Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Indeed (Score 0) 317 317

Christ, try being original with your trolling

?

It's been repeatedly proven that the "harassment" has been the professional victims using alternate accounts to send themselves messages - and it's also why none of these supposed "threats" have ever been reported to the police.

That's a complete lie. But it is what Gamergaters tell newcomers so they can feel good about supporting a campaign of harassment.

Do you feel good about not merely ignoring the high profile threats and harassment prominent women in tech are experiencing, but also smearing the victims as liars, and spreading false stories to try to get people to disbelieve them?

Comment: Re:Harrassment and frivolity (Score 1) 83 83

OK, but the settlement is unlikely to be for more than pennies (we're talking Youtube royalties here), so what lawyer is likely to take on the case?

Despite the view of many that the legal system is some kind of lottery where you can win arbitrary amounts of cash, the reality is that the civil system generally works on the basis of damages with any punitive element being small or non-existent. Most of the time the high awards you hear about for some injury or another are a product of high medical bills being involved, not because a judge wanted to make Macy's pay for having slippery floors (or whatever.)

Comment: Re:Indeed (Score 4, Insightful) 317 317

Got any evidence ?

Plenty. You can start here.

Nobody's trying to "smear" GamerGate, we read what you write in your own words on 8chan, /r/KIA, and under the #gamergate hashtag.

Your entire movement started when Adam Baldwin tweeted links to YouTube videos smearing a female game dev's sex life because her ex-boyfriend wanted to run a hate campaign against her. That information is public domain. It's not something I just made up. It's the ORIGINS OF GAMERGATE. It's where the hashtag came from.

Forget the links I point to you above, take a look at the last few articles on Slashdot concerning gender - concerning subjects as minor and unthreatening as whether marketing a chemistry set specifically at girls might have the opposite affect to that intended (ie doing so might decrease interest by girls.) Something many of us would like to discuss, but can't, because you fuckers SHITPOST over EVERY. SINGLE. DISCUSSION, doing your absolute best to discourage anyone from even discussing the subject by flooding the comments section with misogynist trolls and off topic bullshit.

If you really are so stupid as to think that GamerGate is something to do with Ethics in Gaming Journalism, you might want to actually look into the movement. You might even want to look at the "journalists" it allies itself with.

Because if it did, it wouldn't:

- Do everything possible to prevent discussions of women in tech. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".

- Harass female game devs constantly, because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".

- Talk non stop about so-called "SJWs" and never mention journalists. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".

- Demand Slashdot ban discussions related to diversity in tech. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".

- Call JACK THOMPSON "BASED DAD", a lawyer who has actually tried to ban games, while calling Anita Sarkeesian a "censor" or "authoritarian", because she produced a video identifying tropes she feels are sexist in various video games. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".

- Support the "journalism" of Milo Yiannopoulos, because he certainly has NOTHING to do with "ethics in (ANY) journalism" FFS.

- Pretend a mass harassment campaign against prominent women in journalism is not going on, pretending instead it's some kind of fund raising stunt (even though it doesn't apparently help any of the targets that it's going on), because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".

Do you get the picture?

Comment: Re:Indeed (Score 0) 317 317

(Third attempt: reposted due to abusive moderation. Interesting how the moderation on virtually everything I post that's anti-harassment these days proves my point. What has happened to tech? What has happened to Slashdot? If I'd posted a year ago that a bunch of female devs would be suffering harassment up to and including rape threats and worse in an attempt to prevent them from speaking about problems they encounter, I'd have been laughed out of town. Now it's happening a significant number of people on Slashdot actively support that hatred campaign and are doing everything they can to silence anyone who opposes it.)

This little loaded troll is +5 Insightful? The one that calls a harassment campaign that's trying to silence women (and other minorities) in tech and their supporters through threats of violence "free minded geeks", and those who oppose them "authoritarian" and "apologists for censorship"? Because constant threats of violence is somehow pro-free speech, and encouraging people to evaluate games, highlighting problematic aspects, and encouraging developers to produce more interesting work is pro-censorship?

There are countries out there that welcome the "MRA/Republican/Stormfront/Racist/Misogyno-nerds" (a fairly decent description of a campaign of relentless online terror against women, blacks, and left wingers) and others that make up your little cesspool - the countries that support the kind of terror you inflict on those who refuse to kowtow to your demands. An Iranian actor just had to apologize for tweeting support for the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. Russia continues to push the bar as far as imprisoning gay people for being gay in public. Saudi Arabia punishes women for invading your traditional male space by, you know, driving and stuff.

Those are countries you guys would love. Why don't you fuck off there, and let the rest of us enjoy a diverse community in which people don't get rape and death threats for criticizing the Hitman video game?

Comment: Re:Indeed (Score 0) 317 317

Your post was downvoted for pretending people like Jenny Bharaj or Oliver Campbell are white male teenager, rather than a women and a black man.

I've never heard of either of these people, nor are they mentioned in my post.

At least be honest when you try to broadly paint a movement as something, as not to dismiss women and minorities like you did. You won't get down modded as much if you are truthful, rather than posting simple flamebait.

What the ever loving fuck are you talking about? Or is this a #notyourshield troll?

Comment: Re:Harrassment and frivolity (Score 4, Insightful) 83 83

I believe there's a concept called Slander of Title, but I'm not sure it actually results in serious damages being paid out, and quite honestly, how many YouTube contributors want to/can afford to pay for a lawyer to sue over what, at best, would be a tiny, measured in pennies, royalty check?

I don't actually buy the argument that this was a mistake. Rumblefish actually doubled down when they were called on that birdsong mistake mentioned in the summary, and Google backed them. I think Rumblefish knows they've found a loop hole, and Google are too scared of the larger copyright holders to vet their claims.

