Jump to content
xnatex

Homophobia in gaming - and bigotry in homosexuals

Recommended Posts

I've tried making new threads to attract people, but my threads rarely even attract the attention of regulars.

 

I currently have a competition running in Gaming (it was actually a 'hey, hows this for an idea, monthly comps!' to gauge interest), but no one has bitten, I even have a pretty decent prize lined up too.

 

I honestly don't know how to get people to stay once their here.

Maybe you could host Highlander TF2 matches every Sunday or something?

TF2 is freely avaliable and fun, so I think people will do that.

 

Also, with the prizes for winning things, I cold contribute a game or so :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've tried making new threads to attract people, but my threads rarely even attract the attention of regulars.

 

I currently have a competition running in Gaming (it was actually a 'hey, hows this for an idea, monthly comps!' to gauge interest), but no one has bitten, I even have a pretty decent prize lined up too.

 

I honestly don't know how to get people to stay once their here.

Maybe you could host Highlander TF2 matches every Sunday or something?

TF2 is freely avaliable and fun, so I think people will do that.

 

Also, with the prizes for winning things, I cold contribute a game or so :)

 

TF2 isn't really my thing. As a matter of fact, I have no idea what you just said :P

 

Any idea if Gamearena still do server bookings? I'm sure we could find some games that they can host for us to play.

Edited by NukeJockey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the problem is how full on the place can be, every other forum I go to everyone is just more chilled, moderators are not even really needed cause everyone gets on, on atomic not everyone but quiet a few people are just way to serious, getting rid of them IMO would help the place 10x more than anything else.

I've been to forums where everyone thinks the same, especially car forums. Can be quite boring.

 

I think there is a range of forums based on diversity of opinion, Atomic may be toward the more diverse end :) The diversity can lead to disagreement, sometimes it's great debate sometimes it's childish, but we don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water. It can be a fine line from a mods perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave I will have to admit my haste to judge, I work in kings cross and get called a homophobe when i dont take the pamphlets to support gay marriage every time i walk past even tho i do support it, seeing sexual orientation stuff having a main feature in my fav tech mag was enough to make me create an account and post this haha.

 

I do understand the issue better now, i feel better now that i vented too lol, sorry for being abrupt :)

I think that's pretty standard tactics for people who hand out pamphlets, like the Greenpeace mob that told me I was killing the planet by not talking to them about the planet. Just try not to let fanatical people like that get to you :)

 

And stick around the forum - we've got plenty of stuff to read and comment on in the tech sections, and a Green Room for general threads like these.

 

I told them that I actually hate trees.

 

I cannot handle people in the Mall or wherever, handing out pamphlets or collecting signatures...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sir, I take my hat off to you.

And tosses it to me as I need a new hat. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I go to work for twelve hours and this happens.

 

A few points.

 

1. I read the article the day it was posted on the site and it did resonate with me, and as a result I have changed my behaviour. Not sure if I was really using the term as a pejorative mostly just as a joke between mates but since I have come to realize that it's at the expense of an entire (community?) I have since stopped.

 

2. The complaints about objectivity are quite frankly mind boggling. A little thought should inevitably lead to the conclusion that objectivity is for most intents and purposes, a myth. Why? you may ask, simple. Every single person on the planet is shaped by their experiences which are by definition subjective and anyone who has experienced just about anything can therefore no longer be truly objective about it. Yes sweeping generalisations are sweeping but if you have an opinion then it's not objective and if you know something about a subject it's almost impossible to not form an opinion.

 

I am so going to get butthurt for that, but as a disclaimer that is my subjective opinion :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I go to work for twelve hours and this happens.

 

A few points.

 

1. I read the article the day it was posted on the site and it did resonate with me, and as a result I have changed my behaviour. Not sure if I was really using the term as a pejorative mostly just as a joke between mates but since I have come to realize that it's at the expense of an entire (community?) I have since stopped.

 

2. The complaints about objectivity are quite frankly mind boggling. A little thought should inevitably lead to the conclusion that objectivity is for most intents and purposes, a myth. Why? you may ask, simple. Every single person on the planet is shaped by their experiences which are by definition subjective and anyone who has experienced just about anything can therefore no longer be truly objective about it. Yes sweeping generalisations are sweeping but if you have an opinion then it's not objective and if you know something about a subject it's almost impossible to not form an opinion.

