Jump to content
Nich...

Gender, Gaming, And Internet Trolls

Recommended Posts

That really would be stupid. Firstly, unless they had some training in how to use their weapons, they'd be more dangerous to themselves and each other than the bad guys. Secondly, the hero would have to sneak in to the operation with a truck full of weapons.

That's a very good point! I'd forgotten that male protagonists across all media have always had responsible weapon training as part of the game.

In any event, let's just settle for "there's often other ways to handle it" and leave it as that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's nice that even when male prostitutes are on the scene, they apparently can't be bullied and controlled like female prostitutes, and not need rescuing.

 

If it's about sexual trafficking, then they're more likely be boys than men. And I'm not sure how that'd get past censors.

 

 

That all avoids the point, tho': how do we, as the consumer, know if a scene/mission rescuing the helpless from sexual exploitation is there for some legitimate, contextual variety, or is just an excuse to throw in some soft porn to bolster sales with the teen boy demographic? It's a potentially gratuitous, exploitative scene. How do we tell if it's being used gratuitously and exploitatively?

Inter-resting ;)

It's like those macho Steven Segal movies. When we were both younger he was cute, he couldn't act but he was cute.

 

All those poor teenage boys who want soft porn ... I thought the teens were the geeks and the older guys and gals were those

playing out their heroic fantasies in game :D

 

I've no idea how many styles of games are out there. (anecdotal) I've passively viewed quite a few over the years and the most

banal one that comes to mind is where the player does his best to kill all the zombies. Fair enough as they seem to want to kill

him / her too, so you know the outcome, it's sort of inevitable. At the same time a lot of these games have not been on-line

either. So it's just been a matter of how we feel about them.

Also it's seems to be coming back to the lack of care re the writing of the stories. Quantity versus quality ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, a good article to read Nich, thanks for that. I particularly like this bit ...

 

"What the Internet has done, however, is to narrowly cleave groups into thousands or millions of these chambers. Reddit is the perfect example of this. Fan of something? There’s a discussion group dedicated to it! Others exist that have the same tastes you do! There’s never any reason to go anywhere else!

 

Unfortunately, living in an echo chamber gives you no skills to respond effectively when something challenges those views. Instead, you respond as the group does; harassing the outsider until they go away, and coming up with crazy stories to justify why those outsiders’ views are wrong. Combine that learned behavior with the assumed anonymity of the Internet and you have the perfect recipe for jackassery."...

 

I've not ever joined facebook, but I'd assume it's the same deal. Sorta why I like atomic really, I don't have to be a nerd or a geek

or pretend to be sane or anything. I've just got to like the place and mix of members, and using the media. Learning more is just

a natural occurrence of being here. Also if I joined fb I'd likely find I had no ' friends ', could be bloody lonely for me there.

 

 

I'm not sure it's the go to " check fuckwads at every turn " that would be very tiring and take any enjoyment from the game or

where ever it is the " fuckwad " is being a fuckwad . Also, it depends on the form the fuckwadary takes imo.

 

It's not ever cool to threaten another person's health in any way. << That'd be the line for me to want to seriously intervene.

 

Anyway, thanks again, for a good and sane read ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are so many interesting and eye-opening articles out there. Just once, I would love to hear from one of the people in the angry mob. And not just a peripheral, "so-and-so is a cunt" poster (hell, we have those people here on Atomic, depending on the subject matter, so that ain't real spesh). No, I want to hear the perspective of someone who deliberately sits down for hours and hours to get access to a bunch of accounts, someone who finds real-life contact numbers and proceeds to harass via that channel, someone who would post someone else's private deets (contacts, bank accounts, whatevs) online.

 

I wanna hear their perspective. I wanna hear their justifications. I want to hear what goes through their mind.

 

(There could be articles out there that are just like that, I just haven't come across one yet.)

 

There are a lot of people, a lot of articles, that talk about and for these people. Their actions and words are interpreted and then reported on. People hypothesise. People theorise. People guess. People represent. I want to hear an article - a well written, polite examination - from the direct perspective of one of these people. There are so, so many articles written about all other aspects of these online shenanigans, and many are well thought-out, researched and interesting.

 

Personally, I'd be willing to bet there's a lack of well written articles from these people because it's a position that can't be defended and so it degenerates into blaming, finger-pointing, shaming and ranting. But I could be wrong. I'd just find it interesting to see what, exactly, would come of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone from 4chan's /v/ board wrote this up (it's a note on Facebook, not a link to 4chan btw) , it's mostly a response to a Cracked "article" but it address a few other points at the same time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those guys are gonna run out of places to 'boycott' eventually...

