Quote from: S'mon;794618Good analysis, although I think the SJW-dominated media were/are genuinely angered by the pushback, which they are not used to seeing. I definitely agree that the SJW counter attack is primarily aimed at the "nice, popular people like Felicia Day and Wil Wheaton" (and Joss Whedon) - people with left-liberal views who can easily be manipulated by the SJW just as the SJW & their forebears have been doing at least since the 1960s. Cultural Marxism is all about 'controlling the narrative' through 'liberating tolerance' - which means suppression of counter-narratives. They have a problem with the Internet because it allows counter-narratives to spring up and spread outside of their control. But "nice, popular people" still rely on the 'commanding heights' of the trusted mainstream media for  their opinions. As long as you control the mainstream media you can control their views, within the acceptable range of opinion - the Overton window - and the window can be moved over time in your preferred direction.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;794620I am making this exact point to the regulars at the GamersGate YT channel, the women at Honey Badger Radio, and in the comments for Sargon of Akkad (so far) as they are good for pro-GG discussion and commentary.

Let's see if they notice in the weeks to come.

Which again is why they were so flummoxed by the death threats in Utah; this side is used to a debate in which everyone is reading off of their script.  It doesn't occur to them that other people either can't be reasoned with (in the case of the trolls) or that they know their reasoning and disagree with it (in the case of the serious pro-GG people).

But that's another problem with the Left in general, being that their opponents often know their methodology better than they do.  Why do you think your average right-wing talk show host knows more about Rules for Radicals than the average Occupy protestor?

JG

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;794721In particular, this line is telling for me: "Once a person is reduced to the status of objecthood, violence against that object becomes intrinsically permitted." Is she trying to demonstrate causation when linking sexualization to violence? That's certainly how the whole paragraph comes accross to me, so the natural counter argument is indeed to point out that male characters are disproportionately the recipients of violence, so there's probably not any causation link between the sexualization and the violence against the female characters [edit: since the male characters are not being sexualized]. The more likely case is that sexualization is incidental to the violence and vice versa-- at least in these sandbox games she is referencing.

I hope I didn't miss any of your actual points.

The part about "inert female objects" presumably refers to things like e.g. taking your NPC follower's clothes away in Skyrim, or arranging corpses in sexual positions (both of which I've done admittedly for novelty value after discovering the game allowed it). In that context, I suppose gender is irrelevant assuming both male and female NPC bodies can be manipulated equally, but the majority of Sarkeesian's arguments around violence vs. women are in relation to actual gameplay. The AEI video didn't seem to be talking about inert object manipulation either. I agree that Sarkeesian fixates on inert female objects with the assumption that they receive the majority of abuse, when that might not actually be the case in reality - you'd have to conduct gameplay observation studies with large numbers of subjects to determine what sorts of side activities are most popular.

Quote from: Will;794679http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/29/opinion/anita-sarkeesian-on-video-games-great-future.html?_r=0

'Death of the gamer' isn't a negative thing. It's a positive thing. When everyone is a gamer, the term loses it's significance.

The fact you cant recognize that article as hate speech directed at a stereotypical generalization that has nothing to do with reality bothers me. That was kind of what NYS was all about: showing that the "gamers" in question are nothing to do with the stereotype being put forth. Youu misewell be saying "when everyone is a N*****, the term loses its signifigance". No , the term stops being derrogatory when people stop assuming that the media portrait of what a gamer is is shown for the prejudiced BS that it is.

If you think this is "straight white males" vs "feminists" then you've grossly misread the situation.

Wow first fucking paragraph of that link that Will gave out is a fucking lie.  Anita in the video she got caught in flat out stated she never played games nor cared much for them.  I cannot believe she is still holding onto that lie when she knows people are not buying it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcPIu3sDkEw

Quote from: Will;794707Uh, that would be the stance of folks rejecting the inclusion of others into 'their' culture.

That 'gamer' should be some super sekrit club.

I've literally never heard or seen that view expressed by anyone who identifies as a gamer. No idea where you get some of this stuff from.

Quote from: Snowman0147;794789Wow first fucking paragraph of that link that Will gave out is a fucking lie.  Anita in the video she got caught in flat out stated she never played games nor cared much for them.  I cannot believe she is still holding onto that lie when she knows people are not buying it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcPIu3sDkEw

Tell a lie enough, and people will treat it as gospel.  That's the entire basis of those on the antiGG side.

