like Quinn, then it's time to start paying attention.

Hell, you even mentioned the Zoe Post, though I doubt any of you actually read it. If the genders were reversed then Zachary Quinn would have been trounced into the ground, but noooo, MIDDLE-CLASS WHITE WOMAN IN DANGER! MUSTER THE TROOPS!

Oakreef link
13/4/2016 06:57:52 pm

@Gumbo The #gamergate hashtag was started on the 27th of August 2014 by a tweet by Adam Baldwin linking to ZoePost/FiveGuys videos. Leigh Alexander posted her "gamers are over" post on the 28th of August. Does Adam Baldwin have a time machine that allowed him to name gamergate two days before it started?

And no I haven't read the post because I don't give a shit about the personal lives of random game developers.

Oakreef link
13/4/2016 06:58:49 pm

*one day

bloody lack of an edit button

Cole Pram
13/4/2016 08:09:59 pm

@Oakreef - "And no I haven't read the post because I don't give a shit about the personal lives of random game developers."

So you have absolutely no idea what the post referred to or what it meant. People LOVE pointing out it was about a relationship gone sour, but always forget it provided proof that a conflict of interest was taking place. That was the important part in the Internet Aristocrat videos that Adam Baldwin tweeted.

It wasn't about Quinn's sex life, it was about the proof that a journalist was in a relationship (sexual or not doesn't mater) with someone he was giving favorable coverage to without stating he was at the very least friends with her. And other journalist were colluding to cover it up, which was further proved when the GamerJournoPro e-mails were released.

GamerGate isn't any ONE thing, event or person. It was a perfect storm that had been brewing for a long time that had just the right people caught at just the right times doing just the wrong things.

As usual people that don't know the whole story are swallowing up the media's smokescreen without even bothering to look at the open details because that's what's easy. If you don't care, fine, it's not your thing I get that, but don't step in and dump on people and demonize them when all they've done is point to the facts.

Gumbo
13/4/2016 08:15:58 pm

@Oakreef - You're right, it was coined by Baldwin the day before Gamers Are Dead.

And absolutely no-one gave the slightest crap.

Until Gamers Are Dead and the mass suppression of discussion.

But you're right, "coined" is probably the wrong term. Congratulations on acknowledging massive collusion on the part of the gaming press, though! We'll have you in the pit with us soon enough.

amazingmikeyc
14/4/2016 10:26:53 am

So... let's say there was a conflict of interest here, and it's all Ms Quinn's fault that she tried to trick the "gaming press" into saying nice things about her games using her sex powers.

But why should I care? Don't you just go "well, that guy is untrustworthy then" and read other reviews? I mean what are you so upset about? That you feel tricked into spending a few quid on something you didn't enjoy? 'cos that might happen without corruption and that 'cos of opinions.

If my local paper prints a favourable review of the local takeaway, and it turns out the takeaway is run by a friend of the editor, that's a bad thing, obviously, but I don't spend 2 years on twitter being angry about it

GG number 9
13/4/2016 02:53:11 pm

What caused things to blow up, was not The Zoe Post, but MundaneMatt making a video about it and Zoe taking it down using a DMCA. This caused the Streisand effect, and prevented The Zoe Post from becoming just another piece of internet drama that happens once a week.
Then TotalBiscuit wrote a tweetlonger where he criticized Zoe for abusing the DMCA system, it got posted on Reddit where it got 24000+ comments before getting deleted causing a much bigger Streisand effect.

It also had the effect that people began looking more closely at Zoe, and she got accused (rightly og wrongly) of having faked the abuse she got in 2013 when she released Depression Quest to get the support needed to get the game trough greenlight on Steam, of having sabotaged TFYC fundraiser, of faking harassment on 4chan to get sympathy, for having got a mod on reddit to wipe the discussion on TB's tweetlonger, and for getting Hotwheels Patreon taken down.

I don't know how much of the above is true. But Zoe doesn't get harassment for having a vagina.

Reply
Cole Pram
13/4/2016 04:27:03 pm

This is exactly what's going on with Alison Rapp right now. Shady people who get involved in shady things get questioned, then a group out of nowhere jumps in to obfuscate the issue because those people happen to be women that might also be receiving abuse. Then they start making things up and pointing fingers to redirect the Shady dealings.

I couldn't have given a damn about Qunn when this whole thing started. I read a couple of the "Gamers are dead" articles then went looking for what was causing all the malice. When I started asking questions I was thrown into the pit with everyone else that didn't immediately go, "Oh, but she's a women getting abused online"

After I started looking at the sequence of events, the zoe post, the internet aristocrat videos, the censorship, then the GameJournoPro list, it was impossible for me not to side with people calling for better ethics in the media. The bad actors were working to put all the focus on Quinn as a person rather than her actions because it was much easier to conflate and belittle people for making threats when they were just questioning bad judgement.

Like with MT's comment above: "True enough that's not how it happened - I watched it all go down. He missed quite a bit - the Zoe Post, her being accused of sleeping with 5 journalists to get good reviews (then changed to 1 journalist for good reviews, then 1 journalist for good coverage, then 1 journalist for coverage...). Zoe's Tumblr getting hacked, abuse and her dox posted on that same Tumblr. The backlash from the media, GamerGate getting coined by the worst Baldwin, ethics in journalism as PR smokescreen..."

It was never "reviews" or multiple journalist, that's all the crap the media fed people. And that's exactly what I mean by "obfuscating" the issue. They took the story the media spun and attributed it to people with other issues, then dismissed those other issues because the media told them it was all the same thing.

H. Guderian
13/4/2016 07:15:50 pm

You keep trying to focus it on Quinn, when the Journalists, Nathan Grayson, was the lynchpin. It could have been other people entirely. If Quinn was a male, and the journalist was still a male, Gamergate would've still happened. If Eron was a female who reported his boyfriend was cheating on him and inflicting emotional abuse, and got the courts to silence 'her' (in this case) and was doing the cheating with members of the media who were then giving undisclosed coverage, we'd all still be here.

Plus have you been following the actual legal case for Eron? He's not rich like his opposition so it took time to get the money for a lawyer to stack up against what Quinn has. Looks like he'll win the appeal. Quinn's primary claims of harassment by her ex-boyfriend are getting defeated in court. Do you think the media will issue corrections for their early Gamergate articles? Probably not, and there's the problem. People like Quinn are in the spotlight because how the media is treating them is unfair. Look at this Alison Rapp situation. This is The Zoe Post all over again. She gets fired for being an escort by Nintendo, and Gamergate is blamed. Are GGers gonna get fair treatment for bad reporting? No. That's the problem.

You might be fine with the media shitting on GG because you disagree. But then when someone you love is under fire you'll find you have no allies to resist the media storm. Fair reporting from the start would've prevented this.

Reply
jenny o'henry
13/4/2016 08:37:07 pm

"Gamergate, whether you're one of "good" or "bad" ones, is a movement that started with Adam Baldwin reacting to Zoe Quinn having a sex life"

that's patently untrue. Baldwin coined the term, but that's it. The frustration with Quinn stemmed from:

1. her undisclosed close friendships/relationships with games journalists giving her favourable coverage.

2. The abject hypocrisy of someone who advocated for mental health and non-abuse (so much so she was making money from it via Patreon) but who was abusing her own partner and even (using her own logic) guilty of rape.

Then the gaming media joined hands to pretend none of this happened and that everyone was a disgusting misogynistic liar, and we realised "shit, this nepotism, dishonesty and bullying goes further than anyone thought" and it kinda snowballed from there as we saw more and more instances of gamers being lied to (and about) by people in positions of trust and power.

Reply
Kendall9000
13/4/2016 09:58:06 pm

Yes, there've been some shitty things done by Gamergate supporters, and the whole thing was tainted from the start by the "slut shaming" of Zoe Quinn.

But during the same period the social justice loving anti-GG crowd have carried out their own share of abuse and harassment, smeared and demonised people who disagree with them, compared opponents to ISIS and the KKK, called women and people of colour "gender traitors" and "uncle toms" for being on the wrong side of the debate, taken quotes out of context to label people neo-Nazis, doxxed people and contacted employers with false claims to get people fired, etc.

"That's just how it is - if people don't want to be associated with that, they have to stop associating with the label."

Back when some GG sympathisers/neutrals were invited to speak at SxSW, they were labelled harassers and the "pro-harassment panel". Two of the four on the GG panel were women, one of the others was a black man, and none of them were guilty of harassing anyone. Despite that, people argued that they'd make the event an unsafe space for women and minorities. Meanwhile, the anti-GG panel was uncritically described as being made up of "anti-harassment activists", despite some of the people involved being blatant trolls and doxxers.

That's why people get annoyed with the media coverage - it isn't that GG is squeaky clean and that there aren't any GG supporters who deserve a good kick up the arse for their repulsive behaviour, it's that all the bad behaviour is presented as one-sided, with the other innocent victims. That just isn't true, and people who think it is have swallowed a lie.

Reply
tehy
14/4/2016 12:52:13 am

what you have missed is that in the past, the media was simply being corrupt for cash. so although they were certainly just as angry as many of today's journalists, they really had no way to fight back, because in order to do so they'd have to admit that they were corrupt and would inevitably only worsen their problems

today journalists are corrupt to help their friends or political causes they endorse, and when you criticize that they say you hate those political causes and it's just an excuse, and then if any of them happen to be women or minorities they will mention that, and then it all goes from there

this was never a rabidly anti-woman hate movement.

Reply
accountname2015
14/4/2016 10:04:52 am

"if people don't want to be associated with that, they have to stop associating with the label."

And what do you think will happen if the 'good' side of gamergate finds a new hashtag/label?
All the trolls that got bored with gamergate will come back and do the exact same thing to the new label.

Reply
DB
13/4/2016 12:40:01 pm

"The KiA Gamergaters tell me they want to fight for an honest and transparent gaming media, a world where political correctness doesn't run rampant."

You can be transparent and "politically correct" (read: being considerate) at the same time.

Reply
GG number 9
13/4/2016 02:58:51 pm

I guess this is where we will have to disagree. To you 'politically correct' means being considerate, to me it means fascist speech control.

Reply
RedBabyBadBaby
13/4/2016 04:19:54 pm

But it does basically amount to just being considerate though, yea? Like, y'know, thinking about how women are portrayed in a reductive and stereotypical fashion in the media. Or objecting to people being referred to as 'tranny' when that's the sort of word that gets yelled at someone before they're beaten to death.

I suppose if you really just don't *care* about such things then it might seem like a massive inconvenience to be forced to think about them...

Cole Pram
13/4/2016 04:38:42 pm

@RedBabyBadBaby I agree with you on being considerate, but "Politically correct" is kind of where being considerate starts being a problem.

When you start telling people they can't say "bob" because that's offensive, and everyone agrees with you so we don't say it. Then you say, "well sus is also offensive", and some others agree with you so we all don't say it. Then you say, "Math is offensive", and so on and so on.

