Gender Diversity / Politics in games (was Tropes Vs. Women)

[Harsin]

Oh it's Sketch! Oh sorry, jumped the gun.

He was also 'a bit wrong'. Got banned from forums for being genuinely racist. I think he thought of Japan as a superior society before he went, he's one of 'those people'.

Was he the one had a mega meltdown when someone mildly made fun of him and started going on about people in council houses and stuff?

[Rudi von Starnberg]

icycalm deleted most of his posts on here but they were pretty unhinged really. He kept calling everyone here 'spastic-autistic crypto-gay New York Art School retards'.

[milko]

Was he the one had a mega meltdown when someone mildly made fun of him and started going on about people in council houses and stuff?

nah that was yet another one wasn't it, the Ookibloks guy? He seemed like a fairly nice bloke up til then as well, albeit one who'd had to go through an abusive relationship out in Tokyo, chronicled through the Love Status thread.

[Spacehost]

nah that was yet another one wasn't it, the Ookibloks guy? He seemed like a fairly nice bloke up til then as well, albeit one who'd had to go through an abusive relationship out in Tokyo, chronicled through the Love Status thread.

Didn't he have a massive rant about how we're all morans who go to Game every week to pay his mortgage? That was some epic meltdown action.

[milko]

Yeah, when he went he really did go for it. I think that also included the council house stuff as well, anyway.

[Michael J Glocks]

Pretty sure that was Gique.

[rumblecat]

Who was the guy who went crazy recently and accused us all of being goyims (?) whose daughters were being fucked by black men or something. I know it's irrelevant to the topic at hand, but his username has slipped my mind and it's really bugging me now.

[Wiper]

We need to get the stories of the forum's more... interesting ex-members straight, so that we can a) attribute the right tales of derangement to the right people, and b) put said stories front and centre in our recruitment campaigns.

[RubberJohnny]

No the white supremacy/jewish global conspiracy stuff was Daewoo Sex Machina.

That one was in the "amazing posts" thread, which I was looking for the weeaboo meltdown in. It's not there.

[Alex W.]

We have had a lot of meltdowns over the years.

[milko]

Pretty sure that was Gique.

That's the one. Whether that's who Harsin meant, I cannot say. I hope he's alright, anyway.

[Benny]

Who was the "fresh out of the jungle" comment guy? Was it Phreak?

[Dudley]

icycalm deleted most of his posts on here but they were pretty unhinged really. He kept calling everyone here 'spastic-autistic crypto-gay New York Art School retards'.

He really got me.

[Anne Summers]

Who was the "fresh out of the jungle" comment guy? Was it Phreak?

Yeah although there were two regular posters (here or on Edge) over the years, using that name. It was one of them.

[DocG]

Has anyone ever seen him and TotalBiscuit in the same room at the same time?

[Spacehost]

My favourite bit is when he says he'd happily live in the dystopian society from Brave New World. I bet he'd run around The Matrix trying to get the Agents to sign his autograph book.

[BossSaru]

We would do well to chronicle all the forum meltdowns we have seen over the years, with links to key posts. Or may be not, it might come across as bullying. But there seems to be so much confusion as to who said what and why that it might be worth doing just to have a record of it, to prevent people being incorrectly associated with racist posts by other forumites.

It would also be a great read, reading how one innocuous post so often causes a mental breakdown and sudden unexpected vitriol-filled posts.

[ZOK]

Don't think it really matters with Phreak, the one who wasn't racist (but was pretty fractious!) left way before the racist one did.

I would suggest that pinning forum meltdowns is the exact opposite of what a friendly community should be doing, personally!

[Harsin]

Found the one I was thinking of Post #18290 in the Love Status thread in Off Topic if you're interested.

I came out here to make video games, snarky cunts like you that sit at home passively consuming my work in your drab little council house making judgements on people ljke me are still paying my fucking rent, wether you like it or not, so kiss my "autistic white boy" arse you glassy eyed talentless consumer cunt, go back to your rainy provincial high street game shop and write me another royalty cheque, bitch.

[rumblecat]

"Glassy Eyed Talentless Consumer Cunt" isn't a bad Fall b-side, if a bit more vindictive than usual.

[Capwn]

http://www.destructoid.com/posters-labelled-gamergate-insulting-anita-sarkesian-surround-e3-294371.phtml?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

[Unofficial Who]

Today she's posted this about dealing with reporting on Facebook.
 

Quote

I've been looking at my page message settings. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but there aren't the same reporting mechanisms on public pages as there are private ones. I have the option to report abusive messages sent to my personal account, but not ones sent to my public page (at least, it looks that way to me).

So tell me Facebook - how exactly am I meant to use 'the appropriate actions' to report men send me private messages of their dicks or rape threats or messages calling me a filthy whore? How exactly am I supposed to be responsible for appropriately dealing with these people when you provide no options to adequately report them, and give your members even less faith that you'll bother reviewing them properly?

And again, the totally bizarre thing is if these messages were sent to her privately and anonymously via snail mail, or if they were made via telephone the creeps doing this would be investigated and/or arrested. But somehow doing it in public under their own names online gives them a total get out of jail free card. (And yes, the guys making the threats? No bans, no blowback.)

[ZOK]

Any chance you can link to that trailer instead geekette? It autoplays every time you open the thread.