Quote from: James Gillen;794756But that's another problem with the Left in general, being that their opponents often know their methodology better than they do.  

I think that is a recent phenomenon, post-2000. Partly it is because cultural Marxism, the SJW ideology, has been hegemonic for so long, it has tended to ossify, many of its adherents are a lot lazier now than when they were a genuine insurgency in the 1950s through early 1960s. Partly its opponents have had time to read and understand its literature.

The most useful book I read to understand the tactics was "Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate", which is a simply written book aimed at the US Left, instructing them on how to control The Narrative. There is a lot of hilarious stuff about how cunning Republicans are doing this stuff, so we simple good-hearted Democrats need to learn how to do it too...

It's very good at explaining 'Framing' where you get the other side to react on your terms. In GamerGate the SJW posit a Misogyny frame. The expectation is that the other side accept the Frame, putting the debate on your terms, where you are bound to win. This usually works, since most opposition don't understand Framing, apply classical-Liberal thinking, and think that they are engaging in a good-faith debate where the aim is to persuade the other side of the rightness of your position and correct any errors - "No, we Republicans aren't racist..." - Lakoff explains that once the Republican accepts the posited Frame, the Democrats have already won.

But the pro-GamerGaters have refused to accept the posited Frame (and have stuck to their own Frame re journalistic corruption), hence the frothing rage from the SJW-media.

Have been reading about #gamergate for sometime now trying to get a handle on it, work out what on earth is going on, where did it start... what is it truly about? Etc

Here are 2 initial observations (as an outsider/ newb to this debate) - from reading through approx. 50% of the material on this thread, as well as other threads and sources......

• For many gamers who post on the matter, they claim that the main issue is the lack of ethics in gaming journalism.
  
• That these unethical journalists are also 'social justice warriors' who are trying to force their extreme left wing ideology down gamers' throats and try and ruin the hobby.
  

I would like to deconstruct this if I may

1) Lack of ethics in journalism.
The claim is that the Quinn case illustrates a deeper malaise within gaming reviewing/ critiquing – that gaming journos are too close to the hand that feeds them

This is a contentious point.  The Quinn case aside (her 'unethical' relationship happened after her reviews), firstly it is often bandied around as a fact – with anecdotal examples given.  To my knowledge it is tough being a journalist today and getting a 'gig' in our 24/7 news culture, with 'citizen journalists', bloggers.....finding work and paying work in this field is increasingly problematic.  The money in journalism is in writing about the money markets not gaming!  Surely this is a job which attracts people who love games and are prepared to work long hours.
Obviously journalists will interact with publishers – this is the nature of their job – getting exclusives/ early access....which can muddy the waters.....but the skill in the job lies in the ability of the journalist to critically appraise the game – whilst also loving their job since they love games..... Thus there is always going to be a certain level of subjectivity in this.

All of these issues are non-exclusive to gaming reviewers – you get the same issues say in film reviewers as well.  I am sure like me you prefer some reviewers over others.  Their style of writing, their prejudices chime with yours, you know they will always rate a fantasy film/ game lower than horror so you factor that in to their review....

2) That these unethical journalists are also 'social justice warriors' who are trying to force their extreme left wing ideology down gamers' throats and try and ruin the hobby

Even let's assume that game reviewers are extremely left wing and are also out to ruin your games...... let us not forget that the gaming industry is a global, multi-billion dollar behemoth, fuelled by profiting and cash, not by ideological dogma.  There has been no social justice revolution.  Just as feminist film criticism failed to radically change Hollywood, so too will feminist gaming theory fail to revolutionise the gaming industry.  Folks don't seem to have a perspective on this!

Which brings me to some other observations:

3.  There is so much hate and anger online – against everyone – but especially against women.

It seems so normal that most posters on forums who have the temerity to post ignore it/ are used to it.  I am not saying everyone who posts is angry or abusive – but there plenty who do.  Kudos to Will on this forum in particular for giving this his best shot for what must have been hours of his life!  Here is my contribution - for what it is worth!

