Gamergate - OP updated 27 October

[unholytestament]

Who secretly used some his millions to back a group whose specific goal was to create and shitpost anti-Hillary memes. That's kinda the important bit that makes this gross to so many people. Oh, and the posts he made on his anonymous reddit account about backing the group. Also kinda awful from what I read of them last night.

What makes this awful?

[Edge-]

What makes this awful?

...that he's secretly funding a group's politically motivated shitposting? And that said shitposting often tends to be racist/sexist/pick your flavor of bigoted, a la the usual fair you see places like r/The_Donald (where two of the moderators are co-founders/co-run the PAC, IIRC).

If he was backing Trump, I'd disagree with him but that's entirely his prerogative and there'd be nothing wrong with it. But secretly bankrolling shitposters isn't really something I'd consider to be good, or even neutral, by any stretch of the imagination.

[unholytestament]

...that he's secretly funding a group's politically motivated shitposting? And that said shitposting often tends to be racist/sexist/pick your flavor of bigoted, a la the usual fair you see places like r/The_Donald (where two of the moderators are co-founders/co-run the PAC, IIRC).

If he was backing Trump, I'd disagree with him but that's entirely his prerogative and there'd be nothing wrong with it. But secretly bankrolling shitposters isn't really something I'd consider to be good, or even neutral, by any stretch of the imagination.

So I guess your stance on both racism and shitposting have changed...?

One persons snarky, stupid shitposting is another persons blatant racism, I guess.

[Edge-]

So I guess your stance on both racism and shitposting have changed...?

Not really, there's not much that's similar about these situations.

I mean, yeah, what one person views as snarky shitposting can be viewed as blatant racism. And it can also be blatant racism too. My comment wasn't intended to be a broad declarative one, but rather referencing that specific instance that we were discussing at the time.

[unholytestament]

Not really, there's not much that's similar about these situations.

I mean, yeah, what one person views as snarky shitposting can be viewed as blatant racism. And it can also be blatant racism too. My comment wasn't intended to be a broad declarative one, but rather referencing that specific instance that we were discussing at the time.

You're condemning a man for supposed racist shitposting but defended another for the exact same thing. The only difference here is scale.

[Edge-]

You're condemning a man for supposed racist shitposting but defended another for the exact same thing. The only difference here is scale.

I was "defending" him in the sense that I found the quality of "responses" to the tweet about him to be pretty awful. I don't think his tweets were good, I don't think I said so at the time either, but I also didn't find them as "deeply offensive" as some seemed to. If some guy wants to shitpost and post racist shit on their personal twitter accounts, that's shitty but that's on them.

Compared to a big money backer financially supporting a group whose specific goal is to shitpost, often times with racist/sexist/bigoted material, for political gain/purpose.

The difference is the scale. The difference is the money. The difference is the intent and goal. Stop trying to paint these two instances like they can reasonably be compared with each other, because they can't.

[KrazyK923]

Scale is important regardless if you want to pretend it isn't unholytestament.

Some nobody shitposting is way different than somebody bankrolling a bunch of people doing it.

[unholytestament]

I can't wait to see the point where Edge drops the hammer and declares this all off-topic.

I was "defending" him in the sense that I found the quality of "responses" to the tweet about him to be pretty awful. I don't think his tweets were good, I don't think I said so at the time either, but I also didn't find them as "deeply offensive" as some seemed to. If some guy wants to shitpost and post racist shit on their personal twitter accounts, that's shitty but that's on them.

What do you call it when you call out the responses to a person and then try to downplay that person's intent? I'd call that defending them, but since you put it in quotes I guess you'd call it something else.

Compared to a big money backer financially supporting a group whose specific goal is to shitpost, often times with racist/sexist/bigoted material, for political gain/purpose.

So you don't think there was any political gain for a man to constantly rag on about how bad whitey is to the repeated adoration of the game's press and other "progressives"?

Plus consider the fact that if Manveer Heir were white and were saying the same things about any minority he would be fired in a heartbeat... Wait, Palmer Luckey is white. I think I see where the real problem is!

The difference is the scale. The difference is the money. The difference is the intent and goal. Stop trying to paint these two instances like they can reasonably be compared with each other, because they can't.

Those differences don't really stop them from being compared. And when those differences are actually considered I think things get more interesting.

Like scale. How much money did he actually pour into this? The website is nothing impressive, and all they seem to have to show for it is a single billboard. I've seen many causes to erect billboards and they don't seem all that pricey, depending on the location. And funding the meme machine? Seems to me that what they're doing is manipulating the already heavily biased social media that is going out of its way to prop up Hillary. I know two wrongs don't make a right, but I'm the one who thinks both instances we're talking about (Manveer Heir and Palmer Luckey) are to be treated equally (whether by ignoring/excusing them or condemning/criticizing).

