@korvus: Thanks.

@super600:

Most gamers don't care about it or feel it's important. Some people have laughed at it whenever it's mentioned. GG has not been able to convince the majority of the gaming press that it actually cares about ethics in game journalism, but instead they have convinced the gaming press that they mostly want to focus on feminism and sjw with ethics as a side thing at times mostly for the sites that disagree with them or do things that disagree with them. GG at times does not even understand what ethics actually means. Yes. GG has found some things that may be an issue with the gaming industry , but a lot of the time this has been blown out of proportion like when GG's uncovered something that ended actually being false about a small Canadian company called Silverstring Media and the whole Allistair Pinsoft thing. The only type of people GG has been most successful at attracting people who only care about fighting the current culture war against feminism and SJW's which is what GG has been used for. People like Mark have joined and he;s trying to do something mostly outside the movement that looks kinda interesting, but I'm not sure if anyone will take the guy's initiative seriously because of his past and the fact GG members will most likely support his initiative.People like Mark are kinda of an exception to the type of people gg attracts because the movement mostly attracts people who care about fighting the latest culture war or have some axe to grind(Which Mark fits a bit), or are really vile in the first place.

I think you may be making some assumptions here.

Gamer-Gate cannot convince the Gaming press that they're about ethics in video games journalism because the Gaming press do not want that. Look at Mark Kern, he disassociated form the Gamer-Gate tag, was very calm and respectful and what happened? VG247 wrote an article slandering him. Ben Kuchera attacked him on Twitter and blocked him. They also accused him of being a Gamer-Gator, despite the fact that the only thing he did was ask for ethical games journalism in the utmost of respectful manner. They indirectly acknowledged that Gamer-Gate was about ethics in video games journalism all along. They're using ''misogyny'' as a deflection of the true corruption. They know this; otherwise the collusion seen in GJP would not have occurred.

Also, despite the fact that Mark was extremely nice towards anti's, they added him to the block-bot. It's this extremist mentality on the anti-side which is ''either you're with us or you're not''. Gamer-Gate is far from perfect, but atleast KIA welcomes and listens to neutrals.

The Gaming press do not want to be ethical --- they like their click-bait and they do not believe in transparency; to them, they feel as if nothing wrong has been done. The proof is in the pudding. Look at what Gamer-Gate accomplished; they made PC Gamer, Eurogamer, The Escapist, Destructoid and IGN update their ethical policies; they cranked on an organized and collective movement to pressure for it. In addition, we've seen Gamer-Gate raise money for a rape victim (I believe this is correct?).

Social Justice Warriors are the problem. A post on Reddit directly nailed it:

I often see a lot of talk about how #GamerGate is getting distracted by all of this "Social Justice" and "feminism" talk. I put those in quotes because they are often used pejoratively, particularly the SJW acronym (Social Justice Warrior). I refer to the movement as the Cult of Social Justice, and feel it applies well and brings an intended negative connotation.

While #GamerGate's primary concern and reason for existing is the issue of ethics in game journalism, there is no avoiding the fact that many of these ethical concerns arise out of the "Social Justice" movement. Nearly every significant ethical issue we're addressing comes back to people who are actively part of the Cult of Social Justice, and that's not a coincidence -- these things are inextricably linked.

Also, no one can deny that addressing these ethical issues has exposed a small but powerfully influential group of Social Justice cult members within the game journalism sphere. These individuals exert their power through appealing to various "social justice" causes, like harassment of women, gender equality, gender representation in games, etc.

Just a reminder not to be ashamed or discouraged from addressing these issues in direct relation to #GamerGate, and do not be discouraged from tagging the hashtag in the process -- these things are inseparably linked together. We cannot adequately, intelligently fight the ethics violations without addressing one of the largest sources of these violations: the Cult of Social Justice.

Either way, I think SJW's are a problem. They claim that Gamer-Gate is against minorities (to be honest, I have no idea why, even the press didn't go this far); despite the fact that Gamer-Gate is much more diverse than Anti-Gamer Gate. Gamer-Gate actually consists of minorities. I'm a minority, and SJW's are nice when you agree with them, but nasty and intolerant if you disagree with them.

