Clarkson gone!

[Ironside]

There's a scandal brewing right now about a calgary expo and seeing how they respond is fascinating.

It sort of adopting the tactics and not getting the point of it. Get in through a lie, then go in with active derailment tactics. That's sort a check list on how to get banned from that type of expo. Then claim victory to show the evil and hypocrisy of their opponents. It was a funded kickstarter with that specific purpose.

Harassment is real, it's not nearly omnidirectional towards femenists, or anti-gg for that matter, but it's real. Doesnt make her refual to allow comments less detrimental to her image.

The edge of harassment is towards feminists. It heavily outnumber the average harassment noise. It's underlying the entire conversation.

Disabling comments one of the things that get mostly ignored, unless you have an axe to grind.

Mess around? You're rewarded for it's disposal with no regard for how much you exploit the game's physics for sexual jollies. Add to that the reward being so low as to be nigh irrelevant I fail to see how: "players are meant to derive a perverse pleasure from desecrating the bodies of unsuspecting virtual female characters" is any less of a lie.

Mess around= Move around in this case. Makes a stronger visual imagery.

It is drawn from a specific narrative. You can reject that narrative and thus rejecting the point it would make (making it incorrect in your mind), but from that narrative it's not a lie. The combined work of the game developers put it in there for a reason.

So? It just means other people wanting to make a buck will come along and fill the holes your converting those developers left. There's a demand, a very big one, and unless you lessen that demand converting the providers in a free market is a wasted effort and sarkeesian is counter productive to lessening said demand.

It would diversify the market. Some games would have more. Most less. That would be a good thing.

And if they cant persuade thier way through that wall they will lose. See here's the thing: I'm not on your side, I could have been but that ship sailed a week ago. What I'm doing here isnt trying to explain why you are wrong in your beliefs, I am trying to explain how you are failing to convince me and others like me.
The big part is not being able to get past the trolls, if you cant take the slings and arrows of he internet you wont reach enough people to matter and you may as well give up.

Getting only trolls would be a vast improvement. That is of an issue. When the trolls have upgraded to harassers (who don't disappear by being ignored) and there's no system to take care of them, what do you do then? Let them win of course. That won't ever become a problem later on.

The second biggest part is the moral highground, stumbling at the trolls is detrimental but going to thier level is fatal. Letting yourself be represented by a unrepentant liar will lose you followers not gain you.

Someone hasn't been studying the greats. I reccomend you look up how Ghandi, Mandela and King won change, it wasnt by letting lies and slander be spoken in thier name unchallenged.

I suspect the new Positive Female Characters is a response to that. Since the focus are mostly on positive things, it's way less aggressive.

When journalists promote someone's product and fail to mention a previous relationship there will inevitably arise questions of intergrity, is this journalist review objective or is he coloured by affection? It doenst matter if it is sexual or platonic such relationships will colour opinion and reduce objectivity, for this reason the public expects journalists to at the very least to mention a prior relationship with the people they write on.

Ben Kuchera did not.

Further digging produced similar instances, Patricia Hernandez, Robin Arnott and others suspected of such relations with game devs. At first the reaction was reasonable; polygon and kotaku announced changes to thier codes of ethics, Kotaku to ban patreon payments between thier journalists and game devs, and polygon to always announce previous relations. People weren't exactly satisfied with this but it was a step in the right direction.

IIRC Ben's article was basically that here's some indie games that you can find to be interesting. I might be mixing him up with Grayson on that though.

It's worth remembering that at this point, something like 99% of the active harassment is still towards Zoe.

We’ve done a really good job there. But, for various reasons, we didn’t do a good enough job taking those same steps with indie developers, and some of us weren’t clear enough about our personal connections while writing about games or stories we found interesting. We fucked up there, and we’ll all learn from it and move on.

But if GamerGate were a movement that solely said “hey, you guys didn’t disclose this this and this” and called out journalists when they did shitty things, we’d be living in a different world entirely

Then this happened: http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...20/941/a84.jpg A series of articles decrying gamers all on the same day. Thus was the Anti-gamergate movment started, with gaming journalists lashing out at gamers right as thier credibility was under scrutiny.

That is how the Gamergate proponants record how the gamergate fiasco started. You can see for yourself this is thier narrative and if anti-gamergate was working optimally it would be attacking that, challenging the points, the evidence collected etc, trying to disprove the accusation of collusions.

It's sort of hard to prove that you don't have a collusion, from someone that wants you to have one, when you're open with that you are in contact with them and do a theme piece. The summary, consisting of two things, if you read the articles is that the gamer is becoming dead the same way a movier is. When everyone does it, it's no longer an identifier,even if some people are more into it than others.

The second and more important part is the massive criticism of an active harassment campaign. Not trolling, major harassment way beyond the regular internet trolling noise. That got the explosion.

The narrative that's pushed that you ignore and that the entire world notices are the massive harassment, way, way beyond trolling. There's a reason why GG got kicked out of 4chan and why the official GG supporters are almost entirely consisting of people with hateful and dubious reputation.

It gets ignored into trolls will be trolls and thus it "disappears".
"Why do you find those guys evil?"
"They kidnap children and eat them."
"Psh, boys will be boys. Show me something bad about them."

Instead it is pointing at the trolls and the fools and going "look how awful gamers are" while ignoring the rational arguers. I think that is less a strategy and more a stopgap measure, but it might have worked if anti gamergate could keep the moral highground, be seen as the mature party.
Language warning:
Alas, they are showing again and again they cant.

That's why they will lose if they dont change. When gamers do things like this noone cares, it's expected and they dont have a reputation to lose, but when those who decry them for it start doing it themselves they show themselves as hypocrites. Worse would be if, as has been claimed, they are truly doing it on purpose as irony, that would mean they are giving things for those gamers you decry to throw it in Anti-GG's face for a cheap laugh.

That is a an example of disorganisation (since anti GG isn't exactly a movement as such) and the internet. Some degree of trolling on the net seems to be the norm on many sites. Then again, you run with 5 mighty examples. I can't post the content of the FF twitter link with more than 100 posts without getting a warning. "Get cancer" is a nicer one from the list. Have you read it?

There is no audience left anymore that hasnt already heard everything in the book applied to gamers. Smearing doesn't hurt anymore and if Anti-GG keep trying it will keep backfireing.
As far as I can see the only way forward for Anti GG is to change tactics and start converting the enemy, and they dont seem to want to.

That would require them to read the tiny areas were something that could be called an organised Anti GG really exist. A well thought out argument has to be read first. And the heavy spinners are pretty much beyond salvation.

You know the major way that gamergate fights right now? By recording what the important people in AntiGG says and showing them to their sponsering companies in the hopes that these advertisers will pull funding due to bad press, and it's been working.
See that's why I dont think GG will lose if things keep going on as they have been; GG has weaponized their opponants own capacity for being offensive.

It worked once, until the context were provided afaik. They are fond of the method though, they also use it against reviews they don't like. Because ethics and free speech, you know.