Support NeoGAF

[Frolow]

Saying that the death threats aren't credible is a way to lessen them and a way to say that she and others reacting to them are being irrational. It's a silencing tactic.

horseshit

I'm not here to debate that or defend the guy. All I wanted to do was stop people taking things out of context. Seeing people say stuff like "Totalbiscuit doesn't think Anita's death threats were real because she hasn't died!" was rather annoying.

 

[Inflammable Slinky]

Well, there are only so many stages to a hate group. They've hit the point where communication is pretty vital. Once all their concerns are addressed and they realize their concerns have nothing to do with their concerns, they'll start to realize what the actual problem is.

The sooner than happens the better.

even if such an amorphous group had concerns that could be addressed in a concrete manner (they don't), the GG v anti-GG stuff has entered something like a culture war, except much lamer since it only exists on the internet.

the upshot is that solving problems is not the goal anymore, the goal is winning.

excuse me, i mean #winning

 

[bishoptl]

He never claimed that Anita didn't receive death threats, if you actually listened to the soundcloud he directly stated that "I have no doubt that these threats exist" moments before. What he meant when he said they weren't "credible" was that nobody was actually seriously making an attempt at Anita's life.

Poor choice of words? Yes. But you shouldn't take stuff out of context like that.

horseshit

 

[Shrike_Priest]

I'm not here to debate that or defend the guy. All I wanted to do was stop people taking things out of context. Seeing people say stuff like "Totalbiscuit doesn't think Anita's death threats were real because she hasn't died!" was rather annoying.

Literally no one said that. I checked. Not a single one of the mentions to that post said anything at all to that effect. What people did do was express anger, disbelief and other negative feelings for a comment that is unbelievable insensitive to people who receive death threats.

 

[crowphoenix]

I'm not here to debate that. All I wanted to do was stop people taking things out of context. Seeing people say stuff like "Totalbiscuit doesn't think Anita's death threats were real because she hasn't died!" was rather annoying.

Now I have not listened since I am at work, but if he did say that her being alive is because the threats aren't credible (or vice versa) then I can't see any other way to read that.

A death threat not being credible means it's fake, and a threat is just that, words signifying a potential of violence. Not being attacked does not mean you weren't threatened.

 

[MYeager]

I'm not here to debate that. All I wanted to do was stop people taking things out of context. Seeing people say stuff like "Totalbiscuit doesn't think Anita's death threats were real because she hasn't died!" was rather annoying.

You're right, he didn't say they weren't real. He said they weren't credible because she's still breathing. That's really fucked up.

 

[TheBryanJZX90]

Literally no one said that.

Nm

 

[Mimir]

I'm not here to debate that. All I wanted to do was stop people taking things out of context. Seeing people say stuff like "Totalbiscuit doesn't think Anita's death threats were real because she hasn't died!" was rather annoying.

How about in context:

She published alleged death threats from an anonymous internet troll

There was absolutely no reason to say "alleged" there, unless you want to imply they weren't real.

 

[bishoptl]

I'm not here to debate that or defend the guy.

That's exactly what you're doing.

 

[Karkador]

I'm not here to debate that or defend the guy. All I wanted to do was stop people taking things out of context. Seeing people say stuff like "Totalbiscuit doesn't think Anita's death threats were real because she hasn't died!" was rather annoying.

But that's exactly what he said

 

[gogosox82]

Has Angry Joe commented on GG at all? Similarly to TB he really tries to push the "fighting for the consumer" angle for his character so i'd be surprised if he didn't have something to say about GG.

I remember him being against the harassment a few weeks ago. It was around the time Anita cancelled her speaking engagement at the university b/c of the death threat(bomb threat? can't remember which) and he agreed with her about cancelling it. I'm not sure if he talked about the movement as a whole but I'm pretty sure he was against the harassment.

 

[Frolow]

Literally no one said that.

I saw a few posts on twitter saying that and I figured GAF shared the same consensus. I apologize if I was mistaken.

That's exactly what you're doing.

How so? I'm not a big fan of what TB has done either, but I wanted to clear up some of the confusion because, well, I listened to the soundcloud awhile ago and didn't get this impression at all. Again, sorry if I'm wrong here but that's just what I thought.

Also Bish, can you check your PMs?

 

[backlot]

I'm not here to debate that or defend the guy. All I wanted to do was stop people taking things out of context. Seeing people say stuff like "Totalbiscuit doesn't think Anita's death threats were real because she hasn't died!" was rather annoying.

