Slashdot Mirror


Game Company Receives Complaints About Bad Example Set By '%FEMALENAME' (kotaku.com)

ArenaNet narrative designer Jessica Price was fired last week after she accused a Twitter user of "mansplaining", and adding later "Don't expect me to pretend to like you here." (Her employer characterized this as "attacks on the community.")

So what happened in the week that followed? An anonymous reader writes: A Reddit user indicated he'd been speaking satirically when he posted that "We can probably fire anyone on the GW2 dev team as long we make a big enough stink," and expressed surprise later that no one had disagreed with him. But another female developer told Kotaku she saw a real call to action on 4chan, and that it was followed by angry letters to the game studio she freelances for calling for her firing too, complaining their games had declined since she was hired (along with another woman). The letters also complained her Twitter account set "a bad example for the letter-writer's children, who supposedly play this game." The company's CEO received "a three-digit number's" worth of angry letters -- though "Fifty or so of them glitched out with a lot of variables exposed, including %FEMALENAME."

"A deeper look at the names and emails associated with the letters went to Facebook bot profiles and people whose profiles indicated associations with Gamergate or 4chan," reports Kotaku -- and Brianna Wu made a similar charge on Twitter last week, citing research by a team of volunteers. "The overwhelming majority of people harassing Jessica Price today on Twitter are bots and sock puppets. These are throwaway accounts that are used as toys. Almost no one claiming to be upset is an established, normal Twitter user." The Verge reports that Wu monitored Jessica Price's account, and found harassment "as bad as she's ever seen," blocking at least 600 different accounts.

Another female narrative designer at Arkane Studios says her employer was messaged with a complaint that she'd "verbally abused" a Twitter user -- and discovered a (since-deleted) online petition calling for her firing. And an angry message was also sent to Opaque Space (collaborating with NASA on VR games and training), complaining the company should take responsibility for the "man hating ideals...spread through social media accounts" by their game design lead. "I know MANY people like me, especially women, who have frequent experience with people calling for their employers to fire them for speaking up, speaking out," she posted on Twitter.

The latest furor began with an accusation of mansplaining which a YouTube streamer defended as "my obvious attempt at creating dialogue and discussion", calling it "disheartening" that Jessica Price didn't "correct me in my false assumptions."

577 comments

  1. irony by c6gunner · · Score: 5, Funny

    I know MANY people like me, especially women, who have frequent experience with people calling for their employers to fire them for speaking up, speaking out

    Yeah, #metoo

    1. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same

    2. Re:irony by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you could share your experience? The more we know, the better we can deal with it.

      Perhaps a Wikipedia entry or a site that employers can be directed to which explains this problem could be created, so that if you are a victim you can show your boss and hopefully get the matter resolved.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:irony by msauve · · Score: 1

      The problem, and solution, is simple. #deletefacebook (and twitter, etc.).

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    4. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I own a game company.

      We get this constantly from players, and it has nothing to do with the sex of the developers. If anything the men get it worse.

      I know that's an uncomfortable truth for you, but it's not anecdotal. It's industry-wide.

    5. Re: irony by c6gunner · · Score: 3, Informative

      Perhaps you could share your experience? The more we know, the better we can deal with it.

      Sure, would you like that list alphabetical, or in chronological order?

      It's going to take me a while to type up an entire encyclopaedia anyway, so in the meantime here's a little primer for you:

      https://www.insidehighered.com...

    6. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      This game company and CEO are blatant tools of the patrarchy. The company must be driven to bankruptcy and the CEO blacklisted. Lawsuits must be filed against the company and the CEO, and possibly even criminal charges as well. The player in question should be banned and criminal harassment and/or stalking charges brought against him.

      The patriarchy and all who enable it need to be destroyed by any means available. In this case the ends do justify the means.

    7. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, #metoo

      Pound me too?

    8. Re: irony by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Well if you insist ...

    9. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes people have tried to dox me and get me fired, and boast proudly online about their bullying, for having some conservative political opinions.

    10. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You were also slapped in the face by Jamie Foxx's penis? OMG #metoo #metoo #METOO

    11. Re: irony by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      I meant your personal experience, not a survey of incidents.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bite the pillow. I'm goin in dry.

    13. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So long as men keep having a Occupational Fatality Rate of 93% over women, they pretty much do have it worse whether you like it or not.

    14. Re: irony by c6gunner · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think you need to go back and re-read my original comment. I never made any reference to my personal experiences.

      Aside from that, I'm always puzzled by women's tendency to focus on personal anecdotes. What exactly could my personal story tell you which a link to others like it could not? Does the slight degree of closeness make it more emotionally appealing? Do you equate that with somehow being more persuasive?

    15. Re:irony by Alypius · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      The Left will not like living under the rules they created.

    16. Re: irony by AcidPenguin9873 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Using the #metoo hashtag without any further explanation means that you have had a personal experience. If you were just referencing the "#metoo movement", your comment was misleading.

    17. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      any public personality like TV host or politician or movie star or basketball player or reality tv star or PUBLIC game developer/youtuber (i am software developer but i never created facebook account or told anyone what i work on outside work so i consider myself anonymous)

      has to be able to handle all consequences of publicity (including firing if they become very unpopular/make their employer look bad, or even risk of being hit in face with pie during political rally or if they wear real fur in-front of green-peace nut sprayed with paint, or even in extreme cases being shot by some insane person like that american president few decades ago)

      she selected to be public person and create facebook account for some reason (my generation didnt have facebook or twiter) so she needs to be prepared for all consequences by haters or nutjobs, and yes if she made his customers unhappy and made him make less money because of it she deserves to be fired regardless if she is guilty or not, regardless if she is male or female, as they say "customer is always right/always keep customer happy"

      in-front of customer you pretend to agree with them and smile, and than when you get home in your private place of residence you can tell worst things imaginable about that customer in front of mirror or your spouse

    18. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This game company and CEO are blatant tools of the patrarchy. .

      When cancer comes for you, you will gain perspective regarding what IS and IS NOT a problem worthy of concern.

      Until then, enjoy wasting your life whining pointlessly.

    19. Re: irony by lance_of_the_apes · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm just as puzzled that you'd use the #metoo hashtag and think that anyone would interpret it any other way. The whole point of the hashtag is to share your own experiences.

    20. Re: irony by c6gunner · · Score: 2, Informative

      Explaining things for the lowest common denominator always feels so ... icky ... but just to remove all ambiguity, it had a triple meaning:

      1. She said "I know MANY people ... who have frequent experience with people calling for their employers to fire them for speaking up, speaking out". Obviously "me too" means that I likewise know many such people.

      2. It was a reference to people using the "pound me too movement" to try and ruin the lives of countless men by riling up online lynch mobs, often with the flimsiest of accusations.

      3. Combined with the title I chose, it should have been read as obvious mockery of women who would gladly try to get a man fired for making a dongle joke suddenly pulling an about turn and whining when one of their own gets sacked for saying stupid, sexist things.

      I understand that all of those concepts are a lot to pack into just two words and a hashtag, but I'm sure that a god chunk of the Slashdot readership had no problem parsing it despite the subtilty/complexity. For the rest of you ... well, now you have the annotated version.

    21. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      awwww. personal and professional jealousy. how quaint.

    22. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're a little too pleased with yourself chief.

    23. Re: irony by c6gunner · · Score: 0

      Would have been far more pleased if I didn't have to explain it. But there's always at least one ...

    24. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      considering men are 186% more likely to make potentially lethal stupid decisions, that's actually a pretty good result

    25. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a request for fodder for AmMoJo to play word games to attack you. Don't fall for the 'sincerity'.

    26. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Pound me too"

      Lol! I never read it that way, but it's hilarious!

    27. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      90% of those stupid decisions is saving a woman, so death is deserved for such stupidity.

    28. Re: irony by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0, Troll

      You used the #metoo hashtag. You don't seem to have a personal experience. In the past you have demanded that women make credible and specific accusations, but now when politely asked refuse to provide one of your own.

      Ah the very least, you seem to be acting in bad faith and got very defensive when I tried to engage with you. Why are you acting this way?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    29. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Explain it or Mansplain it? I'm starting to get confused
      Irony lvl 11 for those that did not understand this comment.

    30. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus Christ you are an idiot. Your head is so far stuck up the social justice hole, you can't even see irony when it slaps you in the face.

    31. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound bitter. Nobody likes bitter people. Reflect on that if you will.

    32. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [pound]metoo

    33. Re: irony by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Odds are they're posting AC because people like you would ramp up the harassment if given some idea where to go.

      Honestly, I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if a major factor in why men might have it worse is because of douchebags like you, who apparently believe that it's A-OK if men get harassed--which is the message you send when you dismiss their complaints casually, and yes, that can on its own make it worse. Harassment is bad, and if you believe your target and/or motives somehow justify it, you are part of the problem.

      Seriously, this sort of thing is part of why I'm not at all comfortable with the anti-gamergate side. What is wrong with you people, that you can't even bring yourselves to say things like "Anybody can be harassed and harassment is wrong"? That shouldn't be controversial, yet it is getting treated like it not only is controversial but is offensive.

    34. Re: irony by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Like diving into a flooded cave to rescue some trapped children the bastards!

    35. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, just the once.

    36. Re: irony by c6gunner · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You used the #metoo hashtag. You don't seem to have a personal experience.

      What kind of experience? Have I been harassed? Of course; who the fuck hasn't. Have I had random internet dipshits try to dox me and get me fired? They didn't succeed, but yeah, quite a few have tried. Have I been sexually assaulted? Absolutely. Only ever by women, too; the few homosexual men who have come on to me over the years were much less presumptuous and understood the word "no" much better than the entitled hetero twats that have tried it.

      In the past you have demanded that women make credible and specific accusations, but now when politely asked refuse to provide one of your own.

      Except I'm not making accusations. I have no interest in making a fucking federal case out of it. Social Justice Warriors freak out when someone grabs your ass; when it happens to men we just laugh it off. Why would I try to ruin some chicks life just because she was a bit drunk and got grabby? Or because she was horny and misread the signals? Unlike twitters Social Junkie Whales I generally care about people. I might be a dick to you in conversation here but if we happened to meet up in real life and you made an off-color joke or dropped your pants in front of me I wouldn't flip out and try to get you fired. I would either laugh or tell you I'm not interested, and we would move on with our lives. I get no benefit from trying to ruin you; on the contrary, I would be contributing to a toxic culture which insists that every faux pas is an unforgivable crime. I don't want to live in that kind of world so I try not to help create it.

      Ah the very least, you seem to be acting in bad faith and got very defensive when I tried to engage with you. Why are you acting this way?

      Look, for a Social Junkpile Wanker, you're not all that bad. I mean you're still clearly delusional, looking to be offended, completely unwilling to consider any contrary opinion, and eager to spin things to suit your needs ... but compared to the rest you're actually kinda alright. So do you think that, for once in your Slashdot career, you could stop assuming that people who are being completely honest with you are part of some grand conspiracy to deceive you into who-knows-what? Maybe apply the principle of charity? I know it's hard, but it's worth a try. You might even have a decent conversation for a change.

    37. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Translation: I'm trying to convince people to tell these women to shut up and take the abuse
      Translation: I'm trying to literally place words in mouths by prefixing the word 'translation'

    38. Re: irony by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      With about 300 million people in the US, it's pretty easy to find a few anecdotes of pretty much anything. That says little about the overall prevalence of the experience. For every one-in-a-million experience, there are 300 people who have experienced it.

      When the anecdote concerns not a random example found online, but rather the person you're debating, it's different. You are only debating a few people at one time. If one of those few has had the experience in question, chances are the experience is relatively frequent.

    39. Re: irony by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      How dare you presume the gender of those burly divers!

    40. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      OP here. False.

      I tell all of my employees that, if they decide to be outspoken and active on social media using their real name tied to our company, they are a) going to be the target of harassment and b) are a representative of the company, and must deal with that harassment gracefully.

      Male or female. It does not matter. If you are representing us, you must be the bigger person. I absolutely would have fired this woman too, because she was openly divisive, insulting, and hostile to customers. That's not excusable, no matter who you are.

      She is free to speak this way. She is not free from the consequences.

    41. Re:irony by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Don't misunderstand me. I don't discredit your experience.

      Personally, I think the vast majority of the time these online petitions to get people fired are nothing more than bullying, coercive harassment.

      But I perceive a problem in the Jessica Price case.

      Jessica's problem was that she was using Twitter basically as an extension of her work life. She -- apparently constantly -- tweeted to people she knew to be gamers about her work designing games.

      In a case like that, yeah, I can see that a backlash on Twitter could lash all the way back to her employer.

      But as I said, most cases aren't like that. Generally speaking, unless someone is tweeting about their own criminal behavior or things that are really, grossly unethical, I don't think social media should have any impact on one's work or professional life.

    42. Re: irony by c6gunner · · Score: 2

      Don't misunderstand me. I don't discredit your experience.

      Don't worry about it. If you had read the rest of my comments you'd see that I'm not exactly a snowflake. And I'm pretty sure you fundamentally misunderstood my position.

      But I perceive a problem in the Jessica Price case.

      Jessica's problem was that she was using Twitter basically as an extension of her work life. She -- apparently constantly -- tweeted to people she knew to be gamers about her work designing games.

      In a case like that, yeah, I can see that a backlash on Twitter could lash all the way back to her employer.

      But as I said, most cases aren't like that. Generally speaking, unless someone is tweeting about their own criminal behavior or things that are really, grossly unethical, I don't think social media should have any impact on one's work or professional life.

      I agree 100% with everything you said, and wish I could mod you up. For my part, I want to give her even more benefit-of-the-doubt just because I realize that, thanks to my dislike for her politics, I'm inherently inclined to judge her more harshly. As you say, if she did regularly mix work PR with her personal feed, that would be the only thing which could possibly justify firing her over this.

    43. Re: irony by pots · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What is wrong with you people, that you can't even bring yourselves to say things like "Anybody can be harassed and harassment is wrong"?

      ... Well I'm not a fan of the anti-gamergaters either, but this question is pretty easy to answer: it's deflection. If someone says, "Look, this group in particular is being singled out and harassed." and you respond, "Hm, yes harassment is bad. Before we do anything else, let's all say that harassment is bad." then you are deflecting from their complaint by changing the topic to something which they hadn't really been discussing. The other person was not talking about harassment being bad, there was an implication that we all already agreed on that point, the other person was talking about this particular group being singled out.

      It's very similar to the "all lives matter" deflection that some people use against the Black Lives Matter protestors. The point of the phrase "black lives matter" is not the concept that lives should matter or that black people have lives. The phrase assumes that we all agree on those points already and so is talking about something else.

    44. Re: irony by c6gunner · · Score: 0

      it's deflection. If someone says, "Look, this group in particular is being singled out and harassed." and you respond, "Hm, yes harassment is bad. Before we do anything else, let's all say that harassment is bad." then you are deflecting from their complaint by changing the topic to something which they hadn't really been discussing. The other person was not talking about harassment being bad, there was an implication that we all already agreed on that point, the other person was talking about this particular group being singled out.

      Sure, but that's not what's happening. Nobody is saying "we have to consider all other groups"; they're saying "all these other groups have been getting harassed for decades and you didn't say a word, so why the fuck do you want us to focus on YOUR group now?"

      It's very similar to the "all lives matter" deflection that some people use against the Black Lives Matter protestors. The point of the phrase "black lives matter" is not the concept that lives should matter or that black people have lives. The phrase assumes that we all agree on those points already and so is talking about something else.

      I agree, it's very similar. People of all colours have been getting killed throughout human history. Why should we focus specifically on the black lives? Are you suggesting that, once we magically stop all black people from being killed, we are suddenly going to see a bunch of black people marching under "Asian lives matter" banners?

      How in the world do you conclude that it's "defection" to point out that the problem affects everyone, and it's retarded to focus on just one group?

      If I started a "rich white heterosexual male lives matter" group tomorrow, would you march with me? What do you expect would be the response from BLM? From Hispanics? From feminists? From the homeless? When they inevitable mocked my group and pointed out the oppression of their own groups, would you accuse them of deflection?

    45. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Customers are fucking morons. Companies can get by fine while still recognizing that. I tell my customers to fuck off all the time.

      Ah, the sweet sweet power of a local monopoly.

    46. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because when you say "all harassment matters" what you're actually saying is "suck it up, it's part of the job, so if you feel singled out because you're a minority you need to shut up"

      That's literally what you're saying.

      How is that so hard for people to grasp?

    47. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Translation: I have no self awareness, and no understanding of human psychology, so I'm going to act like anyone pointing out harmful behavior is being completely unreasonable.

    48. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting that it's impossible for men to view women as equals, and anyone who says they do must be lying?

      Or do you just not understand what feminism means?

      I mean, either you're a moron who doesn't understand simple concepts, or you're a moron who also happens to be a raging sexist. Enlighten is as to which it is, won't you?

    49. Re: irony by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 2

      What is wrong with you people, that you can't even bring yourselves to say things like "Anybody can be harassed and harassment is wrong"?

      ... Well I'm not a fan of the anti-gamergaters either, but this question is pretty easy to answer: it's deflection. If someone says, "Look, this group in particular is being singled out and harassed." and you respond, "Hm, yes harassment is bad. Before we do anything else, let's all say that harassment is bad." then you are deflecting from their complaint by changing the topic to something which they hadn't really been discussing. The other person was not talking about harassment being bad, there was an implication that we all already agreed on that point, the other person was talking about this particular group being singled out.

      If you think it's deflecting, you missed some of what was going on. The point here is that establishing basic things like that--such as agreeing that the behavior being discussed is unacceptable--is important, especially given that some of the anti-gamergaters decided to say legitimately disturbing things like that sexual exploitation is A-OK if the woman does not complain about it. I'm sorry, but by definition, any exchange of good review for sex or a job for sex is sexual exploitation, sexual harassment, and depending on the local laws may count as rape by coercion. None of these things should be remotely okay, ever.

      No, I'm not kidding about the last one. People have even been successfully put in jail on that specific charge.

      It also is something to say to establish that you are, in fact, saying "This group in particular is being singled out for harassment" instead of the unfortunately normal one of "This is the only group whose harassment we actually care about about."

      Maybe, someday, it won't be necessary to insist that only explicit statements of "This is bad for everybody" be acceptable as establishing something that ought to be this basic and obvious is agreed upon. It isn't yet, and as long you keep insisting that being asked to confirm that you agree to what ought to be the damn basics is deflection it won't happen. Save calling it deflection for when the normal response by both sides to somebody who lets slip that they don't agree with that is for everybody to get together to call them out as the sick fucks they are.

    50. Re: irony by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting that it's impossible for men to view women as equals,

      That's a rather funny phrase. I mean ... the women who, over the years, have asked me to move furniture for them clearly don't consider themselves to be my equals in that respect. If they did, they would have just done it themselves and maybe asked for some help, instead of standing on the sidelines telling me where to put the insanely heavy desk.

      On the other hand I have a female friend I've known since I was 15, and she has just finished her medical residency. I don't believe I'm anywhere near her equal when it comes to medicine.

      You're going to have to clarify. What would it mean for me to view a woman as my equal?

    51. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem, and solution, is simple. #deletefacebook

      Especially if you are a woman. I mean what gives you people without a penis the idea that you can give your opinion in public anyway?

      This is what you get when you allow women to vote.

    52. Re: irony by sg_oneill · · Score: 1

      We get this constantly from players, and it has nothing to do with the sex of the developers. If anything the men get it worse.

      I have no idea if this is true or not. But lets say it is, this does not diminish distress felt by women in the industry. Because women , for fairly obvious reasons, have somewhat more reasons for concern, women are sexually assaulted at a higher rate, sexually harassed at a higher rate , are statistically physically smaller and more vunerable to coming to harm by an aggressor, women have good reasons to become more distressed at harassment by strangers (or non strangers).

      Even if the guys are copping it too, that doesn't mean we should fob off upset coming from the women. It just means the problems even bigger than we had thought before, and if its upsetting the women more, then we should be standing by those women and trying to put an end to this sort of utterly garbage behavior by that ugly minority in the gaming community.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    53. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have literally no idea what "literally" means, do you?

    54. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Uhh, I hate to burst your sexist bubble, but men are raped and harassed far more than women.

      I understand that you don't give a shit about people in prison, and you're happy they are striped of their humanity, but people with souls (you wouldn't understand) actually care about this.

    55. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you don't give them the responsibility of the draft you mean?

    56. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I pray to Linus Torvalds that guy was being sarcastic, as his statement was too dumb even for an SJW.

    57. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Especially if you are a woman. I mean what gives you people without a penis the idea that you can give your opinion in public anyway?

      Typical rancid hateful sexual deviant regressive leftist human garbage. You are why Trump won.

    58. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God just kill yourself already, or go back to Tumblr where you came from. (Either is fine, I dont care particularly one way or the other.) This kind of stupid is beyond my tolerance, and the stupid level is *definitely* over 9000!

      Seriously when did slashdot get ruined with so many dumb people using the site? :/ I could swear the average IQ here used to be like 125 now it's like maybe 105 at best?

    59. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typical rancid hateful sexual deviant regressive leftist human garbage.

      You don't think your overreacting, just a tad, do you?

      You are why Trump won.

      Nah, that would be the people who voted for him ... who might have a lot more in common with you, matey.

    60. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They have a word for that..."Egalitarian". You no longer need to use the word feminist, because that is inherently sexist if you think about it.

    61. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is that this accusation of "mansplaining" is as sexist and as unwelcome as any coded misogyny. "Make me a sammich, womman" or "get back in the kitchen, dear" are, if anything, LESS sexist than the accusation of manplsaining.

      It is also a logical fallacy, an ad hom, a refusal to accept what someone is saying not because they're words are wrong but because they are a man.

      And guess what? Complaints about men saying "Make me a sammich, woman" abound too.

    62. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many people place emotional content over rational arguments, some even exclusively following emotions and completely discarding rational thought if it conflicts with the emotion. ("I trust my gut", "I instinctively do what is right for me" etc)

      These people have a very limited view of an objective truth, some go as far as denying anything objective exists even theoretically, or claim that the objective truth can never be disentangled by subjective experience and therefore groups of people neccessarily have wildly differing objective realities and therefore people need a certain background to even be allowed to think about a subject that concerns that background.

      This is present in people of all genders, yet a slightly higher prevalence among women, leading to that stereotype.

      At a benign level, it is cute naivete, at an unhinged North American campus level it has turned into a form of Nihilism with a ton of extra steps.

    63. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The greatest irony of your comment is that it is literally an example of a real person and not a fake and/or bot "desogned" to make it look like there is a cultural problem with men harassing women online.

      Unless you're saying that you're not a real person?

    64. Re:irony by houghi · · Score: 1

      It should not have an impact, but it does. This is not 1995 where nobody thought what impact things could have if youb tolkd them in a public place.

      If I start yelling racist stuff on a market place and telling them my name and where I work, it WILL affect my employer as well. And that is what is going on. People tell where they work, what their name is and the name of their pet fish and then say stupid things.

      For this eason alone I have a nickname that can not be linked to the company where I work. And this is something I knew I had to do before I got online.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    65. Re: irony by strikethree · · Score: 1

      Explaining things for the lowest common denominator always feels so ... icky ... but just to remove all ambiguity

      The problem with explaining for the "lowest common denominator" is that they were never the ones to have a problem to begin with. The people you are actually "explaining" it to have a vested interest in NOT understanding and in twisting your words. All you are really doing is defending yourself from the lowest common denominator getting riled up by the people who don't WANT to understand.

      Anyways... I understood.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    66. Re: irony by houghi · · Score: 1

      I thought #metoo was a reference to AOL users on Usenet where "METOO" was used by many instead of having a more constructive response.
      I guess I am showing my age here.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    67. Re: irony by Cederic · · Score: 1

      this question is pretty easy to answer: it's deflection. If someone says, "Look, this group in particular is being singled out and harassed." and you respond, "Hm, yes harassment is bad. Before we do anything else, let's all say that harassment is bad." then you are deflecting from their complaint by changing the topic

      Is it deflection when you erect a straw man to shoot down instead of addressing the point at hand?

      The claim is, "This group is getting it worse" and the response is, "No, they are not. Other groups get it worse and it's shit all round"

      That isn't deflection, that's refutation.

      People are playing the victim card and seeking bigoted resolutions instead of being honest and accepting that they're not a special snowflake and any appropriate action would include people that aren't part of their precious group. Where's the fucking deflection?

    68. Re: irony by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Given men are more likely to be assaulted than women, your entire point is fucking idiocy.

      Anyway, aren't women meant to be strong and empowered? Sorry but if you can't take criticism then you're not very strong.

    69. Re: irony by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Oh ffs, could you stfu? You're actually making me start to like you! :(

    70. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... Well I'm not a fan of the anti-gamergaters either, but this question is pretty easy to answer: it's deflection.

