What Gamergate should have taught us about the 'alt-right'

[morningstar2651]

That is some lousy, "I'm sorry that I'm not sorry".

I'm not sorry that he doesn't like having a bad reputation after voluntarily joined a group that has a bad reputation because they harass and threaten people. There is a simple fix to his problem - he can disavow GamerGate.

[Staff edit]

 

[Skavau]

GamerGate started when Zoe's ex-boyfriend accused her of sleeping around with 5 other guys. GamerGate's first IRC channel used to plan their harassment campaign against her was named burgersandfries as a reference to 5 guys burgers and fries.

Yes, I've heard. Albeit the conflict of interest and suggestive of favourable review coverage was the curious sticking point of contention, and then big subreddits began to mass censor and block all discussion on it and all hell broke loose, and GG was born.

There may have been no favourable coverage, but there certainly was afterwards. Depression Quest has been the recipient of slavish praise from ideological allies (as was Brianna Wu's game, if I recall).

 

[Skavau]

I'm not sorry that he doesn't like having a bad reputation after voluntarily joined a group that has a bad reputation because they harass and threaten people. There is a simple fix to his problem - he can disavow GamerGate.

I didn't 'join a group'. I am sympathetic to many of the complaints and observations made by GG about society, video gaming, popular culture etc.

If you don't see the problems systemic in the SJ press (as I pointed out to you with citations earlier), then you don't see the problem, and GG-esque groups will continue to form and grow.

 

[morningstar2651]

I didn't 'join a group'. I am sympathetic to many of the complaints and observations made by GG about society, video gaming, popular culture etc.

If you don't see the problems systemic in the SJ press (as I pointed out to you with citations earlier), then you don't see the problem, and GG-esque groups will continue to form and grow.

SJ press? What is the SJ press?

Did you read the article I posted in the OP about what GamerGate should have taught us about the alt-right? It sounds like something you are in agreement with.

 

[Skavau]

SJ press? What is the SJ press?

Did you read the article I posted in the OP about what GamerGate should have taught us about the alt-right? It sounds like something you are in agreement with.

Social Justice press. Sites like Salon, Gawker (RIP), Polygon, Buzzfeed.

What is it you think I am in agreement with?

 

[super animator]

I'm not sorry that he doesn't like having a bad reputation after voluntarily joined a group that has a bad reputation because they harass and threaten people. There is a simple fix to his problem - he can disavow GamerGate.

You can literally make the same logic about Muslims and their terrorism.

 

[super animator]

Yes, I've heard. Albeit the conflict of interest and suggestive of favourable review coverage was the curious sticking point of contention, and then big subreddits began to mass censor and block all discussion on it and all hell broke loose, and GG was born.

Don't forget the coordinated attack on gamers by journalists with their smug "Gamers are dead" articles.

 

[Haramis]

You haven't asked me a single question. Not once have you posted a question directed at me in this thread.

I have in other threads. And I've seen other people ask you questions, which you ignore. And then pivot back to one of your victim examples.

I assume you're aware this type of behavior persuades no one. If you're not, I will inform you that it doesn't.

I prefer to have exchanges with people who discuss ideas, and don't default to character attacks. I wish you luck with your political Depression Quest.

 

[YogaFlame]

[Staff edit]

Does every conversation have to begin with "I denounce violence and harassment that some people that might agree with me partake in... now here's my point" because as was pointed out you could say the same thing about Muslims. Or Christians. Or feminists. Or MRAs. Or Democrats. Or Republicans. Or BLM. Or ALM. And on and on and on. Radical fringe members of every ideological group partake in threatening behavior and harassment, and it would be ridiculous to have to have everyone constantly apologize for the actions of others before any discussion can happen. How about we stop giving power to the radical members of these various ideologies by forcing the fringe into the centre of the discussion?

 

[morningstar2651]

[Staff edit]

Does every conversation have to begin with "I denounce violence and harassment that some people that might agree with me partake in..

No, but it may be a good idea when the topic of discussion is about how an organization with a bad reputation for violence and harassment "isn't that bad". If someone were to come here to post about all the great things the KKK has done, at least one member would ask what that poster thought about the organisation's use of burning crosses and lynchings.

And if that poster denied that there was any evidence that the KKK had engaged in these activities because it was a bunch of anonymous trolls in white hoods, how would we react?

 

[Skavau]

No, but it may be a good idea when the topic of discussion is about how an organization with a bad reputation for violence and harassment "isn't that bad". If someone were to come here to post about all the great things the KKK has done, at least one member would ask what that poster thought about the organization's use of burning crosses and lynchings.

And if that KKK member denied that there was any evidence that the KKK had engaged in these activities because it was a bunch of anonymous trolls in white hoods that merely agree with them, how would we react?

But... they are. Name me a single Pro-GG public figure who sends death threats and harasses people in real life.

Do you not understand how trolls work, what their purpose is? Do you not understand what has happened in the last 2 years? You feed the trolls, they'll bite more - and that's what happened. Millennial feminists, SJW's, regressive leftists (whatever term you want to use) have shown themselves repeatedly to be extremely susceptible to trolling and insult (some are with an agenda in mind) from anonymous accounts. Because they respond to every single death threat and insulting comment. Because they glorify them, they get more. Because that is how trolls work. Don't respond to trolls is not, as FTB thinks it is, "bad science", it's genuinely good advice. Block, report and move on. If you parade around their comments as important, they've succeeded at getting in on the dialogue, succeeding at what they wanted to do, and you've created a copycat or more, who will in-turn create more copycats.

