Poll: I want to change the Gamer reputation.

[Silvanus]

I know you're referring to the "Zoe Quinn debacle" or the "Zoe Quinn slut shaming" or the "Zoe Quinn harassment campaign" or the "Zoe Quinn avalanche of misogynist death threats" or whatever people want to call it. Sorry, I still get a little butt-hurt over it.

I'm a little confused what you mean by "baseless" though. I think we can certainly agree that the scandal was not a big deal worthy of the attention it got, but I wouldn't categorize it as "baseless". Even if you insist that all the evidence people found was part of some massive elaborate hoax, you can hardly blame us for thinking it was real.

I'm not blaming anybody. I'm saying that there was no review. It had no basis.

It's not a good superhero origin story.

 

[GloatingSwine]

I'm a little confused what you mean by "baseless" though. I think we can certainly agree that the scandal was not a big deal worthy of the attention it got, but I wouldn't categorize it as "baseless". Even if you insist that all the evidence people found was part of some massive elaborate hoax, you can hardly blame us for thinking it was real.

When all of the accusations against someone turn out to be false and based on misconceptions, misrepresentations, and distortions of the truth repeated uncritically, that's what "baseless" means.

 

[GloatingSwine]

You are very uninformed. Here's more information regarding the history of shadow of mordor.

https://soundcloud.com/totalbiscuit/in-which-we-expose-how-little-saloncom-bothered-to-research-its-latest-hit-piece

(or read it here: http://blueplz.blogspot.nl/2014/10/saloncom-knows-nothing-about-gaming-and.html )

In short, it shows how totalbiscuit, by now a #gamergate supporter, he was the one who brought this lack of ethics to light and even though it's not really about game journalism (was aimed more at youtube non-reviewers), kotakuinaction reddit still devoted time and energy to it.

I hate to burst your bubble, but that's predominantly quibbling over semantics. TotalBiscuit himself has argued that youtubers are what people are increasingly turning to instead of traditional journalism and they are doing so in the belief that they are getting "genuine" presentation of gameplay experience. He may even have mentioned this in his own Shadows of Mordor video where he discussed the issue.

Quibbling that "oh but they're not journalists" does not hold up in that light, because a youtuber can do equal harm to the consumer by presenting paid for content in this way. That's actually why there is a legal requirement for disclosure for them, (which the brand deal was intended to obscure because no-one reads the clickthrough on a video description).

 

[Ipsen]

Something that bugs me about GamerGate is that if say, myself as a neutral/uninterested party discovered something unethical in game journalism, would I end up in contention with GamerGate? The fact that I don't feel I know the answer to this question signifies the tonal issue with the movement

Even ignoring any sort of accusations of harassment , all I can see GamerGate as is...clumsily aggressive in their base aims. Exposing corruption in games journalism? How do its members reliably go about determining what is corruption (I.E. Can you teach the dedicated to suss out 'corruption' to help the cause)? And more importantly, how is GamerGate attempting to spread their findings to as many people mindsets and perspectives as possible? For the real power in something like GamerGate I see is in the multitudes of persons involved, seeing how we're largely not staff or owners of any part of the game industry or the games journalism industry.

I think GamerGate realizes this too, but due to their angry spark and decision to remain decentralized, the aim is aggressive, the dedicated are aggressive... well, so much aggression seemed to largely attract the angry and/or aggressive. The movement would drink this up as support, but, again ignoring the accusations of harrassment, the most pervasive issue GamerGate has now is exemplified in the neutral backlash; It's not agreeable to as many minds as it NEEDS to be as a consumer movement.

Well, to make this OT, I hope that your website/user group can both address potential corruption in games journalism, but also, in being, well, a group of consumers and equals, you also be resonant with your members as well. Besides cool points for doing so, I think this is how a movement actually centered around corruption in games journalism grows and moves forward (and how GamerGate would have prioritized if it had any notion of responsibility), since you don't really have the spark of some anger-inciting issue to really kick you off like GamerGate.

All in all, best of luck.

 

[RagingTiger]

I support this idea fully, to be honest this idea will end up giving my exactly what I want to be heard about, more so than GamerGate does, as that has just become 2 fringe elements shouting at each other then hiding behind the moderates when they get called out. I am indifferent to feminism, I am indifferent to sexualization in games I do however care about ethics. Personally this is the kind of thing I always thought boogie should of started, or tried to do with his #EndTheHate ideas.

 

[sageoftruth]

So, in other words. You're not welcomed if you decrying "dem sjws" or how much you hate them "feminists."
Those will NOT be what this movement is about.

The vast majority of GamerGate does nothing of the sort. What will you do to keep the "bad eggs" out? All it takes is a few people using your hashtag in combination with GamerGate or to harass someone, and it will be 'poisoned' in no time. Genuinely interested how you plan to avoid that from happening.

I understand what you're trying to say. It's something I've made an effort to think about.
The best honest to goodness way of combatting that would be to rally with people who are also against gamergate.

The purpose of the hashtag is common grown. There are people who disagree with the current gaming narrative who I could call out to support this, actually.

I been trying to contact people like Matt Lees and Jim Sterling about it just to see there thoughts.
I'm also actively trying to talk to the people who have made articles against gamergate.
There are two sides to every issue so I want to stand in the middle to see which people we can try to get support and which not.

I'm mainly calling for the people who have remained very neutral, though.

