She's also posted e-mails on twitter with names, return e-mails and IPs from people that were literally just people calling out her poor research, no swearing or threats, which is explicitly to have her followers harass whomever sent the letter. It's also doxing which is harassment. Criticism isn't harassment, encouraging your followers to attack people and posting private e-mails with peoples names that criticize you is harassment.
The irony is that HotWheels got a Twitter suspension for doing the same thing, but with complaints he'd received from his registrar when anti-GG folks were trying to shut down 8chan by having the domain name seized.
No, during her time as a porn model she went under Locke Valentine for at least two porn sites. Zoe Quinn is a separate alias she picked up later. Her actual name is Chelsea van Valkenburg.
The actual details of what happened is that someone else doxxed him and started a campaign to have people file false complaints against him (How to Report Mike Cernovich to the LAPD w/o a Single Deadlift). Zoe Quinn then retweeted the doxxing. To be fair, she has tens of thousands of followers more than the person who originally did the doxxing so it's not too surprising that some people saw it on her Twitter feed and assigned her credit/blame.
One of Mike's buddies (the somewhat infamous PUA Roosh V) has since turned around and got a photo of the original doxxer, her name, and some other assorted info and posted that info, and said doxxer has decided that that makes them stalkers.
You're missing an important consideration -- when it broke, the people who benefited her career went to ground and tried to stay out of sight, she instead started crying about how harassed she was and where you could donate to her patreon (which something like tripled in just a few weeks).
If gaming media had responded to the actual complaints of GamerGate right off the bat, it would have diffused in a week or two. All it would have taken is stating some new policy about disclosure and recusal in the case of conflicts of interest and then actually following that policy. Instead, they responded by calling their respective audiences wailing hyper-consumer manchildren and the like. Now, we're closing in on being half a year in.
I think you missed the whole "ran out of home" and "giving interviews from said home" being mutually exclusive thing. Because most video shown of her after being "driven out of her home" has been taken in her home.
People who aren't fond of Quinn or Lifschitz have also taking to nicknaming it the "Cash Overdrive Network", on the assumption they're going to do something dubious as far as funding it is concerned.
I, and most other pro-GG folks you'll find online will entirely agree with you that everyone that has engaged in threats and doxxing against anyone need to be tracked down and punished. I'm not worried, because I haven't done those things, nor have most other GG.
I'd love to see some kind of evidence linking the USU threat to GG though, because the threat certainly didn't mention it, and a *lot* of people hate Sarkeesian that aren't part of GG. I know you want to make every time someone says something mean to a woman a case of GG being evil, but then you have all the women that are part of GG and also get harassed (and men, but I don't think you'd consider them important enough to care about as victims). Guess who's doing that harassment? Hint: It's not GG.
Not really accurate. Mostly because you're pretending that #gg is doing all the threatening and doxxing.
Even if we utterly "listen and believe" the folks who claim to have been threatened and then whip out their "donate to me to show how non-sexist you are" buttons that it's exactly as bad as they claim it is, you still have more people being threatened by anti-GG folks than by GG. Of course, many of those don't count because they have the wrong genitals to count as victims, and the rest don't count because women who don't agree with anti-GG folks aren't *really* women, such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Or to put it another way, no one in GG has sent filled syringes or dead animals to the anti-GG crowd, or called their employers to try to get them fired from jobs wholly unrelated to the topic at hand (this is actually a surprisingly common tactic from the SJW crowd when someone disagrees with them). The anti-GG crowd has done those things.
Though I'll admit, asshole that he is, I still find it funny how many times Roguestar has been suspended from twitter.
The only things anti-GG can claim against GG are people saying mean things over the internet, and a school shooting threat that both didn't claim to be related to GG (and let's face it, there are plenty of folks who hate Anita Sarkeesian in particular and feminist speakers in general who are wholly unconnected from GG), and was deemed not to be a credible threat by law enforcement.
Or named for the product of the chemical plants it sprung up around (rather than the plants moving into town, the first plants came first, and people moved around them to shorten their commutes).
That of course, depends on how you ask your questions. "Have you ever had sex after drinking?" is different from "Has a man ever bought you drinks in an attempt to have sex with you?" versus "Has a man ever rendered you unconscious or otherwise unable to respond/resist through application of drugs or alcohol in order to have sex with you against your will?" all yield wildly different responses.
