Quote from: Snowman0147;795255I just refuse to talk to people that will not believe the evidence that is laid before them.  They are a waste of time and I might as well save myself from the head aches to come in trying to reason with them.  They don't want to be reason with.  They want you to drink their damn kool-aid and be a follower.  To them it is listen and believe.  Frankly that shit will not fly with me.

Arguing with the other side isn't going to persuade the other side. How you present yourself in addressing the other side may have an impact on 'floating voters', though. When I see one side of an argument make reasoned points supported by evidence while the other side spews filth and vitriol, I tend to think the reasoned-points side is on to something.

Even if someone seems utterly block-headed, it's best not to get angry at them, and certainly not to type while angry.
Also, even if someone is really annoying, it's best not to call them a troll if they appear to possibly be sincere in their (wrongheaded) views - a troll says stuff just to get a reaction, not because they believe in it.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;795278On a more serious note, David Pakman has done some interviewing of pro and neutral GG people.

TotalBiscuit
http://youtu.be/WaMccosnRMc?list=UUvixJtaXuNdMPUGdOPcY8Ag

Milo
http://youtu.be/ljIMMCQyexA?list=UUvixJtaXuNdMPUGdOPcY8Ag

Jennie
http://youtu.be/kqwLyjcQ6SU?list=UUvixJtaXuNdMPUGdOPcY8Ag

Wow. The interview with Brianna Wu did her absolutely no favors.

Quote from: Snowman0147;795260These reasonable people will defeat the corrupt social justice media in the same manner how they defeated the Salem Witch trails and McArthyism.  With facts, evidence, and reason.

There weren't any real witches in Salem. The US State Department actually was full of Communist sympathisers.

Quote from: Ladybird;795289So, what's your solution to the fact that games media is funded by the major games publishers? How are you going to fix the fact it is "corrupt" by design, has been for decades, and the majority of the audience appear to like the gushing fanboy reviews and lengthy preview articles? Or does running ad content as editorial no longer count as corruption...

I don't need to fix the current gaming media outlets.  I walk away from them, and their corruption no longer screws with me personally.  I make a case to others that they can get better gaming news elsewhere, and more than a few seem to be making that choice.  I participate in boycotts and letter writing campaigns to advertisers, the results of which have been substantial as most do not want to support bigotry and bullying targeted at their customers.  These steps wouldn't work against a 'Nintendo Power' that's directly funded by Nintendo, of course, but for most of the rest they contribute to defunding the target media outlets.  If the money moves, industry moves or dies.

With youtubers, many of the same perverse incentives exist that have existed in gaming media, but they're in a different position.  As independent contractors they can choose to be ethical and not be pressured by a boss.  As their own masters, they can choose to engage in conflicts and not simply be removed from their speaking position by pressure from a game company.  If the trend toward crowdfunding gaming journalists continues, they can choose to do things like forego advertisement entirely -- some of them will.  Many, if gamers push for it and pay for it.  It's easy for even just a thousand people to fund one journalist, and this is an industry measured in millions.  There are many people willing to be ethical journalists if only they can be permitted to pay their damned bills doing it.

Sorry folks, but the next person who posts an image without any other substance to the post gets the thread closed. Pundit has for a long time said that he doesn't like posted images in lieu of content.

Quote from: Alathon;795288Finally, the gender feminists are brittle, a defeat in a mainstream hobby like video gaming will wound them terribly.  They need to look as undefeated as they can for their more coercive tactics to work, and they love them some coercion.  I think I'll take that toy away.

Just to clarify the terminology and motives here, "Equity feminists" lobby for equal rights and tend to be associated with labor unions etc. "Gender feminists" are predominantly academics who identify and attack the underlying causes of gender inequality. While equity feminists steer clear of hot-button topics like cultural misogyny, gender feminists zero in on precisely those issues for analysis. So, "gender feminists" in media criticism may sometimes seem coercive because they're seeking to annihilate the pleasure men derive from misogynistic or objectifying media, and all humans have a natural tendency to defend things we find pleasurable. But gender feminists' ultimate goal is gender equality, not women's supremacy.

Quote from: Alathon;795288Finally, the gender feminists are brittle, a defeat in a mainstream hobby like video gaming will wound them terribly.  They need to look as undefeated as they can for their more coercive tactics to work, and they love them some coercion.  I think I'll take that toy away.

And if they suffer a defeat you'll claim 'ha, they are making themselves look like a victim!'

Nice way to make ANY result look like their clever arch plan. (I don't give them, or anyone, that much credit)

Quote from: Ratman_tf;795279And CH Sommers is threatened via twitter for supporting GG.

https://twitter.com/chsommers/status/527985254192398337

By the SJW Rules of Engagement, I hereby and forthwith declare anyone critical of #GamerGate to be a misogynist, neo-nazi who supports violence against women, and they're probably jaywalkers too. I call for the eradication of this toxic movement of dangerous people.

