Also, gg planned meeting.

antigg tried whole day to get it stopped (with Chu-Chu at the spearhead)

when it did take place BOMB THREAT

delusionaaaaaaal

Took out the offensive stuff in your post and exchanged for equally fictional entity.

Could we talk about anything but fiction? Like, reality? No? Okay, see you in a month or so.

I skip over the question too!

exactly, could you please start? it could make the discussion easier if' you'd stop talking fantasy Vain

Let's go there then. It wasn't Quinn that got shoved anywhere Vaina... the discussion was around Eron... per the article you posted there, which had him as the lynchpin, though it also made broader points. Since you decided to bait me here, let me mention the following.

I remember dropping Anita's participation in the IT podcast here in GOG. I did that in defense of her. I started noticing you over there after that. When did you join there? Me it was in 2012 or 2013, I can't check, obviously. You even a couple of times used the link to that same podcast back here as evidence that Anita is a gamer. I saw you posting pretty much identical content between the forums. But Eron is the obssessive stalker right?

My much older posts on Eron and Quinn are still around, for anyone to find if they so wish. Basically I see both as individuals that need help, and I think Zoe is the one that is less likely to get it.

As to you and your farcical, or maybe delusional, attempt at believing you're better than us (or me - but if you hadn't posted the above I would not suspect you had it in for me to such a level. I even defended you on occasion... go figure.) Anyway you do stress GG ties to right wing politics. You do go after developers like Chmielarz or Wardell that share some ground with GG. And you sure as hell actively support boycott of offending speech. Or if not, go defend my freedom of speech back in IT and prove me wrong.

Anyway, I'm happy you found a community where you feel more at home than GOG. And I'm not happy to be banned anywhere, but being banend as I was, well... it is illustrative, so to speak.

No, you sound like someone in denial or vainly defending your side over the truth.

Why are you surprised that a story of a developer sleeping with 5 gaming industry professionals was newsworthy? She hasn't been "singled out" either. Plenty of attention has been given to Patricia Hernandez writting article after article about her roommate's games. Lots of attention was given to the IGF and the ties they have to various winners of their awards.

Maybe she sticks out because its 5 people who could be helpful to her career? Ever think about that?

Many black athletes have been linked to affairs especially NBA stars, so why has Tiger Woods been singled out? Many stories about Jack Kennedy, but one intern and a pizza, was Bill Clinton "singled out"?

Personally, I find it to be a rather big breach of journalistic ethics. The problem is you have no ethics, so how can you understand them?

Heck even before the Gamers Are Dead articles, tell me why all these magazines are reporting on the Game Jam and all defending Zoe in the same way days apart? Was it because she was good friends with Robin Arnott

Actually, in gathering links, I ran across this which sums it up pretty nicely.
https://medium.com/@socialunjustice/game_jam-and-zoe-quinn-what-are-they-hiding-f711b544d00a

Note how many articles about this were published all by friends of each other? Sound familiar? Sound like Gamers Are Dead?

Mar 31st Jared Rosen (one of the 5) who Zoe slept over at his apartment after the Jam.
Also Robin Arnott (another of the 5) with another article.
And Adriel Wallick who is a professional partner of Rami Ismail who is a friend of Zoe's
And of course Zoe Quinn with a blog post of her own.
And then Kotaku also wrote an article about it. Oh, who was the author? Oh yeah Nathan Grayson (another of the 5)

Is it a surprise they all say the same thing? Isn't it amazing all the damage control in the press defending Zoe Quinn all by her friends and lovers?

Explain the journalistic ethics that allow a bunch of journalist friends to all write articles with the exact same slant across many different magazines?

Well, how about this, for a long time one of, if not THE most popular X-Box magazine on the newsstands was 'Official X-Box Magazine' I've had a quick google but I've been unable to work out how 'Official' OXBM was but either they were in someway sponsored or endorsed by Microsoft or used the suggestion that they were for marketing reasons.

What is more of a 'conflict of interests' and potential hamstring to your journalistic integrity than reviewing X-Box games for a magazine that's officially endorsed by Microsoft?

