#Gamergate

[KhainiWest]

If people are so worried about the negative backlash this could have on the gaming industry, why would people bring this much attention to it? There's a rather large logical inconsistency there that I seem to be missing.

....By your logic any form of corruption should be completely ignored, what? THE ACT AND THE EXPLICIT ABILITY TO EXERCISE ACT IS BAD.

I think the main thing here is that people are acting as if sex is the be-all-end-all for everyone. If I'm friends with someone and I have sex with them, how does that suddenly discredit my entire relationship with them? The next time they give me praises, it must have only been because I had sex with them.

This is GAME journalism. Not gossip girl weekly.

Typically when you have sex, and it's the only person you've had sex with, good feelings are then associated with person, which influences judgment, which influences credibility. If they made it a point that they were having an intimate relationship with said person, much like when other people review friends game, they make it a point they are FRIENDS. The context isn't there and it appears unbiased, which by far, it clearly isn't.

[y0y0y0y0shi0]

So...what? We've suddenly taken it upon ourselves to snuff out the entirety of bias in the media?

In an industry completely built around the foundations of your connections with other people*

Uh huh...

[Takebacker]

I think the main thing here is that people are acting as if sex is the be-all-end-all for everyone. If I'm friends with someone and I have sex with them, how does that suddenly discredit my entire relationship with them? The next time they give me praises, it must have only been because I had sex with them.

This is GAME journalism. Not gossip girl weekly.

Which part of "she traded sex for positive reviews on the game she made" do you not understand?

If i'm friends with someone and i have sex with them, and i happen to be a video game reviewer and i happen to review the game the person i had sex with made and give a positive review, does that discredit my review of the game? Yes. Does it discredit the website i posted the review on? Yes.

Is that a big deal by itself? Not really, it happens in journalism all the time. Is it a big deal that she knowingly did this to multiple websites in an industry young enough to never experience it? Yes.

In an industry completely built around the foundations of "having it in" with each other?

Uh huh...

The f'uck does that even mean?

[y0y0y0y0shi0]

If i'm friends with someone and i have sex with them, and i happen to be a video game reviewer and i happen to review the game the person i had sex with made and give a positive review, does that discredit my review of the game? Yes. Does it discredit the website i posted the review on? Yes.

Let's take the sex out of that.

"If I'm friends with someone, and I happen to be a video game reviewer, and I happen to review the game the person I am friends with made and give a positive review, does that discredit my review of the game?"

Obviously the sole reason I gave a positive review of the game was because I was friends with them. But as soon as I have sex with that person, the whole world goes to pomegranate and nothing else matters, right?


My friend paints a picture. Am I then not allowed to say that I enjoy the aesthetic of said picture?
Someone I hooked up with once also paints a picture. Am I still not allowed to say I enjoy the aesthetic of their picture?

[Malthe]

My friend paints a picture. Am I then not allowed to say that I enjoy the aesthetic of said picture?
Someone I hooked up with once also paints a picture. Am I still not allowed to say I enjoy the aesthetic of their picture?

Sure you are. You're just no longer a credible source that can be trusted in the public eye to give an unbiased review.
If your review is biased or not doesn't matter, you're no longer a source of information that can be trusted in this regard because the possibility of personal bias influencing what you say being too high.
Sorry, but that's how it works.

[ChaoticCJ]

Let's take the sex out of that.

"If I'm friends with someone, and I happen to be a video game reviewer, and I happen to review the game the person I am friends with made and give a positive review, does that discredit my review of the game?"

Obviously the sole reason I gave a positive review of the game was because I was friends with them. But as soon as I have sex with that person, the whole world goes to pomegranate and nothing else matters, right?

Yes, you said it yourself, that this is Game Journalism. With journalism comes some professional and ethical standards, including a disclosure of any information which could possibly sway your opinion on the subject matter. By not disclosing this information, and later finding out that there was a relationship(connection, relation, association, link, correlation, correspondence, parallel, alliance, or bond), it not only discredits you, but your review and the company you write for.

