#GamerGate: Keepin' Journos Honest

[Muff_Daddy]

What’s funny is that this thread is going in circles not because of the people posting, but because of those coming to troll or say what they don’t like GG or etc. A lot of the points Taiki has brought up, from the Zoe harassment to the representation of women in games, have already been discussed and/or address in the thread in the earlier pages.

This is true. We could probably just quote old posts in new replies at this point. That thread search feature works pretty good for finding previous posts.

[Will_Diesel]

This was brought up in another thread. AFAIK, Western feminists tried to get involved in Eastern countries and Eastern feminists pretty much told them to go away and worry about their own country’s problems.

Maybe they saw what they do in the west and made a wise choice to reject it. I mean what would they bring with them? Rape hysteria based on false statistics, demonizing men while infantilizing women, “manspreading” and complaining about shirts and spiderwoman’s butt bringing women down.

They (western feminists) were never willing to tackle actual problems, which is why they boycott Hirli Ali, an actual activist about actual human rights issues. They also try to dismiss CHS for sticking to the factual data.

Edit:
http://www.spiked-online.com/freespeechnow/fsn_article/the-year-of-the-cultural-colonialist#.VJnOul4gAA

They are looking to implement similar tactics in Switzerland. All in the name of non gender identification. Boys and girls are being groomed to believe that there is no discernable gender differences.

[MechWarrior]

Since when did ‘gender’ = your biological sex? Those are two different things.(gender being what you identify as, your b.s. being what you are.)

…Stupid buzzwords.

[Will_Diesel]

Whatever makes you feel better man. Glad you got that off your chest?

[Taiki]

My argument why GG is pointless is that half the problem in the gaming industry is the gaming community itself. We all know that GamerGate isn’t some monolithic group. But there are two major groups involved. First, there are vocal parts of the gaming community that seems to resist the idea that they have an overly entitled attitude towards games and games journalism. I’m willing to concede the fact that while The Zoe Post started this with harassment of her (and continues to harass her), it resonated with a lot of gamer types because this attitude exists.

I’m very critical and skeptical of the idea that the readership of the gaming enthusiast press is somehow to blame for this shitstorm. The so-called “gamers” aren’t the ones who are writing the articles and reviews which are under scrutiny in here. The “gamers” are not equivalent to the gaming press in this scenario. To frame it otherwise is to violently misrepresent the chain of events in the lifecycle of a game. Developers develop. Publishers publish. Consumers purchase. At every step throughout that chain of events (in, during, among, in between, and after the fact) the trade press writes, announces, summarizes, and criticizes. Who among this group of actors has the most legitimate claim to feelings of entitlement with regard to fair treatment? I would argue it’s the consumers. The fact that you say Gamergate isn’t some monolithic group is a major concession in this context, considering we’ve seen the blanket and sustained labeling of the same as rabid misogynists in the trade press outlets. But the fact remains the fault lies with the gaming press (a.k.a the quantitative creators of Gamergate in terms of big numbers). You don’t have to take my word for it, their role in this been chronicled in the mainstream press as far back as 2011.

I’m sorry you feel that way. But you make the bald assertion that the people you’re pissed at aren’t gamers. Who are they? How do you know they don’t game? If this is the case then why aren’t you listening to people like Maddy Myers and other feminist gamers who have been telling you the problems in the gamer community for years?

There’s also a long streak of the Dunning-Kruger effect with regards to how to handle games and games journalism as well. Look at the issue with Polygon and the review of Bayonetta 2. People were calling for Nintendo to withhold support to Polygon unless they pulled their review. That’s literally the opposite of ethics in games, journalism and games journalism. When the producers of content who are also advertisers are using the power of their advertising dollars to affect the editorial content of a journalistic outlet, that’s by definition unethical behavior. The general idea that a journalistic outlet shouldn’t offend it’s sponsors is also wildly unrealistic to expect out of games journalists.

I don’t follow. Who asked Nintendo to take action against Polygon for the Arthur Gies review of Bayonetta 2?

Operation Disrespectful Nod? Operation Platinum? http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/849460-gamergate

BTW what’s with the obsession with “operations?” Are people being flown in behind enemy lines? Wait, no, Brianna Wu just got her house fucking stalked. So don’t answer that one. I’d rather not think about it.