A lot of the surveys that arrive at extremely high rates of rape classify things as rape that the "victims" don't.
As was said, generally rape victims don't brag about it the following day, nor do they follow up their rape by throwing a party to show off their rapist to their friends.
Explain this. Oh, also assume that those engaging in said vote coercion are going to sit you down and ask you to verify your vote in front of them, so they can see who you voted for exactly as you would. Also, that they do in fact hold your career in their hands, so failing to do so entirely will be very, very unpleasant.
You'd need a system in which you could "verify" that you voted for a specific party even if you didn't, and without it being possible for a third party watching the process to know whether you were showing your actual vote or your "boss friendly" vote.
Patent's goal is exactly the opposite of that though, because to get a patent you are supposed to be required to divulge exactly how your $PATENTABLE_THING functions. The alternative is Inventors keeping their methods and designs secret until someone else figures is out, rather than being given legal protection for a limited period of time in exchange for divulging their methods and designs.
The amount of time that protection lasts might be too long (especially for copyright, somewhat less so for patents), and (in particular for patents) might have expanded to cover things that it logically never should have (business method and software patents -- software is essentially by definition a formal way of describing mathematical formula that can be interpreted by a machine; math is not patentable; q.e.d. software should not be patentable, let alone be protected by both patent and copyright [is this the case for any other kind of works?]).
We'd best make it a criminal offense to sell certain books, movies, music, comics, etc to children because they might be corrupted by the evil influence of Elvis' hips. With more or less the sole exception of pornography, these are unhindered by law -- why should video games (which have a rating system similar to movies with similar voluntary enforcement, note that books have no such restrictions) be the exception?
That it's OK to outright disregard the rule of law in a foreign country in order to have those things, because if they are remotely careful they probably won't get caught?
No reasonable person is "anti-immigrant", nearly all of us are descended from immigrants. There exists a legal route for immigration though, one that, again, most of us are descended from someone who dealt with.
It's worth noting that he doesn't need probable cause, just "probable cause" as well. The law's author's went out of their way to avoid the phrase probable cause because that phrase has legal precedent attached, instead using a phrase that sounds like it should have a similar meaning but doesn't innately carry that meaning.
Actually, there *are* ads in CoH. They have to be enabled by the user (they are opt-in) and the replace certain textures in each zone, literally replacing some in universe advertising with paid advertising (that the game is mostly in an urban environment makes this not terribly jarring -- the less urban areas just don't have ads, because it doesn't make sense for a billboard to be in, say, the middle of a graveyard).
Premium players can join SGs, but only VIP (subscribers) can create them.
Which presents an interesting question for me -- I have a SG. All the members are either me or my nephew. We'd both be grandfathered in as premium. Does not being able to *create* a SG limit what we can do with an already existing one? Does that mean a free or premium player who wants to create a SG just needs to sub for a single month to get it made?
You start seeing more variety in environment later on, when you aren't raiding office buildings and warehouses all the time and thus gettng maps with the office building and warehouse tilesets. The villain side has a lot more variety in environments early on than heroes do as well.
I was always personally fond of the Portal Corp missions which mix things up a bit.
I'm hoping CoX does something similar to DDO's approach, actually. Let me buy the bits and pieces I want for keeps, or let me pay a sub and rent everything at once. If I want to play dark elves but not favored souls, and I want this adventure but not those other ones I can simply buy access to them for a few bucks, if I want *everything* then I can have that two with a sub or a much larger outlay of money to the store.
I know CoH is going to have a "premium" option that grandfathers in certain things if you have a previously paid account from before it went free.
I've seen arguments claiming that we need better intersectionality protections, you know for the cases where your employer doesn't discriminate against women or black but does discriminate against black women. That way unless you do something criminal, it's impossible to be fired, not promoted, or receive less than company average raises if you are, say, a transgendered lesbian who has one Latino parent and one black parent. You know, so that you are sufficiently minority to be unique within your employers workforce, and thus anything that could be a slight against you is discrimination against your particular intersection of minorities since 100% of black/latino transgendered lesbians who work for the company have been slighted while a substantially smaller percentage of white males were. =p
Slashdot Mirror
She's also posted e-mails on twitter with names, return e-mails and IPs from people that were literally just people calling out her poor research, no swearing or threats, which is explicitly to have her followers harass whomever sent the letter. It's also doxing which is harassment. Criticism isn't harassment, encouraging your followers to attack people and posting private e-mails with peoples names that criticize you is harassment.
