well, the the escapist was just attacked.

[irishda]

Their people has doxxed, hacked and threatened people in the past. The Email dump has them pressuring Greg Tito into censoring discussion on GG related issues here, it was them.

Remember everyone, ONE guy telling Greg he feels the thread is basically harassment means the saucer people have DDOSed the site at his behest. We're through the looking glass here people...

That is just stupid. No one things Kuchera did it.

Except the guy who I quoted, who shortened Kuchera to "they" either because it sounds better that a bunch of people "ganged up" on Tito or because his brain interpreted a guy saying, "It looks like harassment" to "they pressured Tito into censorship."

But hey, you lot keep beating that "They're afraid of us! That's why they want to shut us up!" talk. Don't worry, it's not the exact same thing the Palin supporters said about her when everyone was ripping on her, and it doesn't make you guys look insane at all.

Because "they" could never just mean "anti gamergate people"? Never even said they were afraid though, just that many who see themselves as antigamergate do want us to shut up. Hell, many in this thread have expressed the same idea around these forums too.

So he doesn't think Kuchera did it even though Kuchera was the one pressuring Tito, but the SJWs are still the ones that did this because Kuchera couldn't pressure Tito?

Meanwhile, from earlier in the thread!

If you wonder why the Anti-GG side is doing this, the answer is simple:

They're bloody terrified of losing their power.

WOW, two posts in a row where you say, "no one said this" despite evidence to the contrary. This is like Forums Bingo.
But maybe I'm being unfair. Maybe you meant only you didn't say "they're afraid." But according to your reply they still do "want us to shut up." Why would they want you to shut up?

 

[Dante dynamite]

I was summarizing your point, you said explicitly, " It's a definition, not the definition."

So, in your own words, what is the definition of misogyny?

If you are summarising my point, why do you keep asking for the definition or my definition? I've explained the irrelevance of my definition, and my point was that there were multiple definitions. How can you summarise that which you patently do not understand?

actually in arguments of language, word used are actually symbols which we as people or society as a whole give meaning to, words them selves are meaningless and we give meaning to them, and to do so in a way that people can successfully communicate it requires an authoritative source to define these words, so when a person uses the word with a different definition either that they apply themselves to the word or a different authoritative source for a conversation to occur must properly convey that to the other parties involved, this is because without a set authoritative detention words have no meaning at all just random symbols in sequence(also some would argue that a personal definition is useless because with no linguistic background they are someone without the full understanding and letting anyone just change or make their own definition means anyone can make everyday words have sinister meanings or cause problems like new English in 1984)

 

[Dante dynamite]

i don't know how to remove a double post so please ignore this

 

[runic knight]

Their people has doxxed, hacked and threatened people in the past. The Email dump has them pressuring Greg Tito into censoring discussion on GG related issues here, it was them.

Remember everyone, ONE guy telling Greg he feels the thread is basically harassment means the saucer people have DDOSed the site at his behest. We're through the looking glass here people...

That is just stupid. No one things Kuchera did it.

Except the guy who I quoted, who shortened Kuchera to "they" either because it sounds better that a bunch of people "ganged up" on Tito or because his brain interpreted a guy saying, "It looks like harassment" to "they pressured Tito into censorship."

But hey, you lot keep beating that "They're afraid of us! That's why they want to shut us up!" talk. Don't worry, it's not the exact same thing the Palin supporters said about her when everyone was ripping on her, and it doesn't make you guys look insane at all.

Because "they" could never just mean "anti gamergate people"? Never even said they were afraid though, just that many who see themselves as antigamergate do want us to shut up. Hell, many in this thread have expressed the same idea around these forums too.

So he doesn't think Kuchera did it even though Kuchera was the one pressuring Tito, but the SJWs are still the ones that did this because Kuchera couldn't pressure Tito?

Meanwhile, from earlier in the thread!

I'll go slow since I think you aren't following.
Kuchera pressuring tito was a demonstration of the collusion in the gaming journalism world. The fact that a journalist of one site felt her had the authority and leverage to try to tell an editor and chief of another how to censor a discussion is despicable in its own way. But that is a discussion for the big thread.