FWIW, I for one, take Maddy Myers’ take on Bayonetta; she’s sexualized, but so what? She’s an active participant in her own story. Plus she’s sexualized while still not slut shamed at all. I think though that it’s the right character at the wrong time. Women women are not expected to be sex objects, she’ll fill the role of kick ass sexy bitch. No, men aren’t subjected to this same expectation because, as an example, while everyone made fat jokes at Rufus’ expense, the fact that Rufus exists in fighting games at all shows that men can be more than just muscle bros. And yes, men are sexualized. But don’t look at Kratos. Look at Raiden. How often do you see hot bishounen guys in games these days anyway? They even unsexied Dante a bit for the reboot of DmC. Final Fantasy 15 is all dudes for playable characters and none of them are giving us man eye candy.

Again, I don’t follow: “it’s the right character at the wrong time”, is a statement that is without substance for me. It’s a series of words strung together that ends up being exceedingly vague in meaning.

You also cut out a lot of the stuff I wrote about the sexualization and the expectation of sexualization of women in media in general and games especially. I made a mistake because I thought I wrote a sentence there saying that women are expected to be sexualized and sexy. But that expectation exists. How many exceedingly unattractive women exist in games? I mean, we get guys like Rufus, Oro, Chang Koehan, etc. in fighting games alone. But protagonist women are rarely if ever fat or depicted in an unsexy way. Like i can think of like, Leap from Guilty Gear and Peewee from Front Mission… Female characters may be depicted as plain, but never unsexy and almost always sexualized.

In case you’re wondering. Yes homo, well, bi. But, the treatment of queer and queer identity in GamerGate has also been hideously awful. Which brings me to the second major group of people upset at the games industry and involved in GamerGate. The racists, sexists, homophobes and transphobes. Anyone upset at “SJWs.”

Where are the so-called “racists, sexists, homophobes and transphobes within Gamergate”? Just on reddit alone there are 20,000+ people on KotakuInAction. It’s quantitatively and qualitatively absurd to suggest that all of these people have engaged in anything you’ve just described. Again, you yourself have stated correctly that, We all know that GamerGate isn’t some monolithic group. So why point out some nebulous, vague cohort of Gamergate in this regard? Also, you say that anyone “upset at social justice warriors” is hideously awful. I’d say that many people sympathetic to Gamergate aren’t upset at them, just supremely annoyed at them to the point of pitying them.

Anyone from the MRA manosphere(Davis Aurini, RooshV, VoxDay, etc), Milo Yiannopoulos, CH Sommers, anyone who throws around slurs and upset at the evil SJW influence(OMG! progressives are here to make your games less shitty to oppressed people!), FartToContinue, RogueStarGamez, Eron Gjoni, Internet Aristocrat…

And yes, anyone who’s upset at SJWs at the level of, “Anyone who wants to make games more accessible and feature better representation” is horrible. I mean, if you think those people are extreme radicals, then you’re really not paying attention to either their arguments or the situation on the ground.

Great, someone in GamerGate might be a trans lesbian of color. That doesn’t mean anything.

On the contrary, it does mean something. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have taken the time to acknowledge that, quote, “GamerGate isn’t some monolithic group”. That’s something you yourself stated, and it tracks back to my earlier point about how most people who play games don’t neurotically project their identity onto the game avatars they control in games.

No, it doesn’t. It doesn’t change the overwhelming qualitative data we have about games and the gamer community. Outliers are just that, outliers. There have always been members of traditionally oppressed groups who have been a part of their own oppression.

Women's National Anti-Suffrage League

Maybe someone who has an extremely compelling case from their own experience may be able to make the argument that things aren’t bad at all or even as bad as it seems, but the argument isn’t there. At this point in time, the bar for that kind of evidence is so extraordinary I don’t think it exists. If it does, I’ll probably swear a lot, but I’ll concede. But I don’t think it does exist.

There’s still a lack of queer representation (Other than the omnisexuality of Dragon Age and Mass Effect, queer characters are few and far between). Games still treat issues of class and race with a pretty deaf ear. Given all that’s happened in Ferguson with the police, was it really a good idea to write Battlefield Hardline from the point of view that the militarized police is a good idea? No. Probably not. I mean, it’s not out yet, but the whole thing still feels tone deaf. So in short, not your shield? Not yours either. There are real issues with games and games writing. Listening to feminists, and racial activists isn’t among them.

