You mean, why creation (i.e. game development) and critique (e.g. game journalism) should be kept mostly, if not absolutely separate?

Heck, I'm sure someone on this this thread is ecstatically glad to tell you why. ;)

Indeed, the film noir era is the sole place where your enemy stereotypes belong.

Ok, I have a few questions, I'm not really a conspiracy theory person. I work on logic, I work on the fact that I know people and that people follow a degree of twisted logic. You can generally follow it, even if it's logic based on emotions.

Note, this is a thought dump, I'm not bothering to organize my thoughts, just vocalize them
-------
The mailing list: I've been in IRC Chans, Mumble Servers, MMO Guilds, hell I even play Mafia on the forums here. Even in these groups there's a core group of friends. A mailing list between 15 people who have rotated from site to site? Reasonable. 50-60? Less reasonable. The alleged 150? No, humans don't remember that many people on a regular basis. Even for friends of friends it's a bit excessive.

Let's not also forget that these are websites that are constantly fighting for an increasingly smaller piece of the ad revenue pie as youtubers become more prominent. Talking about what they're going to and what they're not going to print doesn't make sense because these people are also their competitors. So why? Why would you call to moderate a forum that's civil, especially when it isn't your own?

I don't completely buy the idea that they're doing it to progress an agenda, I've seen the list, it's not everyone that has presented that agenda, and there are also plenty of people who are missing from it in general if it was talking about articles. But I'm kinda at a loss to explain.

-------

Ok, next issue. The suppression of discussion of the ethics surrounding Nathan Greyson's article and if I recall the allegations of him and an games contest judge sleeping with Zoe Quinn

Big Question, short form: Why?

Long Form: The Streissand Effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect) has been pretty well documented. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that by suppressing conversation you don't really suppress it, you explode it all over the internet. Hell, confining the conversation to a few places is also the easy way to let it fade away. Most people didn't give a damn to begin with, we rolled our eyes and just moved on with our lives. So why? Why make such a big deal out of it in the forum of The Escapist? Why make such a big deal of it being on Reddit or 4chan?

------------

August 28, the day of the 'Gamers Are Dead' Articles.

Ok, Big Question, Short Form: WHY?!

Long Form: This has to be the dumbest thing they could have done. And It makes absolutely zero, ZERO sense to me, and I keep trying to wrap my brain around it. It's one of the most unprofessional actions that I have ever witnessed in my life. And it was written so broadly that while the argument could be made that it was only meant to target the assholes, it could have been targeted towards them a lot better.

Most people who work retail get spit on, verbally abused, treated like mental inferiors, and worse because of their jobs. There's a whole subreddit called Tales from Retail, I encourage you to read it if you really don't believe me. But on the clock, they remain professional, they don't scream at everyone, they don't rage in public, they don't take the broadest brush and paint everyone with it. Retail workers.

So what caused this? What made them so angry that instead of ignoring it, instead of pushing it under the rug, instead of calmly trying to have this conversation with everyone, they lashed out like this. Because I have to say, that many articles in a day isn't just random, it isn't a coincidence.

----------------

Ok, big question, and thank you htown for being the one to bring it up because I don't think it was ever mentioned where I could see it.

Why oppose the Gamergate movement like people have? Why try to paint the movement as misogynistic, racist, that we just want our toys to be our toys and no one else can play in the sandbox (Sandbox, seriously it's a fucking beach bigger then the coast of North and South America put together). What do people get out of this, what do people get from the twitter fights, and the circling wagons? Why is it so impossible to get people to accept this, and why has one subgroup who wasn't even the prime focus of this start jumping in like it has?

I...don't know. The only thing I can see is that they lose something if games journalism is forced to adhere to a code of ethics? That they want to desperately claim that Gamers are horrible people for some other reason? This is the thing that doesn't make any sense to me, in fact it's the one thing that makes the least sense. I would have thought that everyone benefits from journalists that are professional and ethical, and articles that are well researched and unbiased. Am I missing something? Please tell me if I am because I can't understand it.