Where does it stop?

Everyone finds SOMETHING offensive and it's really easy to characterize something offensive and also harmful, but if you banned everything someone found offensive then everything would be banned. But you're a good person, right? it's only considerate to think about others, right? Even if that means it's you that might someday be censored, right?

I personally don't want to slide down that slope. I think if you find something / someone offensive you should just avoid it. Don't try to force others to change for your personal benefit or the benefit you perceive for others.

dotec
13/4/2016 04:27:29 pm

Being considerate is great.

The problem arises when completely mundane, inoffensive, every-day expressions and depictions that one dislikes are treated as serious social ills, are used as launchpads to generalize and judge entire swathes of people; and that you must be some kind of ignoramus/moron/jerk if you don't see the big fuckin' deal.

This is why it's pejoratively called "political correctness", and not the completely innocent and inoffensive description you like to think it as.

Reply
Kendall9000
13/4/2016 10:04:36 pm

To me jumping on people, smearing and insulting them, and in some cases trying to get them fired because of something they said, just doesn't seem very considerate...

I think the main problem most people have with political correctness is the way it's enforced, and the inconsistent and self-serving way it gets used against people.

Reply
mrbah
13/4/2016 11:14:00 pm

saying that is very inconsiderate of you.

Reply
tehy
14/4/2016 12:55:12 am

being politically correct is not necessarily considerate, though certain aspects of it are. what it's really about is shunning someone for accidentally saying something they don't mean, or bringing up an inconvenient truth in a context totally devoid of bigotry. oh, and of course, not blaming the crimes of a devout religious fanatic on the religion he believed in.

Reply
Harry Steele
13/4/2016 12:52:01 pm

I must say that following all this my trust in what I see in the media has been shaken.

In fact, I'm starting to doubt that it really WAS 'Turner the Worm being sick' on the last ever Digitiser on TV...

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 12:55:50 pm

Stop trying to misrepresent Turner the Worm.

Reply
amazingmikeyc
13/4/2016 12:53:55 pm

I SPENT $14.99 ON THIS GAME ON STEAM AND I AM ANGRY THAT I A REVIEW IMPLIED I WOULD ENJOY IT MORE THAN I DID.

Reply
tehy
14/4/2016 12:56:48 am

good point mike. Being promised one thing and given another? That's a ridiculous thing to complain about. just accept the other thing you didn't want already, you big baby...

Reply
Nikeyg
13/4/2016 12:56:55 pm

It's a terrifyingly hard subject to be neutral on, because if you are neutral on it then that implies you are neutral to the harassment that was directed at Jenn Frank, Zoe Quinn, Alison Rapp and many others that took more forms than just mere words.
You've stated you're against that however, and I believe you wholeheartedly there.

The issue with them being for 'a fair and transparent games media' is that a lot of their issues either don't exist, or don't really count as ethical quandaries, and that's where the issue of the 'ethics' smokescreen disappears.

I was a lot more outspoken on things last year, but I've calmed down my involvement a lot, and it has made me (slightly) happier as a result. I still chime in with the odd bit here and there, and as such get the odd prat calling me a 'cuck' or 'SJW', making me feel like I'm literally just dealing with angry teenagers, which really isn't worth my time.

As I said to you yesterday, you're a good egg, but this isn't worth the mental drain to put yourself through. Keep it up with the comedy articles and reviews though.

Take care Biffo

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 01:02:02 pm

Cheers, Nikey. Yeah, it was just mentally draining more than anything. We'll be back to normal tomorrow.

Reply
Gumbo
13/4/2016 01:09:30 pm

"that took more forms than just mere words."

Law & Order; SVU is not a documentary.

During the course of the GG controversy, one side has had syringes sent to its leaders and people fired for being part of it due to outright lies sent to their bosses. The other side has had bad words on Twitter.

Both sides have had bomb threats, but only one side had bomb threats sufficiently believable to involve the police.

See if you can figure out which is which.

Reply
Nikeyg
13/4/2016 02:21:47 pm

One side has had swattings galore, seen people harassed from their homes, and had to call of engagements at schools due to threats of violence.
That side has also had someone fired from their job at a major games company due to a group of people thinking that person had influence that they simply did not have.
That side has also had several people quit writing about games because the hassle that they received simply for writing about games wasn't worth it.

See if you can figure out which is which?

Now, let's also consider the fact that 'some' GGers consider GG started before the Zoe Post, I seem to recall some saying it started with Jenn Hepler. That's a completely different set of harassment right there.

Seriously, get your head out the sand. I'm not going to stand here and say all GGers are bad, and all people against are good.
I'm not going to stand here and tell you that only people against GG have received harassment and/or abuse. I'm perfectly aware that it's not localised to one particular area.
What I will say is that gaming has a problem with hand waving abuse and harassment, and as a community it needs to deal with it. It's certainly a much bigger problem than 'ethics in games journalism.'

Now, this is not a conversation worth shitting up Biffo's comments thread with.

Dotec
13/4/2016 04:59:10 pm

Admittedly, I can only think of a handful of people on both sides of this shit that were swatted. But is hard not to notice how one side will get all the sympathetic coverage.

Second issue is here that some of those who claim to have been harassed from their homes are full of shit. Zoe Quinn was going to be out of town at the time any way. Brianna Wu is a serial liar about, well, almost everything that happens to her. I can certainly believe that some people have been legitimately threatened and left their homes for safety. The problem is that these cases are rarely verifiable (why no police report) and people are prone to believe these statements without a hint of investigation. There's a class of people who will absolutely play up their being damseled because they have every incentive to do so thanks to their enablers. And I assume you're referring to Anita about the university talk? Yes, the authorities investigated it and said there was no legitimate threat and she was free to continue. This happens A LOT with university speakers (you should see the furor whenever a conservative is invited to speak), and these things are only cancelled when the threat is considered serious and actionable. It is obvious to me that Anita was being little more than an opportunist, cancelling her talk solely to get more people to rally around her banner.

The above is not an excuse for any harassment or intimidation. Just an acknowledgment there are definitely people who talk about harassment and abuse in completely bad faith.

"That side has also had someone fired from their job at a major games company due to a group of people thinking that person had influence that they simply did not have."

Who are we talking about here? Allison Rapp? I think it's quite obvious why she was fired at this point. Now you could definitely make the argument that it was the Tweet Heat(tm) surrounding her that made Nintendo look into that area of her life, but then why kick the hornet's nest? As an employee in PR role, nonetheless? If she wants to pick fights, she'll get fights.

My sympathies go out to her, but fates like these are sealed if you decide you want to be a Twitter Activist and get the stupid idea that you have Internet Invulnerability. Don't touch the poop unless you can afford getting poop all over you.

"That side has also had several people quit writing about games because the hassle that they received simply for writing about games wasn't worth it."

The vast majority of journalists who have been hassled have not been so because "they write about game". They get hassled for writing smug, judgmental, pugnacious shit. Again, if you want a fight, you'll get one. And like Rapp, these people somehow feel they're entitled to immunity. So after prodding GG with article after article, with more venom than they can seemingly muster for an actual terrorist group like ISIS, they get shit heaped back on them in return and then bemoan gamer culture and lack of civility. These are smart people acting like total idiots, and their exodus from the industry is their own doing.

To be very blunt, some of these people quitting is no great loss to the industry. I regularly see journalists bemoan how hard it is to make a living off of good VG journalism since nobody will pay for it. But, y'know, maybe endless articles about the sexism of Quiet's outfit, or the "tone deafness" of GTA's black characters, the constant stream of piss and vinegar over GG, and the "everything is problematic" mindset... ummm, isn't worth paying for? Maybe your super serious important work in making sure Gaming Grows Up is worthless, and you should be doing something else.

Gumbo
13/4/2016 06:46:43 pm

No-one on the anti side has been harassed from their homes. Several of them are provably liars.
Alison Rapp was fired because Ninty discovered she was moonlighting as a prostitute.

The press are complicit in the lies you have been fed. One side has been blamed for the actions of countless random assholes, most of whom don't even mention the hashtag, because they "must be GG". The other has engaged in constant awful shit and been excused at every step.

And in a completely amazing twist, the side they disfavour is the same side that is agitating against journalists! Who could ever have expected it?

william
14/4/2016 06:48:04 am

"One side has had swattings galore, seen people harassed from their homes..."

Let me fix that for you:

One side has had swattings galore [reported by the press without fact-checking], seen people harassed from their homes [and reported by the press without fact checking] etc, etc, etc.

There are more than two sides in this. The ones responsible for the worst of the harassment are proven 3rd-party trolls. But, but, but these women were harassed!

So you like to hear about victims of harassment? What about what happened to Liz Finnegan? Press blackout and erased.

What about what happened to (I think) QueenyMartha? She is Mexican and was threatened to stop supporting GG or her name and her address would be released Mexican drug cartels. Press blackout and erased.

What about what happened to SlyMirabelle/Bard_of_Peace? She originally started off neutral quickly turning antiGG after encountering a noxious troll (could have been a GG troll, baphomet, keksec, BWC, GNAA, chaos troll, who knows). When she noticed Randi Harper organising her followers to go after someone ("Set yourself on fire!" or the precursor to that), she called them out. Unsurprising for people who know what SJWs are, they turned on her in a way that seem so...so.... Because it is their way, they had gotten Bard_of_Peace to reveal very intimate details about her life. She had been emotionally, physically (and I think sexually as well) by her mother. Bard_of_Peace became emancipated and got a restraining order against her mother that remains in place even today. How did antiGG SJWs respond to her calling them out on their hypocritical behaviour? They contacted Bard_of_Peace's mother, giving her her phone number and her address! This switched her back to GG neutral. She later became proGG after encountering the sane supporters. Koretzky heard the outlines of her story and suggested that he do an interview. He then ignored her. Press blackout and erased.

But, but, but those are not people working in the industry! What about Jason Miller, a fledgling game developer, who along with Ninouh coined #NotYourShield. He was fired from his job because SJWs lied to his boss. By the way he is black, grew up in very difficult circumstances, worked hard and made something of himself. Press blackout and erased.

What about that cartoonist? She was fired but somehow, someone pulled some strings and she got her job back. Press blackout and erased.

What about Jennifer Dawe who was initially bribed to stop supporting GG (the gaming press promised her coverage), then there was an attempt to blacklist her. Press blackout and erased.

What about Roberto Rosario, former IGDA Puerto Rico Head. Accused of being a harasser for just following people on Twitter to try to find out what is going on. Lost his position as a result, harassed for months by a prominent antiGG figure (and her cronies), still being libeled on as a misogynist harasser in the open-source community. Press blackout and erased.

What about the GamersGate website? Inundated with hate mail because of their coincidental name. Who was it that organised a campaign of sending love mail? Press blackout and erased.