Here’s the fundamental issue with this argument: Is there any evidence which suggests that a majority (or a non-insignificant portion) of people who play games (queer, straight, or otherwise) actually identify with in-game avatars to this degree of personal and political investment? I don’t think there is. No one gives a shit about the timing of BF: Hardline in relation to the Ferguson incident. They just want to play Battlefield. This is more Vox Media/Polygon style pontificating that many Gamergate sympathizers consider to have no basis in reality. I think that when Chris Plante suggests that it’s time for big budget video games to help us deal with real world problems he’s grossly overestimating the capacity of games to meaningfully deal with these types of sociopolitical issues. This is simply not feasible. Most gamers don’t want this in games, and the people who create games for most gamers aren’t going to waste their time making games like this for people who don’t want them. Now, if an indie developer made a game about the Ferguson incident and somehow recreated that exact scenario in a game, I’d potentially play the hell out of that game.

First off, the fact that you’re up in arms that gamers don’t want this in games goes back to my initial argument that GamerGate is a temper tantrum by an overly entitled games audience. You’re literally proving my point here.

For women? I can tell you that being able to play as a female character is huge. Especially if you’re a kid. If you’re queer and the game features queer characters? it’s huge. I’m brown(Half Filipino, FWIW). I’m always glad when western games don’t fuck it up and treat us brown people like any given stereotype.

I give a shit about Battlefield being ham handed about the militarization of the police because I really like Battlefield. The leveling mechanics in multiplayer are much more tasteful than Call of Duty’s in my opinion. Plus I can pilot aircraft and tanks out of the box. Which, granted, may have changed since MW2…

It is time for games to take a stand and actually discuss issues. They have a huge platform and a very loud megaphone. Blindly repeating the zeitgeist into it isn’t healthy for games as an art form.

Media plays a huge role into who we are and how we think. I became a liberal because of Playboy Magazine, Gundam Wing, Sailor Moon, Metal Gear and the writing of Al Franken. We always carry biases into whatever art form we go into and if we just ignore our own influences and just carbon copy influences from other media, it’s pointless.

To quote Edward R Murrow in 1958,

This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and even it can inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise, it’s nothing but wires and lights in a box. There is a great and perhaps decisive battle to be fought against ignorance, intolerance and indifference. This weapon of television could be useful.

This was talking about TV. Imagine what an interactive medium like games could do. This is feasible. AAA games cut corners and push production schedules because they’re run by inhumane scumbags. Granted that has to change first, but just talking about the problems of representation in games has given us some great outcomes. I’ve mentioned Dragon Age: Inquisition before. First game I can think of with a meaningful representation of a transgender character. Not just a trans character, but a trans-man. Trans-men nearly never get representation in mainstream media. Given how much money AAA games make, it’s entirely feasible to tackle meaningful social issues. You’re just, again, baldly stating that it can’t be done. DA:I proves otherwise. Metal Gear Solid also proves otherwise.

The impetus behind GamerGate is a push to maintain the status quo in terms of gamer outrage and entitlement. A significant portion of GamerGate is tired of feeling like they’re being treated like shit by the games press, and another part feels like they’re being silenced and ignored and even insulted by the growth of the industry away from the “core gamer.”

In my opinion, this is the crux of the schism, which is to say that conversely, the ostensible purpose of the strident rebuttals of Gamergate critics is seemingly designed to fiercely maintain the current state of affairs—in which the absolutely rotten status quo of the wildly (nay, blatantly) inappropriate and cozy relationships which currently exist between journalists in the gaming enthusiast press and the developers with whom they have financial/personal/sexy ties to and simultaneously write about—in perpetuity. For example: No one gives a fuck if Patricia Hernandez is having sexy times with a developer she lives with and/or a developer she bangs. Nevertheless, it has been observed and correctly pointed out that these conflicts of interest do, in fact, exist. Hence the retroactive disclosures she was forced to add in her articles. Hence the infographics produced by Gamergate which put her on blast:

Spoiler

http://i.imgur.com/jCUJxaG.png

I find it highly telling that infographic is entirely women. But I digress.

It’s a giant lesson in misdirection. First, no sources are cited. It’s just an image with words. Second, let’s assume for a moment everything here is true.