Guys, I'm starting to get kind of sick of seeing this thread pop up all the time. Considering that this entire... thing... is allegedly not about the person in the title at all in any way whatsoever, would you please start using one of the other, more neutrally titled topics instead?

Yes, I recognize the irony of bumping the topic by posting here.

I can agree with this, but the last time we tried to push people to the Gamergate thread

http://www.gog.com/forum/general/the_gamergate_news_thread <---- This one. People just sorta, ignored it. I'm not really sure why, it's at least a place to discuss everything about the whole thing.

Isn't this about news though? I feel like they wouldn't appreciate SJWs like me going in there and arguing about things

We've just been having discussions about shit, I'd rather have an honest conversation then (let's be honest here), someone popping up, bitching about the topic and leaving without actually staying to debate anything, that kinda gets old.

Honestly, I think the problem is that there are some people in the GG movement (a minority, but a vocal one) who are misogynists (I could name at least two) and are worried about people taking away their toys, which should only be for boys. Because there is no hierarchy, a 12 year old kid who goes on twitter and calls Anita Sarkeesian a whore and makes some comment about wanting to harm her family, gets as much attention as an adult who believes there are genuine concerns with corruption in journalism and is able to articulate why.

its similar to the protests over the michael brown shooting. Some people protested legitimately, some people looted. The looters really didn't have anything to do with the protests, but its easier to focus on the looters and criticise everyone as a result, rather than look at the people with a legitimate issue with what happened.

To me, that is why it is so important to put forward sound arguments in support of GG, so that it is less easy to criticise. That benefits the GG movement. Right now, there are still people who think GG is about Zoe Quinn sleeping with journos for favourable reviews or lying about donating to charity and that just makes the whole movement appear that much weaker.
That's what I mean though. This is the topic to have discussions about shit. I don't think they want a legit thread about GG news to be flooded with people like me discussing shit :)

Well, that's the thing, as far as points? That's something I brought up in the news topic, because it's important. Let me go copy pasta that again. It's something we're still discussing though, in a few places, and it's hard to unite all of the differing elements.

Yes there's a problem with no hierarchy, but as far as the 12 year old kid, I have a question to ask. We keep hearing that there's a 'lot of misogyny' in gamers. My question becomes, how many of those are true misogynists, and how many are assholes that realize that a button can be pressed to get someone upset and off their game? How many actually have deep seated issues, and how many will probably sit there stammering because their script didn't get followed and their at a loss on what to do?

I'm not trying to belittle, talk down, or pretend it doesn't exist, I'm simply bringing up another possibility. Assholes and bullies are incredibly uncreative, AMAZINGLY uncreative when it comes to their insults and shit. Case in point: For the past 15 years I've been making people who have talked about having relations with my mother the night before stammer because I accuse them of necrophilia. The sound of them trying to come back from that was fairly hilarious for a while.

As far as people are going to thinking Gamergate is about Zoe Quinn, that's also because places like Cracked are running articles written by her about Gamergate, or Leigh Alexander writing an article about it for Time, or the New Yorker's articles attacking it without trying to do research.

And that's not even discounting TotalBiscuit trying to set up a round table with Games Journalists to discuss this. I'm not going to say that every journalist out there is guilty of this, but there have been a number of very loudly vocal ones.

It does apply everywhere. It just means that without experimenting, you can tell that two things are related but not which caused the other (or maybe both were caused by a third thing).

So in this case, we can say it's very probable that the news articles were coordinated in response to the Zoe Quinn scandal, but we can't tell for sure unless there's other proof too (like if that shows up on the mailing list discussion).

Personally I believe what makes the most sense based on what I have seen, but I'm always open to changing my mind if new evidence comes out. I think that's the only way to function in normal everyday life since there's no way to get absolute certainty for most things.

I think the concern is that so many people are forced into it that it's hard to tell if someone legitimately agreed or not (or maybe she's one of those people who doesn't think it's possible to agree without coercion).

