I had only ever heard of her (even before #gg) in relation to harassment type stuff. She has made a game called Revolution 60 which is apparently ok (and free on iOS - although it looks like it uses in game purchases) so I will probably check it out.

Mangotron put up another Gamergate piece with a pro- and anti- both being interviewed. That's an archive.today link because there's a lot of suspicious stuff happening with the site right now. A lot of it is unproven, but enough of it is that it might be worth playing it safe for awhile.

Totally worth it for the comments where Tadhg Kelly claims to not be a game journalist. Between him and members of Destructoid pulling that card, it seems to be the go-to defense lately. "Oh, I can't be held to any kind of standard because I'm just a blogger."

Great interview. Milo Yiannawhatever is confirmed to be the pro-GG supporter who's going to go on the program, too.

So basically she's a developer who made a tiny little game (I did look at the iOS page, game doesn't look very appealing to me) who is using this situation more to further herself then anything else? And why are people taking her so seriously? Why is she walking around like she owns the goddamn Internet? All I can see is someone who lives for being into this and honestly that's not a good thing, in fact I ran into a lot of those types in Roleplay groups...

I hope that guy gets the same treatment. Pakman should be able to rip him apart as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RVlCvBd21w

Edit: You know, TotalBiscuit, who as of this moment is the top commenter, brings up a really good question when it comes to how these games work. Where's the evidence? Where's the evidence that there's exclusion in gaming, that gaming makes people sexist or misogynistic? Because that's part of the thing that's been bothering me, is the lack of evidence. It's easy to throw anger at a side and use a label, hell I'm guilty of it as well, but a lot of what we're seeing is getting thrown around without actual evidence, solid, HARD evidence. And both sides do it, although it's a question of who throws the accusations around. And it's pretty sad.

Totally. It'll be fun to watch either way.

I'm just glad we're done with the universally soft journalism; we should insist more people hit members of both sides like pinatas with their journalism sticks until the delicious, chewy truth ends up spilling out. I'm sick of the thinly-veiled advocacy masquerading as objective reporting we've been getting up until this point.

Well, there were some studies who tried to find that out.
I'll try to find the ones that aren't largely behind pay wall.

http://vhil.stanford.edu/pubs/2013/fox-chb-sexualized-virtual-selves.pdf
(impact of sexualised avatars on men and women)

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11199-009-9695-4
(a study using Leisure Suit Larry, The Sims and Pac Man :-))

If you have access you can find some more articles on science direct
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103185710220

I was explicitly trying to not exaggerate. That chat was going fast and horrible. I'll see if I have kept any screenshots of that twitch chat but if I even took any I think they are on the hard drive that doesn't work anymore. Maybe on my external backup. I'll have a look.

Because it was done by Brand Watch.
Brand Watch offers programs to monitor social media but they don't have any special twitter access that allows them to see deleted posts from the past. So when they analyze tweets from months back they only get the non-deleted ones.

I stand by my point. Disavowing is not enough for me. If you can kick asshole member out, do so. If you cannot do that (and if you also cannot drown their voices for what reason ever), be prepared to be seen as in one group with them.
And yes, that goes for atheists, feminists, political parties etc. as well.
Just repeating "He/she doesn't speak for me! He/she's just accidentally part of the same group!" is not good enough for me. Kick them out, drown them out or accept that they are part of your group and live with the consequences. If you cannot accept the consequences, you might better get out of that group.

Both sides are shitty, no question there. While I find some complaints a bit ridiculous (like "Nobody wants to interview me although I have so much to say! The media is trying to silence me!") the doxxing and the threats on both sides are unacceptable.
And to use the doxxing and threats of the other side to justify using doxxing and threats as well is a complete no-go from my point of view.
You'll always find a worse asshole than yourself. Still that isn't a way to prove that you're a good person.

Eh, wut?

Edit: Spelling. Even the same mistake as yesterday. Argh.

There is no evidence. What they are trying to do is to repeat the same lie as much as possible until people consider it a fact and stop questioning it. That's probably the only strategy when you can't support your position with factual evidences.

Because it was people she perceives as being part of the GG movement that attacked her after she tweeted to what she calls one the GG victims.
"I did one simple @ reply to one of the main victims several weeks back, and got a flood of things I simply couldn’t stand to read directed at me."

See above.

See above.
She got attacked by GG people, she felt fear, she "crossed the street", she felt it was wrong, she wrote an article about it.


Also I think this reddit is interesting to read:

I think this reddit thread is interesting to read:
http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2k29qc/gamergate_condemns_doxxing_felicia_day/

As well as the reactions she got on twitter for her article:
https://twitter.com/feliciaday/status/525056587866845184

A person there identifies as GG and gets comments like
"there are still monsters wearing your uniforms" and
"Your voices aren't loud enough to drown out theirs."
("theirs" being doxxers and assholes)
"My point is you can't GG was _born_ in that poison. It can't purge its own DNA."

And that's much how I feel about GG as well. It's so rotten now that as much as people try no good will come while using that label. I do believe that there are many, many people among the GGs that just want to improve things, be it gaming journalism, be it gaming culture, be it the view on gamers, be it whatever. But they won't accomplish anything if they still cling to their GG label. And that's sad in more than one way.

I've only speed-read that one and I'm not so surprised by the results because pointing fingers at sexy games is a little bit useless when they could just have done the same with sexiness in general. They could do the same study with poster advertising at bus stop between an ad for christmas sweater (like C&A) and an ad for women underwear (like "Aubade"), results would be the same I think. Maybe Victoria's Secret is the biggest misogynist business around then? :o)

That theory about misogynist advertisements has actually being around for a long time.
And protests against advertisement with sexualised or scantly clad women are pretty common, I think.

Yep, I know those protests pretty common. In fact, I was just baffled that researchers wasted money to do the same study on games while it's common sense that you would get the same results than with ads/films/pictures. I hope the volunteers got paid :)

No offense taken, my OP wasn't clear enough maybe. After all, it's still morning in Europe ;)