6 ms·

#SavePoint on why their panel was cancelled: http://www.theopengamingsociety.org/savepoint-dear-community/ http://www.theopengamingsociety.org/savepoint-dear-co

#SavePoint on why their panel was cancelled: http://www.theopengamingsociety.org/savepoint-dear-community/ http://www.theopengamingsociety.org/savepoint-dear-community... LevelUp on why their panel was cancelled: https://twitter.com/randileeharper/status/658780409765994496 https://twitter.com/randileeharper/status/658780409765994496

douche 11y ago
Which side is which here? I'm not really clued into the whole GamerGate thing... I have seen Randi Lee Harper say some very unpleasant things, and some even more unpleasant things said about her. I know nothing about the Open Gaming Society, but reading their website it seems like a relatively sane organization.
- msabalau 11y ago
  SavePoint was to featured "several prominent GamerGate figureheads". The sponsoring organization generally claims to take "a neutral stance" on GamerGate. (http://motherboard.vice.com/read/sxsw-cancels-gaming-panels-due-to-threats-of-violence http://motherboard.vice.com/read/sxsw-cancels-gaming-panels-...) Randi Lee Harper is noted for making tools to help victims of online harassment. Level Up panel description was "A panel from experts on online harassment in gaming and geek culture, how to combat it, how to design against it, and how to create online communities that are moving away from harassment." The GamerGate crowd claim that they care about "ethics in game journalism" and that the abuse that feminist gamers experience doesn't have anything to do with them. So theoretically, there aren't opposing sides here.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
  - daleharvey 11y ago
    It is not a complicated situation, from the start its been clear that gamergate is solely a vehicle for organised harassment (primarily of women). There isnt any moral quandry or naunced position about it, its just harassment.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
      - BlackAura 11y ago
        Umm... That report does not say what you think it says. Whoever did that excerpt was either utterly useless at statistics (and reading comprehension), or was trying to twist the results to try to prove a point. The report was about harassment on Twitter in general, not GG. They were trying to get a very broad sample from all over Twitter, covering any abuse or harassment that was reported to them. Since the whole GG mess was ongoing at the time of the research, the researchers decided to use the ggautoblocker list to see how much overlap their was between their sample, and people connected to GG, to find out how much it affected their results. The result is that there was a fair bit of overlap - about 12% of the people in their sample were also on the ggautoblocker list. Most of the harassment they found was not related to GG. Their finding: "Reports to WAM! constitute a much wider range of harassment than the GamerGate controversy alone". That's not what the excerpt you posted claims at all. It interprets that as "only 65 out of 9,844 accounts on the ggautoblocker list engaged in harassment". Which is bunk - the study found nothing at all about the remaining 9,779 accounts on that list. Only that those 65 accounts were in both sample sets. Here's another way to look at it. The 65 harassers who were also on the ggautoblocker list were responsible for 12% of the harassment on Twitter that these researchers found. So they obviously only noticed 0.6% of GamerGate. Therefore, if they'd found all of the GG-associated harassment and abuse, they'd end up with about with 18 times more harassment reports, of which 95% would have been associated with GamerGate. That analysis is also complete garbage, but it's just as sound as the analysis in that excerpt you posted, and based on exactly the same faulty reasoning. Many of the accounts on the ggautoblocker list are either bots, or duplicate accounts created specifically for the purpose of harassing people and discarded when they are no longer useful.
        deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
        striking 11y ago
        Sorry for the faulty logic. This is a difficult topic, and I'm glad you corrected me.
  - SomeCallMeTim 11y ago