      No, your post is deflection. Pointing out that something is a common problem and that you have a lot more allies against it that you think if you'd bother to talk to someone is an act of attempting to unify the suffering populace against a real problem.
      Instead of having a look at the concept of police brutality and evaluating the causes and locations of concern, we have Black Lives Matter making it a race issue (which gets the analytic types bothered because a whole lot of evidence disagrees with the BLM claims), and people wearing BLM banners attacking people for being "white".

      If you could get over your one-upsmanship (or one-upswomanship) and realize that you could accomplish more by working together rather than alienating other people who suffer, a lot of good would get done.

    71. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hello? Is anyone in there?

      Cinnamon clearly stated that the harassment of men in the games industry is more frequent (per capita, I'm hoping) and perhaps more vitriolic than for women.

      Though considering how the bots/sockpuppets are persecuting these ladies (fewer but more intense personal attacks), I'm not sure how that's possible.

      If you'd like a chance at some other perspective, try the feminist who listened to men on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WMuzhQXJoY

    72. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with the gamergame deflection point. But I take "black lives matter" as being racist since it only protests when black people are killed. Are only women protesting about harassment or is it both men and women?

    73. Re: irony by nazrhyn · · Score: 1

      "pound me too movement"

      /giggle

      I might've gone with "hash me too movement", but then "hash" is also a verb... Tricky.

      "octothorpe me too movement"? At least that can't be a verb.

    74. Re: irony by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 2

      Given men are more likely to be assaulted than women, your entire point is fucking idiocy.

      Anyway, aren't women meant to be strong and empowered? Sorry but if you can't take criticism then you're not very strong.

      You must be quite the charmer with the ladies.

    75. Re: irony by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I treat them as capable adults. You should try it some time.

    76. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol c6gunner admit it this time you've been owned :)

    77. Re: irony by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      Customers are fucking morons. Companies can get by fine while still recognizing that. I tell my customers to fuck off all the time.

      Ah, the sweet sweet power of a local monopoly.

      Ah... the Comcast solution.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    78. Re: irony by rmdingler · · Score: 2

      I treat them as capable adults. You should try it some time.

      Treating folks equally as adults, and perhaps, based on their abilities and performance regardless of gender, tribal identification, or worship preference.... that's profiling bro, and it will not be tolerated.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    79. Re: irony by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      Hello? Is anyone in there?

      Cinnamon clearly stated that the harassment of men in the games industry is more frequent (per capita, I'm hoping) and perhaps more vitriolic than for women.

      Though considering how the bots/sockpuppets are persecuting these ladies (fewer but more intense personal attacks), I'm not sure how that's possible.

      If you'd like a chance at some other perspective, try the feminist who listened to men on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      I meant in general at the very least, and I'm generally going to go with the level of vitriol the target of the harassment judges it to be. I mean, I really don't want to try to figure out how to objectively judge such things as harassment that's spilling over to death threats to their partner...yes, it's happened, I don't have permission to give more details.

      Part of the issue here is intersectionality--a woman is more likely to get support, a man is more likely to be told to STFU and man up, which causes problems with reporting. This is actually pretty sexist, since it's an extension of women-as-victims; one of the problems is that if you want gender equality? You need to care about all of it--and deal with the fact that sometimes, the sexist assumptions only appear to benefit women. (I actually am part of the school that all gender bias is harmful to everybody--and that even the things that appear to benefit men or women over the other group are in fact toxic to both groups and exclusionary to anybody who doesn't want to follow the social role assigned to their sex. In case some of you missed it? I ain't cis.)

    80. Re:irony by Alypius · · Score: 1

      Or, judging by the downvotes, pointing out this fact. XD

    81. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Odds are they're posting AC because people like you would ramp up the harassment if given some idea where to go.

      Honestly, I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if a major factor in why men might have it worse is because of douchebags like you, who apparently believe that it's A-OK if men get harassed--which is the message you send when you dismiss their complaints casually, and yes, that can on its own make it worse. Harassment is bad, and if you believe your target and/or motives somehow justify it, you are part of the problem.

      Seriously, this sort of thing is part of why I'm not at all comfortable with the anti-gamergate side. What is wrong with you people, that you can't even bring yourselves to say things like "Anybody can be harassed and harassment is wrong"? That shouldn't be controversial, yet it is getting treated like it not only is controversial but is offensive.

      Purely based on what you've just written, my opinion is that all gamers should be rounded up and exterminated. What a vile, garbage fucking culture you represent. Just disgusting hordes of unwanted male children wallowing in their stinking testosterone sweat and stale spunk. No offence.

    82. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Purely based on what you've just written, my opinion is that all gamers should be rounded up and exterminated. What a vile, garbage fucking culture you represent. Just disgusting hordes of unwanted male children wallowing in their stinking testosterone sweat and stale spunk. No offence.

      Hmm! Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

    83. Re: irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's just describing male Feminists as they really are. You, on the other hand, are lying. To yourself and to us.

    84. Re: irony by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

      I treat them as capable adults. You should try it some time.

      No. You do not. Your previous post betrays bitterness and teenarish sarcasm disguised as intellectual wit. Get help.

  2. Progress by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Insightful

    At least this time it's all been well documented and understood, so that the attacks on these women seem to have ultimately failed and if anything backfired. These kinds of sloppy mistakes with mail merge apps are nothing new, but unfortunately sometimes the messages look genuine to the victim's employer.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Kinda like when they fall for false word of mouth accusations, no?

    2. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well documented and understood

      The summary reads like an interview with a schizophrenic, and probably is.

    3. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Understood? Fucking SJW gaming press got trolled by someone claiming it was Reddit who got the rude bitch fired and then propagated that fake news out in their articles. When it became evident they got trolled (none wrote any retractions, btw), they then try and backtrack and "look into it deeper" to blame it on 4chan or gamergate. They fucking made the whole shit storm up.

    4. Re:Progress by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      This claim is untrue.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re: Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      t. Brianna

    6. Re: Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can rest quite well knowing Jessica will get herself fired again. She is a fairly terrible person.

    7. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      well documented and understood

      According to the most biased and least trustworthy sources. Kotaku, Chapotraphouse, Brianna Wu. That's the holy trinity of liars, misrepresenters and professional victims. Throw in the Verge and Eurogamer for even more onesided bias and it becomes a big fat nothing burger.

    8. Re:Progress by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There are two distinct parts to this story. One is that Jessica Price verbally abused and denigrated a fan, for which she was fired (and a male colleague who doubled down on that went along for the ride, which no one seems to talk about). The second part of the story is the mob reaction and ugly, sexist bullshit that was triggered in reaction to her own behavior, and unfortunately spilled over onto other targets as well. There are a lot of idiots who glom onto events like these and use them to launch personal attacks against people. Women do seem especially likely targets for them, but make no mistake - anyone can be a target.

      We have to keep in mind that it was Ms Price who was the instigator of this series of events through her own actions. Or rather, her over-reaction to a fan's innocent response to her piece. She somehow took that response and interpreted it in the worst possible way, and lashed out at him in public, multiple times. Did she deserve the overwhelming hate and bile that was spewed her way? No, of course not, but let's be clear: she absolutely fired the first shots in that nasty little exchange. She was not fired for "speaking out" on women's issues. She was fired for treating a fan like garbage in public.

      Are women exempt from the rules other professional game developers are expected to follow? Had I lambasted a game's fan with which I was professionally associated and called him a "rando asshat" in a public forum, I'd absolutely expect to be fired. I don't believe for a minute that ArenaNet simply caved to mob pressure. And the notion that game development studios are going to suddenly start listening to and acting on random hate-mail complaints because ArenaNet fired Price for inappropriate comments feels beyond absurd to me. In fact, in the examples given, the studios took clear stands to protect their female devs from harassment, but concerns were expressed about "other studios", of course.

      Let's certainly work to foster more civility between developers and fans as we can, and that includes standing up for women when they're harassed simply for being women in a public role. But this story has a bit more nuance to it than that, and I don't think it's helpful to pretend that nuance doesn't really exist and focus only on half the story.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    9. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But even if they were false, they stated a *conversation*. So we should listen and believe, shouldn't we?

    10. Re:Progress by aticus.finch · · Score: 0, Interesting

      This claim is untrue.

      Her own pictures show that she never left her house when she said she did.

    11. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It was equally well documented back in the day that many actions pinned on GamerGate were suspicious or even outright faked, and that didn't stop the press from taking them at face value. Best example being the Felicia Day doxing, where an address was posted by an account with a misspelled name of a notable Youtuber, which was never confirmed to even be hers, but it was spread all over the news within 24 hours that GamerGaters had doxxed her.

      These reporters are like a feminist Fox Mulder, they want to believe the misogyny is out there so badly, all you need is some cheap smoke and mirrors to lead them down whatever rabbit hole you want. Is it any surprise there are trolls eager to pull their strings for laughs? You can call them part of GamerGate too if that makes you feel better, but that doesn't change the fact that the press are being useful idiots and gullable fools.

    12. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems she was attacking men with the mansplainin’ comment first.

      “Attacks on women.”

    13. Re:Progress by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's a very long post about Price, but she lost her job and bares no responsibly for the mob that used her firing to instigate an attack on other random women.

      The real problem here is not one person who was punished for some rude tweets, it's we have a mob attacking people because of their gender. It's important to publicize it and develop countermeasures so that there are not more victims.

      It would also be great if we could understand the people behind this and their motivations. Some people want to write it off as general trolling, like it's some innate property of the internet that just happens spontaneously, but there is a years old pattern of attacks on women specifically with deeply misogynistic motivations.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When feminists started the "mob attacking people because of their gender" bullshit with Adria Richards and various other Twitter crusades against employed people, the other side also took up the tactic against the feminists. The world is balanced, the heavens are fair, for every action there is a reaction. The heavens don't tolerate women waging war against men or men waging war against women, so they will pit the warmongers against each other - Feminists vs MRA's, while the average majority of normal people with normal lives will look at both and see a bunch of raving idiots with accelerated aging induced by constant triggerades and easy offense (turns out being easily offended means you are on the fast track towards grey hair and wrinkles). Yet again, the heavens are fair.

    15. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your wasting your time with amijo

    16. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think they have a journalist mailing list like the gamergate one, so they can cooperate to make the same shit up

    17. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      of she bares responsibility for the mob, with out her being an idiot and bringing sex into some that had NOTHING to do with it they wouldn't have a leg to stand on..

      she built a platform for nutters to use in both directions...by harrasing an innocent person

      Stop standing up for idiots on either side of the topic.. an idiot is an idiot full fucking stop..

    18. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The real problem here ... we have a mob attacking people because of their gender. It's important to publicize it and develop countermeasures so that there are not more victims."

      that's stupid, you could replace her gender with whatever you want, the same result would happen if they behaved the same way.

      there is no problem anymore, she was fired. all else is drama now.

      she might have been punished by her employer but because this is the internet anyone else is free to punish them. this is to be expected when you respond to fans like that. has anyone even read those tweets? she is fucking insane.

    19. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whether or not there is actually a mob of actual people (rather than just bots) is unknown. For all we know this is a handful of angry nerds in this situation. I still see no reason at all to say that sexism is a rampant thing, even in the video game industry. I know that goes against the feminist narrative being pushed so that women can claim victimhood, but it's actually not socially good for people to be able to claim victimhood (even actual victims) because that just drums up hate, so I'm fine with that.

      Not to say that it's good for a small number of people to turn bots against innocent people. I think a more interesting discussion here is how that could be dealt with.

    20. Re:Progress by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2

      Yes, I absolutely agree that people who are using this as an excuse to attack other random women are an issue. Perhaps I didn't emphasize that point clearly enough. If you don't mind, I'll quote myself to re-iterate that point, because I think we're mostly in agreement:

      The second part of the story is the mob reaction and ugly, sexist bullshit that was triggered in reaction to her own behavior, and unfortunately spilled over onto other targets as well. There are a lot of idiots who glom onto events like these and use them to launch personal attacks against people. Women do seem especially likely targets for them, but make no mistake - anyone can be a target.

      But I've also seen a disturbing narrative that seems to be blaming ArenaNet for their firing of Price and Fries, which was completely justified IMO, and speculating that this is going to trigger some dramatic sea-change in the industry, where the mob can just pick any dev (especially female), and simply call for their firing.

      As far as I've seen, game companies have not kowtowed to these idiotic and unjustified harassment of their female devs, instead, swiftly coming to their defense. From my perspective from someone inside the game industry, that's actually the response I'd expect, rather than the reverse. I say that because most game devs are actually pretty socially tolerant and consider themselves supporters of efforts to make a more equitable society. Our industry has a higher percentage of women than more programmer-focused tech fields, because we also employ a lot of writers, designers, artists, animators, etc, which have a more proportional representation than among just programmers (female programmers remain astoundingly rare). And as you might expect, we have a lot of very... interesting people in this industry, so I think most game devs, or at least ones I know personally, tend to be pretty tolerant of others as a rule.

      So, my concern is that we not rush to scapegoat anyone in the game industry for a problem which I don't feel will truly manifest in the long term. I believe these were just "copycat attacks" of a sort that were riding on the coat-tails of an ugly mob reaction to the ArenaNet/Price issue. I'm not trying to downplay them, just view them in their proper context. I wish I had a good answer to solve this problem, but I at least don't want to see the debate travel down a narrative path which seems to pit the game industry against women, when in fact, the opposite seems true - at least from the limits of my perspective.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    21. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      LOL

      The really problem here is that feminists and SJWs have been using these tactics for years.

      All this 4Chan stunt has done is show that a) you are a hypocrite b) no-one cares when they get men fired.

    22. Re: Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget, she believes giant rocks "dropped" from the moon represent a real threat to earth.

    23. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The majority would agree that Price's firing was reasonable, and that we should expect civility from developers and fans. It is really reaching to call that "nuance". Do you really need to hear a majority concession that Price deserved termination before you can turn your attention to other issues?

      The upsurge of trolls and bots seems to be pervasive in more and more aspects of our life. New Slashdot articles are flooded with more shit comments than ever before. The FCC receives millions of fake comments which were used to justify their Net Neutrality stance. God knows how many trolls and bots on Facebook, Reddit, and Twitter are shaping and augmenting people's perceptions. I can't even browse Slashdot without wondering, "Did a bot upvote this comment? Did it upvote the response to drive divisiveness?"

      There is a group with a misogynistic agenda using bots not only to harass, but in an attempt to get women fired. Yes, you are right that this *could* happen to anyone. However, at this time, there has been a call to arms against women, and it shows a lack of solidarity to distract from that reality. "Yes, yes, women's livlihoods are under attack, but look over here! " I have an idea, why don't we focus on putting this fire out right now? The internet has become infected, and the worst of it has turned their swords towards women. Can we at least try to address that, if not out of altruism, then at least out of a desire to protect ourselves from a similar fate in the future?

    24. Re:Progress by Baloroth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's sometimes hard to take these "threats" seriously, especially coming from someone like Brianna Wu, who has proven record of blatantly launched fake attacks against herself before to make herself look like a victim (she has a very long history of this, too). She's probably be right that these are sock puppets and bot accounts, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if they're owned by her. And her "proof" is posts on 4chan, a site where everyone posts anonymously? Come on, son. That's some seriously weak shit right there, even by her standards.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    25. Re:Progress by arth1 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The real problem here is not one person who was punished for some rude tweets, it's we have a mob attacking people because of their gender. It's important to publicize it and develop countermeasures so that there are not more victims.

      Both were attacks based on gender. One by a woman against men, the other by (presumably) men against women, and the second being a knee-jerk reaction due to the first.
      Are the latter developments bad? Sure, but that doesn't make the first part any better.
      You come across strongly as white-knighting here, and I don't really understand why. There is enough blame to go around, and jerks being jerks is a problem both ways.

      It would also be great if we could understand the people behind this and their motivations. Some people want to write it off as general trolling, like it's some innate property of the internet that just happens spontaneously, but there is a years old pattern of attacks on women specifically with deeply misogynistic motivations.

      Sure there is misogyny here, but there is also misandry. Always noticing and striking down on the former but never the latter doesn't strike me as helpful.

      My dream is to one day see that we ignore gender, race and other external factors, and turn our back on whoever brings it up, regardless of their gender or race.
      And that we stop being (mock) outraged on behalf of others, fuelling a fire that doesn't have to rage, just to make ourselves look better.
      Sure, I have my cultural baggage, and probably unconsciously act less than perfect with respect to other groups than those to which I belong. And I think that is true for everybody else. The shiny armor tends to cover people no less human and flawed than everybody else.
      Oppose the behaviour, and don't attack person A and defend person B. Prejudice isn't going to be solved by picking off or praising individuals, or taking someone's side.

    26. Re:Progress by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      You support brianna wu?
      I suggest you pony up some cash for her congressional run!
      Put your money where your mouth is.

    27. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real problem here is ... we have a mob attacking people because of their gender.

      Something you've *never* done, right?

    28. Re:Progress by snapsnap · · Score: 1

      ... female devs, instead, swiftly coming to their defense.

      I saw that when I did contract work for a new gaming company to setup their Agile processes, Java Spring Framework backend REST services, and Drupal for their CMS and shopping cart. There were I think fifteen male programmers and one female. The female one did a lot of stupid things, including a few public-facing like exposing an investor that didn't want his involvement to be public. She had worked in the field for nearly twenty years, so she should have known better. The company always defended her. You are correct. I didn't have a problem with that since it's fifteen on one. Doesn't justify her actions, but I had some sympathy towards her.

    29. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that didn't stop the press from taking them at face value

      Nor AmiMoJo.

    30. Re:Progress by HiThere · · Score: 1

      It's gotten to the point that where someone accuses a woman of something, my default assumption is that they're lying...but it looks like I may need to alter that to "my default assumption is that they're a lying bot".

      This doesn't mean that I trust women in position of power and authority. They are often worse than men. But the worst accusations seem to be directed at those who are minimally bad. It's true that women in positions of power tend to be those that are driven to seek power by their animus (see C.G.Jung), but the men who seek power are also usually driven be unsane motivations. Just ones that are a bit less abrasive (not necessarily less harmful). And this isn't true of jobs that are only peripherally concerned with power.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    31. Re: Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn she looks like a hag. Has she ever heard of a fucking comb? Jesus, I thought neckbearda were bad. I bet she has more hair on her legs than I do.

    32. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The #1 reason this is likely fake is someone got caught doing it with Trump's Supreme Court pick. This is just a copycat on that, but under the belief that the complainers hate women. The people pissed at this websites hate them for all sorts of reasons, not because of "the wimmenz". Even if there were form emails, the variables would be title something like %STUPID_ISSUE% and %IDIOT_JOURNALIST%, or %FOR_THE_LOVE_OF_GOD_MAKE_IT_STOP%.

    33. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is also a years-old pattern of attacks on men specifically with deeply misandristic motivations which, strangely enough, seem to directly precede those attacks on women. But what would you care about that? You've got an agenda to push as hard as you absolutely can.

    34. Re:Progress by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      That's a very long post about Price, but she lost her job and bares no responsibly for the mob that used her firing to instigate an attack on other random women.

      I disagree; she's at least partially responsible for it as she ought to have had the basic sense to realize that her flipping out (and having a rant that would be widely agreed to be misogynist if the roles were reversed) would have consequences--she doesn't seem to even understand that her getting fired was one.

      Given that this sort of behavior was apparently pretty normal for Ms. Price, it seems very likely that she had held onto her job this long because of positive discrimination--which makes her a pretty good example of how it can be harmful. Therefore: One of the countermeasures that is necessary is making it clear that professional behavior is going to be the exact same for everybody and held to the same standards...and that complaints of unprofessional behavior, especially anonymous ones, need to come with evidence. Don't wait to fire somebody for unprofessional behavior just because of $whatever, and do be able to show what specific example of unprofessional behavior it was.

    35. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Price deserves everything she gets.

    36. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My dream is to one day see that we ignore gender, race and other external factors, and turn our back on whoever brings it up, regardless of their gender or race

      So just to be sure, this means you don't support feminism or BLM, right? I just want to make sure you're not supporting hateful ideologies that run counter to your dream.

    37. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope your default assumption that they're lying is only the case when it's another woman making the accusation.

    38. Re:Progress by pots · · Score: 1

      It would also be great if we could understand the people behind this and their motivations. ... [attacks on women] with deeply misogynistic motivations.

      You seem to have assumed the answer to your own question. You're never going to figure it out that way.

    39. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ooh, spot the Incel gamergater. A more useless bunch of fat virgin aspie wankers cant be found.

    40. Re:Progress by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Nope. It's just a default, and evidence can quickly change it, but it currently seems to be the proper default.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    41. Re: Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy shit. I went down the rabbit hole on this one...

    42. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The misogyny is out there alright. It's not some myth like you want it to sound like. The Internet is big, and there are a lot of outright crazies out there, including people who will actually try to get you killed e.g by swatting.

      The question is, who are the misogynists, and how are you supposed to tell the difference between them and the random ass idiot trolls? And is there actually any point in trying to distinguish one kind of idiot masquerading as another kind of the same?

    43. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should they support feminism (which means "fight for womens' rights", not equality of the sexes, women's rights) and what does BLM have to do with it? That is about not killing black people for no reason? Or are they just your attempt to make them wrong because you don't like them not white knighting for women?

      For the point is that feminism is NOT about equality. You don't see affirmative hiring for the mines for women being fought for, nor equal paternity leave, nor equal right to the children, nor equal right to a fair trial or prison time. Only those areas where there are rights that women want them are feminism fighting for "equality" in those rights. Not for equal responsiblities, not for equality in places where women are ahead.

      Know what? THAT IS NOT WRONG. That is what feminism IS for. And for the places where men want rights, there is the MRA.

      Where feminism goes "But we're for EQUALITY!!!!" is to shut down the MRAs so that men DON'T get equal rights. So any feminist or feminist supporter demanding tht feminism means fighting for equality is validly the perjorative form of "sjw" and an authoritarian left pedagogue. Because they're lying, they AREN'T for equality, they're for their rights that they want pushed FIRST. After which, guess what, they will find NEW rights that need adding. And if it eventually turns out that men are the only underclass left, they will stop fighting for equality.

    44. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real problem here is not one person who was punished for some rude tweets, it's we have a mob attacking people because of their gender. It's important to publicize it and develop countermeasures so that there are not more victims.

      I thought the point was that it is not a mob, it is a small number of people using the power of the internet to look like a mob. Which changes the whole dynamic of the problem - it's not that there are a large number of people hating on women just because they are women.

    45. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what's an MRA? also, im pretty sure you're reading too far into this. It was just a bunch of 4chan trolls capitalizing on a current news event. They'll attack anyone (for the lulz) given an opportunity. Don't believe me? Spend some time on /b/ and see what they're like.

    46. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe a better position would be to assume that everyone is lying, at least partially.

    47. Re:Progress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Did she deserve the overwhelming hate and bile

      When you attack a customer asking an honest question like that, yes.

  3. Slashdot misogynists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    And yet the misogynists on Slashdot are defending this type of behaviour. False accusations are always wrong, yet somehow the men on this site think it's okay to harass and defame women with impunity.

    1. Re:Slashdot misogynists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Nice post, your secret crush will surely want to sleep with you now!

    2. Re: Slashdot misogynists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The men on this site? All the men? Every single man?

      Would you care to try again?

    3. Re:Slashdot misogynists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sent those mass emails yourself, didn't you, Brianna?

    4. Re:Slashdot misogynists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound fat

    5. Re:Slashdot misogynists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      creimer says I have a secret crush on him...

      CROFLOL!

  4. bots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    when you use your army of 9 year olds to spam a game company and then spam the upvote system on slahsdot about that event with the same army. ^__^

    1. Re:bots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and then spam the upvote system on slahsdot about that event with the same army

      Please tell me how to "spam the upvote system on slashdot". Do you mean moderation? It is well known by old-timers that you only get mod points from being logged in and reading messages for many months, and then you only get 5 or 15 at time before you have to wait for your next batch. There are also limits on how many times you can moderate messages posted from a single account.

      But 4chan I can understand. /v/ has been one of the worst boards on the site for a while.

    2. Re:bots? by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      spam the upvote system on slahsdot

      That's not how slashdot works.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  5. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is anyone really surprised that identity politics only lead to more and broader generalized hatred?

    1. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What are the identity politics here? Being a woman and working in the video game industry is not a political statement.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When a woman uses "mansplaining" she converts it into a political statement.
      I don't care what the 4chan trolls do, she's shown to be your usual sexist feminazi.

