She didn't though, the clampdown was about using Reddit to organize harassment, not the viewpoints of the people concerned. And this wasn't even the first time a forum had been closed for significant off-Reddit behavior, from TheFappening to SonyGOP - the latter of which I'd be inclined to think should be more controversial than a sub dedicated to shaming people - specific people, in real life - with a particular medical condition.
I know it's unpopular to point it out, but honestly, if this were about views, don't you think rather a lot more subs would have been closed? Reddit's not exactly known for being dominated by left wing "politically correct" (urgh) subreddits, quite the opposite in fact...
those who were targeted by the abuse went and painted the entirety of the population of male gamers as sociopathic misogynists
No. No they didn't. I've been watching this from the start and there was never any point where all male gamers were described by Sarkeesian, Quinn, Wu, Alexander, Harper, or any of their high profile supporters as "sociopathic misogynists" or anything close. Indeed, a huge proportion of their supporters, high profile or otherwise, are male players of games so that would be a pretty dumb thing for anyone to say.
It might be what Gamergaters tell themselves the "LWs" say. But the Gamergaters also think that Leigh Alexander's article didn't put quotes around the word "Gamer" and was calling all people who played games obnoxious, rather than calling for game publishers to stop targeting a demographic that doesn't really exist. (It was virtually identical to what was written after "John Romero's About To Make You His Bitch" except this time was dealing with the actions of what, the day before, had been given the name Gamergate.) Gamergaters also tell themselves such things as "Sarkeesian once posted a review of Hitman", "Quinn gave favors to journalists in exchange for coverage", "Wu should shut up about sexism and start her own video game company", "The harassment doesn't exist and it's all been proven to be the victims setting up fake accounts to harass themselves", "No incidents of harassment have been reported to the police", "It's all about ethics in gaming journalism" and other such rather obviously false nonsense.
I'd concern troll here about suggesting you actually learn a little about what you're attacking before attacking it, but to be honest, I think 90% of GG are well aware that they're spouting something with no resemblance to the real world. You have to be dishonest, or else have an amazing cognitive dissonance to claim simultaneously that "It's about ethics in gaming journalism" and then rarely, if ever, mention journalism, while venting your fury on "SJWs" in every post. Or to declare yourself impossible to criticize for sexism or racism because you have a few women and minority supporters - and then call that argument "Not your shield".
But if you do belong to the 10% of Gamergaters who haven't read the rather entertaining 8chan threads where various Leaders of Gamergate "strategize" on how to derail those pesky "SJWs", and so lap up every word of it: No. What you have been told GG's targets have said is not what they actually have said. Same way that they're not actually journalists. Same way that they've never supported censorship. Same way they've never traded favors to journalists for positive coverage. Same way they've not actually posted the reviews of games you've been told they've posted.
I wouldn't call it trolling if it's up front, non-discriminatory, charged only to businesses that are getting revenue from Android, and based on what are sadly legitimate-in-the-legal-sense patents.
Yes, there's a good case that the patents they're using shouldn't be legal, but they are.
To be honest, I have some sympathy with him. Not that you should swallow the costs, of course, but that vendors should publish prices that are meaningful.
The two worst offenders I've seen are US phone companies and car dealerships. Both are essentially allowed to make shit up. Indeed, the FCC regularly encourages telephone companies to do so, telling them they can cover the cost of an additional expense by adding an unadvertised fee of their own choosing to the final bills of their subscribers.
I appreciate many businesses want to advertise the lowest prices they can, but you have to recognize that from a consumer's point of view, if you advertise something as costing X, and then charge us Y, you were misleading us by saying it cost X. You, in fact, provided no useful information whatsoever to us by advertising X.
In the old days of 1.0 I could run it happily in a 64Mb PC. Now I can't run it for more than a day without it filling up 3-4G of memory, frequently crashing at this point (I assume because it's a 32 bit application now.)
There's been something very wrong with Firefox since 4.0, and while I know the developers have made heroic efforts to fix the constant leaks and bloating, every time they do, it just takes another version to break everything again.
I love Firefox, and keep coming back to it after using Chrome for a little bit and being repelled, but it's not what it was.