What about American McGee's sister? Missing since late last year, the only known lead being a threat American McGee received because he expressed his disagreement with Sarkeesian's take on a gory FPS. (There are some crazy antiGG folks but I do not think they are this crazy. GG is hoping she is found safe and sound, and that her disappearance has nothing to do with this mess.) If anything like this happened anyone from "the only side that receives threats" there would have been dozens of articles screeching with absolute certainty about the culprits. But because her brother spoke out against the wrong person, Mercy has been treated to a press blackout and erased!

And one more thing for you to ponder. The incident that made GG national/international news: Utah State University. Have you ever looked at the threat? The email said nothing about gaming or GG. It threatened Sarkeesian for being a feminist, referencing an obscure tragedy that only feminists know about. Who was it that said this threat came from GG? Not the police, not the FBI, not law enforcement. It was Sarkeesian herself with no proof. Megaphoned by the press and plastered everywhere.

The truth about the GG scandal--which mostly involves the misconduct and dishonesty of the gaming and mainstream press--is being blacked out and erased. Again you all have been lied to.

Random Reviewer
15/4/2016 02:15:22 am

If one appreciates subtlety and nuance and the need to avoid reducing issues to absolute 'with us or against us' stances then it is, in fact, incredibly easy to remain neutral on Gamergate.
I don't support the harassment of these people you mentioned but I refuse to look at them as anything other than complete, rounded, individual human beings. I refuse to demonise them as certain harassers would wish and I refuse to deify them or their work as some in the anti-GG groups have done. A rigid, inflexible 'don't blame the victim' doctrine is one of the many examples of something that should be used as a rough guideline instead being applied as an absolute unquestionable pillar of wisdom.
This obstinate, dogmatic way of looking at things is what is driving moderates away from the discourse around gaming. To the curious bystander you all appear to have lost your minds. It is as if there are two castles on opposing hilltops firing slings and arrows at each other and the rest of us are stuck in the village between. If any of us dares to point out that there are chinks in the castle wall of your ideology then we are the ones that get arrows rained down upon us. Just look at what happened to Steven Fry after he made some perfectly reasonable comments. Here was a witty, engaging voice capable of addressing serious issues who got skewered for not towing the party line.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gfn7MOA2xBE

Reply
Random Reviewer
15/4/2016 02:15:45 am

If one appreciates subtlety and nuance and the need to avoid reducing issues to absolute 'with us or against us' stances then it is, in fact, incredibly easy to remain neutral on Gamergate.
I don't support the harassment of these people you mentioned but I refuse to look at them as anything other than complete, rounded, individual human beings. I refuse to demonise them as certain harassers would wish and I refuse to deify them or their work as some in the anti-GG groups have done. A rigid, inflexible 'don't blame the victim' doctrine is one of the many examples of something that should be used as a rough guideline instead being applied as an absolute unquestionable pillar of wisdom.
This obstinate, dogmatic way of looking at things is what is driving moderates away from the discourse around gaming. To the curious bystander you all appear to have lost your minds. It is as if there are two castles on opposing hilltops firing slings and arrows at each other and the rest of us are stuck in the village between. If any of us dares to point out that there are chinks in the castle wall of your ideology then we are the ones that get arrows rained down upon us. Just look at what happened to Steven Fry after he made some perfectly reasonable comments. Here was a witty, engaging voice capable of addressing serious issues who got skewered for not towing the party line.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gfn7MOA2xBE

Reply
Dr Peanuts
13/4/2016 12:58:08 pm

Please, whatever you do, do not eat shit.

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 01:02:25 pm

But... but I just put some in the oven...!

Reply
Lorna Reid
13/4/2016 12:58:32 pm

What's next, then? Speccy vs C64 or Why the Amiga deserved to die, you know, non-controversial stuff...

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 01:00:35 pm

Well... You might enjoy what's coming up next...

Reply
Gumbo
13/4/2016 01:06:30 pm

About as even-handed as anyone could hope for. Thank you, Mr Biffo.

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 01:12:13 pm

My pleasure, Gumbo.

Reply
Kara Van Park
13/4/2016 01:18:36 pm

'palate' cleanser, unless you're referring to white spirits cleaning an artist's palette.

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 01:20:35 pm

I'm about *this* far from knocking back a bottle...

Reply
Acid Arrow
13/4/2016 01:20:10 pm

When I first heard the term Gamergate, I presumed it was some kind of gaming hub like Steam. After reading loads about it I think I'm just going to stick with my initial presumption.

Reply
TekMerc
13/4/2016 01:26:37 pm

Both sides of the GG argument show frankly embarrassingly low levels of self awareness and a lack of the ability to apply different perspectives to their ways of thinking.

I stopped even reading/thinking about the whole ridiculous affair long ago.

Reply
MrPSB
13/4/2016 01:33:34 pm

Fannies

Reply
David W
13/4/2016 04:51:02 pm

I'll see your fannies and raise you a cock.

Reply
MT Head
13/4/2016 01:35:29 pm

Word!

Mr Biffo, been a big fan since Digitizer days but also, more importantly for this piece I'm a subscriber to both GamerGhazi and KotakuInAction, but fall firmly in the "anti-GG" camp (although I don't like that term.)

I don't think you wrote a pro-GG article. I'm not going to wring my hands because you don't 100% fall in line with the anti-GG side but if you'd indulge me I'd like to try and explain why GG does get such a bad rap. Strap yourself in, I'm going in for a rant :)

Firstly, as you state well in this article GamerGate started before the Zoe Post. We've always had abusers, slut-shamers, homophobes, racists, anti-feminists etc of course - but GamerGate was what galvanised them under a label. A movement built on the harassment of a woman, the ethics label hastily slapped on as a PR move to deflect bad press. So "GamerGate" gets the blame as they've been helpful enough to apply that easy to remember label to themselves. Really these days it's probably better to think of them as yet another arm of the alt-right.

It's possibly easy to accept the "we don't harass women" and "ethics" lines at face value... Until you actually spend any time listening to them. That's why I'm subscribed to KiA.- I was before I ever subscribed to Ghazi. Not all of them are harassers, true enough. But what I see on a day-to-day basis is a group of people who enable the harassers, who parrot talking points and terminology used by the far right (see "Cultural Maxism", "cuck") and revel in the abuse given to the likes of Alison Rapp.

There's a pattern you know? Have you seen it? It starts with the initial witch-hunt. Someone is targeted, multiple threads appear about the things they've written. Gater feelings have been hurt. Coincidentally the target starts receiving abuse via Twitter and other social media. KiA have a clear conscience - they aren't doing the abusing, do you see any abuse on the sub-Reddit? Of course you don't... Save for some slurs and insults of course. Perfectly normal.

Then the likes of 8chan and Kiwifarms miraculously start digging on that same target. Must be a coincidence. After all ggrevolt and Kiwifarms don't even like KiA right? They just happen to go after the same people. If they don't find anything, then they'll either make something up or twist something to an unrecognisable parody that can be used against them. This person post the CP on 8chan! This person fucked a dog! Repeat over Twitter, on forums, through to the Ralph Retort or Breitbart, and from there on to KiA (helpfully labeled as "Drama" or "Ethics") until accepted as the truth. Again purely by coincidence the target sees an upswing in abuse. Employers, if identified, are contacted with this "information".

Dox appears, it is posted on KiA. It is deleted, but not *that* quickly. Certainly I've seen dox threads that remain an hour or two after posting. They get get to say "but we don';t allow that kind of thing" and the Reddit admins get to say they've done due dilligence.

There's then a further upswing of discussion on the ongoing drama and/or fallout. They talk about how terrible that person is - did you hear they once molested a sheep in front of children? They talk about how terrible Ghazi are for defending them because of those reasons. Thread after thread after thread...

And then the KiA hand-wringing begins again. Oh why do we get blamed for all this? We're not bigots. We're not women haters. We just use slurs and kiss the feet of the far/alt-right figureheads that pander to us. We just argue that abuse is free-speech and that dox should be allowed as it's now publicly available information. Why is this happening to us? We're the real persecuted minority! The media misrepresents us!

So yeah, most of the people you'll see posting day to day on KiA aren't the worst. But while they're not always overtly shouting abuse even 10 minutes reading their posts you'll see the more subtle racism/sexism etc. And if they don't want to be associated with that there's a real easy solution to it. We all know what it is.

Did you read all that? Well bless you if you did. Big hugs and you keep being you.Mr Biffo.

Reply
Dr Kank
13/4/2016 01:43:24 pm

Even Brianna Wu has a problem with Gamerghazi. It's a bad place. A real bad place.

Reply
MT Head
13/4/2016 01:48:52 pm

She certainly has disagreed with things that have been written there. As have I. But then I see her occasionally post there too. It's all good.

Ghazi is much better now they focus on social issues in general rather than just mocking GG. Certainly what made me subscribe. As long as we keep talking about how to better ourselves I'm happy with Gaters talking saltily about how it's a terrible sub-Reddit :)

Dr Kank
13/4/2016 01:54:04 pm

Is it really a case of talking about how to better yourselves, or more about talking about how better you are than other people?

MT Head
13/4/2016 01:59:29 pm

Yes to both :-p

But yeah, I remember what Brianna and Maddie Myers said. They criticised the call-out culture of the sub, and that said we lack empathy for GamerGaters... I know some Ghazi members agreed, and I know some disagreed but everyone, especially the mods took it on board. And in the end that's the real difference to GamerGate.

Ape With A Laser
13/4/2016 03:15:06 pm

"There's a pattern you know? Have you seen it? It starts with the initial witch-hunt. Someone is targeted, multiple threads appear about the things they've written. Gater feelings have been hurt. Coincidentally the target starts receiving abuse via Twitter and other social media. KiA have a clear conscience - they aren't doing the abusing, do you see any abuse on the sub-Reddit? Of course you don't... Save for some slurs and insults of course. Perfectly normal."

Surreal. I thought you'd changed perspective 180 degrees when you started talking about witch hunts and trading...you guys call them "receipts" now, right?... awful things they've said and then somehow the swarm of anonymous abuse starts up... and then suddenly you were talking about media watchdogs, not Social Justice.

Are you sure you planned this rant out? You seem to be talking about at least two different things.

Reply
Shinkudragon
13/4/2016 06:08:35 pm

i'll adress your paragraphs with the "GG outlook" so to speak and in order, anything you disagree or want to expand on, i'll probs see it here but you got guaranteed chances in reddit, if anything to tell me to come reply, ok here goes:

PARAGRAPH 1:
i didn't know about this forum until the previous post, which appeared on KIA, i fall in thhe proGG side you might side, and i don't mind the term, but do consider it silly for reasons.

PARAGRAPH 2
i think you wrote a neutral article, which is more than most media do. some "anti" viewpoints that are no surprise considering your "don't want to dig into this too deep" stance, understandable considering the shitstorm this has been.