Now, this recent action was not caused by kuchera, because that would be dumb. It is likely however that it was caused by someone who opposed gamergate and wanted it to be shut up. The reasons for that could be anything from fear to simply ideologically bent, but I never made the claim it was fear in this case. You follow so far?

That guy you quoted? Well that is nice he thinks that, he could be right, but I seem to recall that he and I have different usernames so I don't think it is exactly honest of you to respond to my saying

"Never even said they were afraid though", where it is me saying forth-width that I never said it

And then point to someone else saying it and trying to crow like a rooster that in blatantly misrepresenting me, you somehow scored a victory worthy of mockery and scorn in my general direction. But good on you to try for that.

WOW, two posts in a row where you say, "no one said this" despite evidence to the contrary. This is like Forums Bingo.
But maybe I'm being unfair. Maybe you meant only you didn't say "they're afraid." But according to your reply they still do "want us to shut up." Why would they want you to shut up?

As for why they would, probably because they disagree? Seems a pretty good bet there actually. Could be fear, could be shit-stirrers as I mentioned in another post, could be an ideological bent.

 

[Zontar]

Was this even an attack? Or could it be because tons of people are flocking to the bloated whale carcass of a 6000+ post thread at once on a weekend and it crashed the servers?

That idea would have more credence if the same problem had happened to the original thread when it was in full f5 mode where there where more posts then minutes going by, but that wasn't the case. What there was was a massive, unprecedented and unexplainable spike in usage which could only have one of two logical explanations: either suddenly everyone on the internet wanted to see what was happening on the thread in numbers that where not seen even at its peak, at the same time on what should have been a low-traffic time of day if not the lowest usage time of day outright, or it was a DDOS. Given that the sites manager is the one who came out and said it was a DDOS, and it shows all the signs of it, it's safe to assume it's what happened.

 

[Skatologist]

Please point out what exactly was horrendous. Did I claim her anger was not justified? No, I merely pointed out that similar vitirol has already been directed at the pro-GG people, one that was primarily met with either agreement or dismissal/deflection. I sure as hell didn't see anti-GG people up in arms raging at Faraci when he spewed the same filth.

And are you or anybody up in arms about what Witty said? Am I so f*cking pissed about it that I'm going to share it everywhere and say how it offends and insults me? I'm not sure about the first question, but the second one is a no.

I made the statement in at least a few places that the comparison between those participants in GamerGate and ISIS and terrorists were unjustified and I saw at least a few others do the same. I apologize if you didn't see people like me everywhere, but we do exist.


EDIT: Thank you for also saying no to the first question later in that post.

 

[xaszatm]

How dare you. How. dare. you. You know, I haven't been this mad in a while. You really think you can compare someone who has lost someone they care about? How can you even say that with a straight face? It is absolutely disgusting that you think you would do this. Want to know why no one treats your cult with respect? It's because of shit like this.

And why don't you try to have a some measure of reading comprehension for once? Did you even read what I wrote?

How dare I compare someone who has lost people they care about? How about the part where I said I did too? I was simply pointing out that the anti-GG people have been spewing the same vitriol as the one MarsAtlas got, and that such insults can't simply be hand-waved away by people like you as "hyperboles". Take your misguided outrage and direct that effort towards actually reading what people wrote.

But, if your intent is to imply that I somehow didn't care about my fellow Marines who made the ultimate sacrifice, well, what I said about Faraci, also applies to you.

You're letting people throw you off the deep end! Stay calm. I got mad too, but calling it a cult will not help anyone. Yes, what he implied to Mars was horrendous and she'll probably not respond to it, but he has his reasons. He at a time felt something similar to what she felt then. The best thing to do is inform him that hey, people like me were anti GG and we thought comparisons to terrorists went too far and ask him if he thought what Witty said was also unjustified.

Please point out what exactly was horrendous. Did I claim her anger was not justified? No, I merely pointed out that similar vitirol has already been directed at the pro-GG people, one that was primarily met with either agreement or dismissal/deflection. I sure as hell didn't see anti-GG people up in arms raging at Faraci when he spewed the same filth.