    3. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Tsolias · · Score: 4, Interesting

      10 years ago, there were just developers.
      now there are developers and female developers.
      They tried to make "being a woman" a political statement and a political stance... and they succeeded.
      they made "dongle jokes" a harassment... and fired developers for that.
      they made games their echo chambers for their political views... and they succeeded. ... and now it just backfires.

      do you know why? because when you deal with someone who doesn't care about politics, e.g. gamers, and they mess with their lives, e.g. games, they are going to use every method to attack you, e.g. politically incorrect practices.

      I can't say that I don't like it. I am loving it.

    4. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When a woman uses "mansplaining" she converts it into a political statement.
      I don't care what the 4chan trolls do, she's shown to be your usual sexist feminazi.

      So, she "cuntsplained"? :-D

      Yes. Cunt.

      Being deliberately divisive is nasty enough to warrant "cunt".

    5. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The identity politics happen on both sides or all sides to be precisely. Creating a cycle of hatred.

      But since you single out the "being a woman and working in video the video game industry" part, look at Jessica Price twitter. She reacted on that criticism with:

      Today in being a female game dev:

      Source: https://twitter.com/Delafina777/status/1014554296107483136
      In the criticism she replied to there was no mention of her sexual identity (gender) or biological sex. It was a gender neutral opinion piece that did not attack her as a person at all. You can read it yourself using that link above. But she reacted with "Today in being a female game dev" as if the criticism was leveraged at her entire gender or sex or both, I'm not sure which one applies. That is a strong call for identity politics. Then in another tweet (https://twitter.com/Delafina777/status/1014581433937981445) she used that "manfeels" expression, again using a broad sweeping generalization implying that those who disagree with there are male, in gender or sex or whatever. Maybe she was right, and it was only or mostly males that disagreed with her, but that is also how you put oil into the identity politics fire and reinforce it as women vs men. The result being a self fulfilling prophecy because they aggravated it (of course that doesn't justify the reaction from the other side).
      Just imagine if I answered to your reply under the label of "Romanians on the internet" and then going on about Americans wanting to explain to me how I should write in my tertiary language - English - on the internet. In that case you may think: "What does that have to do with anything?" And you would be right.

      Looking at the other side I have also no doubts that there's plenty of people who overreacted to her tweets and called for a virtual lynch mob. A mob that isn't very selective when it comes to their targets, because if you're not with them, you're against them (unless there's an even bigger enemy around). That is identity politics. And from my perspective it only tends to make the situation worse.

    6. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      If you think any of the women involved are just "being a woman" you are completely uneducated on the subject and have no business commenting.

    7. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a typical misandrous statement!

      You better check yourself.

    8. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by jon3k · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When I was a younger, in its early days, the whole reason the internet was great is because there were no gender, skin color or religion, we were all just nerds. No one knew or cared WHAT you were, just WHO you were. I remember when the idea of telling someone your real name on the internet was considered madness. I miss those days. It was just a lot simpler.

    9. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Male or female, it doesn't matter. If you're a woman, you just have "internalized misogyny".

    10. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by c6gunner · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't say that I don't like it. I am loving it.

      I'm opposed to firing people just because a mob decides to be offended, even when it happens to sexist cunts like her. It would be hypocritical for me to object to it when it happens to people I agree with, but then celebrate it when it happens to someone I disagree with.

      But yes, there is quite a bit of schadenfreude in watching the tables get turned.

    11. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Well, for what it's worth here is my take on this "debate" and people who defend mysoginists. I'm not in the tech business so maybe my experience doesn't count much. Anyway, my two cent:

      1. Where I work, at a university in Europe, there is plenty of sexual harassment of women. A lot. I've seen heads of the department literally making sexist "whiplash" jokes behind the back of female colleagues. A colleague of mine has stalked at least two women who indited him at the police but later retracted their accusations, although they where confirmed by many colleagues, at the request of officials from our institute. One of them lost her postdoc job afterwards. The guy who did it is still there. That's in Southern Europe, mind you, but I was still kind of surprised about it. Didn't expect it to be so bad.

      2. It's ridiculously simple not to harass anyone at the workplace and the majority of men have no problem with it. Never fuck colleagues and never try to, and treat them with respect. Problem solved.

      I agree that in the US there may be some overly broad definitions of sexual harassment and there is way too much prudery and silly anti-sexuality on all political sides, in fact I got into a little fight with some colleague from the US about that issue because he displayed no ability to differentiate and distinguish between assholes, immoral behavior, and crimes. Some ideas out there are also plain bad, for example the bizarre Swedish idea that you should loudly ask for permission and both partners have to loudly say "Yes" before having sex, or otherwise it counts as rape. That's just stupid.

      That being said, overall there shouldn't be much of a debate. Sex and the workplace don't mix well. Don't do it.

    12. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are just random cunts working in the games industry.

    13. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      People shouldn't have to hide their nature just to avoid harassment or discrimination online.

      Beyond the moral argument, many people build an online persona to further their careers or build a reputation. Most of the people contributing to Linux, for example, use their real names and are often doing it as part of their jobs. In this case these women obviously wanted their names on the credits of the games they worked on.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol dont you have cucking you need to attend ?

    15. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by jon3k · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're completely missing the point. I never said, or even suggested, people should have to hide who they are to avoid harassment or discrimination. Twenty plus years ago, we hid our real identities for privacy and safety. The idea of a parent letting a child post their real name on the internet in 1996 would have been abhorrent. The side effect of that was that no one COULD discriminate based on age, gender, race, etc., even if they wanted.

    16. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I remember racism on Usenet and email lists based on the time people posted or the message path headers being used to infer what their nationality was.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    17. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by geek · · Score: 1

      Times change. We also used to balk at the idea of meeting people over the internet and god forbid we ever get in their car. Now we literally call people up with apps over the internet and get int heir cars.

    18. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be a straw man in this context.

      The crux is not about having to hide your identity, it's more about not abusing your identity as a shield.

      Everyone of us has thousands of identities that can be applied to them. They were born at a certain time, certain place, with certain genes. They grew up in certain places, within certain cultures that have certain values. They believe or don't believe in certain things. Maybe you have a certain medical condition, like hypertension, hypotension, being obese, anorexic, deaf, blind, hyperactive, or whatever.

      I could go on forever here and list things that are part of the identity of people. The point being, that if you as an individual are addressed by something, it does not mean that this addresses everyone else who shares one or more of the attributes that define your identity. This is only the case if you are addressed as being part of that group. And if you act like that in such a case and call others that share parts of your identity, then you're using it like a shield that you can hide behind. Biological sex, being one of the identities with the most abuse potential due to the nature of having almost 50/50 of the human population in either one group. Every man vs. woman discussion (whether backed up by empirical data or not) can get heated very quickly. Because most people have some kind of opinion on it and will have anecdotes from their personal experiences; they will run to your defense, just because some who disagrees with you happens to be part of the other group.

    19. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very true, and there was only one user with the id 'cynic', and when i got on as cynic in 1988, s/he told me to pick a different name. At that time, the only way to infer someone's gender was if they made a statement like 'when i was in the army', unless, of course, they were from Israel.

    20. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by jon3k · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your argument now is basically a fallacy of absolutism. Of course it happened, to a very small degree. Because some people, a comparatively very tiny minority compared to today, shared that information. Or you're talking about generalized discrimination, which isn't what this is about. We're talking about targeted harassment.

    21. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, but if you don't know what genitals or what colour skin people have, you might treat them all the same ... which is racist and sexist, apparently.

    22. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This time the firing happened before the mob even formed. Arenanet acted immediately, leaving trolls confused as they had no time to work up a proper mob outrage. Great opportunity wasted by the employer being on the ball, they said.

    23. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We were all just white, US or perhaps Western-European, secular, nerds.

      There, fixed it for you.

    24. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 2

      When I was a younger, in its early days, the whole reason the internet was great is because there were no gender, skin color or religion, we were all just nerds. No one knew or cared WHAT you were, just WHO you were. I remember when the idea of telling someone your real name on the internet was considered madness. I miss those days. It was just a lot simpler.

      Unfortunately, as the internet came to the masses it brought with it all the benefits but also all the problems of society in general. I remember the days when you could actually sell and trade items on Usenet (yes, Usenet =/ Internet) and not worry about getting scammed. Trolling did not have a bad connotation; it had classics such THF2's "Shadows in the vacuum of space." Ludwig Plutonium KIBO AFU even had periodic meetings where you got to know each other. Then came eternal September...

      Of course, even in those days we had things like the Green Card Lawyers spam and a Usenet mob rising up in indignation. The Serdar Argic bot spamming every mention of Turkey.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    25. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by mlyle · · Score: 1

      Yah-- but if I partially disagree with someone in an attempt to try and engage in discussion with them, I would be offended to be told that I'm "mansplaining".

      Sure, they're under no obligation to take the bait and discuss things with me, but if I've been civil they don't need to denigrate, mock me, and implicitly accuse me of sexist behavior.

    26. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >Of course it happened, to a very small degree

      This strikes me as revising history. I don't think this problem was any less "back in the day" then it is now. We're just seeing less tolerance for it, so it's being raised as an actual issue in the public discourse. And the reaction to that has been to organize those who cause the issue, while we try to sweep it under the rug as "oh, that's just 4chan. Not like we can do anything about 4chan".

      But since I haven't done a broad analysis, and no one else wishes to do so (only to win arguments online based on opinion alone), it doesn't really matter. We have the society we have, and people will believe what they will. In the meantime others are being fired for not being able to bottle up their emotions after being mobbed by assholes. It's the easy thing for their companies to do, and we reward them for it by turning the focus around on the people who couldn't be perfectly stoic and take it for the team.

    27. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are the identity politics here? Being a woman and working in the video game industry is not a political statement.

      Yes it is. If we don't get every woman in game companies fired, the bra size of Lara Croft will continue shrinking to the degree where her physics of motion start making sense. That would be boring. I mean, it's like "Conan the Barbarian" actually being able to run rather than desperately trying to juggle his leg muscles around one another without pulling a muscle in the progress, looking like a sloth on steroids.

      That's what gaming is about. That's what makes ogling the screen in our parents' basements fun. We don't want to pretend that Great Tits are passerine birds, do we? Women don't belong in gaming companies, or the game designers would get shamed into pretending women to be complex characters. People can empathize with elves, but women just don't make sense. But great eye candy.

      The place women have in computer games is as rewards.

    28. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Without numbers, you can make up whatever narrative you like and find some random comments to support it. What fun!

    29. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice false flag attempt, maybe you can get MikeUSA here to tell us about child brides while you're at it.

    30. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      In the criticism she replied to there was no mention of her sexual identity (gender) or biological sex. It was a gender neutral opinion piece that did not attack her as a person at all.

      And yet somehow people feel the need to politely explain---in completely gender neutral ways---the utter basics to female carer veterans far more than male career veterans.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    31. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by aticus.finch · · Score: 0

      In the criticism she replied to there was no mention of her sexual identity (gender) or biological sex. It was a gender neutral opinion piece that did not attack her as a person at all.

      And yet somehow people feel the need to politely explain---in completely gender neutral ways---the utter basics to female carer veterans far more than male career veterans.

      Completely untrue. Men get the majority of feedback simply because giving "completely gender-neutral" feedback to a woman is dangerous.

    32. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Tsolias · · Score: 1

      Now we literally call people up with apps over the internet and get int heir cars.

      You used to do that too,
      it's called Taxi.

    33. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      They need to think about their level of sensitivity and commitment to freedom of speech.

      You are constantly berating free speech, insisting that people ought to not be allowed to speak when they say what you do not want to hear. Then choose to use free speech as a shield.

      You, AmiMoJo, are what is wrong with society. People like you got Trump elected. You are abhorrent. You ought to be banned like the speech you so aggressively denounce.

    34. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      There was literally nothing wrong with the discussion the guy was trying to have and prior to that he sort of looked up to her. Yeah she sucks she's clearly a sexist bully. Getting a campaign rolling against this guy could have cost him his career too so I don't feel bad that she got fired.
      ]

    35. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      Just like the midwestern farmer who voted for trump but now cries that the wrong people are getting fucked over by his policies. You'll only care when it happens to you.

    36. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He didn't explain the basics. He explained that although the narrative path and conclusion might necessarily be fixed, agreeing with Price, people might feel more engaged with the story if they were allowed greater opportunities to express themselves in their ostensibly meaningless choices.

      That is not the basics. That is not simple branching narratives as Price claims.

      Remember the many, many narrative choices in early CRPG's? The writers of those games would often give 8 or more options, few or none of which impact the story or have a branching narratives. Those choices provided the player an opportunity to express themselves in the way they wish. That experience is absent from modern MMORPGs, the sort of game Price used to be employed writing for. Now it's typically a choice between the nice response, the asshole response, and the snarky response. Not much of a choice in expression and player engagement; the point that was being discussed.

      Valid arguments remain valid even if a lowly man is discussing them with a woman. Perhaps it appears that these discussions happen with professional women more often because vanishingly few men in comparison make gendered public personas.

      I know you, servicescope_minor, are male because you have said so in the past. But no one could guess that from your handle alone. The public persona: "Jessica Price @Delafina777 Game producer, writer, editor, howling maenad. ArenaNet Narrative team. Obsessed with lionesses. Salty language. I block often. I won't play demure for you." pulls no punches as to what that person is and how they want to be identified. Criticizing you, well that's just criticizing some "rando asshat", to borrow Price's attitude. But criticizing Delafina777, that's criticizing a female game writer obsessed with lionesses, censorship, and excessive aggression.

    37. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know. Can you back up that disparity claim by data? If there's some pattern to this behavior that isn't just due to p-hacking maybe they are on to something. So far I've only found things like these: http://fortune.com/2014/08/26/performance-review-gender-bias/# on the matter. However here they claim that women receive a lot more 'personal' feedback instead of constructive feedback. But the feedback here also a personal attack. Let me quote these tweets:

      Really interesting thread to read! However, allow me to disagree *slightly*. I dont believe the issue lies in the MMORPG genre itself (as your wording seemingly suggest). I believe the issue lies in the contraints of the Living Story's narrative design; (1 of 3)

      When you want the outcome to be the same across the board for all players' experiences, then yes, by design you are extremely limited in how you can contruct the personality of the PC. (2 of 3)

      But, if instead players were given the option to meaningfully express *their* character through branching dialogue options (which also aren't just on the checklist for an achievement that forces you through all dialogue options), (3 of 4 cause I count seemingly...)

      then perhaps players would be more invested in the roleplaying aspect of that particular MMORPG. Nonetheless, I appreciate the insightful thread! (End)

      Source: https://twitter.com/DeroirGaming/status/1014280605599748096
      I think this is called "compliment sandwich". For a seasoned writer talking about the concept of branching dialogue might sound patronizing, but that does not warrant such a reaction. You can still approach it in a rational fashion and maybe talk about the difficulties of having branching dialogue affecting how your character develops and how the game world provides feedback on that character development.
      This create a huge amount of work that grows exponentially as far as I understand; one of the reasons why you mostly only see such approaches in text based games that do not heavily lean on fancy graphics and animations. If you consider how long some writers work on a well written novel, with credible characters and a good plot, imagine how it would be working on an interactive medium, maybe even with multiplayer like an MMO.

      That would be my reply, with my knowledge as an amateur writer and embedded systems developer. Maybe not fit for twitter, but even with my limited knowledge in the field it would still serve to expose the lack of insight from DeroirGaming suggestion without resorting to shit storm-attracting identity politics.

    38. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by i286NiNJA · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Other engineers constantly over explain shit to each other, we're rehashing it in our minds so we don't forget, we're educating each other, we're puffing up our egos. Sure. It happens to me every day, I know I do it too. If I don't have time for it I'll interrupt but usually I don't mind. We're on a roll after our 12th cup of coffee and blah blah blah our mouths are moving 100mph.
      I can tell you even though I don't have problems with my co-workers I'm careful about explaining too much to any woman lest I make someone feel mansplained.
      I also notice with but a few exceptions that most of the women I work with aren't excessive explainers so I can see maybe why they might feel offended.

      Still excluding them from marathons mansplain sessions is sexist and it's the result of some of what I've seen in this supposedly feminist push.

    39. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 0

      Completely untrue.

      completely true.

      Men get the majority of feedback

      Well done going off on an unrelated tangent that sounds superficially similar. That's no indication you have an axe to grind, I'm sure.

      because giving "completely gender-neutral" feedback to a woman is dangerous.

      If you're finding that giving feedback to women is dangerous, the fault is with you and your feedback. I've never had a problem.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    40. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same AC as (#56952086). This was meant as a reply to (#56951734).

    41. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Other engineers constantly over explain shit to each other, we're rehashing it in our minds so we don't forget, we're educating each other, we're puffing up our egos.

      No. We rehash stuff, we don't explain the utter basics to someone we consider a peer. I've never had utter basics of my field explained to me, especially by some young'un at a conference (I ain't a young any more).

      And yet every one of my female friends in tech areas and collegues with whom I've had conversations about the topic[*] have mentoned it happens repeatedly.

      I'm not talking (say) going all motor mouth and over explaining two-phase lookup while chattng about C++20, I'm talking about explaining what a pointer is. To an industry veteran with 10 years experience. That kind of level of patronising.

      [*] You have to be in a strong position of trust to have such conversations, mostly, because far too many guys react badly when they're told life isn't all roses and candy for women in tech.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    42. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I was a younger, in its early days, the whole reason the internet was great is because there were no gender, skin color or religion, we were all just nerds.

      It was more complex than that. My girlfriend at that time actively participated in curating the house network's porn collection. It was not a matter of male culture vs female culture: there was just one, solidly centered on males. And everyone was welcome to participate. It's like gay people loving Jane Austen novels. This is a world where you have no place: enjoy it.

      Some can get into it. And some say "fuck, why am I doing this?" Novels are novels, games are games. They are genres. Some people can enjoy the fine points of genres that have no place for them. But it's a strange state.

    43. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try using the term womansplaining and see the violent reactions you get. But it's perfectly fine to refer to things men say this way.

      Culture is perhaps swinging too far.

    44. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I've been dating someone from work for almost a year. Should I immediately end the relationship as it's clearly harassment.

    45. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      That happens all the time to male devs as well. The industry is full of patronising abusive wankers. The difference is that a man who complained about it on the internet wouldn't get any support and would no doubt be shat on by the same people that defend female devs so much.

    46. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      That happens all the time to male devs as well.

      Way less IME.

      The difference is that a man who complained about it on the internet wouldn't get any support and would no doubt be shat on by the same people that defend female devs so much.

      Nah that's just you inventing stuff to fit your preconceived notions.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    47. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you considered giving yourself a lobotomy with a rocket launcher? If not, perhaps you should.

    48. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Way less IME.

      No. All the time. Every single day.

      Explaining anything to a woman is very dangerous dangerous for any man. I won't do even if asked. Those days any sane man should not explain anything to woman.

    49. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by pots · · Score: 1

      I have thought about this development myself, and the instinct is to blame Facebook and it's ilk for popularizing the notion that people shouldn't use pseudonyms online... But, harassment of women is a particular problem in games and it's relatively recently that this has become a big issue. Some people would claim that it has always been an issue and people are only talking about it now, but my suspicion is that it coincided with voice chat. Once games introduced voice chat, pseudonyms no longer worked.

    50. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the criticism she replied to there was no mention of her sexual identity (gender) or biological sex. It was a gender neutral opinion piece that did not attack her as a person at all.

      And yet somehow people feel the need to politely explain---in completely gender neutral ways---the utter basics to female carer veterans far more than male career veterans.

      Yes. Of course. "Far more". Here in the real non-gaming world we are generally appreciative if someone gives us polite feedback. They may or may not be right but sometimes we either learn something or at the least get to see something from the perspective of an end user which we may not have thought about. Turns out female gaming devs are omnipotent and know and see all. They do not need any feedback, any feedback is just obvious "mansplaining" given for no reason than to denigrate them because they are female.

    51. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by hey! · · Score: 1

      Well, you're implicitly assuming there is one kind of politics which employs identity and another kind that doesn't. I don't think so. All politics is "identity politics", the only difference is whether an identity sees itself as marginalized or in a dominant position.

      The dissatisfaction you have with people's "identity politics" is just the dissatisfaction everyone has with people who have different agenda from them. No matter who you are, people who are different from you demanding concessions.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    52. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If yet another gentle black guy politely tried to recap the origins of jazz/hip-hop/bebop/soul to you, and you are an aficionado of these things, and further you just gave a splendid jazz performance, would you roll your eyes?

      Would you assume they disrespect your credentials because you are white?

      Would you roll your eyes if you were black?

      Naivety is a beautiful thing. Let's celebrate it instead of trampling on it.

    53. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She wasn't fired because a mob was offended. This isn't analogous to the dongle joke firing thing. She was fired for being aggressive and rude to a preferred customer in public, then antagonising everyone and trying to shame the dude. All for asking a polite question about the game she was talking about working on.

    54. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Of course your experience is identical to mine. Your response is a fine example of the patronising dismissive wankers I was talking about.

    55. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1, Troll

      Exactly YOUR experience. We're talking about the experience of female devs and you cannot accept they have a different expereince from you. Yes industry is full of dismissive wankers. The sort who will dismss someone else's expereince because you feel put upon. Kind of exactly what you're doing.

      You don't have any personal esperience of being a female dev and neither AFAICT have you heard any particularly candid opinions from one that you trust t obe accurate.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    56. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No need to end the relationship, but whoever started it was acting in a very unprofessional way.

    57. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Usually two people start a relationship.

    58. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For as much as people like servicescope minor like to say there's no difference between how men and women think, your post really does hit on a fairly major difference. Men explain everything to everybody no matter what, and we get labeled as "mansplaining". Women are the exact opposite where they'll throw the line "if you don't know, there's no point in explaining it". Any man whose ever had a relationship with a woman has had her tell him at some point "if you don't know why I'm mad I'm not telling you". The man will go in to excruciating detail as to what you did wrong, it's just how we're wired differently.

    59. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by houghi · · Score: 1

      There is a great explanation of the "Tits or GTFO" explanation. Can't find it now, but it cam down to that many people use 'being a woman' as an excuse. I put it in quotes, because male person can pretend to be a woman as well.

      The explaination was along thelines of "If you descibe yourself as a woman, you want to use it as a leverage, just as calling yourself a man would be. It seems to be important about WHAT you are and not WHO you are. So no, we do not care and as an answer we say TGTFO.'

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    60. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      "basics" The guy she railed against is so big of a person in the community that they have a: NPC named after them. The upper echelons of the development team come to them to ask input. That they have a unique and special relationship with them and they actively promote GW2 material.

      Look, you can be a complete idiot if you want, but she wasn't fired for being female. She was fired because she was a piece of shit, just like the last time she got fired.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    61. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Cederic · · Score: 2

      We rehash stuff, we don't explain the utter basics to someone we consider a peer

      That's bollocks. If I'm conveying something complex I'll often start at the basics, so that we can build a shared understanding from the bottom up, identify and address and differences in interpretation, and reach a shared conclusion.

      I've never had utter basics of my field explained to me, especially by some young'un at a conference

      What the fuck does a conference have to do with this conversation?

      Anyway, work with me and I'll explain the basics of your job to you, because I will spot you failing miserably to apply them properly. It's what I do. I'm fucking good at it.

      I don't give a flying fuck what gender you are either, I'll do it anyway.

      And yet every one of my female friends in tech areas and collegues with whom I've had conversations about the topic[*] have mentoned it happens repeatedly.

      It happens repeatedly to men too. They just don't scream misogyny.

      I'm talking about explaining what a pointer is. To an industry veteran with 10 years experience.

      Ten years is fuck all. Shit, most people programming for ten years have probably never even encountered a pointer.

      Back when they were common, far too fucking many developers that pretended to be competent fucked up their use anyway.

      That kind of level of patronising.

      Shrug. You think it's patronising, I think it's clear communication. Only one of us is suffering an ego failure here.

    62. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You also fail to accept that others have a DIFFERENT EXPERIENCE THEN YOU.

    63. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Feminists can "invalidate" men's experiences til the cows come home, and nobody seems to find it unfair.

    64. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >just because a mob decides to be offended

      When that 'mob' is your customers, yeah, the chick should be fired.

      >Imagine being entitled to work at Harley Magazine after constantly attacking riders as fat lazy fucks. She is the ideality of a completely *intellectually* regressive millennial.

    65. Re:Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a/s/l?

    66. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never fuck a colleague? Get the fuck back from that SKA Fantasy of Yours, 15 percent of American couples met at work, including Obamas.
      U
      Oh and Michelle was his boss too...

    67. Re: Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama's met at work.
      15 percent of Americans met at work.
      Shut the buck up.

  6. Pointless Internet Fight with Trolling, News at 11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's like when all the AOL users got web access and everything old to us was new to them. Why all the attention on forum fights and troll accounts?

    Also why do people still bother using twitter?

