Gamergate reached 1.8 million

The End

Civilian
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
892
Reaction score
0
Points
11
A GamerGate thunderclap campaign had a social reach of 1.8 million.

https://www.thunderclap.it/projects/17127-gamergate

What's amazing to me is, since the beginning of gamergate and notyourshield, I've lost count of how many times people deny the voices of the minorities that are part of the movement. They want to pretend that their identities don't exist.
 
I don't know what any of those words mean. :csad:
 
fight the power :huh:?
 
Are we making 1.8 million gamergate threads as well? Because I'm pretty sure this is like the third already.
 
Last edited:
I still have no idea what gamer gate is.
 
For the longest time I thought it was a comment on how difficult final stage bosses could be.
 
I thought it was about the girl who falsely claimed she would be using the Kickstarter money she collected to make a game only to use it for personal things such as bills.
 
I still have no idea what gamer gate is.

It's when old geezers like me tell someone who says he is a gamer - "There's the gate...don't let it hit you in the ass as you leave."
 
That makes about as much sense as any other 'gate' news thing happening besides the original Watergate scandal.
 
I thought it was about the girl who falsely claimed she would be using the Kickstarter money she collected to make a game only to use it for personal things such as bills.

Actually, wasn't about that female developer who was found to have had sexual relationships with people prominent in the video game industry, so that they could feature and advertise her product(s)? That's why people got mad, because gaming media's worst kept secret was revealed.
 
Wait? So she had sex with 1.8 million people? :wow:
 
Weren't her games awful conceptually? Like one in which all you do is have a staring contest with Jeff Goldblum. If the complaints were legitimate I'd be on board, but to me this seems like the social justice warriors running amok again.
 
Wait? So she had sex with 1.8 million people? :wow:

Well, it was actually 5 (according to the ex-boyfriend's HUGE post), and if I remember correctly some of them worked for the big gaming media sites like IGN, Gamespot etc.
 
I like my idea better.
 
Gamergate is a crap movement that only exists to deflect criticism of the gaming community and rationalize ****** behavior:

Why GamerGate Is Destined To Fail

http://deathofgamergate.tumblr.com/post/96929549057/why-gamergate-is-destined-to-fail

What Is GamerGate?

It’s the Tea Party of video games. And Zoe Quinn is its Benghazi.

Okay, But What Is GamerGate Really?

GamerGate has been disingenuously framed as a grassroots campaign of gamers “concerned with the quality and integrity of video game journalism.” The campaign is, in truth, an effort to fold in, rehabilitate, and retroactively justify a previous campaign of blatant gender-based harassment against a female video game developer for the capital offenses of having (a) a vindictive ex-boyfriend and (b) friends within the industry.

GamerGate is a campaign run by people who don’t understand what a real conflict of interest actually is, and who would institute standards of disclosure and prohibition on reporting so restrictive as to essentially disqualify all actual journalists from the space. They sincerely believe that the mere act of patronizing a developer precludes one from objectively reporting on that developer - a standard more stringent than that found in political reporting, and for a field of journalism that is far less important.

Yet even if GamerGate’s proposals were reasonable (they’re not), it wouldn’t matter, because no matter how noble its purported aims, the campaign sprung up from one of the most noxious onslaughts of sexism to rock the gaming industry in years, and a not-insignificant number of its proponents continue to engage in that harassment to this day, tarnishing the rest by association. #NotAllGamers, you say? Tough. Welcome to the word of open-invite politics, where anyone who lays claim to a movement is technically part of that movement. See also: the Tea Party. You live and die by your worst members, and right now, your worst members are utterly and openly putrid.

Admittedly, the Tea Party has managed to do well for itself in certain parts of the United States, so why couldn’t GamerGate? The answer is simple: The stakes are too low to stomach the vitriol seeping out of the movement’s underbelly. The Tea Party, laughable as it may be to some, seeks to address real-world issues impacting the country at large, where lives, jobs, and communities are actually at stake. That people within the games industry sometimes hook up doesn’t quite rise to that level of seriousness.