Did you just argue that preventing States from letting gay people get married is expanding the State and "screwing" liberty, justice and freedom?
Generally speaking, when SCOTUS says "No, you can't pass laws preventing consenting adults from doing X", it's defending freedom, not restricting it. Unless your concern is the freedom of State governments, in which case we, the people, don't give a shit. The States exist to serve us, not vice versa.
Not sure about the GP, but I interpreted it as being about Microsoft moving to a subscription service, which Windows doesn't fit into. The sentence was:
Which is where Windows is now. Windows is declining, and as Microsoft moves to the subscription model, will die even faster.
That's the exact opposite of him saying "Windows is switching to a subscription model". He's saying "Windows will die, because Microsoft is moving to a subscription model". If he was arguing Windows was switching to a subscription model, he wouldn't be arguing Windows will die as a result of Microsoft moving to one, would he?
I would be interested in his reasons, but I suspect the logic is something related to the cross platform nature of most cloud hosted offerings, which Office 365 is an example of. If you can use Office on a ChromeBook, you have less need to use Windows. And if you're trying to make money by selling subscriptions, ensuring everyone has 24/7 access regardless of device is probably a good idea and a major selling point.
Good luck, Judges hate it when you try to be "clever" with tricks like that, and rarely rule in your favor. Also don't forget that the diagram is already technically broken into parts (individual bits) by virtue of being digitized and sent through the Internet anyway, so that particular attempt to circumvent a ban is unlikely to work with any law as effectively written.
I don't know about that, were the ACM provisions of the DMCA (the part that in theory banned DeCSS) ever declared to be in breach of the first amendment? I recall we "lost" that legal fight, even if DeCSS's ubiquity meant it ended up being a Pyhrric victory for the DVD-CCA.
Legally I suspect they can "ban" 3D gun blueprints if stored in some computer parsable form. Practically, of course, they'll find that hard to enforce.
. It's hard to believe that it's not practical to build an electric vehicle with a 100 mile range for a price comparable to a gasoline powered vehicle of similar specification.
That's one of two major factors, and yeah, even if one is solved, the other has to be to.
My next vehicle would be an electric except:
1. Price, as you mention. New - yeah, I guess the lowest end electrics compare to mid-priced vehicles, when subsidized, but it's still a price difference measured in many, many, thousands. But used? Forget it. And I'll be honest, I'm a used car buyer. I can't afford tens of thousands of dollars for a new vehicle.
2. There's a good chance the vehicle that'll need replacing will be the minivan. There are no electric minivans.
We need both a wide range of useful vehicles, and prices to be reasonable. It's hard to believe that it's not practical to build an electric vehicle with a 100 mile range for a price comparable to a gasoline powered vehicle of similar specification.
(FFS: An obvious troll is modded +5 Insightful, and virtually everyone calling them on it is modded down through the floor. That's moderation abuse. See you in metamod...)
This little loaded troll is +5 Insightful? The one that calls a harassment campaign that's trying to silence women (and other minorities) in tech and their supporters through threats of violence "free minded geeks", and those who oppose them "authoritarian" and "apologists for censorship"? Because constant threats of violence is somehow pro-free speech, and encouraging people to evaluate games, highlighting problematic aspects, and encouraging developers to produce more interesting work is pro-censorship?
There are countries out there that welcome the "MRA/Republican/Stormfront/Racist/Misogyno-nerds" (a fairly decent description of a campaign of relentless online terror against women, blacks, and left wingers) and others that make up your little cesspool - the countries that support the kind of terror you inflict on those who refuse to kowtow to your demands. An Iranian actor just had to apologize for tweeting support for the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. Russia continues to push the bar as far as imprisoning gay people for being gay in public. Saudi Arabia punishes women for invading your traditional male space by, you know, driving and stuff.
Those are countries you guys would love. Why don't you fuck off there, and let the rest of us enjoy a diverse community in which people don't get rape and death threats for criticizing the Hitman video game?
It's been repeatedly proven that the "harassment" has been the professional victims using alternate accounts to send themselves messages - and it's also why none of these supposed "threats" have ever been reported to the police.