  7. Whose troll army was this? by Entrope · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How many troll armies have been unleashed on the United States, trying to stir up dissent and unrest using tactics like these?

    1. Re:Whose troll army was this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These actions are not limited to the United States.

    2. Re: Whose troll army was this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Citations. Our media only shows it is us.

    3. Re: Whose troll army was this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry - I guess I didn't cite my own assertion about our media.

    4. Re: Whose troll army was this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Citations. Its bot accounts and 4chan trolls according to the article above. My bet is it also involves Russia manipulating groups as well, but I come from a time when we respected our enemy's capabilities instead of dismissing them as fantasy until it was too late.

    5. Re:Whose troll army was this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've known Jessica Price for nearly a decade and worked with her at Smith & Tinker. She isn't using "tactics." This is just her own toxic beliefs and her overabundance of hate. She is so hateful she can't keep her mouth shut.

    6. Re:Whose troll army was this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe someone should block it up with a cock.

    7. Re:Whose troll army was this? by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Nobodies. The person she attacked was a big name in the guild wars community(named NPC after them, get special info from devs, promotes material, story and theorycraft, etc). People who play the game saw a shitty developer attack a pillar of the community that devs higher up the food chain go to for input and promote ideas through to the rest of the community. And...people had enough, especially those that know her past history of attacking the fan base. The "army" you want is the one that tried to make this issue into a gender-circus, and screeched that the only reason it happened is because she's female. This was followed up by the press going batshit insane and outright lying as to why she got fired. And let's be straight, they outright lied and have refused retractions.

      To put it simply? You're seeing the culture war of progressives vs everyone else spill into the mainstream and people are having enough of the bullshit.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  8. Go woke, go broke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    She was fire for insulting the clients, she was not hire to speak garbage in twitter.

  9. Every conceivable group is targeted by MakerDusk · · Score: 2

    These days, it doesn't matter which group you're in, there will be a group targetting you. Be it scammers, hate groups, or trolls. The more you reveal about yourself, your beliefs, and your work... the more you'll be torn into. Also, uninformed people telling you how to do your job has always existed. It very rarely leads to any improvement and instead usually distracts. It all comes down to how you respond. Lashing out on social media just ensures logs exist. Don't give these people ammunition to use against you. Do not encourage them with a response. 'Do not feed the trolls' is a saying for a reason.

    1. Re:Every conceivable group is targeted by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Indeed. If you put something out there, expect feedback and expect that some of it you will not like. That is just how things are set up. If you want unquestioning admiration only, you need to stay within a filter-bubble that assures this.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  10. %FEMALENAME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Why does this feel like one of the false flags from #gamergate?

  11. Ok, so just to be clear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    These tactics are bad and evil when used by one side, but when the forces of social justice band together to get conservatives silenced or fired, it's ok?

    Seems to me they don't like the taste of their own medicine.

    P.S. Are you really sure you want to make this woman your test case? I mean, seriously.

    1. Re: Ok, so just to be clear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      These tactics are bad and evil when used by one side, but when the forces of social justice band together to get conservatives silenced or fired, it's ok?

      Yes. It is wrong to fake a group through the means described already. It is not wrong for a genuine group of people to assemble.

      The difference is significant. And for what it is worth, there is already a record of criticism over form letters and such in protests.

      You seem unaware that this predates the Internet.

      Seems to me they don't like the taste of their own medicine.

      Seems to me that you missed what is going on, namely that somebody substituted poison for medicine.

      P.S. Are you really sure you want to make this woman your test case? I mean, seriously.

      You seemed to have missed the point where multiple people are being targeted.

    2. Re:Ok, so just to be clear by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Interesting

      There has to be a level of tolerance. I guess the level depends on the employer, but it's probably somewhere between "literal Nazi marching proudly" and "voted for the other candidate".

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re: Ok, so just to be clear by kick6 · · Score: 0

      Seems to me that you missed what is going on, namely that somebody substituted poison for medicine.

      Oh I believe he's fully aware. He's also aware that

      Yes. It is wrong to fake a group through the means described already. It is not wrong for a genuine group of people to assemble.

      Conveniently excuses what "your side" is doing by attempting to make it appear geniune while "their side" is obviously faking it. You literally proved his point by attempting to defend your brand of dickbaggery.

    4. Re: Ok, so just to be clear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Seems to me that you missed what is going on, namely that somebody substituted poison for medicine.

      Oh I believe he's fully aware.

      Can you explain your reasonsing for this belief of yours? It seems more likely to me that when somebody thinks it is "a taste of their own medicine" while overlooking the nature of the complaints being about the illegitimacy instead, well, I just don't understand how you can get such awareness from their post.

      He's also aware that

      Can you also provide a reasoning for your belief on this awareness? Again, I see an absence of such cognizance.

      Yes. It is wrong to fake a group through the means described already. It is not wrong for a genuine group of people to assemble.

      Conveniently excuses what "your side" is doing by attempting to make it appear geniune while "their side" is obviously faking it. You literally proved his point by attempting to defend your brand of dickbaggery.

      You seem intent on using possessive pronouns in your dialogue, which makes it more likely than your own position is opposing, and thus biased since you are being accusatory (without actual basis as you don't know me) rather than seeking of understanding.

      Which undermines your position since instead of recognizing the actual point of concern, you are literally harming your own position by resorting to groundless antagonism.

      You should try sticking to a more neutral approach, or remain in thread chains where you are engaging with actual opposition.

      Me? I'm explaining something to somebody who didn't seem to know what was really going on, even though it is something quite old. The particulars may change, but the general concept does not.

    5. Re:Ok, so just to be clear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are completely missing the point of why she was fired. You are mistaken that it is because she is a sexist by itself. The nazi might be marching but he is not harassing anyone. She was.

  12. Big mouths get shit on, more at 11. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Big mouths will always exist.
    I remember in my school, they got bullied and harassed as well. Usually with fists in their faces.
    Now it's just digital. Digital fists.

    People think they have the right to be absolute morons to others and get away with it.
    Protip, friends, you don't. People can and will attack you back. Don't come crying to me when they do.
    When you do it under employment and TO clients of your employer, expect to get the fucking boot out the front door as well.
    The funny bit was her "I'm going to stand up!!" part. Please don't. It'll get you fired again and again.
    You got yourself and a colleague fired because your dumb shit.
    Clearly you should marry that dude. He wants the V.
    Jessica, dude, stop. Having a big mouth wins you nothing.
    Just like make game and delete your twitter instead.

    I have no sympathy for big mouths screaming "i'm getting attacked!" when almost every single time it is them starting it. This is absolutely the case here.
    The other stuff less so, the botted emails, that shit is scummy. But this, absolutely.

  13. I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by edgedmurasame · · Score: 1, Troll

    Given the trend to hoax responses like this, history suggests that the "attacks" are damage control. Whatever slight this was against them, a sloppy "harassment campaign" would only serve to benefit the targets - as they could point to the variable names and incidental joiners-on as a call to harass ArenaNet.

    --
    "Forget the engineers." -Carly Fiorina, briber of MIT Technology Review.
    1. Re:I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      What you mean is known under the expression "false flag".

      Certainly possible, but let's not deny that there are a lot of toxic people on the internet. Misogyny is real, misandry is also real, although probably without that much supporters. In any way there's a lot of hate going around and tribalism is strongly enough ingrained in people to join in if they feel like they belong to a disenfranchised group. And since we're on the internet, it's not that difficult to find and pick nuts from an opposing group. Then act like they're a prime example of that group and let them do your job for you. Shit flinging starts and that rarely leads to a better outcome. It's usually just more shit flinging. At this point, false flag operations often don't seem to be necessary.

      From my perspective, people should perform some reality checks now and then. Distance themselves from the internet a bit and go outside. Look around and see what people around you are doing. Perhaps travel a bit to broaden your horizon. Then judge yourself if the picture your internet communities paint justify all the vitriol that they want you to spew in the actual real and tangible world.

    2. Re:I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      No need to speculate. They discussed doing it openly on 4chan. They always do.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re: I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by c6gunner · · Score: 2

      "They" being who, exactly? You realize that everyone on 4chan is anonymous right? Even if you actually had seen such conversations (and I don't for a minute believe that you had) "they" could very well been the exact hoaxers that he was talking about.

    4. Re: I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, especially hateful conspiracy theories about Russian hackers. There was no meddling.

    5. Re: I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Indeed, one of the things that makes it hard to deal with is the seemingly anonymous nature of the attackers. But that's also their weakness, because the bots and fake accounts they hide behind are not too difficult to spot when you know what to look for. Once you see a lot of fake accounts involved it discredits the attack.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re: I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are likely assholes that enjoy trolling on anything, they don't adhere to one side.

    7. Re: I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by arth1 · · Score: 2

      On 4chan, "they" can even be a single person discussing with himself. It's a standard tool in the trolling toolbox.

      (We presumably see that sometimes here too, with AC account(s).)

    8. Re: I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Creimer and APK employ this tactic a lot.

    9. Re: I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever you say, comrade.

    10. Re: I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 0

      You are aware that you can find archives of 4chan threads and if you're correct about 'they discussed doing it openly on 4chan,' it should be not impossible for you to show proof?

    11. Re: I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So do I.

    12. Re: I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ultimately you still don't know which group to credit, claiming you do is BS.

    13. Re:I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I trust you have an archive of this being "openly discussed on 4chan"?

    14. Re:I wouldnt believe it "backfired" by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Then here's your chance for proof. Archive.is or 4plebs/moe take your pick, you can now show your proof. Digging through archives of hot threads, I can't find anything on /b/ /v/ /r9k/ /pol/ or /vg/ on 4chan of this. Can't find any proof on /b/ /v/ /pol/ on 8chan. Can't find proof on 2.5ch either. So...

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  14. The variable name alone makes it look fake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would anyone really name the variable %FEMALENAME other than a a troll *intentionally* exposing that variable name to achieve their goal of creating anger/outrage?

    (If there really are genuine enraged misogynists trying to drive women out of gaming with attacks like this, wouldn't they be more likely to use a profanity, or something like 'feminazi'?)

    1. Re:The variable name alone makes it look fake by Mandrel · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I regularly see %FEMALENAME in spam Subject and From lines. Obviously a better lure than %MALENAME. So it's possibly an edit of a spam template.

    2. Re:The variable name alone makes it look fake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would anyone really name the variable %FEMALENAME

      What language uses that?

    3. Re:The variable name alone makes it look fake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, if they’d already used %NAME for the fake sender’s name.

    4. Re:The variable name alone makes it look fake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please define 'regularly'. Is it 'I see it once a week' or 'I saw it this one time'? Because I've never seen that in my 20+ years of receiving spam. It's not exactly the hardest programming bug to avoid, and I can't believe the spam I get has been programmed by higher caliber programmers than the spam you get.

  15. Re:Gamers have no lives. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    What makes you think that the 4chan trolls are gamers? Maybe the groups overlap, but they're by no means the same.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  16. Hey nerds... by PmanAce · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...quit blaming your female rejections on women. It's like blaming the driver of the car that hit you because you decided to cross the street when you weren't supposed to while playing your Pokémon Go.

    --
    Tired of my customary (Score:1)
    1. Re:Hey nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be fine if they didn't then also complain that their games don't do well because no one buys that shit.
      So what, I'm supposed to spend my money on shitty games no one likes, or I get called a sexist?
      Fuck that.

    2. Re:Hey nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If by "rejection" you mean, taking away their jobs, taking away their kids, taking away their money, taking away their reputations (ie. blackballing), taking away their freedom (jail)...

      Not all women do these things to men... but I don't use that as ammunition to indict them just for being female.

      Trolls want BIG reactions. Female (game?) news writers and female game developers appear to have the "thinnest skin", they display it all the time on Twitter.

      So who do nihilistic or angry trolls pick to troll most?

    3. Re: Hey nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wtf does your statement have to do with the conversation?

      Projecting much?
      Or just trying to derail the conversation?

  17. Not mansplanining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The dude was perfectly polite in his question. She just went off on him because she obviously knows better as SHE is the dev and he's just a player, that she's doesn't have to explain why he's so wrong that warrants her going off on him and basically called him sexist for bringing her gender into the mix(which he NEVER did, she assumed it herself, it was NEVER a gender issue yet she keeps on repeating it was.)

    This whole thing is ridiculous and all stemmed from that one awful dev, the same one who said she was glad Totalbiscuit was dead (you may not like him, but ffs, that's not something you say about someone that died of cancer and wasn't a criminal).
    It was never a mansplaining or a gender issue, the gender of the dev was never bought into this other than by herself to "justify" her actions.
    She deserved to be fired, this is no way to conduct yourself. A dev online is like a clerk in a store, you represent your company regardless of whether or not you put a disclaimer saying "the views expressed here are your own and bla bla bla".
    Don't like it? Don't respond, simple as that. No one forced her to reply to him in such a manner.

    1. Re: Not mansplanining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With cancer, I absolutely am willing to feel gladness at their deaths. Far too often, treatment just prolongs the misery and suffering rather than provides a cure.

      Circumstances vary, but death can be a celebration.

    2. Re:Not mansplanining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The dude was perfectly polite in his question.

      Well, she did not use the term "mansplaining": the ones hawking on her did. Apart from which you apparently have no clue whatsoever what "mansplaining" even is. It is not a form of attacking a woman. It is being polite and helpful to a woman like any decent person would be to anybody of mental inferiority while not being even able to see ample evidence that the purported differential in competence triggering the helpful action is in ample and open evidence exactly the other way round.

      Mansplainers don't get they aren't helpful. There may be resentment after the object becomes sarcastic but the actual act of mansplaining is both in good faith and totally uncalled for. That's what makes it so annoying. It's based on the firm belief "she is a woman so I know better".

      It's basically the same as "telling a grandma how to suck eggs": the politeness of performance is not the point.

    3. Re:Not mansplanining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People who use the non-existent term "mansplain" are no different than the people who use terms like "hater" or "troll". They are people who have no valid argument, have lost the battle and are resorting to petty and childish name calling.

    4. Re:Not mansplanining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mansplaining... nope. manfeels... yep. https://twitter.com/Delafina77...

      Nope, that ain't sexist, want me to mansplain it to you?

    5. Re:Not mansplanining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine getting your Twitter account verified based on where you work, talking about your work and then claiming that you shouldn't be fired for being an asshole to the customers who replied (politely!) because it's your personal account.

  18. Re:Deserves the firing. by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    If you talk on your private account exclusively about private matters, I can very well see how your views expressed there are yours and yours alone. I doubt your employer (or people caring about who you work for) is bothered by you not liking your pet's doctor because your pooch still got worms after alleged de-worming or you trash talking your kids' elementary teacher 'cause that's the only possibility your genius offspring gets Fs.

    It's VERY different when your "private" account talks about work related stuff and your followers are more likely than not following you because of your twitter talking near exclusively about your work.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  19. Re:Gamers have no lives. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whatever they are gamers or not, is wasn't her job to insult people in twitter in behalf of the company who hire her, people asked question about the game and she insult them, if she was "trolled" she should have ignore the "trolls", but i don't know how can you be trolled when somebody ask you a question about the game.

  20. I don't buy it. by bistromath007 · · Score: 0

    I was involved with Gamergate back when it was actually a thing; people who complain of it doing anything for the past two years are essentially jumping at shadows. There are far more than enough of "us" than would ever need to falsify anything to be heard. "We" also don't really do anything about it these days except get mad on Twitter. The shitty old games journalism sites we hate are all hanging by a thread at this point, so mission accomplished.

    The PC obsessed devs who still complain about GG have always also complained about the industry; apparently even though there are alot of women working on games to be able to complain about it, there is still significant cause for complaint. Maybe they're actually not full of shit about their work environment. In fact, they should probably look closer at that than their putative customer base. People who are concerned with these sorts of issues tend overwhelmingly to love a good backstab more than anything else. It wouldn't be unprecedented for one of them to try to resolve some nasty office politics by putting on this boogeyman's mask.

  21. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by c6gunner · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anything that is merely being said, and not experienced by my own senses, is not real life. All it does, is make you feel bad, about something that is so far out of your control, that you literally cannot even tell if it is real.

    Then I noticed, how much of it actually completely does not exist in my world.
    All those "wars"...
    raging feminist vs neckbears or whatever
    americans vs russians
    refugees vs nazis
    christians vs muslims
    you name it.
    They were just not happening in *real life*.

    This is why the US military forced German civilians to bury bodies in concentration camps after WW2. So that they could experience it with their own senses. It seems that, prior to that, they were all big fans of your philosophy.

  22. Totally 4chan... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except that Gamergate topics are banned on sight which lead to a large exodus that I was a part of. It's either one nut and/or someone with minimal programming experience (about the level of a narrative designer perhaps, but I have no proof) falseflagging for sympathy as those ebil goobergonkers.

    As a side note, I wonder how long they'll be crying "sexism", that a woman who slept with reviewers, had people dare to call out this conflict of interest?

    1. Re:Totally 4chan... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, so they're still at it all this time later? How's that "safe space" plan been working for them?

    2. Re:Totally 4chan... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or it could be one from of the "other chans", which use the same or similar software, and are not as well known. Raid threads are banned quite quickly on 4chan, and mods have been known to give bans to everyone who posted in such threads. "Report and hide" is the proper response for those who see such threads.

  23. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to be like you, until my brother was killed in 9/11.

    liar

  24. Bet they aren't liking this for of equality. by brucekeller · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just because you have a vagina doesn't mean you can be a jerk without retribution.

    1. Re: Bet they aren't liking this for of equality. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, what do those bitches know? You have to be a Caucasian Male Republican before you can be a jerk with impunity.

    2. Re:Bet they aren't liking this for of equality. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ArenaNet new vacancy: whipping boy. Preferibly guilt white.

    3. Re: Bet they aren't liking this for of equality. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      No, you still have to become president first.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re: Bet they aren't liking this for of equality. by houghi · · Score: 1

      But the cunt IS president.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  25. Re:Gamers have no lives. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah! Those stupid gamers are just LOSERS! Not like me... I have a real life! My life is so real that I spend my time in the real world doing real things like making AC posts on slashdot about how those loser gamers have no lives... unlike me!. My friends and partner are so real that I don't even have time to know what stupid fucking game we are even talking about! Stupid fucking loser gamers!

  26. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who
    is
    this
    four
    chan
    ?

  27. Disappointing aspects by Epsillon · · Score: 0

    1) We still have misogyny on the Internet when the 'net community should really be leading humanity's evolution away from such primitive thought patterns as "man lead, woman follow." If you wish to imagine the stone-age intonation there, feel free. It was intentional. Come on, people, we have the world's knowledge at our fingertips. Surely a little research into why these attitudes have no place in our society isn't that onerous. Livelihood taken away simply for reacting once to what was probably a recurring theme throughout her career? What does that say about us, really? We're barely down from the sodding trees.

    2) Exactly how much of your soul does your employer own these days? At what point does one legitimately say to one's manager "Go piss up a rope, I'm a sovereign individual. What I do in the café to which I manage to stagger in order to get the caffeine fix I need to make it the rest of the way home after 22 hours of crunch-time coding to meet your unreasonable expectations, inflexible release schedule and poor planning is my own affair."

    --
    Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
    1. Re:Disappointing aspects by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, the answer is 0): STOP USING TWITTER

      How dumb is it to get in text based public flamefests limited to short sentences? The only thing profiting are companies like Twitter who call it "engagement", which drives up ad revenue. Just stop using Twitter for anything. If you really have to use it, use it for entertainment. So called "social media" is not a place for serious discussion - especially not Twitter! The fact that our President uses it is outrageous enough. Just stop using it. Nothing good comes out of it, unless you are a Twitter shareholder.

    2. Re:Disappointing aspects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) The sources in the article basically live off of crying misogyny. Kotaku is a professional outrage peddler. Chapotraphouse is some fringe liberal extremist nuthouse. And Wu is a professional victim. They'll always scream misogyny, racism, etc because it validates their existence, and if they find none they'll make it up.

      2) Strawman argument. She had her employer in her bio on Twitter. Everything she said on Twitter (i.e. a public forum) was directly associated with Arenanet. She also talked mostly about work and one such covnersations led to her outburst. This wasn't private, non-work related fluff. This was her publicly dragging her employer into her political crusade against the patriarchy.

    3. Re:Disappointing aspects by Epsillon · · Score: 1

      No, the answer is 0): STOP USING TWITTER

      Now, that may just be the most important bit of advice to come out of this whole affair. Facebook, too.

      --
      Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
    4. Re:Disappointing aspects by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      What community? "The internet community" was maybe (BIG maybe) a thing 25 years ago when it took more than half a brain cell to connect and maybe another one to get the various tools to work to actually get a two-way communication going. Back then webpages and being able to start Netscape meant that you can read someone's opinion, not that you yourself could voice yours.

      Today, there is no "internet community". The internet is filled with the same shitty no-brain bastards that littered the meatspace with their idiocy, thanks to plenty of ways to spew your unfounded, uneducated and utterly ridiculous opinions onto a world wide audience. Have you been on YouTube lately? The only "private" content you'll find (opposite to corporate content like music videos) is harebrained conspiracy and answer videos debunking them. This has exactly zero to do with what the 'net community has been about back when it was mostly composed of people whose first association of Spam wasn't canned meat.

      We let the masses in. Yes, that was a mistake and I'm honestly sorry for it. So in a way you can blame us for these idiots being here. I agree. But don't pretend as if these double-digit IQ imbeciles form some sort of "community".

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Disappointing aspects by gweihir · · Score: 0

      We also have misandrism on the Internet. The only sane thing is to either fight both or tolerate both. Any preference is sexist.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    6. Re:Disappointing aspects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Our President using it (and the ensuing hilarity) is the only reason Twitter shouldn't be wiped off the face of the planet as a demonstration of our military capabilities.

    7. Re:Disappointing aspects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For real.

      Hell, it's basically standard procedure that no one from the company makes public statements besides PR.
      As much as I love reading thoughts and feedback from the developers of the games I play, someone ought to be vetting that stuff.

    8. Re:Disappointing aspects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi i hope you don't mind me contacting your employer for this

      you do?

      i guess the answer is to stop using slashdot huh

  28. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by reanjr · · Score: 1

    Sure, like Buddhists in Myanmar, Jews in the West Bank, and Christian terrorists in the U.S., religion can lead to bad outcomes. The thing is, it's universal, so why would you blame religion unless you are an ignorant piece of shit?

  29. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly! Just like I will force all creimertards nazis to burry their own body!
    --
    Going to a comic con this weekend? Check out my vi

  30. Time for a campaign of emails to Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's time for a campaign of emails to the Slashdot management. Posts like the parent are being spammed in one article after another. There are dozens of these posts each day, not one of which contributes to the discussion in a useful way.

    There are a couple of ways to deal with this rampant spam. One is to simply.flag each of the posts is abuse whenever you see them. If the management gets tired of seeing lots of posts legitimately flagged as abuse perhaps they'll curtail the spam.

    The other is to document these posts with links, then send an email to feedback@slashdot.org indicating your frustration with the rampant spam. While Slashdot management doesn't answer many of the emails they receive, a large number of emails might prompt a response.

    Finally, it's worth replying to whipslash whenever you see him post and bringing this to his attention directly. Let him know you're tired of seeing these spam posts disrupting the discussion in what seems like every single article at times.

    The lameness filter was modified to silence GNAA and APK spam, though it's not totally gone. There's no reason the lameness filter can't be adjusted to eliminate many of these spam posts, too. They are becoming far too rampant and disruptive. Replying to the trolls and telling them to stop has no effect and seems to encourage them to spam more.

    The only solution is to insist that Slashdot management put an end to these posts. The three approaches I discussed should be somewhat effective in making it harder to ignore this problem.

    I don't care who is responsible for these posts. I do want these posts to stop before they pollute Slashdot discussions even more.

    1. Re:Time for a campaign of emails to Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chris, please come watch the world cup in my studio! It starts in an hour an a half.

      Christopher, my love,

      Never mind those "hump leg" trolls.

      I am deeply sorry. I didn't feel well lately but I am better now since I had my meds adjusted. I am sorry that I called you all sorts of names on Slashdot and I feel truly ashamed of myself but somebody keeps re-posting my nasty post.

      The python click script you wrote for me my sweet love for my pheromone revenue stream web site suddenly stopped to work.

      Could you come visit me in my studio so we could look at it?

      Signed:
      Ethell, Your sweetee who will love you for ever.

      P.S. when I posted there was a funny form that asked me to retype the word "shoulders" in a text field. That's funny, I did a double-take and I went to look at your new picture again and got turned on. Please contact me ASAP.

    2. Re: Time for a campaign of emails to Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I donâ(TM)t like them putting chemicals in the water

    3. Re: Time for a campaign of emails to Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's turning the cyberfrogs gay!