Comment: Re:Indeed (Score -1, Troll) 317 317

(Repost due to abusive moderation. Interesting how the moderation on virtually everything I post that's anti-harassment these days proves my point. What has happened to tech? What has happened to Slashdot? If I'd posted a year ago that a bunch of female devs would be suffering harassment up to and including rape threats and worse in an attempt to prevent them from speaking about problems they encounter, I'd have been laughed out of town. Now it's happening a significant number of people on Slashdot actively support that hatred campaign and are doing everything they can to silence anyone who opposes it.)

This little loaded troll is +5 Insightful? The one that calls a harassment campaign that's trying to silence women (and other minorities) in tech and their supporters through threats of violence "free minded geeks", and those who oppose them "authoritarian" and "apologists for censorship"? Because constant threats of violence is somehow pro-free speech, and encouraging people to evaluate games, highlighting problematic aspects, and encouraging developers to produce more interesting work is pro-censorship?

There are countries out there that welcome the "MRA/Republican/Stormfront/Racist/Misogyno-nerds" (a fairly decent description of a campaign of relentless online terror against women, blacks, and left wingers) and others that make up your little cesspool - the countries that support the kind of terror you inflict on those who refuse to kowtow to your demands. An Iranian actor just had to apologize for tweeting support for the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. Russia continues to push the bar as far as imprisoning gay people for being gay in public. Saudi Arabia punishes women for invading your traditional male space by, you know, driving and stuff.

Those are countries you guys would love. Why don't you fuck off there, and let the rest of us enjoy a diverse community in which people don't get rape and death threats for criticizing the Hitman video game?

Comment: Re:Indeed (Score 0) 317 317

Which campaign is this ? I haven't seen such a campaign online or in tech

Wow, you've not read any media whatsoever in the last year or so? That's impressive.

The campaign is called "Gamergate". It's been extensively covered by most media outlets.

In fact, most tech places I've worked at for the last 18 years have been tripping over themselves to hire any women that actually apply, as long as they are qualified.

Indeed, and GG seems to be, in part, a reaction to that.

Comment: Re:Indeed (Score -1, Troll) 317 317

This little loaded troll is +5 Insightful? The one that calls a harassment campaign that's trying to silence women (and other minorities) in tech and their supporters through threats of violence "free minded geeks", and those who oppose them "authoritarian" and "apologists for censorship"? Because constant threats of violence is somehow pro-free speech, and encouraging people to evaluate games, highlighting problematic aspects, and encouraging developers to produce more interesting work is pro-censorship?

There are countries out there that welcome the "MRA/Republican/Stormfront/Racist/Misogyno-nerds" (a fairly decent description of a campaign of relentless online terror against women, blacks, and left wingers) and others that make up your little cesspool - the countries that support the kind of terror you inflict on those who refuse to kowtow to your demands. An Iranian actor just had to apologize for tweeting support for the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. Russia continues to push the bar as far as imprisoning gay people for being gay in public. Saudi Arabia punishes women for invading your traditional male space by, you know, driving and stuff.

Those are countries you guys would love. Why don't you fuck off there, and let the rest of us enjoy a diverse community in which people don't get rape and death threats for criticizing the Hitman video game?

Comment: Not the first time (Score 1) 313 313

A colleague got crushed in a very similar accident a decade ago. As an electrician he was servicing a damaged robot in a factory (frozen food warehouse actually) when some suit decided to turn it back on without checking first. He got multiple fractures and almost lost a foot. And a nice settlement.

Comment: This is what I do now, too. (Score 1) 176 176

I state up front that I work on my own terms. I have talent to offer and can solve problems that others often can't, but I place a premium on flexibility and on my own health and family. I am incredibly productive, more than many other employees, but I do not offer *maximum productivity*, i.e. "as much as I am humanly able to produce." Even if it seems that I have more to offer (i.e. I leave at 6:30 when everyone else is still working and Skyping me at 11:30 pm, I travel a only couple of times per year and decline to travel 20 times per year, etc.), I am not willing to give this "more" to the organization—it is for my family and my own personal growth.

And both of the phrases I used are things I've been told—"We have doubts about your how serious you are; we're interested in someone that's more serious about their career" and "We don't doubt that you're highly skilled and productive, your resume and recommendations are stellar, but we're in a competitive industry and we need highly competitive people, and we're not sure you've got that competitive fire in your belly—that you're really going to be one hundred percent invested in the company and its growth."

I have two friends that have been on the serial startup carousel as founders. Both burned out and moved in other directions because they felt it was impossible to actually have a life, be a human being, and get growth and operating capital support from investors. Each startup became their entire lives each time until positive exit, and at some point each said, "I'm not doing this again, I'm losing my own sense of identity and my family."

And if you take that kind of statement out into the public sphere, I'd bet that what others would say is, "Well, they weren't really made to be enterpreneurs, then; they were destined to burn out because it's not the lifestyle for them."

Which is precisely my point—and it sounds like you've seen it, too—there's a prevailing "wisdom" that "real" career builders or "real" enterpreneurs are a particular "type"—the type that gives every . last . drop . of . blood to the company. The rest? They're just not "cut out for it"—they should "do something else."

Of course, if you're not "cut out" for the job market or for enterpreneurship, it's not quite clear what "else" you ought to be doing to earn a living. There are only so many jobs at nonprofits and in government agencies.

It would be better if society were to take a step back and assume the opposite—that everyone is basically loyal, driven, and productive, but in general, a healthy person cannot exist without healthy hours, life balance, and relationships, and if someone is the "type" to be working from 4:00 am until midnight every day of the week, and double that on holidays to pick up the slack, the are probably in need of counseling or personal development, rather than a raise and a promotion. But I suppose that's not how the market works.

Many people are unenthusiastic about their work.

Working...