3 ms·

You were doing pretty good right up until you tried to channel GamerGame... that was a huge mistake. I get that you believe the "Official Party Line"(TM), but a

You were doing pretty good right up until you tried to channel GamerGame... that was a huge mistake. I get that you believe the "Official Party Line"(TM), but a lot of people don't, and a lot of us watched this whole thing unfold real-time across The Zoe Post, 4chan, reddit, and every other major venue on which it presented itself. Furthermore, some of us actually know the participants involved in a professional and private capacity. Yes, Gjoni "did a bad thing" by posting all the duplicitous shitty things Quinn did... but therein lies the rub. If you don't want to be called out for being a cheater who fucks game journalists for good reviews... then don't cheat on your boyfriend and fuck game journalists for reviews. It really is that goddamn simple. What GamerGate really was, was that gamers - the naive idiots they tend to be - found out that their little subculture was NOT immune to all the awful shit that plagues every other human interest. They, however, decided to start fighting back instead of just shrugging their shoulders and saying, "Oh well, everything's corrupt and awful, what can you do?" But the real root cause problem here is that people don't want to accept human nature, almost all people, on almost all sides.

acdha 6y ago
I realize that you might want to view your friends in a positive light but what I wrote is an accurate description of GamerGate (A lot of us saw this unfold, too). “ethics in journalism” was their favored excuse but the real cause was always the seething hatred for feminists and women not knowing their place. They ignored contemporaneous real ethical issues and focused on known-inaccurate excuses for the continued hate mob - for example, you’re still repeating their claim that Zoe Quinn slept with Nathan Grayson for good reviews, despite him not reviewing her games – something easily verified for anyone who cared to check.
- ReflectedImage 6y ago
  "despite him not reviewing her games" The people he directly managed wrote 2 reviews. Stop pushing a lie. The issue here acdha is that you failed to check.
  - acdha 6y ago
    Dude, it’s been almost 7 years, full of widely-recognized dishonesty and bad faith arguments by GamerGaters and fellow travelers. What do you think you’re going to accomplish by trying a new variation of an old claim conspicuously made without any evidence? Do you really think anyone is going to believe it, much less say it excuses what happened?
    - ReflectedImage 6y ago
      No one at the time ever claimed that the articles didn't exist, as you could just read the articles in question. It was a revisionist lie added 6 to 8 months after the events. Since you didn't bother to read the articles, there were 2 seperate articles both about Indie games in general. They both had sections on Depression Quest and both used Depression Quest for all the article's images. One of them at the bottom had a single hashtag #DepressionQuest on it. Both written by Nathan Grayson's subordinates. Obviously, this isn't any different than large publishers giving the gaming journalists huge sacks of money, which they do. The problem was it escalated out of control into the gaming journalists writing hit pieces on the gaming community as part of their damage control. I'm sorry acdha but 7 years ago you were duped by hit piece articles.
      - CRConrad 6y ago
        "Duped by hit piece articles"?!? That might be relevant, IF it in any way any way excused all that followed. I'm sorry, "ReflectedImage1", but looking at it from the other side it looks like this: Seven years later, you're still defending the indefensible, citing some irrelevant bullshit to excuse the inexcusable. Your comment certainly was revealing, but not in the way you probably hoped.

acdha 6y ago

I realize that you might want to view your friends in a positive light but what I wrote is an accurate description of GamerGate (A lot of us saw this unfold, too). “ethics in journalism” was their favored excuse but the real cause was always the seething hatred for feminists and women not knowing their place. They ignored contemporaneous real ethical issues and focused on known-inaccurate excuses for the continued hate mob - for example, you’re still repeating their claim that Zoe Quinn slept with Nathan Grayson for good reviews, despite him not reviewing her games – something easily verified for anyone who cared to check.

ReflectedImage 6y ago
"despite him not reviewing her games" The people he directly managed wrote 2 reviews. Stop pushing a lie. The issue here acdha is that you failed to check.
- acdha 6y ago
  Dude, it’s been almost 7 years, full of widely-recognized dishonesty and bad faith arguments by GamerGaters and fellow travelers. What do you think you’re going to accomplish by trying a new variation of an old claim conspicuously made without any evidence? Do you really think anyone is going to believe it, much less say it excuses what happened?
  - ReflectedImage 6y ago
    No one at the time ever claimed that the articles didn't exist, as you could just read the articles in question. It was a revisionist lie added 6 to 8 months after the events. Since you didn't bother to read the articles, there were 2 seperate articles both about Indie games in general. They both had sections on Depression Quest and both used Depression Quest for all the article's images. One of them at the bottom had a single hashtag #DepressionQuest on it. Both written by Nathan Grayson's subordinates. Obviously, this isn't any different than large publishers giving the gaming journalists huge sacks of money, which they do. The problem was it escalated out of control into the gaming journalists writing hit pieces on the gaming community as part of their damage control. I'm sorry acdha but 7 years ago you were duped by hit piece articles.
    - CRConrad 6y ago
      "Duped by hit piece articles"?!? That might be relevant, IF it in any way any way excused all that followed. I'm sorry, "ReflectedImage1", but looking at it from the other side it looks like this: Seven years later, you're still defending the indefensible, citing some irrelevant bullshit to excuse the inexcusable. Your comment certainly was revealing, but not in the way you probably hoped.