Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn (Score 1) 693 693

Correlation is a probabilistic assertion of equality, "with X probability we can act as if A = B". So no.

You've failed at stats and logic.

I'm not going to get into grading their relationship but I don't see abuse. If the boyfriend wanted an exclusive claim on...

I only discussed it because you said GamerGate hates Anita and Zoe for the same reasons, which clearly isn't the case. And no amount of you saying it's true will make it true. Her cheating on her BF, or her cheating at all, doesn't matter. What does matter is she is abusive, manipulative and a liar. What also matters is who she cheated on him with, but whenever someone tries to talk about Nathan Grayson or Joshua Boggs it gets dragged down to accusations of slut shaming and being concerned with her sex life. Move past it, no one cares about her sex life except you. It's not about her, it's about a society of double standards that's being used to prevent discussion of a series of events around a horrible human.

I don't game.

But more importantly she seems to show a fairly high degree of knowledge of gaming.

And here in lies the problem, you don't game, so you know very little about it and CAN'T possibly know what she's talking about, but you're assuming she has a high degree of knowledge of gaming. I guess this is why you think you're such and expert in discrete math, statistics and logic.

Are you aware she doesn't write her own material?
Are you aware that she's consistently factually wrong about the games she "critiques"?
Are you aware that she doesn't actually play the games she "critiques"?
Are you aware that her footage is "borrowed" from Let's Play? too bad she doesn't credit her source material otherwise you might be

I can only assume you're not aware of any of this, but you believe her anyway. THIS is harmful to the gaming industry, games and gamers. It's someone saying art is misogynistic and makes people misogynistic and people who don't consumer that form of art are agreeing blindly because she's an "expert".

Again impossible. Anita's attention comes before GamerGate.

You're conflating what she's received in the past and her getting harassment anyway to her getting harassed and saying it's coming from a group without proving that group is doing anything of the kind to her.

Why is she getting attention for her involvement in GamerGate from the media?
Have you watched ABC Nightline that was just last week?
Have you read ANY article in the last 5 months on GamerGate?
Because just about everything is saying GamerGate is harassment campaign and has her face slapped on it, but nothing's actually providing proof there's ANY harassment coming from GamerGate.

This is literally what the argument against GamerGate is.

"Kotaku investigated Kotaku and found Kotaku is innocent of all wrong doings. Anyone holding Kotaku responsible for Kotaku's lack of ethics and requesting Kotaku be held to better ethical standards is harassing women and misogynistic." - Kotaku

"Misogynist are harassing women in the gaming industry according to Kotaku, let's talk to someone unrelated to the controversy. Why are misogynist harassing you in relation to the controversy?" - Mainstream Media

"ZOMFG!!111!11 I don't play games, but why is this person that doesn't play games being harassed by misogynist?!?!??!! Well I better get on the intertubes and give those misogynist a piece of my mind!!" - Public that doesn't know what the hell is going on

"Um... We're not harassing anyone... We just write e-mails to advertisers for shitty click bait gaming websites and chat with other gamers on twitter about shitty click bait journalist and gaming related stuff... person unrelated to the controversy is entitled to their opinion, but they're not an expert on gaming, they're full of shit and I don't personally like them." - #GamerGate

"MISOGYNIST!!!!11!1!!11!!" - Kotaku, Mainstream media, Public that doesn't know what the hell is going on


Comment: Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn (Score 1) 693 693


Hand in your nerd badge and GTFO, you've failed all logic and lose the internet -_-

You dislike person X therefore you dislike person Y for the same reason? No, I dislike person X because she's a hypocritical abuser, professional victim and people won't stop talking about her. Plus she's been give a free pass from being criticized for being hypocritical abuser and professional victim because of her gender. <== this is sexism at it's finest. If the genders had been reversed concerning the Zoe post, we'd be praising Zoe for being a strong independent women that called out an abusive ex. I know, I've actually praised women in the past for doing exactly that, but Eron gets shit on by people that NEVER even read his post, which has evidence FROM ZOE that she was an abuser. On top of this she's ACTUALLY used sex to further her career reinforcing the negative stereotype that that's how women in the industry operate.