 

I am so going to get butthurt for that, but as a disclaimer that is my subjective opinion :).

It was nice knowing ya man :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe in objective journalism - I've got a platform and I'm not afraid to use it :)

Is that really your attitude...?

 

Your editorial on homophobia in gaming was clearly an editorial opinion, so no need for it to be objective, and no concerns raised.

 

However, surely you ''believe in objective journalism'' for matters other than opinion pieces...? Eg. reporting news, evaluating and reviewing PC components, etc...?

 

 

However, this means that I cannot believe a single thing you write or edit, due to your frank admission that you have no journalistic integrity, and indeed do not consider it important.

I had a similar ''WTF'' reaction to David's statement above. But I'm pretty sure that he must have been over-stating his lack of concern for objectivity, or meant something else.

 

I guess he will set us straight (no pun intended).

 

 

I should be angry, but really I'm just in awe - absolute awe - of your ability to leap from one statement all the way to another.

I have been responding to posts in this thread as I read them, and just auto-appending new quotes and replies as I read through.

 

Hence my question above... because I had the same concern as Sir S, when I took your words ''don't believe in objective journalism'' at face value.

 

Anyway, from your reaction to Sir S, are you clarifying now that you do believe in objective journalism...?

Edited by Virtuoso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see what all the fear is about , how can one use an article about lets say CPU performance as a platform to voice ones opinion on social issues, you post the benches and report the facts, no room there for squeezing in a soap box.

 

Its obvious the Editorials and Opinion articles were what was being refereed to, I don't remember H saying he believed in dishonest journalism, so I am pretty sure that the tech articles and factual reports are In safe hands.

 

This overreaction has got me scratching my head, and put a slightly bemused look on my face.

 

PS: I don't know if it is possible, to write an opinion piece... without .. (drumroll).. an opinion.

Edited by Waltish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how can one use an article about lets say CPU performance as a platform to voice ones opinion... (Y)ou post the benches and report the facts, no room there for squeezing in a soap box

Easily. One could be a fan of Intel and, if one didn't believe in objective journalism, one could write a review of an Intel chip which praised it unrealistically vs its AMD competition. Or one could be an Apple fanboy and, if one didn't believe in objective journalism, one could write a glowing review of an under-speced Apple Mac. Further, one could show one's lack of objectivity by selectively quoting only those benchmarks which support one's opinion.

 

 

This overreaction has got me scratching my head, and put a slightly bemused look on my face.

It's neither a trivial thing nor an over-reaction when a professional journalist says they ''don't believe in objective journalism''.

 

I'm sure the MEAA, to which David hopefully belongs, and whose code of ethics he hopefully adheres to, would agree with me on this.

 

In any case, as I said above, the homophobia piece was clearly an editorial, which is by its nature obviously an opinion piece, and that is absolutely fine. I think David just accidentally over-stated his position when he said he ''didn't believe in objective journalism''. No doubt he'll correct that when he gets to read this thread, because he wouldn't want there to be any misunderstanding on such a basic principle of his professionalism.

Edited by Virtuoso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In any case, as I said above, the homophobia piece was clearly an editorial, which is by its nature obviously an opinion piece, and that is absolutely fine. I think David just accidentally over-stated his position when he said he ''didn't believe in objective journalism''. No doubt he'll correct that when he gets to read this thread, because he wouldn't want there to be any misunderstanding on such a basic principle of his professionalism.

I took it as you did, and editorial and the same with the lack of belief in objective journalism, hence the smiley face at the end of his sentence. His comment that he has a platform and isn't afraid to use it while a bit tongue in cheek, is really the definition of an editorial.

 

I actually applaud the injection of social commentary into nerdsville :) If technology is supposed to advance the way we live and work then the inclusion of social comment in technical communities, publications, etc is a natural progression if not a necessity.

 

That and I need another coffee at this stupid hour.