    4. Re:Time for a campaign of emails to Slashdot by another_twilight · · Score: 2

      Please don't.

      Slashdot is one of the few sites that doesn't delete unwanted posts. That means we get spam, but it also means we don't have posts that are deemed 'unwanted' simply because they are confronting.

      None of these posts appear at +1. Most are modded to -1. Set your viewing threshhold to 0 or +1 and they will disappear. So will a lot of other A/C posts, like yours, but then, perhaps you should take advantage of the systems already in place, rather than calling for a campaign to modify an existing system so that it's more to your liking.

      I'd prefer to put up with some spam than to see yet another site have to have editors making choices about what is and isn't wanted.

    5. Re:Time for a campaign of emails to Slashdot by fafalone · · Score: 1

      You can also adjust modifiers to remove the anonymous penalty/logged in bonus, so you can still set your threshold to +1 and see comments posted anonymously that haven't been otherwise downmodded.

    6. Re: Time for a campaign of emails to Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for your reply. However, I strongly disagree with you.

      That might be a logical position if Slashdot didn't have a long history of censorship.

      Posts occasionally are deleted by management, and almost certainly not only because of DMCA takedown requests. There is no clear policy, but it does happen. The lameness filter blocks certain types of content including ASCII art, GNAA spam (the n-word is blocked), and a lot of APK's content. Restrictions such as scanning users for unsecured proxy servers were added to combat GNAA spam. Logged-in users have been silently blacklisted for moderating up certain comments that management didn't approve of, so that those users could not moderate or metamoderate again. For that matter, editors have unlimited mod points and have previously used them to moderate entire threads with tens or hundreds of posts to -1. For a long time, Slashdot didn't even disclose that editors were using these capabilities to suppress some types of content.

      Let's do away with the idea that Slashdot doesn't censor content. They absolutely do so. I would prefer that comments not be deleted. However, flagging comments for review is supposed to bring them to the attention of editors, who can then mod them down. The lameness filter could eliminate some spam that's frequently repeated, as it's already been used to do.

      If you're bothered by censorship, the filtering of the n-word should be far more problematic. While that was done to prevent GNAA spam, it also attempts to suppress other racist content and perhaps having the side effect of preventing some discussion of racism. Suppressing these spam posts is consistent with what Slashdot already does with other, similar content. If anything, it should be less controversial than the censoring of the n-word.

    7. Re: Time for a campaign of emails to Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > the filtering of the n-word should be far more problematic

      What, "nígger" ?

    8. Re:Time for a campaign of emails to Slashdot by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      Clap, clap, clap.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    9. Re: Time for a campaign of emails to Slashdot by another_twilight · · Score: 1

      I'm aware that Slashdot's 'no deletion' policy was clearer and cleaner in the pasty. I was here for the furore over the Scientology takedown.

      Blocking a post (via filters for content or proxy) and moderating are very different from deletion. So is playing with how moderation points are assigned.
      I realise that these are restrictions on what can be 'said', and are part of a broader definition of censorship, but, for me, the deletion of something that has been 'said' is far more problematic and for more dangerous. If I think that I've communicated, only to find my post edited or deleted without my knowledge or consent, then my words have been changed. If I know that I cannot post, I can make other arrangements (as the GNAA posts demonstrate, you can't stop the message).

      Deleting has a much greater chilling effect than up-front restrictions, IMHO.

      If you're bothered by censorship, the filtering of the n-word should be far more problematic.

      Why? It's trivial to bypass as has been demonstrated time and again, here and everywhere else. And I cannot believe that Slashdot editors are so ignorant as to believe otherwise. What they can do, however, when they receive a complaint is to be able to say 'look, we tried'. I/we know it's pointless, but that may not stop an injunction or court order. If they can demonstrate that it's pointless, that's another matter.

      perhaps having the side effect of preventing some discussion of racism

      That's a weak argument. 'Perhaps'? If a discussion is prevented because someone can't work out how to use a synonym, alternate spelling or character substitution, then this isn't a tech site.

      The lameness filter is part of a larger 'post quality' process that includes excluding certain characters, line length etc. It's passive and doesn't stop someone who is determined. GNAA hasn't stopped and the reason it's decreased is that it's stopped getting a reaction. APK will never stop because he's mentally ill. The anti-Creimer posts will fade, just like the Kristopeit (sp?) posts (remember those - very similar MO to the Creimer spam inc. creating accounts to pretend to be the target). Grit teeth. Endure. If the poster is sane, they'll get bored when they stop getting a reaction.

      Filtering doesn't work (see both APK and GNAA) and deletion is the part of censorship that I find most worrisome. I've presumed you were advocating one, the other or both and I apologise if that's a mistaken assumption.

      And thanks for the civil discussion.

  31. Pandering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps the management of these game companies should stop pandering to anonymous mysoginists? That way, it disempowers the mysoginists rather than the women who work for the companies. I'm naively assuming that these companies want to hire and retain women.

    1. Re:Pandering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you look at her history (like being happy Totalbiscuit died and ranting against men) I'm fairly certain this was only the last drop why they fired her. She seems like a professional troublemaker.

      Being a woman does not mean you are above criticism. You cannot blame your own personal shortcomings on "the partriarchy". If you're consistently an asshole that's all you.

    2. Re:Pandering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Takes quite a mentally ill disturbed person to feel happy about the death of a cancer victim who on top of it was a law abiding citizen with no history of crime and public disturbance unlike many feminists.
      If she was happy about the death of some murderer or terrorist or pedophile or whatever in those lines, it'd be understandable; but an average guy who did nothing wrong against anyone in his life except not buckling to flawed opinions of feminists? That's already staining the whole collective with her as a medium.

  32. Smell the bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Worse, he gave *positive* encouraging feedback. Exactly the type companies want. I say, "He" but the name doesn't indicate male or female. Perhaps she ranted at a women for all I know. Either way it was bad. Then she double down on it publicly on Reddit, and it became a much much worse, a big problem for the company, to the extent they couldn't ignore it.

    And she got fired, the CEO explained to her personally why, and she took that even badly, suggesting he sacked her personally to gloat. When I read it, that he thought highly enough to sack her personally, and explain why.

    Serious personality issues.

    As to the rest of this shit:
    "But another female developer told Kotaku she saw a real call to action on 4chan, and that it was followed by angry letters to the game studio she freelances for calling for her firing too, complaining their games had declined since she was hired (along with another woman)."

    A targetted letter aimed at a particular woman, yet supposidly a generic template with %FEMALENAME in the template as if its a generic letter sent about all women to every studio?

    And %FEMALENAME, not just %NAME?? The word 'FEMALE" in there to back up the agenda claim. That doesn't ring true, and a google search does nothing to back it.

    So I think this is just bullshit.

    Jessica Price could be *Jeffry* Price for all it matters, he would still need to be sacked for that behavior.

    1. Re:Smell the bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eh? Of course it rings true. This is entirely plausible.

      %NAME for the fake submitter’s own name (Signed, %NAME)

      %FEMALENAME for the name of the woman it is about.

    2. Re:Smell the bullshit by voss · · Score: 2

      I wish I had mod points for you. She wasnt fired for saying "thanks for telling me how to do my job". If she had stopped there muted the guy she would still have a job. She was fired for holding up an enthusiastic player with constructive criticism to public ridicule and further basically describing arena fans as emotional johns. That damages the company she worked for.

    3. Re:Smell the bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was present during most of the threads on 4chan.
      There were assholes saying her firing was justified.
      Other assholes saying it wasn’t but she was still a shit.
      Quite a few “eceleb drama. Remove this bullshit.” Posts.
      Lots of trolling, general mockery and shitposting.

      In short, such a melange of real opinions blended with the apathetic and people pretending for the laughs that if you were to look at it you’d probably find exactly what you wanted to with a few choice posts to support the claim.
      Of course there’d be no guarantee that it’d be a real belief or intended action by any one involved, nor any way of finding out.

      It’s this that makes 4chan such a convenient boogeyman.
      The site is made of mist.
      It can be any scary shape your imagination summons up.
      (Sometimes, the shape fits, but not as often as people would like to claim)
      (And lately it’s been less mist and more a cloud of fart gas.)
      (4chan - the home of sound, fury and poor digestion)

    4. Re: Smell the bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not just public ridicule, it was painting a target on his back and a call to action against him. She wanted to ruin his life, kinda poetic that the reverse happened instead.

  33. Classic "It's only a joke" fallback by MadCat221 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Was only speaking Satirically" = "It's just a joke, lighten up". The classic capper to a round of bullying, trying to delegitimize the grievances of the bullied.

    1. Re:Classic "It's only a joke" fallback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was a false flag written by an SJW. The article is written in such a way to avoid saying that specifically and lead you to that assumption you just made.

  34. Horrid writing by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Could this thing be re-written so that it makes a bit more sense? Its like several disjointed story lines melded into an incoherent whole.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    1. Re: Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well it takes effort to spin 4channonsense into a real issue while defending a terrible person.

    2. Re:Horrid writing by Type44Q · · Score: 2

      She wasn't a "bit rude" but apparently you feel you have credibility to burn; I say otherwise but what do I know? ;)

    3. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except you forgot one crucial thing: This was literally one day after Trump chose his Supreme Court nominee, and the National Women's March organization sent out a press release angrily deriding how evil and sexist "Nominee XX" is, because they wrote it before they knew who his choice was. Where else do you think the Libs false-flagging Gamergaters got the idea from?

    4. Re:Horrid writing by geek · · Score: 4, Informative

      Bit rude? Understatement of the fucking year.

    5. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could this thing be re-written so that it makes a bit more sense? Its like several disjointed story lines melded into an incoherent whole.

      That's the whole point. These things are built up of a set of unrelated cherry-picked 'points' which are meant to launch yet another outrage stampede against someone or something that the original author has a hate-on for.

      The only winning move is not to play.

    6. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Just a bit. If you think it was more, then you are probably too sensitive to lurk on teh internets. It's what we all tell people of %GENDER, so you can live by the same rules.

    7. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AmiMojo a white knight

    8. Re:Horrid writing by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      She was "a bit rude"?

      Sure. And Trump is a bit inconsiderate in his speeches.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:Horrid writing by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      I guess it depends how sensitive you are. Seems mild compared to a lot of the stuff that gets posted, and harsh for an instant firing offense with no warning.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've fallen for it too, the trolls left %FEMALENAME on there *intentionally* to see if they could rile people up against a fictional mob trying to get women fired. And evidently it worked brilliantly. The Reddit post was also a troll, downvoted into oblivion but subsequently reported by various bloggers who didn't bother to research it or simply ignored the facts since it didn't fit in with their click-bait outrage articles. It would be funny if it wasn't so depressing how easily fooled these bloggers masquerading as journalists are.

    11. Re:Horrid writing by gweihir · · Score: 1

      She was more than a "bit" rude, she was openly sexist. Using the term "mansplaining" is quite enough for that. She did this while acting in a professional capability, which happens automatically when she discusses her work and she was rightfully fired for it. Then some male sexists (just as much scum) jumped on this.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    12. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A guy got fired because he joked about a dongle at a professional conference, and a woman, who was not part of the conversation tweeted it and got him fired. Don't even get me started on Damore.

      Seriously, fuck you. You run your mouth plenty on here, but I we all *know* that you're a pussy mano y mano in person.

    13. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She was more than a "bit" rude, she was openly sexist. Using the term "mansplaining" is quite enough for that.

      Except that she didn't. The people hooking on her response (basically "that's the kind of stuff I have to put up with as a female in game development" as a lead-in for quoting his letter) added all of the terms like "mansplaining" and suddenly they were attributed to her.

      A shit storm was started against her on Twitter, and sometime along that shitstorm she blew her top. That response was then claimed to be part of her original response to the man explaining that her exposé on game immersion design was all wrong.

      Really, read up on it in the original contexts. It's a pretty ugly mess, and yes, there are also statements by Price herself that would be out of place in the situations that people pretend that they have been made in.

      She does not pretend to be a saint and said some of the stuff she has been blamed for, but very little of it actually in the context people blame her for having made them in.

    14. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're such a biased abomination.... she treated a partner / customer like shit and created a gender issue out of it, she deserved to get fired.

    15. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not unlike Jessica Price's writing HEY-OOOO

    16. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone got fired for arguing with customers on twitter, decided to play the misogyny card, usual suspects jumps on the bandwagon.

      Someone else posted a clearly bullshit story about her firm receiving e-mails along the lines of "Please fire %FEMALE_NAME", the incestuous segments of the gaming / social justice press decided to report this as fact.

      Slashdot picks it up because editorial oversight doesn't exists here either.

      tl;dr: Someone got fired and nothing else happened, but people are still mad as hell.

    17. Re: Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee do you really need your boss to warn you not to be an asshat with your verified personal twitter account that links you to your company?

      The guy said nothing sexiest to her, and even apologized, but she had to keep at it.

    18. Re: Horrid writing by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Well it takes effort to spin 4channonsense into a real issue while defending a terrible person.

      Well said. When you are right, you are right.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    19. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess it depends how sensitive you are.

      Aren't you against toxic masculinity?

    20. Re:Horrid writing by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      A female game dev was a bit rude on Twitter and ended up getting fired after people complained to her employer. Some guy on Reddit commented that it seemed like they could get anyone fired by complaining to their employer...

      So 4chan trolls got together and started doing just that, targeting random female developers. They screwd up though, because their mail merge failed and sent messages complaining about %FEMALENAME.

      And the reddit dude was wrong. A normal Female developer - read that as a non-misandryst who doesn't take her misandry to Twitter as a representative of the company. isn't at all likely to be canned, especially since she'll be able to prove that she didn't do whatever she was accused from.

      The 4chan crew might have been putting some mistakes in on purpose. If a female developer could get fired for a messed up email, the Reddit dude would be proven right.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    21. Re:Horrid writing by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      She wasn't a "bit rude" but apparently you feel you have credibility to burn; I say otherwise but what do I know? ;)

      Reading the background of the story, It would be very surprising if she didn't bring a whole litany of expressions of her hatred of men to the table, and caused a lot of problems at work.

      It's like getting a speeding ticket or getting caught stealing. Harrdly ever happens the first time you do it. I would bet that she was a constant source of problems, especially if her reaction to that guys post was to go batshit insane over a civil post.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    22. Re:Horrid writing by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I guess it depends how sensitive you are. Seems mild compared to a lot of the stuff that gets posted, and harsh for an instant firing offense with no warning.

      So anyhow - you would stand up for a guy who did the same thing? I've read enough of your postings to know that you would be completely on board with any female who took a Themla and Louise solution to a man who took too long to cross the street - I think thay call that manwalking.

      KNow thyself Animojo. I am an asshole, I know and admit it. You can not find not fault in anything any female would ever do. I'm surprised that you even went so far as "a bit rude."

      But you'd never admit it.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    23. Re:Horrid writing by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      She was more than a "bit" rude, she was openly sexist. Using the term "mansplaining" is quite enough for that. She did this while acting in a professional capability, which happens automatically when she discusses her work and she was rightfully fired for it. Then some male sexists (just as much scum) jumped on this.

      Remember though, that if a person is sexist on one way or another, they will not see that their terms were sexist. Many feminists are both terribly sexist as well as racist in nature. But when one of them mentions something about problems being caused by "White males", the others will nod their heads wisely as they do not see that blaming to a person by their sex as sexist, or blaming them based on their race is racist.

      The worst part is they do not see that they are just as bigoted as white supremacists. They are only rooting for the other side. But they are still what they are. Here is a great example of sanctioned racism:

      http://fortune.com/2017/10/20/... n

      White is a race, Men is a gender (or sex if you prefer) The headline reads: The Bank of England Has Way Too Many White Men, U.K. Lawmakers Say

      Hmmmm White - hey, that is race, Men Hey, that is sex, Too many people of a race and gender.

      So let's diddle that headline a little: The Bank of England Has Way Too Many Black women, U.K. Lawmakers Say

      Is that racist? Is that sexist?

      Why yes, it is. Bigoted as all hell. And quite socially acceptable. We don't even blink when a woman or her sycophants scream about how awful men are, or how all problems are the fault of those white men. Held up as an aspiration - Held up as the solution is getting rid of white men. Funny how the people claiming they are working for social justice are such racist bigots. They are become their own enemy.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    24. Re:Horrid writing by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Not unlike Jessica Price's writing HEY-OOOO

      I have manhurts now.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    25. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, take a look at this:

      https://www.ephemera-inc.com/Can-t-we-give-old-white-men-their-own-little-count-p/1378.htm

      That's just plain bigotry, folks.

    26. Re:Horrid writing by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I am an asshole, I know and admit it.

      Does that extend to simply making shit up to "prove" a point?

      You can not find not fault in anything any female would ever do.

      Oh, looks like a yes!

      I'm surprised that you even went so far as "a bit rude."

      So you even admit he foud fault but said he didn't anyway. You're weird.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    27. Re:Horrid writing by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Yeah, take a look at this:

      https://www.ephemera-inc.com/Can-t-we-give-old-white-men-their-own-little-count-p/1378.htm

      That's just plain bigotry, folks.

      Isn't it funny how bigotry is a wonderful and proper thing as long as it is the far left that espouses the bigotry and racism?

      This is an example of why I consider that left or right is not a ruler, but a circular continuum. Starting out is the middle facing us. As people go left or right, and the further they go left or right, the eventually meet in the back with the same abount ot hatred, racism, and bigotry. They will scream and yell how they are not at all alike, but at the core, they have the same outlook, merely about different groups.

      More reading material:

      https://thebristolcable.org/20...

      http://feministing.com/2013/01... This little gem was feminists pissed that the OBlama administration was too white!

      Stop reading books by White cisgendered men!!!!! https://www.xojane.com/enterta....

      CBS is too fucking White!! http://ew.com/article/2014/07/...

      Google is going to stop hireing white guys https://www.digitaltrends.com/...

      And just when we figured that Hootie and the Blowfish meant that racism was gonna - Nooooooo! Too many white men in bicycling!!! https://www.digitaltrends.com/...

      So yeah, while the feminists and their sycophants strut around like they are so inclusive, so tolerant, so benign, they really need a uniform that suits their actual sexism and racism. I would suggest a rainbow tapestry gown and a pointy hood, modeled after their conservative doppelgängers, the Ku Klux Klan.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    28. Re:Horrid writing by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      I am an asshole, I know and admit it.

      Does that extend to simply making shit up to "prove" a point?

      Lame, I've been reading Animojo's posts since I've been here, and his positions on matters of feminist social justice have been pretty consistent. Now, mind you, if you care to point out exactly what shit I made up, hell I'll acknowledge it.

      You can not find not fault in anything any female would ever do.

      Oh, looks like a yes!

      I'm surprised that you even went so far as "a bit rude."

      So you even admit he foud fault but said he didn't anyway. You're weird.

      A bit rude? Wow - talk about condemning with incredibly faint condemning. Here is a woman rejoicing over a social media "enemy's" death via cancer, who freaks over constructive disagreement, then plays the sexist card pretty hard, while representing the company she works for - sorry that's not a bit rude. That's a metric fuckton of rude and sexism to boot.

      Now on the more serious side, at least I can have a civil conversation with Animojo. You on the other hand, are pretty incapable of that sort of thing. You apparently find personal insults to be a fitting substitute for cogent arguments. And that's okay - I mean you are what you are, and I've realized that early on in interactions with you.

      The woman who is "a bit rude" had had these things to say while representing her employer:

      "The kindest thing I can say is "Im glad he's no longer around to see doing harm." referring to a Youtuber "Total Biscuit" whom she had disagreements with who had just died of Cancer.

      Some content creator was politely referred to by her as "Mansplaining Rando Asshat" and "Since we've got a lot of hurt manfeels today, lemme make something clear: this is my feed."

      Her being fired was because she was compliling a volume of work, and since she liket to reference who she worked for, she was setting herself up as a representative even on her own feed.

      And that's the real rub. I don't care what you say or do. But if you act out while representing whoever it is you are working for, then you need to be disciplined. But hey - I do exactly understand why you would wholeheartedly support her.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    29. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      when an article can't/won't be made coherent, it's a pretty good sign it's pushing a political agenda and should be ignored. The fact that it's flagged #gamergate, and slashdot's 1 sided editorials of the later, it's a pretty good sign it's a big nothing-burger.

    30. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That this is marked flamebait is sad. While I would disagree with AmiMoJo on many things, this is simply a thankfully lucid answer to the GP's question... with only minor editorializing. Where are the meta-moderators?

    31. Re:Horrid writing by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      A bit rude? Wow - talk about condemning with incredibly faint condemning.

      So it WAS condeming. You have finally admitted that you simply invented a claim about AmiMojo.

      Now on the more serious side, at least I can have a civil conversation with Animojo. You on the other hand, are pretty incapable of that sort of thing.

      I've had many civil conversations with AmiMojo.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    32. Re:Horrid writing by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      A bit rude? Wow - talk about condemning with incredibly faint condemning.

      So it WAS condeming. You have finally admitted that you simply invented a claim about AmiMojo.

      Now on the more serious side, at least I can have a civil conversation with Animojo. You on the other hand, are pretty incapable of that sort of thing.

      I've had many civil conversations with AmiMojo.

      A bit rude? Wow - talk about condemning with incredibly faint condemning.

      So it WAS condeming.

      You write like a person who tries to invalidate an argument by searching for punctuation. But more on that.

      You have finally admitted that you simply invented a claim about AmiMojo.

      No, not at all. Taking the body of that woman's work, the rather impressive litany of undigused hatred of the male of the species - to the point of taking joy of another's death, and labeling it as "a bit rude" is very much standing up for her.

      Saying she was a bit rude is like saying Harvey Weinstein was a bit pushy when dealing with women.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    33. Re:Horrid writing by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Taking the body of that woman's work,

      So talking about something else entirely is something else entirely. Well done. I shall endeavour to remember that the only way to satisfy you in an argument is to guess which direction you want to veer off into.

      Saying she was a bit rude is like saying Harvey Weinstein was a bit pushy when dealing with women.

      Not remotely the same order of magnitude.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    34. Re:Horrid writing by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Taking the body of that woman's work,

      So talking about something else entirely is something else entirely. Well done. I shall endeavour to remember that the only way to satisfy you in an argument is to guess which direction you want to veer off into.

      Saying she was a bit rude is like saying Harvey Weinstein was a bit pushy when dealing with women.

      Not remotely the same order of magnitude.

      Funny how you want to completely control the narrative. Magnitude is not remotely the issue here. Fact is, this woman hates men, and attempts to turn a completely polite disagreement into a sexist men against women screed. She has a track record of this. Even a mild form of "A bit rude", is not in the least condemning here. It is like saying that you agree with her premise, but not her delivery. She was "rude" - yes. But she wasn't just rude. She was rude, and she was sexist, and she was attempting to turn every discussion with her by a man into sexism on his part. And having a track record of continually doing that, she was very deservedly terminated.

      Weinstein is total scum at best, and used his power to fuck women in order for them to secure acting parts. He's scum and wrong and deserves to be removed from society.

      The point which you haven't gotten on all of that, is that a sexist hate filled woman who was most definitely wrong in her actions, and was dismissed as "a bit rude" is hardly a condemnation. A creepy rapist is likewise wrong. And orders of magnitude aside, to say he was pushy is simply the same thing.

      Point is, when people are wrong, they are wrong. And whitewashing them with silly statements like "A bit rude" is not condemnation, it is saying that they were correct, but their delivery was a problem. She was simply wrong, she deserved what she got. Weinstein is getting the same.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    35. Re:Horrid writing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're correct: Price was full-on rude, injecting a main course of gender politics and self-victimization.

      I hope that's what you know.

    36. Re:Horrid writing by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      I had a long point by point reply typed out but I deleted it because there's little point in engaging you in an actual debate:

      and she was attempting to turn every discussion with her by a man into sexism on his part.

      No that's you just flat out making shit up, again!

      I'm done and I'm not going to engage with you further on this. No, that doesn't mean you've won, it means I've got better things to do than point out every single time you knowingly invent stuff.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  35. Re: Deserves the firing. by reanjr · · Score: 0, Troll

    Employers need to stop bending over and letting the mob fuck them in the ass. The Internet isn't n real place. Opinions on the Internet have no value. 4chan should not have the power to affect the real world. People who act as the physical arm of 4chan should not put in C-level positions or in charge of corporate communications.

    Stop being such fucking snowflakes, grow some balls, and figure out how perspective works.

  36. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why does he wear the mask!??

  37. This discussion gives me great hope for the future by remoteshell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The topic of discussion and the depth and quality of the subsequent commentary gives me great hope for the future. My hope is that arthropods are back at the top of the food chain again. And the way this discussion and ecological changes are going, they have a good chance. I for one hail our new lobster overlords.