She's rich brat that comes from a rich family and a horrible human being who's being defended for being a horrible human being at the expense of hardworking women and other indi devs just trying to make ends meet. She's taken advantage of her "privilege", real privilege, not this made up "you're white so you never had to work for anything in your life and the fact that you don't know that means your privileged" privilege, to ATTACK things like the WizzardChans, TFYC and GamerGate. AND SHE'S GETTING AWAY WITH IT!!

I dislike person Y, because she's a liar and a con artist that had NOTHING to do with the current situation, but inserted herself and claimed, without proof, people looking for ethics in journalism were attacking her. Even though THOSE people tracked down one of her harassers to HELP her and she's gotten a shit ton of media attention for slandering them.

Go read the comments on ABC Nightline's Youtube video with her, or their Facebook page, the VAST majority of commenters, including women, see right through it, but she's STILL held up by people like you as an example of how bad "gamers" are because they don't like being talked down to and told they're misogynistic shitlords for playing Mario because Peach is a "damsel in distress", by someone that plays a real life damsel in distress and HATES GAMES. Then when anyone so much as scratches their head in her direction, MISOGYNY!!!!.

Other than the fact that BOTH these women are using GamerGate as a spring board for attention they are completely unrelated. I hate a lot of people, most of whom are men, Jack Thompson, Nathan Grayson, Sam Biddle, Geordie Tait, Barnie the Dinosaur and the Red Power Ranger to name a few and I don't hate them all for the same reason, not even for remotely the same reasons. And God help you if you say no one else on Earth has a common hatred for Sam Biddle and Barnie the Dinosaur -_-

Comment: Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate (Score 3, Insightful) 693 693

Sex was inconsequential. Nathan was friends with Zoe going back as far as 2012, twitter history proves that. On top of that Nathan was thanked in the games credits, so even if they weren't having a sexual relationship, he was promoting his own game without disclosure and was friends with the dev he was writing about, without disclosure. Even if it was two days after he'd written about her, it's still proof their relationship was close enough he should have recused himself or disclosed the relationship.

Also the whole mess with Nathan Grayson was only the tip of the iceberg. Milo Yiannopoulos released the GameJournoPro mailing list, which was based of the JournoList mailing list that was a huge scandal in the mainstream media and got people fired back in 2010 for blacklisting and collusion, but hey didn't work for them lets start anther one. For the most part the GJP was harmless, but they did discuss blacklisting people, donating to patreons of gamedevs, how to narrate the GamerGate story, what game developers to suppress and what ones to promote, which is all collusion.

Then there's the "Gamers are Dead" articles, which discuss the death of the "Gamer" identity. 10+ nearly identically worded articles all released in 24 hours, sorry but if that doesn't prove collusion I don't know what does. These articles are ACTUALLY what got GamerGate going. I could have cared less about Zoe Quinn and Nathan Grayson, but the gaming media slandering an entire demographic that's supposed to be their customers? To what end? In defense of their poor behaviour and being asked to be more ethical? Yeah that didn't fly with me, and if you look at the Topsy graph you can see August 28th is where GamerGate starts to go in to full swing.

What's really funny though is at the end of the graph where #GamerGate is still getting 20K-25K tweets a day, most of the people I got into #GamerGate with aren't even using the tag anymore. We're all mostly following each other now, so using the tag to talk is pointless, we just read our regular twitter feeds, or spend time on KiA, or 8Chan. I'm pretty much just a twitter user myself, but I'm warming up to KiA. It's really easy to miss info on twitter and 140 characters sucks and encourages people to get into on sentence slap fights. Which is pretty much all you see on the #GamerGate tag now.

The big issue is people are SOOOOOOO hung up on Zoe Quinn, most of us didn't care about her in the first place, but we're forever stuck explaining the origins rather than talking about what's happened since. GamerGate has already been successful:
  • It had several sites update their ethical policies, The Escapist, IGN, and PC Gamer.
  • Journalist ARE using disclosures now.
  • It helped point out blacklisting and collusion in the industry, like the blacklisting of Allistair Pinsof.
  • Pushed the FTC along in updating their guidelines and they're investigating sites like Gawker.
  • Cost Gawker Media millions in lost ad revenue and forced them to retroactively update articles with associated links
  • As a bonus GamerGate's donated over $120K to various projects to get women into the industry (TFYC & BasedGamer), and charities (anti-bullying, suicide prevention, UNICEF, GamerFruit, etc..)

