Gamergate - OP updated 27 October

[unholytestament]

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

It's really not though. The "gamers are dead" debacle were all opinion pieces posted closely together. They weren't reporting anything, they were dictating.

Whereas with the Palmer Luckey thing they're reporting a thing that happened and most of the articles point directly back to the site that broke the news. The media does this all the time, and considering how Palmer is a millionaire connected to Facebook the story is going to spread so everyone needs to get on board if they want their clicks.

[hrugner]

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 - - -



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?

"Early on" is the only time he could have donated since Nimble America appears to be less than a month old https://www.nimbleamerica.com/ . I read some people saying it's only a week old but I don't know how to check on that. I also don't see shit posting on their page, so I don't really know where that comes from aside from the billboard.

The story is looking like complete bullshit rather than just poorly reported real happenings.

[Edge-]

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

Wait, most sites are going to cover major news (this counts as major news) while it's new within the first 24 hours? And most sites are going to write critically of a guy using his wealth to secretly back a group of shitposters online?

This is standard stuff, and the criticism is rightly earned.

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

I mean, we've got some pretty firm details already.

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.

Which begs the question - if he supports Johnson why is he giving money to a pro-Trump group? Why does he think that this group putting up a few billboards is "innovative" in any way (that shit has been standard practice forever)? Why does he think that shitposting memes online is a "new" or "interesting" way to productively reach out to younger voters?

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.

They reported on it based off an interview where he told them, apparently.

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.

Except that they do have the facts. He did donate to this group, fact. This group is engaged in shitposting anti-Hillary memes online (amongst other things). Fact. This group has direct ties to r/The_Donald and all the joys that come with that bucket of filth. Fact. And he admitted to Daily Beast that NibleRichMan was him on Reddit. He's now denying that, but why would he confirm it in the first place?

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.

His response is interesting, but it doesn't change the initial story reported. He's not denying that he posted as NibleRichMan, but that's it. He's not denying donating money to the group, nor the type of behavior the group engages in, nor their ties to the cesspool of shit that is r/The_Donald.

As for the charity that does shitposting, can anyone point to any of said shitposting?

Here's their post outlining what they do: https://webcache.googleusercontent.c...&ct=clnk&gl=us

I see a billboard they created, but fail to see how it can even be interpreted as shitposting, more like satire.

The billboard (what an innovative new way to reach young voters!) was a part of what they do. They're treating it as a "logical" extension of the shitposting they already do online. See the webcache link above, including the first response to the post from one of the former r/The_Donald mods running the group.

Are there other things they do or is this just the message the media wants to get across about them?

Who knows, but we do know that they're engaged in continuing the anti-Hillary meme shitposting. Which kinda undermines any legitimate work they may do.

"Early on" is the only time he could have donated since Nimble America appears to be less than a month old https://www.nimbleamerica.com/ .

He already admitted to donating to the group. He confirmed that in his post responding to this controversy. There's no question about whether or not that occurred. Also, as per the webcache link they publicly announced the group September 17, so that jives.

I read some people saying it's only a week old but I don't know how to check on that.

Whoever is saying that is wrong, please see when this page was saved: https://webcache.googleusercontent.c...&ct=clnk&gl=us

I also don't see shit posting on their page, so I don't really know where that comes from aside from the billboard.

See the posts in the webache link.

The story is looking like complete bullshit rather than just poorly reported real happenings.

Not really, all the available info backs everything in the story up except for Luckey's recent denial of making the NimbleRichMan post. Another Daily Beast writer posted what he said was an email exchange with the author and Luckey where Luckey confirms that was his post, but it lacks headers to confirm that it's Luckey emailing. So either the editor is lying and keeping that info secret to cover it up (less likely) or that he's not posting Luckey's personal/business email publicly because you don't do that shit.

Whereas with the Palmer Luckey thing they're reporting a thing that happened and most of the articles point directly back to the site that broke the news. The media does this all the time,

Yes, because that's how they're supposed to do it. When one site breaks a story and you decide to report on that story because it's big news, you reference the original source of the news. that means pointing back to the site that broke the news.

Welcome to how news works. It's the same as when you see broadcast news and they report on a story, "As reported in the Wall Street Journal...", citing the original source of the story they're reporting on to give credit.

Whereasand considering how Palmer is a millionaire connected to Facebook the story is going to spread so everyone needs to get on board if they want their clicks.

I don't see the real relevance of that? I mean, there are a lot of rich folks connected to Facebook. And yes, Luckey is a public figure. But if anything, it goes against the usual jabs that Facebook gets for leaning too liberal.

Yes, they're going to report controversial stories about powerful people connected with major public companies. Shocking.

[unholytestament]

Yes, because that's how they're supposed to do it. When one site breaks a story and you decide to report on that story because it's big news, you reference the original source of the news. that means pointing back to the site that broke the news.

Someone needs to calm the fuck down and realize that's exactly what I was saying.

[Edge-]

Someone needs to calm the fuck down and realize that's exactly what I was saying.