 

EDIT for clarity (now that I have my second coffee in hand)

Edited by Mac Dude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets not get having an opinion and being dishonest confused with each other , or assuming that voicing ones opinion causes a loss of integrity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gosh, and people say I sound pompous when I pontificate. Okay, I'll address this in bit of a stream.

 

First up, no, I'm not a member of the MEAA - very few journos I know are. As to the Code of Ethics, I don't think there's any conflict between the Code and my beliefs; I have always, quite openly stated, I adhere more to the Gonzo code than anything else, but the two need not be at odds. And let's be honest, from day one, that's been the mission statement:

 

"You see, we're only going to cover what we think is cool in the world of computers - so, we're trusting you have similar tastes to ours." Ben Mansill, issue 1.

 

In objective journalism, the writer is absent - they're a cipher for the raw facts. That's also, frankly, boring. If you like Atomic, I hope you like it for the voices and personalities therein. If you dislike it - and feel free - it's probably for a similar reason. However, you will always find those individual thoughts and opinions freely expressed, openly admitted to, and never taking prominence over the necessary facts.

 

As to equating my statement against objective journalism to a lack of integrity or ethics or whatever, well... chances are nothing I say's going to sway that. I should think it's obvious I disagree, but hey - not everyone has similar tastes to ours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In objective journalism, the writer is absent - they're a cipher for the raw facts. That's also, frankly, boring.

Well man, its your mag. However, I see an editor as exactly what you said above, a cipher for the raw facts. I don't want your opinion, I want your editing ability. I don't pay you for your world-shattering perspective on things. On average, I could find opinions just as interesting and informed by asking random people on the street as by asking you, and I wouldn't need to pay them for it either.

 

Your job is to edit without bias. You want me to pay you money for your magazine, that's what you need to do, because that's whats hard. That's what people care about.

 

It's easy to edit with a target opinion in mind, and end up with a pile of bullshit that completely skews information beyond any truthfulness. Interesting? Could be. Its still worthless crap though. Infotainment, with dubious sources of the info ingredient.

 

Editing without bias is what is worth my money.

 

Now, editorials are a different matter, but just because you slap a big old editorial sticker on the front of an article doesn't make it ok to use your position as editor to push your own personal agenda as if you are the only person who matters in the entire building. You want to try and present the face of homophobia in gaming, do it the integral way. Ask peoples opinions, and arrange them into a cohesive article. Draw a conclusion.

 

Using your position to force thinly-veiled rants onto the top of the website and pin them there is biased and egotistical, and neither is a quality that I will pay you for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using your position to force thinly-veiled rants onto the top of the website and pin them there is biased and egotistical, and neither is a quality that I will pay you for.

I don't think you understand what it is a modern editor actually does, but, hey, your call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using your position to force thinly-veiled rants onto the top of the website and pin them there is biased and egotistical, and neither is a quality that I will pay you for.

I don't think you understand what it is a modern editor actually does, but, hey, your call.

 

Enlighten me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dislike it when folks bandy the "People" word around as if they are speaking for everyone, and that by invoking the "People" word they get a +5 power up of righteousness.

 

Folks that do that should really ask around, I think that they would find that "People" aren't Monolithic and that maybe they the "People" agree or don't agree with them to varying degrees, and that some don't agree with them at all.

 

I am obviously not one of the "People" being invoked by Sir_Substance, I am reasonably confident there are others.

Edited by Waltish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In objective journalism, the writer is absent - they're a cipher for the raw facts. That's also, frankly, boring.

Well man, its your mag. However, I see an editor as exactly what you said above, a cipher for the raw facts. I don't want your opinion, I want your editing ability. I don't pay you for your world-shattering perspective on things. On average, I could find opinions just as interesting and informed by asking random people on the street as by asking you, and I wouldn't need to pay them for it either.

Then you might as well read a newspaper and never ever read a magazine again. And then discount most of the newspapers available in Australia. There is not a single magazine out there that is what you are wanting. Scientific American are not a cipher for raw facts and neither is atomic.

 

Now, editorials are a different matter, but just because you slap a big old editorial sticker on the front of an article doesn't make it ok to use your position as editor to push your own personal agenda as if you are the only person who matters in the entire building. You want to try and present the face of homophobia in gaming, do it the integral way. Ask peoples opinions, and arrange them into a cohesive article. Draw a conclusion.

