Gamer Gate

[dsheinem]

A conflict of interest is still a conflict of interest - but let's not pretend that games journalism websites owe us anything approaching journalistic integrity or transparency.

I still think most of the major game websites are pretty transparent. Here's some examples of ethics statements, review policies, links with advertisers, etc:

http://www.polygon.com/pages/ethics-statement

http://www.ign.com/wikis/ign

http://kotaku.com/a-brief-note-about-th ... 1627041269

So no, they may not "owe" readers these things but most of them do take pains to be as transparent and ethical as they can. I've met with and chatted at length with the editors of both Kotaku and Polygon on this and other subjects, and I can assure you that they think much more critically and operate much more carefully about press-industry-reader relations than most of the irate and uniformed "Gamer Gate" knee-jerkers probably ever have.

[jp1]

That post was for Dave but what evs

*nods respectfully in your direction

Mine was intended for the topic in general. Not you specifically.

Sorry, if it came off like a personal attack.

[flex wood]

And still, arguing for censorship of games you haven't even played is still a shitty thing to do even if you are not actually forcing anyone to do anyone.

It isn't "arguing for censorship", it is arguing for the devs to be more considerate of the audience based on some early information about a game. Censorship would be the blocking/removal of something that already exists...

The people complaining about this isn't the audience though. They are people that want to censor anything that doesn't fit into their narrow world view. There is a vocal minority trying to speak for all which there shouldn't be.

[alienjesus]

There is a vocal minority trying to speak for all which there shouldn't be.

It's funny how you sound increasingly like what you describe.

[dsheinem]

And still, arguing for censorship of games you haven't even played is still a shitty thing to do even if you are not actually forcing anyone to do anyone.

It isn't "arguing for censorship", it is arguing for the devs to be more considerate of the audience based on some early information about a game. Censorship would be the blocking/removal of something that already exists...

The people complaining about this isn't the audience though. They are people that want to censor anything that doesn't fit into their narrow world view. There is a vocal minority trying to speak for all which there shouldn't be.

Again, it isn't censorship if you are asking for a dev to reconsider the direction of their title because you are concerned about its potential impact on the audience (whether or not you consider yourself a member). The dev is, of course, under no obligation to comply.

[flex wood]

Again, it isn't censorship if you are asking for a dev to reconsider the direction of their title because you are concerned about its potential impact on the audience (whether or not you consider yourself a member). The dev is, of course, under no obligation to comply.

No censorship is exactly what they are asking for. How is that even up for discussion? And if they don't comply they would get a hit piece written by someone at kotaku, among other places, most likely Patricia Hernandez. You understand that the gaming press has the ability to completely fuck over almost any dev and kotaku has done so numerous times.

That isn't up for debate. They have reported on "rape" where none occurred and when called out on it they said well he should have apologized instead of denying it.

They have reported on sexual harassment suits while using claims as facts, while leaving out the fact the woman making the claims quit her job before the suit and deleted sensitive work and programming.

Oh right you don't care you want them to print more of your work.

[dsheinem]

Oh right you don't care you want them to print more of your work.

wow, dude

i don't know anything about any of these things you are claiming happened. maybe i need educated: links please?

What's wrong with Hernandez's articles?

[prfsnl_gmr]

as someone who closely follows and often writes about game culture and the issues surrounding "gamer gate" i nonetheless found it impossible to give a fuck about any of it.

Yeah...This seems like the biggest "who cares?" scandal of all time, and I honestly can't believe that we have seven pages devoted to it. <shrug>

[flex wood]

I was just being a smart ass with the last line dude.

But yea the thing is all of her articles have been removed and I can't do the way back machine right now. They would all be right here in this link but none of them are. From what I can tell she now writes for AU kotaku. The rape allegations were against the guy that created Cards against humanity. The sexual harassment case I can't remember the name of the studio maybe 7k knows. He was also receiving death threats and his kids were getting picked on and bullied at school after the article ran. They don't give a fuck about anything.

http://kotaku.com/tag/patricia-hernandez

[Luke]

Wow people.

I thought this was as simple as.

1) Dude gets cheated on by his girlfriend who slept with five or six other dudes.
2) Dude angrily and stupidly releases names.
3) Some names are video game critics.
4) People question the ethics of the critics.
5) Critics get pampered, gamers question reviews.

Then I guess we all throw feces.