GamerGate, at its core, is about a woman being denied sexual agency. Yes, there is high-minded rhetoric about a lack of integrity in journalism, but with a curious inability to point to any examples of inaccurate journalism that can be traced back to any sort of influence-peddling. It is impossible to see the tenuousness of these claims and the ferocity with which they are made as anything but overcompensation for what gamers have done to Zoe Quinn. And the refusal to admit this is only making it worse.

The Unflattering Genesis

For those unaware, GamerGate can be traced back to a single event: The Zoe Post.

In short, indie game developer Zoe Quinn was recently made the subject of a novella-sized blog entry by her scorned ex-boyfriend (“The Zoe Post”), who laid out a sordid and overwrought tale of interpersonal betrayal. His professed goal was to “warn the public” as to what kind of person Quinn supposedly is. The immediate reaction was predictable: burner Twitter accounts began to pillory Quinn with cruel invective, memefying her alleged infidelity and hounding her on every corner of the Internet.

Around this time, digital hazmat teams were deployed by many websites to stop their message boards from being used as coordination hubs for harassment campaigns against Quinn. The hue and cry of “censorship” reared its head, forming one of the core conspiracies of GamerGate: that the upper echelons of the gaming industry attempted to suppress any discussion of The Zoe Post to protect “one of its own.”

This is where accusations of corruption begin to fall apart. Zoe Quinn, while certainly a colorful personality in the gaming industry, is not by any means a power-player, and her peers are not beholden to her from any sort of financial or publicity standpoint. How easy would it have been for Kotaku et al. to run stories on The Zoe Post and rake in easy ad revenue thereby? They forfeited these opportunities, however, in the name of integrity and an attempt to elevate the collective image of the gaming industry – to show the world that we are not captive to sub-TMZ levels of malicious voyeurism.

Yet as the old adage goes, you can’t save someone from themselves. With members of the press refusing to validate The Zoe Post as an actual story, schoolyard cruelty turned to outright animosity. The details of this chapter are highly disputed, yet simultaneously unimportant – whether Quinn was “doxxed,” or doxxed herself for attention, there is no doubt that the campaign against her hit a fever pitch of venom and outright misogyny. One way or another, gamers were going to make Quinn into a headline.

And it worked.

The press finally took notice, but not for the reasons that GamerGate proponents wanted – they had unwittingly become Exhibit A for why the gaming industry was still widely considered a cesspool, unbefitting the respect accorded to traditional media. Quinn was a victim, and the gaming community her assailant. Well done, gamers!

The Incredulous Transformation Into GamerGate

To most outside observers, the discussion of Quinn was not only highly offensive, but downright embarrassing for the community at large. It was a tawdry affair with no real public interest component, one conducted with a high school-level of maturity, and the fact that so many gamers seized on it with such fervor only reinforced the “man-baby” image that our industry has been trying to shed for years. The refusal of the gaming press to validate it was, in fact, an attempt to save the community from itself. But the community made clear that it wanted nothing more than to set itself on fire.

At this point in time, it was safe to say that the campaign against Quinn had been a failure. If the intent was to ruin Quinn’s personal life, her detractors certainly came close – she and those around her endured weeks of harassment and personal threats, made even worse by the suggestion that they not “feed the trolls” by fighting back against the torrential abuse. Yet Quinn’s professional life had never been more secure. Her Twitter followers went up by 50%, Patreon funds flowed in, and the industry realized more than ever how much it needs people like Quinn – people capable of revealing just how much adolescent rage and misogyny still exists amongst rank-and-file gamers.
Quinn’s detractors quickly found themselves on the receiving end of some well-justified scorn for how they had collectively conducted themselves. They realized that, in order to gain any sort of foothold into legitimacy, they would have to shift focus away from “Zoe Quinn is an awful person” as their mantra, as too many of their members could not resist dragging Quinn’s irrelevant sexual exploits into the discussion. Instead, they attempted to seize on the one kernel of The Zoe Post that might conceivably serve as a springboard for objective critique: Zoe Quinn once dated a video game journalist.

Seriously. That’s all they had.

Gamers Put On Their Journalism Hats

The story goes that Quinn got into a relationship with a guy shortly after he wrote a piece on her involvement in a scrapped webseries. The guy then went on to write for Kotaku, where he never reported on Quinn again. Somehow, this non-story got spun into a whole web of accusations about bias and corruption in the media, failing to identify a single instance of alleged bias in the journalist’s writing. Even now, people still accuse Quinn of sleeping with journalists to generate good press and/or reviews for her games, yet have been unable to provide any examples of this actually occurring.