Feminist theories of cinema emerge in the mid-70s with ideas such as L. Mulvey's 'the male gaze' in 1975.  That is nearly 40 years ago people.  40 years.   What I find shocking is that such ideas have not seemingly made the migration to analysis of gaming until recently.  Yes, there have been discussions about sexism in gaming waaaaay back in the 1980s in White Dwarf magazine's heyday (when it was an rpg magazine) about the ethics of women exclusively clad in titillating costumes, eg chain-mail bikinis.

Thus when Sarkeesian produces her videos (for which she raised money for legitimately online via a KS) she is derided and subjected to hate, verbal abuse, death and rape threats – by libertarians/ those posing as such.... (always find this curious – surely libertarians like freedom of speech?).  She was criticised for not producing enough evidence (I guess her critics wanted to watch a longer video (since I am sure they watched each in their entirety)), not producing a video up to the standards used in academia (as if this was the purpose of the video!).....One guy produced an online game in which you beat up Sarkeesian.  Rape art was circulated online as well.  She and others have been 'doxxed' having their personal identities, address etc posted online leading to threats for their safety in general and having to leave their homes......Moreover other so-called hacktivists DDOSed her KS account, to crash it and try and stop her gaining success from her Tropes v Women videos.
What is interesting – from an outsider's viewpoint – is that these acts hardly caused a pause/ a rethink from those gamers who claimed to be worried about ethics in journalism.  Some posters claimed her death threats weren't real and she was using the situation to get more air-time and sympathy for her cause.  (Maybe in the US death threats are so normal, such a daily occurrence that it is like water off a duck's back....thus Sarkeesian is simply a wimp and needs to 'man up'?      

Other female gamers / celebrities have been loath to speak out in case they too are doxxed.  Felicia Day's public details were put online after she described her #gamergate fears.  She hadn't talked about #gamergate due to fears of being doxxed – and indeed she was, shortly after she spoke out.  http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/23/felicia-days-public-details-online-gamergate.  

Which brings me to observation 4:

4. #gamergate is seemingly – for many - a Trojan Horse for angry men to vent their spleens.

Yeah. I said it.

J. Valenti says this better: "Gamergate is loud, dangerous and a last grasp at cultural dominance by angry white men.  The outrage isn't about 'ethics' or even really gaming. It's about harassing women to protest the movement for female equality" http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/21/gamergate-angry-men-harassing-women

Sarkeesian is hardly saying radical stuff.  These ideas, that historically societies have been male dominated (patriarchal to use the lingo) is surely an accepted fact.  That in the context of living in a patriarchal society, women were encouraged via socialisation and social control (through rewards for good feminine behaviour and punishments for bad) to accept their place.  We see this all around the world.  It is easier to see this in developing countries: dowry beatings/ murder; stoning raped women to death for 'adultery'; the ancient Indian custom of suttee (women were encouraged to place themselves on their dead husband's funeral pyre, bringing country and western lyrics more poignancy when singing 'stand (or is that lie?) by your man' ....... Female genital mutilation (circumcision).

But in my country (UK), gender inequalities are alive and well alas.  It was not until 1991 that rape in marriage was criminalised.  Until then this was lawful.  Operation Sapphire, the specialist sex-crimes unit in the Metropolitan Police has come under severe criticism for its at best incompetence on dealing with sexual assault/ rape, and at worst, some of its officers seemingly colluding with rapists to enable them to continue raping.
 
On gender inequalities in cultural production.
On a lighter tone, gender inequalities in the film industry, despite 40 years of criticism from so called 'social justice warriors' has failed.  A recent report http://stephenfollows.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Gender_Within_Film_Crews-PRERELEASE_COPY1.pdf shows how over 75% of block-bluster film crews are male.  Even in creative areas men were found to dominate. In the 2,000 films surveyed revealed that women accounted for only 13% of the editors, 10% of the writers and just 5% of the directors.