    --
    Just the washing instructions on life's rich tapestry
  38. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by c6gunner · · Score: 0

    The thing is, it's universal, so why would you blame religion unless you are an ignorant piece of shit?

    Terrorist: "Kill the infidels! Allah wills it!"
    Western retard: "Why blame religion you ignorant piece of shit?"

    It takes a lot of effort to make religious fanatics seem reasonable in comparison, but somehow you've managed it.

  39. Which part of 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While I'm not going to deny the possibility that some people would go out and have fun at Jessica Price's expense after this whole ordeal, I'm having trouble figuring out which board would have allowed the discussion about it to begin with. The boards involving tech and video games tend to be more liberal leaning and wouldn't tolerate attacks on women in the work place, especially a call to action via email or Twitter, and the boards that might get joy throwing fuel into the fire would have the threads deleted. So where would this have even taken place? Topping it all off it's impossible to say whether or not they themselves created the threads trying to cause trouble.

  40. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Nobody can cause you your job if you don't throw hissy fits for goodness sake. Don't be trolled into saying something stupid.

    If you cannot watch how you respond using an account with your real info then really you should have known better.

    Imagine a waiter who serve a difficult customer and manage to professionally diffuse the situation.... then went home and spout verbal garbage online and it went viral.... do you think he/she will keep his/her job? She was perfectly professional at work.... spouting garbage is her private life...

    It's obvious right?

  41. Same problem as always by skovnymfe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Some idiot brings gender into a discussion on the internet. We don't hate you because you're a woman, we hate you because you're trying to get in our face about being a woman. On the internet. Where you aren't a woman. You're a collection of bytes. Bytes don't have a gender. So shut the fuck up already.

    1. Re:Same problem as always by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The better question is why the majority of women think they matter.
      The average person has a limited quota of people they can care about in their small lifespan before it starts feeling like the precious gift given to them is being wasted by irrelevant random retards and bitches, a lesson taught by my dear mother even as she explains how she didn't birth me so random wastes can waste my lifespan.
      The amount of women to care about in one's life is extremely limited: Mother, Grandmother, Wife, Daughter, family and closest friends (none of those Internet kinds).
      The last people on this planet one should care about are Internet women.
      Feminism has this idea that all women hold equal value to one's important women who have actual influence on one's life,
      or that women like mothers and wives will pick feminists over their beloved men when it comes to arguing.
      Feminists would get fucking slapped until they are shitting themselves by my gf and mother to be honest if they ever heard a random feminist insulting me.
      This unwarranted sense of self-importance, inflated arrogance, and overinflated ego, is what is making feminism undesirable in the eyes of average people with normal lives (the vast majority) who all live by the above creeds.

    2. Re:Same problem as always by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      You're a collection of bytes. Bytes don't have a gender.

      0 and 1 would beg to differ...

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    3. Re:Same problem as always by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      Some idiot brings gender into a discussion on the internet.

      Yep, the women should just shut the fuck up about the shit they have to deal with. I mean the fact that there's troll armies targeting %FEMALENAME trying to get them fired, has nothing to do with it. They're hurting my delicate feelings by complaining and it makes me sad.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    4. Re:Same problem as always by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some idiot brings gender into a discussion on the internet. We don't hate you because you're a woman, we hate you because you're trying to get in our face about being a woman. On the internet. Where you aren't a woman. You're a collection of bytes. Bytes don't have a gender.

      Internet porn wants to have a word with you. Lara Craft wants to have a word with you. But I repeat myself.

    5. Re:Same problem as always by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      There ARE people who hate some women just because they work in the game industry. They see a change in a game company's direction and blame it on the women involved, never mind that customers as a whole have been changing. They may be few in number but they seem to make a lot of noise, and they're not being shushed.

    6. Re:Same problem as always by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the context of a fan of your game offering polite minor criticism then yes, women should just shut the fuck up about the shit they have to deal with, as should men. The correct response to "Hello, I enjoyed your post but disagree on this minor issue, could you elaborate" is not "WOMEN ARE OPPRESSED YOU HORRIBLE MAN! EVERYONE LOOK AT THIS LOSER TRYING TO TALK TO ME!"

    7. Re:Same problem as always by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't fix that by shushing all men though. All you are doing then is alienating potential allies.

    8. Re:Same problem as always by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please show a link with real proof those letters existed? I've found zero evidence in my search that they did. Further, if they did (again, I have found no evidence thus far), that could literally be one person with an agenda. Is one person a "movement" or "campaign"? Is one poorly scripting internet poster an army? This follows a very heavy handed agenda and would play perfectly into the hands of those who are pushing it. This does not pass the smell test.

    9. Re:Same problem as always by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are troll armies targeting anyone with any visibility online
      (for that matter there's troll armies targeting random people with little visibility to)

      being targeted by trolls has nothing to do with being female and everything to do with being visible online.

      what makes people say 'shut up the fuck up' is her trying to make it about being female, when it clearly is not.

      and by the way trolls armies will as a general modus of operandi throw shit at you till they see what sticks in your craw ... then throw more of whatever sticks in your craw.

      Namecalling and stereotyping is easy, it can be done to everyone in one way or another.
      When trolls find that some particular form of it pushes your buttons, and makes you flip out... they're going to have a lot of fun pushing that particular button.
      It's not generally fueled by genuine racist/misogynistic/anti-whatever sentiment, it's mostly just 'we want to annoy you and we find this approach works for annoying you'

  42. Feminists, good intent but crap methods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not really funny how feminists have been having the opposite effect with their idiotic methodologies. Feminists have good intent but their methods and strategies are all shit. Sex-negative feminists especially are the Westboro Baptist Church equivalents, common puritanism included.
    The best example is the war against sexualization and "objectification" with gamers. There is not a single study which supports the idea that sexualizing women in video games leads to the creation of rapists, mainly because gamers are stuck at their homes releasing their frustrations and steam through their massive abundance of hobbies and mediums which also take a shitload of their lifespan and attention to be able to care about real women.
    The end result turned out like this:
    Feminists only made a bunch of gamer nerds who are non-rapists mad and angry, while the male feminists born out of this conflict turned out to be the rapists.
    A look at the recent few years show disproportionately that male feminists are the only ones being outed as rapists, NeoGAF owner as an example.
    Feminists alienated a benign collective while in the process creating their own rapists. This is a sign of poor strategy, poor thinking, and poor ideology, which only damaged the innocent but resolved no problems. The innocent were feminists who fucked themselves over and gamer nerds who were at peace in their caves being prodded and undermined by a misplaced belief and concept among feminists. It's a pretty fucked up situation.
    It's fucked up to the point that Feminism has managed to alienate Centrists and Moderate Liberals. That's already a sign of an urgent need of restructuring, purging some concepts, and repair of feminism which is obviously a leaking boat filled with electrical wires whipping everywhere.

    1. Re:Feminists, good intent but crap methods by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The problem isn't feminism. The problem is that some people use the label "feminist" to con people out of money, much like others use religion for the same purpose. If their con job is called out, they call prosecution and play the misogynist card as a thought-terminating cliché, hoping (often successfully) that their narrative will work.

      This is the main problem feminism currently has, especially with its own supporters.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Feminists, good intent but crap methods by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Yep. It is about money and power and those believing in the cause are used as just useful idiots. And yes, same with religion and other similar things.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    3. Re:Feminists, good intent but crap methods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you define yourself by a -ism, this is always a problem. Ideological thinking is always a problem. I never understood why people choose by themselves to impair their freedom of thinking.

      Feminism, Nazism, fascism, patriotism, communism, capitalism, ...

      Hard to find anything of sane finishing in -ism.

    4. Re:Feminists, good intent but crap methods by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      A German comedian once said "If you know who the enemy is, it gives your day some structure". I guess he's right, when people know what to hate, they feel better about themselves because it allows them to externalize hatred they might otherwise have to internalize.

      In other words, as long as you have someone to blame that isn't you, you can get by without antidepressants.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  43. Re: Deserves the firing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The joke is that the channers mostly don't think the internet should affect the real world.
    But because for some reason people let it, they take full advantage of that and troll the shit out of everyone.
    They all forget the #1 rule: don't feed the troll, and are even doubling down on it and saying that you should feed the troll.
    The trolls will obviously grow more and more.

  44. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    more like
    *gun violence ensues*
    lets duhh shut down science researching cuz it gives daa gunz #wewuzkangs

  45. Re: Deserves the firing. by aticus.finch · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Employers need to stop bending over and letting the mob fuck them in the ass

    Maybe we should tell James Damore that?

  46. Re:Deserves the firing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem with Twitter is that it is a platform for superficial surface-level thinking, and whoever uses it has their mental capacities and potential reduced to that level making them incapable of holding conversations with depth and substance. Incidentally the biggest Twitter users are feminists and their arguing methods always boil down to these definitive traits shaping them. Constructive debate which covers as many angles as possible objectively is becoming a near-extinct virtue.

  47. Hire a narrative writer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's not remotely how I read it, AmiMoJo. A game writer went "oh look what I have to put up with just because I'm female", which wasn't remotely an issue right up until she (and nobody else!) made it one. That's not "being a bit rude", that by now has become deeply identity-politicised and, to borrow a term from the SJW crowd, is toxic behaviour.

    Predictable AmiMoJo predictably tries to give it a predictable spin. My sole reaction is "oh right, you too."

    And yeah, if you stir up shit like that, then you stir up 4chan trolls and other infantile lowlife scum. Birds of a feather, etc.

  48. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most Germans did not know what happened in the concentration camps during WW2, much less approved of it. Those that did question what was happening over there publicly ended up in camps themselves.

  49. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by jythie · · Score: 1, Informative

    Part of the original griping was that 'hissy fit' only ever seems to apply to women. When a guy tears down a user like that they usually end up getting neutral to positive feedback.

  50. Double standard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What bugs me the most about this whole debacle is that online journalism is still trying to support Jessica a week after it happened and say that this is not how employees should be let go, yet when the Subnautica sound designer got fired months ago, online journalists seemed to encourage and support the firing: https://kotaku.com/subnautica-dev-fired-over-hateful-statements-1822746373

    If you don't want mob rule to get game developers fired, you've got to oppose it in all circumstances, not accept it when it fires someone you don't like, and then chastise it when it fires someone you do like.

  51. Too Much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh man, too much. If you, %LONELYINDIVIDUAL do this to a wrong person, they will find your %HOMEBASE and make it belong to %THEM. Just too much, dude.

  52. Re: Deserves the firing. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Well, maybe employers will finally notice that just because a bunch of internet trolls get worked up over someone, whether that someone "deserves" it in the eyes of some assholes, this ain't no reason to fire him or her.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  53. This is fake news by ma1wrbu5tr · · Score: 4, Informative

    I have been following this since it started. I have yet to see any evidence whatsoever of the '%FEMALENAME' letters that are being referenced in blogs, social media, etc. Until I see a pastebin, photocopy, or something published by an actual company who received it, I'm filing that under "shit-that-never-happened".
    The facts in this that we KNOW to be true are as follows. 1: Price received some feedback she didn't like. 2: She got offended over nothing and reacted badly. 3: She and a colleague were fired.
    In the real world, a business' bread-and-butter are its customers. (This is doubly true for entertainment related businesses) Treat them badly, and your business suffers. Treat them badly a lot and do it publicly, it suffers seriously. GW2 was hemorrhaging players already and Ms. Price's writing was likely playing a part. I uninstalled it about 6 months ago myself after playing for years.

    --
    Why can't we go back to using jumpers to configure slot adapter cards? Why? I say!
    1. Re:This is fake news by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Until I see a pastebin

      Fuck me, that's your standard of proof?!

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:This is fake news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with a pastebin? If someone posts an entire email complete with headers, that's pretty good proof. Sure, it could be faked - but it could be faked if posted ANYWHERE. And it beats the current proof, which is none.

      I don't believe any of this is happening either. There's no evidence, nothing. And %FEMALENAME is a bit on the nose. This sounds a lot like people latching onto current hysteria to try and drum up support for "their side" after realizing that the majority of people don't like them.

      So until there's evidence, I agree with the OP - this is shit-that-never-happened.txt material.

    3. Re:This is fake news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't matter if anyone used a template with %FEMALENAME. She was the one who started using sexist slurs for no reason. That she got some sexist reactions in return isn't any better, but nor does it justify what she did. TFA tries to use these sexist reactions in her favor, which is ridiculous.

    4. Re:This is fake news by serviscope_minor · · Score: 0

      Fuck me, that's your standard of proof?!

      No, I demand a SCRENSHOTTED pastebin. Nothing less will satisfy me.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    5. Re:This is fake news by squiggleslash · · Score: 0

      I demand a YOUTUBE VIDEO that TALKS about a screenshotted pastebin with the title SOMETHING OR OTHER BUSTED! (which should be in large comic sans text over the preview frame)

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    6. Re:This is fake news by serviscope_minor · · Score: 0

      Nearly but not quite good enough. The talking must be accompanied by a link in the video that's supposed to point to the screenshot but actually 503s. 404 isn't acceptable.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    7. Re:This is fake news by Solandri · · Score: 1

      The ironic thing about this entire incident to me is that what Price experienced, fair or not, is basically the employment world that men have lived in for the last couple decades. Stepping on eggshells for fear of doing something that might offend some woman, who could file a sexual harassment claim against them and get them fired.

      I'm a firm believer that offense has to be intended by the person making the comment for it to be discrimination (be it misogyny or misandry). If you set the benchmark as whether the person hearing the comment was offended, you create a logically inconsistent process. As your program to stamp out discrimination succeeds, more people grow up never learning certain slurs and stereotypes. But because your system is based on whether someone was offended, someone who does remember those slurs gets offended. When they report their offense, an innocent person is punished for violating some rule they never knew existed. That's already happened with racism. And you end up punishing people whose only crime was that your program to stamp out discrimination was successful . The only rule which is logically consistent is to punish behavior intended to be offensive. A much more difficult standard to prove, but the only one which makes logical sense.

      Unfortunately, we live in a world (or at least a media) that's decided that offense should measured based on how listeners interpret what you say. And by that standard, Price was hung with the same rope used to hang many a man before her (someone interpreted her statements as sexist and were offended).

    8. Re:This is fake news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't matter if anyone used a template with %FEMALENAME. She was the one who started using sexist slurs for no reason.

      Someone who was a women got pissed off at being patronised, so any other game developer with a %FEMALENAME should have angry letters robomailed to her employer demanding she's fired? Seems reasonable to me.

    9. Re:This is fake news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, you're right. If Brianna Wu saw this post, I'm sure she would quickly write the requested pastebin and link it as proof.

  54. The problem is that I trust no media anymore by aepervius · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seeing how many of them were springing up to defend price, and seeing how easy it is for anybody, male, female, whichever , to set up a fake email campaign and make it look like a badly organized MRA thing, and we know that both side at some point not only boasted they were doxing the other side, but some troll also boasted he made both side fight harder... I am watching such pretend campaign with a wary eye. It could be male incel idiot trully wanting to fire female, it could be troll seeing the great way to shit everywhere and make people reacts, or it could be feminist seeing a great occasion to muck things up by pretending being MRA sending letter. Who knows ? Nobody unless you really catch the one doing it and check what was their reason for it.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  55. No excuses in this time of equality. by Sqreater · · Score: 1

    Women's privilege, which lets women do and say things men cannot, must end in a time of equality. And trying to pin the problem on men is just more of what I call cherchez l'home, or search for the man behind the woman's bad behavior, speech, or attitude. If you cannot turn the genders around and find the speech and behavior acceptable, it isn't acceptable, period. And what man can make up words and phrases to attack women? We can't without the same kind of consequences she is having. It is time for equality to mean equality, not equality and special privileges.

    --
    E Proelio Veritas.
    1. Re:No excuses in this time of equality. by gweihir · · Score: 1

      If you cannot turn the genders around and find the speech and behavior acceptable, it isn't acceptable, period.

      And that is the only standard that counts. Female sexism is just as despicable, repulsive and toxic as male sexism.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  56. Tired of hearing about this childish lady by Chewbacon · · Score: 2

    She couldâ(TM)ve agreed to disagree professionally and left it at that. Ignored further inquiries or insults. But no, sheâ(TM)s a triggered child and had to lash out as a representative of her company.

    I work for one of the largest healthcare industry companies in the world and while we are encouraged to be participate on social media, we are not allowed to argue with others or defend the company other than offering to report complaints. I comment on my companyâ(TM)s posts, but I donâ(TM)t respond to other people even if itâ(TM)s positive as shit can get so twisted.

    --
    Chewbacon
    The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
    1. Re:Tired of hearing about this childish lady by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I can see why, that "â(TM)" instead of ' looks silly.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Tired of hearing about this childish lady by Chewbacon · · Score: 1

      Suppose it'll be the style until /. devs decide to fix it the issue. Maybe it is intended to distract readers/commenters/ACs.

      --
      Chewbacon
      The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
    3. Re:Tired of hearing about this childish lady by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Odd. What magic trick makes my apostrophes work out?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Tired of hearing about this childish lady by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Odd. What magic trick makes my apostrophes work out?

      Typing them with 1970s-era technology?

    5. Re:Tired of hearing about this childish lady by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Odd. What magic trick makes my apostrophes work out?

      Turning off the "smart quotes" feature on your phone, or whatever you use to post. The only quote characters that will work are U+0022 and U+0027.

    6. Re:Tired of hearing about this childish lady by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Must've been better tech if it managed to put men on the moon but today's can't manage to make text appear in a way that's legible.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:Tired of hearing about this childish lady by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simpler, not better. The point is that /. isn't using it and practically everyone else is.

  57. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by c6gunner · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's great that you've managed to reduce massive numbers of humanity into broad caricatures which you can hate unreservedly. Such attitudes never turn out badly.

  58. Not fired for accusing someone of mansplaining by najajomo · · Score: 4, Informative

    'Jessica Price was fired last week after she accused a Twitter user of "mansplaining"' No she wasn't forced for "mansplaining": ref:

    'After a long AMA on the Guild Wars 2 Reddit, Jessica Price; a writer for ArenaNet, went on to Twitter to post a 25-part essay on how she comes up with stories, and what is relevant as far as stories in todays MMO's. (Very rough synopsis, quite a good read.)

    After posting the essay, many community members chimed in to thank Price on sharing her views, and how insightful the read was, with one very popular community member; who has his own NPC inside of Guild Wars 2, commenting on the essay hoping to be able to start a civil and polite conversation with, one of his favorite writers. (He denotes this in his Twitch stream before the Twitter debacle)

    The attempt however at starting a polite and civil conversation with the ArenaNet Writer, ended in Price slandering and defaming the community member as a sexist who is trying to mans-plain the job to her, even after the community member apologized for trying to start a civil conversation. (Community member posted a total of 2 Replys to Price, the first being the initial polite conversation starter, the second the apology for attempting communication.)

    The next day on July 5th (This all occurred on July 4th), ArenaNet's CEO Mike O' Brian released a statement on a Guild Wars 2 Reddit post stating that Jessica Price and another ArenaNet member have been fired for harassment of an community member, when no such harassment was necessary
    .'

    1. Re:Not fired for accusing someone of mansplaining by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Ah, well. Some "professionals" cannot stand questions regarding their work. It points to a character flaw. Any real professional is happy do discuss their work, their rationales, their insights and their limits because they care about the subject and not about appearing as some kind us supreme, infallible expert that must not be questioned. I mean, what was she thinking how people would react? And if somebody states a counterpoint and asks for clarification, that is just normal, civilized discourse.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:Not fired for accusing someone of mansplaining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jessica was fired for calling the guy an 'asshat'. The other developer was fired for leaking upcoming content.

  59. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's not universal.
    If you follow the teachings of Christ alone and ignore all the other optional bullshitters in the Bible, you will suddenly follow the words of a pacifist whose worst crime was flipping a few merchant tables and you will still be Christian (with emphasis on Christ).
    If you follow the teachings of Buddhism and Buddha you will still be peaceful towards all life unless you meet with a force trying to exterminate you and life around you as a self-defense measure. That's the Buddhists in Myanmar who tolerated every religion in the world including Christian idiocy, meeting with something so far worse than ever experienced that they had to make an exception for it - Islam.
    If you follow the teaching of Islam, you follow the teachings of a guy named Muhammad whose head was once filled by shit by a bunch of Christian monks when he was little, who then went to invent Islam from that experience, who then went to wage over 60 war campaigns, sacked cities, perpetrated atrocities, married and had sex with an underage girl, enslaved people of all races including blacks, and was generally a god damn demon. You can't ignore Muhammad to focus on the teachings of the less violent people in the Quran and be Muslim, but you can ignore the retards in the Bible while only listening to the Pacifist Christ and still be Christian. The difference is pretty fucking big.
    So no, it's not universal. It's dependent on how big of a loophole we are dealing with and how rooted that loophole is in the core definition of a religion. Because Christ himself never said anything about stoning and killing gays, Spain and Netherlands were the first countries to legalize gay marriage without any violence or gay-bashing and killing every happening at a time when both countries had majority Christian populations (even more so for Spain to who Christianity is deeply related to their Independence and politics since they were slaves to Muslims).
    The same will never happen with Islam because Muhammad can't be ignored, if you ignore Muhammad then you are no longer following Islam but rather the unaltered Christianity or Judaism which he modified into what is known as Islam.

  60. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Cite examples, or stfu.

  61. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    stop spouting utter bullshit..

    remember both her and a guy got fired for the same shit...

  62. Bares no responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "[S]he lost her job and bares no responsibly for the mob...]

    Oh? Then what did she bare?

    Learn to spell, moran.

  63. Ooh. Look! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A tempest in a teapot.

    Let me "mansplain" that nobody gives a fuck.

  64. Lesson: Sexists are scum by gweihir · · Score: 1

    And that goes for both genders. For some reason, many female sexists were not seen as sexist and that is stopping now. Good.

    Maybe we can stop listening to these people altogether, regardless of form, size of shape. Same for racists. It is always only about elevating themselves and putting down others.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  65. Title correction by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

    BTW, editor, I'm pretty sure that title makes more sense as:

    Game Company Receives Complaints About Bad Example Sent By '%FEMALENAME'

    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  66. And of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot users LOVE what those trolls did.

    1. Re:And of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They (aside from the -1s that I mostly didn't read) mostly said "yes, she was insulting a customer, so she probably deserved to be fired". Most mentions (which were few) of the trolling said it wasn't right to do.

      But then indicting the majority for the minority's actions is getting to be pretty typical online.

  67. SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's a very long post about Price, but she lost her job and bares no responsibly for the mob that used her firing to instigate an attack on other random women.

    "Bears", and while she's not responsible for the mob's actions, certainly her actions (and not her being) turn out to have been the trigger for a mob of idiots to go on harassing other women. While I don't condone any of this, it's fairly clear why it happened: Someone threw oil on what turns out to have been a smoldering fire. And now it burns. Whoops.

    It's a bit like dropping a smoldering cigarette butt in a dry forest. Many times it'll just go out. Sometimes, even if you stamp it out then walk away, might still cause the entire forest to burn down. If you know the forest is dry, even lighting up a ciggie there is criminally irresponsible. (Hard to grasp concept for some. How about you?)

    The real problem here is not one person who was punished for some rude tweets,

    For some identity politics-flavoured toxic tweets. It was well beyond mere rudeness. Which explains (but doesn't justify, thanks) the counter-trolling. But I see you mostly post to make your spin stick. Again, "oh, it's AmiMoJo again. Oh well."

    it's we have a mob attacking people because of their gender.

    That's actually not quite correct. The mob is trolling to see if they can get people fired, which happens to be aimed at females because the trigger happens to be female. If she'd been male then the barrage of bot-complaints would've been against male game designers. I know it's not on your agenda to admit this, but I'll point it out to you anyway.

    It's important to publicize it and develop countermeasures so that there are not more victims.

    Knowing what's going on ought to be enough. If your employer would fire you without first talking through the complaints then you're better off not working for that employer. In an internet age employers cannot afford to let their valuable human capital up and vanish because some random troll sent a truckload of automated complaints over, well, nothing. If they succumb, the company eventually succumbs.

    It would also be great if we could understand the people behind this and their motivations. Some people want to write it off as general trolling, like it's some innate property of the internet that just happens spontaneously, but there is a years old pattern of attacks on women specifically with deeply misogynistic motivations.

    Go hang out on 4chan and report your findings, there's a good little researcher.

    To be clear: 4chan has "a years old pattern of attacks" against just about anyone, everyone, regardless of any single thing. They'll hate you just so they have an excuse to hate you, until their attention span runs out and then they'll hate something else for a while.

    Again, not on your agenda to admit it, but 4chan's history is pretty clear to just about everyone else here.

    1. Re:SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by arth1 · · Score: 0

      Again, "oh, it's AmiMoJo again. Oh well."

      Oh, cut him some slack. White knighting may be his only chance to get some poontang.

