Games Journalism 2014: The Wherever-the-hell-this-has-gone

[gnmarsh]

To me disingenuous means lying, rather than seriously underestimating gun threats.

I guess there’s a confidence interval there. “This is American, land of the gun nuts. There’s a 85% probability this guy is willing to gun me and an auditorium of people down, but only a 5% chance he’ll bomb us all. With metal detectors and bouncers that shooting % goes down to 8%. I like those odds!”

• If they can’t get guns past the metal detectors, how can they shoot anyone? (assuming they don’t hide outside in the bushes and gun people down on the way in…)

Shoot the guys operating the metal detectors?

[Teiman]

I heard you can bypass the metal detectors if you are too busy playing Angry Birds on your iPad and don’t pay attention to the Security Theater.

[hepcat]

Well I just updated my List of Creepy People:

[ul]
[li]Paul Reubens [/li][li]John Waters[/li][li]John Getty[/li][li]Tim James[/li][/ul]

;)

On a serious note, point taken. “In poor taste” would have been a better substitute for creepy.

-Todd

John Waters is not creepy. He’s awesome. Remove him from this list at once! Tim can stay though. I don’t know him.

[Telefrog]

Unfortunate ad placement:

And yes, I know it’s not really Polygon’s fault. It’s still funny.

[inactive_user]

God that is delicious though. Ahahahahahahaha.

[Razgon]

Doesn’t sites have any control over the ads that runs there? I thought so.

[Telefrog]

Doesn’t sites have any control over the ads that runs there? I thought so.

Marginally, yes. Usually in cases like this, the ad runs based on what AdSense serves up, then the site removes it once they get enough complaints. It’s not like someone reviews every ad before they run.

[Razgon]

Ah - I actually thought so. Thanks for clarifying that.

[AntediluvianArk]

Juxtapositions like that are a constant problem over at RPS. Frequently they have a thoughtful article followed by one of those clickbait ads: “You won’t believe these scandalous pics of Kim Kardashian’s best asset!”

-Todd

[Teiman]

Unfortunate ad placement:

And yes, I know it’s not really Polygon’s fault. It’s still funny.

are we run full circle?

from the first page of this thread:

Appropriate.

:DDD

The marketing departament of Polygon must be the most passive aggressive place in the world.

[Telefrog]

Hahahaha! Teiman on point, as always! I didn’t even think about that first post.

[mouselock]

Except when is wrong right? I mean is the only way you would have felt the decision making process might be flawed is a room full of bodies as if that hasn’t happened a few times in that number of years. If someone told you some lunatic would mow down a bunch of first graders, would you believe me? It’s not worth the risk.

The problem is, if the “risk” is simply the possibility it might be followed through, very little can proceed that one unhinged person decides he wants to stop.

At some point, you have to look at things statistically instead of a worst case scenario.

(Mind, I take no exception to Sarkeesian cancelling. I also understand that because of stupid state laws here, USU more or less had its hands tied to making the environment completely safe. They’re not allowed, by law, to interfere with legal carrying by citizens. Universities are not inherently protected spaces here, in the same way that courthouses would be.)

The only real thing to be learned is that:

a) Some people we’d be better off without (I’m looking at you Mr. anonymous woman hating tough guy!)
b) Some decisions are hard to make, and it generally doesn’t make them easier to go off half cocked (all the folks who decided the school’s decision was passive-aggressive condoning of an anti-feminist stance)
c) Ms. Sarkeesian has a really shitty life right now, and is a fucking hero for continuing to pursue a cause she believes in despite the effect its having on her life. If occasionally she decides that discretion is, indeed, the better part of valor, I sure as hell can’t fault her for it.

[TimJames]

USU more or less had its hands tied to making the environment completely safe. They’re not allowed, by law, to interfere with legal carrying by citizens. Universities are not inherently protected spaces here, in the same way that courthouses would be.

[logging off as fast as possible]

It’s Friday, and the weather is beautiful.

[RickH]

The problem is, if the “risk” is simply the possibility it might be followed through, very little can proceed that one unhinged person decides he wants to stop.

At some point, you have to look at things statistically instead of a worst case scenario.

The real risk is the ones that let their actions speak for them.

Ms. Sarkeesian has a really shitty life right now, and is a fucking hero for continuing to pursue a cause she believes in despite the effect its having on her life. If occasionally she decides that discretion is, indeed, the better part of valor, I sure as hell can’t fault her for it.

Illustrating my point that this culture imputes virtue to victimhood. Under this stanard, aren’t Sarah Palin and Michelle Malkin even bigger heroes?

[robc04]

Illustrating my point that this culture imputes virtue to victimhood. Under this stanard, aren’t Sarah Palin and Michelle Malkin even bigger heroes?

Wasn’t Sarah Palin made fun of because she actually sounded way too dumb when she spoke to become President of the United States - not because she is a woman?