Gender representation in gaming
Zak S did a good piece on this within Warhammer – found here http://dndwithpornstars.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/gender-and-representation-in-warhammers.html?zx=6dbb8ddcd3b72544
I don't really see how Sarkeesian's analysis differs from Zak's.  Are women used as objectified 'decorations' in video games?  Too often yes – and far more so than men.  Feminists are not saying that naked/ chainmail bikini women depicted in gaming per se is wrong.  It is rather that this is all we tend to get.  That the range of representations of women is very limited.  Tuchman developed a concept for analysing the media back in the late 70s: symbolic annihilation.  I would argue the concept is alive and well.  Women (and for that matter, ethnic minorities, the LGBT community, those with disabilities) in film, TV, graphic novels, art...... and gaming are subject to a process termed symbolic annihilation: they are under-represented in narratives and when they are present they are stereotyped.  These are broad brush strokes.  This is the general context of how women are depicted.  Different producers/ writers will vary.  You even got this in the recent Paizo product Wrath of the Righteous: the male incubi was downplayed whilst his oversexed female counterpart the succubus was over-represented later on in the adventure.

Why representation matters on a selfish level for all gamers.Representations do matter.  They define the typicality of the social group.  They can reinforce stereotypes.  They can put off stereotyped groups from gaming......which surely on purely a marketing angle is madness: to have more money thrown at game development, to have better quality art and music, to get the best script writers into gaming, the gaming industry needs more women  for example to buy and play games.  But to do this, we need more games which offer positive roles for women to play (as in the option to play a female pc like in Mass Effect, and not as in GTA) and narratives to be more complex, and offer female centred story-lines as well – or at least, as a starter, have these as options, as well as cutting out the lazy background sexism: women npcs are only there for a sex angle/ to be looked at etc etc.  In reality, I don't see the very sexist games disappearing – far from it.  Sexism (sadly) sells and once the world economy picks up, I expect more sexist products to sell since sexism is alive and well around the globe (alas).  
But I do expect there to be a continued improvement in representation in roleplaying and video games.   Thanks to the rise of the new media and digitization, new markets for female gamers are being opened up, and new female game writers are emerging.  Likewise, industry heavy weights such as writers like Zak S, as well as powerful female movers and shakers such as Lisa Stevens at Paizo are pushing their creative talents and money in the right direction.  Today, nearly half of the UK's video game players are women, and now they are designing and writing them too, including top sellers.  Smart phones have enabled new indie companies to spring up to meet demand, such as Mitu Khandaker who runs her own indie development studio, Tiniest Shark.

To Conclude
I would certainly accept some online feminist writers will write clumsily, will be rude, will flame people.....will misunderstand feminism, misrepresent its ideas.....But this does not mean the central goal of feminism: for women to be treated as human beings and to be given the same opportunities in life as men – and not be judged on their gender, that this goal is therefore wrong.  Moreover, if feminists get angry and seemingly 'lecture' people, this is hardly surprising given the CONTEXT of the issue: women face far more barriers to employment etc than men.  #gamergate illustrates this clearly – with most of the hate and threats aimed at a small number of women.

Thus I have to conclude, in #gamergate

• There has been a lack of empathy for the women receiving death and rape threats
• There has been a crude dismissal of feminist discourse and ideas as 'social justice warriors'
• The focus is on attacking women/ SJWs in #gamergate and not on journalist ethics.

Thus #gamergate is seemingly – for many - a Trojan Horse for angry men to vent their spleen

Which is a shame  - since there is so much more to be gained by dialogue and listening IMHO.  Sexism in gaming is so so obvious I don't see why this is still a debating point.

Quote from: S'mon;794618Good analysis, although I think the SJW-dominated media were/are genuinely angered by the pushback, which they are not used to seeing. I definitely agree that the SJW counter attack is primarily aimed at the "nice, popular people like Felicia Day and Wil Wheaton" (and Joss Whedon) - people with left-liberal views who can easily be manipulated by the SJW just as the SJW & their forebears have been doing at least since the 1960s. Cultural Marxism is all about 'controlling the narrative' through 'liberating tolerance' - which means suppression of counter-narratives. They have a problem with the Internet because it allows counter-narratives to spring up and spread outside of their control. But "nice, popular people" still rely on the 'commanding heights' of the trusted mainstream media for  their opinions. As long as you control the mainstream media you can control their views, within the acceptable range of opinion - the Overton window - and the window can be moved over time in your preferred direction.

Hi S'mon

New to this board but have read a lot of your posts..... and since this is a public forum.... I will respond......