That's news journalism NOT editorial. Homophobia in gaming is NOT news (at least not to anyone who has been on a gaming server in the last 10 years). It's a perfect topic for an editorial piece and by definition an editorial is about opinion.

 

ed·i·to·ri·al/ˌediˈtôrēəl/

Adjective:

Of or relating to the acquiring or preparing of material for publication.

 

ed·i·to·ri·al

   [ed-i-tawr-ee-uhl, -tohr-] Show IPA

noun

1. an article in a newspaper or other periodical presenting the opinion of the publisher, editor, or editors.

2. a statement broadcast on radio or television that presents the opinion of the owner, manager, or the like, of the station or channel.

3. something regarded as resembling such an article or statement, as a lengthy, dogmatic utterance.

 

The fact is that a very great deal of journalism is about opinion. That and the attitude of those who own the particular piece of media. Just ommiting certain stories could be counted as "biasing" the informaiton, and no media is ever going to be able to cover every single piece of information.

 

And this hasn't changed in the last 20 odd years. I did Journalism studies over 20 years ago and when I did them again during my time at Uni it hadn't changed all that much at the roots. The only thing that has really changed is the research methods.

Edited by Chaos.Lady

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

stuff

Then do yourself a favour, and don't read the editorial. M'kay? Skip onward to the product reviews and tech articles that you crave. You know, the sections that don't overtly purport to be opinion. The sections that aren't, in fact, editorials.

 

I laugh out loud when I hear "shoved down out throats" and similar hyperbole, when the reader likely had at least one working arm and hand combo, and could turn the page (or click 'back', or change the channel or whatever) in a matter of seconds, or less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just slapping a big +1 on what Chaos posted - an article in a newspaper or other periodical presenting the opinion of the publisher, editor, or editors

 

IMO that's exactly what the article in question was...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've been at work a lot since making this thread and taking note of the words i say in general day to day speak. I swear a like a trooper, about everything, when some one helps me with something i thank them by calling em a madcunt. I must have said "this is gay" quietly and too myself nearly each time i faced a difficult problem.

 

Ive grown up in an environment where using colourful language is normal, its actually gonna be a little tough to find replacement words lol

Edited by xnatex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Enlighten me.

Here's the issue - you already make it plain you have little faith in what I have to say, due to the fact that you and I obviously have vastly different beliefs. Further, you've also shown a willingness to twist what I say so that you can make it sound like I'm some kind of pantomime villain.

 

So, no, I won't enlighten you. I think it's actually physically impossible to do so, without being willfully misinterpreted; doubtless, you'll consider even this reply further supporting evidence. The beauty of this situation is that I don't mind; no one publication is going to please everyone, in the same way that no one editorial tone will do likewise; and hey, at least you're engaging, which is one of the basic points of this kind of communication.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've been at work a lot since making this thread and taking note of the words i say in general day to day speak. I swear a like a trooper, about everything, when some one helps me with something i thank them by calling em a madcunt. I must have said "this is gay" quietly and too myself nearly each time i faced a difficult problem.

 

Ive grown up in an environment where using colourful language is normal, its actually gonna be a little tough to find replacement words lol

I hear what your saying. I used to say gay and fag fairly often, till I read this article. Be honest I still struggle with it. But now I

 

know I'm a fucking prick for saying it. So it's robbed any joy I once got out of saying that sort of shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In general, i love it when people complain that homosexuality and the "homosexual agenda" are being "shoved down our throats".

how so?

 

I find that i personally dont worry about the whole homosexuality thing but i find it annoying when a issue like this is raised consistently. Yes it is a issue and im fine with that just dont rub it in too much.

 

as for the article i found it interesting as i learnt alot from it (it was a good article,very good opinion piece david). As for the whole "gay" and "fag" think i dont use those words alot (well hardly ever) so saying that they offend is ok, i get that people are offended by alot of things these days and understand that. So people have to understand that slander will exist forever (im not just saying gay slander,just slander in general) so people have to either grow up and take it on the chin or keep been annoyed by it.

 

 

i know this post might raise a few hairs and im ok with that. this is just my option.

Edited by jdog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×