TotalBiscuit proposes, let go of the bullshit, enjoy games, support artists, have fun

[Imnick]

What is and is not "clickbait from drama whores" is an extremely loose definition though.
A lot of people would use it to describe virtually any complaint that doesn't fit the already existing status quo, or their personal agenda, it's not a useful yardstick.
And when you're talking about murky issues like, for example, all the notorious ones constantly bickered about between gamergate and their opposition, they all call each others liars and people intentionally creating problems out of nothing to create drama, but that stuff still is legitimately important to many of them. Any dissenting opinion is labeled as coming from "just some drama whore", how do you separate out the "real" liars and those who really are just in it for "clicks"?

It's not a useful criticism. People don't complain about things if they don't care about them.

[urasim]

Difference being, no one knows who the fuck you are and thus no one gives a shit about you.

You don't have to deal with a fraction of what TB had to go through.

No one on this forum knows who I am, that's true, and I'd like to keep it that way.

It's funny how in defending TB in this way you're actively ignoring his advice.

[Doylez]

Why do people comment on a thread literally with the video in the post if they clearly haven't watched it?

Probably because it's 30 goddamn minutes long.
Didn't watch it either but I won't have anyone tell me what I can or can't criticize.

[KrazyK923]

Probably because it's 30 goddamn minutes long.
Didn't watch it either but I won't have anyone tell me what I can or can't criticize.

Then your opinion should be rightly dismissed for being made in ignorance.

If you can't even be bothered to hear what he actually said, at best you're arguing against a strawman.

[eschatological]

But you don't need to know what a person actually said to critique what they said, right? That's how it works?

[Twilight Cultist]

Probably because it's 30 goddamn minutes long.
Didn't watch it either but I won't have anyone tell me what I can or can't criticize.

How are you going to argue against someone when you don't even listen to what they say? The OP could have easily linked a 30 min Rick Roll video and just made up some BS in his post.

Edit: On that note, it would be funny if someone did that, just to see how many people actually watch the videos that are linked in threads.

[KrazyK923]

But you don't need to know what a person actually said to critique what they said, right? That's how it works?

- "The Internet."

Put that on a bumper sticker.

[urasim]

Then your opinion should be rightly dismissed for being made in ignorance.

If you can't even be bothered to hear what he actually said, at best you're arguing against a strawman.

I watched the video.

"I won't have anyone tell me what I can or can't criticize." Holds true for me as it should for you and any sensible human being. Why are you dismissing that?

It just seems like you guys are irrationally idolizing TB...

[dholland662]

Waaaaayyyy too vague

[Twilight Cultist]

I watched the video.

"I won't have anyone tell me what I can or can't criticize." Holds true for me as it should for you and any sensible human being. Why are you dismissing that?

It just seems like you guys are irrationally idolizing TB...

And that is fine if you came to that conclusion. What they were saying was that his argument held no weight because he didn't even watch the video, not that TB is 100% correct and his points are irrefutable.

[Doylez]

How are you going to argue against someone when you don't even listen to what they say? The OP could have easily linked a 30 min Rick Roll video and just made up some BS in his post.

Edit: On that note, it would be funny if someone did that, just to see how many people actually watch the videos that are linked in threads.

Arguing against the TLDW version.
If that summary is incorrect... I guess... I'll look stupid on the internets?
Oh well, I'll live.

[urasim]

And that is fine if you came to that conclusion. What they were saying was that his argument held no weight because he didn't even watch the video, not that TB is 100% correct and his points are irrefutable.

Seems like a shitty excuse to avoid thinking critically to properly refute an argument.

[unholytestament]

when you dont ignore it they get to go to the un.

back when people ignored it, it just stayed on tumblr where it belonged.

If you were paying attention you might know that the UN thing wasn't exactly a win for them. Anyone who bothered to actually talk about the contents of the talk point out how hilariously out of touch the materials were. Even some of the professional victims tried to distance themselves from the thing shortly after it was over.

[KrazyK923]

I watched the video.

"I won't have anyone tell me what I can or can't criticize." Holds true for me as it should for you and any sensible human being. Why are you dismissing that?

It just seems like you guys are irrationally idolizing TB...

Assuming that you did listen to it, then you fundamentally failed to understand his basic point. Which was about giving attention to clickbait attention whores.