The irony is that HotWheels got a Twitter suspension for doing the same thing, but with complaints he'd received from his registrar when anti-GG folks were trying to shut down 8chan by having the domain name seized.
No, during her time as a porn model she went under Locke Valentine for at least two porn sites. Zoe Quinn is a separate alias she picked up later. Her actual name is Chelsea van Valkenburg.
The actual details of what happened is that someone else doxxed him and started a campaign to have people file false complaints against him (How to Report Mike Cernovich to the LAPD w/o a Single Deadlift). Zoe Quinn then retweeted the doxxing. To be fair, she has tens of thousands of followers more than the person who originally did the doxxing so it's not too surprising that some people saw it on her Twitter feed and assigned her credit/blame.
One of Mike's buddies (the somewhat infamous PUA Roosh V) has since turned around and got a photo of the original doxxer, her name, and some other assorted info and posted that info, and said doxxer has decided that that makes them stalkers.
You're missing an important consideration -- when it broke, the people who benefited her career went to ground and tried to stay out of sight, she instead started crying about how harassed she was and where you could donate to her patreon (which something like tripled in just a few weeks).
If gaming media had responded to the actual complaints of GamerGate right off the bat, it would have diffused in a week or two. All it would have taken is stating some new policy about disclosure and recusal in the case of conflicts of interest and then actually following that policy. Instead, they responded by calling their respective audiences wailing hyper-consumer manchildren and the like. Now, we're closing in on being half a year in.
I think you missed the whole "ran out of home" and "giving interviews from said home" being mutually exclusive thing. Because most video shown of her after being "driven out of her home" has been taken in her home.
Ironically, it also makes their initials "CON".
People who aren't fond of Quinn or Lifschitz have also taking to nicknaming it the "Cash Overdrive Network", on the assumption they're going to do something dubious as far as funding it is concerned.
I, and most other pro-GG folks you'll find online will entirely agree with you that everyone that has engaged in threats and doxxing against anyone need to be tracked down and punished. I'm not worried, because I haven't done those things, nor have most other GG.
I'd love to see some kind of evidence linking the USU threat to GG though, because the threat certainly didn't mention it, and a *lot* of people hate Sarkeesian that aren't part of GG. I know you want to make every time someone says something mean to a woman a case of GG being evil, but then you have all the women that are part of GG and also get harassed (and men, but I don't think you'd consider them important enough to care about as victims). Guess who's doing that harassment? Hint: It's not GG.
Not really accurate. Mostly because you're pretending that #gg is doing all the threatening and doxxing.
Even if we utterly "listen and believe" the folks who claim to have been threatened and then whip out their "donate to me to show how non-sexist you are" buttons that it's exactly as bad as they claim it is, you still have more people being threatened by anti-GG folks than by GG. Of course, many of those don't count because they have the wrong genitals to count as victims, and the rest don't count because women who don't agree with anti-GG folks aren't *really* women, such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Or to put it another way, no one in GG has sent filled syringes or dead animals to the anti-GG crowd, or called their employers to try to get them fired from jobs wholly unrelated to the topic at hand (this is actually a surprisingly common tactic from the SJW crowd when someone disagrees with them). The anti-GG crowd has done those things.
Though I'll admit, asshole that he is, I still find it funny how many times Roguestar has been suspended from twitter.
The only things anti-GG can claim against GG are people saying mean things over the internet, and a school shooting threat that both didn't claim to be related to GG (and let's face it, there are plenty of folks who hate Anita Sarkeesian in particular and feminist speakers in general who are wholly unconnected from GG), and was deemed not to be a credible threat by law enforcement.
Or named for the product of the chemical plants it sprung up around (rather than the plants moving into town, the first plants came first, and people moved around them to shorten their commutes).
That of course, depends on how you ask your questions. "Have you ever had sex after drinking?" is different from "Has a man ever bought you drinks in an attempt to have sex with you?" versus "Has a man ever rendered you unconscious or otherwise unable to respond/resist through application of drugs or alcohol in order to have sex with you against your will?" all yield wildly different responses.