Isn't saying "that death threat is not credible" basically the same as saying "that wasn't a real death threat"? People are upset because he is denying their legitimacy, not their existence.

 

[Beelzebufo]

But that's exactly what he said

Not exactly. Switch out "real" with "credible". You can't really take a death threat seriously if they don't actually try to kill her I guess.

 

[Corpekata]

IIRC he wasn't totally "anti" per se (seemed to think the movement was still redeemable, though then again it was a few weeks ago) but was calling it out on attaching itself to a bunch of toxic figures and ideas.

I dunno, that seems like a pretty anti-position to me. Mostly describes my thoughts really, minus the still redeemable thing.

 

[GolazoDan]

Isn't saying "that death threat is not credible" basically the same as saying "that wasn't a real death threat"? People are upset because he is denying their legitimacy, not their existence.

Basically this. The actual intent of the individual behind the threat is irrelevant and the end result is often the same - fear and intimidation instilled in the victim. This is gonna happen whether the threat's coming from some gun-toting maniac parked outside their house or some bored teenager halfway across the world if the threat is specific enough.

 

[Karkador]

Not exactly. Switch out "real" with "credible". You can't really take a death threat seriously if they don't actually try to kill her I guess.

It comes off as mincing words. I don't see much of a difference between the words "real" and "credible". Yes, TB saying "the death threats were real" is saying that he is not calling the threats a lie that never happened, but describing them as "not credible" is like saying that there was really nothing to worry about; in other words, not a real threat.

I don't know about you, but I don't retroactively say "there was nothing to worry about, not a big deal" because the bomb on my doorstep didn't go off after all. It's great that nothing happened, but you don't downgrade the threat that was initially felt because of that.

 

[louiedog]

Basically this. The actual intent of the individual behind the threat is irrelevant and the end result is often the same - fear and intimidation instilled in the victim. This is gonna happen whether the threat's coming from some gun-toting maniac parked outside their house or some bored teenager halfway across the world if the threat is specific enough.

Yep. "Don't tell people you're being harassed because it'll increase it." "These threats aren't real so they don't matter."

It's all about silencing their victims and critics. "Just let us do whatever we want, whenever we want, to whomever we want. That's the only way to guarantee we won't have a reason to hurt you."

 

[Shrike_Priest]

edit: nm, dead horse, didn't need to flog it.

 

[bishoptl]

How so?

TB stated that the death threats were alleged, and in the soundcloud he doubled-down on attacking the credibility of those threats. That is what you're defending - his statements and the downplaying. Own it.

Also Bish, can you check your PMs?

I checked my PMs this morning. Skating from mod to mod trying to get other poster's bans reviewed is pretty disingenuous, which is why I ignored it.

 

[Mesoian]

It comes off as mincing words. I don't see much of a difference between the words "real" and "credible". Saying "the death threats were real" is saying that they actually happened, but calling them "not credible" is like saying that there was really nothing to worry about.

I don't know about you, but I don't retroactively say "there was nothing to worry about, not a big deal" because the bomb on my doorstep didn't go off after all.

Or, "That white powder that fell out of the envelope in my mail box turned out to be baking soda, and not ricin. So it was no big deal. IT WAS PROBABLY JUST A PRANK! JUST TROLLIN' GUYS! MAN THEY GOT ME GOOD RIGHT?!?".

Right.

 

[gogosox82]

He never claimed that Anita didn't receive death threats, if you actually listened to the soundcloud he directly stated that "I have no doubt that these threats exist" moments before. What he meant when he said they weren't "credible" was that nobody was actually seriously making an attempt at Anita's life.

Poor choice of words? Yes. But you shouldn't take stuff out of context like that.

He's trying to delegitimize the death threats by saying they aren't credible b/c nothing happened. Its a debate tactic but it doesn't really work simply because a threat can still be made even though nothing can come of it but that doesn't mean we automatically assume that the threat didn't happen. Either a threat happened or it didn't, and to try and marginalize it like he tried to is to imply that it didn't happen which is bullshit and extremely insensitive to anyone who has received any death threats over the past couple of months and had to protect themselves just in case the threat was real.

 

[scoobidoo112]

Wow. And to think that just a year ago I was looking forward to his videos on new game releases.

To be fair here, the death threat at Utah State was deemed non-viable:

Following a disturbing email received late Monday evening, Utah State University police and administrators have been working throughout the day to assess any level of risk to students or to a speaker scheduled to visit. USU police, in conjunction with several teams of state and federal law enforcement experts, determined that there was no threat to students, staff or the speaker, so no alert was issued.