Do you have a link to the threat?

Quote from: Herr Arnulfe;795330Just to clarify the terminology and motives here, "Equity feminists" lobby for equal rights and tend to be associated with labor unions etc. "Gender feminists" are predominantly academics who identify and attack the underlying causes of gender inequality. While equity feminists steer clear of hot-button topics like cultural misogyny, gender feminists zero in on precisely those issues for analysis. So, "gender feminists" in media criticism may sometimes seem coercive because they're seeking to annihilate the pleasure men derive from misogynistic or objectifying media, and all humans have a natural tendency to defend things we find pleasurable. But gender feminists' ultimate goal is gender equality, not women's supremacy.

Savvy negotiators and honest people both will claim that their goals are just for all, that their methods are appropriate and really not that bad.  It can be tricky to tell them apart at first, but track records are a good way to figure them out.  When people have a track record of attacking people aggressively for minor faults, insinuating blame where no credible authority or responsibility exists, implying socially corrosive things in response to their position being challenged, and threatening consequences for lack of compliance, it's a pretty safe bet that they're abusive people using coercion to their advantage.

If you're a gender feminist, that's not something you should be proud of.  Running  a 24/7 rape scare to keep the followers energized and fearful of their designated enemies is Hearstian.   It's no accident that in America, liberal media outlets are picking this up right before November fourth, while second tier conservative outlets support GG and the big ones keep mum.  It's also no accident that the gamergate is dead (haha) narrative is being run; it's likely so when the liberal outlets change their coverage of it come December they have some plausible deniability.  They can say it's over, or say that whatever is going on is clearly some new movement that emerged from the previous movement.

Quote from: Will;795333And if they suffer a defeat you'll claim 'ha, they are making themselves look like a victim!'

Nice way to make ANY result look like their clever arch plan. (I don't give them, or anyone, that much credit)

Anita Sarkeesian, Brianna Wu, and the rest, are shouting to all that will hear them that they've been driven from their homes by rape and death threats made anonymously on the internet.  They surely do not need my assistance in messaging that they are damsels in distress.

Quote from: Alathon;795345Anita Sarkeesian, Brianna Wu, and the rest, are shouting to all that will hear them that they've been driven from their homes by rape and death threats made anonymously on the internet.  They surely do not need my assistance in messaging that they are damsels in distress.

Then your comment that 'a defeat would wound them terribly' doesn't make much sense, does it?

Quote from: Herr Arnulfe;795330But gender feminists' ultimate goal is gender equality, not women's supremacy.

It can be very difficult to tell that sometimes.

Quote from: Will;795334Do you have a link to the threat?

A woman feels threatened on the internet, that's all I need to know.

Quote from: Herr Arnulfe;795330Just to clarify the terminology and motives here, "Equity feminists" lobby for equal rights and tend to be associated with labor unions etc. "Gender feminists" are predominantly academics who identify and attack the underlying causes of gender inequality. While equity feminists steer clear of hot-button topics like cultural misogyny, gender feminists zero in on precisely those issues for analysis. So, "gender feminists" in media criticism may sometimes seem coercive because they're seeking to annihilate the pleasure men derive from misogynistic or objectifying media, and all humans have a natural tendency to defend things we find pleasurable. But gender feminists' ultimate goal is gender equality, not women's supremacy.

Non-feminists don't necessarily accept gender feminists' claims re gender feminsts' goals... Especially as gender feminists don't accept that it is legitimate to scrutinise the motivations of gender feminists. They say this explicitly, eg I have a book of essays called Critical Legal Theory where one says "Feminists do not seek to make ourselves the Object of Study'" - warning off other academics from inquiring into (gender) feminist motivations.

Quote from: Iosue;795294Wow. The interview with Brianna Wu did her absolutely no favors.

Yeah. I'm on the fence about Pakman himself. Skimming his videos, he seems to be some kind of weird progressive shock jock, but his interviews with gamergate people have been decent.
Brianna retreated to twitter and bitched about the interview, calling it a 'hit piece'.

Quote from: Alathon;795345It's no accident that in America, liberal media outlets are picking this up right before November fourth, while second tier conservative outlets support GG and the big ones keep mum.

Dang, I hadn't spotted that! I knew the US left-media were keeping the Ferguson outrage going to try to increase black turnout in the midterms, but I hadn't thought about GamerGate and how the negative left-media coverage of GG could potentially increase liberal-female turnout. Even if not by a lot, every little helps in midterms where turnout of less motivated voters is traditionally low.