Ha! I didn’t realize Naked and Afraid was a show (since I haven’t had cable in years) and I initially read your post as if it was stream of consciousness writing channeling James Joyce or William S. Burroughs. In my mind I read that with the inflections of a poetry slam. That made my morning. :-)
-Todd
So, uh, Running With Scissors made new DLC for their 2003 game, Postal 2. Paradise Lost has all the subtlety you’d expect from a Postal game. Hidden away amongst the poop jokes and wanton killing, there is this:
There’s a part of the game that actually lets the player go into the Double Fine offices (which is a bank vault with Tim Schafer’s office on the side, har har) to wreak havoc. RWS, of course supports GG and Double Fine’s Schafer has been a vocal supporter of Anita Sarkeesian.
Quaro
4685
Naked and Afraid is a better show than I guessed from the teasers for it. It’s usually two chill people working together to survive, with very little reality-tv-drama between them. The people actually in the show take the absurd premise seriously and professionally.
CraigM
4686
When you are naked and stranded you kind of have to take it serious.
Oh it gets worse. Milo is in it.
Super Oppressed PPL and White Knight Fury are better tbh.
You get an occasional kook though, like that girl with the magnifying glass who was grieving over her father’s recent death and appeared to be actively trying to die from sun exposure.
That was still interesting as a portrait of grief though, I guess.
Twitter broadens “violent threat” stance, makes offenders face music
New notice to offenders: “Now please delete the Tweets that are in violation.”
Should a user violate Twitter’s rules, according to the update, he or she will receive a lock-out notice for the account in question along with a countdown timer. That timer can be bypassed should users “complete additional tasks” to get the account back online.
One of those is mobile phone number verification—and upon completing that, users are then instructed to delete their own offending tweets in order to finish the make-good process and come back online (all while greeted with a reminder of Twitter rules about harassment and threats). In other words, Twitter is now rubbing bad tweets in users’ noses.
To that end, Twitter has also broadened its definition of “violent threats”—which may lead to more users getting stuck in this new suspension net—by removing a “direct, specific” qualifier and adding a qualifier about “promoting violence against others.” (Twitter failed to effectively blur the hypothetical example posted in the announcement, however, and its text—attributed to a dummy account that Twitter often uses in announcements—was far from indirect: “You bastard, I’m gonna find you and fucking stab you to death.” Geez, what did @henryellis888 ever do to you, @KatieWMorgan?)
-Todd
RWS did post this and this on their own forums, along with a rotating set of Postal Babes so yeah, they’re full-on GG.
I think it’s a step in the right direction to reducing the amount of abuse on Twitter.
I think the key change is removing a “direct, specific” qualifier and adding a qualifier about "promoting violence against others. That way trolls can no longer hide behind the passive voice or implied acts.
-Todd
Yup. No one can say “I only tweeted that I wished you would get raped to death. I didn’t say I’d rape you to death. Hur hur.”
Busbecq
4694
I imagine the people who care about this stuff will just spend all day/night flagging the other team’s spicy rhetoric. If you’re tweeting DIE CIS SCUM out of solidarity with your brethern and sistern does that get you flagged?
Well I hope it reduces abusive and threatening communication from all sides of the equation. Extremism, regardless of flavor, is poisonous to all involved. But we already know that.
-Todd
Take the quiz! Who said it - Anita Sarkeesian or Jack Thompson: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/04/25/who-said-it-anita-sarkeesian-or-infamous-game-hater-jack-thompson/
Got 6/10. They really are equally ridiculous.
Quaro
4697
An additional more recent candidate for the quiz, from a year ago post Elliot Rodger’s massacre:
He modeled himself — particularly his camp, affected YouTube persona — on the loner protagonists of the video games with which he was obsessed and the sci-fi movies his father directed.
It’s those movies and games that provided the contextual framework for his crimes… it is the games we should look to for insight into his condition. It’s the blurring of fantasy and reality in today’s video game-obsessed young men that’s the real enemy. If there’s a cultural milieu that contributed to the creation of Elliot Rodger, it was that of nihilistic video games…
10/10. That really wasn’t that hard. Anita’s quotes are the ones that sound like someone speaking to a university audience. Thompson’s quotes all sound like they were blabbed on Fox News.
CraigM
4699
9/10, and it’s fairly clear when it was something said by someone offering critique versus someone’s unhinged ranting.
But can’t say I expected any different. Desslock, sorry, but someone critiquing something =/= wanting to censor something.
I did the quiz sincerely - I was surprised that I didn’t do better than 6/10, but probably shouldn’t have been since they are identically unhinged, self-aggrandizing, self-interested and desirous of removing games they find “problematic” from the public.
I might have gotten only 5 if I didn’t remember one of the GTA quotes from Thompson. Is it possible you got more accurate because you were more familiar with additional quotes? Try giving the test to a non-gamer or someone who isn’t familiar with either person and just tell them to identify if the quote came from either a religious puritan or a feminist academic - I gave it to two financial services employees in my office and one of them got only 3 right, while the other got 5.