What I find extraordinary is how you have constructed a fantasy that 'Cultural Marxism' (whatever you mean by this) has been influential on Western Societies.  That Joss Whedon et al are a sock-puppets of the aforesaid Cultural Marxism.  Fascinating conspiracy theory material straight out from the McCarthy era of the mid-1950s.

For sure, Gramscian influenced analysis is alive and well at any decent university studying cultural studies and cultural production.  I was not aware that it was so dangerous and that we had to be worried about its pernicious influence!

Moreover, also fascinating, it that you think mainstream/ what goes for 'normal' benefits all parties.  That society is based on shared values and that by in large it works well for everyone.  Everyone seems to be a winner.  Those who challenge this 'fact' are to be seemingly smacked down' by you/ your allies on this site and accused of being a sock-puppet to Cultural Marxism (especially feminists!).  For McCarthy, behind every uber-nationalist was a Communist.  He was right on so many levels I imagine.

Can you not at least agree that there is a genuine debate to be had here, and that there is plenty of evidence that women are generally poorly represented in game narratives in video games?  Why do you think Marxism is behind feminism? Why do you think Joss Whedon doesn't think – using his intellect and emotional intelligence – that it is more interesting to have new narratives in which, for example, women are empowered?  What is wrong with female empowerment in games or film/ TV?  Why on earth are you so angry about it?

Quote from: Novastar;794755Ok, out of 316,669 tweets over three days, you cherry-picked out the 1,994 tweets about these three controversial individuals. You then reclassified them positive/negative/undetermined based upon, what exactly?



See for yourself, he placed all 1994 of them in full on a googledocs spreadsheet here: [URL="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1O2KtuAOJycLvu_jT7gRr09tX4rBfn9UVnRVjU3VCftE/edit?pli=1#gid=792578227]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1O2KtuAOJycLvu_jT7gRr09tX4rBfn9UVnRVjU3VCftE/edit?pli=1#gid=792578227

From what I can see the Newsweek/Brandwatch analysis classified 90% of the tweets as undetermined in terms of sentiment analysis. Baio puts it at 75% negative, 15% positive, 10% negative, but they aren't measuring the same thing. Newsweek was looking for negative tweets directed at individual, i.e. harassment; Baio classified anything pro-GG as negative,

QuoteRoughly 90–95% take a clear side either in favor or against Gamergate.

You really should click through and judge for yourself. Looking at the actual data is always useful. Personally I think he's way off base classifying by partisanship; "yay GG" isn't the same as "you suck", and certainly not the same as a threat.

Quote from: S'mon;794824I think that is a recent phenomenon, post-2000. Partly it is because cultural Marxism, the SJW ideology, has been hegemonic for so long......But the pro-GamerGaters have refused to accept the posited Frame (and have stuck to their own Frame re journalistic corruption), hence the frothing rage from the SJW-media.

Never knew Cultural Marxism was so influential over games and the cultural industries!  Wow... can you name any games influenced by it?

& disagreement from feminists - to use your term' SJW' is 'frothing'!  Fascinating!

Better get back to work!

Quote from: BenTheFerg;794837Hi S'mon

Not S'mon, but hi, interesting choice for a first post.

QuoteWhat I find extraordinary is how you have constructed a fantasy that ‘Cultural Marxism’ (whatever you mean by this) has been influential on Western Societies.  That Joss Whedon et al are a sock-puppets of the aforesaid Cultural Marxism.  Fascinating conspiracy theory material straight out from the McCarthy era of the mid-1950s.

Translation: you're an idiot S'mon, and gosh, don't I sound sophisticated.

QuoteFor sure, Gramscian influenced analysis is alive and well at any decent university studying cultural studies and cultural production.  I was not aware that it was so dangerous and that we had to be worried about its pernicious influence!

Translation: You're really an idiot S'mon, and I'm not actually sophisticated, just really condescending.  

QuoteMoreover, also fascinating, it that you think mainstream/ what goes for ‘normal’ benefits all parties.  That society is based on shared values and that by in large it works well for everyone.  Everyone seems to be a winner.  Those who challenge this ‘fact’ are to be seemingly smacked down’ by you/ your allies on this site and accused of being a sock-puppet to Cultural Marxism (especially feminists!).  For McCarthy, behind every uber-nationalist was a Communist.  He was right on so many levels I imagine.

Translation: you're also a paranoid, conspiracy nut, McCarthyite, S'mon.