The article also states:

Throughout the day, USU police worked to assess the level of threat with other local, state and federal agencies, including the Utah Statewide Information and Analysis Center, the FBI Cyber Terrorism Task Force, and the FBI Behavioral Analysis Unit. After a careful assessment of the threat, law enforcement officials determined that it was similar to other threats that Sarkeesian received in the past.

Edit:

TB stated that the death threats were alleged, and in the soundcloud he doubled-down on attacking the credibility of those threats.

I vehemently disagree with TB in this case, the threats were very real. They exist. They were made. I'm surprised he would say such a thing. I was under the impression that TB simply said "the threats were not viable" but apparently I am mistaken. Apologies.

 

[Frolow]

TB stated that the death threats were alleged, and in the soundcloud he doubled-down on attacking the credibility of those threats. That is what you're defending - his statements and the downplaying. Own it.


I checked my PMs this morning. Skating from mod to mod trying to get other poster's bans reviewed is pretty disingenuous, which is why I ignored it.

Ah, see where you guys are coming from and you're right. Sorry if it looked like I was trying to defend TB. Again, I don't like him either but I just thought people were taking things out of context, which I disdain.

Thanks for checking the PM though. I sent it to a few mods because I didn't know if I could do a mass PM to all the staff or if I had to do it one at a time. Didn't know contacting them individually wasn't allowed so I apologize for that. Is there someone higher up or someone I could talk to about this?

 

[Aeana]

Thanks for checking the PM though. I sent it to a few mods because I didn't know if I could do a mass PM to all the staff or if I had to do it one at a time. Didn't know contacting them individually wasn't allowed, so is there someone higher up or someone I could talk to about this?

There is nothing wrong with contacting mods individually about an issue. What's wrong is when you get an answer from several of them and try to go to other mods to get a different response. We talk to each other, you know. We know exactly what you're doing.

 

[besada]

Ah, see where you guys are coming from and you're right. Sorry if it looked like I was trying to defend TB. Again, I don't like him either but I just thought people were taking things out of context, which I disdain.

Thanks for checking the PM though. I sent it to a few mods because I didn't know if I could do a mass PM to all the staff or if I had to do it one at a time. Didn't know contacting them individually wasn't allowed so I apologize for that. Is there someone higher up or someone I could talk to about this?

I'm reasonably sure you know Evilore's twitter account.

 

[Frolow]

There is nothing wrong with contacting mods individually about an issue. What's wrong is when you get an answer from several of them and try to go to other mods to get a different response. We talk to each other, you know. We know exactly what you're doing.

Can I send a PM to you about this if that's alright? Seems a little off topic in this thread.

 

[Sir Abacus]

I love how people will debate the finer points of a death threat and from their armchair determine with 20/20 hindsight whether it was idle or credible.

And by love I mean I threw up in my mouth a little.

If someone threatens your life, credible or not, it's nothing but sheer abject terror. Full stop. It's not something someone should have to ignore or get used to.

 

[Shrike_Priest]

Kind of OT, but I think it's interesting that non-viable threats still warrant extra police presence/security measures. Anyone know what the rationale is behind that?

 

[BlastProcessing]

I don't really understand why Total Biscuit keeps hammering on the word 'consumer' in the context of all issues GamerGate talks about -- they seem pretty disconnected. But apart from anything to do with GamerGate, feminism, etc, I think there's a discussion to be had around the use of the 'consumer first' as a goal in games coverage in the first place. Do other people in here think of themselves as consumers first, with respect to gaming?

I think about this with other media. I read a decent amount of books. What would 'consumer first' mean respect to the fiction? I guess I'd want New York Times Book Review critics to consider fans of a series first?

Is 'consumer first' television/movies/fiction stuff that appeals to the greatest common demographic, or stuff with higher production quality?

Games are more expensive in general. So some people value things like replayability to maximize the value of their gaming purchase, but I'd hardly put that first. Frankly my Steam library has ten times more games than I could ever realistically play, so maximizing the value of my gaming dollars is pretty low on the list of priorities. It's nice to know if a game is broken or has frame-rate drops or whatever but that's not going to move a game to the top or bottom of the list either. So the whole 'consumer consumer' thing seems kind of strange to me. Just like it'd be strange to choose which books I read based on the ones that are the most amount of words for the cheapest price.

Everytime I hear the word "consumer" come up in #Gamergate I think a quote from This excellent Folding Ideas video.

So much of their identity as gamer is tied up in materialism... The culture of gaming is a culture of ownership and and the priests of that culture are the reviewers who tell them what to buy. This is why Gamergate seeks to purge all conflicting ideologies and demographics because the free market is their god. If Anita Sarkeesian isn't an invader she is a customer just like them and has equal right of access to the market.