    I've been following the #GamerGate trainwreck for a while. #SavePoint seems to maybe be about improving gamer culture? I don't know. I've not seen #SavePoint before today. For those who don't know, #GamerGate claimed to be about "journalistic ethics" when they were actually just harassing a women (and later other women) who said negative things about how women were treated in games. [1] The #SavePoint group seems to be very explicitly against harassment of any kind, and at least gives lip service to freedom of expression of both game developers and critics. I don't know if this is just a facade, like the one previously worn by #GamerGate, or if this is the real deal. The #GamerGate tag is hopelessly associated with misogyny and harassment, so the fact that they want to use a new hashtag is actually a minor point in their favor. But other than "gaming ethics," I'm not really sure what they exist to promote. And I'm not even sure what they mean any more by "gaming ethics," considering the initial #gamergate accusations were proven completely and utterly false. (Including outrage at an article on GamaSutra [2] that pissed off a bunch of "gamers" who completely misunderstood it. [3]) [1] http://gawker.com/what-is-gamergate-and-why-an-explainer-for-non-geeks-1642909080 http://gawker.com/what-is-gamergate-and-why-an-explainer-for... [2] http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/224400/Gamers_dont_have_to_be_your_audience_Gamers_are_over.php http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/224400/Gamers_dont_have_t... [3] https://medium.com/plaguearist-does-gamergate/im-doing-this-without-permission-of-the-author-but-here-is-an-annotated-version-of-gamers-don-6bc264fec0f3 https://medium.com/plaguearist-does-gamergate/im-doing-this-...
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
      - BlackAura 11y ago
        #3 is... a bunch of paranoid conspiracy theory bullshit. Let's have a look at the first entry. I'll probably get bored after a few of these, but... whatever. Charge 1 - Leigh Alexander stands accused of writing an article that GG disagree with, and that many of them inexplicably interpreted as some kind of threat, or something. I don't know. The article was basically about how video games have become mainstream, the concept of a "gamer" demographic is largely meaningless, and developers and publishers need not, and should not, solely target everything at this narrow demographic. Charge 2 - She is accused of talking to her colleagues, possibly at other publications. She may have engaged in such crimes as discussing her work with others, and building a network of contacts. Y'know... journalism. Because apparently all journalism must be done in a vacuum. Charge 3 - She is accused to also doing other work, and talking about that other work on her personal social media accounts. Even though there's no evidence that she's done anything wrong as a journalist, she totally could have if she wanted to, and therefore can't be trusted, or something? At this point, I'm just bored. Most of the rest of the list is basically that Leigh is accused of having professional relationships with people in the games industry. Y'know, like every other games journalist - this whole professional networking thing is kind of how journalists get access to things. Same's true for journalists covering any other entertainment industry. Or politics. Or business. Or... I mean, repeatedly accusing a journalist of doing her job just seems utterly ridiculous. What else... There's an accusation of lying, which is included even though the accusation itself says that it was probably misinterpreted. A whole bunch of Twitter B.S. that nobody cares about. Some paranoid ramblings, and a whole bunch of other inconsequential crap that nobody cares about... So... That's the smoking gun? Really? > Even though most #GamerGate accounts were proven not to be harassers Wrong. There was no "proven" anywhere - just that there was a lot of harassment on Twitter that wasn't associated with GG, and a wider study only picked up a small number of GG-associated accounts. Which is something entirely different, despite what GG like to pretend.
  - interpol_p 11y ago
    It is a bizarre and vile thing that Feminist Frequency has come to be associated with "anti-GamerGate" when it has primarily been about the critical discussion of women in media, including video games. The very fact that discussing the representation of women in media can be seen as "anti" anything makes me incredibly sad. Feminist Frequency has always produced well researched and well argued videos. They incite much needed and level-headed discussion about how we represent women in games and other media. That anyone can throw hate at them for it suggests we have a long way to go as a society.
eertami 11y ago
I know nothing about the subject, but I've seen this twitter account before and instantly assumed it was parody. Is it a character being portrayed or a real person because I still can't tell.
- falsedan 11y ago
  A parody of what? Seems like a regular human making normal tweets about interacting with ridiculous close-minded misoginist chaps.
  - BlackAura 11y ago
    Probably assuming that the people she's reacting to are imaginary, because he doesn't believe it could possibly be that bad.
  - carrja99 11y ago
    Pretty sure the parent is commenting on the sheer volume of tweets from the account.