The hysteria of GamerGate has, amongst other things, reduced the concept of a “conflict of interest” to absurdity. Are gamers simply unaware of how industry - not just video gaming, but any industry - functions? Do they think restaurant critics are not friendly with chefs? Film critics with actors? Music critics with musicians? Without relationships, there can be no reputation-building, no insight, no nuance or holistic understanding of subject matter. To reduce every point of interest to a presumptive conflict, as GamerGate does, both fundamentally misunderstands and kneecaps journalism, and will inevitably result in journalists getting worse, not better.

The unfortunate thing is that there is certainly corruption and a lack of ethics in many pockets of the video game industry’s journalistic wing. Suspect sponsorships and payola have been standard for years; anyone remember when Jeff Gerstmann got fired from GameSpot way back in 2007 after writing a middling review of Kane and Lynch, advertisements of which were plastered all over the website? Where was GamerGate back then? Why did it take The Zoe Post, a story utterly bereft of actual corruption, to galvanize gamers into pushing back against these entrenched practices?

No matter how desperately GamerGate proponents try to sweep this detail under the rug, the fact is that they only got truly interested in this subject when there was a woman to sexually shame for it. And that’s more damning than anything in The Zoe Post.

The Oppressors As Victims

Right out of the gate, GamerGate has only managed to find traction as a data point in a wider discussion of sexism and persecution in the video game industry. It is a desperate attempt to put a constructive gloss on what started and continues to operate in the shadows as a vehicle for gendered abuse and scorn. And so the narrative has taken another turn, this time towards “gamers” as an oppressed minority, vilified simply for wanting a certain level of decorum in discussion of them and their activities.

I’ll let the irony sink in for a moment.

The big problem with that angle is that GamerGate proponents conflate the act of gaming with their self-ascribed identify as gamers. Gamer doesn’t simply mean “one who plays games” – rather, it describes those who build a lifestyle around games, who emotionally invest in gaming subculture, and who take an active interest in the internal politics of gaming. And many of those so-called “gamers” are, in fact, the ones who were first to seize on The Zoe Post in its nascent, most prurient stage. Before anyone was interested in “journalistic integrity,” it was gamers launching incendiary volleys of ****-shaming Quinn’s way, choking her Twitter feed with blatant harassment.

Gamers are not being vilified for the mere act of playing games. They’re being vilified for constructing and nurturing a subculture that readily allows fiascos like The Zoe Post to take hold. One simply doesn’t see this level of sustained, community-based harassment in other spheres of media; not even comic book nerds would have the gall to conduct themselves in this manner. To throw up one’s hands and whine “#NotAllGamers!” is to abdicate any responsibility for taking care of one’s own house - a house that desperately needs tending before termites destroy the whole foundation.

Video gaming has come a long way in the past decades, from being a niche nerd hobby to now constituting a multi-billion dollar global industry. Attempts to shed its reputation as the #1 hobby of stunted man-children, however, have been regularly stymied by the “core” fanbase of gamers who perceive any critique of their subculture as a personal affront, one requiring not merely a retort, but retaliation. It is this childish mindset that prohibits many gamers from perceiving what is and isn’t fair game in a discussion.

In case they need it spelled out, the number of people someone has slept with isn’t fair game. Nor are weak gestures at legitimate issues when they operate as Trojan horses for gendered animosity. And until a sufficient number of community members digest that lesson, the remainder must accept that they will be judged alongside their brethren.

Don’t like it? Tell your brethren to knock that **** off.

Why GamerGate Won’t Succeed

The preceding should make it abundantly clear that the ostensible overarching goals of GamerGate have been entirely subverted by the muck and mire it crawled out from. The prevailing headline is not about any journalistic crisis in video gaming, as the GamerGate community has failed to provide any journalistic product that demonstrates inaccuracy linked to bias. Instead, the headline is about how gamers attempted to destroy a woman’s entire life (additionally targeting anyone in the blast radius for the sin of proximity) largely based on alleged crimes of gender.

