Thoughts on gamergate

[The Duck]

I don't think it's just that. It is pernicious because people who engage in things like TiA regularly seem to develop a warped sense of what things like feminism are. As a result, in other instances where someone even mentions identity politics, the bar for labeling and dismissing someone as an "SJW" is lowered because of all of the time these people spend in a place ridiculing strawmen. Not only that, immersing yourself a place like that also shifts how you perceive how frequent an opinion or behavior is in the wider population.

[metroid composite]

Meanwhile, on 8chan....

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/02/11/1363758/-Federal-Judge-Katherine-Forrest-doxed-SSN-posted-on-8ch-net-baphomet-8chan-Admin-Destroys-Evidence?showAll=yes

[Grefter]

While hitting the Ghazi hot buttons on the topic

https://web.archive.org/web/20150212032240/https://twitter.com/infinitechan/status/565688109837590528

Archive and forward to the authorities?  I was not aware that this was an available option.

[metroid composite]

Filthy Frank

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOAJu4CrBUU

EDIT: cool gender research I find by hanging out on Gamerghazi:

http://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943

[Grefter]

http://www.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/2wiew7/do_you_people_not_remember_jack_thompson/

I figure this will get burned down quickly, but wanted to link to something dumb.

[metroid composite]

If you want silly Ghazi shit, I had some involvement in this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LznsK7TmH4

[metroid composite]

So....turns out Jace Connors was not schizophrenic at all.  He was an actor, who thought what he was doing was funny.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/gamergates-archvillain-is-really-a-trolling-sketch-comedian#.yhX5e7DxJ

Seriously, what the fuck?

[Grefter]

Yeahhhhh gonna need more sources than buzzfeed on that one before I believe that is the full story.

[metroid composite]

Yeahhhhh gonna need more sources than buzzfeed on that one before I believe that is the full story.

Fair, this was posted on ghazi:

Uh, I'm not sure if he does. This article is a bit strange to me. If you look at his recent, out of character comments on Youtube and Steam he seems to have a much more chevalier attitude about all of this. One to the effect of being quite amused that Brianna spent time and money trying to get a restraining order against "a figment of my imagination." This seems a bit inconsistent with all of it, is all.
So either he's playing both sides or... I'm not sure that this article is telling the truth. One or the other, I think.
Regardless, one thing is quite certain at this point. Jace Connors was a ruse.

His repentant attitude as displayed in the buzzfeed article may not be genuine.  Aaaand I'd say some of the harassment he's gotten doesn't match 8chan's MO.  (Knocking on someone's door and running away?  That's like...a 90s prank, and not something that 8chan has done yet to my knowledge).

Regardless, none of this makes him look better.

EDIT: yeah, found the comment that was paraphrased above--it sounds much nastier in his original wording:

ParkourDude91 ~ 12 hours ago
 
Still laughing that an insane tranny wasted 2 days in court and hundreds of dollars trying to get a restraining order against a figment of my imagination

source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBlJZdSsfcw&feature=youtu.be


EDIT: a second article on the issue, but it doesn't shed much more light:

http://jezebel.com/man-who-terrorized-brianna-wu-for-months-says-he-was-ju-1687689719

EDIT2: there is now some skepticism as to whether he was ever a comedian; the comedy group he claims to be a part of doesn't have him listed.  Some are thinking he might just be a gater.

In other news, this looks to be the most upvoted thing on Ghazi ever, so I'll leave it here:

http://ahs-comic.com/poseidon.png

[Grefter]

He gets a prize for being the first person I have heard of to have a joke that was criminally unfunny.

[metroid composite]

The most gamergate tweet ever, courtesy of Roguestar:

http://i.imgur.com/FqZupHQ.jpg
(EDIT: archive: https://archive.today/TlozN )

A really good read on the whole Mark Kern thing:

http://www.brokentoys.org/?p=5672

A response hashtag that spun off from the above, that I thought was pretty cool:

https://storify.com/Tolvo/women-and-allies-speak-out-on-letwomenspeak

And...I actually learned quite a bit about how the press works from this piece:

https://medium.com/@ashleylynch/collusion-corruption-and-other-gamergate-myths-fc8b8a02bfa3

[The Duck]

This is tangential but really disheartening. Reddit witch hunts always seem to yield positive fruit.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/witch-hunt-against-fake-female-hearthstone-player-/1100-6425551/

[metroid composite]

Was thinking of LD as I wrote this:

https://storify.com/metroidcomposit/if-you-actually-want-to-be-neutral

[Grefter]

Oh hey that was you, didn't notice.

