Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: But let's remember (Score 1) 474

See, as much as I love Occham, it's not at all necessary here. That post proves nothing even if it ISN'T shopped, and as far as I'm concerned it's irrelevant to ZQ.

Beyond that, you point out metacritic and mention 0/100 scores... but there's only one professional review on metacritic (50/100), and a user reviews on every other side. I'm SURE none of the scores could possibly be related to the gamer gate nonsense. This just reaffirms that ZQ is irrelevant to the discussion, especially when it should logically be about NG.

Comment: Re:But let's remember (Score 1) 474

None of the above is true -

Her game wasn't mentioned "in the list" - it was singled out for specific positive publicity before the list even started.

There was no "months later", it was a few weeks later IIRC. I suppose that changes it from "trading sex for publicity" to "trading publicity for sex". Whatever. Still not good.

Oh that changes everything, it was mentioned with a few other games before the list! The molehill has suddenly become... wait, no, still a molehill.

The strongest evidence against her is not any of this, but this is always what the anti-GG folk trot out. You expect no response to this?

She, personally, doxxed many of the prominent indie reviewers who disagreed with the blackout (the main thing). Once again, you can look up her twitter account.

Alright, done- her twitter account shows nothing at all that you mentioned. Drink coke, play again.

The problem is not even with ZQ, mostly, she's simply the straw that broke the camels back. The game reviewers have no problem with material gain in exchange for favourable reviews. Look at depression quest, for example. It's got one of the lowest user scores ever on metacritic[1] (deservedly - I've seen better results from 8 year olds using the same software that ZQ used - she isn't a techie at all and knows no programming language as far as anyone can tell) but was hyped up for special mention by NG.

Ok- care to mention any of these examples? you say it's not with SQ, and then continue to do nothing but talk about ZQ. I've noticed that's a bit of a trend with "gaters".

By all user reviews, this game is a piece of brown smelly stuff. Yet the journalist who singled it out for special mention in a positive light just happened to receive sexual favours from her not much later? Many gamers are neither naive nor stupid. When they pointed this out the media blackout occurred. Let me reiterate: The threads and users that were banned en masse were not those that sent death threats, but those that pointed out a shitty game got a positive spin by a journalist who a mere few weeks later slept with the game "dev"

Still talking about Quinn... and oh my, people were banned for reposting rumors and accusations against a person that weren't even based on reality? Don't bother lying to me or yourself- when this all started, it wasn't about a single mention before and during a list, it was over a supposed "review" that even her ex said didn't exist.

So far, that media blackout isn't working - gawker alone lost around 10 or so advertising contracts, including BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Adobe and other prominent businesses. The Streisand effect, FTW :-) The important thing in all of this is to continue ensuring that the media blackout (and collusion to blackout/blackball) doesn't work. So far, so good :-)

Funny how harassing businesses can affect them- except that they all seem to be doing juuuust fine. If anything, they're probably getting more hits thanks to GG continuing to harass folk. I'm actually a little conflicted about that, but it's supporting gawker, so it works I guess.

[1] Depression quest might just set a new record for worst game ever, at the rate it is going. Games which didn't even start without bugs got higher scores on metacritic (Big rigs:over the road - listed as one of the worst games of all times got a score roughly five times higher than depression question, in spite of all the publicity that DQ got).

Still talking about Quinn... did you have a point to any of that aside from making me waste time on twitter?

Comment: Re: THIS is the kind of thing that GamerGate is a (Score 1) 474

Yes, these things are indeed sexist! Thank you for pointing them out. Except that it HAS been thought of and discussed- and Anita Sarkeesian does a much better analysis of it than I ever could. Improving the way both genders are treated in games would be a wonderful thing- but what I take issue with is when someone says "Oh hey there's some sexism against women in these games", there are inevitably people who say "BUT SEXISM EXISTS FOR MEN TOO!" ...Ok, yes, it does, but can we, just this once, let THIS conversation started about sexism against women be about, oh, I don't know, women? Does the major lack of female role-models in gaming compared to male role models mean so little?

And before you even start- yes, female role models exist- but for every female you provide I guaran-damn-tee you I can come up with 5 more males.

