Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Didero

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 213
@MasterChiToes: I'm sorry I allowed an inkling of doubt, I'll try to be completely 100% unmovably entrenched in my opinion like you from now on. Also nowhere I insulted 'all gamers', but you already seemed to have made your mind up.

**** it, I'm out, this is useless, I don't need this aggravation.

I was gonna write a big post with replies to all of you but **** it, this is taking up far too much of my time already.

Maybe the reason journalists seem to 'ignore' GG concerns is because the only thing they see of its supporters is either threats, insults, or far-fetched conspiracy theories, and when they try to have a discussion, it ends in insults or non-sequiturs. THAT's the reason for all those 'Gamers are dead' articles: If a group of people get extremely angry because some lady somewhere has sex or another points out things she dislikes in their hobby, those journalists don't want to write stuff for that group anymore, because they don't need to; there are far more people that also enjoy games but aren't stuck in time.

The only 'ethics concerns' I've seen from GamerGate are either ridiculous or provably false, and the actual ethics concerns are completely ignored by GG.

Milo is a right-wing sensationalist but you really can't pretend that he hasn't been reasonable about this.

"I know almost all woman in the game industry" is wasting everybody's time.
I don't have to pretend. Did you read the questions he wanted to ask Wu? They basically boiled down to "When are you going to apologize for being wrong?".  His portrayal of the issue is as one-sided as GamerGate claims major gaming site treat it, except they're less critical since he's on their side.
Did you read through his other articles?

Oh, in addition to my post, Wu's response to Yiannopoulos's accusation of her ignoring him.

Furthermore, most of the questions Yiannopolous wanted to ask seem very leading, and hardly impartial or even fair.



It wrecks the MSNBC interview from earlier today.

Strap in, this is a long one. I already wasted far too much time on this, so there's gonna be grammar and spelling errors.