[Excal]

I suspected that that was a reference to LD in your defense of the piece.  Nice to see it confirmed. 

[VySaika]

I tried reading the met-link but got "this storify api is unreachable"?

EDIT: Okay now I can read it...kinda? It gets to the bottom of the page, I see a "read the next page" button. Click it. Nothing happens. <_______>

Double EDIT: Hey finally got it to work. That sight just did not want to work for me. Will post below with thoughts.

[The Duck]

http://www.staresattheworld.com/2015/03/jordan-owen-absconed-budget-sarkeesien-effect/

omg

[NotMiki]

Was thinking of LD as I wrote this:

https://storify.com/metroidcomposit/if-you-actually-want-to-be-neutral

Interesting piece.  I broadly agree with the points you make, but I want to go a bit further with this.  To me, neutrality is a dirty word.  What people who claim neutrality really want is freedom from being criticized for refusing to condemn the contemptible.  The ability to offer aid to an organization you know is corrupt without being tarred with their corruption.  Finally, they want to be praised for their circumspection, for people to admire them for choosing the "right" path.  Fuck that, and fuck them.  Fuck Switzerland.  Fuck swing voters.  Fuck all of it, and fuck each and every one of those sanctimonious assholes.  If you see something that's wrong, say it's wrong.  If you won't say it's wrong, you're a coward, and you should just own it instead of pretending you a big fucking neutral hero.  If you can't tell it's wrong, you're willfully blind.  If you want to mediate...well, that's fine, but you must understand that the purpose of mediation is to create a workable agreement.  Mediation is explicitly NOT about coming to the right answer on a moral question.

[VySaika]

So some of this is in response to met's article, most is in response to Jim's "fuck all you neutral assholes" rant.

For me, neutrality is usually a shorthand for either a) not actually caring enough about the issue to get involved. Or b) not having enough information/being skeptical of the information you have received. Which the piece there covered pretty neatly. If B, then follow all these steps! Or get off the fence. Or turn it into A if following all those steps is too much of a hassle. If A...well, then carry on not giving a fuck, that's fine. But there is something else that...kinda falls into 'neutral' but kinda doesn't.

What I see sometimes on issues(not on Gamergate because, uh, I only vaguely follow it here) is someone claiming neutrality because they can't bring themselves to agree wholly with any side of it. I see this in politics, people who like some of what one party does, but not other things. And same deal on the other party. So they have to prioritize what they care about most, or wind up sitting it out. I also see neutrality used by people who don't want to feel associated with the crazies that get the most publicity on either side of an issue.

Is that cowardice? I'm betting Jim will say yes, but I don't really think so. Because whenever someone takes a stand on an issue, the first thing opponents will do is drag up the craziest assholes that support your stance and go "oh so you think this shit is okay?". Which is dumb and bad, but people don't know how to deal with it. Condemn the extremist actions of your own side? Get ready for a deluge of "How dare you criticize us, you're not really on our side at all!" Try to brush it off or ignore it? Hey, that's just another form of refusing to condemn the contemptible! Deflect by pointing out the crazies on their side? And now we reach Business As Usual for arguments.

I'm kinda rambling at this point, but...I don't really have a good answer to the above. To speak only for myself for a moment(since I am the only person I can speak with absolute surety for), I certainly feel kinda like a hypocrite when I take a strong stance...and then my supposed allies on that issue start acting like giant douchebags and doing indefensible things in the name of a good cause. I take the route of condemning their actions, dealing with the backlash and moving on...usually right out of the arguments because I now feel ostracized by the very people I theoretically agree with. If I don't feel strongly enough about an issue to risk walking into that exhausting viper's nest again? Then I don't take an active stance and just quietly agree with the side I like more...but I stay out of the fighting. If it's a political issue I vote my conscience and stay out of the debates. I just don't have the energy to take a hard stance on every issue that crosses my path, quite frankly. Arguing is mentally exhausting and emotionally draining, only worth it if I really feel strongly about something.

So yeah, that's...not really "neutral" but it's not really taking a side either. I don't quite know what to call it, so it winds up getting lumped under "staying neutral". And while I also tend to roll my eyes at those who claim neutral is morally superior or whatnot, I also find myself curious if the "I don't have the energy to argue" or "I can't fully agree with either side so I don't know what to do" kinds of "neutral" fall into that "fuck you neutral cowards" territory?

