14 ms·

Can you be more specific? What are you talking about?

by 4ad 11y ago

TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
A lot of 4chan users got upset when moot banned gamergate, the thinly-disguised harassment campaign. Since gamergate characterises any opposition to it whatsoever as being from 'SJWs', 4chan mods are thus 'SJWs'.
- izzydata 11y ago
  A lot of 4chan users will be upset if you do anything. That is too much of a generalization and isn't possible to determine for the community as a whole. Keep in mind the vast majority of 4chan users don't even post.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
    I'm not saying all of 4chan was upset (I'd imagine many might be quite happy, but kept quiet). Perhaps not even most of 4chan. I just think that's probably the main reason why anyone would call the mods 'SJWs'. (Though maybe 'SJW mods' is just the new 'fascist mods')
    - chisleu 11y ago
      I don't think this is the case at all. Gamergate was noisy and annoying at it's best on 4chan. However, there have been many bans for posts wildly outside of gamergate, that were on SJW talking points. The reason gamergate was banned from 4chan is they kept posting pics of zoe and moot hanging out at conferences and bars and such.
      - Torgo 11y ago
        Mods/janitors ruined /cgl/ (cosplay board) well before gamergate existed and it definitely had a (so-called, I dislike the term) "SJW" flavor.
        astrange 11y ago
        Do you want /cgl/ to have more or less flaming? It's a very popular and active board and everyone is still pretty rude.
    - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
      I'm not sure about the larger picture of the whole internet, but after seeing the fempire spread on reddit and reading some of the ways they did so, I can see why some people jump to it as the default argument.
- mushtifaha 11y ago
  > the thinly-disguised harassment campaign I am not convinced that repeating a lie a thousand times will make this claim the truth. The propaganda may have worked well back when gamergate was completely unknown to the general public, but we are past that, I think.
  - robin_reala 11y ago
    You’re partially right at least. It’s now a completely undisguised harassment campaign.
    - Karunamon 11y ago
      Yeah, no. People claiming "harassment!" absent evidence is not proof of said harassment existing, doubly so when the people shouting the loudest have a profit motive for its supposed existence. Also: It would be rather disingenuous to claim that gamergate are a bunch of harassers without acknowledging that prominent people within the movement have received things like syringes and knives in the mail... and been blackballed from the industry.. Kind of puts in perspective this "harassment", which at its worst, can be described as "people saying mean things on the internet". http://deepfreeze.it http://deepfreeze.it - also all public record.
      - igreulich 11y ago
        Perception is reality. And it seems the perception is that Gahergate is a group of harrasors. You (not you personally) saying it is not will not change that perception. It seems to me that if you want Gamegate to be taken seriously (though I think it is way to late for that) Gamergate needs to start cleaning out it ranks. Which highlights the real issue. Gamergate has no central entity. So there are going to be people harrassing under the banner of Gamergate, and you can’t do anything about it. The name is tarnished, full stop. It will be almost impossible for Gamergate to do any good now, assuming it ever wanted to good!
        Karunamon 11y ago
- benihana 11y ago
  I think what people tend to get upset about is having their opinions dismissed and smugly described as a harassment campaign. Both sides of that stupid gamergate fiasco had legitimate complaints and both sides had assholes who harassed the other side. I mean it's pretty easy to see what camp you fall into, and you're basically ascribing a very shallow set of beliefs to an entire group of people - the exact same thing you're accusing that group of doing. Without knowing anything going on with the other side, I could see why people would get upset with that.
  - comrh 11y ago
    So some research and it is easy to see the beginning of the GG movement was mainly a force to harass people like Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian.
    - Karunamon 11y ago
      The start of it, sure. This is all public record at this point. Judging what exists now by what existed over a year ago is hardly fair. People who actually harass people are now loudly shouted down wherever they're seen doing it.
      - mintplant 11y ago
        GamerGate was sharing photos of Zoe Quinn from her old modeling profile as recently as a month ago. This is a continuous problem.
        Karunamon 11y ago
        Citation needed, and even if true, posting pictures of someone that they made public years ago is not "harassment".
      - icebraining 11y ago
        Frankly, and this is not specific to GG, but I don't get why would one join a movement if one disapproves of how it got started. If one doesn’t want to be associated with assholes, maybe one shouldn't associate themselves with asshole-created groups.
- Uhhrrr 11y ago
  They got upset because moot banned any discussion of GamerGate, including journalist conflicts of interest and censorship on other forums around the web. 4chan until then had had very few restrictions on speech. It was very unusual for posts to be removed for mentioning, say, that Kotaku's Nathan Grayson had given favorable coverage to close friends.