That's a complete lie. But it is what Gamergaters tell newcomers so they can feel good about supporting a campaign of harassment.
Do you feel good about not merely ignoring the high profile threats and harassment prominent women in tech are experiencing, but also smearing the victims as liars, and spreading false stories to try to get people to disbelieve them?
OK, but the settlement is unlikely to be for more than pennies (we're talking Youtube royalties here), so what lawyer is likely to take on the case?
Despite the view of many that the legal system is some kind of lottery where you can win arbitrary amounts of cash, the reality is that the civil system generally works on the basis of damages with any punitive element being small or non-existent. Most of the time the high awards you hear about for some injury or another are a product of high medical bills being involved, not because a judge wanted to make Macy's pay for having slippery floors (or whatever.)
Nobody's trying to "smear" GamerGate, we read what you write in your own words on 8chan,/r/KIA, and under the #gamergate hashtag.
Your entire movement started when Adam Baldwin tweeted links to YouTube videos smearing a female game dev's sex life because her ex-boyfriend wanted to run a hate campaign against her. That information is public domain. It's not something I just made up. It's the ORIGINS OF GAMERGATE. It's where the hashtag came from.
Forget the links I point to you above, take a look at the last few articles on Slashdot concerning gender - concerning subjects as minor and unthreatening as whether marketing a chemistry set specifically at girls might have the opposite affect to that intended (ie doing so might decrease interest by girls.) Something many of us would like to discuss, but can't, because you fuckers SHITPOST over EVERY. SINGLE. DISCUSSION, doing your absolute best to discourage anyone from even discussing the subject by flooding the comments section with misogynist trolls and off topic bullshit.
If you really are so stupid as to think that GamerGate is something to do with Ethics in Gaming Journalism, you might want to actually look into the movement. You might even want to look at the "journalists" it allies itself with.
Because if it did, it wouldn't:
- Do everything possible to prevent discussions of women in tech. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".
- Harass female game devs constantly, because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".
- Talk non stop about so-called "SJWs" and never mention journalists. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".
- Demand Slashdot ban discussions related to diversity in tech. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".
- Call JACK THOMPSON "BASED DAD", a lawyer who has actually tried to ban games, while calling Anita Sarkeesian a "censor" or "authoritarian", because she produced a video identifying tropes she feels are sexist in various video games. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".
- Support the "journalism" of Milo Yiannopoulos, because he certainly has NOTHING to do with "ethics in (ANY) journalism" FFS.
- Pretend a mass harassment campaign against prominent women in journalism is not going on, pretending instead it's some kind of fund raising stunt (even though it doesn't apparently help any of the targets that it's going on), because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".
(Third attempt: reposted due to abusive moderation. Interesting how the moderation on virtually everything I post that's anti-harassment these days proves my point. What has happened to tech? What has happened to Slashdot? If I'd posted a year ago that a bunch of female devs would be suffering harassment up to and including rape threats and worse in an attempt to prevent them from speaking about problems they encounter, I'd have been laughed out of town. Now it's happening a significant number of people on Slashdot actively support that hatred campaign and are doing everything they can to silence anyone who opposes it.)
This little loaded troll is +5 Insightful? The one that calls a harassment campaign that's trying to silence women (and other minorities) in tech and their supporters through threats of violence "free minded geeks", and those who oppose them "authoritarian" and "apologists for censorship"? Because constant threats of violence is somehow pro-free speech, and encouraging people to evaluate games, highlighting problematic aspects, and encouraging developers to produce more interesting work is pro-censorship?
There are countries out there that welcome the "MRA/Republican/Stormfront/Racist/Misogyno-nerds" (a fairly decent description of a campaign of relentless online terror against women, blacks, and left wingers) and others that make up your little cesspool - the countries that support the kind of terror you inflict on those who refuse to kowtow to your demands. An Iranian actor just had to apologize for tweeting support for the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. Russia continues to push the bar as far as imprisoning gay people for being gay in public. Saudi Arabia punishes women for invading your traditional male space by, you know, driving and stuff.