QuoteCan you not at least agree that there is a genuine debate to be had here, and that there is plenty of evidence that women are generally poorly represented in game narratives in video games?  Why do you think Marxism is behind feminism? Why do you think Joss Whedon doesn’t think – using his intellect and emotional intelligence – that it is more interesting to have new narratives in which, for example, women are empowered?  What is wrong with female empowerment in games or film/ TV?  Why on earth are you so angry about it?

Translation: reasonable sounding  questions, but of the "when did you stop beating your wife" trap variety. With a nice little souson of belittling PA at the end.

Verdict: Troll. Self-satisfied, self-aggrandizing, condescending, troll. Nicely designed bit of trolling though; mean-spirited but passive aggressive, reasonable sounding but vacuous of anything but intent to rile, aimed at everyone but straight from the bully's handbook only picking on only one person. I'd give it a B, but it isn't well enough disguised, so F.

Enjoy your time on the board BenTheFerg. I've certainly enjoyed 'deconstructing' your post. It was a nice way to spend the time while having a little bout of insomnia, though worthless beyond that. Let's see if I can get back to sleep, eh? I suspect I'll add more value to the planet asleep than you will at work.

Quote from: BenTheFerg;794830(Maybe in the US death threats are so normal, such a daily occurrence that it is like water off a duck's back....thus Sarkeesian is simply a wimp and needs to 'man up'?  

Anonymous threats seem to be very common; credible threats are much rarer. Pro-GamerGaters and Anti-GamerGaters seem to both get them. While it's possible that Sarkeesian was lying, it seems far more likely that she got the same sort of non-credible threat that pro-GamerGaters also routinely get. The SJW narrative is that all threats against them are credible and should be investigated while threats against their enemies are non-existent, non-credible, or their enemies deserve it anyway.

I do think women on both pro and anti side may be more likely to receive rape threats than men; though some of these threats come from other women.

Quote from: BenTheFerg;794837Hi S'mon

New to this board but have read a lot of your posts..... and since this is a public forum.... I will respond......

What I find extraordinary is how you have constructed a fantasy that 'Cultural Marxism' (whatever you mean by this) has been influential on Western Societies.  That Joss Whedon et al are a sock-puppets of the aforesaid Cultural Marxism.  Fascinating conspiracy theory material straight out from the McCarthy era of the mid-1950s.

For sure, Gramscian influenced analysis is alive and well at any decent university studying cultural studies and cultural production.  I was not aware that it was so dangerous and that we had to be worried about its pernicious influence!

Moreover, also fascinating, it that you think mainstream/ what goes for 'normal' benefits all parties.  That society is based on shared values and that by in large it works well for everyone.  Everyone seems to be a winner.  Those who challenge this 'fact' are to be seemingly smacked down' by you/ your allies on this site and accused of being a sock-puppet to Cultural Marxism (especially feminists!).  For McCarthy, behind every uber-nationalist was a Communist.  He was right on so many levels I imagine.

Can you not at least agree that there is a genuine debate to be had here, and that there is plenty of evidence that women are generally poorly represented in game narratives in video games?  Why do you think Marxism is behind feminism? Why do you think Joss Whedon doesn't think – using his intellect and emotional intelligence – that it is more interesting to have new narratives in which, for example, women are empowered?  What is wrong with female empowerment in games or film/ TV?  Why on earth are you so angry about it?

You may have slightly misread my post. I think Joss Whedon is a "nice left-liberal", not a cultural Marxist or cultural Marxist sock puppet. FWIW I enjoy Joss Whedon's work as much as the next nerd. I particularly enjoyed some of his dialogue in the Avengers movie recently, although the female character didn't get much of it; Iron Man & Captain America got the best lines.

BTW you do a good job 'Framing the Debate', kudos.

Quote from: apparition13;794846Not S'mon, but hi, interesting choice for a first post.

.......Enjoy your time on the board BenTheFerg. I've certainly enjoyed 'deconstructing' your post. It was a nice way to spend the time while having a little bout of insomnia, though worthless beyond that. Let's see if I can get back to sleep, eh? I suspect I'll add more value to the planet asleep than you will at work.

good to have a debate where there is genuine attempt at argument.  The only troll seems to be you.  Not surprised by this.