UHD wrote on Oct 15, 2014, 17:34:An advertisement is a PRIVILEGE.
It is a business deal. Neither side would do it if it didn't mean a profit or benefit down the road. Privilege implies a whole different thing.
You have consistent trouble with words. I'd suggest putting more thought into how you present your ideas.
And still nothing on TFYC I see, which is what breaks the narrative completely of all SJWs. They can't stand that Gamergate funded a great project to help women developers, it completely goes against their narrative.
Beamer wrote on Oct 15, 2014, 16:50:
Speaking of, I haven't seen you comment on that Bioware dev's articles I've posted a few times.
Beamer wrote on Oct 15, 2014, 16:47:
Why would being a misogynist not be a valid reason to be fired from a job?
Beamer wrote on Oct 15, 2014, 16:47:
Removing an ad isn't censorship? Trying to get a site to be defunded because you disagree with their opinion is. You were literally trying to bankrupt them because they hurt your feelings.
Beamer wrote on Oct 15, 2014, 16:47:
Brianna Wu did not paint GG as something it never was. Search your own history for "SJW." It's ALWAYS been about being angry at women. From the start. That's where it came from. Eronj didn't make his video to uncover something wonderful, he did it because he was hurt. "Burgers and Fries" didn't become a tagline because of ethics, it did because people thought a woman having sex with five people was funny.
There are so many worse instances of journalism ethics in games, and they're ignored as people instead keep turning to social issues. Massive swag for reviews? Ignored. Editorials about feminism? Burn the site down!
Beamer wrote on Oct 15, 2014, 16:11:
Funny, I often feel I'm one of the few here that uses reason rather than launching off on tirades about what people must not be allowed to do, as you frequently say.
Brianna Wu is not a journalist. Even if she's interviewed, she has nothing to do with journalist integrity so constantly spamming us with shit you feel she's done is pointless.
You focus on "SJWs" infinitely more than you do on journalism ethics. You call me "intellectually dishonest," while never, ever pointing to proof. Your enormous history of complaining about "SJWs" while claiming it's about ethics seems fairly true that you have no clue what you're talking about, what you're fighting for, what your narrative is, or even what's going on.
Prez wrote on Oct 15, 2014, 15:35:Verno wrote on Oct 15, 2014, 14:55:Yeahyeah Yeah wrote on Oct 15, 2014, 13:55:
The advantage here is GG is also getting positive press, precisely because this issue has gotten bigger. Which is partly why anti-GG people are freaking out on the media end. They are not used to being replied to on anything approaching an equal level.
Yeah pretty much nailed it there. They expected the same sort of one sided bullshit we've been seeing for months thanks to gaming editorials and other nonsense. Now that people aren't reacting the way they want them to its freak out time. Oh well, looks good on them for being dumb and lumping everyone together when people bitched about it time and time again.
Yep. They are used to being the ones controlling the narrative, so any challenge to that makes them freak out and circle the wagons.
Loopy wrote on Oct 15, 2014, 15:13:
Ohhh my God, I actually clicked on that History of... link out of ill-advised curiosity and it was like someone writing a term paper on NerdWar 2.0 Advanced Tactics. Why is Patrick Stewart's picture there? What is with all the little cartoon girls? Are those the girls that play videogames??
Quboid wrote on Oct 15, 2014, 14:51:
Are you honestly stupid enough to think that ISIS trying to hijack hashtags is an endorsement? Evidently yes. They're also keen on the BBC's "The Price Of Football" report, the trouble in the Serbia - Albania football match and the scorer of Ireland's late, late equaliser against Germany. Or they post their propaganda under the trending tags.
I was going to point out how ridiculous it is for someone using the label SJW to talk about bias, and how you're focusing on the actions of the extreme few to paint a large group and what the rest of GamerGate seems to think of that but what's the point. Come on, ISIS propaganda?!
Beamer wrote on Oct 15, 2014, 14:44:
I absolutely adore that you call something "non-biased." It's adorable. So cute.
And Brianna Wu has nothing to do with games journalism. WHY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT HER IF IT IS ONLY ABOUT ETHICS?!
That's right, because it was never about ethics to you. It was always about whining about SJWs.
SpectralMeat wrote on Oct 8, 2014, 08:59:
Ahh the annual apologizing for the previous game's launch has begun.
We must be getting close to the new BF game release.
Redmask wrote on Oct 8, 2014, 07:03:bobbyric wrote on Oct 8, 2014, 01:19:Redmask wrote on Oct 7, 2014, 21:31:
Oh please, go read some of her tweets, she antagonizes people on purpose and brags about ruining careers.
This is my first time hearing about this chick and her troubles, but according to her presentation she says a lot of her "tweets" are falsified photoshops reposted by aggressors. Actually going to her twitter, you can't see her tweets unless you're a follower of her, of which there's only about 3,000
That is a complete falsehood, people and the press have archived her tweets. The protected twitter crap is a recent development because she got embarrassed when people used past ones against her then she tried to delete them.
The SJW will literally make things up to suit their purposes and people still defend them. This is insane.
UHD wrote on Oct 6, 2014, 12:06:
I'm mostly talking about bullshit like this:ASeven wrote on Oct 5, 2014, 16:50:
This is why SJWs must not be allowed to keep spreading their hate-filled speech lest gaming suffers a backward leap so huge it may set the industry decades until it recovers.
Have your opinions, but don't go thinking nobody else can have theirs because they're not the same as yours. That stupid shit benefits no one.
Prez wrote on Oct 5, 2014, 16:15:
I agree that the issue has gotten somewhat convoluted (partially by design on the part of the self-righteous crusaders who like building strawmen then later cutting them down) but I have to agree with Redmask. My fear is that if we don't at least occasionally offer up some significant resistance to the absolute face-palm stupid things the hyprocritical crusading thought police are pushing we may be sorry we didn't later on down the road. Beamer is wrong; they don't just want the occasional game with a strong female lead. They want far more than that, and without someone offering counterpoint to their idiocy, developers and publishers may eventually start listening to them. That's my opinion anyway.