"Ethics and Journalistic Integrity"

[Deadpan]

how you take legal judgements as objective proof of character, right after knocking on objectivity

 

I'm not saying that this makes it objectively true, I'm saying it's pretty weird that you attack this article for making supposedly unsubstantiated claims without ever touching on that kind of substantial evidence. Like, your entire argument here seems to be that it's unfair to assume that what people are saying about the guy is true, even though an institution dedicated to making impartial judgements in such "he said, she said" cases has already reached the conclusion that why indeed he is. A flawed institution, yes, but so far you've said nothing that managed to cast even the shadow of a doubt on its verdict. So yeah, I think it's supremely weird that you act as if we're arguing on equal grounds here. I think he's a stalker, you think he's not, so let's agree to disagree? Yeah, right.

 

 

Banned 'im. Zero tolerance for that nonsense.

 

Well now I just look silly.

[coaxmetal]

Brasas, (forgive me, rest of the forum, for being genuinely interested), what is your argument? That Eron Gjoni is a good man? That his actions post Quinn breakup were reasonable? Is there a specific point that you're arguing against?

 

I don't understand why you're being argumentative, exactly. Or: I have pretty good guesses, but they're not flattering to you, and I prefer (against better judgement?) to give the benefit of the doubt.

 

I was actually interested to see how they would reply to this, in case there was an actual argument there (but of course I didn't expect one). Probably for the best though.

[dium]

Yeah, I didn't really expect anything beyond my suspicions (that he's one of the frighteningly large number of people who're still actively angry at Zoe Quinn on Eron Gjoni's behalf) but I dunno! He was acting like maybe there was something else he was trying to say. That probably makes me a sucker.

 

..no, that DEFINITELY makes me a sucker.

[Markson]

As a wise dad once told me, "Tough tellin', not knowin'."

 

I found it uncomfortable that they seemed to be assuming that someone (or the Boston article?) implied Gjoni is a sociopath or autistic. Because I don't think anyone did that. It'd be kind of shitty if they did. But Deadpan already addressed it and I agree with what Deadpan said, so whatever!

[Gormongous]

I was actually interested to see how they would reply to this, in case there was an actual argument there (but of course I didn't expect one). Probably for the best though.

 

I didn't see that he was actively updating his final post with edits as responses to following posts, and I can actually reconstruct something of an argument there, beyond hedging and barbs? Something about character judgments being subjective and therefore not the purview of an article in a publication, I don't know. I get the idea of "who can say what Eron Gjoni is really thinking" in the abstract, but we don't typically deal with the secret lives of people around us when we interact with them. If you're an asshole, even just on the surface, I'm kinda at the point in my life when I'm done with you. Especially with tech-industry assholes like Weev, I've been validated repeatedly in this mentality.

[natellite]

i don't know if we need to bring words like "autistic" and "sociopath" into the argument as long as we can all agree that gjoni is a complete fucking choad, an abuser, and needs to go to asshole jail (where assholes rule)

[Apple Cider]

I really didn't like reading that article because Eron pretty much reminds me of the same behavior that compelled my stalker. These men feel entitled to their behavior because they feel that the woman in question has earned that punishment for some combination of real or imagined slights that are so far below what the reaction actually is. There's no doubt in my mind that Eron has no concern for Zoe and definitely premeditated to cause her life to be ruined. He wanted to cause as much problems for her as possible. The fact that he can flout a gag order and a restraining order is really criminal.

[Vainamoinen]

What did I miss?

[twmac]

Also, I'm not so much appealing to the legal judgment of Gjoni inherent in the restraining order, but to his disregard of it. Surely, if it's baseless, he'd be able to get it thrown out, barring systemic collusion against him, but by ignoring and violating it instead, he's almost demonstrating that it was an insufficient response to his behavior in scale, not in type. Who shoes that they're innocent of wrongdoing by doing more wrong? More pointedly, who brags about violating their gag order to a reporter?

 

Lundy Bancroft's book 'Why doe he do that? Inside the minds of angry and controlling men' talks about how he has noted that abusive men will continually disregard court orders and consider themselves above it. The fact that Gjoni's friends think he is a good/nice guy is another construct of the abuser (according to Lundy) outwardly he seems great as he is concerned about other people's perception of him.

