Slashdot Mirror
SXSW Reinstates Panels On Harassment, Adds All-Day Harassment Summit (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader writes: On Tuesday, the South by Southwest Festival announced that it had canceled a pair of panels about online harassment after receiving threats involving them. The cancellation generated a massive outcry, including threats from media organizations to withdraw their support for the festival. Now, SXSW has announced that they're reinstating the panels as part of an all-day summit dedicated to talking about online harassment. They said, "By canceling two sessions we sent an unintended message that SXSW not only tolerates online harassment but condones it, and for that we are truly sorry. The resulting feedback from the individuals involved and the community-at-large resonated loud and clear. While we made the decision in the interest of safety for all of our attendees, canceling sessions was not an appropriate response." They've scheduled more than two dozen speakers for the event, and they plan to stream it live online. "Online harassment is a serious matter and we stand firmly against hate speech and cyber-bullying. It is a menace that has often resulted in real world violence; the spread of discrimination; increased mental health issues and self-inflicted physical harm."
You're thinking of SXSW Music. SXSW has split into 3 parts: Music, Film, and Interactive. This is SXSW Interactive. SXSW Music doesn't even start until SXSW is over.
There's also 7 different exhibitions: http://www.sxsw.com/marketing/...
An example would be Twitter who has banned people for claiming they posted doxs, or harassment like Leothepirate or Thunderf00t for example but allowed people like Quinn, Harper, Sarkeesian and Wu to run free, who've posted doxs, harassed people, or even sent their followers out to attack others. I think that's what they're talking about, the rules don't apply equally. If you're in the right kind of clique, you can do whatever you want.
Om, nomnomnom...
There's nothing there that says gamergate was involved at all. Here's a question, why would gamergate want it's own panel shutdown? It's not any different than the tinfoilers who claimed that gamergate tried to shut down their own gathering at Local16(which is an on-going investigation still), or claiming that they shutdown the SPJ Airplay event with multiple bomb threats(also an on-going investigation), where the SPJ actually gave them a voice, instead of what the media was claiming it was.
In my book it falls into one of two camps, either exceptionally devout SJW's did it because they believed they're doing the right thing(there is an extremely long list of SJW's who have faked things to get attention or try to stop something--from fake racism to claiming non-existent rape while claiming it was "to create a dialog) or for the lulz, or trolls doing it for the lulz. You know, people like Joshua Goldberg who was a prolific writer for a pile of left-wing sites like The Guardian, Daily Kos, Feministing, and had dozens of articles published by them. But, he uses the gamergate hashtag(which anyone can use) 35 times, when there are 3.5m+ tweets in it, but that automatically makes him a member of gamergate says the SJW crowd.
Om, nomnomnom...
It's entirely up in the air where the threats came from. It could be a Jace, it could be mattress girl, it could be the Jew going around his neighbourhood painting Swastikas, it could be me, it could be you.
We have known cases of SJWs getting people fired, which is why for the moment the violence of SJWs is more effective than the alleged threats of violence from GG/MRAs. For the moment SJWs have the power to ruin arbitrary people's career and they aren't afraid to use it, while GG/MRAs have the power to troll people online who make a career out of getting trolled online for pity bucks.
At some point GG/MRAs might become more violent, but going on the past you have more to fear from the SJWs.
One can SET the table, have a SET of tools, or SET something down. These are unrelated meanings which happen to have the same spelling, mostly because English speakers prefer their words to be shorter than the Latin and Greek from which they derive.
PUSI-ll-animous is latin for cowardly. A long time ago it was brought into English as "pussy" (other origins are also possible, it was a long time ago).
Some time later, cat or pussy was separately used as slang for vagina.
Two unrelated meanings that happen to have the same spelling because pusillanimous is "too long; didn't say".
I think I can answer that: because whenever GamerGate has participated in a public forum, it has only been embarrassed and seen public support drop. For example, the recent event with that Koretzky dude from the Society of Professional Journalists turned into a monkey-show of GG e-celebs and floor-crappers. Public exposure is not GamerGate's friend. Remember Aurini's big documentary? ou think GG is gonna be helped by having Oliver Campbell explain how he's in deep cover for the FBI investigating the feminists? Or Ralph Retort talking about the ethics of doxxing bitches while cleaning out his ear with a toothpick? I repeat: public exposure is not GamerGate's friend. If the past year has taught us anything, it's that fact. Every event, every happening has just caused GamerGate's support to erode.
Really? You mean the same thing from the SPJ which has a gaming-only related journalism reward that only goes to sits that show they have no conflict of interest? Or people like Lynn Walsh who are on the savepoint panel because of it? Strange I don't seem to remember Cambell ever saying that, link? But if you're right and all that has cause GG's support to erode, then why do subs continue to increase, and why do subs and sites continue to consistently draw more people?
On the other hand, if you ask the question, "Why would the blue-haired SJWs want their own panel shutdown?" now you have something of a quandary. Every time they get their mugs in public, they have multinational companies throwing money at them (Intel) or they get invited to be on Colbert or to speak at the United Nations or they have their new non-profit anti-harassment organization funded. Their Patreons get more donors and they get to be social darlings. Public exposure is the SJW's friend. They suck that shit up, and having a panel at SXSW cancelled would be a disaster for them.
In summary, one party has nothing to gain and the other has nothing to lose.
Really GG has nothing to lose anyway. Gamers themselves have been bullied, called mass murders, the cause of all of societies ills since the 1990's. You're basically looking at one of the most bullied sections of society who've already been beaten down, and saying "no fucks are given." But if they had nothing to gain, or provided nothing then all those gaming sites wouldn't have changed their disclosure and ethics policies, the FTC wouldn't have changed their native advertising rules, and the media wouldn't be so obsessed with us as the "new 4chan" that hacks, rapes, destroys, doxes, and takes candies from babies. You literally can't go a week without some new article claiming that GG is evil, or GG did this or that because they're GG. It's almost turned into a dank meme all because of their hard work.
Om, nomnomnom...