You’re talking about indie studios and developers who can only get any kind of press by being friends with games journalists. The Patreon situation is also blown incredibly out of proportion because most Patreon donations are on the order of 5 or 10 dollars. They give the money to the people because they like the work and they like the people. It seems a bit circular, but, but there’s no real kickback here. If I’m a games journalist and I kick money over to say, Zoe Quinn, i’m not getting money back for that investment. Another misunderstanding of journalism and games journalism in particular is the idea that they’re biased towards their friends. Of course they’re biased. They’re editorial writers. They’re biased towards the things they like. I think it’s ridiculous to hold Patricia Hernandez to the same ethical standard Keith Olbermann got his ass kicked for at MSNBC. The stakes and kickbacks aren’t nearly as high as a journalist contributing to a political campaign.

You might see it as “corruption” but in any other field of entertainment, arts and media journalism? It’s well within reason. I shudder to think the outrage GamerGaters would have over the art world.

As far as I’ve observed, people in Gamgergate are merely saying, “Okay, just tell us about this up front, Hernandez.” But no, let’s segue into endless deflections of this reality to the ZQ saga. Moreover, the idea of “the growth of the industry away from the core gamer” is rightly considered by Gamergate proponents to be pure nonsense (more accurately, bullshit).

“The growth of the industry away from the ‘core gamer.’” [citation needed] This is a vague memetic talking point. The game industry did not morph into the multi-billion dollar that it is by moving away from the core gamer audience. Just the opposite.

The “core gamer” is the bread and butter combo of the gaming industry writ large. The preferences and tastes of the so-called core gamer audience have been catered to and economically recognized as the veritable cash cow that it is. Hence the realization that if this were not the case, the gripe that games need to be “more inclusive” would have no substantive merit whatsoever.

It boggles my mind how people critical of Gamergate can simultaneously make the claim that games are expanding and moving away from being marketed to the pre-packaged narrative-driven demographic of straight white males while also hand wringing over the fact that they need to be more “inclusive”. Games, we are told, are moving away from that, but somehow not moving away fast enough.

“Core gamers” barf don’t have to be the core audience for games and largely are going to be left behind. Game studios that keep catering to that same group of angry fuckbags upset over god knows what are going to get left behind. The way these things are getting pushed isn’t exclusively or even largely or marginally by AAA developers. AAA developers are extremely risk adverse. Indie games have been pushing things forward for representation. Studios that invest now in not treating non-straight white men like shit are going to reap huge rewards and it’s going to be great. That’s the warning. That’s the push. We like COD and Battlefield and Street Fighter and all the schlock AAA puts out. It’s fun. We want them to come with us.

[angelpalm]

Yeah just what we need to be represented more in games, more white guys, oh but wait the kicker is that he likes other white guys sexually. “what is this a dating sim?” No it’s a call of duty clone.

[BB_Hoody]

@Taki In regards to your gripe about queer/gay representation in gaming. I’ll tell you the same thing I said in response to female representation in gaming. Watch this and replace the words girl with gay and movie with game.

[quote=“BB_Hoody, post:6109, topic:171214”]

Saw this old episode of Arthur a few days ago and I couldn’t believe just how well this sums up the whole “representation of females in gaming” issue. Just replace the words cartoon and movie with game. Everyone who complains about females in gaming need to do as this episode says. Stop bitching and take the initiative.

[/quote]

And why is it so important and critical to have gay characters in gaming? And if it is so important, well again watch the video.

[the7k]

Well I sure as heck ain’t reading all that, but what I’m getting out of that last paragraph is that:

1. Games with straight white men are automatically less interesting than games with non-straight non-white non-men. How well written a character is is apparently not as important as what check boxes were marked in the characters bio sheet.

2. By simply not including a non-straight white male protagonist, you are treating every minority like shit.

3. Rather than create our own content and reward them, we will punish all existing content for not lining up.

Do you know why Trevor was a far more interesting character than Johnny, Nico, Franklin, etc. Because he’s a straight white man. Only they are allowed to be disturbing and flawed. If Trevor were any sort of minority, he’d be the target of progressives for ages for mocking that minority.

[angelpalm]

Pretty sure Trevor was bisexual bro…

[Cryoh]

It’s a giant lesson in misdirection. First, no sources are cited. It’s just an image with words. Second, let’s assume for a moment everything here is true.

@Taiki‌

Did you just choose to willingly ignore the words at the bottom of the image? I’ll type them here for you:

All sources: is.gd/ethicfail

Additionally, here is a more exhaustive summary of information found thus far, that covers more situations to date instead of just the Gone Home/ZQ/Leigh Alexander one.

http://imgur.com/a/K2SwD

Within are examples of blacklisting, nepotism, bribery, and a general disregard of gamers and ethics in general.

