What is Gamergate?

[Drinjanin]

I'm not into popular culture drama, 'cause it's all staged bullsh*t for dumb people, but I would like to know at least what does Gamergate mean?
I want clean explanation - no bullsh*t, no origins of the tearm, I don't care about anyone's feelings about it, no liberal agenda, just what is it, and what does it stand for.
Google didn't help me out because all articles I found were about one female designer who cheated or didn't cheat on her boyfriend drama, or explaining that the term is used with the hashtag... :facepalm: I guess people writing those articles don't know anything about it themselves.

[Drinjanin]

Tux eredeti hozzászólása:

no its just hate on women pure and simple

Your comment made it clear. It's liberal feminist agenda. Ok. Thanks for the unintentional exposure of that term. It kinda makes sense if I split up that term / gamer gate / gate, to close something. Censorship of video games. That's right, now it makes sense. Yup, dumb drama, like I presumed.

[THIS HUMAN IS DEAD]

Gamergate is not a movement, group or whatevet. It was a "scandal" a while back related to a female journalist and her review of a game. #Gamergate is just how people referred to it. Go look at Wikipedia if you want more answers

[Factorio]

Drinjanin eredeti hozzászólása:

This just shows nobody actually knows anything about that term. Still no clear answer.

ravens response was perfectly clear

[Zefar]

GamerGate was and always will be about Ethic in gaming journalism. It wasn't a hate group and the few trolls that used it as a hate group where never the main group of users. All the big profiles in the group told people not to behave like and even asked for those people to be banned in some way.

The reason this spiked in one year was because in an indie gaming tournament where you where supposed to make a game in like 2 days.
One of the winners was a girl who supposedly had a boyfriend who was part of the team who judged the games.
Kinda unethical so to say.

Then it brought out more hidden agenda from various big gaming journalism sites that kept secret conversations on what to do.

GamerGate actually managed to make large gaming journalism sites change their terms of service and be a bit more open about it. So all in all GamerGate won.
Media won't shut up about the trolls in it though.

[Tux]

Drinjanin eredeti hozzászólása:

Tux eredeti hozzászólása:

no its just hate on women pure and simple

Your comment made it clear. It's liberal feminist agenda. Ok. Thanks for the unintentional exposure of that term. It kinda makes sense if I split up that term / gamer gate / gate, to close something. Censorship of video games. That's right, now it makes sense. Yup, dumb drama, like I presumed.

no it was a Russian sponsored attack on women for really zero reason other than they (women ) spoke. Hell they didnt even say anything remotely radical at all.

[PastelWraith]

I feel like GamerGate was in some aspect responsible for the current culture war going on with SJWs. The mod explained it perfectly though, that's all it was, an issue with ethics in game journalism that got really big and made the whole "video games are sexist" thing blow-up

[ナルゴ]

- A girl made a horrible game.
- Game journalist gave that game favorable review because he was intimate with her.
- Video game enthusiasts rightfully offended by that. Everyone wants unbiased reviews for the things they may spend their hard earned money on.
- Gaming journalist cartel attacked said video game enthusiasts by saying they're evil, sexist misogynist, etc. With several sites publishing "Gamers are dead" articles all at once.

Eventually these gaming journalist sites lost their viewership, their sponsors, and most importantly, loads of money. Some even had to shut down.

Good riddance.

Also, the fact that Wikipedia incorrectly states that GamerGate was a harassment campaign only drove home the point that wikipedia is a horrible source for pretty much anything political.

[Tux]

月に叢雲花に風 eredeti hozzászólása:

- A girl made a horrible game.
- Game journalist gave that game favorable review because he was intimate with her.
- Video game enthusiasts rightfully offended by that. Everyone wants unbiased reviews for the things they may spend their hard earned money on.
- Gaming journalist cartel attacked said video game enthusiasts by saying they're evil, sexist misogynist, etc. With several sites publishing "Gamers are dead" articles all at once.

Eventually these gaming journalist sites lost their viewership, their sponsors, and most importantly, loads of money. Some even had to shut down.

Good riddance.

Also, the fact that Wikipedia incorrectly states that GamerGate was a harassment campaign only drove home the point that wikipedia is a horrible source for pretty much anything political.

that game was good

but more than that, a bit playing the victim about the oppressive unfairness of reviews on games nobody cares about. A bit over the top on SJW dont you think?

[Gus the Crocodile]

月に叢雲花に風 eredeti hozzászólása:

- Game journalist gave that game favorable review because he was intimate with her.

This literally never happened, which was clear almost immediately after the accusation became public. The review never existed. GG figureheads eventually even figured that out and pretended like they knew all along, but the fact that people are still repeating it, three years later, just shows the extent to which this is not a bunch of people concerned about ethics and truth.

[PastelWraith]

Gus the Crocodile eredeti hozzászólása:

月に叢雲花に風 eredeti hozzászólása:

- Game journalist gave that game favorable review because he was intimate with her.

This literally never happened, which was clear almost immediately after the accusation became public. The review never existed. GG figureheads eventually even figured that out and pretended like they knew all along, but the fact that people are still repeating it, three years later, just shows the extent to which this is not a bunch of people concerned about ethics and truth.

Back up your claims.

[Tux]

PastelWraith eredeti hozzászólása:

Gus the Crocodile eredeti hozzászólása:

This literally never happened, which was clear almost immediately after the accusation became public. The review never existed. GG figureheads eventually even figured that out and pretended like they knew all along, but the fact that people are still repeating it, three years later, just shows the extent to which this is not a bunch of people concerned about ethics and truth.

Back up your claims.

no the burden of proof is on the person who is claiming the affirmative which would not be Gus

[Tux]

whats also funny about gamergate was its total and complete failure.
misogynist cant now even speak without getting locked, they became the SJW they like to complain about and now even a movie is going to be made about how horrible the misogynist where in this whole story

[Doomerang]

It's too complicated to be explained in a sentence or even a paragraph. I'll just say one thing : anyone who uses the word mysoginist as such a blank term in explaining it with so little explanation is just looking to spread propaganda to you and trying to make you believe their very biased views on it. It goes way more deep then that, so much so I won't bother trying to say it myself but I'll just say watch some youtube video's on it.

[Zefar]

Tux eredeti hozzászólása:

whats also funny about gamergate was its total and complete failure.
misogynist cant now even speak without getting locked, they became the SJW they like to complain about and now even a movie is going to be made about how horrible the misogynist where in this whole story

GamerGate was not a failure. They got sites to update their ethics and policies. They even hurt massive sites like Gawker because they did a lot of bad stuff.
The movement got what it wanted in the end and that's not exactly a failure.

Also the fun fact about this is that plenty of Anti GamerGate have been charged for sexism or worse. In an actual court that is.

[Gus the Crocodile]

PastelWraith eredeti hozzászólása:

Back up your claims.

Yeah that's not how argument works. Pretty transparent, the way you neglect to challenge someone making a claim, but challenge the person challenging their claim.

There's nothing I can provide you that proves something that never existed doesn't exist. The person making the claim that it does exist should be the one you ask to back up their claim, because demonstrating something does exist is trivial, you just show the thing. Anytime is fine.