Hey you're the one with no point to argue and resorting to ad-hominem attacks and undefined subjective terms. If you want to debate the issues you have with this movement, please post some here or PM anyone who's participated. If you just want to engage more in meaningless dogma on dogma ''discussion'', I see no one stopping you from going to Neofag or Neogaf or whatever.

Also, Tim Schafer's new project is a risky investment : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFX0f_YUn1I

Of course it is a risky investment. Corwdfunding is often a risky investment.

Just leaving this here...

http://kukuruyo.com/comic/gamergate-life-67-english/

Yer first link is dead end - and the second user-name / password restricted, As of now.

So jafequeso - what's up? OP and all.

lol the OP is outdated. Oh and here's a little something about an SJ-driven antiGG biased site that is commonly quoted around here and other places : http://matthewhopkinsnews.com/?p=2963

Not directly connected to GG or SJWs, but with the recent developments at universities etc:

oligarchs

You can jump right to minute 47:00.

An interesting documentary.

Interesting.

And I thought gamergate supporters had very vocally and with some finality thrown "Matthew Hopkins" out of the movement after he proudly hunted, personally contacted and de facto threatened hundreds of Randi Harper's Patreon supporters with doxxing and legal action, drawing on personal data acquired through a leak.

To be honest, that was one of the sole moments in 2015 I saw a shred of decency emerging on KiA, when at least a few of them told "Hopkins" Sam Smith what a piece of shit he is and how he brings the movement nothing but a bad name and confirmation of the stereotype.

But, *sigh*, hey, let's rather count on gamergate supporters to welcome clear cut harassers and black holes of media ethics back at the earliest convenience, shall we?

Agreed with most of the video's informative content. Not with the crappy litigable title and the entire tone of course, that's just laughable hateful drivel. Double Fine is perpetually in danger of insolvency, and their last wave of layoffs only happened around Christmas last year, which just doesn't point at any kind of financial stability; and the "investment" option on fig is definitely geared towards all too rich fans, not actual investors who assess risk vs. gain.

I wish the accountant who made that video would strictly keep to topics of accounting. Instead, he's doing a lot of videos the topic of which he knows zip about – you know, ludology, sociology, narratology, the usual. All the "analysis" done with bare hands and, occasionally, a big hammer instead of the precise tools academic research has provided other people with.

I also wish that Double Fine's evident financial problems would be discussed in good faith, instead of just because Tim Schafer happens to have retweeted a Tropes vs. Women video back then, thus making him a target of gamergate supporters, which in turn Schafer has well countered since then.

In short, this is precisely the wrong thread for this discussion if any air of a good faith/sincere debate is to be preserved. Schafer is a gamergate target because he spoke out against gamergate – which perfectly mirrors e.g. the only relevant criterium for "corruption" used by deepfreeze.it.



Added December 31st:


A "snarky video" wouldn't imply (a) fraud and (b) more specifically, a Ponzi scheme. These are ralphretort level exaggerations that have no basis in reality. They in fact claim illegal proceedings on the side of Double Fine, and we all know that's not what's happening. Double Fine's trouble, after all, is that Double Fine just plain wants to make games. Not rip off anyone. The accountant leaves the path of wisdom and abandons his teachings when his findings don't match his fixed conclusion.

The video becomes uninformed hateful drivel.


The harassment started when Schafer retweeted the Tropes vs Women video. It's a simple undeniable truth. It exploded when Schafer commented on gamergate and on female representation in video games.

Gamers have a huge, huge problem with feeling insulted by a simple joke at their expense. It's a MASSIVE CULTURAL PROBLEM that needs to be addressed ASAP.
http://www.kotaku.com.au/2015/09/we-need-to-stop-telling-people-to-kill-themselves/

Gamergate supporters have that same problem times one hundred.

Today, the problem basically constitutes gamergate's raison d'être. I'm hearing "the journalists insulted us" as a reason for gamergate's existence ever so often when (a) that's bullshit, (b) it's an all too simplistic 'they' enemy concept and (c) it's not even clear who "us" is, because I sure as hell wasn't insulted at all, and I've been a "gamer" for more than a quarter century.

Double Fine had no failed Kickstarter, and that's where the uninformed drivel only begins (they had, in my opinion, a failed Early Access attempt, but fuck Steam for that stupid concept). Double Fine has delivered Broken Age by investing their own money into the game; they could have just cut back on content. Now, years after the problem became apparent, gamergate supporters are starting to criticise the budgeting, even though they're neither backers nor interested in DF's projects. And they're practically always starting their criticism like total beginners, with the idiotic "3.3 million budget" fallacy.