Ah, apologies. Just woke up and not fully caffeinated yet -_-

[hrugner]

So, according to your link, they announced their work not less than a week ago but last Saturday and their relationship with the donald reddit is being told to leave. I'm satisfied with a week old on that, since a week and a day isn't an absurd stretch. Being asked to leave isn't much of an association. I clicked the links, they take me to a locked subreddit and to their web page which just doesn't have any meme magic on it. It looks like they pitched public meme magic and produced one sign and a webpage. I can't say I'm impressed so far.

The Daily Beast email exchange, when taken in it's entirety, shows that the dude was saying that yes, one post that he gave them to make on his behalf represents him. That's not exactly the same as being a big part of the operation, or saying that everything that comes from that poster comes from him.

Like I said, it looks like a whole lot of nothing.

[Wilian]

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.

Sadly the far right stole the word and twisted it.

[KrazyK923]

Sadly the far right stole the word and twisted it.

Yup, its something that ended up running me off of Kotaku in Action. While there are still some people on that forum and in the movement who are liberal (or even just libertarian, I don't really care what their political alignment is), a large part of GamerGate has turned into a pro-Trump, anti-Hillary/Democrats movement.

And the political alignment of people in the original movement didn't matter. I remember that famous Political Compass of GG supporters from the beginning and most of it was libertarian/liberal. People only cared about pushing back against an anti-Gamer/pro-censorship agenda. Now, if Hillary Clinton slips on the street and [insert news station/website/magazine] doesn't cover it like the most important issue in the world, it's suddenly big news on Kotaku in Action for some reason.

[eillas]

Yup, its something that ended up running me off of Kotaku in Action. While there are still some people on that forum and in the movement who are liberal (or even just libertarian, I don't really care what their political alignment is), a large part of GamerGate has turned into a pro-Trump, anti-Hillary/Democrats movement.

And the political alignment of people in the original movement didn't matter. I remember that famous Political Compass of GG supporters from the beginning and most of it was libertarian/liberal. People only cared about pushing back against an anti-Gamer/pro-censorship agenda. Now, if Hillary Clinton slips on the street and [insert news station/website/magazine] doesn't cover it like the most important issue in the world, it's suddenly big news on Kotaku in Action for some reason.

It's something I noticed. At first, it was more balanced. You had people from all over the political spectrum. It was mainly about pushing ethical standards. But over time it began to go to the Right, trump, and anti feminism focused. I see less about ethical journalism, and more about social justice.

I think once a lot of the original goals got accomplished people left, and the ones who largely remained were shitposters, vengeful watchdogs.

Even Notyourshield hasnt been talked about at all.

[unholytestament]

And the political alignment of people in the original movement didn't matter.

He says in a post complaining about how supposedly prevalent views opposing his seem to be in the movement.

People only cared about pushing back against an anti-Gamer/pro-censorship agenda. Now, if Hillary Clinton slips on the street and [insert news station/website/magazine] doesn't cover it like the most important issue in the world, it's suddenly big news on Kotaku in Action for some reason.

People making a big deal about stories that conflict with the narrative going unreported?

Yeah, that clearly has nothing to do with ethics in journalism.

[eillas]

Thing is this was about The Gaming industry.

[unholytestament]

Thing is this was about The Gaming industry.

Then tell the mainstream media to stop mentioning Gamergate.

[KrazyK923]

He says in a post complaining about how supposedly prevalent views opposing his seem to be in the movement.

I knew that you would be the one to completely misunderstand what I was actually saying. You've become quite emblematic of my exact issue with GG.

Let me spell it out so that even you can't mistake it: The point was that your political alignment didn't matter because it wasn't a left vs right issue. It was an authoritarian vs libertarian issue. Which is exactly what GG was boiled down to its simplest form. Which was the entire point of me bringing up the political compass. GG was primarily composed of mostly libertarian/liberals, and the people we were fighting against were authoritarian liberals for the most part, as well as the random retarded conservative. The POINT being that it wasn't left vs right because so many of the people IN GG were left and fighting against other leftists.

But now its largely pro-Trump and conservative politics corrupting it all and a joke. This was my exact fear when I saw Milo stick his disgusting fingers into the pie and people acting like it was a good thing.

People making a big deal about stories that conflict with the narrative going unreported?

Yeah, that clearly has nothing to do with ethics in journalism.

Once again, horseshoe theory at its best. Ignoring what somebody actually said to complain against a strawman. You do the SJWs proud.

Now, if Hillary Clinton slips on the street and [insert news station/website/magazine] doesn't cover it like the most important issue in the world, it's suddenly big news on Kotaku in Action for some reason.

The implication that it is covered, but, you know, not seen as the literal biggest problem in the world.

I guess you missed that in your hullabaloo about being offended at the accusation that you're acting exactly like the group you've deigned as your enemy.

- - - Updated - - -

It's something I noticed. At first, it was more balanced. You had people from all over the political spectrum. It was mainly about pushing ethical standards. But over time it began to go to the Right, trump, and anti feminism focused. I see less about ethical journalism, and more about social justice.

I think once a lot of the original goals got accomplished people left, and the ones who largely remained were shitposters, vengeful watchdogs.

Even Notyourshield hasnt been talked about at all.