PARAGRAPH 3:
gamergate started with the quinnspiracy, which itself spawned in one of the "cesspools" of the internet, as such, you'd have both those interested in the ethics aspect, which had very obviously waned in recent years, and those who love to stir and throw shit. to compare, "4chan" in general is viewed under a bad light, when in reality most of the crap tended to come from /b/, while there's outright nice 4chan parts like the cosplay one where people help each other with cosplays, 2 very different groups under the same banner, for good or bad.

the name "gamergate" came precisely to separate the two, not that the media cares of course, i'm sure you can agree that if you make enemy of the media they won't play precisely fair with you (look at trump, he's a colossal dumbass, but the media portrays him as even MORE of a dumbass in an effort to drive people away.

PARAGRAPH 4
there's your regular loud guy with obnoxious opinions on KIA, won't deny that. reason being that kia allows you to express your opinion even if it's not liked, i was just recently banned from ghazi, you know why? for saying that if the allegations against rapp were true and nintendo found out, they would have been right in firing her.

i didn't mention the allegations, i didn't say they were true, i merely said that the possibility existed, and that banned me from ghazi.

let's not forget the header at kia that says: "posting here will get you banned from X, Y and Z reddits regardless of what you post"

simply engaging with kia is a bannable offense, and that's the problem with most of the opposition, as biffo recently learned, either you follow the line, or you're thrown out.

as such, in kia anyone has a voice, if one of the guys who released rapp's information came, we'd let him talk, we'd probably disagree with him, insult him, some other guy might agree with him, you yourself can come in and say what you want. it's an open forum for discussion. KIA only moderates KIA, what you do outside of it is your own problem (which we might talk about)

PARAGRAPH 5
let's take a look at the latest case, rapp. she insulted the gamers that complained about fire emblem and worked with a group that had received criticism lately, that ignited the spark. did i harass her? no, did someone else? i'm sure, all kinds of people respond in different ways, and the internet is one big amount of different people. then the digging started. KIA endorsed? no, KIA is just the place where people talk about said things, they didn't issue a "call to action" and in fact did the opposite, encouraged people to only discuss and not harass, in the end though that's a personal choice and kia isn't gonna follow your twitter to make sure you behave or ban you

most people were for alison's firing, but not because of her thesis on pedophilia (some were for this reason, it's a touchy subject), some were for her firing due to her very risque photos in her official nintendo PR account, all were for her firing due to her remarks towards the consumers she disagreed with. cue the walton foundation in this case which wanted for her firing only because of the pedo thesis, 100% unrelated to gg.

in the end she was fired and that was it, nintendo claimed moonlighting, something nobody had accused her of (at least with proof), KIA thought "well nintendo must know something we don't" and that's it.

PARAGRAPH 6:
but the media didn't let it end there, what did it do? it blamed gamers from gamergate and kia for it, said it was an excuse from nintendo and they submitted to peer pressure

as a gamergater, there's 2 options: let the media slander you (again), or fight the allegations by investigating. media will hate it but most of the abuse people receive is precisely because they paint people who did wrong, as being victims, so the only way to prove one's innocence is to prove the other's guilt, KIA does that by recopiling the info people find around the net, kia's a hub after all, nothing more or less.

in the case of rapp though it ended (for kia) fairly easily: we said "well if they did it might have been wayne's foundation who did it too"

that's it, rapp, for kia at least was a dead topic. of course people that aren't so nice like the ones that manage encyclopedia dramatica didn't stop there, they don't a

Reply
shinkudragon
13/4/2016 06:56:06 pm

holy crap half the post was eaten, nope, not writing it back, GG NO RE.

HandofBane
13/4/2016 07:03:12 pm

"Dox appears, it is posted on KiA. It is deleted, but not *that* quickly. Certainly I've seen dox threads that remain an hour or two after posting. They get get to say "but we don';t allow that kind of thing" and the Reddit admins get to say they've done due dilligence."

KiA moderator here - there is no such thing as a subreddit that has moderators watching everything posted as it's posted for things like that. We also rely rather heavily on user reports to find that kind of thing (and users posting such items get warnings/bans depending on the circumstances). There is nothing stopping *you* or anyone else from reporting threads that contain anything considered "dox", and thanks to how reddit works, all reports are anonymous as they arrive to the mods. It's just not remotely feasible to expect an instant removal, especially without bringing on at least twice as many moderators as we have - which means a lot of mods having major idle time during overlapping hours.

Also, if you hadn't noticed, we have to be damn particular about who we bring in as a new moderator thanks to people seeking to push their own agendas, some wanting to use it as a stepping stone to e-celeb status (yeah, those people exist), and the rather blatantly obvious attempts of "plants" seeking either to cause damage to KiA/GG or to get as much internal info as they can to try and leak later. We've done well enough in that regard that only two moderators in the history of the sub have ever been fired from their position, and would prefer to keep that number as low as possible.

Reply
Zero132132
13/4/2016 08:04:48 pm

Here's the issue; you're essentially saying that if a group of people express an opinion about a target of harassment, they're inherently enabling harassment of that person.

If you actually take the position, then death threats against that dentist that killed Cecil the lion should have lead to the media going quiet on the subject. The same is true for that stupid-ass pizza place that said they wouldn't cater to gay weddings, or the Chic-Fil-A guy that supported bullshit homophobic attitudes.

You don't blame media criticism of these people for the harassment. Neither of us would want to live in a world where you can't discuss and criticize people with shitty ideas because some idiots will take it too far. The volume of harassment when the media publishes misrepresentations and/or outright lies is higher, but that doesn't mean they have an obligation not to voice opinions. These opinions just need to be based in fact rather than mere supposition. GG, the media, and humanity as a whole is bad at this due to our preconceived notions. I hope to hone bullshitometers so that people are better at this, but I can't talk to aGGros, so it's easier to feel like GGers are better at it than others, even when it isn't the case.

Reply
throwawaybecausereasons
13/4/2016 02:10:17 pm

Hats off to you for at least trying to come into a more nuanced understanding of what has happened.

I also consider myself a neutral on this issue, i followed both sides pretty closely since i consider myself a worker in game industry, and whether i liked it or not, the fact of the matter is most of these gamergate guys are game industry's core audience.

And like you said, there is no conclusion to be had, both sides have their own argument, but from following it i must say when you clear out the bullshit, if we're honest with ourselves, the ugliest pattern of behavior is displayed by the anti side. The prominent figure of GG seem to be called out for their abhorrent opinions, that the anti side disagree with. Whilst the anti side has been caught lying again and again about their own credentials. I ignore the harrasment narrative because there has been that coming from both sides, so to claim one side is more harrassed than others is not only disingenuous but the main reason why this thing has became a shitflinging contest between two tribes.

And what i really didnt like about the whole thing is the fact that it's so easy for us to accept that a large group of human being, that shares our hobby and passion is being grouped into the same category as terrorist, KKK, nazi, etc. Everybody that's famous because they are a gamer, and because these kids liked them, suddenly hates these kids with all their passion, start blocking them on twitter, and took every opportunity to beat them down.

I don't wanna name names, but it's puzzling to me why some of these more prominent anti GG figureheads are being followed to the hilt, without even a sliver of attempt of criticism, if not at least some checks and balances, by the media. Instead, they all grouped together to fight against this hashtag, forgetting that these are the people that used to love them too.

And then people asked, "Why are these gamergate kids so mad?" well, when you throw your friends, that shares the same love and passion for game as you do just because of their opinion, without giving them a chance to be understood, do you really need to ask?

Reply
Shish link
13/4/2016 02:26:39 pm

> To look at GamerGhazi, all Gamergaters are as bad as one another in their eyes. To look at KiA, everyone on GamerGhazi is a knee-jerk feminist.

This pattern seems a pretty good summary of every pair of opposing groups in human history. It generally ends when one side is literally dead, and the other side writes the history books to make it look like they were right all along :(

Also, CGP Grey did a wonderful video that seems tangentially related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc

Reply
SomeGuy
13/4/2016 03:37:27 pm

That's not always true, though. There is at least one pro-British website on the topic of America's Revolutionary War:

http://www.redcoat.me.uk/Rev-War.htm

Reply
Voiced Asrai
13/4/2016 02:29:57 pm

Mr Biffo, I completely understand you wanting out, and I respect that decision. My apologies for the swamping of messages and notifications you received, but as we get so few people who give us a fair shake I hope you can understand the overwhelming response.

I did not see your pieces as pandering, I thought they were rather nuanced, neutral articles. And I am completely ok with that! I too hope that one day AGG and PGG can come together and talk this out, but as you have also said I don't see that as likely.


I hope you have a wonderful day,
~Voiced Asrai, Pro-GG

Reply
Ape With A Laser
13/4/2016 02:32:02 pm

"Misrepresentation? Slander? Attacks on person and livelihood?

Well, probably. Better them than me, though. I'm out."

I suppose you're entitled to whatever reaction you like.

Reply
Denethor
13/4/2016 02:38:46 pm

I'm glad digitiser is still going. It was the only thing worth reading on teletext. I want to know if Mr T ever managed to stop those kids fucking around with his bins.

Good article. A neutral position is better than the reporting on GG so far, so I'm a happy camper.

Reply
Waffle
13/4/2016 02:41:18 pm

I like you Biffo, you're one of the good guys.

I've stayed the hell away from Gamergate but, like you, my sympathies have always been with those getting harassed and having their personal lives and careers disrupted who "coincidentally" usually turn out to be women. Mainly because I'm, you know, a human being.

Personally I blame Twitter. It's basically one giant clusterfuck group message where people can only communicate through short shouts which leads to complex ideas and conversations being boiled down to "YOUR FUCKING MUM M8"

Reply
Ape With A Laser
13/4/2016 03:01:43 pm

They "coincidentally" turn out to be women because those are the only cases the media are interested in.

Ask Brad Glasgow. Jason Miller. Daniel Vavra.

I realize that both their external genitals AND their desire for better media representation in gaming make their cases 'unpalatable', but if you wanted stories of disruption, spurious lawsuits, social media harassment, and attempted (or in Miller's case successful) doxxings to get them fired with the "engaged in a harassment campaign against women" narrative that AREN'T directed at women - ps I would love to hear who these women are* - those would be the names to ask.

* Quinn's planned trip to Europe, Wu lying about leaving her house (confirmed by photographic evidence), and Sarkeesian choosing to shut down a talk over a non-credible (not my words, the Utah State Police's) threat so she could complain about how Utah's CC laws make her "unsafe" don't count for the obvious reasons of being lies.

Reply
Nick the Gent link
13/4/2016 03:34:52 pm

Completely agree with this.

Twitter has been raised a few times in all these discussions, and the consensus seems to be it's the message, not the medium.

But the medium enables the shouting matches, as you say Waffle.

