Because I like the general “don’t give a shit about anything” attitude there? The completely free, virtually untraceable communication (unless you do something really illegal)? Because the porn’s good? I dunno. There are plenty of reasons why someone might frequent 4chan. Beyond that, sheer tribalism goes a long way in explaining this behavior. You’re part of a group now. Might be a shitty group, but a group nonetheless, and now you’re all getting called shitheads. THIS WILL NOT STAND! Let’s band together and stand up for our tribe! Kinda stupid, honestly, and part of the reason I’m not about to declare my internet affiliation as “4chan” (that, and the fact that I’m mostly just there for /gif/), but it makes sense to some people.
Also, the issue about Gamergate censorship was not about “Waaah! We’re not allowed to be terrible people”, it was about “Waah! We’re not allowed to talk about whatever we want!” Which, when it comes to 4chan culture, is kind of a big deal. That’s part of the reason a lot of people are there - to talk about whatever they want without the constraints of even pseudonymity. Couple that with the SJW angle, a few posts by a former moderator who is displeased with the situation, and the (Moot-admitted) poor communication on the issue, and what a lot of people thought was happening was that 4chan was being taken over by the dreaded SJW scourge, and that moderators were going to sanitize discussion, which is absolutely antithetical to what 4chan is about.
I can see that. But painting the whole group with the misogynist brush is still stupid, and assuming they donated $20,000 to a feminist group just to say “fuck you” to Zoe Quinn out of a hatred for women is just silly. Oh, I’d believe they’d do that to say “fuck you” to Zoe Quinn, but not because they hate women. Because they hate Zoe Quinn. Which, let’s be honest, as far as targets of hate go, I’ve seen much worse.
If you just hate one black person because you think they are a nigger, does that make it not racism? They hate her for misogynist reasons. Everywhere else on the Internet where the same screed was posted, it was treated for what it was. But, on 4chan, many people believed it. Why? Because it’s a place where misogyny is allowed to run unchecked. They believed what happened because it fit their preconceived ideas.
The funny thing is that they are so scared of SJWs, when what they did was really just SJWism. Quinn was a social evil they needed to correct.
And, BTW, if you think Quinn is an acceptable target of hate, then I’m pretty sure you still buy some of the misogynist crap they were selling. There’s pretty much no legitimate reason to be upset at her.
And, really, when the rules are about not being a terrible person, and you are complaining about “not being able to say whatever you want,” I really don’t see the difference between that and complaining about “not being able to be a terrible person.”
The whole “freedom of speech” as a moral concept is largely populated by people who want to be the freedom to be a jerk. It’s almost never about some other type of censorship.
This, on the other thing, I’d find convincing to a certain extent… Except that the criticism of people like Quinn, Sarkeesian, and “Tumblr Feminists” in general is not entirely based in misogyny. There are good reasons to not like these people beyond “they’re standing up for women and I don’t like women”. The article I’d normally link to, by a games design talking about how the mob mentality of the SJW crowd leads leads to a stifling, oppressive culture for game designers in the indie scene has been taken down by its authors, but there is something to it. What’s more, they often seem to really go out of their way to find ways to be offended by things - InternetAristocrat is a terrible person but his series on “Tumblrisms” really does offer some insight into why people might have beef with the SJW crowd.
Really? You mean aside for her ludicrous and unwarranted critiques of TFYC? Her sinking a totally different game jam? The general complaint that she’s a part of and somewhat representative of the same general group of people who basically go out of their way looking for something to get offended about? I dunno, I’d say there are some legitimate grievances in there somewhere.
Hey, I never said they were right. Just that this is a perceived bit of board culture that they took seriously for no good reason.
And if you’ll excuse me I’ve spent something like a combined hour defending 4chan. I need to rethink my life choices.
It looks like his username is the product of hurriedly clicking random keys. Is he searching every forum in existence for ZQ threads?
Larry Borgia, you might think this is all nonsense, and you’d be right, but it’s like watching a Mexican soap opera. I can’t understand what’s going on, but it’s entertaining to watch all these gamer industry nerds get all upset and flustered.
Also, SJW stands for “Social Justice Warriors.” I thought it was “Single Jewish Women.”
In addition to “ludicrous” and “unwarranted,” I believe we can add “apocryphal.” When I asked you to cite the actual critiques, you were unable to do so.
You’ve criticized her for criticizing TFYC, and your beef with her is that her criticism of them is factually unfounded.
But your criticism of her is factually unfounded.
This is why I don’t use my irony meter on the Internet, and why doing so voids the warranty.
I read this guy’s monomania and I think of the class of stalker that thinks they are the victim and have to go to all these offensive stalking measures to stop it.
Legitimate, sure, but his post was very much a nuanced apology. What he says is that it’s a place for folks to bounce ideas around. The “public letter of support” idea was bounced around and rejected, due to journalism ethics; his apology is for raising the idea in the first place, which strikes me as ridiculous (it’s hardly such a terrible idea that its mere mention should cause the vapors).
The scandal isn’t even that the equivalent of a sympathy card was sent, then–it’s that the idea of sending one was considered and rejected. What kind of dummy thinks considering a sympathy card, and rejecting sending a sympathy card, is a scandal?
I’m not arguing if it was a scandal, I’m saying that hand-waving “Bah, Breitbart!” is wrongly dismissive of the emails that do, in fact, exist. I’ll leave you guys to quarrel about if they’re meaningful but they didn’t stop existing just because a source someone doesn’t like reported on them.
I don’t care for Breitbart.com either but, with the emails confirmed by the alleged sender, there’s no question of their legitimacy any longer.
Edit: Huh, I didn’t know the forum autolinked a URL with no www or whatever to it. Anyway, I only added the dot-com since some people in the world still claim to be confused when you invoke the name of a dead guy as a website name.
Edit II: And now it unlinked it. Ok, you win this round SDMB software.
The “bah, Breitbart!” is correctly directed at the absurdly “J’accuse!” tone of the article. It’s as if someone read a tweet making a self-deprecating joke about overwhelming someone’s server with traffic and started seriously accusing the person of DDOSing the server.
Yes, the emails existed. No, they’re not remotely scandalous, as Breitbart pretends.
This is what I’m talking about. Let’s translate insane misogynist troll cretin into English:
Secret mailing list: a semiprivate mailing list available to any game journalist with no shibboleths for entry. Forces of villainy: said game journalists. Coordinate: bounce ideas off of one another. Evil deeds: sympathy card.
The SFPD’s spokesperson mentioned a March incident in the Aurini conversation that was used to (falsely) accuse Sarkeesian of lying about reporting threats to the police. Kotaku’s Stephen Totilo, while investigating these false claims about Sarkeesian, found out more details about this March incident, and quoted the organizers of the Game Developer’s Choice Awards (whose ceremony was threatened with the bomb attack) about the threat made in March, as well as quoting the SFPD spokesperson again who described the Explosive Ordinance Disposal Division sweeping the site of the awards ceremony with officers and bomb-sniffing dogs.