Hee hee, yeah :P I probably agree with most of the ideas of real feminism, but I generally avoid using the word because everybody has a different definition of it and I'm never quite sure what people mean when they say feminism (at least until they expand upon what they're talking about).

There are a few reasons, one being the perceived origins of the movement from a group whose sole aim was to harass the so called 'SJWs' and Quinn in particular. Note I say perceived.

Another would probably be the constant attacks on 'SJWs' generally (sort of fits in with the first I know, but I think its less about harassment). I know 'SJW's are attacking Gamergateers too, and you could argue for weeks about who started it, but end of the day that doesn't matter, the fact its happening is enough.

There is Gamergate's somewhat unclear set of agendas, its not just about journalism, or at least its not for everyone under this particular banner.

Also some people are just using it as cover to troll Gamergate for whatever reason trolls have.

I could go on I'm sure but I won't.

Personally speaking, I don't see any reason there should be opposition to Gamergate per say if it is the sort of movement some people claim it to be. Many people on both 'sides' have said there are problems in gaming journalism (even journalists themselves), and would like to debate the issue. I don't see how a Gamergate agenda to protect the creative freedom of developers would conflict with the goals of many so called 'SJWs' for more inclusiveness in gaming (I would guess most don't want to force change, and most don't expect it in every single game). The two are not mutually exclusive but while the tone of the debate, the insults, the harassment from BOTH sides continues they will be.

So we should use the one thats about 'some feminist drama', or the one thats for 'gamergate news'? Neither of which is particularly neutral either?

I don't think any one of the three available topics on the subject is ideal, two were covering the same idea, and the news thread seems somewhat more exclusive, and I echo htown1980's statement that they might not appreciate arguing. I actually think its a compliment to GOG that many people who would debate the issues in the news thread have stayed away and seem to be respecting the nature of the thread. And finally, not sure GOGers as a whole would appreciate a 4th more neutrally titled thread.

I don't know, some people are talking about making a concrete list of points and demands, it's gonna be a process.

Myself? Honestly? I'm taking a break from all of this. In the past two weeks I have seen a side of the internet and people that I do not like to see. I've seen people doxxed, threatened, blacklisted, I've seen one person turn her back on her dreams because of fear of the people who are attacking gamergate people. I see one guy getting sent syringies full of an unknown liquid. All of this because of video games. I gotta be honest, after the 3rd time I've debated giving it all up and selling my gaming stuff, I think I just need to not see if for a while and remember that this is supposed to be a hobby, and a fun one. When the stress of being a gamer is starting to peek the stress of living with an alcoholic, then it's time to step back for a while.

Might still chat in here, at least you people are mostly sane, but I'm not going to follow the news, it's just too much.

No, not because of video games, but because of a certain fringe group of people (call them SJWs, third-wave feminists, hipsters with degrees in cultural studies, cultural Marxists, cultists, pod people, crazy assholes, whatever...) who wish to co-opt vidya for their own agenda. And the phenomenon isn't exclusive to video games either, as could be seen with the abomination they created with atheism+.

Giving up on video games won't solve anything. Putting these people in their place will.

Culture war. It exists and has had many casualties. Sadly, gaming has now somehow been pulled into the meat grinder. It's a letdown for me, but we have to stand our ground. I know people like these SJW types. For those of you who don't think it's a big deal... it is. These academia brain washed morons will not give up. They ARE a cult of synthesis... hive mind, unity consciousness, whatever label you want to call it. The tops in their field seek nothing less than the homogenization of the entire human race and the eventual end to individual thought, liberty, or awareness. They would love to turn the entire human species into one big, tolerance loving bee colony. They're the communist hippie version of the Borg on Star Trek. They believe that RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.

It is not.

I remember a gaming convention on a university campus where the local LGBT group decided to "protest" by marching through all the gaming rooms mid-session. Not even sure what the point of it was except some unfocused message that gaming was somehow not as gender balanced as they wanted.

Frankly, the room I was in, they were just ignored, can't interrupt important die rolling! Must have been about 5-7 years ago.