Money? The only reason Palmer gets away with this is because he's a millionaire. If my name were attached to anything like this you can guarantee I'd lose my job, my family would be harassed, and many other wonderful things courtesy of the "progressives" that want to convince me how dangerous and hateful Trump is. Even if all media everywhere banded together to drag Palmer's name through the mud he will still sleep soundly atop his remaining millions. Manveer Heir requires no such protection because his message is narrative approved and his race is protected.

Intent and goal? How are these any different? They're both motivated politically. They're both smearing people. You had a better point with scale.

Shitposting hurts no one. The billboard hurts no one. I honestly just can't believe this is how Oculus dude wants to use his remaining money, but then I don't really see this little campaign costing much.

Scale is important regardless if you want to pretend it isn't unholytestament.

I want everyone to ask themselves a question about this situation: Which of these two men's actions are going to effect you more?

We're all gamers here, so I think it's likely to assume some of us will have interest in the Mass Effect series, and Manveer Heir plays a large role in that game's development (and will likely continue to have a hand in most future Bioware games). Then again, Manveer Heir is one voice in a chorus and the game would likely follow their current narrative trend even if he were out of the picture.

A lot of us here are Americans, so the coming election will have a major impact on our futures. But will Palmer Luckey's campaign have much of an impact on the election? If so, isn't that a sad commentary on the current state of our country? And if not... What's the big deal? Has anyone been harmed? I would think if they were actually harassing and doxxing it would have been mentioned in the article (because they love to paint EVERYTHING as harassment and project their compunction to doxx on others).

Long story short, none of this is a big deal. Manveer Heir's racism is just a symptom of a larger problem that wouldn't be in any way effected by his absence and Palmer Luckey is wasting his money for the lulz. Everyone's allowed to comment on both situations and everyone is allowed to react to those comments and so on and so forth. I'm just amused by Edge's double standards.

Plus Hillary's campaign blowing up over Pepe was fucking hilarious.

[KrazyK923]

I want everyone to ask themselves a question about this situation: Which of these two men's actions are going to effect you more?

This is irrelevant to the point both of us are making.

You seem to be ignoring any actual distinction because you either hate Clinton or are just excusing it for the lulz.

There's a huge difference between a single person doing something of their own volition, and somebody paying a bunch of other people to collectively do something to a political opponent. Its the difference between somebody going to protest somebody they disagree with and somebody hiring a bunch of people to go protest their opponent. Do you really not see the difference here?

It doesn't matter what effect it will have on the election.
It doesn't matter if it will affect me.
It doesn't matter how stupid Clinton's reaction to memes is.

Edge isn't having double standards here. You're just flatout ignoring any kind of distinction or nuance to yell about hypocrisy. And that's from someone who has no problem criticizing them.

The "big deal" here is that people are fully within their right to cancel their pre-order of a video game is completely within their right, and you sitting here and trying to pretend somebody bankrolling a group of people go to attack somebody online as not any different as me making a meme about Trump being a manchild.

In the effort of freaking out over anybody who comes across as a SJW, we're sitting here ignoring nuance and yelling about hypocrisy because people dared to have a negative reaction to a dude doing something dickish.

[unholytestament]

There's a huge difference between a single person doing something of their own volition, and somebody paying a bunch of other people to collectively do something to a political opponent. Its the difference between somebody going to protest somebody they disagree with and somebody hiring a bunch of people to go protest their opponent. Do you really not see the difference here?

If we're splitting hairs then you have already made a mistake.

He wasn't paying people to do it. He was providing funds for people who were already doing it.

[KrazyK923]

If we're splitting hairs then you have already made a mistake.

He wasn't paying people to do it. He was providing funds for people who were already doing it.

Jesus christ. Alright I'm out dude. Enjoy your contextless outrage.

[unholytestament]

Jesus christ. Alright I'm out dude. Enjoy your contextless outrage.

A funny reaction to me providing more coherent context...

Hmm, coherent is not the right word... Specific?

[KrazyK923]

This is part of the reason I've been so disappointed with GamerGate these days. People acting exactly like SJWs but against SJWs instead of against "racists/misogynists"/ect. Its why I stopped going to Kotaku in Action, and its why I've mostly stopped posting in this thread.

Horseshoe theory at its finest, unfortunately.

[unholytestament]

Now that your edit fit seems to be over.

Edge isn't having double standards here. You're just flatout ignoring any kind of distinction or nuance to yell about hypocrisy. And that's from someone who has no problem criticizing them.

I explained a lot of nuance. You ignored that. Hi Mr. Pot, I'm more of a dark gray though...

The "big deal" here is that people are fully within their right to cancel their pre-order of a video game is completely within their right, and you sitting here and trying to pretend somebody bankrolling a group of people go to attack somebody online as not any different as me making a meme about Trump being a manchild.

Well it isn't any different, seeing as how said "attacks" are just memes. And a billboard that no one seems to care about and probably won't effect much.

In the effort of freaking out over anybody who comes across as a SJW

Freaking out? How? How is this any different from every day forum posting that thousands of other people are doing here, yourself included?

we're sitting here ignoring nuance and yelling about hypocrisy because people dared to have a negative reaction to a dude doing something dickish.