00:16:   Only things directly mentioning GamerGate can possibly be related to it, right
00:39:   Casual dismissal of death threats
00:45:   Only believes something if ALL the proof is shown, no such qualms with own evidence
01:00:   One GamerGate tweet is not sexist, insulting or negative, therefore all of GamerGate is fantastic
01:15:   Alex Baldwin is famous so he can't be sexist
01:40:   'Battle of the Sexes', granted, is a stupid way to present this. Since this is easily refuted, no need to spend minutes on it though
03:00:   That list is people in the same industry discussing that industry. That's pretty common in most industries, and not proof of collusion. Plus, that's not how GamerGate got started
04:00:   What's TFYC got to do with journalistic integrity? I thought you said that was what GamerGate was about
04:24:   Not literally all women are threatened out of the industry, so there is no problem. wut
04:40:   How the hell are Quinn's personal sexual relations in any way relevant?
05:00:   Wait, so now suddenly the fact that Quinn supposedly slept with journalists DOESN'T matter? Make up your mind!
05:30:   And now Quinn isn't even important anymore... Furthermore, even if she did have a falling-out with an organization, that's no reason for death threats. Those threats and the extensive analysis of an individual's sex life are the reasons most press didn't want to report on it in the way GamerGate sees things. 'Indie Dev argues with Charity' is exactly the kind of non-game-related stuff people complain gaming sites write too much about.
06:10:   Are you saying making a joke is reason enough for death threats?
06:42:   The same Yiannopoulos that started a website and then didn't pay the people he hired and started picking fights with people so much even his co-founder and friend distanced himself from it: No lack of journalistic integrity indeed
06:50:   Oh no, pissing people off, surely that's deserving of threats and abuse
07:22:   So in this case a direct link between threats, the meme, and GamerGate is needed, but all you need as evidence for journo collusion is that they chat online once in a while?
08:09:   "My friend". If you're gonna imply collusion, there's a good moment for it. Nope, missed it
08:33:   So because the threats were made close to when she checked her Twitter, they're fake? I can't even think of any intermediate logic steps that could lead from the premise to that conclusion. And for crying out loud, if you want to claim she's lying, at least be brave enough to say it, instead of admitting to only implying it, which is an incredibly weak way out.
08:58:   You ban people from 4chan by IP address. There, simple answer. Next!
09:30:   Is he implying Moot was pressured or something? Be more clear, with evidence
09:40:   Using the same phrase as someone is not immediately quoting them. 'Suck my dick' is an insult regardless of who says it. 'An eye for an eye' is a stupid way to approach this
09:58:   Again, only exact literal proof is good enough here, but vague allusions to corruption is good enough for them.
01:30: Wu hasn't been 'proven to be a liar'. The only factually wrong thing she said in the interview was about 8chan's founding, and that can be an honest mistake.
10:43:   'Notorious provocateur' needs some explanation
10:55:   Wait, she needs to prove who she knows? Why and also how?
11:20:   So Wu is not allowed to speak for female game devs, but he is? Also, again saying that being threatened is a normal reaction to being provocative.
11:34:   There is no way you can take that badge as anything but a joke
11:35:   All 'wars' are instigated by women? PROOF (oh wait you don't need to give any)
11:56:   I'd keep shouting 'PROOF' on the claim that 'Wu has misrepresented 'everything', but that'd be fruitless. Also, retweets are all that's necessary for a friendship?
12:06:   Hey, now he's misrepresenting facts! That article never appeared on Polygon, despite 'cleverly' shopping it to make it appear that it did. Also, yay cherrypicking quotes! From the same article: "i hate men doesnít mean i hate you. it means i hate your position in this world. it means iím not obligated to like you. it means i donít have to talk to you if i donít want to. it means i get to have my space and i donít have to dance for you, smile at you, or soothe you." ( ) Allen doesn't want to destroy men, she just doesn't want to adjust to their expectations and wants.
12:22:   She's not the one that goes out of her way to destroy things she hates. That's another group. I don't have to prove it's GamerGate, since implying is apparently enough
12:31:   Wait, just knowing Quinn is enough to warrant harrassment, abuse, and threats now? Guilty by association, right
12:33:   Paying a game dev is no different from buying their game, that's not corruption.
12:41:   Yeah, those aren't obviously and unmistakeably jokes, nope. Also, oh no, she 'hates videogames', better send abuse her way!
12:45:   What's bigoted about not liking video games, assuming they even don't?
12:56:   The 'death of gamer' articles weren't about hating gamers, they were (at least the ones I've read) about how the old notion of 'gamer', i.e. male teenage basement-dweller spending hours and hours on end staring at a screen pushing buttons, isn't applicable anymore, since almost everybody plays video games. They weren't personal attacks.
13:20:   Yes, the people that dedicate their lives to making video games obviously hate them.
13:54:   Prove sexism in the tech industry? Did you forget the #1Reasontobe and #1Reasonwhy hashtags already?
15:45:   The #GamerGate tag was started by Baldwin while linking to a video about Quinn's so-called sexual escapades, not about corruption
16:10:   Sarkeesian is an 'academic' in the sense that she has a degree in this sort of thing
16:18:   That 'teleseminar' thing is 7 years old, Feminist Frequency is a charity, and did she get her degrees as part of the scam as well?
16:29:   'Political leftist extremist' requires a bit more proof than a single screenshotted tweet, especially one that contains a platitude like that
16:50:   'Literally gone mad with power', again without proof
17:03:   They declared the TERM 'gamer' dead, since almost everbody is a gamer now in some form or another. They didn't literally wish everybody that self-identifies as a gamer dead
17:23:   An indignant tone is neither a standpoint nor commentary
17:54:   Oh, now suddenly proof is required. More proof than gender statistics?
18:15:   So now it's the fault of women they can't work in the industry? That's  just denying the responsibility of the people already in the industry
18:40:   'I have proven this' is not proof in and of itself
18:46:   Ugh, that 'dead' thing again. The TERM. THE TERM. Not the people
19:03:   The point she's making is that men don't see that some of their behaviour is antagonistic, not the fact that antagonistic behaviour exists
19:40:   The MSNBC report is about a woman / women being threatened in the game industry. You want to hear the pro-harassment side?
19:55:   Yes, prefixing it with dramatic music, that doesn't influence anybody at all
20:19:   Don't pretend to be neutral when all you report on is the pro-GamerGate stuff
21:30:   Right, sure, let Yiannopoulos explain everything from his side (no proof again, just his word)
22:32:   Unsubstantiated accusation of malice
22:50:   First you claim to be neutral, now you say you're pro-GG. What is it, Milo?
23:06:   Neutral and objective, right
23:31:   Spend over a minute explaining how much time and money it cost, "time and money aren't the real issue here".
23:49:   That's pretty close to slander, assuming all opponents of GamerGate are liers and avoid every question
24:25:   "She annoyed me, so her privacy isn't important anymore". Journalistic integrity, right
25:00:   Assuming your response is the 'natural' one is kind of self-important. Asking admission for a debate isn't unheard of, and crowdfunding can be a sort of 'global admission'.