I can show you screen-shots of anti-GG SJW's being racist towards minorities and bigoted towards trans people, but I'm not sure if it's allowed here. Some of it is pretty vile.

On the subject of threats, I think it is not right to judge all Gators on the actions of a few; I recommend you watch this video. It highlights that the so-called threats from Gamer-Gate are actually very minimal, and that anti-GG are dishing out more.

I have a lot of catching up to do. Apologies if my posts are disjointed.

Below, is the Comics Code. It was once mandatory (I believe; if not mandatory, it was used for DC and Marvel for over 25 years).

What I'm about to post was once actually enforced with comics.

• Crimes shall never be presented in such a way as to create sympathy for the criminal, to promote distrust of the forces of law and justice, or to inspire others with a desire to imitate criminals.
• If crime is depicted it shall be as a sordid and unpleasant activity.
• Policemen, judges, government officials, and respected institutions shall never be presented in such a way as to create disrespect for established authority.
• Criminals shall not be presented so as to be rendered glamorous or to occupy a position which creates a desire for emulation.
• In every instance good shall triumph over evil and the criminal punished for his misdeeds.
• Scenes of excessive violence shall be prohibited. Scenes of brutal torture, excessive and unnecessary knife and gunplay, physical agony, gory and gruesome crime shall be eliminated.
• No comic magazine shall use the words "horror" or "terror" in its title.
• All scenes of horror, excessive bloodshed, gory or gruesome crimes, depravity, lust, sadism, masochism shall not be permitted.
• All lurid, unsavory, gruesome illustrations shall be eliminated. Inclusion of stories dealing with evil shall be used or shall be published only where the intent is to illustrate a moral issue and in no case shall evil be presented alluringly, nor so as to injure the sensibilities of the reader.
• Scenes dealing with, or instruments associated with walking dead, torture, vampires and vampirism, ghouls, cannibalism, and werewolfism are prohibited.
• Profanity, obscenity, smut, vulgarity, or words or symbols which have acquired undesirable meanings are forbidden.
• Nudity in any form is prohibited, as is indecent or undue exposure.
• Suggestive and salacious illustration or suggestive posture is unacceptable.
• Females shall be drawn realistically without exaggeration of any physical qualities.
• Illicit sex relations are neither to be hinted at nor portrayed. Rape scenes as well as sexual abnormalities are unacceptable.
• Seduction and rape shall never be shown or suggested.
• Sex perversion or any inference to same is strictly forbidden.
• Nudity with meretricious purpose and salacious postures shall not be permitted in the advertising of any product; clothed figures shall never be presented in such a way as to be offensive or contrary to good taste or morals.

^ Now imagine that twisted for Gaming. Let's pretend this is applied to video-games on the insistence of 'activists'/video games critics.

How would you personally react? Would you protest in the streets? Would you not care? Just curious.

I encourage this.

I want the FBI to research this. Because the FBI will know this is largely nonsense. Gamer-Gate has not only dished out less threats than Anti-Gamer Gate, but set up a Gamer-Gate harassment patrol account on Twitter to catch any third-party trolls or those harassing under the tag. I more or less know that by this point, these so-called threats will be deemned non-credible.

If the FBI hypothetically look into Gamer-Gate, then Gamer-Gate will gain a massive victory. We saw shades of this with Anita Sarkeesian (a known liar), her so-called death threat which caused her to cancel her University talks was found by the Police to be non-credible.

I disagree.

Firstly, most Gamers don't 'despise' Gamer-Gate. But I agree with the former, they don't care for it --- until larger issues, such as creative freedom is limited.

Secondly, Gamer-Gate is constantly growing. An example of how large Gamer-Gate was evident a few days ago. Mark Kern (lead dev in WOW) wanted the hashtag #letmarkspeak to trend because VG247, a yellow gaming site slandered him without giving the right of reply --- Gamer-Gate supported Mark and got the hashtag trending in several countries within 1 hour. That hashtag trended for nearly a day. That Tim Schaefer joke, was also trending within an hour --- for an entire day.