Maybe.

But as someone who is a fan of Cracked in the past, I was a little sad to see them effectively allowing their platform to be used as an open-mic for her to give her side of the story.

It's not exactly the most balanced look at the issue, at all. And as you say, fuel for the fire.

 

I agree with some of the arguments in that article. It's a great example of the Streisand principle - preventing people from using your discussion platform, to discuss something that they feel is important to them, is going to lead them to overreact, and draw nastier inferences about who is involved and why.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Those guys are gonna run out of places to 'boycott' eventually...

Maybe.

But as someone who is a fan of Cracked in the past, I was a little sad to see them effectively allowing their platform to be used as an open-mic for her to give her side of the story.

It's not exactly the most balanced look at the issue, at all. And as you say, fuel for the fire.

 

I agree with some of the arguments in that article. It's a great example of the Streisand principle - preventing people from using your discussion platform, to discuss something that they feel is important to them, is going to lead them to overreact, and draw nastier inferences about who is involved and why.

 

 

Why does it need to be "balanced"? As you say it is her side of the story. it isn't an news article, a trial or a debate.

 

God knows you can get the "other" side in a thousand other places. What's wrong with the victim having one forum to herself?

Edited by Hlass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are so many interesting and eye-opening articles out there. Just once, I would love to hear from one of the people in the angry mob. And not just a peripheral, "so-and-so is a cunt" poster (hell, we have those people here on Atomic, depending on the subject matter, so that ain't real spesh). No, I want to hear the perspective of someone who deliberately sits down for hours and hours to get access to a bunch of accounts, someone who finds real-life contact numbers and proceeds to harass via that channel, someone who would post someone else's private deets (contacts, bank accounts, whatevs) online.

 

I wanna hear their perspective. I wanna hear their justifications. I want to hear what goes through their mind.

 

(There could be articles out there that are just like that, I just haven't come across one yet.)

 

There are a lot of people, a lot of articles, that talk about and for these people. Their actions and words are interpreted and then reported on. People hypothesise. People theorise. People guess. People represent. I want to hear an article - a well written, polite examination - from the direct perspective of one of these people. There are so, so many articles written about all other aspects of these online shenanigans, and many are well thought-out, researched and interesting.

 

Personally, I'd be willing to bet there's a lack of well written articles from these people because it's a position that can't be defended and so it degenerates into blaming, finger-pointing, shaming and ranting. But I could be wrong. I'd just find it interesting to see what, exactly, would come of it.

 

You're asking the Cunt-Bitch-Slut-Die people to articulate their reasoning? That's mean.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Those guys are gonna run out of places to 'boycott' eventually...

Maybe.

But as someone who is a fan of Cracked in the past, I was a little sad to see them effectively allowing their platform to be used as an open-mic for her to give her side of the story.

It's not exactly the most balanced look at the issue, at all. And as you say, fuel for the fire.

 

I agree with some of the arguments in that article. It's a great example of the Streisand principle - preventing people from using your discussion platform, to discuss something that they feel is important to them, is going to lead them to overreact, and draw nastier inferences about who is involved and why.

 

 

Why does it need to be "balanced"? As you say it is her side of the story. it isn't an news article, a trial or a debate.

 

God knows you can get the "other" side in a thousand other places. What's wrong with the victim having one forum to herself?

 

The problem is this professional victim has had her side of the story in many media outlets.

All of which are just on her side of the story, with nothing from anywhere else.

 

The only article I know of from one of the actual victims is here: http://apgnation.com/archives/2014/09/09/6977/truth-gaming-interview-fine-young-capitalists

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does it need to be "balanced"? As you say it is her side of the story. it isn't an news article, a trial or a debate.

 

God knows you can get the "other" side in a thousand other places. What's wrong with the victim having one forum to herself?

Quite honestly, I think Zoe Quinn's got a lot of really good airspace to talk about herself. Most of the actual news stories have either been mystified, or in her favour. Both sides have done a bang-up job being jerks to people on the other side. Her actions with the Fine Young Capitalists honestly doesn't sit very well with me.

 

Go and read her twitter comments, all of which were made before any of this blew up, and tell me she's purely a victim in all of this.

 

She's been the victim of horrific abuse.

 

Posting people's private information online, without their consent. Hacking their sites. Organising mass hate on twitter focused at a particular group. All of that is truly horrific. So It's kind of hardened me against Quinn, that before this blew up she was involved in the above with regard to the FYC. She was retweeting doxings on the FYC before this blew up, she twittered accusations about their project dozens of times to her followers and seemingly talked to a number of news sites about her accusations about their projects. It took this whole thing to blow up, before FYC got any airplay at all and even then it wasn't in any of the sites that appear to be aligned with Zoe Quinn.