Did anyone complain? No. Did they vote with their wallets? No - as I say one of the most popular X-Box magazines on the newsstands for YEARS

So you're saying that people generally felt comfortable with spending £50-60 on games for year after year on the say so of people who claimed to be Microsoft's official mouthpiece but it turns out that some people who said that one game you can download for free from Steam and takes maybe 30-60mins to playthrough is 'good' may have had ulterior motives for saying that and that justifies a huge outpouring of hate and death-threats? WTF?

What does that have to do with anything? We are telling you why we care and all you seem to do in this thread is try to poke holes in anything we say and imply we have our opinions because we are misogynists. Get over yourself. Personally, I care when games are getting great reviews and awards and you find out it is a shitty little game which was promoted by some friend of the developer. I care when I can't find a real review only to instead read some piece of crap review about how "offensive" a game is in content or style. I care when some politically correct a-holes are saying they are going to change games by pushing story over game play and the examples they use have no game play and a story only a social activist will really care for. I care when I see developers cry over bad reviews and try to blame the consumer over it.

What I see are a bunch of supposedly gaming magazines that no longer really review games but instead are pushing social commentary in the guise of game reviews. I see a bunch of these magazines seemingly supporting select indie developers while ignoring many others. These developers all seemed to be part of the same clique.

And with your example, a magazine endorsed by Microsoft for the XBox, did you ever think they have a vested interest in playing fair with the developers? That one might expect objectivity because Microsoft would otherwise be accused of favourtism? And maybe this fairness and objectivity led to its success. I remember often reading Game Informer, the magazine of Gamestop. Once upon a time, the reviews were actually pretty decent. PC Gamer same way. At the time, I thought I was getting a decent judgment of the games from those reviews.

And seriously, what "huge outpouring of death threats"? Gimme a break, they get a handful of nasty Tweets, few actual death threats and exaggerate the hell out of it. Seriously, claiming 6 months forced away from her home? Frankly I call Bullshit on that claim. That is all "professional victim" talk. All I see are certain people significantly prospering based on their "victimhood". And when they start falling out of the news, they find ways to get back in the news, be it calling all males potential mass murderers, or reminding people how they are still homeless and mentioning their Patreon accounts...

Seriously, WTF is up with YOU? Why do you feel you have a right to question our motives? Superiority complex maybe?

Then either the sponsorship was obvious or disclosed. Or not enough people may have found out. Alos, its about the principle of it. He did something he was not allowed to. Hence his ethics will be called into question. Simple.

The sponsorship is obvious, just like Nintendo Power before it. Total Biscuit is paid to do reviews as well but he discloses that fact. There isn't a problem with conflict of interest as long as it's disclosed or obvious.

Actually; not reviews. He discloses paid brand deals. He hasn't accepted money for positive opinions. He does e-celeb tournaments and nothing else.

at the same time, he doesn't give review scores. He plays and describes what he like and hates (no FOV sliders again?). If he were not genuine, you could probably hear it. This is an advantage to his youtube format compared to written text: forging a fake opinion and keeping up the cover is 100 times harder when playing and commenting in parallel.

I wonder how people can play and talk at the same time. I always find it difficult to multitask like that. Either way, it is indeed very difficult to lie throughout a 20-30 min video, and as far as I recall, he did a tournament thing something for Chivalry and that blimp combat team-based game, and then something else?

Your tweet links to one random person on the internet calling out Tornquist for going SJW, which is obviously not true. Just to check though, I browsed around, and I can find no real mention or campaign against this character by Gamergate. KotakuInAction brings up absolutely nothing. A search of "#gamergate dreamfall" brings up no other tweets that share that same message. Why does some random joe that even declares he/she is a nobody mean anything in this conversation?

But hey, you brought up Dreamfall, so we can talk about that. You are aware that anti-Gamergate/SJW people went after this game because it had an "ableist" character in it, right? And this was not one person on the internet, but a culmination of posts on the official forum and Twitter. The character was meant to be unlikable, but people had to complain about her anyway. The ones defending Tornquist and the right to make what he wants were Gamergate (, [url=https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2kanmy/dreamfall_chapters_criticized_for_ableist/]KiA).

Again, there is only one side trying to censor and shame developers, and it is not Gamergate. If you want your argument to carry more weight, please find more relevant examples and sources. I am more than willing to listen, but so far all I see in your post is conjecture.