Again, I explained a lot of nuance. And the rub doesn't come from someone having a negative reaction, but from them having a negative reaction to something they previously defended.

You say it's a big deal because it's on a larger scale? Why? What is it hurting? "It's a big deal because it's different" doesn't fly. Different isn't bad.

[Edge-]

This is part of the reason I've been so disappointed with GamerGate these days. People acting exactly like SJWs but against SJWs instead of against "racists/misogynists"/ect. Its why I stopped going to Kotaku in Action, and its why I've mostly stopped posting in this thread.

Horseshoe theory at its finest, unfortunately.

That's been a criticism/complaint of mine regarding this whole affair for a very, very long time. Even when I did lurk/post in KiA it was something I spent a lot of time calling out in an attempt to get folks to stop doing it, but usually ended up with a few positive responses and a huge number of folks calling me a cuck/shill/beta/ghazi/etc.

It's disappointing, both in its hypocrisy and the fact that it makes having any kind of discussion extremely difficult.

[Strangebrew]

That's been a criticism/complaint of mine regarding this whole affair for a very, very long time. Even when I did lurk/post in KiA it was something I spent a lot of time calling out in an attempt to get folks to stop doing it, but usually ended up with a few positive responses and a huge number of folks calling me a cuck/shill/beta/ghazi/etc.

It's disappointing, both in its hypocrisy and the fact that it makes having any kind of discussion extremely difficult.

Stop living under the delusion that the people against Gamergate are even remotely willingly to have any form of discussion, they haven't for years, and they never will be. Prominent GG people have tried a dozen fucking times to bring a discussion face to face with these people, they refuse from their echo chambers and cliques.
It's delusional, they need to be dragged out into the spotlight like the weasels they are.

There is a reason why they are using blockbots on twitter blocking anyone who just even follow's someone who are slightly positive to GG.
This good guy act you people like to put on is never going to work, and it never will, they aren't even remotely interesting in hearing your side.

[Deleted]

I like to remember the fact that this whole shit fest started with Zoe Quinn being just as shady but the reaction was "Her private life is of no public concern".
Now we have Palmer Lucky's girlfriend who has the audicity to be a GG supporter and suddenly everyone is on it because she's the wrong person on the wrong side having wrong ideas.

Remember guys, no such thing as bad method, only bad target.

[Strangebrew]

I like to remember the fact that this whole shit fest started with Zoe Quinn being just as shady but the reaction was "Her private life is of no public concern".
Now we have Palmer Lucky's girlfriend who has the audicity to be a GG supporter and suddenly everyone is on it because she's the wrong person on the wrong side having wrong ideas.

Remember guys, no such thing as bad method, only bad target.

Yep, the hypocrisy and behaviour of these people is revolting.






All the same kind of articles within a 24 hour timespan, nothing to see here guys, move on, listen and believe.

[Deleted]

Yep, the hypocrisy and behaviour of these people is revolting.

All the same kind of articles within a 24 hour timespan, nothing to see here guys, move on, listen and believe.

Holy shit... it's the fabled 10 articles all over again.

[erthwjim]

...that he's secretly funding a group's politically motivated shitposting? And that said shitposting often tends to be racist/sexist/pick your flavor of bigoted, a la the usual fair you see places like r/The_Donald (where two of the moderators are co-founders/co-run the PAC, IIRC).

If he was backing Trump, I'd disagree with him but that's entirely his prerogative and there'd be nothing wrong with it. But secretly bankrolling shitposters isn't really something I'd consider to be good, or even neutral, by any stretch of the imagination.

Probably best to wait till more facts come out and not media speculations.

So from what I've read, Palmer is a Garry Johnson supporter, he indicates he donated money to that cause, but only 10k and only early on at the beginning, he has not donated to them since. The media claims they have logs/emails/some sort of elusive proof showing said user name belonged to Lucky and that he was still shitposting, but I have not seen said proof, but then it's the media, I actually have a tough time believing most of them. Personally like everything else, the media is jumping the gun and coming to conclusions before they have facts, which then extends to most people who rely on said media. And now a narrative is formed and people have their hard line opinions and it won't matter what the facts do or don't show because the media has already done their damage.

As for the charity that does shitposting, can anyone point to any of said shitposting? I see a billboard they created, but fail to see how it can even be interpreted as shitposting, more like satire. Are there other things they do or is this just the message the media wants to get across about them?

- - - Updated - - -

I like to remember the fact that this whole shit fest started with Zoe Quinn being just as shady but the reaction was "Her private life is of no public concern".
Now we have Palmer Lucky's girlfriend who has the audicity to be a GG supporter and suddenly everyone is on it because she's the wrong person on the wrong side having wrong ideas.

Remember guys, no such thing as bad method, only bad target.

Exactly, so many times they've had double standards, recently I heard about some post similar to the Zoe post, but it was a girl calling out her bf for similar behavior, guess who's side they were on?