[jonathanhoey]

Two different but complementary articles about Facebook moderation. Worth reading both.

The first is from a blogger who really seems pretty hostile and angry. I'm not sure I completely agree with their POV but it's nonetheless interesting/enlightening.

The Real Story Behind Facebook Moderation and Your Petty Reports

Quote spoilered for content as it is describing something graphic.

What I care about, what really, truly fucking offends me is the fact that after 5 hours of reading through your butthurt sob stories, I find the 7 year old girl who, too scared to tell an authority has figured out how to report a picture her uncle posted of her that was blatantly, obviously sexual, and begged for help. “He says he’s coming over today at 2. Can you please help me, I don’t know what to do.”

Thanks to your delicate sensibilities, I didn’t get to read her report until it was 5 her time. Four hours ago I could have possibly prevented another one of her rapes. I could have had the police waiting for him when he arrived at her house. Four hours from now I’ll probably cry myself to sleep because I didn’t get to. Thanks again, to people who obviously need to stay the fuck off of the internet. Why did her report not come up faster? Because she’s seven, she reported the picture as a lesser offense that reported properly would have bumped it up the queue past all of your cries of visual injustice.

“Why did Facebook never respond to my report or my ban issue?”

I’ll be blunt here. Overtaxed system, automatic algo ignored you. OR, not enough fucks given about your issue if manually modded.

The second piece is from WIRED, and is a bit longer, more factual (describing the working conditions etc) and less confrontational.

The Laborers Who Keep Dick Pics and Beheadings Out of Your Facebook Feed

[Unofficial Who]

I think that article about petty reports is something to think about.

Unfortunately when the usual suspects get hold of it (and they will) it will be waved under the noses of women as yet more reasons for women not to complain and just deal with it.

"When you reported those guys sending you dick pics and telling you jokingly to go sit on a knife, not only were you attacking their free speech but you caused a little girl with real problems to get raped. Don't you care about things like that?"

In response, I can see some commentators calling that out as a shitty response, but I can see many more women and minorities internalising it and just putting up with the abuse or walking away. Because women are pretty much still conditioned to put everyone else's needs first.

[The Bag]

96% of teen girls play games, and yet we have something like 10-12% women in the game industry overall.

I think anyone who wants to work in this industry should be able to. At the same time that 95% number bothers me, it's accurate but it includes everything. It's the same measuring things like the ESA use to say more people than ever play games - it includes people who play mobile games to kill time. Most of us working in the games industry can point to one or two pivotal experiences or games as the spark to why we want to make games. Some others because it was this exciting new frontier of interactive stroytelling (usually coupled with the first). I just don't see where that comes from in the extremely popular mobile games - these are free and disposable. I just don't see anyone playing Candy Crush or FarmVille or the Kim Kardashian game and saying this, this is what I want to devote my life to. So while more people are playing games I think fewer people are playing games which will inspire them to want to make games.

It's the younger ones I have hope for, those that grew up playing Minecraft. Things are going to get really interesting when they start making games.

[RubberJohnny]

It's all games though - carving off bits of the industry as "not true games" because they don't have bloody-handed men with beards is basically what Gamergate did and is something that never ends well? Like isn't that also part of the problem with the industry and women? That anything they like gets forced into the "not-a-proper-game" ghetto, like the Sims and stops seeing coverage? I've even started to see this happen with Minecraft due to Youtube, despite it getting its start with twenty-something hardcore gamers.

[The Bag]

I'm not saying they're not games and I'm not saying people shouldn't be playing them. I'm happy more people are playing games than ever before, I've always wanted games for everyone.

My (poorly made) point is as an industry we've increasingly made games disposable, especially mobile games. The other edge is some of these games are just exploitative Skinner boxes designed to separate you from your money.** I have no real issue with their existence (although some of the shadier F2P practices could do with going away) and people obviously want them looking at the numbers of downloads and the amounts of money they're making. My issue is I don't see these games inspiring people to make games*, so while there are more people playing games I'm not sure them number of people playing the and deciding they want to make them will have really changed that much.

* I could be totally wrong on this part, I accept that. I'm totally the wrong generation to make that call, that's just my gut feeling on it.

** Edit - I just sort of abandoned that thought. What I was trying to get at is if that's your majority experience of games does that seem like a viable industry to go work in?

[RubberJohnny]

AAA games have had multi-billion dollar genres for decades that are just skinner boxes (loot games like Diablo, all MMOs, Destiny), but they've never been considered "a threat to the industry" like Facebook was or smartphone games are.

And AAA is increasingly using the shadier F2P techniques and microtransactions, it's just they get constantly attacked when on mobile without having played them because they're considered "the wrong kind of games", but get constantly given the benefit of the doubt when on top of a $60 price tag and $40 season pass without anyone having played them when they're for "the right kind of games" (men with beards, etc), I mean look at the conversation in the Phantom Pain thread for examples.

[The Bag]

I think you're projecting onto what I'm saying somewhat, I've never called either of these things a threat to the industry. And I've never had any sympathy towards the "real game" argument/crowd, I play everything I can get my hands on.

Yes many AAA games are essentially Skinner boxes, the difference is they're used to keep you playing rather than part with your money which is arguably just as bad. Or that used to be the case anyway, as you point out we're seeing more of the shady money grabbing stuff on the AAA side too and I'm uncomfortable with it no matter where it is.