    2. Re:SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah. He's a Pakistani in Britain. Every date he gets is cancelled for fear of an acid attack if he doesn't get what he wants.

    3. Re:SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by arth1 · · Score: 2

      Nah, AmiMoJo is usually a fairly level-headed guy, it's just his extreme predictability when it comes to whiteknighting that gets a bit grating. I shouldn't have said what I did, but he manages to come across as it doesn't matter what people do or say - if it's a woman saying it, it must be defended no matter what. He's the person I think most likely to whiteknight Elizabeth Bathory.
      That rubbed me the wrong way, and I went for the man and not the ball. Apologies for that. (But not for thinking whiteknighting and other on-behalf-of-indignation is exactly as bad as what it tries to fight.)

    4. Re: SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are arguments that the contemporary accusations against Bathory were fabricated, and it is certain a lot of the developed story about her is exaggerated at best.

      Look it up. If you're curious.

    5. Re:SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Oh, cut him some slack. White knighting may be his only chance to get some poontang.

      Couldn't you social justive warriors please learn what things like "white knighting" mean before using them?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    6. Re:SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I had to Google who she was, but jeez how could anyone defend her?

      I'm any case, I think the original tweets were an overreaction and uncalled for. But so was firing her and the other guy.

      I don't really get the white knight allegations... I mean, we don't even live on the same continent, I'm happily married and the only "reward" I get from all this is a bunch of -1 mods.

      If it's anything I'd say it's annoyance at the narrative that gets pushed around here, and my Quixote-like delusion that posting this crap on the internet where someone might find it at -1 matters. I mean, it's 00:05 and I'm posting this nonsense...

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm any case, I think the original tweets were an overreaction and uncalled for. But so was firing her and the other guy.

      Drink! AmiMojo still defending the woman's side!

      I don't really get the white knight allegations

      Drink! AmiMojo not getting why people call him the shit that he gets called, just like a racist who wonders why people keep calling him a racist!

      If it's anything I'd say it's annoyance at the narrative that gets pushed around here

      Drink! AmiMojo calling opinions he doesn't like a "narrative", as if there's some kind of conspiracy.

      Yup, "oh, it's AmiMojo again"

    8. Re:SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't get the white knighting allegations? I've made this and couple other anonymous snipes at you because you misrepresented what people were saying, posted the link to your "source" (only after much prodding), the link clearly didn't support what you were saying, then you continued on in the future announcing your claim like it was well supported fact, all to defend SJW misrepresentations of something. So now you've got a couple people on your ass for that kind of bullshit, maybe reconsider if there's not actually a reason for that.

    9. Re:SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Care to point out where the error was displayed in that quote, moron? Or is it you that don't understand what white knights are?

      Also stop trying to just blat out "sjw" because it is currently the meme swearword in this thread.

      You DO know what people can be assholes, right? That socialjustice isn't why they're an asshole? Or is your assholishness sourced from it too?

      So two terms for you to research with a grown up: SJW and white knight.

    10. Re:SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by RedK · · Score: 1

      If it's anything I'd say it's annoyance at the narrative that gets pushed around here

      Yes, we are annoyed at the msmash narrative pushed here, by known Internet trolls and liars like Kotaku and the Marxist game blogs, and then repeated as gospel by you.

      Maybe you guys could actually look into things rather than take statements by "poor defenseless, but nonetheless strong and independant women!" at face value all the time.

      Gamergate was about Nathan Grayson's unethical journalism until the victims turned it into something about "women being attacked". No dipshits, this is about the guy who wrote the piece without disclosing he was having sex with a person he was giving prominence to. Who that person is doesn't matter. What matters is Grayson's blatant disregard for proper journalistic practices.

      Or at least admit what you're doing with Rock Paper Shotgun isn't journalism. Don't pretend you're the "gaming press" if you're just a crappy PR agency that gives coverage to anyone willing to give you favors.

      --
      "Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
      Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
    11. Re:SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Marxist game blogs

      You owe me a new keyboard, mine has coffee in it now.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:SJW spin in full AmiMoJo swing by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Also stop trying to just blat out "sjw" because it is currently the meme swearword in this thread.

      Wow you sound like a real SJW for saying that. What about my free speech?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  68. I miss the days of handles too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The most ironic part being that on IRC now even if people are just cybering and never planning to meet, there are still the asl idiots (who have been around since irc existed in the 80s/90s) demanding those details rather than just having fun and then going their separate ways.

  69. Brianna Wu by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

    The most trustworthy name on the internet...

  70. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is rich. I've got a PhD in Chemical Engineering, and both myself and a couple of colleagues (i.e. other faculty members and researchers) are NRA certified handgun instructors. We've lost more IQ points during a night of drinking during the weekly poker game than you had in the first place.

  71. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why would you blame religion unless you are an ignorant piece of shit?

    It is YOU who is the ignorant piece of shit, motherfucker.

    Go suck some cock and quit pretending you know how the world works : you do NOT.

  72. What's the solution then by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    to address inequality? Racism and Sexism really are things. It's not like we've eliminated them completely from human thought and we can just go on our way. Just having laws against racial and sexual discrimination is technically 'identity politics'. Sure, you can take it too far (there's lots of whack jobs on the left and the right wing media spends an unhealthy amount of time reminding us of them) but when somebody's a racist or sexist you don't stop pointing out they're racist or sexist just because a few whack jobs want to cut everybody's dicks off.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:What's the solution then by aticus.finch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      to address inequality? Racism and Sexism really are things. It's not like we've eliminated them completely from human thought and we can just go on our way. Just having laws against racial and sexual discrimination is technically 'identity politics'. Sure, you can take it too far (there's lots of whack jobs on the left and the right wing media spends an unhealthy amount of time reminding us of them) but when somebody's a racist or sexist you don't stop pointing out they're racist or sexist just because a few whack jobs want to cut everybody's dicks off.

      Well, we pointed out that Jessica Price was sexist. What more do you want?

    2. Re:What's the solution then by fafalone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The solution is to actually pursue equality, and accept that equality of opportunity does not guarantee equality of outcome. *That* is the problem people are having with progressives/SJWs; they clearly don't stand for equality, they want special treatment; to switch who gets the privelege. You can see that in such fantastic claims like "Why color-blind meritocracy is a tool of white supremacy", never willing to address the origins of the inequality, just claiming it's racism and sexism and trying to enforce it at the end by giving special treatment. Setting up justice systems where only what the women feels matters, evidence and elements of crime be damned-- Title IX kangaroo courts, allowing expert witnesses in real courts that literally say 'the womens lies prove she's telling the truth". Turning simple, obvious truths like "men and women may be biologically predisposed to different career preferences" into 'burn the heretics who dare say that', but only ever complaining about white collar, highly paid jobs-- never about the lack of women in waste management or oil rigging-- somehow I don't think it's sexism that's keeping them out of those fields.
      All of that is standard progressive/SJW ideology, and it's very alienating to the rest of the left who just want equality. And just watch as this comment gets modded into oblivion for daring to point it out,

  73. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Probably because the guy then doesn't go on to complain about how much he hates the entire demographic the company he works for is targeting.

  74. It was also just white dudes by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm assuming you're in your 40s. Maybe 50s or 60s. The reason why there was no gender was it was 99% white guys. The reason for that is, well, there weren't a lot of minorities in technology because especially 20-30 years ago (especially if you're old enough to remember BBS) minorities were in even worse shape than they were today and they didn't have a lot of access to tech, especially the expensive tech from the 90s (anyone remember building a 486 DX100 in 1995 for $400+ and being amazed at how "cheap" it was?). As for women, well, the places I hung out weren't exactly friendly to them. Lots of "Locker room" talk; which to be blunt was mostly thinly veiled misogyny from nerds (which I'm embarrassed to say my younger self took part in).

    Tech got cheap. Really cheap. Like, I can get a laptop online for about $100. $250 if I want a nice new one. $50 if I'll settle for a desktop. Also, the internet became a global communication tool and software was written to get non-nerds online. Finally, the old nerd caves (like /.) are full of bitter old coots like me and, well, we're just not as much fun to be around.

    On the plus side you've got a _lot_ more folks online. A lot of those folks are helpful and good folks. I've been able to do tons of projects thanks to them.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:It was also just white dudes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bullshit. I'm 42 and ran a small BBS and was into the BBS scene, in a small town, in Colorado. We had a few meetups, and there were people from all walks of life, both genders (and probably a few extra) and all races, as represented by our local community. It certainly wasn't all white. It was like 60% latinx and other minorities and the BBS group seemed to roughly match this. And you know what? Nobody cared about that, the OP has a point, it was just a bunch of nerds, race was a non-factor.

      Neither was cost... we were poor as FUCK. As poor as everyone else. I had to beg my dad for a second phone line to run our BBS and I only got that for a few months, after that I had to time-share on the main line and run it only after dark. We bought a computer from RENT-A-CENTER. Anyone could, and did, that's where all the poor people got their appliances (and it's part of WHY they were poor but that's another topic). BBS knowledge just "got around" indiscriminately as it tends to because it was cool and people helped each other and weren't giant racist assholes.

      Then, much, much later, everyone decided to get all racist about literally everything and ruined society.

    2. Re:It was also just white dudes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I'm assuming you're in your 40s. Maybe 50s or 60s. The reason why there was no gender was it was 99% white guys.

      I'm in my 40s, and I _do_ remember the BBS days. I assure you that in the early to mid 1990s, it _wasn't_ 99% "white guys". I'm assuming you're in your 20s or 30s, and actually weren't there. I was.

      I'd guesstimate that it was maybe 75% white guys, 15% white women, and maybe 10% minorities. I was part of the hacker underground during this time, and I distinctly remember attending a con, and some (rather racist) people being shocked that one of the hackers was black.

      Just to back this up, MOD (Masters of Deception), a hacker group from the 1990s was mostly minorities, and LOD (Legion Of Doom!) was I believe all "white guys" as you call them. Supposedly there was some kind of racist garbage going on between some of the MOD/LOD guys, mostly because some of the LOD guys were kind of racist.

      And yes, there were women. Not many, but they existed. It wasn't zero. I still know several of these women today. I think they'd be offended at your idea that they weren't even there!

      Sorry buddy, but your narrative doesn't work. The internet HAS changed. I also distinctly remember several stories about black people really liking the Internet in the 80s/90s because nobody knew they were black.

      So get off your high horse, and get on some reality truth serum. You either weren't actually ON the internet in the 1990s, or you never actually met anyone in person.

    3. Re:It was also just white dudes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you are grossly wrong there, mate, and only see the tree where you live from the forest of the rest of the world. Here in Australia during the late 80's & early 90's it was known as the, "Asian invasion". More asians here had access to computers and bbs than the, "white guys", by the greatest percentage. I can attest to the number at my schools and I had/have no issue being a part of this mixed culture. It was only a problem to the much older generations. I am now in my 40's.

    4. Re:It was also just white dudes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny you use those numbers. My first 486 DX was bought in 1995 for ~$100 at a county auction. Still had the judge's casefiles on it and he left the modem in the carry bag!

      I was online instantly as a teenage trailer park white boy with a paper route that paid 8 dollars a week. Don''t give me that garbage about minorities being so incapable they were unable to scrounge up 100 bucks.

    5. Re:It was also just white dudes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Minorities? White Europeans make up 8% of the world population. Who's the minority again?

    6. Re:It was also just white dudes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My experience of tech in the 90s is not remotely like what you describe. I'm Canadian but my entry into the tech industry at a dot-com start-up beginning in 1998 in Ontario was in an office environment in which white men were the minority. The men were mostly Asian. And the majority of the white male programmers were immigrants who had fled the Bosnian war. Women were "under represented" in dev & ops, but they were present in both. In fact, in one of my entry positions I worked directly under a female network admin.

      But what I remember most about those days was that no one cared about the skin colour or genitals of their co-workers. We were too busy focusing on doing our jobs.

    7. Re:It was also just white dudes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The reason why there was no gender was it was 99% white guys. The reason for that is, well, there weren't a lot of minorities in technology because especially 20-30 years ago (especially if you're old enough to remember BBS) minorities were in even worse shape than they were today and they didn't have a lot of access to tech
      [huge fucking citation needed].

    8. Re:It was also just white dudes by strikethree · · Score: 0

      I'm assuming you're in your 40s. Maybe 50s or 60s. The reason why there was no gender was it was 99% white guys.

      That is an interesting way to interpret things. Since I lived through those years, I am going to ask you to provide proof that what you claim is the reason behind "no gender".

      My experience was that we DID NOT CARE about gender (or race or anything else that stupid people care about) because gender was absolutely fucking irrelevant.

      This is why I am going to ask you to back up your statement. The people who invented and/or participated in the early Internet were smart enough to not care about irrelevancies. It was the hordes of stupid people, aka Eternal September, that brought this type of stupidity to the Internet.

      I know this is rude, but since you are clearly not of the more intelligent type, I will spell it out for you: You are a fucking moron and YOU are one of the reasons the Internet has devolved. Give it up. Only stupid people care about irrelevancies.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    9. Re:It was also just white dudes by Cederic · · Score: 1

      The reason why there was no gender was it was 99% white guys

      That'll be why I still meet up regularly with the girl I met online in '92, went to the wedding in Texas of the Chinese girl I met online in '91, had women from Sweden and Norway come and visit me in '96, lived for a while with a girl I met online in '92 and have since met people face to face that I first met online, and that represent a broad mix of races, genders, nationalities and sexual preferences.

      As for women, well, the places I hung out weren't exactly friendly to them.

      They were nonetheless using the internet, and nobody gave a shit.

  75. Um... these are public figures by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    they're typically well known people at game studios. What's more, the ones in this story are being targeted for their gender. They're not just a collection of bytes. They're not anonymous /. posters. They're employees at a company expected to function in a customer service role. They can't "shut the fuck up". It's literally their job to engage with and talk with the community. The only way they can "shut the fuck up" is if they leave the industry, which, well, seems to be the goal here....

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  76. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course you have:
    1. You're NRA members.
    2. You drink.
    3. You gamble.

  77. Tools use sexism/racism to justify being a tool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Jessica Price is a tool. The people trolling her and others are also tools. Tools beget tools.

    There's really nothing else to the story. Yes, there's the facade of sexism/racism that's become endemic to practically every conversation we have today (for the worse), but that just seems to be a way for tools like Jessica Price to justify being a tool.

    Jessica (and her ilk) are clearly just toxic people. There's always been toxic people in the world, but we haven't until recently had a socially acceptable way of being toxic. Today it seems that whenever you can identify an "ism" (sexism, racism, etc), you have some sort of god given right to become a toxic ass-hat to whomever is being accused of the ism. They invented a whole new set of slurs to identify the ism offenders, or defend whatever the anti-ism people believe. Mansplaining, microagressions, trigger warnings, violating "safe spaces", etc. Other toxic people all chime in, creating an anti-ism circle jerk of hate. Then the other "anti-anti-ism" people chime in to try to "correct" the anti-ism people. Rinse, repeat.

    All this seems to do is create MORE toxicity, not less. The identity politicians of the left, and now increasingly of the right now only seem to destroy the very thing they think they're saving, themselves and everyone around them. Everyone just starts to hate everyone else just a little bit more as they dig deeper and deeper into themselves and their own little tiny self.

    Is it really a surprise? The more you start to think about your own little group, the less you think about everyone who isn't you. Some people seem to want to so narrowly define themselves they seem to forget that anyone else outside their own group even matters. Hate breed hate. We seem to have forgotten that.

    It's terribly upsetting to me. It's even more terribly upsetting that this is largely coming from "the left". This attitude is ANYTHING but liberal. It's fascist. Liberal is _supposed_ to mean an acceptance of people. not this toxic rejection of anyone and anything that doesn't fit into your world view that's taken hold. The extreme left and the extreme right have itself around in the political spectrum, and become nearly one in the same. Call it libro-con neo-facism.

    Can't we just build a bunch of rockets and send these people off into deep space? Then they can fight each other to their hearts content in and endless battle for Justice. Just tell them we're doomed, and send them off to Mars. On second thought, Mars isn't far away enough. How about the Andromeda galaxy?

  78. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    by definition, religious fanatics are the absolute minority. seems like you people hate every minority equally. it's not religion, it's the radical 1% of the 1% of everything that sucks.

  79. Oh really by Jiro · · Score: 2

    This article actually leaves in sufficient facts to contradict the narrative.

    The reason that the reddit user "speaking satirically" comes up is that Polygon was pretending they had found someone who actually believed that, but Polygon accidentally linked to the post where he admits his post was fake. This demonstrates that Polygon knew that the post they linked to was a fake post from their own side, but they deliberately used it anyway as clickbait.

    Furthermore, the claim that "nobody disagreed with him" is a voted into the negatives and deleted. Voting things down is often used to express disagreement.

    The slashdot post is written poorly because it's trying to avoid admitting these things, because "the supposed misogyny among gamers is a false flag operation" contradicts the narrative.

  80. "the left" by i286NiNJA · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These people are "the left" as much as the kkk is "the right".
    Nobody likes these people and all her friends who also get harassment are fellow internet warriors.

    1. Re:"the left" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shhhhhhhh! You're going to shatter their fragile world view if you keep exploding their straw man arguments and exposing them to reality like that!

    2. Re: "the left" by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      The difference being that when the KKK complains about black people, businesses don't fire them. Whereas when "these people" whine about some perceived slight, it's goodbye paycheque.

    3. Re: "the left" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is now a distinct difference between the left, and liberalism.

      You and I are liberals, who belive in equality, freedom of speech, individualism, etc.

      You know... Alt-right literal Hitler Nazi xenophobic racist sexist feckless cunts.

    4. Re:"the left" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Shhhhhhhh! You're going to shatter their fragile world view if you keep exploding their straw man arguments and exposing them to reality like that!

      That would require that they have a certain amount of self-awareness and the ability to critically analyze their own beliefs. In the age of the Internet and cable news channels, echo chambers have become easier to find and easier to live in, and they break down the ability to see the bullshit of their own side.

    5. Re: "the left" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference being that when the KKK complains about black people, businesses don't fire them.

      Considering what happened to Papa John this past weekend, would you like to provide some examples?

    6. Re: "the left" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, literally all of the kkk are Republicans. Same for the neo-nazis. They literally call themselves "the alt right" meaning "conservative, but not necessarily fiscally"

      How is that shit so hard for you idiots to understand?

    7. Re: "the left" by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Sure. You're a weirdo who assumed that "them" meant KKK members (or, more broadly in the context of your example, white dudes making racist statements) whereas I clearly meant that when the KKK complains about black people, businesses don't fire those black people.

    8. Re: "the left" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the moment you realize that the KKK were Democrats. Literally all of them.

      The Republicans freed the slaves. The NRA was first created to arm black people against the Democrats.

      You have been lied to, and worse, it won't change anything knowing that. You're happy being the new KKK.

    9. Re: "the left" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the left treats women and minorities like infants and deny them their autonomy, which is also racism.

      Obama was president, twice...

    10. Re:"the left" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "as she flounced away I gained a better understanding of what the word "herassmeant" referred to in the real world"
      '"

      '

    11. Re:"the left" by Alypius · · Score: 1

      I tend to agree, but it's hard to argue when it's the banshees who are successfully making the rules. #WalkAway.

  81. People at 4chan ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .. children! Sigh. Behave!

  82. The left must be hungry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's eating its own.

  83. To be fair, %FEMALENAME is kind of a shithead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The stories I could tell you about her... Oh, I actually already did.

  84. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you know that whenever you go off on an unhinged, infantile, profanity laced rant that contains no argument whatsoever, you give even more credibility to the post your replying to?

    No? Good, then keep it up.

  85. Wait what? by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

    Since when does Slashdot report on and even wade into internet troll drama? Please. I dunno about other /. users, but I for one do NOT care about this. This isn't even news, it's just tabloid gossip talk. Get this off of here.

  86. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're called "assholes". Not neutral or positive.

  87. She was fired for being a dick. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not because of her groin. If she had NOT been a dick she would not have been fired. Talking about your work on-line and the getting pissy about criticism and calling people chauvinist pigs right of the bat IS bad PR.

  88. You know how dumb the average person is...? by TiggertheMad · · Score: 3, Interesting

    No one knew or cared WHAT you were, just WHO you were.

    Actually, I always got the sense that nobody cared who you were, just that your ideas were good ones. In the early days of Slashdot, there were a lot of really smart people commenting on the stories with a lot of interesting insight to add. Now, every third post seems to be by an AC with a IQ of 80 who feels a need to share their opinion with the world. Articles about quantum computing end up degenerating into Hillary and Trump mud slinging fights. Oh, Intranets.....

    The Internet really went downhill in the 90s when companies like AoL were trying to get everyone in the world online for $14.95 a month. Now the Internet is a pretty good reflection of humanity in general, and it shows.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:You know how dumb the average person is...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eternal September is a bitch, ain't it.

  89. Not only that, but Brianna in particular... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was a Republican shill in her former identity's political life.

    For all we know they're pushing the 'left' to 'far left' with these identity politics stunts to help convince moderates to side with conservative politics. The further left the left is, the less right the right seems, even the extreme right. Really a brilliant tactic from a gay Bush Sr.-supporting 'former' republican.

  90. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by k2r · · Score: 1

    This is a lie.

    The neighbors in Düsseldorf / Germany told my father, who was a child back then, that sticky tape was made of dead Jews and dead Russians.
    They knew.

  91. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Absolutely not. Over my career, I have separated 2 SW engineers and a salesman after they posted a bunch of crap online. Free speech is not consequence free, and it applies equally to men and women

  92. Another side effect of that by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    was a complete lack of tact.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  93. If she'd just been rude by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    and the same level, but without the bit about "mansplaining" would she have lost her job? It's a bit hard to say because she's been a bit of an ass in the past. But I'm not entirely convinced that without the backlash from the opposition to the #metoo movement that she couldn't have just held out until everything blew over.

    Also I can't help but wonder if this had been a bit of sexism from a man (so long as it didn't stray into sexual harassment) if we wouldn't see a lot of defenders arguing that so long as he did his job well it's fine; maybe suggesting he take a class or two in anger management...

    I guess my point is, rudeness isn't what got her fired, angry men were. Now, feel free to continue arguing whether they have a right to be angry. Maybe they do, but OTOH there are probably better things to get angry about.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  94. Wished to be the Genie, wish granted. by Tyr07 · · Score: 1

    You don't get to pick the parts of equality that you want. You get them all.

    I look at this like Aladdin and wishing to be the genie. You wanted everything someone else had, well, you get the shackles that come with it.
    Going to get a bit of a wake up call, the grass isn't as green as you thought it was on the other side, except for the 1%.

  95. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by admin7087 · · Score: 1

    Well, not many talked about the IRA as fundamental Christian terrorists, yet they killed 1,823 people over three decades, and nobody should talk about them in this way. There are always exceptions to the rule, but generally speaking people become terrorists for political reasons, not because of their religion. There are about 1.8 billion Muslims and 2.2 billion Christians on the world. Compare those numbers to the hundreds of terrorists - or maybe thousands, if you're very pessimistic - that are active in the world and it's easy to see that religion can hardly play a major role. Terrorists are basically local politicians without much of a conscience.

  96. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    Well, not many talked about the IRA as fundamental Christian terrorists, yet they killed 1,823 people over three decades, and nobody should talk about them in this way.

    If IRA members had regularly strapped on suicide vests, walked into British cafes, yelled out "Praise Jesus!" and then blown themselves up, I would gladly have referred to them as fundamentalist Christian terrorists. They didn't, so I don't.

    There are always exceptions to the rule, but generally speaking people become terrorists for political reasons, not because of their religion.

    That's a distinction without a difference. The big Abrahamic religions, at the very least, are inherently political. Many others are also.

    There are about 1.8 billion Muslims and 2.2 billion Christians on the world. Compare those numbers to the hundreds of terrorists - or maybe thousands, if you're very pessimistic - that are active in the world and it's easy to see that religion can hardly play a major role.

    Makes sense. There were tens of millions of Nazis, but only a few thousand worked in concentration camps. Clearly Nazism didn't play a major role.

  97. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Buddhists and Jews fighting against the mindless death cult of Islam are not, "a bad thing" my dude. They are our only hope of salvation, and the tip of the spear.

    Or are you pretending that homosexuality, free expression, religious criticism, and being an uppity woman isn't a capital offense in most Islamic countries?

    You're defending pure evil.

  98. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both of you assholes hahaha

  99. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to Pew Research in 2015, 67% of the world's Muslim population believes that DEATH is the appropriate punishment for leaving Islam, and 72% believes DEATH is the appropriate punishment for homosexuality.

    You know... A "minority" of "fanatics".

    Dipshit.