Those are countries you guys would love. Why don't you fuck off there, and let the rest of us enjoy a diverse community in which people don't get rape and death threats for criticizing the Hitman video game?
Your post was downvoted for pretending people like Jenny Bharaj or Oliver Campbell are white male teenager, rather than a women and a black man.
I've never heard of either of these people, nor are they mentioned in my post.
At least be honest when you try to broadly paint a movement as something, as not to dismiss women and minorities like you did. You won't get down modded as much if you are truthful, rather than posting simple flamebait.
What the ever loving fuck are you talking about? Or is this a #notyourshield troll?
I believe there's a concept called Slander of Title, but I'm not sure it actually results in serious damages being paid out, and quite honestly, how many YouTube contributors want to/can afford to pay for a lawyer to sue over what, at best, would be a tiny, measured in pennies, royalty check?
I don't actually buy the argument that this was a mistake. Rumblefish actually doubled down when they were called on that birdsong mistake mentioned in the summary, and Google backed them. I think Rumblefish knows they've found a loop hole, and Google are too scared of the larger copyright holders to vet their claims.
(Repost due to abusive moderation. Interesting how the moderation on virtually everything I post that's anti-harassment these days proves my point. What has happened to tech? What has happened to Slashdot? If I'd posted a year ago that a bunch of female devs would be suffering harassment up to and including rape threats and worse in an attempt to prevent them from speaking about problems they encounter, I'd have been laughed out of town. Now it's happening a significant number of people on Slashdot actively support that hatred campaign and are doing everything they can to silence anyone who opposes it.)
This little loaded troll is +5 Insightful? The one that calls a harassment campaign that's trying to silence women (and other minorities) in tech and their supporters through threats of violence "free minded geeks", and those who oppose them "authoritarian" and "apologists for censorship"? Because constant threats of violence is somehow pro-free speech, and encouraging people to evaluate games, highlighting problematic aspects, and encouraging developers to produce more interesting work is pro-censorship?
There are countries out there that welcome the "MRA/Republican/Stormfront/Racist/Misogyno-nerds" (a fairly decent description of a campaign of relentless online terror against women, blacks, and left wingers) and others that make up your little cesspool - the countries that support the kind of terror you inflict on those who refuse to kowtow to your demands. An Iranian actor just had to apologize for tweeting support for the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. Russia continues to push the bar as far as imprisoning gay people for being gay in public. Saudi Arabia punishes women for invading your traditional male space by, you know, driving and stuff.
Those are countries you guys would love. Why don't you fuck off there, and let the rest of us enjoy a diverse community in which people don't get rape and death threats for criticizing the Hitman video game?
Which campaign is this ? I haven't seen such a campaign online or in tech
Wow, you've not read any media whatsoever in the last year or so? That's impressive.
The campaign is called "Gamergate". It's been extensively covered by most media outlets.
In fact, most tech places I've worked at for the last 18 years have been tripping over themselves to hire any women that actually apply, as long as they are qualified.
Indeed, and GG seems to be, in part, a reaction to that.
This little loaded troll is +5 Insightful? The one that calls a harassment campaign that's trying to silence women (and other minorities) in tech and their supporters through threats of violence "free minded geeks", and those who oppose them "authoritarian" and "apologists for censorship"? Because constant threats of violence is somehow pro-free speech, and encouraging people to evaluate games, highlighting problematic aspects, and encouraging developers to produce more interesting work is pro-censorship?
There are countries out there that welcome the "MRA/Republican/Stormfront/Racist/Misogyno-nerds" (a fairly decent description of a campaign of relentless online terror against women, blacks, and left wingers) and others that make up your little cesspool - the countries that support the kind of terror you inflict on those who refuse to kowtow to your demands. An Iranian actor just had to apologize for tweeting support for the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. Russia continues to push the bar as far as imprisoning gay people for being gay in public. Saudi Arabia punishes women for invading your traditional male space by, you know, driving and stuff.
Those are countries you guys would love. Why don't you fuck off there, and let the rest of us enjoy a diverse community in which people don't get rape and death threats for criticizing the Hitman video game?