I've read journalists and PR folks and others basically say they need things like Twitter in order to do their jobs. But it just seems a real risk to me, when one errant tweet or post can set-off a nuclear backlash.

Reply
Nick the Gent link
13/4/2016 03:57:05 pm

To be clear, I was agreeing with Waffle's post above.

InvisibleJim
13/4/2016 03:04:16 pm

Sing it loud and sing it proud, were all #GamerGators now!

Reply
paulvw
13/4/2016 03:15:06 pm

Mr Biffo

You may be a fucking asshole, but you are our fucking asshole.

Now walk away.

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 03:16:45 pm

Aw shucks.

Reply
Bill
13/4/2016 03:18:43 pm

Buddy. "but, again, it's unrealistic to think that women aren't being harassed."

I share most of your demographics. Old. Lots of kids. Degrees in psych and soc up the wazzoo. Not enough time to be engrossed in this. But I have been following it since the beginning. And I'd like you to at least try to entertain an idea--because if this idea turned out to be a truth, it would flip this entire situation for you, and for others:

Women aren't being harassed. I know! Crazy thing to say. Of course women are being harassed. It's obvious! Just look at all the tweets! TWEETS, for gods' sake!

If you're going to accept a truism like "women are harassed, therefore..." then, being a bright person, you probably want to know more than "this has happened." You want to know its prevalence, its proportion, its magnitude, since it is a demographic assumption.

Well, every single entity that has attempted to use scientific measurement to find out what's actually going on out there--applied epistemology rather than assumption--has found no realistic merit to the charge. They've discovered (brace yourself) that people who are vociferous, or who take polarized positions contentious topics, are spoken ill of, completely commensurate with their level of engagement with the public. Men actually tend to receive more abuse than women, though women tend to receive more "gendered" insults. Whether or not that's an interesting or useful factoid to you depends on where you stand.

Disagreement is not harassment. Being spoken ill of is not harassment. Harassment is, and can only be, because it's the only tenable meaning of the thing that allows it to remain useful as a word, a concept, and an icky thing: Repeated, unwanted, direct contact or attempt at direct contact by a unique actor. This is almost totally absent from all these gamergate goings-on, and the small amount that has actually happened has been roundly condemned by all communities, since the beginning.

You said you have an instinct to defend the one who appears to be abused. As an educated person, you obviously know that's not a unique or rare trait. And many people embroiled in this conflagration absolutely rely on others having that instinct, and use it to hide their own complicity. You obviously know this too, as it's bundled into your victimhood triangle thingy.

So if you stance is predicated on this truism, that "women are being harassed," what would happen to the Matryoshka doll of your opinions if that turned out to be *not true?*

Might be worth a thought experiment.

Reply
gisuck link
13/4/2016 03:44:23 pm

> Rightly or wrong, the likes of myself don't want to be seen as lacking in compassion, or accused of supporting a movement that has been reported as populated by right-wing, women-hating, extremists. You only have to look at the response to my pieces this week to know how difficult it is to talk about the subject in a neutral way without it blowing up in your face.

> Gamergate, regardless of whatever its real intent is, has come to represent something in the wider psyche. Remember that the swastika used to be a sacred symbol for good fortune?

> Like it or not, truthful or not, Gamergate is perceived as something ugly, whether it is or not. I think it has gone too far now for that to ever be reversed. The word itself comes pre-loaded.




Wait, what? Everything you have stated in the last few articles is neutral and well thought out, but what is this?

You write a blog complaining how you are apparently being labelled a gamergater now because of a neutral post about Alison Rapp and you want to change that viewpoint with a follow up article. But somehow, even though gamergate has convinced you that it's not the boogieman that media has portrayed it to be, you are going to continue to portray it as a boogieman because it's perceived as something ugly, so it must remain to do so.

I agree both sides needs to have some self reflection, but I would like you yourself to have some self reflection with this statement on how disingenious you are being. I think it's unjust that you can say "I should not be labelled as this" yet say "unfortunately they will have to live with the label they got."

Reply
Minglefingler
13/4/2016 04:28:50 pm

Hmm, if you read the article Biffo at no point says that he's going to continue to portray Gamergate as a boogieman, he's merely pointing out that when something gets labelled in a certain way then that label tends to stick. Gamergate has negative connotations for a lot of people, that is highly unlikely to change that's highly unlikely to change regardless of whether it's unfair or not so anyone identifying as a Gamergater will be tarred by that association. That's how the world works unfortunately, reputations, deserved or not are hard to lose.

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 04:32:56 pm

Yeah - what Minglefinger said.

Minglefingler
13/4/2016 04:43:54 pm

I realy need to proofread, that looks like bad rhetoric.

gisuck link
13/4/2016 04:47:37 pm

My apologies, a misunderstanding on what was being said here. That also seems fair.

Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 08:42:46 pm

No worries, gisuck.

SomeGuy
13/4/2016 03:50:30 pm

I propose the creation of a small transportable Panmunjom-like blue habitable structure - such as a tent or inflatable room - that can be easily transported to gaming enthusiast conventions. There, cease-fire and later treaty negotiations can take place between representatives of the belligerent parties, coordinated by widely respected minds from the fields of law, the social sciences, and ludology. Moderators of forums would affix a label to their websites to indicate their strict adherence to the terms of the cease-fire and later treaty. The websites using such a label would be accredited by a joint review committee established by the terms of the treaty, potentially yearly or semi-annually. The treaty would be placed under automatic review every three years by the belligerent parties for potential amendments, though amending the treaty could take place sooner.

Reply
Aunty Entity
14/4/2016 10:57:21 am

How about an alternative solution?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHU6K47qgc8

;)

Reply
Nick the Gent link
13/4/2016 03:52:21 pm

​"I want to understand Gamergate. I want to understand the culture war that's raging, with the games industry at the heart of it. But I don't think I'm going to be able to. Not fully. Frankly, I don't have the time."

Fully agree, Mr. Biffo. I find the cultural issues at the heart of this fascinating, but the sides, the opinions, the trending topics, the accusations, are incomprehensible to most gamers.

And as you say:

"Gamergate is fighting for an ethical games media.
Okay... but I don't really care. I think there are more important things to worry about."

This, as the kids says, this.

Yes, there may be a lot of bias out there, an often cozy arrangement between big publishers and the big websites who cover their games. And it feels like every new game gets 7/10 on average.

But it was always this way.

I've noticed some folks on the pro-ethics side have listed their demands: that articles should be marked as "opinion" (er, what else would they be?), and that bias should be declared openly, and then opposite articles should be introduced to address this bias.

Or, you know, you could just stop expecting games journalists to tell you what to think.

Play the games. View the videos. Read others' comments, or better yet write your own user reviews, set-up websites.

It's not like back in the day when there were only print magazines and a few other outlets. We're not short of info on new games.

Anyway, I'm glad that you're deciding to stay out of this mess, Biff!

Reply
Darcy
13/4/2016 04:50:57 pm

I'm just going to agree with this, since it saves me writing.

Still can't believe this is all over "video games journalism".

All media has bias. That's how it works. I just ... I can't help but wonder if the people calling for "more ethics" have ever stepped out of their video games bubble. I mean, you just have to look at our wonderful press to see more red and blue spinning than the average level of Sonic the Hedgehog!

Reply
Twei Lim Lou
13/4/2016 05:02:37 pm

it's not that hard to report you have moneys or relations with the things they report about non? And they are slowly changing towards it


The problem is pedestalling scammers and professional victims as heroes but no coverage on other hard working women that did create more than 1 game or industry contributions

Darcy
13/4/2016 05:15:28 pm

Oh, yeah, I can see that there's an issue with nepotism. I knew a dev who could never get publicity for her games because she simply didn't have mates in the right places. Again, though, that standard across *all* media, and always has been. "It's who you know" and all that.

If people want that to change, they have to be that change. Instead of moaning because some hipster clique has dominated the gaming press these past ten years or whatever, they've got to provide an alternative. Ignore the cliques, stop giving them attention, and soon enough the only audience they have will be themselves.

Dotec
13/4/2016 05:31:31 pm

I have good news! A lot of the people who hate gaming media seem to hate the wider media in general for similar reasons. Some of them always hated it, while others had to do a complete reevaluation of it because of this GG flashpoint.

I'm sure everybody involved has previously been aware of media bias. You could pack an auditorium full of diverse people and ideologies and if you asked them "Do you think the media is shit?" you'd get almost unanimous agreement - keeping in mind that everybody has a different "media" in mind and may hate it for different reasons than their neighbor. And like most people, they typically don't REALLY give a shit until it touches on something they care or know about. The casual "Meh, what can we do about it?" shrug over biased media gives way to pitchforks.

I also want to add that while media bias is always going to get a strong reaction, it will be even stronger when that bias includes grossly demonizing a group of people or culture. No surprise that shit becomes personal real quick.

Darcy
13/4/2016 05:50:48 pm

Like Biffo, I had a look at KiA when this all blew up. I did again, just now. And you know what I found in the thread on this very article?

"Male feminists are pathetic. They will stab you in the back in a heartbeat if they think it would get them laid."

Yeah. That and various references to "blue pills", as if there's some grand feminist conspiracy to keep men locked in illusion, and it's up to Milo whatshisface and his Breitbart satyrs to be their Dionysian saviour.

The bias - the illusion - goes both ways. I hope people realise that.

Zero132132
13/4/2016 07:46:40 pm

@Darcy

Don't count on it. Trying to nudge people out of their perceptions of the world rarely works.

Mentski link
13/4/2016 04:00:18 pm

The thing with harassment - and I don't want to belittle female Internetters who've had it happen to them by saying this (although in certain people's eyes it almost certainly would) - is this:

If you have an opinion on the internet, the more people who read it and disagree with it, the more likely there are going to be a few "unhinged" people in that group with incredibly poor social skills that see no problem in wishing that harm will come to you.

And that can happen to *anybody* - female, male, black, white, gay, straight, lefty, righty, and everything in between.

Now we could argue that these fine upstanding examples of the "Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory" are predominately white straight males, and you know what... That might be true. But to make a claim that they're exclusively targeting women, or for that matter they're officially aligned with the type of "GamerGaters" that you see in KotakuInAction is tenuous at best.

Plenty of "big names" get it in the ear from whatever internet pit of arseholery these folk DO come from. All those Youtube folk such as TotalBiscuit, and Boogie2988 et al are constantly getting hostility thrown at them for their opinions on certain games and topics.

Others who in the eyes of some GamerGaters, are part of the SJW "problem" such as Jim Sterling, and Adam Sessler have had it in the ear too - not for their social-political leanings, but for game reviews they've done in the past.

And then there's you, Uncle B, and the crap that led you to drop off the grid for so long.

In my eyes this harassment we keep seeing is far from a "misogyny" thing, but a result of dickheads who can't counter somebody's opinion without invoking hostility.

