BigJKO Posted October 12, 2014 Gaters claiming they've had people contact their employers to try to get them fired (Maybe this was the guy you were thinking of, BigJKO?) Noo... That's not the one. Damnit, I wish I had just posted this here when I stumbled upon it back then.. EDIT: Ah, trawling through the IdleThumbs IRC logs, I finally found a mention of it! https://twitter.com/CodeusaSoftware/status/514899020679245824 EDIT 2: A TwitLonger account of his tale: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sclnt4 - I haven't read it yet, and his twitter is ironically calling Anita a "professional victim" and making fun of talking about harassment on twitter, so I'm taking this with a grain of salt so far.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nachimir Posted October 12, 2014 Following this one, Elizabeth Simmins spent quite a while tweeting at Stephen Totlio yesterday: https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520982456171003904 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520982582012686336 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520982727680876544 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520982906375000064 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520982996372164608 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520983111841349632 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520983232184324097 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520983373431701504 At which point does an editor think "Fuck it?" on this? When someone puts an argument like this to them? When they realise how small GG actually seems to be and suddenly fear less for their ad revenues? When they realise they're way less at risk than the women who are being targeted? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Synnah Posted October 12, 2014 Noo... That's not the one. Damnit, I wish I had just posted this here when I stumbled upon it back then.. EDIT: Ah, trawling through the IdleThumbs IRC logs, I finally found a mention of it! https://twitter.com/CodeusaSoftware/status/514899020679245824 EDIT 2: A TwitLonger account of his tale: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sclnt4 - I haven't read it yet, and his twitter is ironically calling Anita a "professional victim" and making fun of talking about harassment on twitter, so I'm taking this with a grain of salt so far.. The Twitlonger post just seems to imply that his boss was unhappy with him, and kind of a dick about it. Looking at the original tweet, he said that an 'SJW' slandered him to his boss, but further down the thread there are the following tweets: @TabuthaRasa Sep 25 @CodeusaSoftware The social side has no right to do this. Why do bosses keep believing the lies they tell them? @CodeusaSoftware Sep 25 @TabuthaRasa Its more to do with behavior review than anything else at this moment. @TabuthaRasa Sep 25 @CodeusaSoftware Why though? Have you done anything questionable aside from being in a stream? They have no right. @CodeusaSoftware Sep 25 @TabuthaRasa Sharing an email that was meant to be for work purposes seems to be the biggest issue internally. Costing business and what not @TabuthaRasa Sep 25 @CodeusaSoftware What email was it? How did it cost business? How'd they figure out who you are? @CodeusaSoftware Sep 25 @TabuthaRasa The email was one company wanting to hire the company I work for, I derailed that by sharing it with the public. @CodeusaSoftware Sep 25 @TabuthaRasa I also left some information on my blog that traced back who i worked for I'm not sure what stream they're referring to, or what the circumstances were behind him sharing a work-related email, but it kind of sounds like his dismissal might have been on grounds of unprofessional conduct, and not because an SJW slandered him. But of course it's a better story if you imply that that was the reason! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Twig Posted October 12, 2014 Polygon and Kotaku both reported the story. Kotaku's is significantly better than Polygon's, which is a turnup for the books. How shitty must you be if you can't even clear Kotaku's low bar? Much as I've disliked Kotaku in the past, I honestly think they've been getting a lot better recently? Granted, I really only read things people have linked to me, so I don't know if that's representative of the whole shebang. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Twig Posted October 12, 2014 also (thanks to wehuntedthemammoth) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Merus Posted October 12, 2014 The Twitlonger post just seems to imply that his boss was unhappy with him, and kind of a dick about it. Looking at the original tweet, he said that an 'SJW' slandered him to his boss, but further down the thread there are the following tweets: I'm not sure what stream they're referring to, or what the circumstances were behind him sharing a work-related email, but it kind of sounds like his dismissal might have been on grounds of unprofessional conduct, and not because an SJW slandered him. But of course it's a better story if you imply that that was the reason! Ho, wow, he made a takeover bid public. It takes time to do those negotiations, but 'the company is available for sale' is very valuable information in the hands of the market, and that changes the negotiating position enormously. The other company would be justified in calling off the takeover thanks to bad faith negotiations. I've had a formal warning because I told a customer the shop I was working at was being readied for sale. Much as I've disliked Kotaku in the past, I honestly think they've been getting a lot better recently? Granted, I really only read things people have linked to me, so I don't know if that's representative of the whole shebang. I am being a little dishonest because I feel like Kotaku's biggest problem is mostly that they have some terrible posters from the early days working alongside actual journalists who do great work. Brian Ashcraft is almost single-handedly responsible for the skeevy reputation Kotaku has, although Luke Plunkett is also pretty rubbish. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bjorn Posted October 12, 2014 I needed to blow off some steam. Feminism: Threat or menace - Amazing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JonCole Posted October 12, 2014 Following this one, Elizabeth Simmins spent quite a while tweeting at Stephen Totlio yesterday: https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520982456171003904 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520982582012686336 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520982727680876544 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520982906375000064 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520982996372164608 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520983111841349632 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520983232184324097 https://twitter.com/vivian_games/status/520983373431701504 At which point does an editor think "Fuck it?" on this? When someone puts an argument like this to them? When they realise how small GG actually seems to be and suddenly fear less for their ad revenues? When they realise they're way less at risk than the women who are being targeted? I don't really understand what you're trying to get at here. Is Vivian_games run by Elizabeth? I do think the way Kotaku handled that transphobic article was not good and makes me still remain relatively skeptical about how seemingly good Kotaku is being about reporting on GG stuff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nachimir Posted October 12, 2014 My bad, I was half asleep when I typed that post, Elizabeth was simply retweeting them. What I'm wondering is when so many sites seem to be trying to stay silent on GG, what tips an editor over the edge of "Fuck this abuse, and fuck the consequences if we lose some audience, we're covering this now". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Twig Posted October 12, 2014 I don't really understand what you're trying to get at here. Is Vivian_games run by Elizabeth? I do think the way Kotaku handled that transphobic article was not good and makes me still remain relatively skeptical about how seemingly good Kotaku is being about reporting on GG stuff. I don't think it's fair to call that article transphobic... In fact, it came out in support of the person who was hurt. Unless it was edited before (or after) I read it? It was, of course, unsympathetic to her desires to take the article down, of which I have mixed feelings, but transphobic? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JonCole Posted October 12, 2014 I meant that the article covered the transphobic person and was getting at the thing you mentioned, that they refused to take the article down or even edit it in such a way that it would be less easy to track back to her. I remember they took out a direct link to her Twitter, but otherwise left the article as they originally published it. I can theoretically agree with Totilo's stance that it's news and should be covered, but they could have done a much better job of obfuscating her personal details to make her less of a target. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Synnah Posted October 12, 2014 Ho, wow, he made a takeover bid public. It takes time to do those negotiations, but 'the company is available for sale' is very valuable information in the hands of the market, and that changes the negotiating position enormously. The other company would be justified in calling off the takeover thanks to bad faith negotiations. I've had a formal warning because I told a customer the shop I was working at was being readied for sale. Okay yeah, I would say those are pretty good grounds for dismissal, especially if the deal fell through because of it. His boss being told about the GamerGate stuff probably didn't help (And was a shitty thing to have happened), but it seems highly unlikely that it was the cause, and he's trading on this as if the story is 'SJWs Got Me Fired From My Job', which is pretty wide of the mark. ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIwclpFij9U (thanks to wehuntedthemammoth) Jesus, that manifesto. It reads like the work of FartToContinue, but with slightly bigger words, and only one font. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Twig Posted October 12, 2014 I meant that the article covered the transphobic person and was getting at the thing you mentioned, that they refused to take the article down or even edit it in such a way that it would be less easy to track back to her. I remember they took out a direct link to her Twitter, but otherwise left the article as they originally published it. I can theoretically agree with Totilo's stance that it's news and should be covered, but they could have done a much better job of obfuscating her personal details to make her less of a target. Okay yeah that's more understandable and I agree. Sorry I misunderstood! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted October 12, 2014 I meant that the article covered the transphobic person and was getting at the thing you mentioned, that they refused to take the article down or even edit it in such a way that it would be less easy to track back to her. I remember they took out a direct link to her Twitter, but otherwise left the article as they originally published it. I can theoretically agree with Totilo's stance that it's news and should be covered, but they could have done a much better job of obfuscating her personal details to make her less of a target. Especially since there's a history of journalists posting articles about trans individuals in the name of the "truth" that lead to their harassment, harm, or suicide. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
namman siggins Posted October 12, 2014 Jesus Christ, that fucking Grantlabd article, ugh. One of the worst and cruel things I've read; no respect for the subject's privacy. I refuse to call that writer a journalist or that a journalistic piece for truth; what a crock of shit. Some people will never understand why most stay cover, I did and still do to an extent because of the amount of abuse that can get thrown at you; it can simply overwhelm you and go into deep hiding which hurts and fucks with you even more. I wouldn't want that in anyone! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Merus Posted October 13, 2014 So some fun news: John Scalzi, battle-hardened from years of dealing with abuse from Vox Day and his followers, decided he'd had enough of Gamergate (he's friends with Brianna Wu), and concluded his comments with an assertion that he was going to order pizza. ********* pizza. Thanks to his followers, #*********PizzaGate was trending a couple of hours later. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aeolist Posted October 13, 2014 Wait why does this forum censor ********* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
namman siggins Posted October 13, 2014 pineapple pizzagate Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ozzie Posted October 13, 2014 Because it's the naughtiest of fruits? We're talking about ananus, aren't we? Apparently we are. Edit: ananas. Right, ********* is censored. Because ananas isn't even an English word. My bad. :/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Merus Posted October 13, 2014 I thought about removing the censor, and then decided it was funnier the way it was. Here is Scalzi recounting the madness he unleashed: http://whatever.scalzi.com/2014/10/12/*********pizzagate/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Merus Posted October 13, 2014 Edit: ananas. Right, ********* is censored. Because ananas isn't even an English word. My bad. :/ As the song goes, "this shit is | ananas | *cough* A N A N A S" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ozzie Posted October 13, 2014 Hrm, so I guess the word is part of the English language? Jeez, I can't even trust the LEO dictionary anymore. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brkl Posted October 13, 2014 Nope, Merus is just being clever. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