I think a lot of Ubuntu and GNOME3 users would be much, much, happier if you were right. Both Unity and GNOME3 have tried to re-invent the desktop, but neither really have been successful.
Neither are a 2000s museum. But both could learn a lot from what Microsoft is doing - this should not be written as an endorsement of anyone deciding that the next GNU/Linux Desktop should be a clone of Windows, there's a difference between learning from and copying..
Slashdot Mirror
She didn't though, the clampdown was about using Reddit to organize harassment, not the viewpoints of the people concerned. And this wasn't even the first time a forum had been closed for significant off-Reddit behavior, from TheFappening to SonyGOP - the latter of which I'd be inclined to think should be more controversial than a sub dedicated to shaming people - specific people, in real life - with a particular medical condition.
I know it's unpopular to point it out, but honestly, if this were about views, don't you think rather a lot more subs would have been closed? Reddit's not exactly known for being dominated by left wing "politically correct" (urgh) subreddits, quite the opposite in fact...
No. No they didn't. I've been watching this from the start and there was never any point where all male gamers were described by Sarkeesian, Quinn, Wu, Alexander, Harper, or any of their high profile supporters as "sociopathic misogynists" or anything close. Indeed, a huge proportion of their supporters, high profile or otherwise, are male players of games so that would be a pretty dumb thing for anyone to say.
It might be what Gamergaters tell themselves the "LWs" say. But the Gamergaters also think that Leigh Alexander's article didn't put quotes around the word "Gamer" and was calling all people who played games obnoxious, rather than calling for game publishers to stop targeting a demographic that doesn't really exist. (It was virtually identical to what was written after "John Romero's About To Make You His Bitch" except this time was dealing with the actions of what, the day before, had been given the name Gamergate.) Gamergaters also tell themselves such things as "Sarkeesian once posted a review of Hitman", "Quinn gave favors to journalists in exchange for coverage", "Wu should shut up about sexism and start her own video game company", "The harassment doesn't exist and it's all been proven to be the victims setting up fake accounts to harass themselves", "No incidents of harassment have been reported to the police", "It's all about ethics in gaming journalism" and other such rather obviously false nonsense.
I'd concern troll here about suggesting you actually learn a little about what you're attacking before attacking it, but to be honest, I think 90% of GG are well aware that they're spouting something with no resemblance to the real world. You have to be dishonest, or else have an amazing cognitive dissonance to claim simultaneously that "It's about ethics in gaming journalism" and then rarely, if ever, mention journalism, while venting your fury on "SJWs" in every post. Or to declare yourself impossible to criticize for sexism or racism because you have a few women and minority supporters - and then call that argument "Not your shield".
But if you do belong to the 10% of Gamergaters who haven't read the rather entertaining 8chan threads where various Leaders of Gamergate "strategize" on how to derail those pesky "SJWs", and so lap up every word of it: No. What you have been told GG's targets have said is not what they actually have said. Same way that they're not actually journalists. Same way that they've never supported censorship. Same way they've never traded favors to journalists for positive coverage. Same way they've not actually posted the reviews of games you've been told they've posted.
If the road is in use, it's not abandoned.
In practice it means anyone's whose views on women is more progressive than Bill Cosby's.
Too soon?
I wouldn't call it trolling if it's up front, non-discriminatory, charged only to businesses that are getting revenue from Android, and based on what are sadly legitimate-in-the-legal-sense patents.
Yes, there's a good case that the patents they're using shouldn't be legal, but they are.
...as long as John McClane isn't a fictional character...
To be honest, I have some sympathy with him. Not that you should swallow the costs, of course, but that vendors should publish prices that are meaningful.
The two worst offenders I've seen are US phone companies and car dealerships. Both are essentially allowed to make shit up. Indeed, the FCC regularly encourages telephone companies to do so, telling them they can cover the cost of an additional expense by adding an unadvertised fee of their own choosing to the final bills of their subscribers.
I appreciate many businesses want to advertise the lowest prices they can, but you have to recognize that from a consumer's point of view, if you advertise something as costing X, and then charge us Y, you were misleading us by saying it cost X. You, in fact, provided no useful information whatsoever to us by advertising X.
