Jesus Christ this dude is obsessed.

WannaLogAlready wrote on Jul 3, 2022, 05:17:
Who the heck is Anita Sarkeesian and why did she appear in the thread ?
Oh, I see, a Dr. Disrespect butthurt fan
Well, don't care and any overblown obsessive trolling won't make me.
But somewhat funny and sad, like pets disgracing themselves.

The irony is we all agree Dr. Disrespect is lame. Just some thought they would virtue signal by defending Anita Sarkeesian, then after getting blasted with facts they have never seen before since being in a tech lefty bubble, tried to claim they were not actually defending Anita.

Back to the flash point:
"The guy is like Anita Sarkinson. Will say anything to get more press attention."
Was a pretty fair / non-crazy statement as both people are known for saying wild things for attention.

Who the heck is Anita Sarkeesian and why did she appear in the thread ?
Oh, I see, a Dr. Disrespect butthurt fan
Well, don't care and any overblown obsessive trolling won't make me.
But somewhat funny and sad, like pets disgracing themselves.

Behold passers by where tech lefties defend Anita Sarkeesian for reasons they do not even know. Boss arguments consisting of:
-This channel doesn't have many subscribers
-Sources are supposedly not "creditable", with no elaboration
-Didn't like the link format

Actual arguments against evidence of Anita being a dishonest grifter..... ¯\_ツ_/¯
Looks like these guys have a real solid case for their view cooking here.

All to defend a person who has declared it their job to claim essentially everything in video games is problematic. With such great content consisting of complaining character walk cycles are to feminized, to be quickly followed up by saying other character walk cycles are not feminized enough. Top tier commentary totally worth dying on the hill for.

Hardline Mike wrote on Jul 2, 2022, 20:11:

milspecmonkey wrote on Jul 2, 2022, 19:55:
Supposedly doesn't give 2 shits, spends grand effort to try and say sources of obvious proof aren't creditable. Ok bro. The videos show areas of concern, which typically reference Anita directly saying things and can be confirmed on her still up videos. Just sounds like you don't like what the evidence has to say ¯\_ツ_/¯

And still my question remains unanswered. Also, now I'm a secret undercover Anita Sarkesian fan? Me? The guy who just said she was an irrelevant grifter? The very thing you're accusing her of? Is English not your first language? Because there seems to be a serious failure in comprehension here. Let me translate into your native language:

ME NOT LIKE ANITA, BUT ME NOT LIKE YOUR POSTS AND SOURCE THINGIES TOO!! IT NOT MATTER IN THIS THREAD BUT YOU DO IN ALL THREAD!!!. ALSO YOU CANT SPELL ANTIFA WITHOUT ANITA, COINCIDENCE????????? GAMER RISE UP

GOES TO GREAT LENGHTS TO CLAIM CONTENT SHOW BAD ANITA NO GOOD. LATER CLAIMS NO LIKE ANITA ANYWAY. MUCH SAY ODD USE OF TIME.

Beamer wrote on Jul 2, 2022, 09:18:
"Wikipedia is garbage" screams exceptionally far right man who lacks any self awareness and thinks he's a moderate, a centrist, a rational thinker, and part of some "silent majority" despite the fact that he constantly makes 5 posts in a row, meaning he's anything but silent.

When you live in echo chambers online, you lose your connection to reality and call things like Wikipedia biased. You don't realize that your willingness to absorb very stupid, biased, unsourced YouTube videos made you an extremist.

The the projection, lol every time. Startn' to have those imaginary conversations again I see.
Nobody should trust Wikipedia, says man who invented Wikipedia
Apparently you can't understand the concept that wikipedia mods with heavy bias pick what can be considered a source. A stupid cycle of, well buzzfeed said some shit, it must be true and to us, this is a trusted source because the mod said so. There are endless examples of looking at the cited sources and the sources were just opinion nonsense pieces with no evidence. Meanwhile they block anything they consider "self published" which could be the most obvious evidence ever on a subject.
But yeah sure, they sounds like a totally squared away system that no way could be abused, lol MUCH EXTREME VIEW.

milspecmonkey wrote on Jul 2, 2022, 19:55:
Supposedly doesn't give 2 shits, spends grand effort to try and say sources of obvious proof aren't creditable. Ok bro. The videos show areas of concern, which typically reference Anita directly saying things and can be confirmed on her still up videos. Just sounds like you don't like what the evidence has to say ¯\_ツ_/¯