[Spirit_Juice]

This was brought up in another thread. AFAIK, Western feminists tried to get involved in Eastern countries and Eastern feminists pretty much told them to go away and worry about their own country’s problems.

Maybe they saw what they do in the west and made a wise choice to reject it. I mean what would they bring with them? Rape hysteria based on false statistics, demonizing men while infantilizing women, “manspreading” and complaining about shirts and spiderwoman’s butt bringing women down.

They (western feminists) were never willing to tackle actual problems, which is why they boycott Hirli Ali, an actual activist about actual human rights issues. They also try to dismiss CHS for sticking to the factual data.

Edit:
http://www.spiked-online.com/freespeechnow/fsn_article/the-year-of-the-cultural-colonialist#.VJnOul4gAA

Prrrrrrrrrrrrrobably isn’t as cut and cry as that. Going into a foreign culture that you don’t live in everyday and saying how to fix things that you don’t understand makes a lot more sense to me.

[Taiki]

It’s a giant lesson in misdirection. First, no sources are cited. It’s just an image with words. Second, let’s assume for a moment everything here is true.

@Taiki‌

Did you just choose to willingly ignore the words at the bottom of the image? I’ll type them here for you:

All sources: is.gd/ethicfail

Additionally, here is a more exhaustive summary of information found thus far, that covers more situations to date instead of just the Gone Home/ZQ/Leigh Alexander one.

http://imgur.com/a/K2SwD

Within are examples of blacklisting, nepotism, bribery, and a general disregard of gamers and ethics in general.

No, not willingly. I just woke up. Didn’t really read the whole thing. BTW, if you’re ever going to make an infographic, it’s usually more intellectually honest to cite sources inline with the claims being made instead of trying to figure out what claim is backed up by what source.

Wow. There’s a lot here. It’s going to take a long time(assuming I don’t find someone who’s already done a thorough takedown of it) to go point by point to find sources and all. Especially the Pinsof stuff. But there is a few things that I can easily point to. The repeated hamming of the Nathan Grayson/Zoe Quinn thing. There was no conflict of interest there, period. Period. Again and again and again how many times must it be said?

Second, the reviews. Citing Metacritic scores isn’t actually showing anything. You can brigade a Metacritic score extremely easily, for one thing. For another, even assuming that Metacritic has a representative sample of gamers as a whole(and I’m willing to bet they don’t), and also assuming that the Metacritic algorithm for figuring out how to get a numeric score out of a qualitative review even is accurate(which I’m again, guessing it’s not), when the critical score doesn’t match up with the player scores, … you haven’t proven anything. Twilight, for example, heavily panned, but people saw it in droves. Not only that but they loved it. Numbers also suck to express how good a game is or isn’t. Destiny got a pretty bad average review in terms of numbers, but the game is still doing very well for itself. Why? Because the qualitative experience of playing the game as a whole package transcended the mediocre score it got.

Third, I find it highly tone deaf that in the middle of a slice of images that is basically whining, whoever wrote this cited being called whiny is somehow awful and corrupt. Sorry, some gamers are loud, whiny, obnoxious, abusive and thoroughly negative.

What’s really troubling and trying is that when disagreeing with GamerGate, one of the things being thrown out is that you’re not a gamer if you’re not on board this train of ignorance and bad logic.

[mowr]

Repeating something makes it just a little bit more true each time!

[foger]

What do you call people like me who couldn’t give a fuck about what any of you are talking about and just want more accountability in game reviews

jesus christ

[po_pimpus]

And as I anticipated, the new guy is getting wrecked by facts and truth.

Good job guys. I can go back to actually playing games now.

[SenninSRK]

This new guy is bad comedy.

[Cryoh]

Even if there is no pertinent conflict of interest between ZQ and Nathan Grayson (which there kind of is, given that he did playtest the game), there is still the conflict of interest regarding Patricia Hernandez writing multiple articles and endorsing games created by her close friends and roommates without providing disclosure of said relationship.