(Again, #NotAllGamers is irrelevant. They were gamers. They came from the gaming community. They did it in the name of gaming. And they get away with it because of the nature of the gaming community’s prevailing subculture, which many gamers continue to defend in substance, if not in form. The community is culpable for what it births, and that culpability grows every time its member try to sweep the abuse under the rug.)

Whether or not you agree with the preceding capsule summary is irrelevant – that’s the headline. It’s the one that’s been carried from The Guardian to Time Magazine, with only a handful of low-level webzines and YouTube channels buying the GamerGate version of events. And every subsequent attempt to change the narrative has only collectively dug the community in deeper as it runs from one corner of the Internet to the next, desperate to avoid a mea culpa - to find something, anything, to exonerate it, instead of lifting a finger to try and help the people hurt by its own members.

This is the conduct of children. This is the conduct of screaming toddlers unable and/or unwilling to admit the extent to which they transgressed, desperately deflecting to purported issues of substance in the hopes that enough flailing and kicking will make everyone forget what got them in trouble in the first place. This is why gamers are infantilized – because they so often act like infants. And GamerGate won’t change this perception, because it’s an extension of that infantile aversion to responsibility.

Conclusion

Let’s not mince words: GamerGate is stillborn. It will not be salvaged by a public relations cleanup. No number of cute mascots or appeals to broader principle like censorship or journalistic integrity will negate the damage its members have done to their own cause, simply because the cause is not one of sincere origin. It would be as if the Ku Klux Klan (or a group that includes members thereof) tried to convince the public that their real concern is high levels of inner city crime created by low-income residents – knowing where the Klan came from, why wouldn’t their superficially legitimate concerns immediately be seen as suspect?

(A note for the slow: No, this is not to compare all gamers or GamerGate proponents to Klansmen. It is to say that the foundational movement of GamerGate, borne of The Zoe Post, is a heinous one, and the linkage between the two still manifests to the detriment of every single constructive element of the campaign’s current form.)

If gamers really want to make a positive impact on the perception and function of their community, they will get their priorities straight. The first goal should be to make sure what happened to Zoe Quinn can never happen again – at the very least, not on the appalling scale that it did. After that, maybe we can start to talk about those ”standards of conduct” that were curiously absent from GamerGate’s entire first act.
 
“Gamergate Isn’t Even About That Anymore. It’s About Ethics in Journalism”
Posted on: September 18, 2014 By: Todd In: Blog

http://chezapocalypse.com/gamergate-isnt-even-about-that-anymore-its-about-ethics-in-journalism/

My dad always told me that for the sake of not alienating my audience I shouldn’t say controversial things, but the cat is pretty much out of the bag on this one. I’ve said a lot of negative things about the Internet hashtag movement called “#Gamergate” in the last week or so and I’ve gotten a lot of pushback from its supporters. Most of them were awful, some attempted to be reasonable, the most notable was a very, very long one I got just today. I wasn’t going to respond, particularly because there are already better articles out there (I’d recommend this one in particular). But getting all this off my chest has been surprisingly good for my system, and I suppose this is as good a place as any to put my thoughts and observations. (Be warned: This essay is not for beginners; it presumes you already know the basics of this story because trying to recap this mess would be too depressing and exhausting.)

Anyway, back to that guy (I think it was a guy) who sent me that long thing. Right off the bat, he conceded that gaming culture does have a deep problem with misogyny and that many of the Gamergate supporters are troglodytes, and because of the movement’s diverse and disorganized nature, the sane members were stymied and in disagreement on what to do about it. But he also believed firmly that the idiots didn’t represent the whole of Gamergate, that it was a force for good and didn’t deserve to be dismissed because of its worst elements. He was conciliatory and respectful and I believe it was an honest attempt to earn some respect for his cause, and various others have clamored at me that I should be taking Gamergate more seriously.