And still my question remains unanswered. Also, now I'm a secret undercover Anita Sarkesian fan? Me? The guy who just said she was an irrelevant grifter? The very thing you're accusing her of? Is English not your first language? Because there seems to be a serious failure in comprehension here. Let me translate into your native language:

ME NOT LIKE ANITA, BUT ME NOT LIKE YOUR POSTS AND SOURCE THINGIES TOO!! IT NOT MATTER IN THIS THREAD BUT YOU DO IN ALL THREAD!!!. ALSO YOU CANT SPELL ANTIFA WITHOUT ANITA, COINCIDENCE????????? GAMER RISE UP

Hardline Mike wrote on Jul 2, 2022, 13:54:

milspecmonkey wrote on Jul 2, 2022, 08:49:
We both know it wouldn't matter how popular the video or channel is, as long as the video talks bad about Anita you are gonna come up with some vague dumb excuse to claim it is invalid.

Have another where you can not bring up a single counterpoint again:

As I said in my first response to you, I don't give two shits about Anita Sarkesian, and have little to say about her other than she seems like a grifter and that her 15 minutes of fame ran out almost 8 years ago. I don't know why you keep bringing this back to her, or thinking I'm going to defend whatever she did. This news post isn't even about her. But you do the same thing in every thread about every topic you engage with. In the case of Anita Sarkesian, you probably can't find any quality links about her because she hasn't done anything relevant enough to warrant scrutiny by a reputable and reliable party. After a little searching, I haven't found anything that seems credible in either direction, just a lot of random YouTubers either defending or attacking.

On the other topics you engage with you absolutely could do better with sourcing your claims.

Supposedly doesn't give 2 shits, spends grand effort to try and say sources of obvious proof aren't creditable. Ok bro. The videos show areas of concern, which typically reference Anita directly saying things and can be confirmed on her still up videos. Just sounds like you don't like what the evidence has to say ¯\_ツ_/¯

I love that I called Anita "rote," which is the kindest thing said about her here, and we're all accused of defending her.

"Rote" isn't a nice thing to say about someone. But really thin skinned and irrational dinks blew what she did way out of proportion and sadly made her the center of some idiotic culture war that they felt was important and no one else understood.

milspecmonkey wrote on Jul 2, 2022, 08:49:
We both know it wouldn't matter how popular the video or channel is, as long as the video talks bad about Anita you are gonna come up with some vague dumb excuse to claim it is invalid.

Have another where you can not bring up a single counterpoint again:

As I said in my first response to you, I don't give two shits about Anita Sarkesian, and have little to say about her other than she seems like a grifter and that her 15 minutes of fame ran out almost 8 years ago. I don't know why you keep bringing this back to her, or thinking I'm going to defend whatever she did. This news post isn't even about her. But you do the same thing in every thread about every topic you engage with. In the case of Anita Sarkesian, you probably can't find any quality links about her because she hasn't done anything relevant enough to warrant scrutiny by a reputable and reliable party. After a little searching, I haven't found anything that seems credible in either direction, just a lot of random YouTubers either defending or attacking.

On the other topics you engage with you absolutely could do better with sourcing your claims.

fakespyder wrote on Jul 2, 2022, 01:28:
I'm just glad I don't know much about any of the people you guys are talking about. Something tells me I'm all the better for it.

You are. In the end, I think it has very little to do with the people ostensibly under discussion.

"Wikipedia is garbage" screams exceptionally far right man who lacks any self awareness and thinks he's a moderate, a centrist, a rational thinker, and part of some "silent majority" despite the fact that he constantly makes 5 posts in a row, meaning he's anything but silent.

When you live in echo chambers online, you lose your connection to reality and call things like Wikipedia biased. You don't realize that your willingness to absorb very stupid, biased, unsourced YouTube videos made you an extremist.

Hardline Mike wrote on Jul 2, 2022, 04:52:
You didn't answer my question though. Why not provide better links if you're going to provide them at all? And no, Kotaku and Polygon aren't much better. Barely better than random shitty YouTube channels. If all you're doing is piping in with your opinion on a topic, there's no need to waste anyone's time with a link to someone no one knows repeating the same opinion you just posted. On the contrary, it makes you look like you have no opinions except the ones you've been fed by said YouTube channels.

Any fact worth posting can be backed up with a source that most people will agree is credible and probably accurate. If it can't, it's either not a fact, or not well-founded enough to bring to the table. And opinions are just that: opinions.

It's what people like him do.
There's was another guy from Austria who used to post here, I think his name was venti or venmo. It was not uncommon for his links to be debunked before he posted them. All very reminiscent of anti-vaxxers.