So whatever happens to GamerGate from here on out, it's already a win. People can throw all the crap they want at Gamers. Where people sit around and complain about the media or just accept it's corrupt and there's nothing to be done, we stood up and made an ACTUAL difference, even if people don't want to recognize it.

Comment: Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate (Score 1) 693 693

I would have just gone with, "Sex was inconsequential. Nathan was friends with Zoe going back as far as 2012, twitter history proves that. On top of that Nathan was thanked in the games credits, so even if they weren't having a sexual relationship, he was promoting his own game without disclosure and was friends with the dev he was writing about, without disclosure. Even if it was two days after he'd written about her, it's still proof their relationship was close enough he should have recused himself or disclosed the relationship."

Comment: Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate (Score 1) 693 693

... Calling someone a social justice advocate as a pejorative is insulting to that movemen...

No, no no, no no no. "social justice advocate" is not the same as "social justice warrior" and you don't get to change the phrasing you're arguing about now just to suit your need.

...I find the use as a pejorative offensive.

But apparently I'm not allowed to be offended by people who are deliberately using a pejorative with the intention of offending others.

We'll there's your problem, you find it offensive and don't like other people defining it for you. Maybe think about why "Gamers" are so mad they've been labeled cis-white-male shitlord misogynerds?

Comment: Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn (Score 1) 693 693

I only just read about that last night. Something about her trying to claim Linux == GamerGate == 8Chan therefore Lin... MISOGYNNNNNYYYYY!!!!

I don't know enough about her to bring her up here, but apparently she's pissed at Linus for being a dick? which everyone on /. I'm sure can agree to, but I think most of us would shrug it of as, "so"...

I'm not aware of her profiting off of it just yet though, but I'm sure she's working up to it.

Comment: Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate (Score 1) 693 693

The claim you made was "everyone knows", which is an appeal to popularity. The terms SJW and Social Justice have alternate meanings to lots of people, what you're presenting is, "everyone agrees with me" while MANY people are disagreeing with you, RIGHT IN THIS THREAD. Therefore "everyone" does not believe what you say they believe. The example you provided ( links to a page using RationalWiki and twitter as sources so it's just as relevant as Googling "Social Justice Warrior" and aggregating the top ten results, which clearly defines it as something other than you're trying to define it as.

I'm not insulting you personally, just pointing out that you're clearly wrong with your argument in saying, "everyone" as a way to BTFO people that clearly are not agreeing with you.

I support the dictionary definition of feminism:

the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men

But that doesn't mean I support crack pots that claim to be "feminist" so they can justify attacking a man over his shirt.

How feminism is defined and how it's perceived are two entirely different things. In one case it's dictionary definition is used as, "You support equal rights for women, great you're a feminist then!!", on the back end it's used to justify out right attacking people that are "anti-feminist" as being "anti-women" and the use of positive discrimination, which has NOTHING to do with women's rights and everything to do with forcing people to comply with a minority ideology. I've seen people, women, claim to be egalitarians because they don't like the public perception of feminism and get practically lynched for it. I REALLY want feminism to survive, but if it's going to, people need to separate "I support equal rights for all" feminist from the "Boys are dumb, throw rocks at them" feminist.

TL;DR - How something is defined in a book is not always how it's used in practice.

Comment: Re: misspelling (Score 1) 693 693

It's a form of adhom, "Look at all the horrible things he's said about WOMEN!!", rest of anything else he has to say is irrelevant. It's usually followed by, "HE'S THE LEADER OF GAMERGATE!! IF YOU SUPPORT ETHICS IN JOURNALISM YOU SUPPORT MISOGYNY!!!", because you can't obviously agree with people on some points, but disagree with them entirely on others.

