Quote from: TristramEvans;794324Thats just the general view of Americans this side of the border.

It's a fair cop.

Quote from: Will;794257Yes. And the point of saying so is that the topic isn't 'ethics in gaming journalism' but the role of feminism, which, in this case, is seen as a problem in gaming journalism.

You do understand that even feminists do not condone Zoe Quinn's trading of sex for good reviews of her "Depression Quest" game, don't you? That it is unethical?

You mean the thing that never happened?

Holy shit check this out.  Go between minute 10 to minute 12 to see what I mean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHoc4M2l8jE

Quote from: Will;794332You mean the thing that never happened?

EDIT: I was wrong.

Important side note: A lot of the people calling for “journalistic ethics” quite transparently don’t know anything about journalism — to say that sites should clearly label what is and isn’t opinion, for example, is just plain weird, because a) that distinction is less and less relevant and is mostly a relic of newspaper days; and b) it’s a basic reading-comprehension thing; anyone who reads on a daily basis can tell, pretty simply from various cues in the narrative, whether they’re reading a work of “straight” journalism [outdated, troublesome term], “pure” opinion [again, bleh], or some combination of the two [which is what a lot of games coverage is].)

Oh, I SEE - the trouble isn't objectivity in journalism, it's just that we've moved beyond such quaint notions. If you keep moving the goalposts motherfucker, you'll have to move the whole team half-way across the country to keep up (pithy NFL reference there).

A FUCKING RELIC OF THE NEWSPAPER DAYS?! You fucking agenda-driven MORON.

Fuck the author and fuck their new-age bullshit. OBJECTIVITY IS WHAT JOURNALISM WAS ALL ABOUT - who what where when why - and not "what I fucking think about it and what you should, too". That's called an Editorial, or an Opinion Piece.

Again - degree in journalism here, so I do know quite a fucking lot about what "journalism" is, or what it's supposed to be.

Quote from: Will;794271Yeah, you guys go on winning hearts and minds.

http://www.themarysue.com/joss-whedon-reddit-gamergate/

The mental gymnastics of "GamerGaters are talking about the people who are attacking them, so they must be misogynists" is literally painful for me to read.

Quote from: jeff37923;794331You do understand that even feminists do not condone Zoe Quinn's trading of sex for good reviews of her "Depression Quest" game, don't you? That it is unethical?

As far as I understand, that never happened. Zoe Quinn overall is a red herring; her ex posted a whiny rant after they broke up talking about a bunch of guys she slept with. One happened to be a reviewer, but he never did a review of her game. Quinn may have kicked off proto-GG, but by the time the GG hashtag was established it had nothing to do with her. Thats one thing I think is really hurting GG's credibility: they need to collectively never bring up Quinn again.

Trying to claim you aren't motivated by misogyny when you slam a woman for whoring herself out for game reviews weeks after it's been shown to be completely false is... a really tough argument.

A friend asked me where I stood on Gamergate but I'd only seen references go by on Facebook without caring enough to read closer.
So I did a Google and got this article on Reason.com... which seems to be trying to be reasonable (hah!).

It suggests the Quinn woman did get up to some questionable shenanigans... but nothing to do with trading sex for favors (and certainly nothing that condones any crazed attacks on her). Something to do with a contest that she got pissed about and started glutting up with Twitter outrage... which in turn got a number of folks, including other female game designers, angry at her.

Quote from: Will;794339Trying to claim you aren't motivated by misogyny when you slam a woman for whoring herself out for game reviews weeks after it's been shown to be completely false is... a really tough argument.

Thats a fair enough point, though in the majority Im only seeing Quinn mentioned by the mass media and people who are just now catching up.


Of course, since this whole mess started Quinn's been engaging in some questionable stuff herself in her anti-GG activities. Not to mention that the threats against her that she blamed on Gamergate actually happened weeks before GG started.

Tristram: I had assumed GGers had moved on except for some radicals who are immune to reason.

Seeing GGers here keep trotting it out is... a bit surprising.