 

The whole thing seems fucking weird. It's especially complicated given that she's effectively trying to set up a competing project, which at the moment entirely consists of a name, some vague ideas, and no dates for anything.

 

Look, nobody comes out of this with their reputation intact. But nearly all the negative behaviour she describes in her article, she instigated against a group with no capacity to fight back, and without her links in the gaming community. That's pretty fucking despicable.

 

EDIT: Oh yeah, Charcoals already got it covered before I hit submit. :)

Edited by TinBane
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am disapoint in Cracked because I don't care who is doing the writing, I want my social satire with some comedy. That didn't seem funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cracked does seem an odd place for a 'my side of the story' expose I must say.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an industry outsider, all I can think now is that these GamerGate people couldn't organise their way out of a wet paper bag. Seriously fucking useless. Speaking as an outsider, it's incredibly difficult to find a coherent argument or team line in all the noise they're generating. And sadly, that's all they are achieving: noise. White noise.

 

SSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

 

They might have a point - something about corruption and integrity, maybe? - but I wouldn't fucking know based on the maelstrom of conflicting information from their own camps and a complete lack of coherent vision. If they want to have a cause, why isn't someone more organised? Why can't someone or someones speak clearly? If they think they have legitimate concerns, why is there so much trouble presenting them in a coherent manner?

 

They might have legitimate concerns, but I wouldn't fucking know based on the sheer volume of SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

 

Yes, Mr FB Article, it has become "pointless fucking bullshit" because it's degenerated into SSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

 

Which is sad. I love a good debate and discussion. This whole scandal ceased to be a debate and a discussion ages ago. All we get now is

 

SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an industry outsider, all I can think now is that these GamerGate people couldn't organise their way out of a wet paper bag. Seriously fucking useless. Speaking as an outsider, it's incredibly difficult to find a coherent argument or team line in all the noise they're generating. And sadly, that's all they are achieving: noise. White noise.

 

SSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

 

They might have a point - something about corruption and integrity, maybe? - but I wouldn't fucking know based on the maelstrom of conflicting information from their own camps and a complete lack of coherent vision. If they want to have a cause, why isn't someone more organised? Why can't someone or someones speak clearly? If they think they have legitimate concerns, why is there so much trouble presenting them in a coherent manner?

 

They might have legitimate concerns, but I wouldn't fucking know based on the sheer volume of SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

 

Yes, Mr FB Article, it has become "pointless fucking bullshit" because it's degenerated into SSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

 

Which is sad. I love a good debate and discussion. This whole scandal ceased to be a debate and a discussion ages ago. All we get now is

 

SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...

I think that's because it's a mass of people, the loudest of whom are very inarticulate and unsophisticated in their communication.

And they are going up against a much smaller group of people whose living is based on their ability to write.

 

A mass of people who have trouble communicating their point(s) vs a smaller group of people hose profession is communicating their point(s)?

Is it any wonder why it seems like noise?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an industry outsider, all I can think now is that these GamerGate people couldn't organise their way out of a wet paper bag. Seriously fucking useless. Speaking as an outsider, it's incredibly difficult to find a coherent argument or team line in all the noise they're generating. And sadly, that's all they are achieving: noise. White noise.

 

SSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

 

They might have a point - something about corruption and integrity, maybe? - but I wouldn't fucking know based on the maelstrom of conflicting information from their own camps and a complete lack of coherent vision. If they want to have a cause, why isn't someone more organised? Why can't someone or someones speak clearly? If they think they have legitimate concerns, why is there so much trouble presenting them in a coherent manner?

 

They might have legitimate concerns, but I wouldn't fucking know based on the sheer volume of SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

 

Yes, Mr FB Article, it has become "pointless fucking bullshit" because it's degenerated into SSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

 

Which is sad. I love a good debate and discussion. This whole scandal ceased to be a debate and a discussion ages ago. All we get now is

 

SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...

 

Yes. This. One billion times this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... snip ...

A mass of people who have trouble communicating their point(s) vs a smaller group of people hose profession is communicating their point(s)?

Is it any wonder why it seems like noise?

 

A really excellent point Charcoal.

 

I don't have a problem with them disagreeing , I have a problem with them wanting someone dead and raped, and w/e else.

But, granted the style of "noise" chosen certainly brought the whole thing to the fore, so yeah it works :)

 

I read others walls of text and wonder how they do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decoherence isn't just a problem with the loudest being knuckledraggers.

 

It's that how do we know that any sane, single voice is speaking for any sizeable group?

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

×