In the old days of 1.0 I could run it happily in a 64Mb PC. Now I can't run it for more than a day without it filling up 3-4G of memory, frequently crashing at this point (I assume because it's a 32 bit application now.)
There's been something very wrong with Firefox since 4.0, and while I know the developers have made heroic efforts to fix the constant leaks and bloating, every time they do, it just takes another version to break everything again.
I love Firefox, and keep coming back to it after using Chrome for a little bit and being repelled, but it's not what it was.
Did you just argue that preventing States from letting gay people get married is expanding the State and "screwing" liberty, justice and freedom?
Generally speaking, when SCOTUS says "No, you can't pass laws preventing consenting adults from doing X", it's defending freedom, not restricting it. Unless your concern is the freedom of State governments, in which case we, the people, don't give a shit. The States exist to serve us, not vice versa.
Not sure about the GP, but I interpreted it as being about Microsoft moving to a subscription service, which Windows doesn't fit into. The sentence was:
That's the exact opposite of him saying "Windows is switching to a subscription model". He's saying "Windows will die, because Microsoft is moving to a subscription model". If he was arguing Windows was switching to a subscription model, he wouldn't be arguing Windows will die as a result of Microsoft moving to one, would he?
I would be interested in his reasons, but I suspect the logic is something related to the cross platform nature of most cloud hosted offerings, which Office 365 is an example of. If you can use Office on a ChromeBook, you have less need to use Windows. And if you're trying to make money by selling subscriptions, ensuring everyone has 24/7 access regardless of device is probably a good idea and a major selling point.
Good luck, Judges hate it when you try to be "clever" with tricks like that, and rarely rule in your favor. Also don't forget that the diagram is already technically broken into parts (individual bits) by virtue of being digitized and sent through the Internet anyway, so that particular attempt to circumvent a ban is unlikely to work with any law as effectively written.
I don't know about that, were the ACM provisions of the DMCA (the part that in theory banned DeCSS) ever declared to be in breach of the first amendment? I recall we "lost" that legal fight, even if DeCSS's ubiquity meant it ended up being a Pyhrric victory for the DVD-CCA.
Legally I suspect they can "ban" 3D gun blueprints if stored in some computer parsable form. Practically, of course, they'll find that hard to enforce.
I don't think you read the entire sentence ;-)
That's one of two major factors, and yeah, even if one is solved, the other has to be to.
My next vehicle would be an electric except:
1. Price, as you mention. New - yeah, I guess the lowest end electrics compare to mid-priced vehicles, when subsidized, but it's still a price difference measured in many, many, thousands. But used? Forget it. And I'll be honest, I'm a used car buyer. I can't afford tens of thousands of dollars for a new vehicle.
2. There's a good chance the vehicle that'll need replacing will be the minivan. There are no electric minivans.
We need both a wide range of useful vehicles, and prices to be reasonable. It's hard to believe that it's not practical to build an electric vehicle with a 100 mile range for a price comparable to a gasoline powered vehicle of similar specification.
(FFS: An obvious troll is modded +5 Insightful, and virtually everyone calling them on it is modded down through the floor. That's moderation abuse. See you in metamod...)
This little loaded troll is +5 Insightful? The one that calls a harassment campaign that's trying to silence women (and other minorities) in tech and their supporters through threats of violence "free minded geeks", and those who oppose them "authoritarian" and "apologists for censorship"? Because constant threats of violence is somehow pro-free speech, and encouraging people to evaluate games, highlighting problematic aspects, and encouraging developers to produce more interesting work is pro-censorship?
There are countries out there that welcome the "MRA/Republican/Stormfront/Racist/Misogyno-nerds" (a fairly decent description of a campaign of relentless online terror against women, blacks, and left wingers) and others that make up your little cesspool - the countries that support the kind of terror you inflict on those who refuse to kowtow to your demands. An Iranian actor just had to apologize for tweeting support for the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. Russia continues to push the bar as far as imprisoning gay people for being gay in public. Saudi Arabia punishes women for invading your traditional male space by, you know, driving and stuff.