The sub-reddit KotakuInAction has reached 30,000 subscribers and as of now, it's surprisingly very active for the amount of subscribers it has; at one point it entered the top 20 most active sub-reddits.

Thirdly, Gamer-Gate isn't about affecting the industry per-se; just the yellow press. The SVU episode was an example of how the press can craft the narrative of what the outside see. Just yesterday, Eurogamer revised and updated their ethics policy --- this is a win for Gamer-Gate.

Fourthly, Gamer-Gate isn't just about getting sites to improve their ethical standard; it's about building a new press in the place of the old. Sites like IGN, TheEscapist, TechRaptor are all endorsed by Gamer-Gate.

I think Gamer-Gate has it's problems, for sure; from a rational standpoint, I can't argue otherwise --- but it breaks my heart to see the gaming press turn on it's own reader base.

@SambaLele: I might need some time to respond to your comment, this is a VERY short reply I'm making, but my essential point is that ethics in video games journalism cannot be achieved without combating SJW's,

SJW ideology and headlines resulted in the SVU episode.

It's directly linked to who the press is using: SJW's are part of the problem; they are actively doxxing, harassing and getting Gamer-Gators fired. In a video I posted on the previous page, it was proven that SJW's dish out more threats.

Gamer-Gaters were forced into combating SJW's. There's not a way around it: the gaming press are enabling SJW ideology and using it to smear those who criticize the press.

I despise SJW's as much as the next guy; admittedly I haven't read this thread the full way through, but are you sure there are SJW's in this thread? Most people on this forum don't know what Gamer-Gate is, and I suspect they don't want to (I'm a supporter of GG, btw).

Anti-Gamer Gate want to censor Gaming and believe that the banning of GTA V in a store in Australia was justified, I don't think those types of people are in Gamespot. I imagine a lot of people at Gamespot would be pissed of political correctness censored their games. I also imagine that many Gamers here would NOT want 3rd Wave Feminists telling Gamers that they're evil misogynerds.

Don't get me wrong, there ARE certainly people in Anti-GG on this site, and there are SJW's in Gaming, but most SJW's who oppose Gamer-Gate aren't even Gamers.

@McStrongfast: Allow me to debunk your argument because it's painfully bias. My full article is here, with hyperlinks for proof: but essentially Gamer-Gate is not a hate group.

If something is going to be designated, the evidence needs to be STRONG; with Gamer-Gate, it's not. It'd be quite bigoted to bill it a hate group. My post bellow debunks your claim. We can't just go around calling entire groups of people evil and awful if there's a weak foundation for it.

I'm not a bigot, and I'll never use a fringe minority to smear the majority. This is why I don't think the majority of Muslims are terrorists; and this is why I don't think the majority of Gamer-Gators are evil and awful people.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/thefreethinker/no-gamergate-is-not-a-hate-group-1cmjl

From getting The Escapist, The Destructoid, IGN, The Verge, Eurogamer and PC Gamer to all update their ethics and disclosure policies; to helping to raise more than $50,000 for TheFineYoungCapitalists (an organization with the aim of supporting work by underrepresented labor in the media industry) to getting advertisers to pull out of unethical sites (to the point of costing Gawker into the seven figures).

And yet, GamerGate is labelled as ”an evil white male” misogynistic movement?

Wait. The same consumer revolt which raised thousands of dollars to help women in the industry is against women?

Huh?

The same consumer revolt which seen from the hashtag #NotYourShield, compromised of a vast range of ethnic minorities and females advocating their support for GamerGate’s goal of ethical reform is against women and solely exists on the basis of prohibiting ethnic diversity?

Huh?

Yeah, you read that right. Despite a good chunk of the consumer revolt consisting of ethnic minorities (ironically, moreso than those who oppose the revolt) and females, it’s somehow labeled as a hate group against the very group of people the consumer revolt consists of! —- which is is an utterly unfortunate betrayal of rationality and reason.