Comment: Re:Link please? (Score 1) 693 693

Six anonymous female developers, at the very beginning of GamerGate. I read them and the articles were highly suspicious, I'm skeptical when someone won't put a name (even a sudo name) on something they've said. Others who commented in favor of GamerGate, like all the devs that also support GamerGate, were quickly threatened and had their games boycotted... Which turned out to be a big mistake on the oppositions part. They called for a boycott, GamerGate had the game green-lit.

Both sides are a minority of gamers overall, GamerGate (pro and anti) is some 150,000 accounts on twitter, Facebook groups, KiA (pro subreddit >25,000), GamerGhazi (anti subreddit ~4,750 subs)... The opposition seems to be primarily made up of non-gamers, or people that hate gaming and gamers at the very least. The pro-GamerGate side is MUCH larger than the opposition. Then there's everyone else that just doesn't care one way or the other and/or points and laughs at both sides for being idiots.

Here's a guy that did a really nice network analysis of the twitter tag, who suffered a lot of abuse for it.

Comment: Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate (Score 1) 693 693

Pretty much what you said. Every single threat attributed to GamerGate hasn't even mentioned GamerGate. Some random guy on twitter threatened me and said he was going to rape my 3yr old daughter then burn down my house. You know what I did? Blocked the guy, turned off twitter and went to bed.

What I didn't do was screen cap it and send it flying around the internet to make myself look like a huge target for trolls that LOVE to go after people that give them attention and then blame people playing pokemon for threatening me despite pokemon not even being mentioned in any of the threats.

The media has created a huge issue here. Instead of blame being placed where it should be and seeking out the perpetrators of the harassment now everyone's taking the lazy way out, "It was GamerGate", which gives real trolls a perfect operating environment. Something Awful, GNAA, Bill Wagnor's Crew, /b/, Lizzard Squad are all riding the train now because they know they won't be called out for actual harassment. They don't support GamerGate and actively antagonize the pro camp as well, but it's not as much fun because the media doesn't report all the pro-Gamer people that are getting harassed. If it's not getting lulz, why do it? Dox or SWAT some unknown opponent of GamerGate and BAM!! instant news coverage with the victim on the front page or on an international show crying their eyes out blaming someone you hate equally as much.

Comment: Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate (Score 1) 693 693

And everyone else knows

If you have to resort to claiming "everyone else" believes what you believe, despite evidence to the contrary, it probably means your wrong and/or bullshitting it.

It's pretty clear there are multiple people that don't agree with you, so who is "everyone else"? Just the people agreeing with you?

Comment: Re:She doxxed people as well... (Score 1) 693 693

Actually they've learned a lot. I'm a GamerGate supporter, but by continuing to put out click bait articles on GamerGate, which is a hot topic, they're keeping themselves in business because people are eating it up. It's clear when you read most comment sections on these articles or videos or sites like /. there are A LOT of people not buying the BS. They keep doing it because they don't care about creditability, or integrity, they're just trying to keep their crappy sites open by driving outrage. Yeah, GamerGate cost Gawker millions in ad revenue, but it's a drop in the bucket, I'm sure the increase in traffic from pro and anti GamerGate people alike is more than enough to post on quarterly site reports to drum up new advertisers. They'll keep doing it until it stops getting clicks then they'll move on to some other hot button.

What GamerGate's taught me though is the mainstream really isn't any better. I knew it wasn't great, but I always expected "real journalist" did some amount of fact checking and sourcing. As it turns out sourcing is:

Gawker: Kotaku said xxxx
Kotaku: Gawker said xxxx
Polygon: xxxx is true because Gawker and Kotaku
BBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBC, all other liberal media: Most gaming media agrees xxxx is true
BBC, MSNBC, ABC, CBC, all other liberal media for months after: ZOMFG!!!! WORLD ENDING BECAUSE xxxx!!!!! MISOGYNY!!!!

I'm a liberal Canadian, GamerGate is the first time I've EVER given any props to the conservative media, but at the very least Fox News hasn't crapped all over gamers on this issue (that I'm aware of) and Sun News (Canadian Fox) actually gave time to Jennie Bharaj to talk about the issue and plug her site BasedGamer which is one of the alternative game sites that's come out of GamerGate.

GamerGate, keeping women out of the industry by helping to raise $70K for TFYC to get women into game development and $50K to help women start alternative news sites... but misogyny right?

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.