Reply
Bruce Flagpole
13/4/2016 04:07:13 pm

Nice work Mr B. i find the whole thing a bit mad and stay well out of it, but appreciate your honest attempts to discuss these kind of topic. I hope that any aggro it has brought on you fades away soon and doesn't become an issue.
Instead of a drama triangle we need a big 'hug circle', and we'll stick you right in the middle of it. This will probably result in you accidentally being crushed by all those people rushing to hug you, which would prove something or other i guess.

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 04:30:27 pm

Aw, man. Properly blown away by the niceness of you Digi readers. Honestly not sure what I've done to deserve it, but I feel privileged. Mercifully, the aggro has been very slight - barely anything to be honest. And what there was I expected, and can take. When you consider that people are angry, then it's inevitable that they're going to lash out.

I think everyone, mostly, responded to an honest attempt to understand, and treated me in kind. It has been eye-opening and gratifying.

I did my best to speak to people on both sides of the divide, and I absolutely understand it all better. At the same time, it's hard to know what the absolute truth is, and I don't trust my overriding liberal, rescue-y instincts enough to know what to believe. So I err on the side of caution.

So, yeah. I'm more than fine. There was just a lot to read, which caused my brain to melt a bit...!

Reply
Ninj
13/4/2016 04:11:39 pm

Biffster, thank you for speaking to GG. The misrepresentation is such that it's often all that can be hoped for.

Reply
Gigapurin
13/4/2016 04:15:11 pm

Another veteran dev here. Yeah, "the only winning move is not to play".

One thing I don't understand is why people keep trying to push their political views on each other. It costs practically nothing but your time to create and publish the games you want, and people will buy your game if it's marketable, so why go through the trouble of coercing an existing dev to cater to you (unless it's not about video games at all...).

Same goes for trying to change gaming journalism. #GG, you've already won, their credibility is long gone (along with regular MSM), and people are fleeing to YT and Twitch. Although, similar concerns will surely arise with the so called "influencers", or popular personalities. There are always people willing to compromise ethics for a stack of dollars.

Personally, I think the goal of diverse representation in games is much more realistic. I know I've changed my views after realizing diversity and representation issues are actually important to many people (and try to accommodate them when it's reasonable, and doesn't actually make the game worse).

However, gender/identity politics is something that should not be forced on the developer, which is one of the main beefs #GG has with the issue, I believe. This goes for both sides, it's better to vote with your wallet than try to pressure the developer with harassment/smearing campaigns. Keep buying the games you like, and let the shitty games die, the market is wise in that regard. Causing controversy just fattens the bank accounts of professional agitators.

All that being said, the "#GG is a smokescreen for people who hate women, children, and puppies" narrative insults my intelligence, browsing KiA for give minutes will pretty much debunk that myth. Yet even people in the industry propagate that particular narrative. I have the pleasure of working with smart, kind, and reasonable people, so I really thought we were better than that.

Reply
SomeGuy
13/4/2016 04:44:02 pm

The kicker is that most people one works with - or even just chats with face-to-face - are "smart, kind and reasonable people". They have to be. Most everyone would avoid a real life bloke screaming sexist invectives or a woman loudly spouting snarky Tumblr "male tears" jokes. I'd even wager $50 that if members of the belligerent parties actually met each other face-to-face that the hurtful language would drop by about 90%. Because as you said, we *are* better than that, but the convenience of using online text encourages people to overlook its core deficiencies in communication.

Perhaps we should go back to the pre-1994 days of a NSFNET/CERN-managed Internet when it was harder to use the Web. It might increase overall happiness in the crude utilitarian sense of the term.

Reply
Abobomb
13/4/2016 07:02:27 pm

" Yet even people in the industry propagate that particular narrative."

The sad thing is it's the propagation of that narrative that's basically forced the issue to splinter into extremist groups (GGrevolt, Kiwifarms), that have nothing to do with GG/KiA anymore but continue to be lumped as a whole and it benefits them that this is the case, because they use GG, not as a smokescreen, but as a meatshield.

If the industry came out and said they were wrong about GG (not SUPPORT it, although that would be seen as such to AGG extremists), and acknowledge there are groups PRETENDING to be GG to cause problems, then a lot of the anger would dissipate.

Unfortunately , it would require the industry to hold its nerve in the aftermath as those extremist groups then trolled the crap out of them hoping to reverse that decision.

Reply
Minglefingler
13/4/2016 04:40:09 pm

Spot on Biffo, spot on. Any chance of a Sonic 3 review?

Reply
Twei Lim Lou
13/4/2016 04:49:26 pm

it isnt just us them or no nuance or no chances given.... and or just a gaming journalism thing...

Atheism+ cultists, extreme SJWs, pampered trust fund babies with many ignorances
TWEI LIM LOU·MONDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2015
*** *** ***
2014 2015
the problem are the overly politically correct, sex negative (all sex is rape / kill all men), extreme gender feminists always saying everyone else are not feminists
(equity feminists, elder generations of feminists, secularists and humanists.)
They behave like cultists, apologists. Hypocritical bigots.
Professional victims, conmen / scammers.
And protected by a following of similar witchhunting hate mobs and gullible white knights
So easily offended / triggered and believing that one have to silence, censor "bad" thoughts and words.
Not to mention they are the same in behaviour as the Atheism+ cultists / SJWs
(to me SJWs are people pretending to be for social justice, just use it to bully or pretending to be superiour and or authoritarian censorship by moral panic or ostracizing shame tactics) = neo puritans
*** *** ***
Atheism+
Pat Doyle 1 month ago
It is actually theism minus - all the shit you hated in your church, minus the god.
Hyde Hill 3 weeks ago
Saw someone coin it faitheism. Liked that.
*** *** ***
SJWs / extreme gender feminists / extreme minority on tumblr / apologists / extreme political correct / no bad thought or words / hypocrites / bigots / bullies / power mad / authoritarian censorship / same moral shame tactics / same ostracizing and harassment doxx tactics / focused on punishment guilt and make people lose their jobs and not on information / education
=> FreeThoughtBlogs
=> Rational wiki
-> often community managers
-> spread by media.
spread by quite some in social and gender studies / universities
- similar as creationism / scientology / cult problem
often selfish or narcissistic logic

People pretending to be morally superiour, bullying others, the rules do not apply to them and focused on punishing (ostracizing) people instead of spreading correct information and education.... Need to be recognized as apologist / cultist behaviour

Reply
Twei Lim Lou
13/4/2016 04:49:49 pm

we do not dislike feminism

The problem are:
the extreme SJWs,
tiny minority extreme tumblers,
extreme, sex negative, gender feminists that considers

all elder generations of feminists, equity feminists, humanists, egalitarians not feminists (enough)

not to mention their stances on things make the extremists seem like neo puritans.

atheism+ cultists have this religious with us or against us extremes too...
https://archive.is/i8cCH#selection-599.404-615.40

Atheism+ had became the purview of social justice warriors.
Because Atheism+ was righteous, those who offered criticism were not just people who disagreed; they were bad people. In order to be a valued member of the community, one needed to be the right kind of feminist. Those who saw feminism as being primarily about the quest for equality and not about "rape culture" were not welcome here.
Equity feminists would soon be labeled "sister punishers," and pro-feminist men would be called "rape apologists."

Atheism+ would become divisive in short order and would never recover from this choice.

Reply
Darwin
13/4/2016 04:50:30 pm

Eating crisps is a noble endeavor. Do you prefer a brand of crisps, or do you prefer to make your own? My sister makes a mean plate of crisps, and she can slice a potato so thin you can also see through the thing. So I prefer the homemade variety, of course.

Reply
Lasermoat
13/4/2016 04:52:58 pm

"(...) some of them are fighting to be left alone to play the games, and say the things that they want to say. "

I've heard this claim many places, and I've always wondered - what are they fighting against? What's stopping joe gamer from being left alone to work on his leader board ranking? You apparently found something compelling in that message, and I'd be interested in reading anny elaboration you'd care to offer.

Reply
Twei Lim Lou
13/4/2016 04:54:30 pm

So what liberals and secularists in gamergate hate are scammers, professional victims, cry bullies that makes it worse for real victims of harassment and worse.

people pretending they are good but their history of tweets is bullying behaviour and then pretend to be victim
DARVO reverse victim offender


Reply
Anymoose
13/4/2016 05:11:43 pm

What do you think will happen if he actually reads the Zoe Post?

Reply
Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 05:26:41 pm

Me? I have.

Reply
Anymoose
13/4/2016 06:23:47 pm

Vindictive ex or chronicle of psychological abuse and manipulation?

Mr Biffo
13/4/2016 06:27:47 pm

Sorry to continue with my fence-sitting, but I felt for both parties.

Gumbo
13/4/2016 07:57:52 pm

It's fine to keep an open mind.

Now consider that the media has universally characterised the Zoe Post as "a misogynist screen by a jilted ex".

And consider for just a moment what would have happened if Erin Gjoni had written that account of their abusive relationship with Zachary Quinn.

It's that episode of The Simpsons where Homer gets monstered by the media after a young woman mistakes his desperate attempts to retrieve a candy sweet for a grope. "Your tears say more than real evidence ever could."

Gamergate puppet of hate
14/4/2016 01:44:55 am

Fuck the Zoe post.
I post regularly on KiA and am pro GG but focusing on that stuff is a waste of time and makes it look like we were just after her. Even if that's not the fact, drop the Zoe post, there's so much larger issues at hand and misrepresentation.

Yes there was misrepresentation then but there's much, much more now. Far bigger issues from the SJWs and media, not just gaming media.

Reply
nobuyuki
13/4/2016 05:54:06 pm

Good luck with staying out of future drama. It was a nice few articles. If there was one thing I'd like to point out, it would be that some people won't settle for the fact that a media-invented stigma is acceptable to live with merely because it is the status quo. An entire group of people were smeared publicly because they challenged a small elite with a relatively large public speaking platform.

And like yourself, I hate to make this argument because of the potential kneejerk reaction, but outside of Western culture, the swastika still is considered a symbol of Good Luck first and foremost. Up until recently, Japan used it as their symbol for temples on public maps, and only changed it to a torii due to confused (and sometimes upset) tourists who thought only if nazi connotations. They made the change to be more amiable to Westerners, but they shouldn't have had to be expected to change their culture because it offended someone far away due to their own misunderstandings, even if it seems like an insignificant topic. Either way, most reasonable people would consider Japan a welcoming space.

As for videogames, we all "live" in close proximity. You've correctly identified two "tribes" belonging to different cultures living in the same space. But unlike the whole swastika thing, the symbolic propaganda wasn't used righteously to slander an enemy far away. The consequences of ww2 propaganda may have created minor misunderstandings today, but in the here and now, the propaganda made "in defense of women" was clearly aimed by its negative connotations at destroying one of these coexisting tribes. Worse yet, many inside that tribe and out believe it was done for ignoble reasons, and continues to be. That others promote this as the "new normal" can be seen as offensive to those who saw the initial (proven!) coordinated propaganda campaign intended to punish the "GG tribe" for speaking out against darlings of the media elite.