Those are countries you guys would love. Why don't you fuck off there, and let the rest of us enjoy a diverse community in which people don't get rape and death threats for criticizing the Hitman video game?
?
That's a complete lie. But it is what Gamergaters tell newcomers so they can feel good about supporting a campaign of harassment.
Do you feel good about not merely ignoring the high profile threats and harassment prominent women in tech are experiencing, but also smearing the victims as liars, and spreading false stories to try to get people to disbelieve them?
OK, but the settlement is unlikely to be for more than pennies (we're talking Youtube royalties here), so what lawyer is likely to take on the case?
Despite the view of many that the legal system is some kind of lottery where you can win arbitrary amounts of cash, the reality is that the civil system generally works on the basis of damages with any punitive element being small or non-existent. Most of the time the high awards you hear about for some injury or another are a product of high medical bills being involved, not because a judge wanted to make Macy's pay for having slippery floors (or whatever.)
Plenty. You can start here.
Nobody's trying to "smear" GamerGate, we read what you write in your own words on 8chan, /r/KIA, and under the #gamergate hashtag.
Your entire movement started when Adam Baldwin tweeted links to YouTube videos smearing a female game dev's sex life because her ex-boyfriend wanted to run a hate campaign against her. That information is public domain. It's not something I just made up. It's the ORIGINS OF GAMERGATE. It's where the hashtag came from.
Forget the links I point to you above, take a look at the last few articles on Slashdot concerning gender - concerning subjects as minor and unthreatening as whether marketing a chemistry set specifically at girls might have the opposite affect to that intended (ie doing so might decrease interest by girls.) Something many of us would like to discuss, but can't, because you fuckers SHITPOST over EVERY. SINGLE. DISCUSSION, doing your absolute best to discourage anyone from even discussing the subject by flooding the comments section with misogynist trolls and off topic bullshit.
If you really are so stupid as to think that GamerGate is something to do with Ethics in Gaming Journalism, you might want to actually look into the movement. You might even want to look at the "journalists" it allies itself with.
Because if it did, it wouldn't:
- Do everything possible to prevent discussions of women in tech. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".
- Harass female game devs constantly, because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".
- Talk non stop about so-called "SJWs" and never mention journalists. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".
- Demand Slashdot ban discussions related to diversity in tech. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".
- Call JACK THOMPSON "BASED DAD", a lawyer who has actually tried to ban games, while calling Anita Sarkeesian a "censor" or "authoritarian", because she produced a video identifying tropes she feels are sexist in various video games. Because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".
- Support the "journalism" of Milo Yiannopoulos, because he certainly has NOTHING to do with "ethics in (ANY) journalism" FFS.
- Pretend a mass harassment campaign against prominent women in journalism is not going on, pretending instead it's some kind of fund raising stunt (even though it doesn't apparently help any of the targets that it's going on), because that has nothing to do with "ethics in gaming journalism".
Do you get the picture?
(Third attempt: reposted due to abusive moderation. Interesting how the moderation on virtually everything I post that's anti-harassment these days proves my point. What has happened to tech? What has happened to Slashdot? If I'd posted a year ago that a bunch of female devs would be suffering harassment up to and including rape threats and worse in an attempt to prevent them from speaking about problems they encounter, I'd have been laughed out of town. Now it's happening a significant number of people on Slashdot actively support that hatred campaign and are doing everything they can to silence anyone who opposes it.)
This little loaded troll is +5 Insightful? The one that calls a harassment campaign that's trying to silence women (and other minorities) in tech and their supporters through threats of violence "free minded geeks", and those who oppose them "authoritarian" and "apologists for censorship"? Because constant threats of violence is somehow pro-free speech, and encouraging people to evaluate games, highlighting problematic aspects, and encouraging developers to produce more interesting work is pro-censorship?
There are countries out there that welcome the "MRA/Republican/Stormfront/Racist/Misogyno-nerds" (a fairly decent description of a campaign of relentless online terror against women, blacks, and left wingers) and others that make up your little cesspool - the countries that support the kind of terror you inflict on those who refuse to kowtow to your demands. An Iranian actor just had to apologize for tweeting support for the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. Russia continues to push the bar as far as imprisoning gay people for being gay in public. Saudi Arabia punishes women for invading your traditional male space by, you know, driving and stuff.