[y0y0y0y0shi0]

Sure you are. You're just no longer a credible source that can be trusted in the public eye to give an unbiased review.
If your review is biased or not doesn't matter, you're no longer a source of information that can be trusted in this regard because the possibility of personal bias influencing what you say being too high.
Sorry, but that's how it works.

...And therefore I'm the scum of the earth who is undeserving of most common decencies? The entire internet must now band together to subject me to the entirety of their wrath because I may have written a review about a single video game with some amount of bias.

When I say:

If people are so worried about the negative backlash this could have on the gaming industry, why would people bring this much attention to it? There's a rather large logical inconsistency there that I seem to be missing.

I'm not saying things like this should be completely swept under the rug. I'm saying none of this is necessary. What is the point of an internet-wide witch hunt to say that a few people's credibility might be a bit disagreeable.

Social justicers on tumblr going on a witch hunt like this would be mocked for their immaturity/irrationality.

If Zoe Quinn is shedding a negative light on games journalism, what do you think crap like this does to gamers or the internet as a whole? It must take a very large number of very respectable people to try and systematically destroy peoples' entire beings.

[Flonne]

Why does nobody care about the people she slept with, though? I don't get it.
People haven't given a pineapple about Zoe Quinn for decades. She's notorious as being a giant asswipe.

For the record, I still don't give a pineapple about her, I'm just using her as a stepping-off point to get to the real issue, pomegranatety gaming journalism and how it could potentially be harmed irreversibly by this. Giving her any sort of positive and/or negative attention whatsoever is exactly what she wants, it's better to think of her as a useful object. Like a weapon. A weapon that is used to murder mainstream gaming journalism.

[ChaoticCJ]

...And therefore I'm the scum of the earth who is undeserving of most common decencies? The entire internet must now band together to subject me to the entirety of their wrath because I may have written a review about a single video game with some amount of bias.

When I say:
I'm not saying things like this should be completely swept under the rug. I'm saying none of this is necessary. What is the point of an internet-wide witch hunt to say that a few people's credibility might be a bit disagreeable.

I am sure everyone has heard of the saying, "It isn't the scandal people react to, it's the reaction." This situation could have easily have been remedied by disclosing all of the information when the story got traction; but instead there has been an overreaction of both sides when information starts(ed) to become suppressed and deleted.

In reality, this isn't as big of a deal as you make it out to be. It is a small portion of the internet demanding some action be taken to remedy a situation which is unfair and biased. While this is news in the visual effects, gaming, and gaming journalism community, there is no harm in discussing the reality of the situation in an attempt to create a better community for this field.

[KhainiWest]

...And therefore I'm the scum of the earth who is undeserving of most common decencies? The entire internet must now band together to subject me to the entirety of their wrath because I may have written a review about a single video game with some amount of bias.

You just said that the girl was getting too much flak yet the reviewers who are equally responsible are not, so how does the "reviewer" lose all common decencies? DO you mean credibility? You haven't had sex before so you really can't even understand what it means to write someone for a friend, and write for someone in an intimate relationship with. So that's not something you can really discuss to be honest.

When I say:
I'm not saying things like this should be completely swept under the rug. I'm saying none of this is necessary. What is the point of an internet-wide witch hunt to say that a few people's credibility might be a bit disagreeable.

Social justicers on tumblr going on a witch hunt like this would be mocked for their immaturity/irrationality.

If Zoe Quinn is shedding a negative light on games journalism, what do you think crap like this does to gamers or the internet as a whole? It must take a very large number of very respectable people to try and systematically destroy peoples' entire beings.

If it was discussed by the very gaming journalism, if there was some kind of "PR" announcement regarding it, rather than them trying to use their power to sweep it under the rug, censor those who bring it up, and even up front lie about (to the point where an attorney is harassing the ex saying he's slandering based on lies), then it becomes an issue. You don't even know what you're trying to argue anymore.