But ok, feel free to soap box about a thing nobody's even saying.

[Deleted]

Hey hey hey, I don't play that. I just have other eroges.

Yo hit me up with something fam. None of that vanilla shit tho

[Belize]

But if the internet doesn't have something to complain about the world will explode.

Is that really a bad thing?

[Simulacrum]

if people didnt bitch and moan about everything anita and kotaku and those like them said they wouldnt have been able to go to the fucking un.

they have a platform because their haters made them a platform

Right, because having the gaming press, the mainstream press, games awards, TED talks, wikipedia, kickstarter, twitch.tv, hordes of useful idiots on social media, etc., constantly talk about you even when it has nothing to do with gaming at all (while shutting down any and all criticism of anything she says or does) doesn't constitute being provided a platform. And it's not like it's possible to fake abuse against yourself on the internet, eh? Even if it were, it's not like people would actually do that precisely to draw attention to themselves by painting themselves as victims, right?

That this shit is ignored is why it is a problem. Not the other way around. It wasn't people constantly talking about how idiotic the ADE 651 was that got it adopted by western militaries. It wasn't James Randi that provided Peter Popoff a platform. It wasn't scientists working tirelessly to discredit Andrew Wakefield's work that generated the anti-vaccine movement. It wasn't people "bitching and moaning" about these things that made them blow up; it was the lack of people "bitching and moaning" about them that did.

Same is true for Sarkeesian and her arguments: It's pure nonsense that people just didn't bother to fight when it was small, which allowed it to fester and grow malignant until it reached some form of (likely still fledgling, actually) maturity as represented by her what would otherwise be inexplicable popularity. People complaining about her didn't "give" her a platform. There are millions of people complaining about millions of other people on the internet, but none of them are somehow magiced platforms out of thin air just because they're being harassed or abused. There was already a platform there for her to exploit before she even started, which had nothing whatsoever with any "bitching and moaning" about her or it existing.

The people who believe that doing nothing actually makes sense when combating scammers are either completely clueless idiots, or those who want to do something about this, but who can't be bothered to, self-deceiving themselves into thinking that by doing nothing they're actually helping, thus allowing themselves to still feel good about themselves. By saying "just ignore them" you may as well be saying "KONY2012", since these two statements are essentially the same perverse masturbatory abdication of responsibility.

[Immitis]

Right, because having the gaming press, the mainstream press, games awards, TED talks, wikipedia, kickstarter, twitch.tv, hordes of useful idiots on social media, etc., constantly talk about you even when it has nothing to do with gaming at all (while shutting down any and all criticism of anything she says or does) doesn't constitute being provided a platform. And it's not like it's possible to fake abuse against yourself on the internet, eh? Even if it were, it's not like people would actually do that precisely to draw attention to themselves by painting themselves as victims, right?

That this shit is ignored is why it is a problem. Not the other way around. It wasn't people constantly talking about how idiotic the ADE 651 was that got it adopted by western militaries. It wasn't James Randi that provided Peter Popoff a platform. It wasn't scientists working tirelessly to discredit Andrew Wakefield's work that generated the anti-vaccine movement. It wasn't people "bitching and moaning" about these things that made them blow up; it was the lack of people "bitching and moaning" about them that did.

Same is true for Sarkeesian and her arguments: It's pure nonsense that people just didn't bother to fight when it was small, which allowed it to fester and grow malignant until it reached some form of (likely still fledgling, actually) maturity as represented by her what would otherwise be inexplicable popularity. People complaining about her didn't "give" her a platform. There are millions of people complaining about millions of other people on the internet, but none of them are somehow magiced platforms out of thin air just because they're being harassed or abused. There was already a platform there for her to exploit before she even started, which had nothing whatsoever with any "bitching and moaning" about her or it existing.

The people who believe that doing nothing actually makes sense when combating scammers are either completely clueless idiots, or those who want to do something about this, but who can't be bothered to, self-deceiving themselves into thinking that by doing nothing they're actually helping, thus allowing themselves to still feel good about themselves. By saying "just ignore them" you may as well be saying "KONY2012", since these two statements are essentially the same masturbatory abdication of responsibility.

gotta love that free publicity

[Simulacrum]

gotta love that free publicity

gotta love the willful ignorance

[Bathory]

Did totalbiscuit really have to tell you this concept? :\