Hardline Mike wrote on Jul 2, 2022, 04:52:

milspecmonkey wrote on Jul 2, 2022, 00:27:
And also enjoying the ignoring of content just because they didn't come from kotaku or polygon, which is exactly what makes places like wikipedia garbage for anything political.

You didn't answer my question though. Why not provide better links if you're going to provide them at all? And no, Kotaku and Polygon aren't much better. Barely better than random shitty YouTube channels. If all you're doing is piping in with your opinion on a topic, there's no need to waste anyone's time with a link to someone no one knows repeating the same opinion you just posted. On the contrary, it makes you look like you have no opinions except the ones you've been fed by said YouTube channels.

Any fact worth posting can be backed up with a source that most people will agree is credible and probably accurate. If it can't, it's either not a fact, or not well-founded enough to bring to the table. And opinions are just that: opinions.

Oh man you really are going to push this? Such great hits as Anita claiming to be some big gamer, despite declaring earlier absolutely not being gamer, it isn't an opinion. Being caught stealing footage of games that clearly she haven't even played, isn't opinion. Claiming everything is racist, sexist, yada yada including video games is obviously false and isn't opinion.

I'll look at whatever, even if I'm not a fan of the source as usually it isn't hard to see if what they say checks out or not. You apparently won't look at anything unless fits your preconceived headline opinion or idea of "good" source. The comedy of someone who won't even look at information because they don't like a thumbnail or some shit to then say I have no opinions of my own, you played yourself good sir... We both know it wouldn't matter how popular the video or channel is, as long as the video talks bad about Anita you are gonna come up with some vague dumb excuse to claim it is invalid.

Have another where you can not bring up a single counterpoint again:

Anita's Pinhole: A Veteran Game Developer responds to Feminist Frequency (Finally!)

milspecmonkey wrote on Jul 2, 2022, 00:27:
And also enjoying the ignoring of content just because they didn't come from kotaku or polygon, which is exactly what makes places like wikipedia garbage for anything political.

You didn't answer my question though. Why not provide better links if you're going to provide them at all? And no, Kotaku and Polygon aren't much better. Barely better than random shitty YouTube channels. If all you're doing is piping in with your opinion on a topic, there's no need to waste anyone's time with a link to someone no one knows repeating the same opinion you just posted. On the contrary, it makes you look like you have no opinions except the ones you've been fed by said YouTube channels.

Any fact worth posting can be backed up with a source that most people will agree is credible and probably accurate. If it can't, it's either not a fact, or not well-founded enough to bring to the table. And opinions are just that: opinions.

I'm just glad I don't know much about any of the people you guys are talking about. Something tells me I'm all the better for it.

Beamer wrote on Jul 1, 2022, 20:59:
Newsflash: man that absorbs all of his opinions from bad faith YouTube videos set to radicalize medicore white men whines about bad faith YouTube videos without seeing the irony

Funny you say that, seems like this guy represents a lot of your wisdom filled thoughts
Anita Sarkeesian's Greed VS. Your Charity and Compassion

Not yet one counter to any Anita being trash argument yet, luvn' it.
Apparently we are down to critiquing the link format, LIKE A BOSS

And also enjoying the ignoring of content just because they didn't come from kotaku or polygon, which is exactly what makes places like wikipedia garbage for anything political. If by axes to grind you mean pointing out Anita being a lying grifter, they exist because the top search results are flooded with pro Anita bullshit who don't dare give even the slightest critique.

Everything is Sexist (Music Video)
Speaking of bad faith and agenda, LOLERSKATES

Can't make any of you watch anything, but having a great time documenting people basically putting their head in the sand to stand up for female Jack Thompson for reasons they don't even know.

Newsflash: man that absorbs all of his opinions from bad faith YouTube videos set to radicalize medicore white men whines about bad faith YouTube videos without seeing the irony

Hardline Mike wrote on Jul 1, 2022, 19:32:
I couldn't give two shits about Anita Sarkesian, I just don't understand why you'd link to such obvious trash and expect anyone here to watch it? You seem to have a habit of posting stuff from sources like tiny YouTube channels with obvious axes to grind, or lobbyist/activist sites whose entire existence is to push an agenda. That's not to say that either of these types of links can't have some truth in them, but they aren't going to get any traction in convincing anyone of anything.

Wait, you weren't swayed by ALL CAPS link. Did you not notice ALL CAPS. Now I know you're lying. No one can resist ALL CAPS.
Now where did I put my big chief tablet.