The Metacritic scores that are cited in the green text are the official site reviews, versus the orange text, which are the user reviews (which can be brigaded, yes). The reason why those are brought up is because many sites are in the rush to put up day one or early reviews in order to gather a large amount of page views for advertising revenue, without playing said game in the public environment. This has been particularly troublesome with games such as Diablo 3, Sim City, and more recently Halo: The Master Chief Collection, which rely on the online component in order to either function, or in Halo’s case, is a primary portion of replayability.

Regarding Sim City, Polygon (yet again) is actually a really good example as to why reviews should not be quickly published and based on a closed-server experience. They updated their review score
4 separate times (going from a 9.5 to an 8, a 4, then a 6.5), yet Metacritic still shows a 95 out of 100 as their official score.

Twilight, Destiny, Call of Duty, and other forms of entertainment do share certain things in common. They are all experiences that were crafted in order to generate appeal from their target audience, and regardless of how they are reviewed, their fanbase is large enough to support them quite well. Even if certain critics dislike the games/movies, they do a fantastic job of catering to their audience. I mean, I love the hell out of some Dynasty Warriors, and I can acknowledge that the franchise has some flaws (and most reviewers will agree), but they cater to my desire to wipe out swarms of baddies.

I don’t quite understand how the tone of the statements within the images can be construed as being filled with bad logic and ignorance, when it is filled with valid information, complete with links to where the information was found. Yes, some gamers can be pieces of crap not worth acknowledging, but the issues brought forth here go beyond the trolls on the internet/XBL/PSN/Steam, and are tied to people that affect gaming in some shape or form.

@Taiki, I thank you for making me take a closer look at what I post.

[Pertho]

The repeated hamming of the Nathan Grayson/Zoe Quinn thing. There was no conflict of interest there, period. Period. Again and again and again how many times must it be said?

Second, the reviews. Citing Metacritic scores isn’t actually showing anything. You can brigade a Metacritic score extremely easily, for one thing. For another, even assuming that Metacritic has a representative sample of gamers as a whole(and I’m willing to bet they don’t), and also assuming that the Metacritic algorithm for figuring out how to get a numeric score out of a qualitative review even is accurate(which I’m again, guessing it’s not), when the critical score doesn’t match up with the player scores, … you haven’t proven anything. Twilight, for example, heavily panned, but people saw it in droves. Not only that but they loved it. Numbers also suck to express how good a game is or isn’t. Destiny got a pretty bad average review in terms of numbers, but the game is still doing very well for itself. Why? Because the qualitative experience of playing the game as a whole package transcended the mediocre score it got.

What’s really troubling and trying is that when disagreeing with GamerGate, one of the things being thrown out is that you’re not a gamer if you’re not on board this train of ignorance and bad logic.

Sure let’s take this in steps:

1. Yes there was a conflict of interest. Grayson was in a position to cover a game made by somebody with whom he had relations. He wrote about the game and didn’t disclose it to his editor. Was it as bad as it could’ve been? Nope. The outcome being “not bad” doesn’t do anything to fix the situation of “I wrote about a game made of a chick I was fucking”. He didn’t formally review it, but he wrote about it. He gave her free advertisement. He could’ve used other games to highlight, but since the title was a reference to her game, cookie couldn’t be more in the jar.

2. Metacritic scores are a huge deal because we KNOW (from multiple dev interviews) that contracts are tied to those scores. Heavily panned or not, we can no longer take metacritic for granted since money for devs can hinge based on them. But who gets to influence those scores? People who will get mad at bayonetta for being sexy. While this isn’t that big a deal in the case for Platinum because they’ve proven that they seriously do not give a fuck, it isn’t a luxury for other developers. What’s worse is that a dev can’t look at the coverage for Bayonetta and propose a game with a sexy female lead. You want a female character that is in charge of her sexuality in a company that cares about metacritic scores? Not worth going through the hassle.

What’s really troubleing is that when disagreeing with GamerGate, one of the things being thrown out are facts which have been established already. If you’re not on board with all the information which has been presented early on then you just go around making ignorant posts.

[mIRC]

I’m still waiting for an Anti-GG person to come around that has points or motivations that don’t revolve around defending white women.

[bloodymess]

Tweet by @superspacedad on Dec 22nd 2014 21:14:14 UTC — via TweetSave

So someone tried false flagging. Here’s a list of relevant tweets by the same user.

http://tweetsave.com/datdrunkanon

Also hey, a new Kotaku article.

https://archive.today/VB1Ca

our 2014 gamers of the year: you

They pulled off such a 180 they broke their own goddamn necks