douche 11y ago

Which side is which here? I'm not really clued into the whole GamerGate thing... I have seen Randi Lee Harper say some very unpleasant things, and some even more unpleasant things said about her. I know nothing about the Open Gaming Society, but reading their website it seems like a relatively sane organization.

msabalau 11y ago
SavePoint was to featured "several prominent GamerGate figureheads". The sponsoring organization generally claims to take "a neutral stance" on GamerGate. (http://motherboard.vice.com/read/sxsw-cancels-gaming-panels-due-to-threats-of-violence http://motherboard.vice.com/read/sxsw-cancels-gaming-panels-...) Randi Lee Harper is noted for making tools to help victims of online harassment. Level Up panel description was "A panel from experts on online harassment in gaming and geek culture, how to combat it, how to design against it, and how to create online communities that are moving away from harassment." The GamerGate crowd claim that they care about "ethics in game journalism" and that the abuse that feminist gamers experience doesn't have anything to do with them. So theoretically, there aren't opposing sides here.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- daleharvey 11y ago
  It is not a complicated situation, from the start its been clear that gamergate is solely a vehicle for organised harassment (primarily of women). There isnt any moral quandry or naunced position about it, its just harassment.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
    - BlackAura 11y ago
      Umm... That report does not say what you think it says. Whoever did that excerpt was either utterly useless at statistics (and reading comprehension), or was trying to twist the results to try to prove a point. The report was about harassment on Twitter in general, not GG. They were trying to get a very broad sample from all over Twitter, covering any abuse or harassment that was reported to them. Since the whole GG mess was ongoing at the time of the research, the researchers decided to use the ggautoblocker list to see how much overlap their was between their sample, and people connected to GG, to find out how much it affected their results. The result is that there was a fair bit of overlap - about 12% of the people in their sample were also on the ggautoblocker list. Most of the harassment they found was not related to GG. Their finding: "Reports to WAM! constitute a much wider range of harassment than the GamerGate controversy alone". That's not what the excerpt you posted claims at all. It interprets that as "only 65 out of 9,844 accounts on the ggautoblocker list engaged in harassment". Which is bunk - the study found nothing at all about the remaining 9,779 accounts on that list. Only that those 65 accounts were in both sample sets. Here's another way to look at it. The 65 harassers who were also on the ggautoblocker list were responsible for 12% of the harassment on Twitter that these researchers found. So they obviously only noticed 0.6% of GamerGate. Therefore, if they'd found all of the GG-associated harassment and abuse, they'd end up with about with 18 times more harassment reports, of which 95% would have been associated with GamerGate. That analysis is also complete garbage, but it's just as sound as the analysis in that excerpt you posted, and based on exactly the same faulty reasoning. Many of the accounts on the ggautoblocker list are either bots, or duplicate accounts created specifically for the purpose of harassing people and discarded when they are no longer useful.
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
      - striking 11y ago
        Sorry for the faulty logic. This is a difficult topic, and I'm glad you corrected me.
- SomeCallMeTim 11y ago
  I've been following the #GamerGate trainwreck for a while. #SavePoint seems to maybe be about improving gamer culture? I don't know. I've not seen #SavePoint before today. For those who don't know, #GamerGate claimed to be about "journalistic ethics" when they were actually just harassing a women (and later other women) who said negative things about how women were treated in games. [1] The #SavePoint group seems to be very explicitly against harassment of any kind, and at least gives lip service to freedom of expression of both game developers and critics. I don't know if this is just a facade, like the one previously worn by #GamerGate, or if this is the real deal. The #GamerGate tag is hopelessly associated with misogyny and harassment, so the fact that they want to use a new hashtag is actually a minor point in their favor. But other than "gaming ethics," I'm not really sure what they exist to promote. And I'm not even sure what they mean any more by "gaming ethics," considering the initial #gamergate accusations were proven completely and utterly false. (Including outrage at an article on GamaSutra [2] that pissed off a bunch of "gamers" who completely misunderstood it. [3]) [1] http://gawker.com/what-is-gamergate-and-why-an-explainer-for-non-geeks-1642909080 http://gawker.com/what-is-gamergate-and-why-an-explainer-for... [2] http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/224400/Gamers_dont_have_to_be_your_audience_Gamers_are_over.php http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/224400/Gamers_dont_have_t... [3] https://medium.com/plaguearist-does-gamergate/im-doing-this-without-permission-of-the-author-but-here-is-an-annotated-version-of-gamers-don-6bc264fec0f3 https://medium.com/plaguearist-does-gamergate/im-doing-this-...
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
    - BlackAura 11y ago
      #3 is... a bunch of paranoid conspiracy theory bullshit. Let's have a look at the first entry. I'll probably get bored after a few of these, but... whatever. Charge 1 - Leigh Alexander stands accused of writing an article that GG disagree with, and that many of them inexplicably interpreted as some kind of threat, or something. I don't know. The article was basically about how video games have become mainstream, the concept of a "gamer" demographic is largely meaningless, and developers and publishers need not, and should not, solely target everything at this narrow demographic. Charge 2 - She is accused of talking to her colleagues, possibly at other publications. She may have engaged in such crimes as discussing her work with others, and building a network of contacts. Y'know... journalism. Because apparently all journalism must be done in a vacuum. Charge 3 - She is accused to also doing other work, and talking about that other work on her personal social media accounts. Even though there's no evidence that she's done anything wrong as a journalist, she totally could have if she wanted to, and therefore can't be trusted, or something? At this point, I'm just bored. Most of the rest of the list is basically that Leigh is accused of having professional relationships with people in the games industry. Y'know, like every other games journalist - this whole professional networking thing is kind of how journalists get access to things. Same's true for journalists covering any other entertainment industry. Or politics. Or business. Or... I mean, repeatedly accusing a journalist of doing her job just seems utterly ridiculous. What else... There's an accusation of lying, which is included even though the accusation itself says that it was probably misinterpreted. A whole bunch of Twitter B.S. that nobody cares about. Some paranoid ramblings, and a whole bunch of other inconsequential crap that nobody cares about... So... That's the smoking gun? Really? > Even though most #GamerGate accounts were proven not to be harassers Wrong. There was no "proven" anywhere - just that there was a lot of harassment on Twitter that wasn't associated with GG, and a wider study only picked up a small number of GG-associated accounts. Which is something entirely different, despite what GG like to pretend.
- interpol_p 11y ago
  It is a bizarre and vile thing that Feminist Frequency has come to be associated with "anti-GamerGate" when it has primarily been about the critical discussion of women in media, including video games. The very fact that discussing the representation of women in media can be seen as "anti" anything makes me incredibly sad. Feminist Frequency has always produced well researched and well argued videos. They incite much needed and level-headed discussion about how we represent women in games and other media. That anyone can throw hate at them for it suggests we have a long way to go as a society.

eertami 11y ago

I know nothing about the subject, but I've seen this twitter account before and instantly assumed it was parody. Is it a character being portrayed or a real person because I still can't tell.

falsedan 11y ago
A parody of what? Seems like a regular human making normal tweets about interacting with ridiculous close-minded misoginist chaps.
- BlackAura 11y ago
  Probably assuming that the people she's reacting to are imaginary, because he doesn't believe it could possibly be that bad.
- carrja99 11y ago
  Pretty sure the parent is commenting on the sheer volume of tweets from the account.