Comment: Re:But let's remember (Score 1) 474

Riiiight. That point might be a bit stronger if that "publicity" was a review or endorsement, rather than saying "Oh hey, this FREE software exists, and look at all these other things in the same category!" If the strongest evidence GG has against ZQ in regards to journalism is "a journalist said the name of her game once in a list with a bunch of other games and months later she slept with him and he never spoke of her game again", there really is NO BASIS WHATSOEVER for harassing her and saying it's about "ethics in gaming journalism."

Comment: Re: THIS is the kind of thing that GamerGate is ab (Score 1) 474

+1, posting anon to not undo my mods. Anybody who asks for the sauce needs to read this neogaf link. Some heroic person cataloged all of the #GG wrongness in one place along with all the links.

+1 for your link- quoting it for a little more visibility since it has more information than most places regarding the topic. Heck I'll even repost it here, for burning justice!

Comment: Re: THIS is the kind of thing that GamerGate is a (Score 1) 474

Ahhh, right, "censoring the topic." You're half-right on that point, but I'd say that a lot that was taken down in the early days of the "scandal" was for good reason. I'd argue that, were I a game developer who'd had an ex of mine post all the sordid details of my personal and private life to the internet, I'd want that info taken down too. Who she slept with in this case has no bearing at all on the coverage her game received, has no implications for the industry at large, and is completely irrelevant outside of "hey an Indie developer did a thing." So, while censoring something is a good way to Streisand Effect your way into the stratosphere, there was still legitimate reason for the removal of the material.

Where I disagree with you is on your second point. Perhaps you're right in saying no one went after other women because of the scandal. However, the events AROUND the scandal, such as women coming out in support for having this information taken down, have been harassed, doxxed, threatened with all sorts of awful things... all for daring to say that a woman's sex life is irrelevant to "gaming journalism." Granted, most of these women were already being harassed for daring to speak out against sexism in games, but it's certainly seemed like it's gotten worse to me. I'd also disagree that they "injected" themselves into the discussion- they attempted to participate in the talk, same as anyone else. The only real difference is that they actually have some visibility thanks to what they do in relation to games.

Comment: Re:But let's remember (Score 1) 474

So, by that logic, if a member of my test team is writing a list of software, and the software I wrote is rightfully included for being applicable, this is somehow corruption and I have a relationship with them? Are people in the industry no longer allowed to even be friends with eachother?

Comment: Re:THIS is the kind of thing that GamerGate is abo (Score 1) 474

So... have you considered the simple solution of getting a new tag, and denouncing the people who've been harassing/doxxing women? Then possibly you could stop making this about fighting "SJW"s and actually focus on game journalism.

Comment: Re:THIS is the kind of thing that GamerGate is abo (Score 1) 474

Funny, the way the mod system can be used to silence a conversation just because someone disagree with their views. It's almost as if the people trying to silence feminist viewpoints are acting unethically in regards to games journalism and discussion.


Comment: Re: THIS is the kind of thing that GamerGate is a (Score 1) 474

Well, here's the thing, though- I don't like Zoe Quinn at all. If that blog post was true in the least, I think she's an awful person, and that's bad.

However, that doesn't have a damn thing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism", or whatever drivel they're on about. Her sex life is irrelevant to the development work she's done, and the gaming industry as a whole. As you say, if the roles were reversed here and a man had done this to a woman, yes- it would be awful! However, do you think for one MOMENT that it would have gone on this long and been this big of a deal?

So, no, criticizing Zoe Quinn in and within itself is not misogyny. However, using her private life and personal relationships to go after other important women in the gaming industry just for the crime of not wanting gaming journalism to cover Zoe's sex life IS misogyny.

Comment: Re:Yeah, right... (Score 1) 459

by Aerokii (#48363665) Attached to: Black IT Pros On (Lack Of) Racial Diversity In Tech
The articles linked apply to the article here on Slashdot just about as much as affirmative action does- and beyond that, several of those links were more than individual incidents but instead included data over time regarding systemic racism. In regards to the "poll question", I'd say yes, it's racist to ask to ask if "blacks are being too demanding of equal rights." The fact one must DEMAND equal rights at all because they are not being received is a huge problem on its own, and the phrasing there just reinforces a negative image that's pandering to a racist demographic.

All that being said, I don't really think affirmative action is a useful tool for what it's designed for- but when we're discussing an article talking about diversity in tech, attempting to derail it with "but... but 'reverse racism' unrelated to this topic!" isn't really all that helpful or useful.

panic: can't find /