Sorry for the long, but there's so many things wrong with that video.
tl;dr: Don't selective shout 'Show proof' when you don't apply that to your own sources as well. Especially not when that proof is easily found.

Everything Else / Re: Old Gaming Steve IRC hideout issues
« on: October 10, 2014, 01:46:36 am »
There's already so few people that stop by the IRC channel, at least during the European day. I hope switching again doesn't reduce that number even further.
But you're right, blocking all-caps messages is ridiculous. I'm open to suggestions for a different server.

Everything Else / Re: Bye.. I'm leaving for vacation
« on: September 29, 2014, 06:51:53 am »
Alternatively, everybody wanted to get away from the crazy flailing man :P

Nice that you're having fun though!

Where have you been? We've been complaining about spa retreats and wraparound advertising for years.
I thought the whole GamerGate thing was about indie publishers being too familiar with game journalists.

These game journalist are probably corrupt given the financial interest at stake, the hard facts provided, and their general reaction. Not everyone is corrupt, but people want accountability and disclosure.
I guess I missed the hard facts, since all the evidence I've seen is convoluted charts aiming to prove journalists and devs know each other, which was apparent before and is no proof of corruption.

But those strict rules are pretty interesting. Of course, there's far less money directly at stake with the indie developers this all started about. It's scarier with the big publishers, but I haven't heard anybody complain about that.
Whose strict rules? The ones you just made up out of thin air? Those aren't the rules, there aren't any rules to corruption, that's the whole idea.
...The strict rules for accountants you mentioned in the piece of your post I quoted.

I've always been under the impression since the Kane&Lynch GameSpot fiasco that big publisher game reviews from big media outlets are to be discarded. That's why people have been up in arms with YouTube content policies and such, they don't want valid criticism being taken down due to publisher complaint.
Yeah, that was a blatant case of unacceptable meddling by game companies. And YouTube's content filtering is an ovezealous copyright prevention system that's being abused by people that want to annoy differing opinions, which is scary. But I've not seen any of that brought up in GamerGate.

It's why people are upset with the fact that indie media owners have financial and personal interest in certain indie games that just so happened to win multiple awards from said media outlet. It's fishy, they didn't disclose this anywhere, and their hostile reactions are unacceptable.
That does reek of conflict of interest, but this forum is the first place I've seen mention of the IGF thing.

Also, one reason game journalists may not be reacting as professionally as maybe they should, could be the fact that besides the people having genuine complaints and worries there is a large amount of people not interested in debate but just in slinging insults and threats. That wears on your patience after a while.
The whole thing kind of reminds me of this comic:

So accountants could be corrupt but aren't, but game journalist can be corrupt so they probably are?
You have a financial interest in making your client appear good too.

But those strict rules are pretty interesting. Of course, there's far less money directly at stake with the indie developers this all started about. It's scarier with the big publishers, but I haven't heard anybody complain about that.

Eh, it's not so hard to believe people with similar interest will work together to see those ends met. If people own equity in one project, while also being in control of a site that is supposed to be unbiased when divvying out rewards/ratings, it's not too hard to see where a conflict of interest might push someone to act in a way they wouldn't have otherwise.