Being a watchdog organization should have been what it became after most of GG's goals were met. But while they still occasionally act like this, its almost always with a political bent to it. People will froth at the mouth if MSNBC...does...I don't even know...doesn't say all black people are bad, but Milo can steal a bunch of money from his "charity" and its largely ignored.

[Gruffertus]

I am actually going to support KotakuInAction here - they had a discussion a while back about politics on the forum and the rules got a lot firmer. I don't find myself nodding along any more than before, but it's no longer /r/The_Donald in green and purple - no matches for ''Clinton" on the KIA front page!

[Strangebrew]

I am actually going to support KotakuInAction here - they had a discussion a while back about politics on the forum and the rules got a lot firmer. I don't find myself nodding along any more than before, but it's no longer /r/The_Donald in green and purple - no matches for ''Clinton" on the KIA front page!

And for once you're correct, the only time Clinton or Trump is being brought up on KiA is because the media love to bring Gamergate into anything that is related to Trump and "white supremacists" and i have a feeling this is just krazy being heavy biased towards Clinton and not seeing that's why she get's brought up so much.

KiA is as political as it ever has been, in fact, the most prominent GG names that is well known around on KiA have been taking a piss at the whole alt-right movement the last few weeks.

I don't know how a sub-reddit that essentially just reports on various bullshit that is happening from media to SJW shit can be any more political anyways, for fucks sake, if anything is even remotely political, it will be tagged as such in the OP.

[unholytestament]

I knew that you would be the one to completely misunderstand what I was actually saying. You've become quite emblematic of my exact issue with GG.

Let me spell it out so that even you can't mistake it: The point was that your political alignment didn't matter because it wasn't a left vs right issue. It was an authoritarian vs libertarian issue. Which is exactly what GG was boiled down to its simplest form. Which was the entire point of me bringing up the political compass. GG was primarily composed of mostly libertarian/liberals, and the people we were fighting against were authoritarian liberals for the most part, as well as the random retarded conservative. The POINT being that it wasn't left vs right because so many of the people IN GG were left and fighting against other leftists.

But now its largely pro-Trump and conservative politics corrupting it all and a joke. This was my exact fear when I saw Milo stick his disgusting fingers into the pie and people acting like it was a good thing.

Care to explain how support for Trump equates to no longer being against authoritarians? You kind of make a jump in logic there.

As someone who spends tons of time on KiA I have to wonder at what point in time you were there that lead you to believe it's "largely" pro-Trump and not just anti the narrative that's propping up Hillary.

The implication that it is covered, but, you know, not seen as the literal biggest problem in the world.

I guess you missed that in your hullabaloo about being offended at the accusation that you're acting exactly like the group you've deigned as your enemy.

I'm not the least bit surprised that the guy who was trying to get on me about context is pretending the "why are people making a big deal about Hillary's health?" articles is coverage when those articles are mostly calling people trolls/sexist/racist/right/alt-right for suggesting there's anything wrong and those same outlets will turn around and dig through Trump supporter tweets for any reason to paint them as racist/etc. and treat that as news.

The funny thing here is that Gamergate was labeled anti-Hillary before they even did anything anti-Hillary. You can actually go back through this topic and find the points where we all discovered that supporting Gamergate meant we obviously supported Bernie Sanders, and later when he dropped out and supported Hillary that meant Gamergate now obviously supported Trump. Because anyone I don't like is Hitler Gamergate!

Gamergate is anti-Hillary because the media is propping her up, sweeping her many misdeeds under the rug, and waving the sexism flag if you dare question them. Just like video game media has done for its icons.

[KrazyK923]

Gamergate is anti-Hillary because the media is propping her up, sweeping her many misdeeds under the rug, and waving the sexism flag if you dare question them. Just like video game media has done for its icons.

Sweeping her "many misdeeds under the rug" there's that hilarious ignorance of reality that I just love with people like you these days.

Its not like the media is 24/7 pounding the drum of how much of a terrible candidate she is.

I've realized now that you're just a lost cause like GamerGate has become. What a shame. Goodbye.

and i have a feeling this is just krazy being heavy biased towards Clinton and not seeing that's why she get's brought up so much.

Baahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahhahah.

[unholytestament]

Sweeping her "many misdeeds under the rug" there's that hilarious ignorance of reality that I just love with people like you these days.

I guess it's a good thing for you that there wasn't more to that sentence and you hadn't previously tried to call me out for "Ignoring what somebody actually said to complain against a strawman."

[Sorrior]

It's something I noticed. At first, it was more balanced. You had people from all over the political spectrum. It was mainly about pushing ethical standards. But over time it began to go to the Right, trump, and anti feminism focused. I see less about ethical journalism, and more about social justice.

I think once a lot of the original goals got accomplished people left, and the ones who largely remained were shitposters, vengeful watchdogs.

Even Notyourshield hasnt been talked about at all.

Honestly it may also be that the way things have played out and the fact that almost exclusively very right sources taked about it without us being branded as evil attracted right wingers and may have pulled/pushed some to the right

[Strangebrew]

so many narratives, who do i listen to? so confusing.