You know what the differences is between me and people like xaszatm? I won't try to paint everyone who's anti-GG as incapable of reading comprehension just because xaszatm is. I didn't see the post that Mars was referring to, but just in case you're wondering, yes, I'd extend the same offer to that poster as I did to Faraci. You want to call a fellow service member who gave their life as worse than Westboros? You'd damn better make sure you aren't doing it to my face.

When did I, as you put it, "call a fellow service member who gave their life as worse than Westboros?" Please, point me where I made such a claim. I most definitely respect you for being a marine and doing a duty I could never do but I never insulted nor meant to insult your service. If that is what you got out of my post, then I will apologize on that.

However, on the topic of this thread, you have taken someone who has been so hurt by this the the person just needed to vent their frustrations and twisted it to fit your own agenda. You feeling sorry for this person (and I genuinely believe you do) does not excuse that. That is why I snapped. I would never say that you are like ISIS behind or in front of your face. I suspect you think me a coward for writing this but its the truth. Still want to beat me to a pulp?

 

[irishda]

I'll go slow since I think you aren't following.
Kuchera pressuring tito was a demonstration of the collusion in the gaming journalism world. The fact that a journalist of one site felt her had the authority and leverage to try to tell an editor and chief of another how to censor a discussion is despicable in its own way. But that is a discussion for the big thread.

I agree, I think we're moving entirely too fast. But I disagree, I think that's a discussion for right here. After all, since everyone's arguing about why there was an attack, and a reason some have put forth is "Kuchera pressured Tito", it seems fitting to talk about it here.

I'm glad you feel that a group of editors, writing in their own group to each other, most likely on a large variety of issues, expressing one opinion to another is evidence of "the authority and leverage to tell another Editor-in-chief how to censor a discussion." Do you have friends you talk to? Are you exerting authority and leverage on them when you tell them you think something they're allowing is wrong?

And the collusion bit. I love that the most. Clearly, his SJW Overlords have given him no other option but to make Tito censor the discussion. I'm picturing it like that scene in Zoolander at the beginning with Mugatu and the Fashion board. From now on, I'm going to remember that conforming opinions is evidence "secret cooperation for an illegal or dishonest purpose." I mean it couldn't possibly mean that decent people have reached the same conclusion after seeing the smoking gun evidence provided by knowyourmeme, Breitbart News, and Encyclopedia Dramatica.

 

[Something Amyss]

actually in arguments of language, word used are actually symbols which we as people or society as a whole give meaning to, words them selves are meaningless and we give meaning to them, and to do so in a way that people can successfully communicate it requires an authoritative source to define these words, so when a person uses the word with a different definition either that they apply themselves to the word or a different authoritative source for a conversation to occur must properly convey that to the other parties involved, this is because without a set authoritative detention words have no meaning at all just random symbols in sequence(also some would argue that a personal definition is useless because with no linguistic background they are someone without the full understanding and letting anyone just change or make their own definition means anyone can make everyday words have sinister meanings or cause problems like new English in 1984)

Except words don't have an authoritative source, they operate upon mutual consensus. This is why we define and agree upon terms in debates, in papers, etc. There is no one dictionary or one source for language except common uses, which the multiple dictionaries reflect and catalogue. It's a start point, not the end all. there are multiple bodies which "define" language within a given body of language.

Demonstrating my point, there are multiple definitions of misogyny. Which is THE definition? The one true definition? How can you determine that when people actively use multiple definitions and they are recognised? And how does the fact that we still manage to communicate without a unified definition not prove you wrong about the need for a set definition? How does language manage to evolve within such an authoritative structure? Why does "literal" now have a definition that means the exact opposite as codified by some dictionaries?

Words are often imprecise. For one person to say something is misogynistic and another to immediately jump on them for not knowing what the word means because they must have meant a particular definition is utter sophistry.

 

[kyp275]

Please point out what exactly was horrendous. Did I claim her anger was not justified? No, I merely pointed out that similar vitirol has already been directed at the pro-GG people, one that was primarily met with either agreement or dismissal/deflection. I sure as hell didn't see anti-GG people up in arms raging at Faraci when he spewed the same filth.

And are you or anybody up in arms about what Witty said? Am I so f*cking pissed about it that I'm going to share it everywhere and say how it offends and insults me? I'm not sure about the first question, but the second one is a no.