I can't work for Pricewaterhouse and have stock in the companies we audit.
And that's why good journalists don't review a game when they know the people that made it, or at least mention the relationship. And in the specific case this all blew up over, that didn't get violated.
Are you also forbidden from knowing people in the companies you audit? If you audit the same company a few times, you get to know the person(s) handling the company's finances, does that make you corrupt?
Because it's the same in the game industry. Of course journalists and game developers are going to get acquainted when they keep running into each other at shows and events. That doesn't mean it by definition clouds their judgement or makes them corrupt.

Keyword being 'alleged'. Like I said, all I've heard about that so far are far-fetched conspiracy theories and logical fallacies.

So when the IGF recently said, "If any individual was directly involved in the creation of any game entered in the festival that year, they recuse themselves from judging the festival."  What would you would call the fact that nobody recused themselves, including the person overseeing and advising every single vote, the year that a gaggle of voters were backing the game that won, including the person overseeing and advising every single vote?  Is that one of your alleged conspiracy theories or your alleged logical fallacies?

The logical fallacy is that "I'll you've heard" can be somehow equated with "all the information available".
I'm not sure I understand what you mean, but of course the majority of the voters are going to vote for the winner, otherwise how can it win? And if they like the game enough to vote for it, they probably like it enough to tell other people they like it. Got any links to articles about this I can read?

And I've said that, like everybody else, I'm getting my information from biased sources, so of course my opinion is biased and incomplete. I'd watch more of the videos in this thread if I knew they were posted because they are genuinely interesting and not because they're funny, and I don't really have the time to find that out, since for some reason most of them are an hour long. (Sorry Pat, I can't really tell when you're being serious!)


And I guess their earlier article is almost exactly what I was trying to say in my previous post.
Here are two responses from somebody in that group. Of course the pro-GamerGate people aren't going to believe him on his word, and the anti-GamerGate people are, but take it as you will.

Keyword being 'alleged'. Like I said, all I've heard about that so far are far-fetched conspiracy theories and logical fallacies.

Gauphastus, you can't also ignore that there are a LOT of people in the pro-GamerGate movement that are absolute ****s too, sending death threats to people they disagree with, and sharing private information like addresses and bank accounts just to mess with people.

Also, I'm still not entirely sure what the whole thing is about. I know a lot of game journalists get flown out to, like, Las Vegas by big publishers to preview games, and that's kinda gross. But the main problem here is that some game journalists know some game devs? That seems hard to avoid since, you know, the first group reviews the second group's products, so they're bound to run into each other at expos and the like.
All the rest seems like a far-fetched conspiracy theory to me. All the banning could be because maybe some website owners don't want to provide a platform for death threats and doxxing.

Then again, some of you seem to get most of your info from 4chan, and I seem to get most of my info from the other side, so all of our opinions are biased.

PC Games / Re: Minecraft
« on: September 16, 2014, 10:39:47 am »
For everybody worried with the Microsoft take-over, maybe look into Minetest. It appears to be a Minecraft clone, except not written in Java, and without some (or a lot) of Minecraft's features. It's free and open-source, so there's less chance of a company messing it up (inb4 C&D). They've been going for a few years, it seems, so it's not some knee-jerk flight of fancy. Also, they've got a modding API in already.

PC Games / Re: The Sims 2-3-4 (including expansions)
« on: September 15, 2014, 11:10:16 am »
So how does Sims 4 compare to Sims 3?
Obviously a lot of stuff from the expansion packs is missing, but is this a better foundation than Sims 3? Or did they limit everything too much?

Everything Else / Re: Old Gaming Steve IRC hideout issues
« on: September 13, 2014, 01:57:34 am »
This still works though:
CentralChat got moved to VoltIRC. Either use the webclient on their website or direct your IRC application to ''. The channel is still '#gamingsteve'.
And it's nice to see more people coming to visit our little channel, it can be pretty quiet.

Come hang out with us!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 213