fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3819 ]

[ SECRET POST #3819 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3819 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 40 secrets from Secret Submission Post #547.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I have no horse in this race but please don't pretend for even a second that there weren't some serious issues with harrassment campaigns from the antiGG camp as well, a fact that was and still is getting conveniently ignored in favour of painting the GG side as the evil devils and the anti GG side as pure little angels.
Both parties were shitheads, for the most part.

"Tu quoque" doesn't make GG legitimate.

No, but look at it this way: Its a demonstration exactly what I was getting at: You have a movement with a goal: Good! Said movement gets taken over by thugs and bullies and people looking to send vile shit through the post to their enemies. If gamergate shouldn't be a thing because it had vile assholes, if gamergate no-longer has any valid points because there were scumbags doing scumbag things, then the people arguing against gamergate also no longer have any valid points, also need to shut up and stop pretending to have the moral authority to call out what they feel is shitty behaviour from another party, see?

if gamergate no-longer has any valid points because there were scumbags doing scumbag things,

Which isn't the argument at all. GamerGate didn't have many valid points to start with, and the few issues of ethics it did address were broadly misapplied to game players, game producers, and game advocates who produced content that GG didn't like.

If anything, the scumbags have proven to be useful idiots for GG advocates to throw under the bus, rather than deal with problem that the GG agenda was largely bullshit to start with.

GamerGate didn't have many valid points to start with

And this is why we won't be seeing eye to eye on this. I completely disagree.

Let's see here:

Even if she was screwing people for positive professional attention,

Didn't actually happen. And as you admit, wasn't her responsibility. Curiously the journalist in question is nameless in this discussion.

Zoe Quinn screwed some games journos, some of whom covered her game in a positive way.

From one to plural? From what I can tell, the coverage was "hey this is interesting because of the subject matter and it exists" which is what everyone else was saying independently about her project because games dealing seriously with mental illness were, in fact, a new an interesting thing. The course I produced on game design last year covered a half-dozen of them created after Quinn's game.

The games journo industry, as a group, respond by ignoring the complaints and focus instead on the side of fandom going after quinn.

Perhaps because Quinn was, in fact, getting hundreds of harassment messages including death threats on a scale that had previously been unprecedented in the history of twitter? So much that people started writing new software to deal with mass harassment mobs? Maybe because Quinn, who did nothing wrong other than having two boyfriends within the small circle surrounding independent games development, became the figurehead for "corruption in games journalism?" Perhaps because other female developers in the field were targeted for online harassment after Quinn?

Meanwhile, those publishers began more openly disclosing many of their relationships, documenting their participation in publicity events, and explaining the process of how they got review copies?

The keep this momentum up, including on the same day, various outlets release several articles outlining how gamers are a dead identity, and game companies don't need to make games for gamers because basement dwelling misogynists, white male, disgusting, games industry is for the journos and the people who read their publications.

Which isn't remotely what the articles in question on Ars Technica and Gammasutra (which is a site that regularly runs features by game developers themselves) actually said. The thesis of those articles was that the market for games includes women and older adults, is international, and is multi-platform with increasing revenue coming from mobile gaming.

A mailing list of professional games journos is leaked along with chatlogs showing various outlets discussing what narritive they need to focus on - with each other to push narratives, and focus on actual reporting, as well as all the people who heard from the media that if you want to attack women, join gamergate.

Oh no. A profession has a mailing list! The horror! The corruption! Since the rest is presented without any additional support, it can be rejected without comment.

You're really hitting it in on "valid points" here.

"Even if she was screwing people"

"Zoe Quinn screwed some games journos"

From one to plural

No? From Plural to plural.

And btw, wan't it confirmed? didn't Nate Grayson admit it? So did one of the other ones, I think, but I cant remember exactly what the deets where there. but like I said, this was the spark. He bigged her up, she was, at very least a friend of his, he contributed to her patreon. He did also admit to dating her. These are all things he had a responsibility to declare. Even if you think these are minor, the fact that when called on it, and entire industry closed ranks, hinting at wide spread collusion and complimentary back scratching...

Which, you wont see as a problem. Its a none issue to you. Argh, why am I still trying to justify this to you?

Fuck, it's half 12. I'm out.

And btw, wan't it confirmed? didn't Nate Grayson admit it?

Grayson did. There's no indication that there was any others. Furthermore, Grayson's article was published before their relationship, was about GameJam, and only mentioned DepressionQuest to identify Quinn as the creator. Which was admitted by Gonji who wrote the original expose.

but like I said, this was the spark.

Quinn was getting harassment months before Gonji's post.

He bigged her up, she was, at very least a friend of his, he contributed to her patreon. He did also admit to dating her. These are all things he had a responsibility to declare.

It was his responsibility to declare a future romantic relationship that happened weeks after the publication of an article about Quinn's involvement in Game Jam, an unrelated project? What is Grayson, a Time Lord?

Even if you think these are minor, the fact that when called on it, and entire industry closed ranks, hinting at wide spread collusion and complimentary back scratching.

You mean, rather than reporting on a chronologically impossible conflict of interest, they reported on the unprecedented harassment of game developers that started long before Gonji pointed fingers and accused Quinn?

I mean, as far as conspiracy theories go, this isn't even the realm of magic Kennedy bullet. It's pure bullshit.

I agree that we should take that seriously, but it's completely impossible for that to be a justification for Gamergate

Like, it just is not a reason to support Gamergate. which is what we're talking about here!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3819 ]

Re: confessions

Re: confessions

Re: confessions

Re: confessions

Re: confessions

Re: confessions

Re: confessions

Re: confessions

Re: confessions