ROFL!
…you dish it out easy, but when you take it, you turn into a handwaving whiny baby. Really quite pathetic to watch.
Try this definition.
So, you can’t do it, or refuse to do it and instead retreat to name calling and attempted condescension. Okiedoke.
Regards,
-Bouncer-
I’m not sure it helps, because if it’s not the appeal to authority part of the definition (which I don’t think it can be), then it’s what, an implication that He and Mr. Bear there are acting as some sort of team and therefore are letting their side down by their behavior? Do you think that’s what he means when he says concern-trolling?
I don’t think they are acting as team. To be fair, they are both reacting with way more froth and spittle than I expected. For whatever reason, they both seem to have a lot emotionally invested in this. Another possibility is that their towering righteous anger is not genuine at all. /shrug
Regards,
-Bouncer-
PS: Harassment still bad. For the record.
…oh grow up you big baby. Did you read your own posts? You think I’ve retreated to “name calling?” You’ve been calling people out since you entered the thread.
If you are going to call out someone for having sex with someone for commercial gain then you better make sure you’ve got evidence on your side. And if you haven’t, just stop doing it.
No-one has been able to disprove any of them.
The nudes were not “leaked” and the death threats are dubious.
But indie devs and the corruption of money and sex is a new one.
A twitter mob can do a great deal of damage, banning them from twitter did damage, and obviously her friends in the media refusing to provide them with coverage did damage.
I don’t think you understand how IRC works. Any idiot can go on there calling himself Eron Gjoni. I’d think Zoe had faked it, but then she would probably have had him say something that’s actually incriminating, which didn’t happen.
So what’s damning?
I mean, there’s proof it happened, and she admitted it happened, but yeah it “probably didn’t happen”.
It is amazing how often feminists are rape apologists.
Hence we have some accusations that people are saying mean things on the internet but because they are said to a woman she is a damsel in distress and the White Knights of Rape come in to hope that the meanies spend several years being brutally gang-raped.
Piss off, you nonce.
When did Bouncer admit he was a bully?
And you have, to date, not yet demonstrated that you have stopped masturbating in front of nuns and disabled children.
For anyone who may be interested, I ran across this article explaining the issue:
So basically the whole thing was a made-up, manufactured controversy.
Umpteen paragraphs about Quinn’s “discoveries”, brief lipservice to 4Chan making the entire logs available and rebutting Quinn’s account and a dumb Watchdogs screenshot. Sounds like unbiased journalism to me.
I don’t mean to imply either that I think 4Chan is “innocent” or whatever. Don’t know, can’t say that I desperately care. But that article makes no attempt at all to be objective do any investigation beyond “Let me tell you what Quinn says”. As far as declaring the whole thing “made up”, it’s remarkably bad.
It sure looks more than lip service to 4chan’s release. They cite the conclusions of another blogger who looked over 4chan’s log release and found things were even worse.
None of which has anything to do with the whole “#Gamergate is all fake and made up and orchestrated” thing. It’s a bunch of disgusting prattle about Quinn but not really much about the claim at hand in the Ars Technica piece.
Although, making the claim (or even proving) that #Gamergate was “orchestrated” doesn’t mean much except to those already convinced that it has no merit. For example, it’s pretty well established that the Tea Party wasn’t really “grass roots” and had a big boost from Fox News pretending to be neutral while promoting and advocating the movement. None of that detracts from the actual effects the Tea Party has had on politics or makes its members less confident in their beliefs. Convincing a Tea Party supporter that its origins were largely orchestrated isn’t going to make them give up their ideology, it just lets the other guy gloat and feel superior.
Likewise, proving that #Gamergate or #Notyourshield were born in an IRC channel isn’t going to make its current supporters say “Oh, well, never mind then I guess that’s not how I feel about SJW’s speaking for me after all”. It’s just a way for one side to say “Neener neener”.
All this internet bullying of Bouncer is wrong. You whiny bitches should be ashamed of yourselves.
I understand how you might start off thinking you’re witty, but after this many years, you’d think you’d have sobered up.
What I found really weird about the whole thing is how game “journalists” suddenly took up arms against the people who consume their content… Suddenly it was war against gamers, denouncing ALL of them as anything from socially awkward, to rapists, and even calling for gamers to be killed.
Seriously? I expect that from the unwashed twitter masses, but these supposed professionals?
The whole mess sounded like repressed anger over gamers moving further and further away from traditional games journalism to other outlets for their gaming content fix, like youtube and twitch.
Bottom line for me: Who cares who this Zoe Quinn person fucked, or who she cheated on? Why does any one care? Not only that, but even a cursory look at the supposed positive coverage of her crappy game by the fuckees shows that there wasn’t any serious issues in terms of biased coverage of her game. There was barely even anything remotely resembling coverage of her game at all by these people.
Finally, I find it hilarious that people were all up in arms about this woman supposedly sleeping with these guys for one or two off-hand mentions of her game that didn’t amount to anything, but then don’t bat an eye at the OBVIOUS and BLATANTLY biased, over-hyped coverage that publishers and console manufacturers pay for in one way or another.
You can’t watch two Gamespot, IGN, or Kotaku videos without running into one that plays like a hype commercial for “X” game. Jeebus, these people hand out"awards" for games they’ve never even seen (outside some CGI, stylized trailer), nevermind played to any extent.
They are marketing arms for the publishers 90% of the time.
I see what you did there.
Tangentially related, but…
Anyone notice anything missing from that? Like, I dunno, the actual criticism? If you read that article, you could get this (misleading) opinion that Sarkeesian’s videos have no legitimate criticism and are widely accepted. Now, if you look through the edit history, what you can find is at least one person having pointed out that there has been fairly extensive, well-thought-out criticism of the videos. This was removed, based on “inadequate citation”, and shortly thereafter, the page was locked. These videos aren’t awful, but the fact remains that there is a lot of criticism of it, a lot of which is really valid. Things like her dishonestly misportraying the Hitman series (acting like the game wants you to treat a dead hooker like a plaything, when in reality killing the hooker in the first place is explicitly penalized) or her distinct lack of evidence that this type of media portrayal actually leads to the claimed real-life effects. Certainly you’ll find quite a lot of gamers who reject her conclusions for reasons not based in knee-jerk reactionism. Why is this not represented here?