[Malthe]

>Proof that you're not credible surfaces
>Use power to censor and remove anything trying to display this proof
>Lie about being hacked by a site like 4chan
>Have it blow up in your face because of trying to hide everything and censoring multiple sites

Gee i sure wonder why this got so big, it's almost like people were censored from even talking about it. Oh right, they were.
When you remove peoples ability to talk about something you can be sure they REALLY want to talk about it. And you can be sure it's going to blow up and become much bigger than it had to be.

Like what do you expect 4chan to do if someone actively drags them into it(Which Zoe Quinn did)? They're a site notorious for witch-hunts.

She's a pineappleing idiot and 100% the cause of this blowing up on her and getting this out of hand.

All this could've ended with a single article from pomegranateaku explaining how Nathan was clearly in the wrong for reviewing the games of someone he was in the intimate relationship with. But it didn't because Zoe Quinn actively decided to try to cover it up instead.

[y0y0y0y0shi0]

You just said that the girl was getting too much flak yet the reviewers who are equally responsible are not, so how does the "reviewer" lose all common decencies? DO you mean credibility? You haven't had sex before so you really can't even understand what it means to write someone for a friend, and write for someone in an intimate relationship with. So that's not something you can really discuss to be honest.

I'm sorry what? Why exactly are you pretending to know *anything* about my life? Are these the same sort of apparently misguided assumptions that you're making about this story? And, at that, how does my life have anything to do with this? You wouldn't know anything about my life, so that's not really something you can discuss, to be honest.

If it was discussed by the very gaming journalism, if there was some kind of "PR" announcement regarding it, rather than them trying to use their power to sweep it under the rug, censor those who bring it up, and even up front lie about (to the point where an attorney is harassing the ex saying he's slandering based on lies), then it becomes an issue. You don't even know what you're trying to argue anymore.

An issue to...whom, exactly? The journalism company, the misters, the ex, and her? How does that concern the rest of the internet?

[Malthe]

You know what, i give up, clearly not worth it.

[Takebacker]

The people pomegranateaku expects to read and trust their articles.

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/kotaku.com

Some context for how huge kotaku is.

And in comparison with southperry: http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/southperry.net

[KhainiWest]

I'm sorry what? Why exactly are you pretending to know *anything* about my life? Are these the same sort of apparently misguided assumptions that you're making about this story? And, at that, how does my life have anything to do with this? You wouldn't know anything about my life, so that's not really something you can discuss, to be honest.

Because your response was not outright denial but rather a deflection that my assumption is true. Plus I mean, man, it's obvious.

An issue to...whom, exactly? The journalism company, the misters, the ex, and her? How does that concern the rest of the internet?

...I'm not sure how to tell you this but the internet, has a big community and involvement in this entertainment like system, called VIDEO FCUKING GAMES. When you have SOURCES OF INFORMATION that help you DETERMINE if a game is purchasable or not based on your f`ucking criteria, and some swamp ass got his c`ock sucked to say that it fits all your goddamn criteria I as the consumer, am being f`ucking scammed.

Not only that but what about the real female game devs who STRUGGLE to get into this line of work, only to be shunned as a "possible zoe f`uck up", as sh`it like this just slander and encourages the sexist/sexism stereotypes in the establishment currently. In fact, this women is ass backwards as she RAMMED an entire foundation into the ground because she felt she was entitled to be paid for her ideas, when the guidelines perfectly stated its charitable. And if an entire news organization is going to sit here and feed me hand picked sh`it based on the best (and probably very limited) p`ussy they get, then they should be working for goddamn penthouse, not be one of the sources of information for things I don't have access too.

Here I'll summarize for you;

[Takebacker]

Not only that but what about the real female game devs who STRUGGLE to get into this line of work, only to be shunned as a "possible zoe f`uck up", as sh`it like this just slander and encourages the sexist/sexism stereotypes in the establishment currently.