First off, I want to make clear: I have done the research on this. Whenever anyone criticizes or has a negative opinion of this movement, they get told repeatedly, as I did, that they have a misunderstanding of what’s going on. I assure you: I have all the information you do. I’ve read all the manifestos, I’ve witnessed the Gamergaters in action, and I have come to my own conclusions. They are this:

Gamergate exists primarily as a reaction to the original anti-Zoe Quinn explosion, which was a disgusting hate mob of blatant misogyny and harassment. (No one try to tell me it wasn’t, please; I watched it as it was happening and it was transparently vile.) Because of its awfulness, there was a pro-ZQ backlash. Shortly after, something called “Gamergate” sprang up, centering around the most legitimate-sounding issue brought up by the anti-Zoe people: ethics in gaming journalism.

It sounds like a nice thing to care about, especially because gaming journalism has notorious problems with its coziness to game publishers, on whom they are dependent for ad revenue. From what I can tell, there’s a lot of resentment against gaming journalism in general, and I think that’s where Gamergate gets most of its non-******* supporters from.

Well, I have read as much about the movement as I can. I read and I read and I read, all the posts, all the tweets, manifesto after manifesto, the strongly worded defenses, the ridiculous convoluted conspiracy theories, the *****ebags, the non-*****ebags, and all in between. And the main theme I got is this: Gamergate exists primarily to defend gamer culture from accusations of misogyny. And for some it’s an avenue that they pursue in an admirable, positive way. There are at least some people within the movement attempting to police it and remove the ****heads and harassers.

Now, for others, the opposite is true. For some, it remains a vehicle for misogyny, unchanged from the pre-Gamergate iteration of this movement. And there are many varying degrees of responses between those two poles – the “#notyourshield” hashtag trying to highlight the movement’s diversity, passive statements against harassment, attempts to move the conversation away from Zoe Quinn entirely, sockpuppets, and so on.

Note that almost none of this has anything to do with ethics in journalism. Gamergate is a counterargument to the notion that misogyny is an epidemic in gaming culture. That’s all. That’s where the movement came from; that’s where it remains. It’s a spin job; at best an attempt to actively remove *******s from the cause, at worst a deflection and smokescreen for continuing misogyny. I have seen a vast, dispiriting quantity of the latter; I’ve seen very little of the former. (Some Gamergaters claim that they reject harassment, but harassers sure aren’t rejecting Gamergate in turn.)

And for that reason, I’d call Gamergate mostly an anti-feminism/social-justice movement. Partly that’s because that’s exactly what many, many Gamergate activists explicitly told me it was. But it’s also because that seems to be the only common thread within the movement–the actual stuff about ethics is muddied, half-assed, shifting and grasping at straws. This week people are angry that journalists from different sites talk to each other on a message board; last week it was racketeering. Three weeks ago Gamergate was angry about Zoe Quinn; now Gamergate is angry that Zoe Quinn is making Gamergate about her. And when this latest “scandal” fails to gain traction, Gamergate will be about something else. The movement is constantly searching for something that will legitimize the intense level of rage that everyone initially joined in on.

But the anti-SJW stuff? That’s pretty consistent. (And “SJW” in this case apparently encompasses anyone who criticizes Gamergate.) It ranges from mild resentment at critics calling gamers a bunch of hateful white boys, to open undisguised misogyny. The #notyourshield hashtag was launched to defuse accusations that it consists of racist misogynists. The attacks on gaming sites center entirely around the ones with “pro-SJW” reputations who are believed to be “unethical” based on unverified, convoluted conspiracy theories from sketchy sources, while sites with more flagrant and proven ethical violations go untouched. Gamergate has been quick to attack Anita Sarkeesian and quick to adopt Christina Hoff-Sommers, despite neither having anything to do with ethics or journalism. Forum moderators attempting to keep the hatemob from spreading get called “SJW”s – even, hilariously, on 4chan. As a movement about journalism ethics, Gamergate has been a complete and total failure, but as an anti-social justice movement it’s been wildly successful. It is only barely about what it’s “about” and for that reason alone, I do not respect it. Its most reasonable defenders have tried to get me to ignore the (enormous) negatives associated with the movement and acknowledge the positives, but I just don’t see any. At best Gamergate is confused and useless; at worst it’s cancerous and evil.