I made the statement in at least a few places that the comparison between those participants in GamerGate and ISIS and terrorists were unjustified and I saw at least a few others do the same. I apologize if you didn't see people like me everywhere, but we do exist.

As I've already stated in my response, I did not see the post by Witty. The forum was down most of the day, and even now I can still only access threads that I had already opened (clicking on the off-topic directory gives me a 404 error). Either way, I've already stated to you what my response to this "Witty" will be.


In any case, thank you for your stance on Faraci's comments, it is not one that I see very often.

 

[runic knight]

I'll go slow since I think you aren't following.
Kuchera pressuring tito was a demonstration of the collusion in the gaming journalism world. The fact that a journalist of one site felt her had the authority and leverage to try to tell an editor and chief of another how to censor a discussion is despicable in its own way. But that is a discussion for the big thread.

I agree, I think we're moving entirely too fast. But I disagree, I think that's a discussion for right here. After all, since everyone's arguing about why there was an attack, and a reason some have put forth is "Kuchera pressured Tito", it seems fitting to talk about it here.

I'm glad you feel that a group of editors, writing in their own group to each other, most likely on a large variety of issues, expressing one opinion to another is evidence of "the authority and leverage to tell another Editor-in-chief how to censor a discussion." Do you have friends you talk to? Are you exerting authority and leverage on them when you tell them you think something they're allowing is wrong?

And the collusion bit. I love that the most. Clearly, his SJW Overlords have given him no other option but to make Tito censor the discussion. I'm picturing it like that scene in Zoolander at the beginning with Mugatu and the Fashion board. From now on, I'm going to remember that conforming opinions is evidence "secret cooperation for an illegal or dishonest purpose." I mean it couldn't possibly mean that decent people have reached the same conclusion after seeing the smoking gun evidence provided by knowyourmeme, Breitbart News, and Encyclopedia Dramatica.

It is fitting as the overall theme of this entire movement. People rise up and demand answers about something they see as wrong going on, then they get censored. Happened with totalbiskit on reddit, happened across the various gaming websites, happened in the escapist now.

So it has some relevance when people ask "why would antigamergate people DDoS the thread?" Well, because anti gamergate people have a history of censoring the discussion about what is going on from the start, both in demonstrable examples, and in revealed coordinated attempts such as kuchera's.

Well, I never went and tried to tell a manager at what is suppose to be a competitor's firm that they needed to shut people up talking about a product on their website, no. Because that specific context is actually sort of important when you care about why people are actually upset and not trying to handwave it away like you have been. I am sorry that the idea that journalists working together to promote a narrative and help cover each other's backs doesn't see questionable to you, but it does to a lot of people and those people are the core of gamergate. Honestly, I can't understand why you seem so determined to dismiss, deflect or just dishonestly present things though. Really is not that hard to understand or that complex. Gamers are pissed at the journalists they see as unethical and unprofessional and who have been caught with their pants down being unethical and unprofessional time and again.

When did I say this was "SJW" stuff? Hell, look though my back post, most of the times I am talking about "SJW" is to dismiss the term and try to get people away from using it. But nice to see a familiar strawman being wheeled out again. Now collusion is a very unprofessional and unethical behavior in any job. Despite your scoffs to the contrary, it isn't so much a big super secret cabal, but rather the same group of jackasses people have been arguing on twitter with and their professional, competitor and parent company ties all working together in an unprofessional way that violates various ethical standards of reporting.

But please, do continue your mocking of me and others who support gamergate as a means to clean up a long dirty industry.

 

[kyp275]

How dare you. How. dare. you. You know, I haven't been this mad in a while. You really think you can compare someone who has lost someone they care about? How can you even say that with a straight face? It is absolutely disgusting that you think you would do this. Want to know why no one treats your cult with respect? It's because of shit like this.

And why don't you try to have a some measure of reading comprehension for once? Did you even read what I wrote?

How dare I compare someone who has lost people they care about? How about the part where I said I did too? I was simply pointing out that the anti-GG people have been spewing the same vitriol as the one MarsAtlas got, and that such insults can't simply be hand-waved away by people like you as "hyperboles". Take your misguided outrage and direct that effort towards actually reading what people wrote.