I mean think about it. After 2-3 months, it was obvious that sending death threats would cause very bad press. Why on earth would anyone who genuinely supports GG think that it would be a good idea at that point? It would be completely self-destructive.

And don't, by the way, assume that SJW trolls are beyond imitation or beyond sending their own threats (Brianna Wu has been caught doing it several times). SRS, as a community on Reddit has a history longer than GG.

 

[morningstar2651]

Name me a single Pro-GG public figure who sends death threats and harasses people in real life.

They hide their identity behind a screen name to avoid going to jail for their actions. They hide behind a mask because they fear the consequences of their actions.

Do you not understand how bizarre it is for you to ask me to identify someone who hides their identity? Do you believe anonymity absolves these people of guilt? Should they be allowed to threaten people, or should law enforcement get involved when someone threatens murder?

 

[super animator]

They hide their identity behind a screen name to avoid going to jail for their actions. They hide behind a mask because they fear the consequences of their actions.

Do you not understand how bizarre it is for you to ask me to identify someone who hides their identity? Do you believe anonymity absolves these people of guilt? Should they be allowed to threaten people, or should law enforcement get involved when someone threatens murder?

In other words you can't, because it doesn't exist.

 

[morningstar2651]

Name me a single Pro-GG public figure who sends death threats and harasses people in real life.

But yeah, I can do that for you.

Ethan Ralph

 

[morningstar2651]

Wasn't Milo banned from twitter for harassment, or does harassing people on twitter not count as "real life"?

 

[Skavau]

They hide their identity behind a screen name to avoid going to jail for their actions. They hide behind a mask because they fear the consequences of their actions.

Yes. Of course they do. So you and me have no idea who they are, or what their motives are, or who they really support. We're just assuming.

Do you not understand how bizarre it is for you to ask me to identify someone who hides their identity? Do you believe anonymity absolves these people of guilt? Should they be allowed to threaten people, or should law enforcement get involved when someone threatens murder?

The point is that pretty much all threats, doxxing, insults claimed to be from GG have been through anonymous accounts claiming to represent GG (or sometimes not claiming that at all, with affiliation to GG assumed by choice of target). This sort of thing isn't unusual, especially with such a firebrand topic. Look at the mentions of basically any slightly controversial journalist, politician, activist. Almost all of them will have a perpetual barrage of abuse, criticism, and mockery. This isn't unusual, it predates GG and when GG-issues began to surface to the mainstream, it ramped up on all sides.

 

[morningstar2651]

In other words you can't, because it doesn't exist.

...what doesn't exist?

 

[Skavau]

But yeah, I can do that for you.

Ethan Ralph

What did he do? Apparently he was arrested for assault of law enforcement officers, but that's not really got anything to with GG.

Wasn't Milo banned from twitter for harassment, or does harassing people on twitter not count as "real life"?

Mocking someone on Twitter, who also does the same thing is not harassment.

Twitter is not, or should not be serious business. It's not required social media. People taking the mickey out of you on it is not harassment, for goodness sake.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Do you not understand how trolls work, what their purpose is? Do you not understand what has happened in the last 2 years? You feed the trolls, they'll bite more - and that's what happened. Millennial feminists, SJW's, regressive leftists (whatever term you want to use) have shown themselves repeatedly to be extremely susceptible to trolling and insult (some are with an agenda in mind) from anonymous accounts. Because they respond to every single death threat and insulting comment. Because they glorify them, they get more. Because that is how trolls work. Don't respond to trolls is not, as FTB thinks it is, "bad science", it's genuinely good advice. Block, report and move on. If you parade around their comments as important, they've succeeded at getting in on the dialogue, succeeding at what they wanted to do, and you've created a copycat or more, who will in-turn create more copycats.

Incidentally, that's how Trump likes to play the media. He will deflect criticism by making a comment he knows they will find outrageous, thereby making them change the subject. He knows they just can't help themselves...

 

[morningstar2651]

Yes. Of course they do. So you and me have no idea who they are, or what their motives are, or who they really support. We're just assuming.


The point is that pretty much all threats, doxxing, insults claimed to be from GG have been through anonymous accounts claiming to represent GG (or sometimes not claiming that at all, with affiliation to GG assumed by choice of target). This sort of thing isn't unusual, especially with such a firebrand topic. Look at the mentions of basically any slightly controversial journalist, politician, activist. Almost all of them will have a perpetual barrage of abuse, criticism, and mockery. This isn't unusual, it predates GG and when GG-issues began to surface to the mainstream, it ramped up on all sides.

So now whe have two possible scenarios -

Either several people that identify as supporters of GamerGate target the targets of GamerGate for harassment because they are supporters of GamerGate that are participating in GamerGate's organized campaigns.

OR

Several people that identify as supporters of GamerGate coincidentally target the targets of GamerGate for harassment independent of GamerGate's organized operations.

Either way, you haven't found an adequate explanation for what makes targeting journalists for stalking, harassment, or death threats an acceptable behavior and you haven't found a defense of GamerGate's organized harassment campaigns