Off Topic > Off Topic
Can someone explain gamergate to me in the simplest way possible
Conan:
is the wikipedia article completely wrong on this then? it talks (with many citations) about how the majority of the accusations were incorrect in the first place, and that although it may not initially had been about social justice stuff, the targets for harassment and threats happened to all be female, and one target was known primarily for her criticism of loveism/loveuality in games
Bisjac:
fake (game) news and unrelated sjw bullstuff
beachbum111111:
--- Quote from: Conan on November 21, 2017, 12:12:01 PM ---is the wikipedia article completely wrong on this then? it talks (with many citations) about how the majority of the accusations were incorrect in the first place, and that although it may not initially had been about social justice stuff, the targets for harassment and threats happened to all be female, and one target was known primarily for her criticism of loveism/loveuality in games
--- End quote ---
Yes it's completely wrong. There was an editing war and Wikipedia sided with the handicaps
Conan:
--- Quote from: beachbum111111 on November 21, 2017, 12:18:56 PM ---Yes it's completely wrong. There was an editing war and Wikipedia sided with the handicaps
--- End quote ---
is there any comprehensive rebuttal anywhere? there's a lot of sources pointing to evidence that the thing was more about harassment than actual gaming journalism ethics.
if i'm sounding defensive of the article blame it on my libtard tendencies. i just want to see both sides of it, eg a counter article to wikipedia's stance if it exists.
one thing that is for certain though is badspot being right about it blowing over if it didnt get so much media attention. would have just been a one-time harassment case
beachbum111111:
--- Quote from: Conan on November 21, 2017, 12:26:40 PM ---is there any comprehensive rebuttal anywhere? there's a lot of sources pointing to evidence that the thing was more about harassment than actual gaming journalism ethics.
if i'm sounding defensive of the article blame it on my libtard tendencies. i just want to see both sides of it, eg a counter article to wikipedia's stance if it exists.
one thing that is for certain though is badspot being right about it blowing over if it didnt get so much media attention. would have just been a one-time harassment case
--- End quote ---
Yeah all those sources are the same sites that were being accused of corruption. Really makes you think.
As for sources. The original quinsperacy videos are what started this whole thing. And we had a gamergate megathread on the forums that detailed a bunch of stuff. If you look up "gamers are dead" articles youll more then likely find the articles that happened in response to people getting pissed off.
I'm on my phone right now so I can't get links and if I have to correct one more loving autocorrect mistake in going to shoot up the Samsung headquarters.