[Grefter]

If I don't make it, tell my wife "Hello".

I think the difference would be between being passively "Neutral" out of ignorance or lack of investment in an issue and acting actively "Neutral".  I think ambivalent might be the word you are after?

So like if you are not invested in the topic then you probably aren't (or shouldn't...) be discussing it greatly.  If you are actively involved in a topic and sit on the fence on your high horse you aren't really adding much of value to the conversation.  In that case, I am kind of with Jim in that people like that can kindly fuck right off.

[metroid composite]

To be clear, I am definitely not neutral; I post on Ghazi daily, and frankly rarely even glance at kia these days.  I do have a couple of gaters I keep in touch with, just so I have a second source on things.

Nor am I saying neutrality is the noble choice.

But like...look at today's events.  The twitterverse against gg goes on a witch hunt against Brianna Wu.  Why?  Because she had coffee with Brad Wardell (a gater).  Look at Athena Hollow's timeline if you're curious.  The rage actually spilled over onto Ghazi (usually Ghazi is more moderate).  The demand for ideological purity was pretty clearly taken too far today.

[NotMiki]

Gref has it right.  My invective is directed not at people who refuse to take sides in a bipolar conflict (or who have decided to tune the whole thing out) but rather with people who claim that there is inherent virtue in refusing to take sides.  They're the ones who condone vile behavior and ask to be applauded for it.  They disgust me.  Think Nazi gold in Swiss banks, because hey, not our problem.  (Seriously fuck Switzerland.)

I appreciate people who take a complicated stance that can acknowledge some wrong in positions they broadly agree in.  I have no problem with a person who has looked at the bundle of associations on either side of a conflict and decided that neither is worth associating with.  That's an problem inherent to labels.  You don't have to feel like a hypocrite because people who agree with you one one important point also happen to be douchebags.

[Grefter]

There was definitely some fire on Twitter today about two opinionated game devs talking when they were both at convention and one of them saying that on the topic of actually running a business they agree on stuff.

So yeah, suffice to say people getting up in arms about it was pretty crazy.  I feel bad for Brianna having to feel like she needed to defend herself from people that usually had her back, but Brad Wardell pushes their buttons.

That isn't to say people should have blown up at her.  People should have known to take some distance themselves and remember that part of the problem is how much crazy microscopic scrutiny there already is on her life and that maybe, just maybe, who she socializes with at an industry event is her prerogative and the fact that she can come out of it with "Hey we agree with each other on some things" is something she is well within her rights to broadcast (especially noting that it is how to run a business, so nothing to do with GG related stuff more than tangentially in that some of the sketchy stuff Wardell has been accused of was in the workplace aaaand that he threw out a tweet suggesting a gater artist apply for work way early in the piece).

People lost their shit because she was trying to approach him as a human and to try and to humanise other people's interpretation of her.  Just like Wardell is no devil she is no saint either.

All I hope is she gets some time to decompress after the crazy convention schedule and do some things she enjoys.

This is also obviously not to be "neutral" but to say you don't have to always be an activist 24/7.  Sometimes, maybe, just possibly people are allowed to do their day job and not be constantly scrutinized for it.

Edit - Checking what people were saying.

Errrrrgh there is a lot of "we defended her even though she didn't do everything perfect all the time" sort of sentiment or being mad that she isn't 100% perfect as an activist.  Do people forget what they were defending her from?  Personal attacks and commonly transphobic slights as if her genital mattered to the quality of her games.  Should people suddenly have stopped defending someone from that kind of shit at any point?

Gross internet is gross.

[VySaika]

Re: Jim/Gref - I'm...honestly quite happy to be wrong about how I read what you wrote there, then! Maybe it was the hour, or maybe it was just my recent mood, but that read like an absolutist "pick a side or fuck you forever" stance to me at first. Which...well, my discomfort with absolute stances is one of the topics I'm willing to expend the energy to argue(is that irony? It feels like irony. But I'm not an english major). On clarification, I get what you're actually saying now and p.much agree.

Re: Brianna Wu thing - ...what the fuck? She has a civil conversation with a guy on the other side of the issue at a convention and gets villified for it? <________> I don't even have words for that. Being able to have those civil discussions with someone you are on opposite sides with is...imo a mark of maturity and should be respected. Even if you can't come to any agreements on the issue in question(or aren't even looking to come to any agreements on that), being able to talk about other things without the contested issue bleeding over is good!

[Cotigo]

Watch Tim Schafer's sock puppet account engage in hate speech.