If you want neutral people, Matt Lees and Jim Sterling are among the last people you should ask.

edit: So.. you want to ask anti-GG people but not pro-GG people? Who's that neutral then? :/

I watched a special discussion between TotalBiscuit and Kotaku last night, where journalistic integrity was the main focus.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpmIrWqEUUU&list=UUy1Ms_5qBTawC-k7PVjHXKQ
If anything I'd say TotalBiscuit is definitely pro-consumer and definitely sees civility and proper discussion as the key to any kind of improvements in the way things are right now. In the numerous videos I've seen, he has decried members of GamerGate for threats and harassment, but he also understands that a Kotaku article that comes across as an attack on the entire gaming community will naturally be perceived as a threat and a call to arms by some. Overall, he doesn't seem to be on anyone's side. He just wants everyone to handle this matter like grown ups.
Basically, I think he's an excellent representative of what you're aiming for.

 

[Davroth]

So, in other words. You're not welcomed if you decrying "dem sjws" or how much you hate them "feminists."
Those will NOT be what this movement is about.

The vast majority of GamerGate does nothing of the sort. What will you do to keep the "bad eggs" out? All it takes is a few people using your hashtag in combination with GamerGate or to harass someone, and it will be 'poisoned' in no time. Genuinely interested how you plan to avoid that from happening.

I understand what you're trying to say. It's something I've made an effort to think about.
The best honest to goodness way of combatting that would be to rally with people who are also against gamergate.

The purpose of the hashtag is common grown. There are people who disagree with the current gaming narrative who I could call out to support this, actually.

I been trying to contact people like Matt Lees and Jim Sterling about it just to see there thoughts.
I'm also actively trying to talk to the people who have made articles against gamergate.
There are two sides to every issue so I want to stand in the middle to see which people we can try to get support and which not.

I'm mainly calling for the people who have remained very neutral, though.

If you want neutral people, Matt Lees and Jim Sterling are among the last people you should ask.

edit: So.. you want to ask anti-GG people but not pro-GG people? Who's that neutral then? :/

I watched a special discussion between TotalBiscuit and Kotaku last night, where journalistic integrity was the main focus.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpmIrWqEUUU&list=UUy1Ms_5qBTawC-k7PVjHXKQ
If anything I'd say TotalBiscuit is definitely pro-consumer and definitely sees civility and proper discussion as the key to any kind of improvements in the way things are right now. In the numerous videos I've seen, he has decried members of GamerGate for threats and harassment, but he also understands that a Kotaku article that comes across as an attack on the entire gaming community will naturally be perceived as a threat and a call to arms by some. Overall, he doesn't seem to be on anyone's side. He just wants everyone to handle this matter like grown ups.
Basically, I think he's an excellent representative of what you're aiming for.

Actually, he has been firmly pro GamerGate from the very start of this whole mess. All of GamerGate decries the fringe for the threats and harassment, so he's not really special in that regard. If you were to take him in, that, too, would be far from neutral from that kind of standpoint.

 

[sageoftruth]

So, in other words. You're not welcomed if you decrying "dem sjws" or how much you hate them "feminists."
Those will NOT be what this movement is about.

The vast majority of GamerGate does nothing of the sort. What will you do to keep the "bad eggs" out? All it takes is a few people using your hashtag in combination with GamerGate or to harass someone, and it will be 'poisoned' in no time. Genuinely interested how you plan to avoid that from happening.

I understand what you're trying to say. It's something I've made an effort to think about.
The best honest to goodness way of combatting that would be to rally with people who are also against gamergate.

The purpose of the hashtag is common grown. There are people who disagree with the current gaming narrative who I could call out to support this, actually.

I been trying to contact people like Matt Lees and Jim Sterling about it just to see there thoughts.
I'm also actively trying to talk to the people who have made articles against gamergate.
There are two sides to every issue so I want to stand in the middle to see which people we can try to get support and which not.

I'm mainly calling for the people who have remained very neutral, though.

If you want neutral people, Matt Lees and Jim Sterling are among the last people you should ask.

edit: So.. you want to ask anti-GG people but not pro-GG people? Who's that neutral then? :/

I watched a special discussion between TotalBiscuit and Kotaku last night, where journalistic integrity was the main focus.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpmIrWqEUUU&list=UUy1Ms_5qBTawC-k7PVjHXKQ
If anything I'd say TotalBiscuit is definitely pro-consumer and definitely sees civility and proper discussion as the key to any kind of improvements in the way things are right now. In the numerous videos I've seen, he has decried members of GamerGate for threats and harassment, but he also understands that a Kotaku article that comes across as an attack on the entire gaming community will naturally be perceived as a threat and a call to arms by some. Overall, he doesn't seem to be on anyone's side. He just wants everyone to handle this matter like grown ups.
Basically, I think he's an excellent representative of what you're aiming for.

Actually, he has been firmly pro GamerGate from the very start of this whole mess. All of GamerGate decries the fringe for the threats and harassment, so he's not really special in that regard. If you were to take him in, that, too, would be far from neutral from that kind of standpoint.

I guess the fact that he's real big on journalistic integrity and the way game companies treat their customers would make him quite a GamerGater. Still, that makes me wonder if neutrality is really what we're aiming for? Isn't this really about creating a new GG group that lacks the toxicity of the former one? Come to think of it, I imagine that's what both pro and anti GG people would want. I doubt that the anti-GamerGaters actually oppose transparency.