But, if your intent is to imply that I somehow didn't care about my fellow Marines who made the ultimate sacrifice, well, what I said about Faraci, also applies to you.

You're letting people throw you off the deep end! Stay calm. I got mad too, but calling it a cult will not help anyone. Yes, what he implied to Mars was horrendous and she'll probably not respond to it, but he has his reasons. He at a time felt something similar to what she felt then. The best thing to do is inform him that hey, people like me were anti GG and we thought comparisons to terrorists went too far and ask him if he thought what Witty said was also unjustified.

Please point out what exactly was horrendous. Did I claim her anger was not justified? No, I merely pointed out that similar vitirol has already been directed at the pro-GG people, one that was primarily met with either agreement or dismissal/deflection. I sure as hell didn't see anti-GG people up in arms raging at Faraci when he spewed the same filth.



You know what the differences is between me and people like xaszatm? I won't try to paint everyone who's anti-GG as incapable of reading comprehension just because xaszatm is. I didn't see the post that Mars was referring to, but just in case you're wondering, yes, I'd extend the same offer to that poster as I did to Faraci. You want to call a fellow service member who gave their life as worse than Westboros? You'd damn better make sure you aren't doing it to my face.

When did I, as you put it, "call a fellow service member who gave their life as worse than Westboros?" Please, point me where I made such a claim. I most definitely respect you for being a marine and doing a duty I could never do but I never insulted nor meant to insult your service. If that is what you got out of my post, then I will apologize on that.

However, on the topic of this thread, you have taken someone who has been so hurt by this the the person just needed to vent their frustrations and twisted it to fit your own agenda. You feeling sorry for this person (and I genuinely believe you do) does not excuse that. That is why I snapped. I would never say that you are like ISIS behind or in front of your face. I suspect you think me a coward for writing this but its the truth. Still want to beat me to a pulp?

Sigh, that sentence you're talking about? that was not about you, it was what someone else had apparently said about Mars's friend.

I'm not twisting her words to "fit an agenda". What I'm saying is basically "Hey, you know that really shitty thing that someone said to you that really pissed you off? it's just like that really shitty thing that someone said to us that really pissed us off". If this was anywhere but a thread talking about GG, I would not have said anything, but given the context of this thread, I felt that is a relevant thing to point out, so people can see that it's not all just "hyperbole" or "joke" when the shit is flung from their side of the fence.

Nor do I think you're a coward. Frankly, the fact that you're discussing this in a level headed manner puts you well above many who has nothing more than intellectual dishonesty in their posts.

 

[Caiphus]

Snip

Well, actually you're wrong.

Words can only have one meaning, and that meaning shall henceforth be primarily determined by its Latin roots.

So the next time someone uses, say, "terrific" when referring to anything positive, they should immediately be attacked with a wet fish.

 

[Darkmantle]

Was this even an attack? Or could it be because tons of people are flocking to the bloated whale carcass of a 6000+ post thread at once on a weekend and it crashed the servers?


Nah, that's too simple. Instead I think we should all agree that the SJWs run the internet and decided to censor this important debate about who Zoe Quinn is currently having sex with.

It was a confirmed DDOS attack, targeting the Gamergate thread.

https://twitter.com/archon/status/513377137035059201

https://twitter.com/archon/status/513365103329423360

If you don't believe the General Manager of the Escapist, who will you believe?

 

[Darkmantle]

*Doublepost*

 

[xaszatm]

Snip

Well, actually you're wrong.

Words can only have one meaning, and that meaning shall henceforth be primarily determined by its Latin roots.

So the next time someone uses, say, "terrific" when referring to anything positive, they should immediately be attacked with a wet fish.

Out of sheer curiosity, what does "terrific" mean then? I know you are joking here but it's gonna bug me.

 

[Caiphus]

Out of sheer curiosity, what does "terrific" mean then? I know you are joking here but it's gonna bug me.

Well, from experience, it is usually used to describe something extremely positive.

However, it has the same Latin roots as "terrifying"* (the similarity is pretty clear) and used to mean roughly the same thing.

*Edit: And also terrible, terror.

 

[Thorn14]

I bet if Neogaf was DDOS'd this same way everyone there would be blaming #GamerGate for it.