Yeah i fear for my ex. Her and her bf are coding a horror game together that they intend to release it so hopefully this doesn't hurt them somehow.

[y0y0y0y0shi0]

Next time I have sex with my current boy/girlfriend, I'll be sure to send you numerous details about the entire engagement if you're so interested in my personal life.

When Watch Dogs came out and it wasn't to peoples' standards, people complained that they were "lied to". But what did you want them to do? Make a better game that's suddenly going to fulfill your utmost desires? Demanding retribution doesn't exactly solve anything.

"If you don't like a product, don't use it."
If you don't like the way Kotaku is handling this, don't read their articles? I could name a few dozen websites that cover gaming news. People have a multitude of choices. If you don't agree with one, choose another. And if you're mad that you blindly followed a single reviewer's opinion on a video game, I'm not exactly sure what you expect here. You're being "scammed" for using a free service designed to allow you to formulate your own opinion on whether or not to purchase a game (one that most people in this witch hunt probably never purchased anyway)? What?
We didn't like the way Sleepywood was run so we, what, the obvious solution was to sit around complaining about it whilst trying to destroy Adura's reputation? Because that worked out extremely well.

People have said Kotaku's been bad for a while now. Anyone can formulate their own opinion on that matter.


But what is any of it accomplishing? To what end?

I don't see a point in any of this. I'm not trying to invalidate the situation, I just think there is far too much attention put on such an insignificant thing with rather simple solutions.

But I suppose I don't have anything else to say so I'll concede here.

[Flonne]

We didn't like the way Sleepywood was run so we, what, the obvious solution was to sit around complaining about it whilst trying to destroy Adura's reputation? Because that worked out extremely well.

You aren't even comparing apples to oranges anymore, closer to fruits and invertebrates.

[Niernen]

Next time I have sex with my current boy/girlfriend, I'll be sure to send you numerous details about the entire engagement if you're so interested in my personal life.

Just make sure its in a PM, don't want to get infracted.


Pretending 4chan hacked you and trying to set them up is incredibly stupid. I mean really, /V/?

To be honest, I never use review/gaming sites, I look more at personal reviews by people I know, or people I know have similar tastes.


@Flonne; they are both organic?

[KhainiWest]

Next time I have sex with my current boy/girlfriend, I'll be sure to send you numerous details about the entire engagement if you're so interested in my personal life.

Your personal life is on southperry IRC or LoL so I don't care, it's just sex man, why you making a big deal out of it? Honestly if you can't tell the different of me writing an article about, I don't know, f`ucking a southperry member, vs the love of my life, then, well, I have no help for you, common sense can't be taught.

When Watch Dogs came out and it wasn't to peoples' standards, people complained that they were "lied to". But what did you want them to do? Make a better game that's suddenly going to fulfill your utmost desires? Demanding retribution doesn't exactly solve anything.

CTRL +F retribution

Not found??????

The authors should be held accountable for conflict of interest and not disclosing it. Period. Have you not had a real job either?

"If you don't like a product, don't use it."
If you don't like the way Kotaku is handling this, don't read their articles? I could name a few dozen websites that cover gaming news. People have a multitude of choices. If you don't agree with one, choose another. And if you're mad that you blindly followed a single reviewer's opinion on a video game, I'm not exactly sure what you expect here. You're being "scammed" for using a free service designed to allow you to formulate your own opinion on whether or not to purchase a game (one that most people in this witch hunt probably never purchased anyway)? What?
We didn't like the way Sleepywood was run so we, what, the obvious solution was to sit around complaining about it whilst trying to destroy Adura's reputation? Because that worked out extremely well.

See this is just more proof you're entirely uneducated on the matter. Like entirely, your opinion is worthless, you might as well just leave my thread. This isn't just one fansite you, jesus christ at least read the content.

What is any of it accomplishing? To what end?

Holding accountable of something as common as "conflict of interest", it's like journalism 101.