 

[jgminto]

Holy shit, I can't believe he actually said that. It's like he's gone totally insane.

 

[Sir Abacus]

Kind of OT, but I think it's interesting that non-viable threats still warrant extra police presence/security measures. Anyone know what the rationale is behind that?

Because nobody wants to have to stand up and tell America why someone was gunned down in cold blood after a specific threat was issued against the slain person's life.

 

[StoOgE]

Kind of OT, but I think it's interesting that non-viable threats still warrant extra police presence/security measures. Anyone know what the rationale is behind that?

because no one knows how viable a threat is and takes it very seriously lest a human wind up dead.

:slapsforehead:

 

[crowphoenix]

Kind of OT, but I think it's interesting that non-viable threats still warrant extra police presence/security measures. Anyone know what the rationale is behind that?

I would think it's because they could be wrong. Otherwise people could threaten over and over until no one takes it seriously and then act. Safety precaution, you know?

 

[scoobidoo112]

Holy shit, I can't believe he actually said that. It's like he's gone totally insane.

Just saw this on the previous page, apparently he's having a bad case of "Jeff Winger Ego"

 

[Beelzebufo]

Kind of OT, but I think it's interesting that non-viable threats still warrant extra police presence/security measures. Anyone know what the rationale is behind that?

Because if the one time it's not taken seriously something actually happened, it would be unbelievably horrible. That's why a few years back they still evacuated a building at Pitt if it received a bomb threat, even after there were 200+ threats with no payoff.

Also, when you bother to include that you did research into a person's location when you make your death threat, I wouldn't say it's non-viable.

 

[Ayt]

Everytime I hear the word "consumer" come up in #Gamergate I think a quote from This excellent Folding Ideas video.

"So much of their identity as gamer is tied up in materialism... The culture of gaming is a culture of ownership and and the priests of that culture are the reviewers who tell them what to buy. This is why Gamergate seeks to purge all conflicting ideologies and demographics because the free market is their god. If Anita Sarkeesian isn't an invader she is a customer just like them and has equal right of access to the market."

I was thinking about this video earlier today and his point on Anita being seen as an other/invader. TB did exactly as the video described when he stated that she "inserted" herself into the discussion.

Incidentally, TB was not happy about being included in this video when it was released. It was quite prescient to include him.

 

[Vlade]

Just saw this on the previous page, apparently he's having a bad case of "Jeff Winger Ego"

Wait, so actually, GG is about ethics in totalbiscuit?

 

[louiedog]

Here's a story about a woman who was murdered with photos of her dead body uploaded to 4chan by the person who is probably her killer.

This is why they take these threats seriously. Just because someone is some dick on the internet doesn't mean they aren't capable of horrendous acts.

 

[SovanJedi]

Hooooooly crap, talk about diving off into the deep end here. I have absolutely no respect for TotalBiscuit now.

Starting up a new YT channel (http://www.youtube.com/user/roomforgames/) for developer testimonies on inclusiveness in gaming, as well as the #roomforeveryone hashtag, if any of you NeoGAF-reading devs reading this would care to participate!

I would participate, but I stutter quite a lot and wouldn't be a coherent talker. But I wish you the best of luck!

Y'know I just realized there seems to be an inordinate amount of visible British pro-GGers. Must be something in the water.

Whoa steady on there chicken eyes, not all of us British are pro-GGers, not in the least.

 

[Messofanego]

Just saw this on the previous page, apparently he's having a bad case of "Jeff Winger Ego"

I AM THE FUCKING UNIVERSE

 

[Felix Lighter]

TB has always been quick to pull out the "Don't you know who I am!?" card.

 

[Shrike_Priest]

because no one knows how viable a threat is and takes it very seriously lest a human wind up dead.

:slapsforehead:

You know, you're totally right and I feel stupider than I have in a long time. I was not in any way saying that death threats shouldn't be taken seriously.

I was just hung up on the notion police/FBI deeming something "non-viable". As in, to me that kind of assessment means they've examined the issue and found it to be fraudulent somehow (I dunno, IP being in India or some other evidence which proves it lacked intent/ability). Because otherwise I would have expected them to use language like "low-risk" or "unlikely" or whatever, "non-viable" to me seemed more certain. And with the press release stating that there was no risk to students and so on it seemed somewhat contradictory. But of course you guys are right, it's not exactly complicated.

 

[Cyrano]

Wait, so actually, GG is about ethics in totalbiscuit?