I've been a backer, I've criticised Broken Age's budget explosion wayyyyyy before gamergate started, and I'm absolutely not on board with the way fig operates.

And I still think that Tim Schafer is a great guy, a brilliant game designer and a positive force in innovative indie games.

The ad hominem and the insinuations are where the gamergate witch hunt starts.


I'm afraid I can not do your research for you. I will not just explain literary theory, feminist theory or basic concepts of sociology to you. I did my fair share of explaining in two threads, though no one seemed to listen, and so I'm done with it. Turns out that before I could even continue to do that, I'd have to compile a 500+ bullet point gamergate amnesia list, the deeply basic stuff you continuously forget because you really, really want to. That's why in one, two, three years, you'll still find uninformed losers arguing "cherry picking"/"games turn into sexists"/"calling US misogynists"/"censorship" at Anita Sarkeesian.

Opinions are very important, but a pile of opinions doesn't tantamount to "the truth". For that, you'll have to start learning before you form an opinion.

Maybe search for a feminism 101 website. Get up to speed with cultivation theory. Find out what use the identification of stereotypes in narratives is, and the long history of this kind of analysis. Listen to what the people actually say instead of what snippets detractors present to you. Start with Sarkeesian's/Quinn's UN speech. Investigate, compare and contrast where video game 'journalism' started out and where it is, because and despite of those beginnings, now. Get some information about how a non profit organisation works. Try to find out how successful play-asia's recent obvious marketing ploy was. Get some statistics on the percentage of women in the gamersphere throughout the last 30 years.

Start literally anyhwhere.

You may find that the people you hate for no reason at all have, at the very least, far more worthwhile things to say than some harassing internet idiot who thinks it's fun to force the hashtag #feminismiscancer on people in dozens of tweets.

Holy shit what happened to the electricity grid?? lol no power for 2 hours. Anyhoo, late reply:

I thought for like a whole 5 minutes about what you were talking about, trying to establish whether I know this guy. I'm not certain about this guy's role in the dox threats and since I know very little of the incident, I'll check it out and comment on his character a bit later. But as far as forgiveness goes, I don't think he would've been forgiven that easily if even a minor figure like Alison Prime was still viewed with salt even though ''she'' barely did anything. Rest assured if he did dox or threaaten anyone, KiA wouldn't accept him. Hoe did he threaten them? Do they(victims) have screencaps?

Do you even understand how vague the term ''hateful'' is?? Please use context with it. You literally may be referring to a snarky video as ''hate speech'' or jokingly snarking about your disagreements with it. Like, what the actual fuck is ''hate'' to you? And in what context do you use it?

And what are these tools? What gives these tools credibility? Anyone can say their opinion, and the more opinions there are, the more arguments there will be and a higher chance of reaching base truths or the base truth. I don't know what tools you refer to but would really like to know what they are, since you seem to be comparing GG demands with using them as a standard (which isn't bad, inherently).

Tim Schafer is latched on to not because of his percieved slights, at least the one you mentioned. People on KiA are much more quick to bring his failed K$s to argument than the sockpuppet thing, which is just a little nickname nowadays. I haven't ONE person at all mentioning him liking an FF tweet, and either way he's not the only person that has.

I don't know what mean by ''target'', considering he'd be a target for anyone since he's more or less a one man Randy Pitchfork (I know, his name is not that), who is one man anyway. Plenty of people have spoken out against GG, and for prominent figures, ''gators'' do little more than looking at past content / tweets to make (dank) memes.

A good article on how misinformation was propagated because of bad fact checking and circlejeraking article content : http://www.pokebeach.com/2015/12/break-starter-pack-to-mostly-contain-reprints-of-random-cards Deals with the recent Pokemon TCG set reveal and its subsequent misinterpretation and misrepresentation.

Very classy, I might say, slightly sarcastically. ;-)

But I asked the OP quite earnestly. I want to know if he/she is up for it. And in case you want to make an earnest point yerself, I will listen.

That was kinda earnest. The OP is more than a year old. The thing started many wolf moons ago and this is a news thread where news is sometimes posted. This thread was made for news posting and the first two were the discussion threads at the time. But they both died out and this one didn't. So yah; that is the gist of it.