Those are countries you guys would love. Why don't you fuck off there, and let the rest of us enjoy a diverse community in which people don't get rape and death threats for criticizing the Hitman video game?
I've never heard of either of these people, nor are they mentioned in my post.
What the ever loving fuck are you talking about? Or is this a #notyourshield troll?
I believe there's a concept called Slander of Title, but I'm not sure it actually results in serious damages being paid out, and quite honestly, how many YouTube contributors want to/can afford to pay for a lawyer to sue over what, at best, would be a tiny, measured in pennies, royalty check?
I don't actually buy the argument that this was a mistake. Rumblefish actually doubled down when they were called on that birdsong mistake mentioned in the summary, and Google backed them. I think Rumblefish knows they've found a loop hole, and Google are too scared of the larger copyright holders to vet their claims.
(Repost due to abusive moderation. Interesting how the moderation on virtually everything I post that's anti-harassment these days proves my point. What has happened to tech? What has happened to Slashdot? If I'd posted a year ago that a bunch of female devs would be suffering harassment up to and including rape threats and worse in an attempt to prevent them from speaking about problems they encounter, I'd have been laughed out of town. Now it's happening a significant number of people on Slashdot actively support that hatred campaign and are doing everything they can to silence anyone who opposes it.)
This little loaded troll is +5 Insightful? The one that calls a harassment campaign that's trying to silence women (and other minorities) in tech and their supporters through threats of violence "free minded geeks", and those who oppose them "authoritarian" and "apologists for censorship"? Because constant threats of violence is somehow pro-free speech, and encouraging people to evaluate games, highlighting problematic aspects, and encouraging developers to produce more interesting work is pro-censorship?
There are countries out there that welcome the "MRA/Republican/Stormfront/Racist/Misogyno-nerds" (a fairly decent description of a campaign of relentless online terror against women, blacks, and left wingers) and others that make up your little cesspool - the countries that support the kind of terror you inflict on those who refuse to kowtow to your demands. An Iranian actor just had to apologize for tweeting support for the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. Russia continues to push the bar as far as imprisoning gay people for being gay in public. Saudi Arabia punishes women for invading your traditional male space by, you know, driving and stuff.
Those are countries you guys would love. Why don't you fuck off there, and let the rest of us enjoy a diverse community in which people don't get rape and death threats for criticizing the Hitman video game?
Wow, you've not read any media whatsoever in the last year or so? That's impressive.
The campaign is called "Gamergate". It's been extensively covered by most media outlets.
Indeed, and GG seems to be, in part, a reaction to that.
This little loaded troll is +5 Insightful? The one that calls a harassment campaign that's trying to silence women (and other minorities) in tech and their supporters through threats of violence "free minded geeks", and those who oppose them "authoritarian" and "apologists for censorship"? Because constant threats of violence is somehow pro-free speech, and encouraging people to evaluate games, highlighting problematic aspects, and encouraging developers to produce more interesting work is pro-censorship?
There are countries out there that welcome the "MRA/Republican/Stormfront/Racist/Misogyno-nerds" (a fairly decent description of a campaign of relentless online terror against women, blacks, and left wingers) and others that make up your little cesspool - the countries that support the kind of terror you inflict on those who refuse to kowtow to your demands. An Iranian actor just had to apologize for tweeting support for the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. Russia continues to push the bar as far as imprisoning gay people for being gay in public. Saudi Arabia punishes women for invading your traditional male space by, you know, driving and stuff.
Those are countries you guys would love. Why don't you fuck off there, and let the rest of us enjoy a diverse community in which people don't get rape and death threats for criticizing the Hitman video game?
I think a lot of Ubuntu and GNOME3 users would be much, much, happier if you were right. Both Unity and GNOME3 have tried to re-invent the desktop, but neither really have been successful.
Neither are a 2000s museum. But both could learn a lot from what Microsoft is doing - this should not be written as an endorsement of anyone deciding that the next GNU/Linux Desktop should be a clone of Windows, there's a difference between learning from and copying..