Being Indian myself, I’ve frustratingly been met with the claim that I’m an evil white racist misogynist for associating with a ”hate group” —- the claim that GamerGate is a hate group mostly comes from the fact that several notable females have received threats, but that’s the deal with a hashtag movement. Anyone (e.g. third party troll) can send a hateful message and attach a hashtag to it on Twitter; for Gamer-Gate atleast, the harassment is actually a fringe minority coming from the hashtag.

If one is going to judge it to be a hategroup, surely it is a remarkable piece of illogic to use a minority to represent the majority of the movement? (judging an entire group based on the actions of a few is what leads to, by definition bigoted thinking). Or if you’re trying to gauge the movement, atleast use something morerepresentative.

Such as the sub-reddit KotakuInAction, the main hub of GamerGate which not only roundly condemns harassment in it’s official site rules but has a subscriber total of around roughly 28,500 (and it’s only rising). Surely, that is more representative of the revolt, no?

It is completely illogical, irrational and faulty to assume it is a hate-movement. But then again, are we to expect rationality on the Internet?

The reason that you’ve probably not heard of this is because of the lack of media acknowledgement of it; with them instead opting to give professional victims such as Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian a platform to police what Gamers should and shouldn’t do. Brianna Wu, a known liar who sent threats to herself and Anita Sarkeesian, a third-wave Feminist who claimed to have gamed since the age of 5, only to then being found to admitted that she has never cared for Gaming.

Hell, if we focus on the topic of harassment, shall we not point to the fact (and to no surprise, gained no coverage) of the pro-Gamer Gaters who actually received harassment on social media?

Such threats as seen in the link from the Anti-Gamer Gate crew literally call for the genocide of all Gamers and those who support GamerGate. Though who oppose Gamer Gate may protest that ”they are not a group/movement” —- yet the woman they report so much on, outright said that Anti-Gamer Gate is a movement?

I have myself, witnessed several of my friends (who could be considered ethnic minorities) face harassment and doxxing for simply daring to associate themselves with GamerGate.

Here we have, an Anti-Gamer Gate movement, which evidently has dished out far more harassment. Shall we lump all those that oppose Gamer-Gate has abusive people based on the statistic? Or, is that a generalization?

I write this not to appeal to the gaming press; they know they’re in the wrong, and they’ve cast their own narrative (which is beginning to fall apart). I do not write this to even appeal to the radical Social Justice Warriors who align themselves against Gamer-Gate, as they are simply not interested in what they claim to fight for (they only care about minorities and women who agree with the narrative, they’re not interested in the facts).

I write this to appeal to neutrals; those who may be anti-Gamer Gate but have doubts. Do you honestly believe GamerGate is against the very group of people it consists of? Does disliking ultra-third wave politically correct Feminists make you a ”misogynist”? I think not.

The problem I have with this ''minority representation'' nonsense is that it has nothing to do with Gamer-Gate. I'm an ethnic minority, and I have brown skin. Whenever I've disagreed with a Social Justice Warrior, I've been called, and I kid you not, a ''useless sh*t skin'' --- it....makes no sense, that SJW's who claim to fight for minorities, will use racial attacks at those who disagree with SJW's and can speak for themselves.

On that note, it's ironic that many SJW's are indeed CIS white males, self-hating ones too. I find it remarkble, that anti-GG claim to fight on the behalf of minorities, yet are white CIS males themselves; frankly, I don't have a problem with white CIS males. I judge by the content of the character, not race.

Oh, and it IS about ethics in video games journalism. Eurogamer have just updated their ethics policy, this is what Gamer-Gate wants

http://blogjob.com/oneangrygamer/2015/03/eurogamer-updates-ethics-policy/

On the topic of ''no, it's actually about ethics in video games journalism'' insult. How about ''no, it's actually about a secret conspiracy to which a group of white misogynists are secretly plotting to kick women out of video games and are invoking terrorism worse than ISIS!''