It's actually about ethics in biscuits.

Discussion of problems in games industry and, you know, nice things too: http://www.ravishly.com/2014/10/31/...itor-interview-profile-games-gaming-community

 

[Vlade]

Kind of OT, but I think it's interesting that non-viable threats still warrant extra police presence/security measures. Anyone know what the rationale is behind that?

people, quite often are not computers with defined words that feed into if/then statements and produce results that are also defined. sometimes actions must be taken in a way that accomodates a situation based on the best allocation of resources given the scenerio. A term like "non-viable" might be used and be largely accurate, yet judgement and situation could allow for some precautions in case that or something else were going to happen. even the threat itself might not be 100% accurately described in the words of the terrorist. when people are involved in the affairs of humans, things can get complicated.

said more simply:

because no one knows how viable a threat is and takes it very seriously lest a human wind up dead.

:slapsforehead:

edit:

You know, you're totally right and I feel stupider than I have in a long time. I was not in any way saying that death threats shouldn't be taken seriously.

I was just hung up on the notion police/FBI deeming something "non-viable". As in, to me that kind of assessment means they've examined the issue and found it to be fraudulent somehow (I dunno, IP being in India or some other evidence which proves it lacked intent/ability). Because otherwise I would have expected them to use language like "low-risk" or "unlikely" or whatever, "non-viable" to me seemed more certain. And with the press release stating that there was no risk to students and so on it seemed somewhat contradictory. But of course you guys are right, it's not exactly complicated.

i took too long busting balls!!

 

[SovanJedi]

TB has always been quick to pull out the "Don't you know who I am!?" card.

He has a serious ego because he has over a million subscribers and has helped expose several indie games (including one of ours), but that coupled with a self-admitted short temper does not bode well for a rational discussion on anything. Especially over Twitter, where he has been found to send somewhat abusive tweets back during heated discussions.

 

[Shrike_Priest]

i took too long busting balls!!

fr srs

Kind of deserved it anyway though.

 

[Beelzebufo]

That TB tweet is especially funny now because of the few who actually know who is is, most just know him as "That crazy #GamerGate guy who thinks he is the internet in its entirety."

Now we have:
Skull-loving Nazi guy
Fat couch philosopher guy
Sociopathic law guy
Ego trip guy

Any others?

 

[Ty4on]

He called GG overblown and annoying and called out Adam Baldwin and Thunderf00t about the GG movement and talked about Anita having to cancel her speech. He said he would have done the same thing as Anita, that people have the right to cancel a speech if they feel unsafe.

He did also go on to talk a bit about when you become a personality on the internet, there are unhinged people who make it their life mission to torment you and base their reality around you.

https://twitter.com/AngryJoeShow/status/523635471529046016

https://twitter.com/AngryJoeShow/status/523635676794060801

Those are some good tweets I wish more people had read. It's quite uncomprehensible for us "unknowns" to know what a mob on your doorstep is like. Even if it's online they might suddenly share your address and send a crazy person to your door.

Why do they like this Christ Centered Gamer site?? They literally give games a Morality score.

From what I've seen a lot of important gators come across as very moralistic and judgemental so maybe they like the morality score when it's stuff they agree with

Y'know I just realized there seems to be an inordinate amount of visible British pro-GGers. Must be something in the water.

Jenni is british though. She has written some great stuff about it:
http://pixietalksgamergate.wordpress.com/
In a conversation with Sargon (google it) she joined at 1:30. If you don't wanna listen to all of it I recommend when she called him out at 1:57:00, 2:02:00, 2:04:30 and 2:23:30 which is kinda long, but worth it. 2:27:00 is even longer, but she really hammers in that GG is all about feminism and this was late September.
They're usually not the full context because Sargon is quite long winded at times and I wanted the first three to be less than two minutes. The full hour and fifteen minutes she is on isn't too cringeworthy to listen to thanks to Jenni calling him out. KingofPol joined, but that was just before Sargon had had enough and kicked her out.

I see that SwissLion's TB debunking post is the top submission on /r/GamerGhazi right now. There's a mod on /r/cynicalbrit (TB's subreddit) claiming to have crossposted on their sub but idk. Seems he's defending TB's actions of the past months as well.

It was for three hours! I love times like this when I can be proud of smart gaffers.

I AM THE FUCKING UNIVERSE

Aha...
I knew it was buggy, but now I really understand the hate for that game

 

[Fantastapotamus]

I actually understand what he is trying to say but....that applies to literally everbody in the "mainstrem media" as well