Reply
JetLagg
13/4/2016 06:13:55 pm

I appreciate the honesty, even if I still disagree with your conclusions.

One last thing to keep in mind about GG is that, just as the media mislead you to believe we had no females in the group, no LGBT people, no minorities, that we were right wing (an absurd lie that a journalist can only repeat if they're callously dishonest or completely incompetent), they could also have been misleading you about the harassment. As with the other cases of misdirection, I think this is a combination of a few intentionally dishonest reporters followed by dozens upon dozens of lazy and incompetent reporters.

Why was it that nobody complained about Jack Thompson receiving death threats when he was still around, essentially doing what Anita Sarkeesian does now? Was it because he was a male? Isn't that sexist? Was it because he wasn't part of our clique? Doesn't that rob us of any claim to the moral high ground?

Why, when I read about the infamous lion-killer Walter Palmer do I see his treatment referred to as "international outrage" and "mob justice" rather than "sustained campaigns of harassment"?

He's not a helpless victim set on by a swarm of anti-dentites, driven solely by their hatred of dentistry, granted, but why does the media then have such a hard time admitting the same is essentially true of Zoe Quinn? She's hardly helpless. Hardly innocent. She wielded considerable influence in the media and used that influence to (among other unsavory things) attempt to torpedo a radical feminist project to get women into game development. Does that make her the valid target of community mob justice? And if not, on what grounds are we really determining who you can and cannot use these tactics on?

Those aren't rhetorical questions, and I'm happy to work on answers to them with anyone, but not until they cease with the double standards, and admit they're every bit as bad as the rest of us (or worse, in Zoe Quinn's case. Read more about what she's done to Gjonji. I honestly think she might be a sociopath).

Reply
Relliksan
13/4/2016 06:40:59 pm

As someone who identifies as on the fence leaning in favour of:
I like to believe I'm someone who distinguish between the work and the opinions of the person who made it. It's how I'm able to read a lot of stuff you've written on the issue, why I still watch Jim Sterling and why I read but rarely take part in the debates.

I could give you masses of reading material but you've made it apparent your done, so I'll leave it at me looking forward to more silliness.

Reply
Superbeast 37
13/4/2016 06:49:18 pm

Why the focus on women?

Men are statistically more likely to receive abuse online than women.

The nature of the abuse varies as those doing the abusing naturally pick whatever they feel will hit a nerve with the target.

Women receive sexual threats, men receive violent threats.

All totted up, men receive more abuse than women.

Majority of that reported in the media is women women women women. Odd. Absolutely humongous disparity in the patreon victim bucks that victims receive depending on what genitals they have too. Also odd - especially as those making the donations seem to espouse "equality" a lot. Turns out they do something different with their money.

http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2014/10/PI_2014.10.22__online-harassment-03.png

Obviously ANY abuse is bad regardless of what genitals the victim has. I care about everyone. Granted I care a bit less if I get the impression that the victim is in any way baiting, exaggerating, finger pointing without evidence etc.


I have zero time for identity politics. The media absolutely stink of it. A previous poster listed all the high profile men who have been harassed.

Totalbiscuit in hospital receiving chemo and being told that "I hope your cancer kills you sooner". BBC and Guardian didn't care much about that. Doesn't fit the narrative I guess.

How about we stop with political narratives and treat everyone the same?

Reply
Abobomb
13/4/2016 06:53:18 pm

" Albeit, mostly Gamergaters, who thought I was jumping aboard their cause. I wasn't, and I'm not. I was merely reporting being labelled as a Gamergater, in a sort of sarcastic way."

Woah, back up. Come on, nobody thought you were 'jumping aboard the cause' on the GG side *waves*. We just thought you were an example of another neutral being THROWN IN WITH US AGAINST YOUR WILL. (there's a joke on the Gamergate side that goes: "you don't join gamergate, you're thrown in the pit with us".

Gamergaters do not care if you are not a Gamergater. We care if you either misrepresent us (as AGG/SJWs will), or you are attacked by AGG/SJWs (because it's more evidence that AGG/SJWs are psychotic).

Trust me the tone with which you wrote 'GamerGater' in your last article left no illusions that you consider yourself one. You refer to it like a a substitute for 'misogynist' or 'racist'.

GamerGate is not desperate for your allegiance or approval. We're used to the media being against us.

I hope whoever is giving you shit leaves you alone now, but I doubt thye will. SJWs expect you to kiss the ring even when they've got their jackboot on your face.

Good luck.

Reply
Saiyo link
13/4/2016 06:59:15 pm

I´ve seen both sides for a while.

GG has nothing to do with misogyny nor extreme right wing philosophhy, in fact there was a survey and most GGers are left leaning, just not the so called "regressives" the term used by Dave Rubin, Sargon of Akkad, Bill Maher and left leaning people who are against extreme political correctess, "justified" sexism against men, racism against black and all that posmodern bullshit.

AGG at least in Ghazi is more of an echo chamber, they ban you just for posting on KIA lol! they have some reasonable people and some extreme SJW nutjobs or "regressives" as i said previously. In general that's a forum on the opposite of KIA, they only can speak about certain issues and there is a flock mentality where if you disagree you get banned.

KIA is totally for free speech, open debate and humanism (against sexism and racism, "color blindness" to AGG)

GGhazi wants social justice (too) but more in a extreme authoritarian way.

Just two ways to see the world, but the second one can only function by restraining the first.

Obviously i simpatize more with GG and KIA. Also cause i'm very mixed race and progressive theory fucks me up, i want people to judge for what i am, my race is irrelevant fuck SJW! Also i'm poor and from a southamerican country and i hate people calling me "oppresor" and "privileged" just by my sex. That's a ridiculous sexist and dehumanizing ideology created by burgeoise to deny their privileges. The projection from SJW is brutal.

I want the MLK ideas again to be relevant! i'm a human not a fucking race or sex

Reply
Abombob
13/4/2016 07:10:20 pm

Also, while I concede that people on either side of the fence can be equally bad, the difference is only one side is left with the 'dark mark'.

As bad as AGG can be, people are less willing to believe that's the case. It's much easier for them to believe that GG are these horrible monsters, so it benefits AGG to keep that narrative going because in the eyes of the media, they are essentially bulletproof.

The way out of this is for both sides to rally against the extremists and trolls, but they wont because AGG is receiving the full benefit right now.

Reply
H. Guderian
13/4/2016 07:23:46 pm

Thanks for visiting the issue. In the end it is best to be as neutral as possible. But if you want, make a fresh anonymous reddit account and hang around KiA.

Every time a debate like this pops up we get a little spike in our subscription numbers on KiA. In my mind Public Neutrality is just about as good as support. Because there are no 'private' anti-Gamergaters. You can't get in trouble for being Anti-GG, unless you rely on having a clear twitter feed. I won't ramble as much this time, but thanks again for an even shake. You actually came buy to see what KiA was talking about. There's a lot of pointless dumb shit we say over there, but we're free to say it. Only if more people reported on what we actually said rather than what they wish we said to fulfill some boogeyman prophecy that they require.

Reply
Scatman John
13/4/2016 07:27:54 pm

What's GamerGate again?

Reply
Wadaload
13/4/2016 07:28:30 pm

This reminds me a little of Peter Hitchens vs. the Church of Scientology. Although I hope it doesn't reach that point for you, his only recourse was to remove his articles.

Wait a minute... I've just compared you to a writer for the daily mail! The transformation is complete!

Reply
Zero132132
13/4/2016 07:42:19 pm

As much as it sucks, I doubt people will let you out. Gamergate likes to keep track of examples of SJWs drawing bizarre conclusions about people who try to stay neutral. They like to use them when talking to outsiders about what all this is actually about.

Because of the way antis perceive and treat this sort of thing, they'll continue seeing you as someone who enables harassment. Unless you do a 180 and completely denounce GG as evil, the perception that you're someone who doesn't care about harassment of women, and enables it by seeing any legitimacy in GG as a cause/movement, will persist.

I could be wrong. People don't talk about Erik Kain anymore, though people still complain about TotalBiscuit, Boogie, Liana K, Brad Glasgo, and maybe others that I'm forgetting. Best of luck to you in escaping the GG quicksand.

Reply
Myr
13/4/2016 08:03:30 pm

A "pro-nuance" position like you describe is what most of GG wants. Digging up info on someone, for example, is meant to make sure the person they criticize *actually did* what they are receiving heat for (I mean, God, I wish people would dig into *me* before they spread things). GG are the ones trying to highlight the difference between Gamergate and places like Baphomet, who are often conflated as being identical despite not getting along at all. Gamergate are even the ones stressing that not every feminist or social justice advocate is a "social justice warrior" worthy of criticism.

Heck, even look at the people they criticize. Though they may get called harassers for it, GG opposes *individuals*. It's opposition opposes broad groups that they readily group people into, regarding the non-hostile ones as nothing but a "cover" for the harassers. The irony of this is that, if these people criticized the actual harassers rather than the so-called "cover", Gamergate would take their side fully.

Reply
oso
13/4/2016 09:44:58 pm

The fact remains, that women who work in the games industry are far too often targets for abuse,...

Ok where is the proof? You can't slay an imaginary dragon... And you must find where it lives.

You keep saying waste of time but then, why is it that no matter what a person does with videogames is ALWAYS considered childish and a waste of time?

Reply
Floating Ray Winstone Head
13/4/2016 10:22:05 pm

I enjoy your words Biffo. ALL OF THEM

Reply
Gamergate puppet of hate
14/4/2016 01:34:12 am

I see you're still trying to stick in the neutral ground here. I commend you for it, it's very difficult to do, lest people start branding and labeling you.
Some of the KiA folk seem annoyed that you've discovered some of the bullshit lies surrounding gamergate and how we're consistently misrepresented, yet you're still wanting to stay neutral.
I am hopeful no one from the GG side gives you a hard time for this, but who knows, it's a huge group with many different opinions.

I as a 'gator' don't take issue with you staying neutral, honestly delving too deep into this can be bad for your mental health, I wish I could close pandoras box, but the endlies lies and bullshit have piqued my attention and I can't not follow it all.

I hope you manage to avoid any hassles in the future, I suspect you're probably branded as "one of the bad guys" regardless by the antiGG crew and thrown in the pit with us, but maybe not.

Good luck!

Reply
Adam
14/4/2016 03:10:30 am

You should make it so that only people who set up a monthly sub to Digi can comment on these articles. You'd keep the site going for years.

Reply
Panda
14/4/2016 08:40:44 am

"I was busy with life, and kids, and a job, and eating crisps, and getting the car serviced".