 

I've only got to the second page of that article but over and over again there are alarm bells for an abusive personality going off as signalled by Bancroft's book.

[Mawd]

I was thinking of the Bancroft book too while reading that. Not just the way he flouted her boundaries or how he built her up. I was reminded most of all by a point Bancroft made that abusive men frequently attach adjectives that describe their own behaviour to their victims.

Also the whole idea that he was pushing her until she 'forced' him to come out with a ~10,000 word screed (new word!) that he'd been carefully building over months.

I wouldn't be surprised if he coldly calculate situations where he could act or be seen to act under emotional duress so he could be seen as having an 'understandable reason' for being as vicious as he has been. I'm not sure if this next statement is too harebrained but. I think there are people who know how to manipulate themselves for an overarching goal and that he may be one of them.

I haven't actually read many of the articles from or about that time. I read one or two Gamers are Dead articles and RPS' word on the events because that was the main site I went to but didn't have much contact with it all outside of a few occasions where friends of mine who read /v/ linked me articles and expected me to share in their outrage. They weren't very happy with my replies.

[brkl]

Social justice indeed.

[Apple Cider]

Lundy Bancroft's book 'Why doe he do that? Inside the minds of angry and controlling men' talks about how he has noted that abusive men will continually disregard court orders and consider themselves above it. The fact that Gjoni's friends think he is a good/nice guy is another construct of the abuser (according to Lundy) outwardly he seems great as he is concerned about other people's perception of him.

 

I've only got to the second page of that article but over and over again there are alarm bells for an abusive personality going off as signalled by Bancroft's book.

 

True story, an hour after my court hearing to get a restraining order against my stalker, he was back hounding me on Twitter an hour later. Restraining orders are horribly outdated against internet harassment too, unfortunately.

[Vainamoinen]

Oh, speaking of Star Trek TNG and Eron Gjoni, gaters trying to make Lt. Worf drink the gaterade:

 

https://twitter.com/akaWorf/status/593234588597522432

 

short version: NO DEAL

[Spenny]

I spent a lot of time yesterday arguing with people in a game design Facebook group about the Gjoni article. It's incredible how many people are willing to question the article and defend gamergate's position. It's disgusting yet interesting, watching the mental gymnastics these people do to defend their "righteous" cause.

[Henroid]

Oh, speaking of Star Trek TNG and Eron Gjoni, gaters trying to make Lt. Worf drink the gaterade:

 

https://twitter.com/akaWorf/status/593234588597522432

 

short version: NO DEAL

I love the way he phrased that. Also this explains why I was seeing people say that basically all Star Trek persons aren't on GG's side.

[Reyturner]

I love that the tweet preceding that is someone literally, poe facedly, unironically sending Dorn that Zoe Post as a defense of Eron Gjoni.

And by "love", I mean that down thumb barfing, farting into eternity emoticon that I don't know how to post from my phone.

[feelthedarkness]

all good stories are based on many secret truths nobody but this mob will tell

[coaxmetal]

There is someone in a giant bomb irc channel that I was trying to convince that privilege exists, it stemmed out of a gg/harassment argument. I usually don't bother but irc is a much better venue for a discussion than, say, twitter, so I was trying to argue in good faith, and then the dude started getting really really racist out of nowhere, so I stopped. That was kinda scary though.

[itsamoose]

There is someone in a giant bomb irc channel that I was trying to convince that privilege exists, it stemmed out of a gg/harassment argument. I usually don't bother but irc is a much better venue for a discussion than, say, twitter, so I was trying to argue in good faith, and then the dude started getting really really racist out of nowhere, so I stopped. That was kinda scary though.

I get this quite a bit, particularly when dealing with religion. I think that what is most scary to people is that in order to admit that privilege exists you must also admit your own weaknesses. If circumstance truly can exert some control over our lives, then we must recognize we are fundamentally vulnerable. I was certainly raised on the idea that determination was all that mattered, and for me at least coming to terms with this idea was scary as hell at first.