[Nesrie]

The problem is, if the “risk” is simply the possibility it might be followed through, very little can proceed that one unhinged person decides he wants to stop.

At some point, you have to look at things statistically instead of a worst case scenario.

(Mind, I take no exception to Sarkeesian cancelling. I also understand that because of stupid state laws here, USU more or less had its hands tied to making the environment completely safe. They’re not allowed, by law, to interfere with legal carrying by citizens. Universities are not inherently protected spaces here, in the same way that courthouses would be.)

There are people who speak all around the world who do not get death threats for doing so. Death threats are not ordinary in cases like these. Maybe with politicians, but it’s not like every time someone comes to speak in a school setting there are scores of death threats against their life. That just isn’t the case. And my point is, the unthinkable is just that, unthinkable until it happens. She has some real psychos after her. The authorities can simply measure whether or not they think those sickos will actually act or not, but how much comfort would that be in a room full of the dead and wounded?

I realize this is the gaming community and some how death threats, threats of rape, and generally gross stuff is so common we’re still talking about victim hood instead of how to address the real problem, but in other areas of the world, on some topics that some would call more serious than gaming, they can make a public appearance, speak controversially and not be chased down by an internet mob threatening to kill them… most the time. And in some cases events have been cancelled.

[RickH]

I realize this is the gaming community and some how death threats, threats of rape, and generally gross stuff is so common we’re still talking about victim hood instead of how to address the real problem, but in other areas of the world, on some topics that some would call more serious than gaming, they can make a public appearance, speak controversially and not be chased down by an internet mob threatening to kill them… most the time. And in some cases events have been cancelled.

Hey, in some cases it’s a literal mob that hunts the speaker down and kills them. The world is not yet that sophisticated. In fact, I’d say tolerance of dissent is the exception, not the rule.

And regarding using internet anomymity to threaten people, I’ll say yet again, this is a crime that should be prosecuted. I’m disappointed that the harasser that Sark originaly posted hasn’t been arrested yet. A few high-profile arrests and prosecutions and people won’t be so eager to try crap like this.

[RickH]

Wasn’t Sarah Palin made fun of because she actually sounded way too dumb when she spoke to become President of the United States - not because she is a woman?

I get it now, it’s OK because she’s stupid. And stupid people can’t be heroes. Or correct.

[Nesrie]

Hey, in some cases it’s a literal mob that hunts the speaker down and kills them. The world is not yet that sophisticated. In fact, I’d say tolerance of dissent is the exception, not the rule.

And regarding using internet anomymity to threaten people, I’ll say yet again, this is a crime that should be prosecuted. I’m disappointed that the harasser that Sark originaly posted hasn’t been arrested yet. A few high-profile arrests and prosecutions and people won’t be so eager to try crap like this.

I am not going to base my view of Anita’s response and the authorities response to a threat on what happens in parts of the world where armed militants threaten everyone. That would be ridiculous. It is absolutely not ordinary in the country she lives in to be chased out her home and to have venues she intends to speak at to be inundated with threats of physical harm. Politicians might deal with that, but it’s not to the point where all of them have to have secret service running around after them all the time. The behavior of people who hate Anita is not ordinary; it’s extreme. And yes, there probably are a few that would cross that line, they’ve already crossed many lines.

[CraigM]

I get it now, it’s OK because she’s stupid. And stupid people can’t be heroes. Or correct.

Honestly those kind of threats disgust me. I despise Palin. I would like nothing more than to never hear her speak in a political context again.

I also don’t think there should be any type of limits on her ability to do so though. That her ideas get a national spotlight is kinda scary, but she should be allowed to have it, as long as she is not using that platform to do actual harm.

Same with threats. I don’t want her anywhere near a lever of national power, but threatening, or god forbid actually following through? That’s simply wrong.

Here’s the thing pertinent to the gaming bit, I know how I felt about Jack Thompson. He received all kinds of threats. Ultimately he was stopped because he was actually corrupt and acting unethically. I also know that in my younger days (I was high school/ college at the time) I viewed those threats differently. I never did them myself, and always said they were wrong, I really wasn’t seriously bothered by them. I felt something along the lines of ‘they shouldn’t be doing that, but he’s a pretty reprehensible fellow so I’m not totally opposed to them’.

It was wrong of me, and as I’ve matured towards 30 I’ve learned that. Not only are such actions wrong in themselves, which they unequivocally are, but they give the person a perch of moral superiority (at least temporarily). Whatever else is going on a person receiving a death threat is in many ways unchallengeable for a time.

So no, it isn’t Ok because she’s stupid. As for being a hero, hero and villain are a matter of perspective. And correct? Even broken clocks are right twice a day, and I try to be man enough to admit when someone I disagree with or dislike is right.