Some have suggested to me that Gamergate only got distracted from its original goal because they’ve been forced to play defense after so many accusations of misogyny, but Gamergate was borne directly from a sexist hate mob. The rampant hate and ugliness was its original goal. #notyourshield literally exists only to be a shield, to protect gaming culture from the consequences of the original onslaught of hatred and sexism. Zoe Quinn has been downgraded from Public Enemy No. 1 to the codename “Literally Who” in an attempt to expunge the movement’s origins, as if that **** could or should be erased. It’s a whitewash of the real issue; you don’t get to drag a person’s life through the mud and then just decide it’s not about her anymore. (And notably, this rhetorical shift only happened after it was clear that Zoe was winning the PR war.)

That’s my view of the movement; it likely won’t change. I’ve read all the most reasonable-sounding defenses of the movement and they have completely failed to alter my opinion. And as a side note, the person who wrote me that long essay sent it to many of my colleagues, noting that all the web personalities he admired seemed to be anti-Gamergate. He acknowledged the obvious response to that observation (“That should tell you something”), but offered instead that it could mean that no one has really tried to see it from his perspective.

To that I’d make the counterpoint that most of Gamergate has zero awareness of how it looks to anyone outside of it, especially those of us who work on the Internet. Sexism and harassment have become a fairly constant part of my life now, because there are females I work with and care about, all of whom have been exposed to horrible things pretty goddamn similar to what happened to Zoe Quinn because they said the wrong thing, crossed the wrong person or just plain was a woman. And I’ll be honest: This job has become a lot less fun because of it. That’s my perspective; that’s the perspective of pretty much everyone on this side of the troll wall, especially if they are a woman or work with one. There is a reason that most reputable media professionals and grown-ups have come out against Gamergate; it seems piddling compared to real issues. Even without the doxxing and threats, it would be hard to drum up support for this cause among outsiders, but in connection with the horror of the harassment that actually happened to a real person? I simply do not believe that this movement was salvageable at any point.
 
Also, for the record: The Watergate Scandal revolved around a massive government conspiracy involving election tampering, covert operations in South America, both the FBI and CIA spying on and assassinating American Civil Rights activists, and ultimately the resignation of a President and the incarceration of several key members of his staff. Do not use the -gate suffix lightly.
 
Yeah, if it truly was about integrity in gaming journalism, they would be focused on the big publishers. Not this one female indie maker.
 
Gamergate is a crap movement that only exists to deflect criticism of the gaming community and rationalize ****** behavior:

Why GamerGate Is Destined To Fail

http://deathofgamergate.tumblr.com/post/96929549057/why-gamergate-is-destined-to-fail

Gamergate (ugh, I hate the use of the suffix -gate. I hate that the nude hack thread is named "celebgate" for some reason) has not gained any mainstream attention and will not, because Video Game publications Websites have not only have no actual journalistic credibility, their journalistic credibility is actually worse than tabloids.

http://bonglorio.tumblr.com/post/96244295610/i-work-for-reuters-im-a-journalist-in-the-media

"I work for Reuters. I’m a journalist in the media business.
Back in 2008, I sat in a conference and reviewed some proposals to integrate news sources focused on electronic gaming into our RSS service as niche content providers.
We considered IGN, Gamespot, and a few other syndicated online info feeds.
Now, in order to white label a source as affiliated with Reuters, you need to run through a checklist of ~100 items that are necessary for journalistic integrity. The source and its organization has to score at least a 60 out of 100 for it to be considered fair and unbiased.
These tests are carried out by senior journalists, editors, and investigators.
NONE of the gaming publications scored higher than a 15. For reference, the National Enquirer scored a 38 and the MSNBC blogosphere scored 44.
Some failures included:
- Economic ties with publishers
- Acceptance of favors
- 0% of staff held journalism degree
- Very small percentage worked in other major publications
- No real editing process
- No accountability
tl;dr: Gaming “journalism” is a joke and the laughingstock of reporting media. Continue to read these publications if you want, but assume that everything you read is biased or an outright lie.”
Gaming news is officially worse than supermarket tabloids folks. Let that sink in for a while. These people are are several steps below “IS BRAD PITT CHEATING ON ANGELINA???”

These gaming publications are deflecting blame but it's failing, mostly because gamers don't buy it and the only people that do are radical feminists (who do not care for games) on twitter looking to for issues to forward their own interests.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"