Quote from: TristramEvans;794337As far as I understand, that never happened. Zoe Quinn overall is a red herring; her ex posted a whiny rant after they broke up talking about a bunch of guys she slept with. One happened to be a reviewer, but he never did a review of her game. Quinn may have kicked off proto-GG, but by the time the GG hashtag was established it had nothing to do with her. Thats one thing I think is really hurting GG's credibility: they need to collectively never bring up Quinn again.

Quote from: Will;794339Trying to claim you aren't motivated by misogyny when you slam a woman for whoring herself out for game reviews weeks after it's been shown to be completely false is... a really tough argument.

Quote from: Will;794344Tristram: I had assumed GGers had moved on except for some radicals who are immune to reason.

Seeing GGers here keep trotting it out is... a bit surprising.

I was wrong, then. I must admit that I have not been keeping up with events as they happen. Mea culpa.

However, slamming anyone for whoring themselves out for good reviews is natural because it is unethical behavior. When I came in to the story, ZQ had suppossedly done this, which is unethical behavior. The fact that she is a woman was the only reason why it attracted the attention of the SJW/Cultural Marxists so that they could scream "misogyny!", because you cannot say that the behavior is acceptable by either the creator of what is being reviewed or the reviewer.

ZQ has wholeheartedly been taking advantage of this situation, though, especially by aligning herself with Anita Sarkeesian and her Patricia Pulling message.

Quote from: TristramEvans;794337As far as I understand, that never happened. Zoe Quinn overall is a red herring; her ex posted a whiny rant after they broke up talking about a bunch of guys she slept with. One happened to be a reviewer, but he never did a review of her game. Quinn may have kicked off proto-GG, but by the time the GG hashtag was established it had nothing to do with her. Thats one thing I think is really hurting GG's credibility: they need to collectively never bring up Quinn again.

ZQ factors in with how the SJW clique rallied around her. She might have wound up a bit of internet gossip, like seeing a Brittany Spears crotch shot on Gawker, but the internet muscle flexed in her behalf caused a lot of people to sit up and take notice.

There we go again with the canard that literally Who's sex life is what gg is concerned with. Let's review the beginning of this thread:

Most of the talk at the start of this thread has been about the illiberal left, which is just as bad and hypocritical as the extreme right.*

The first mention of feminism was by dragoner to identify as a feminist.

First mention of Literally Who by Novastar is in relation to Cracked letting HER define gamergate in a supposedly neutral article, written by her no less. And banning counter arguments (there's that illiberal streak again). Nothing about her sex life, but I guess Jeff's opinion overrides what Novastar actually wrote.

Snowman is the first one to explicitly tie with a weariness caused by "SJW journalists" who not only *generalize their audience as sexist, woman hating *pigs, but who are themselves corrupt and hypocritical in their double standards.

Novastar links to article about Sarkeesian's cancellation of talk. http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=792127&postcount=50 I'll let Novastar explain the comment after it.

Sacrosanct mentions not being that worked up by the journalistic integrity but bothered by the double standard coming from anti gg. Why aren't they highlighting the abuse coming from their side? only mentions Anita and literally who to say that the critics of gg don't really care about them. Nothing about their sex lives, but I guess Jeff's post is enough to condemn this poster too.

The Will Factor finally drops in to say, with a straight face, that gamergate is a hate group. Thread could have ended here by invoking Godwin's Law.*http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=792233&postcount=54

Jon Wake points out that Feminism, Civil Rights and Gay Rights group all have or have had very hateful and problematic members, yet no one is calling those movements *hate groups. This is the first time Feminism has been mentioned in thread. Took 57 posts. http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=792245&postcount=57

Woodsmoke outs himself as anti feminist.*I guess that defines every pRo gg participant here, somehow, according to the resident anti gg

The Will Factor links being concerned about overreaching SJW posers to being part of a hate group. Yeah, because SJWs never have ridiculous notions of what is acceptable. For the Will Factor, you're either with the Outrage Brigade or you are a Nazi*

by the way, whoever posted this is now on notice:*http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=791789&postcount=36*you can't be a hatemonger and also be for social justice, so you better get your hate on pronto or I'll revoke your Nazi membership.

With that out of the way, I thereby retroactively invoke the Godwin Law on this thread and declare it as having jumped the shark on post #54. Please ban me for thread capping in lieu of Will O'Reilly cutting my mike off.