Didn't notice the edit. Its is truly sad that you have reply in edits to a post because of downrepping, but such is the state of things. Obviously it isn't unique to people who hold your opinions, since people who hold opinions contrary to yours AND people who don't even talk about this get downrepped frequently and bleed rep. If its easier for you, we can debate via PM and post screencaps here so everyone can read; or you could create a TWC account and we can debate in the fight club they have there.

I'll just number them since its night time and I'm too sleepy to endlessly edit quotes

1.Still not close to what ''hateful'' means;
It depends on what you call snarkiness; but if the company has declared that returns are completely potential in the license agreement, I wouldn't say someone isn't beyond reasonable criticism to say it can happen. Did the video say it was a Ponzi scheme? AFAISaw (I watched it all) it didn't do it; since he didn't say they'd be recycling funds from investors to enrich older investors. No, it is illegal. They compiled their LA in such a way as that the legal person receiving the money as per receipts and the legal person it actually goes to are two separate legal entities, without a legal relationship between eachother. In such a scenario, if the (legal) person the money is officially going to goes under, the money is still going to the actual (legal)person, who is by LA not liable to pay it back in the event of any repayment order.
Some people have the opinion that they are shady; and given Tim Schafer's previous budget mis-managements, I wouldn't say that is unwarranted. Ofc that is not the only reason why, but I trust people to be more scared by that rather than a meaningless tweet, especially when the man has no real impact on anything other than the game he is creating. And him assuming malice on DF's part is the same as you assuming innocence. Both have reasonable basis but objectivity is lacking.

2.Please just link to some harassment as you call it. An archived tweet? An unreasonable criticism? Anything? And why do you hold this guy being harassed as such a big thing when plenty of proGGs were harassed as well? That's a question of tone;
And pointing out double standards; when someone makes a joke about game journalists, its harassment? Again, what exactly does

No it doesn't. GG doesn't use insults from the media as an argument. It is a completely tonal disagreement as you said; and as you didn't notice, isn't put forth as an argument, and wasn't so in the email campaigns or at SPJAirplay.

And again, you're still using amorphous terms like ''BS'' and without even saying why. Like if you think its BS, please say why so. If its just a jab, it too is just ad hominem.

No failed kickstarter. But when they ask for 400K and get 3 million and got only 50% of their game done, you can't blame people for not being skeptical. And are you saying it was completely acceptable for them to go this far off budget and NOT finish the game? That we should be thankful that we got it at all? And early access is completely to blame for THEM not managing their budget? Its like leaving a drug addict in a pharmacy and suing the pharmacy when he / she injures themselves with an overdose. Ofc we could debate the value of early access, but not now.

Holy shit you make assumptions on assumptions man. What proof do you have that no GGer has contributed to DF's crowdfunds or has no interest in their work? I for a fact saw someone inn the first few posts who kickstarted BA ep1 on a KiA newspost.

What fallacy is that? Please do say it. AFAIK you don't spend a fortune buying drilling equipment without checking if an area has potential mineral reserves.

3.So sociological and feminist critique methods are objectively the best ways a game could be analyzed? And by extension the only only use of games as well as all art forms is materialistic in that they should be used as a tool for social change and the only parts worth analyzing are of those aspects only?
I fucking hate to say it but that is materialistic as shit. Like, really out there. Art is an expression of thoughts and feelings by an individual or group and is not a commodity or product but is a means to an end (means being creation of art and end being expression). And there shouldn't be anyone who decides for others an optimal or sole purpose of art.

And ''obvious'' marketing ploy? How is it obvious? What does ''obvious'' even mean in this context? And even if so, what is wrong that they rightly tweeted out that western ''cultural'' sensitivity was too high for the Japs to localize this game without controversy and to hence to get it from them? Saying the truth is bad?
Quoting didn't work properly in the last post. So a bump for showing up in notifications.

#StopGaymerGate2016

First we need #StartGaymerGate2016. Also; don't know if this a joke but it probably not : http://imgur.com/45H45KM

Wait a minute ; http://matthewhopkinsnews.com/?p=2600 , http://matthewhopkinsnews.com/?p=2618 , http://matthewhopkinsnews.com/?p=2626
You just flat out lied. That clown just searched for the mailing the Patreon hackers leaked and emailed her patrons that she defended Sarah Nyberg, and said that if she were arrested following an arrest of Nyberg, that he will give the info on the mailing list to the authorities; not that the authorities wouldn't have trouble finding it or that any decently crooked lawyer wouldn't dig them up.

Ofc what he did was still retarded since getting an email address from hacker exposed document is still shady as fuck. But harassment? Please point out the harassment in them.