A lot of the surveys that arrive at extremely high rates of rape classify things as rape that the "victims" don't.
As was said, generally rape victims don't brag about it the following day, nor do they follow up their rape by throwing a party to show off their rapist to their friends.
You missed the whole Battle.net outrage, huh?
So, does that mean it has a 5 minute summoning animation??
Explain this. Oh, also assume that those engaging in said vote coercion are going to sit you down and ask you to verify your vote in front of them, so they can see who you voted for exactly as you would. Also, that they do in fact hold your career in their hands, so failing to do so entirely will be very, very unpleasant.
You'd need a system in which you could "verify" that you voted for a specific party even if you didn't, and without it being possible for a third party watching the process to know whether you were showing your actual vote or your "boss friendly" vote.
Patent's goal is exactly the opposite of that though, because to get a patent you are supposed to be required to divulge exactly how your $PATENTABLE_THING functions. The alternative is Inventors keeping their methods and designs secret until someone else figures is out, rather than being given legal protection for a limited period of time in exchange for divulging their methods and designs.
The amount of time that protection lasts might be too long (especially for copyright, somewhat less so for patents), and (in particular for patents) might have expanded to cover things that it logically never should have (business method and software patents -- software is essentially by definition a formal way of describing mathematical formula that can be interpreted by a machine; math is not patentable; q.e.d. software should not be patentable, let alone be protected by both patent and copyright [is this the case for any other kind of works?]).
We'd best make it a criminal offense to sell certain books, movies, music, comics, etc to children because they might be corrupted by the evil influence of Elvis' hips. With more or less the sole exception of pornography, these are unhindered by law -- why should video games (which have a rating system similar to movies with similar voluntary enforcement, note that books have no such restrictions) be the exception?
That it's OK to outright disregard the rule of law in a foreign country in order to have those things, because if they are remotely careful they probably won't get caught?
No reasonable person is "anti-immigrant", nearly all of us are descended from immigrants. There exists a legal route for immigration though, one that, again, most of us are descended from someone who dealt with.
It's worth noting that he doesn't need probable cause, just "probable cause" as well. The law's author's went out of their way to avoid the phrase probable cause because that phrase has legal precedent attached, instead using a phrase that sounds like it should have a similar meaning but doesn't innately carry that meaning.
Goes to show how long it's been since my subscription was last active. =p
Now, do the same for me! =)
Actually, there *are* ads in CoH. They have to be enabled by the user (they are opt-in) and the replace certain textures in each zone, literally replacing some in universe advertising with paid advertising (that the game is mostly in an urban environment makes this not terribly jarring -- the less urban areas just don't have ads, because it doesn't make sense for a billboard to be in, say, the middle of a graveyard).
Premium players can join SGs, but only VIP (subscribers) can create them.
Which presents an interesting question for me -- I have a SG. All the members are either me or my nephew. We'd both be grandfathered in as premium. Does not being able to *create* a SG limit what we can do with an already existing one? Does that mean a free or premium player who wants to create a SG just needs to sub for a single month to get it made?
You start seeing more variety in environment later on, when you aren't raiding office buildings and warehouses all the time and thus gettng maps with the office building and warehouse tilesets. The villain side has a lot more variety in environments early on than heroes do as well.
I was always personally fond of the Portal Corp missions which mix things up a bit.
I'm hoping CoX does something similar to DDO's approach, actually. Let me buy the bits and pieces I want for keeps, or let me pay a sub and rent everything at once. If I want to play dark elves but not favored souls, and I want this adventure but not those other ones I can simply buy access to them for a few bucks, if I want *everything* then I can have that two with a sub or a much larger outlay of money to the store.
I know CoH is going to have a "premium" option that grandfathers in certain things if you have a previously paid account from before it went free.
I've seen arguments claiming that we need better intersectionality protections, you know for the cases where your employer doesn't discriminate against women or black but does discriminate against black women. That way unless you do something criminal, it's impossible to be fired, not promoted, or receive less than company average raises if you are, say, a transgendered lesbian who has one Latino parent and one black parent. You know, so that you are sufficiently minority to be unique within your employers workforce, and thus anything that could be a slight against you is discrimination against your particular intersection of minorities since 100% of black/latino transgendered lesbians who work for the company have been slighted while a substantially smaller percentage of white males were. =p