Oh gosh.
You probably should read the blog post by Felicia Day that is the subject of this thread. Because that is what they are talking about. The reference are taken straight from the blog post.
4 Likes
Uh. This one. The one the OP links-to/talks about. Where she receives doxxing and threats.
1 Like
i would suggest that there is another alternative-- they read the article, comprehended the meaning, and found the idea that gaming could be seen as inclusive a terrifying and identity shattering concept which has led to their crazed and execrable response.
They are not referencing anything in that post by saying someone did show up to her (or someone elseâs) house.
At this point, all gamertaint apologists are missing the point.
I donât care to talk about gaming journalism until the threats stop.
So yes.
From her post, linked above:
[quote]I have had stalkers and restraining orders issued in the past, I have had people show up on my doorstep when my personal information was HARD to get[/quote].
2 Likes
This is the kind of thinking that has prevented peace in the Middle East in modern times (among other reasons). Youâre letting a small group of assholes dictate your behavior. If all it takes is one anonymous potentially mentally ill guy making baseless threats over the internet to stop you, then youâll never do anything.
1 Like
To be honest, Iâd be a lot more interested in the âjournalism ethicsâ conversation if there were actually some meat there. But as far as Iâve seen, everything put forward as part of that has been:
A) based on lies that were already debunked (i.e., pretty much everything involving Quinn)
B) not any different from what happens in any other journalism
C) not precisely an ethics issue, or dubious (i.e., the Patreon stuff)
D) quickly addressed by the organization involved, rendering the point moot
or
E) some combination of several of the above
Aside from that, it seems to boil down to whining that âthey said mean things about usâ, which doesnât have anything to do with ethics.
7 Likes
Erm, Gonna go out on a limb here, and guess youâre under a certain age, or, didnât play games some time ago? Iâm not going into the â#GamerGateâ fray here, but, it doesnât take being involved in that business to realize that for a number of people, video games very much are part of their identity, without claiming any sort of code, or particular claim to class or honor. Compare to the related but slightly separate idea of DnD gamers, or, Anime fans.
Perhaps it doesnât have any current relevance now, and the mainstreaming of games makes this seem archaic, but, it used to be a very odd thing to be heavily into video games. And the culture is there, some of it interesting, some⌠Not so flattering. But, in some sense, it is like a family, you might have some parts youâre not too proud of, but, when people start flinging accusations at the name as a whole, the shield wall comes up.
For many of us, back 20-30 years ago, games were a shelter from a very cruel and un-accepting society. Sure, popular culture knew of Mario and Zelda, but, to be fanatic about them⌠To choose to buy a Nintendo instead of a bike or a football, marked you as the âotherâ from the ânormalâ. Later, when multiplayer games became available, and the nascent internet started connecting groups of gamers, the commonality of experience strengthened that identity. Weâre not talking about folks that occasionally played an arcade game or two, weâre talking about folk that lived at the arcade. Not the folk that played Myst once or twice, the ones who had LAN party rigs they spent every cent of spare income on.
Now perhaps it just isnât that odd or unusual for a kid today to enjoy, say, Minecraft. But it damn well would have been for his/her 1990âs or 1980âs equivalent.
For some context, read books like âReady Player Oneâ, thatâs about a sort of 80âs fanaticism in general, but, pay attention to just what games in particular mean to the characters of the book. Obviously thatâs fiction, but, for many of us, while the plot may be fictional, the underlying ideas arenât so much.
1 Like
What is time to a bot?
1 Like
Here is -one- of them. With links to several others in the body. (in addition to the original post, which also refers to in-person âvisitsâ)
Thanks for asking!
ââugly muchââ - FTFY
Please donât detract from this discussion. You can be ignored, the way you say people can do, but do you need to be? Whats in it for you?
In what might be fallout from Gamergate, read the review of Bayonetta 2 over on Ars. It reads like the reviewer found himself in a conundrum after playing the game and liking it. He canât just say he likes the game when the official art looks like this:
Check out my perfectly framed butt
So he has to construct this elaborate narrative about how empowering and pro-women the game is. Simply liking it would mean heâs a sexist monster.
Riiight, your âfriendâ 
But kidding aside, if its your friends opinion, why defend it? Especially if youâve already said you donât agree.
2 Likes
Nope, Iâm at the other end of the spectrum, but I think youâve helped figure out what I donât know. When I was first gaming, the atari 2600 was hot stuff. So I got used to videogames as a solitary hobby. The MMOâs breed a completely different kind of gamer, in that teamwork counts for more than just waiting for your turn at the joystick.
Itâs a strange thought for me, but I can imagine growing up with MMOs might shape a kidâs worldview so that alien life forms like women seem impossible to engage with. I wish Iâd had role models like Felicia Day when I was growing up!
1 Like
Insecure people who paint others as responsible for their unmet needs are pretty much toxic to human dignity, and this gamergate bullshite is one of the most toxic blooms I have seen online, yet.
4 Likes
Whatâs interesting is, from what Iâve watched of Ms Dayâs work, with âThe Guildâ and the Geek and Sundry stuff, I suspect that she likely finds that âgamerâ is a part of her identity too. But thatâs just my suspicion, perhaps sheâs said as much, or the opposite, in her own blog, and someone whoâs more tuned in on that front has better info.
So, anyway, yay one small green bud of understanding, in an otherwise thorn thicket of nasty!
YupâŚnothing at all to do with misogyny.
Felicia Dayâs response comes days after Chris Kluweâs highly inflammatory message
to GlabberGlangers, in which he calls them (among other things)
âpaint-huffing shitgoblings.â Kluwe, being a man, was naturally not doxxed.
Per his tweet:
Chris Kluwe 
And for the record, none of you fucking #Gamergate tools tried to dox me, even after I tore you a new one. Iâm not even a tough target.
9:22 PM - 22 Oct 2014
8 Likes
The more that I think about it, the less sympathy I have for the âuseful idiotsâ who actually think that this has anything to do with corruption in game journalism â because for decades, game journalism was simply paid advertising for games, and we all knew it. And whatâs curious is that even the âuseful idiotsâ arenât talking at all about that corruption.
In the last few years, weâve started to get independent game reviewers, and weâre starting to get real games criticism, as our understanding matures of the nature of a new medium. And that is exactly what the âuseful idiotsâ complain about. The complaints about âcorruptionâ are complaints about political and social criticism of the newly dominant artistic medium. Itâs of a piece with a tradition of complaints about informed criticism of literature, film, and other media.
There is no aspect, none whatsoever, of Gamergate, that isnât reactionary.
9 Likes
This would mean that the actions they are taking are rational and serve what they perceive to be their best interests.
I do not have that much faith in humanity.