Can you be more specific? What are you talking about?

by 4ad 11y ago

Can you be more specific? What are you talking about?

A lot of 4chan users got upset when moot banned gamergate, the thinly-disguised harassment campaign. Since gamergate characterises any opposition to it whatsoever as being from 'SJWs', 4chan mods are thus 'SJWs'.

izzydata 11y ago
A lot of 4chan users will be upset if you do anything. That is too much of a generalization and isn't possible to determine for the community as a whole. Keep in mind the vast majority of 4chan users don't even post.
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
  I'm not saying all of 4chan was upset (I'd imagine many might be quite happy, but kept quiet). Perhaps not even most of 4chan. I just think that's probably the main reason why anyone would call the mods 'SJWs'. (Though maybe 'SJW mods' is just the new 'fascist mods')
  - chisleu 11y ago
    I don't think this is the case at all. Gamergate was noisy and annoying at it's best on 4chan. However, there have been many bans for posts wildly outside of gamergate, that were on SJW talking points. The reason gamergate was banned from 4chan is they kept posting pics of zoe and moot hanging out at conferences and bars and such.
    - Torgo 11y ago
      Mods/janitors ruined /cgl/ (cosplay board) well before gamergate existed and it definitely had a (so-called, I dislike the term) "SJW" flavor.
      - astrange 11y ago
        Do you want /cgl/ to have more or less flaming? It's a very popular and active board and everyone is still pretty rude.
  - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
    I'm not sure about the larger picture of the whole internet, but after seeing the fempire spread on reddit and reading some of the ways they did so, I can see why some people jump to it as the default argument.
mushtifaha 11y ago
> the thinly-disguised harassment campaign I am not convinced that repeating a lie a thousand times will make this claim the truth. The propaganda may have worked well back when gamergate was completely unknown to the general public, but we are past that, I think.
- robin_reala 11y ago
  You’re partially right at least. It’s now a completely undisguised harassment campaign.
  - Karunamon 11y ago
    Yeah, no. People claiming "harassment!" absent evidence is not proof of said harassment existing, doubly so when the people shouting the loudest have a profit motive for its supposed existence. Also: It would be rather disingenuous to claim that gamergate are a bunch of harassers without acknowledging that prominent people within the movement have received things like syringes and knives in the mail... and been blackballed from the industry.. Kind of puts in perspective this "harassment", which at its worst, can be described as "people saying mean things on the internet". http://deepfreeze.it http://deepfreeze.it - also all public record.
    - igreulich 11y ago
      Perception is reality. And it seems the perception is that Gahergate is a group of harrasors. You (not you personally) saying it is not will not change that perception. It seems to me that if you want Gamegate to be taken seriously (though I think it is way to late for that) Gamergate needs to start cleaning out it ranks. Which highlights the real issue. Gamergate has no central entity. So there are going to be people harrassing under the banner of Gamergate, and you can’t do anything about it. The name is tarnished, full stop. It will be almost impossible for Gamergate to do any good now, assuming it ever wanted to good!
      - Karunamon 11y ago
benihana 11y ago
I think what people tend to get upset about is having their opinions dismissed and smugly described as a harassment campaign. Both sides of that stupid gamergate fiasco had legitimate complaints and both sides had assholes who harassed the other side. I mean it's pretty easy to see what camp you fall into, and you're basically ascribing a very shallow set of beliefs to an entire group of people - the exact same thing you're accusing that group of doing. Without knowing anything going on with the other side, I could see why people would get upset with that.
- comrh 11y ago
  So some research and it is easy to see the beginning of the GG movement was mainly a force to harass people like Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian.
  - Karunamon 11y ago
    The start of it, sure. This is all public record at this point. Judging what exists now by what existed over a year ago is hardly fair. People who actually harass people are now loudly shouted down wherever they're seen doing it.
    - mintplant 11y ago
      GamerGate was sharing photos of Zoe Quinn from her old modeling profile as recently as a month ago. This is a continuous problem.
      - Karunamon 11y ago
        Citation needed, and even if true, posting pictures of someone that they made public years ago is not "harassment".
    - icebraining 11y ago
      Frankly, and this is not specific to GG, but I don't get why would one join a movement if one disapproves of how it got started. If one doesn’t want to be associated with assholes, maybe one shouldn't associate themselves with asshole-created groups.
Uhhrrr 11y ago
They got upset because moot banned any discussion of GamerGate, including journalist conflicts of interest and censorship on other forums around the web. 4chan until then had had very few restrictions on speech. It was very unusual for posts to be removed for mentioning, say, that Kotaku's Nathan Grayson had given favorable coverage to close friends.