Usually the response to this is pretty predictable. First deny context, then refute specifics with ideals, and finally suggest the opposing opinion is the result of elitism. There doesn't need to be be bigoty mixed in there, but it usually is.

[Gaizokubanou]

It's fascinating how given the world history, anyone has any doubts about privileges.  There are so many times when millions were killed by forces far beyond their control.

 

Now I get the repulsion against equally useless "nothing I do will ever matter" attitude... but the direct opposite (everything in my life is under my control) is so silly.

[Smart Jason]

Oh, speaking of Star Trek TNG and Eron Gjoni, gaters trying to make Lt. Worf drink the gaterade:

 

https://twitter.com/akaWorf/status/593234588597522432

 

short version: NO DEAL

 

 

[Gormongous]

Oh, speaking of Star Trek TNG and Eron Gjoni, gaters trying to make Lt. Worf drink the gaterade:

 

https://twitter.com/akaWorf/status/593234588597522432

 

short version: NO DEAL

 

I made the mistake of reading the entire follow-up conversation after Dorn laid down the truth, and while these people make me physically ill, I'll never get tired of the way that their complaints and protestations escalate. It's always "Did you hear about this awful thing that's ruining video games" to "We don't care about Zoe Quinn, of course, but someone should" to "#GamerGate has been correlated to several minor improvements in way that game developers and journalists operate" to "Fuck you then, who cares about your opinion anyway." I wonder if they ever get tired of calling their heroes frauds for not wanting to give their blessing to this sad little crusade.

[Gaizokubanou]

I made the mistake of reading the entire follow-up conversation after Dorn laid down the truth, and while these people make me physically ill, I'll never get tired of the way that their complaints and protestations escalate. It's always "Did you hear about this awful thing that's ruining video games" to "We don't care about Zoe Quinn, of course, but someone should" to "#GamerGate has been correlated to several minor improvements in way that game developers and journalists operate" to "Fuck you then, who cares about your opinion anyway." I wonder if they ever get tired of calling their heroes frauds for not wanting to give their blessing to this sad little crusade.

 

Their followups are the most convincing proof.  Every single time, without fail, it devolves into something awful or nonsensical.  During the first month of this fiasco I used to give people using GG hashtag huge benefit of the doubt (and well, early on I assume many did genuinely didn't really know what they were getting into (and perhaps I too was too ignorant to see the problems more clearly)).  But longer it goes on, it's like why are you still so stuck to this 'hashtag' and speaking in these weird code names and constantly flock to news about people that has little to no correlation with what you say you are about???

[Vainamoinen]

 I used to give people using GG hashtag huge benefit of the doubt

 

The origin of the hashtag has never justified that doubt, sadly.

 

Gamergate is about ostracizing video game critics and indie developers with a thematic focus on diversity and other societal issues as outsiders to the medium. Women in particular.

 

Interpreting the diverse approaches of gamergate's supporters becomes quite easy if this common goal is kept in mind. The continuous sleight of hand, track covering, evasion maneuvers and smoke screens notwithstanding, this is where they're going 24/7. The ideology has been there for a long time, but last August seems to have served as a rallying call.

 

And that is why Gamergate HAS to defend Eron Gjoni. He HAS to be the good guy. It is, arguably, gamergate's most transparent lie. But they must defend it fervently, because it is the root out of which their precious thornbush grew. Yet it does serve a purpose to discuss these roots, as we've seen: 

 

 

 

The first reply makes the base lie as obvious as it will ever get; the second is interesting in light of the claim first uttered before gamergate even became gamergate: "It's not about Zoë Quinn any more". Seems like it was, all along, for eight months. We're still right there and August DID never end. To understand the Quinncident means understanding gamergate.

[Gaizokubanou]

The origin of the hashtag has never justified that doubt, sadly.

 

Oh yeah, I had no doubts about its origin stemming off from harassment against Zoe Quinn, but for about a month, whenever I saw a hashtag user, I gave the said individual benefit of the doubt that they actually just didn't know that and bought the 'ethics' part instead of being one of the founding harassers.

 

It wasn't a benefit of the doubt about legitimacy of the hashtag, but about whether the individual using it was making an honest mistake (and those who did seem to drop it once they talked more about it).