  100. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    cause -> cost
    diffuse -> defuse
    you -> an utter retard

  101. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's great that you've managed to reduce massive numbers of humanity into broad caricatures which you can hate unreservedly. Such attitudes never turn out badly.

    "Social Justice Warriors"
    "Social Junkie Whales"
    "Social Junkpile Wanker"

    ---c6gunner

  102. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by reanjr · · Score: 1

    Most republicans polled think women should get the death penalty for having an abortion. Over 80% believe the world is younger than 6000 years old. When people are asked doctrinal questions, they give doctrinal answers. All that demonstrates is that you don't understand polls.

  103. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    Yeah, you got me. Lightly poking fun at a small subset of the population who engage in one specific type of behaviour is totally the same as lumping multiple disparate groups together for no other reason than that they all disagree with you on something.

  104. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Vapula · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I work as a teacher... As such, I have some restrictions on what I can do outside my work... and I never had to sign any document about that...

    1) no racist attacks (even if the people in front of me act racist, I CAN'T answer in the same terms)
    2) no talks against my school... Even if I see problems with some coworkers, I can't make random posts about it.
    3) no talks about coworkers in front of students (the big taboo)
    4) no "unrespectable behaviour"... this includes being seen drunk in the public space, unfit clothing (no SM-wear in the street or nazi costume or ...)
    and so on...

    I guess that requirements imposed on teachers are bigger than those on gaming company... but clearly, what she posted is unacceptable... She was not on the internet as "Jane Doe" but as "Jessica Price, writer at Arena.Net"... As such, she had only two choices : politely avoiding the conflict or blocking the guy and ignoring him...

    And now, we see people getting pissed off because she got fired... she deserved it... If she can't control her temper online, she should avoid posting !!!

  105. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can't ignore Muhammad to focus on the teachings of the less violent people in the Quran and be Muslim, but you can ignore the retards in the Bible while only listening to the Pacifist Christ and still be Christian.

    But Christ himself said that he was not replacing Jewish law. I guess you can follow some of Christ's teachings, there's certainly some good stuff to be taken away from there, but if you want to follow his example and believe as he did, you need to follow all of the Old Testament.

  106. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    Please don't just make up numbers as you type.

  107. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the socioeconomic and geopolitical roles were reversed, evangelical Christians would be running around blowing themselves up and chopping off heads.

  108. Fake story. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, but there is no foundation for this story. It's made up and the typical anti-gamer outlets have continued to push it without any evidence.

    Also, Arenanet didn't fire Price because of this. They also fired another guy who had been there for thirteen years and he has confirmed this.

    Quit buying into this bullshit. Game journalists are lying fucking hacks as has been evidenced over and over again. Stop promoting their bullshit.

    Also, quit with the "hurr hurr life is hard they tried to get me fire don the internet". Guess what? That's what SJWs do fucking NONSTOP. Say something someone disagrees with on twitter? CALL THEIR EMPLOYEE AND GET THOSE FUCKERS FIRED!

    You all need to fucking grow up. Just because some dipshit voted for trump or doesn't support gay marriage (even in fucking 2018), I'm not going to call their boss or tweet their boss and tattle on them. Who fucking cares if they have a different view point than me? Good for them and shit.

    1. Re:Fake story. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quit buying into this bullshit. Game journalists are lying fucking hacks as has been evidenced over and over again. Stop promoting their bullshit.

      Oh, so it's really about ethics in gaming journalism?

    2. Re:Fake story. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Weaksauce shit, man. Go back to 2014. :P

  109. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by alexgieg · · Score: 2

    Kinda. My great-aunt was a German Red Cross nurse during WW2, and had occasion to help one or two Jews who were being transported in trains to concentration camps. She knew they were being rounded and were being taken to a prison somewhere, but she didn't know of what was being done to them. From her perspective they were all POWs, and very hungry and sick, but that was it.

    I should point out her family was anti-Nazi. Her father, my great-great-father, had ordered her to enter the Red Cross so that she wouldn't be forced to attend Nazi Youth, and insisted she kept her knowledge of Portuguese. They were late 1920's German immigrants to Brazil who really liked it here, and they were visiting Germany when the war broke out, being forced to stay there. That was so effective that, once the Americans took over, she began working for the US military base set up closest to their home.

    So, yeah. Some might have know, probably those who lived closest to concentration camps, but for the majority, including the most antisemitic among them, it was all a huge question mark.

    --
    Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
  110. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You forgot to mention being an Incel too.

  111. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 0

    I don't hate anyone. Why would I want to go through life like that?

    Fact is if your life sucks there is rarely anyone else to blame.

  112. The anon by philmarcracken · · Score: 1

    If you give the anonymous mob what it wants - attention - expect more of them. The social, near primal need to 'group up' in response to threats from women does them no favors online. If the mob targets a man, he will whine and complain and give them only so much attention. But he will never paint a target across all men and say 'look what we have to deal with[as men]'.

    You might want to stop dragging every other woman into bullshit you caused yourself as an individual, because you'll never outnumber the anonymous mob.

  113. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Heir+Of+The+Mess · · Score: 0

    It's morning here in Asia, so people are just starting to read this Slashdot post, and when browsing at threshold 4, the first 7 comments are all yours. Well done! Unfortunately you've also distorted the apparent IQ of Slashdot posters by posting so many comments that are of higher quality than the norm. I generally come here to laugh at the idiots.

    --
    Australian running a company that does C# / C++ / Java / SQL / Python / Mathematica
  114. SJW Propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Price wasn't a victim. She was the abuser over and over and over again. Now. she wants to rewrite history by having her SJW friends spread propaganda, lies and outright misinformation to paint a different narrative. Anet is a very liberal company. Price was a toxic feminist. She's never once apologized to her victim.

  115. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Part of the original griping was that 'hissy fit' only ever seems to apply to women. When a guy tears down a user like that they usually end up getting neutral to positive feedback.

    If the guy uses gender neutral terminology it is very different to what happened here. "You're an idiot" is a very different statement to "you're a typical dumb woman". First gets a stern talking to from your manager, second and you better be ready to find another job. It's not OK for a man to discriminate against a woman just as it's not OK for a woman to discriminate against a man. Both are wrong. Both should get you fired. The fact the SJW crowd think one way is OK but the other deserves a lynch mob is the problem - and let's be real here, the lynch mob "let's get person X fired" approach was started by the SJW crowd it's just the other side has learned and adapted. Reap what you sow.

  116. Re: Deserves the firing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Employers need to stop bending over and letting the mob fuck them in the ass. The Internet isn't n real place. Opinions on the Internet have no value. 4chan should not have the power to affect the real world. People who act as the physical arm of 4chan should not put in C-level positions or in charge of corporate communications.

    Stop being such fucking snowflakes, grow some balls, and figure out how perspective works.

    It's actually quite simple. Reap what you sow. For every one that you tried to get fired from their livelihood there are now 100 trying to get you fired from your livelihood. Enjoy your creation.

  117. Define the rules by chesh1re · · Score: 1

    I share in many sentiments on what I've read here in response. But, the company should not have fired her. It's backing down to mob mentality at the end of the day- And that sort of behaviour needs to be stood up to no matter what side you support. Besides, Hasn't Arena Net heard? On a macro-level, outrage is so commonplace it's starting to become ineffective.

    1. Re:Define the rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Racist? Sexist? Misogynist? Water off a duck's back now.

      It's been used in a hyperbolic way too often to be taken seriously by anyone but those with a Twitter presence for their company's PR.

      Dozens of complaints on Twitter is also millions who aren't there to say "no big deal" on the platform.

  118. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And here you are, writing in defence of the sacking of any and every female developer!

    Strawman. Nobody has suggested sacking any and every female developer except you. You put these extreme words in other peoples mouths then attack them even though they have never suggested anything of the sort. "You don't agree with everything I say? You must want every female developer sacked!". Obvious SJW tactic is obvious. It's what started this whole mess to begin with. SJW didn't like what someone said so fabricated and responded to a sexist attack that just plain didn't exist.

  119. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good one bro, now the ladies will see how much we respect them, and we get to crush allot more puss.

  120. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that like, the opposite of slut shaming?

    And I guess it's tolerated because men are the targets. Seems a little sexists to me, but what do I know.

  121. I read it on the internet, it must be true by sabt-pestnu · · Score: 1

    Looked up your links.

    lolcow.wiki looks like a wiki dedicated to articles of the nature you describe: "the main stream media is all wrong about this." I love how the Brianna Wu page has, as citations, links to comments on sites such as knowyourmeme and twitter. At least one of the links to FBI FOIA results (a more creditable citation) is cited misleadingly, claiming it shows something that it doesn't actually show.

    Some highlights from that page:
    - Nonetheless, Wu retweeted it as if it were credible.
    - Brianna Wu nonetheless tweeted it as a legitimate threat.
    - but Brianna Wu claimed they were legitimate all the same

    Yeah, I don't think your links show anything more than "someone said it on the internet". Sorry. But feel free to provide creditable citations! I'm always willing to listen.

    1. Re:I read it on the internet, it must be true by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I don't think your links show anything more than "someone said it on the internet". Sorry. But feel free to provide creditable citations! I'm always willing to listen.

      I'm not going to go through all the claims in the lolcow.wiki. Too long and too detailed, and misses the forest for the trees. Here's my summary of Brianna "Stayed Home" Wu:

      • "She" inserted herself into the GamerGate issue by making fun of gg'ers.
      • "She", in return, was made fun of on 8chan. One of the posts contained her address and a threat. This post was quickly deleted by mods.
      • "She" went on a hysterical media tour, claiming she had to flee her home.
      • "She" was so afraid for her life, that she posted on Twatter where she would be at a public convention.
      • "She" gave multiple interviews from her home while claiming she was in hiding.
  122. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Follow his actions then, what rules or laws from the old testament did he observe that you consider morally questionable?

  123. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you dumb...?

    Nope, I can speak the leg off a chair. The question is can you read?

    He just wants that women fired ...

    Which woman?!! The only one woman in the entire world with a %FEMALENAME, do you mean? Any or all of the female developers apart from Jessica Price whose employers have been bombarded with demands to fire them ... who? You know, it's almost as if you haven't read the summary above?

    Don't accuse him of sexism ...

    Accuse whom of what?! It's almost as if you haven't read the comment to which you are replying.

    ... you fucking loser SJW garbage of a human

    You definitely haven't read the comment you're responding to.

  124. Survival of the fittest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good one bro, now the ladies will see how much we respect them, and we get to crush allot more puss.

    Well yeah, evolutionarily speaking, wearing one's misogyny on one's sleeve is probably not the most effective mating strategy. It's kind of reassuring that "whiney assed tech bros" are being selected against ...

    1. Re:Survival of the fittest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound like a friendless virgin who has never even touched a woman.

      Which nicely illustrates your tenuous grasp on reality boy, and not just a little projection one imagines.

      ... women don't go for ...

      Oh, don't pretend to me you have the least idea, your just sprouting some like some crap you've read on Red Pill or #incels.

      They like alpha guys ... because we tend to ...

      You just seriously called yourself an "alpha guy!" LMFAO What an complete tosser ... the self-proclaimed "alpha guy!"

      Look seriously stick to pr0n, it doesn't have a mind of its own you need to navigate.

      ... make for good protectors and fathers.

      Well on that last score yours has clearly failed. If either of my sons were puffed up wankers who proclaimed themselves "alpha guys" I'd be ashamed at having raised such prats. No seriously, just grow up a bit.

  125. Women are scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She's never once apologized to her victim.

    She should, at least, be made to pay for all the psychotherapy the poor victim who suffered her unprecedentedly vicious and callous attack will need to undergo! She literally could not have hurt him more if she carved him up with butchers knives. Women are so scary the way the use words.

    Remember guys: "Sticks and stones may not break my bones, but words will surely maim me."

  126. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You'd probably make better arguments if you actually knew what you're talking about.

    The Nazi party never got more than just shy of 44% of the votes, many of which gave them their vote for about the same reason that people voted for Trump; "democracy is a failure, the elite is robbing us", yadda, yadda.

    "But I've seen the documentaries" I hear you say. Sure buddy, but filming or taking photos in Germany under Nazi rule without authorisation would land you in hot water in record time. Verboten, indeed. So, those "documentaries" you've seen, who took the pictures you've seen in the documentaries? The Nazis. You've been watching Nazi propaganda, with a modern day narrator.

    Especially interesting is that, even despite it over time getting increasingly obvious that membership of the party would be highly socially and professionally beneficial, sometimes even necessary, the Nazi party never had more than 8 million members. Only two of those joining before 1933.

    Germany being full of hardcore Nazis is a myth and your "argument" does nothing but illustrate your own ignorance and willingness to accept propaganda as truth.

  127. Here it is defelction from male harrassment. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And the "lets say it's all bad" is trying to INCLUDE the one who claims "but but but but WIMMEN GET HARASSED!!!". So your target is entirely wrong.

    This would be like black peole saying that black lives matter, then others coming along and saying but blue lives matter (the distraction) then YOU complaining that me saying "all lives matter, right?" as a presage to "So blacklives matter too, yes? So why does it seem like they don't?"

  128. That's a shit reason to vote trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because trumpwill fuck you over harder than any politically infantile moron than amijojo here would while fucking over amijojo. It would be like releasing antrax into the city you live in to get back at some bankers or skinheads. You live there too and will be fucked over hard, and you enjoying it as long as they get fucked over too is kinda sick.

    Your claim is also complete and utter bollocks.

    People didn't vote trump, they just didn't vote hillary. Still more voted for her than trump. trump did not win, hilary lost. The republicans would have voted in a rancid cowturd as long as the cowturd vowed to undo all the work of "that ni gger in the whitehouse", they lost their collective shit when a black man got in charge of the country, and still haven't recovered.

  129. A moronic RWNJ talkng point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nope, progressives are not "demanding equality of outcome", and that moronic screed from the RWNJ echo chamber never once had a source of even vague rationality. The compalint seeded from the communism strawman argument: "from each according to their means, to each according to their needs", which was the previous RWNJ complaint, but "according to their needs" is NOT equality of outcome. Didn't stop you nutjobs claiming it, though.
    Like price and her "mansplaining" YOU have to do the same thing and decide that %CURRENT_BAD_THING is due to an entire group, and YOU double (literally) down with making it TWO completely unrelated groups: Progressives as well as the hoary old chestnut of "SJW".

    Tell me, moron, how do you feel when I call you a racist KKK bigot? Bad? But they're rightwingers and YOU'RE a rightwinger, so they're all the same. What? They aren't rightwing, they're the KKK and anithetical to conservative values? Well so what, idiot, "SJW"s (a term defined to BE "those who do these things that are objectively bad" hence they are bad people even if you can't find anyone IN that set) are not progressives and fight against that. SJWs are authoritarian left. Progressives are liberal left.

    Fucking moron.

    1. Re:A moronic RWNJ talkng point. by fafalone · · Score: 1

      Sorry, forcing school classes and workplaces to reflect the population instead of the applicant pool, and total compensation to be equal despite time taken off/hours worked/raises asked for is 100% trying to enforce equality of outcome. I also have no idea what RWNJ is. Progressives and SJWs self-describe with those labels and under those labels promulgate the ideology described, so that's not inaccurate.
      It's also always fun being told by insane progressives like you I'm a right winger, while the right-wingers insist I'm a batshit leftist. You've supported my argument pretty well though, despite not knowing what most self-described progressives support.

  130. So you think men should never be silenced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, YOU bring up this idiotic claim because SHE made the sexist comment and SHE should not, so SHE should have STFU. If it had been HE made the sexist comment and HE should not, so HE should have STFU, where would your complaint be now? The only reason why SHE should shut up is because the moron being sexist and abusive was a woman.

    No other reason.

  131. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amen to this. I know I regularly post shit that I regret later that could get me in trouble because I'm more hot headed than would like, hence why I'm on here as an AC and why I don't use social media. The world doesn't care if you regret it later, once said and linked to you, the damage is done.

    Know thyself. Don't set yourself up for failure.

  132. Really, Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Granted, ArenaNet is a dumpsterfire, but this is the shit you choose to discuss?

    Not ANet shoving spyware into Guild Wars 2?

  133. Using the word "mansplain" is sexist by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

    The premise is if a women explains something that is AWESOME.

    If a man explains something, that is INSENSITIVE.

    People should keep using the word "mansplain" so I can tell who the sexists and SJWs (but I repeat myself) are.

  134. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by p0larity · · Score: 1

    Wrong.

    She is not a teacher and she didn't say a single thing that warrants firing. Not even the slightest.

    She publicly rolled her eyes at someone. There's a huge difference. I don't blame her one bit for not wanting to hear another "well, actually" go into a long tirade about how she's wrong.

  135. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a male developer had "rolled his eyes" at a user's "girlfeels," you can bet your ass there would be a huge outcry to dismiss him.

  136. Manchildren BTFO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where do these dweebs even find the time? Between harassing women with bots and pretending misandry is real on slashdot, it must be tricky to get a chance to just relax and jerk off to hentai rape scenes.

  137. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    False equivalence. Misogyny != reacting to misogyny. There is no matriarchy.

  138. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a waiter got regularly harassed by their customers, then their boss would have a responsibility to handle that, not fire them for being upset at being mistreated. Service workers aren't obligated to endure everything a customer says. And game development is not even an industry where you should be tolerating customers at all, much less harassment.

  139. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where are all the freeze peach right wing nutjobs? They seem mighty quiet all of a sudden.

  140. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I understand where you're coming from, but I'd wager that far more knew than didn't. Speaking with the veterans from WWII who had seen and visited the camps, so many of them could be smelled when the wind changed. They were not a very well kept secret. Some in the country might have been more ignorant to what was going on, but in my opinion they would be a minority.

    To quote one of my favorite veterans to talk to, Sgt Don Burgett, A Company 506th of the 101st Airborne: "I was shocked... all of these Germans everywhere and not a single nazi! Everyone of them claimed they'd never known what was going on and never agreed with what the nazis did. They insisted they were never part of the party. Hell, you could smell the camps from town. There was no way they couldn't know they were there".

    So yes, I believe some people genuinely didn't know, but Germany is not a large landmass, and people and soldiers talk. When the US rounded up Japanese, most citizens were fully aware, and they didn't even have to smell a camp to know.

  141. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by alexgieg · · Score: 2

    I understand where you're coming from, but I'd wager that far more knew than didn't.

    I think people knew Jews and other people were being imprisoned by the government, and many were most certainly in favor of this given how prevalent antisemitism was. What I don't think they knew, though, was that some of the concentration camps those prisoners were being sent to were actually extermination camps. Given most concentration camps were "just" that, not having a focus on extermination, that also meant that, while those living near them knew of them, and of how badly prisoners were treated, they didn't know of the few mass extermination ones.

    Take your US example: while most Americans were certainly aware people of Japanese ancestry were being rounded up and sent to concentration camps, few, if any, thought the US government was exterminating those prisoners, and they were correct in that assumption. In the case of the Nazi government, most Germans were certainly taken by surprise when they came to know, from the Allies, what had been happening.

    Had the Nazis been victorious, or at the very minimum had they signed a peace treaty instead of having had to surrender unconditionally, and kept governing Germany and Nazi-occupied areas, and the extermination camps would have continued to operate until all the people the Nazis wanted exterminated had been exterminated, then destroyed so as to erase any evidence, and news about that would have been uncovered only several decades later.

    "I was shocked... all of these Germans everywhere and not a single nazi! Everyone of them claimed they'd never known what was going on and never agreed with what the nazis did. They insisted they were never part of the party. Hell, you could smell the camps from town. There was no way they couldn't know they were there".

    Ah! But that's easy to understand. My great-aunt told me that when it became clear to the population the Allies would win, everyone began rushing to destroy any evidence they themselves had had anything to do with Nazi activities. Some due to fear. Some because they had genuinely had been forced to. My great-aunt, for example, despite her family having been anti-Nazi, had had to collect an album of articles about Hitler as an ongoing school project. She, others like her, and even her actually-Nazi colleagues, all hastily burned theirs down even before news of US troops arriving had been divulged.

    And the fear was fear of any military occupation. Men and boys were afraid the occupation forces would kill them for any reason whatsoever, so they hoped that by erasing any trace of Nazi-support they'd slightly increase their chance of survival. Women and girls were afraid the men in their lives would be killed and that afterwards they would be raped and then killed, so they did it with even more intensity than men. When the US occupation forces actually arrived and then acted with honor and nobility, abuse incidents being minimal, that was perceived in shock and then in gratitude, which coupled with all the monetary help explains why Germany got so pro-US in the following years. (By the way, that this was a legitimate fear can be seen in the fact Germans who had had the bad luck of being URSS-occupied suffered exactly those things, including the expected mass rapes.)

    And that explains why everyone had "never" been a Nazi.

    --
    Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
  142. Re:It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So fuck all that shit! It isn't real!

    ...

    So I guess the heads of those bad swarms are the only problem. Those need fixing.

    in a democracy, how do you get the power to fix the heads of swarms? to do it in an accepted manner, you need swarms. if you taught swarms how to tell the different between what's real and what isn't, wouldn't that fix them?

     

  143. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The massive numbers of humanity reduced themselves into caricatures. We're merely remarking on our observations of them.

  144. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The creimertards, "APK", and the faggot/INCEL/pedophile/traitor/Nazi trolls are all the work of disreputable political operative David Brock and his 50 cent army of "nerd virgins".

    https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/david-brock-hillary-clinton-correct-the-record/

    Earlier they gained notoriety for their duplicitous "Correct the Record" misinformation campaign on behalf of presidential candidate Hitlary Clinton.

    They are are employed by a Democrat affiliated "progressive" propaganda works called "American Bridge 21st Century". According to Wikipedia their biggest funder is George Soros.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Bridge_21st_Century

    The purpose of their spamming and targeted cyber-stalking is to silence unapproved narratives. They do this by deterring free public discussion and poisoning any forum that does not implement censorship of unapproved viewpoints.

  145. Re: It's not real life! Stop giving a fuck! by reanjr · · Score: 1

    I didn't. That's based on actual polls of voting Americans. You hear unexpected numbers and you assume I didn't look up actual polling data. Polls aren't the source of truth you think they are.

  146. Re:This discussion gives me great hope for the fut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At which point you will rename yourself..."remoteshellfish"?

  147. You can't wear the face of crazy. by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

    Lol once again both parties have embraced their fringe. Why? I have no fucking clue "energize the base" maybe?
    If that's the case it means all these lunatics, the SJWs, the trumpers, for all their noise don't normally get off their asses and vote. Oh plus she burned her bridges with half of the far left by fucking over bernie. Who was my first choice but even so he was fringe enough that I hoped the rest of the government would moderate his more out there moments.

    In hillary's case she embraced small activist groups who collectively manage to piss at least everyone off. They made great soundbites for fox too.
    In the case of the republicans they're completely ran by lunatics to the point that they have taken over the party and won't settle with patronizing pats on the head anymore, play ball or gtfo.

    I don't understand her at all, as an establishment candidate you'd think she'd be doing everything she could to keep radicals from taking taking over the DNC the way it's taken over the GOP.

  148. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Vapula · · Score: 1

    you're missing the point : when you work for some employer, you've restriction put on what you may do outside work, what you may say on social networks, what you may say to other people (talking),... As I'm a teacher, I know the restriction imposed upon teachers (in my country, YMMV). She was developper at Arena.net and as such, she also had some restrictions... even if she never signed some document about it...

    As soon as she acted using her name and identity, linked to her work (and with a pseudo-autority given by that), she HAD to restrain herself.

    She could have used another account (anonymous and not linked to her) to post comments but she didn't. so she was responsible for the word she used and the tone of her answer...

  149. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when you work for some employer, you've restriction put on what you may do outside work

    Excuse me, but unless I've signed some kind of agreement, what I do outside of work is none of my employer's damn business.

  150. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by wtrmute · · Score: 1

    You'd be surprised: your employer typically can fire you for any reason or for no reason at all, so long as they pay you severance and follow all the procedures. Remember, the First Amendment guarantees that "Congress shall make no law (...) abridging the freedom of speech..." Brendan Eich was sacked from Mozilla for donating $1,000.00 for Proposition 8 in California, and the same media circus over Jessica Price happened over him. Were they wrong in firing him?

  151. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Were they wrong in firing him?

    Yes. You have a right to engage in any legal political activity you like on your own time, and hold whatever opinions you like no matter how unpopular.

    However - he was probably right to step down (they didn't actually fire him) because the shitstorm the crybabies caused could not be contained. He apologized and tried to make amends, but that wasn't enough for the Inquisition.

  152. Re: Time to out the assholes on 4chan by Vapula · · Score: 1

    Except if what you are saying can hurt reputation or image of the company...

    And this is even more true if you're doing some "official statement" because you're doing it while saying that you work for that company.

    Having a signed agreement only makes things more easy...