Not to undermine all the thought and effort that's gone into it but that's the most important sentence in this article for me. So many people need perspective. When you're knee deep in a four hour long debate/argument/rampage, maybe just take a step back, look in the mirror and say "why am I doing this and is it really that important?" People who play video games - VIDEO GAMES, FOR CHRIST'S SAKE - aren't part of a single social group any more than people who like disco dancing or people who eat chips.

I don't regard myself as a model human being but when something gaming-related winds me up - like the career success of Anita Sarkesian despite a lot of horrendously lazy and disingenuous work - I might type the odd rant but when I press submit, I move on with my (real) life, content with the knowledge that I'm allowed to communicate whatever views I hold and that I don't need to stoop to venomous bile to stand out or demonstrate how much something means to me.

Also, the main thing I tend to take away from most of these debates is that the internet always - ALWAYS - provides a level social playing field for those who don't necessarily deserve it. You don't get twelve-year-olds walking into university debates and calling someone a moronic c*nt because he's on the opposite team and then see half the room taking him/her seriously. But you always get the equivalent online because that anonymous, reputation-less status is now parallel with any that of any member of whatever "intelligentsia" is most relevant to the topic. Yeah, the chaff gets separated eventually but I find it takes a lot longer than it should for people to completely disregard tactless, ignorant idiots who think aggressively discouraging the opposition from even making an attempt is the best way to win a debate. By the time you realise you shouldn't have given them credence, it's too late.

Since Biffo inescapably brought up the Nazis, imagine if everyone in the wartime UK had almost equal footing on all public discourse platforms. You can absolutely guarantee there'd be a lot more Nazi sympathisers than there should be just because sensible people can't get on board with so much of the bile that pre-internet society was thankfully able to sift out organically.

I hope those points illustrate why the sobriety of Biffo's articles is something that should be encouraged. He could hold the most offensive views and communicate them with a bit of class or he could hold the most sensible views and communicate them in a shameful way that would make even the most aggressive psychopath hesitate if this was all face-to-face. And there's no topic that's not worth writing/thinking/debating about but if something is speaking to the core of your identity to such an extent that you're moved to actually eliminate the opposition with aggression, maybe take a moment to consider whether or not your investment is so worthwhile that it really does justify turning your back on the type of classy, sober debate that has existed for thousands of years.

Reply
Yeah right like I'm letting you dox me
14/4/2016 09:50:40 am

The simple fact that you had to pretend there are "two sides" of this and even used the language "SJW" and "aGG" prove you are untrustworthy. There are not two sides. There is GG, and everyone else. Good to see where you've pledged your loyalties.

It's ok though. I'll be sending emails to the people who actually care about games warning them about you. Zoe, Anita, Brianna, Kotaku, TheMarySue, Jezebel, Jimquisition, everyone will find out your true nature and make sure you never make a cent of off games and abusing minorities again.
And when you find yourself jobless, blacklisted, your wife and children leaving you to die a lonely death in a one room apartment, maybe you'll realize you shouldn't have supported GG, you misogynist abusive fucko.
Burn in hell you fucking right-wing shitlord.

Reply
Panda
14/4/2016 10:03:27 am

Case in point, re my previous post...

Reply
Talk to Frank
14/4/2016 10:17:30 am

I would pay top dollar to watch you washing Anne Widdicombes bra on I'm a celebrity get me out of here

Reply
Ross
14/4/2016 02:08:58 pm

You are an idiot. MOST people in the world do not give a shit about this and if you explained it, still would not. I imagine what is left is split fairly equally. Why be deliberately dishonest with the worn out "Gamergate and everyone else" false narrative. Its not only dishonest but so very stupid.

You seem a bit touchy.

Reply
Rob Ace
14/4/2016 02:19:17 pm

Think you might have fallen victim to Poe's Law.
Giving you the benefit of the doubt I found it funny anyway.

Reply
Yeah right like I'm letting you dox me
14/4/2016 02:56:55 pm

Aww, did little tighty whitey male get offended? Did I step all over your privilege maybe? Wanna try calling me a fake gamer girl, maybe that'll make you feel better huh shitlord?

People like you attempting to deny our abuse, suffering, and valid complaints are why we keep fighting harder every day. Keep using your shitty 2 sides narrative if you want, but don't be surprised when the rest of the world sees you for what you are and throws you with the rest of the trash.

Gamergate puppet of hate
15/4/2016 02:11:41 am

This one is so over the top and ridiculous, that it's obvious bait. This isn't an SJW folks - they are loopy but not that loopy (and most of them don't actually use the term shitlord, since we adopted it ironically)

Good try none the less.

Reply
Neill
14/4/2016 11:42:45 am

I was about to spend a long time composing a message about starting a new group of Gaming Apathists, for people who don't really care about any of this, and just want to sit back and play games.

Or, in the case of this site, sit back and read funny, yet oddly arousing Chart Cat lists.

The biggest problem here is people just enjoy arguing too much to give up. You've just got to keep reminding yourself that the vocal few on social media are still just about 1% of the actual gaming public.

The rest of us probably agree with parts of both arguments. I for one am pro-trans/positive female/gay representation in games, against corruption in gaming/review sites, but utterly indifferent when it comes to games activism of any kind.

Basically, social justice, the games industry, whatever else... it's all roughly heading in the right direction. And if I didn't think it was, I'd just stop playing games.

We need to somehow find a way to get Gamer Gaters and SJW's more pissed off about subjects like climate change and tax evasion. I mean, why hasn't anyone doxxed someone over the panama papers yet?

Once again, it's one rule for people with feminist/pro-trans sensibilities, another for our dodgy politicians and wealthy elite.

Reply
Ross
14/4/2016 02:04:26 pm

"We do not WANT you to be one thing or another. WE are fine with neutrals.We ask for honesty and fairness in reporting. Looks like you have done that and THAT places you in a small percentage of people reporting on Gamergate.

So you keep coming around to this women getting harassed and threatened. you men "people" getting harassed right? Because statistically men and women get harassed at about the same numbers and certainly the harassment of Gamergate proponents bears this out (who by, I don't know BUT according to YOUR definition because it is as a result of them being involved with Gamergate - it must be from "Gamergate", right? You see how mind-numbingly stupid that narrative is?).

People get harassed on the internet. Therefore Gamergate has to be involved right? Matt Smith - wore a racy tshirt and was attacked by SJWs on social media until he broke down in tears on tv on the day he was supposed to be celebrating a mammoth win for science. Tim Hunt? SJWs went after him for being sexist and he was fired (though later it turns out that he was quoted out of context and was being humorous and self-depreciating), Jian Ghomeshi was attacked by SJWs over rape charges that ended up being bogus and Gregory Elliott was attacked by SJWs for disagreeing with SJWs. Cost him over $100 000 court cost and three years of no wages as he was prohibited going on the internet - before being found guilty of anything. The accusers not only were allowed on the internet, but did not have to pay court costs and actually gained more notoriety from this.

MOST of the prominent SJWs in all of these instances happen to be women. Most of the prominent anti-gamergaters happen to be women. As evidenced from you completely minimising any harassment to men, women and minorities stand to gain from perpetuating and maximising on victimhood. Men are not listened to and even more so if they happen to be white.

Trolls stand to gain a lot by inciting harassment to either camp. The troll groups orbiting Gamergate are Baphomet, GNAA, Bill Wagoneer group, Something Awful forums, Kiwi Farms, and Ayyteam. When they target our allies nothing is reported and the attacked wears it. When these people attack the other camp it is blamed ion us and EVEN you do it in this article when you say "Whether that makes them Gamergaters or "Gamergaters"... I dunno."
By that same rationale, as I say when OUR people get harassed and death threats/rape threats, bomb threats or swatting, by that definition it "makes them Gamergaters or "Gamergaters"". Its beyond stupid and disingenuous.

Oh and yes I will not denounce much from herre on in. I will tell you why. I remember well when a person I did not know suddenly had a heap of nasty tweets sent in by someone by the username "Death to Brianna". No idea who sent them. They did not reference Gamergate. I jumped on it and contacted Twitter safety. I was not alone. at least 8 other gamergate supporters and 4 anti-gamergate did and when all condemned the statements and applauded the account being removed.
Have a wild guess who had to cop crap as a Gamergate supporter for this threat that they helped get rid of and without said tweet seeming to have anything to do with us? THAT set the benchmark for all their dealing with us. Why SHOULD I denounce a damn thing. They won't like us if we don't? Who cares? They will blame us regardless. Why ought we curry their good favour and pander to them?

Reply
Toaster
14/4/2016 09:34:01 pm

GG v SJW - tedious, innit? Gets a lot of traffic to the site though... Glad this is the end of it.

Reply
ProfFaust
15/4/2016 01:27:51 am

"It feels reductive to me to dismiss a huge group of people as being one amorphous mass, rather than a collection of individuals."

Now, if only you were consistent with yourself by not treating women who work in the games industry as "one amorphous mass, rather than a collection of individuals," you'll have crossed fully over to Dark Side.

Reply
The Gun Slinger
23/4/2016 12:44:39 pm

I don't agree with your conclusion, Biffo. Yes, I understand you're trying to look reasonable and neutral, but you're wasting your time. Let me explain why:

>Yes... I do think the media has probably been guilty of misrepresenting some sections of Gamergate, and understand how frustrating that must be. But I don't really blame them.

I don't either. After all, the news nowadays is a kind of based-on-a-true-story fiction aimed at 50+ year olds who think they're too sophisticated to read novels. The problem is that 50+ year olds generally don't play video games, don't know anything about games, games journalism or the industry in general, so they don't care; they have no horse in the race.

Which subsequently means they don't care about your opinions, either, or who you happen to side with.

In fact, I have to question who these people are who you say you want to look compassionate in front of. The way I see it, they consist broadly of two groups: 1) The aforementioned 50+ year olds, who don't care. 2) The anti-gamergaters, who'll hate you unless you're an outspoken opponent of it ("you can't be neutral on a moving train" - Anita Sarkeesian, 2014). If we're being honest, most of *them* probably don't play video games, either.
3)The Gamergaters themselves, who obviously don't believe it in the first place.

Neutrality is best carried out thought silence, or at least by saying that you're not going to engage the topic.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    This section will not be visible in live published website. Below are your current settings:


    Current Number Of Columns are = 2

    Expand Posts Area =

    Gap/Space Between Posts = 12px

    Blog Post Style = card

    Use of custom card colors instead of default colors = 1

    Blog Post Card Background Color = current color

    Blog Post Card Shadow Color = current color

    Blog Post Card Border Color = current color

    Publish the website and visit your blog page to see the results

    Picture
    Support Me on Ko-fi
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    RSS Feed Widget
    Picture

    Picture
    Tweets by @mrbiffo
    Picture
    Follow us on The Facebook

    Picture

    Archives

    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    November 2020
    September 2020
    July 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014


    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
  • MAIN PAGE
  • Features
  • Videos
  • Game Reviews
  • FAQ