Page 16 of 61 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 320 of 1217
  1. #301
    Quote Originally Posted by gwathdring View Post
    One of them is a film mogul whose films (which I haven't watched) support causes I love ... but the way he talked about his audience with this horrible manipulative contempt, the way he talked about using money to be above the system ... it was disgusting and disquieting.
    ??do tell?

  2. #302
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus gwathdring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    3,960
    Quote Originally Posted by cardinaldirection View Post
    ??do tell?
    Jeffery Skoll of Ebay. His idea of spreading awareness about pandemics? The film Contaigion.

    But I misremembered. He wasn't the one who made the classist comments in the Charlie Rose piece; that was someone else. My bad--Skoll didn't say anything particularly troublesome.

    ERgh. And one of them talked about Bill and Melinda nearly eliminating polio. And ... I was frustrated ... because most of the legwork in that had nothing to do with Gates charities but was more associated with global organizations and Google.org charities. Larry Brilliant is a better name to drop in terms of eradicating polio than "Gates."

    Not that CBS bothered to correct that. Or pushed any of them very hard about their general arrogance. Or touched on this awkward bit:

    Warren Buffett: I've got I've gotten a lot of yeses when I've called people. But I've gotten a lot of nos, too. And I am tempted, because I've been calling people with a billion dollars or more, I've been tempted to think that if they can't sign up for 50 percent, maybe I should write a book on how to get by on $500 million. Because apparently there's a lot of people that don't really know how to do it.

    [general laughter]
    It was more awkward in context. Like ... people are people. When you're that rich, you're going to be out of touch. But it was painful.

    Randall Lane: The public has a right to know who owns the world. [referring to Skoll's efforts to make films that talk about corporate ethics ... conception of irony not included]


    Randall Lane, the editor of the business magazine Forbes, says billionaires like Skoll have become so influential he devoted an entire issue to philanthropy.


    Randall Lane: Government is showing, you know, over the past couple decades that it can no longer solve the great problems of the day. Now these philanthropists who have incredible wealth, the problem-solving brainpower, and also the name and the influence to be able to open doors are uniquely qualified right now to solve the huge problems.


    But that does raise the question: do these billionaires have too much power?


    Charlie Rose: There's some people who say big philanthropy is not such a good idea, meaning that somehow you have enormous power and you're not elected and, and that that may not be such a good idea to have people with enormous wealth to have so much influence.


    Warren Buffett: Well, would they prefer dynastic wealth? Pass it on. Or would they prefer, you know, obscenely high living? There's a couple other ways to get rid of money, but I-- I-- I-- think it's better if you're helping other people, using a good bit of it for helping other people. [edit: sidestepping the question!]


    Charlie Rose: OK, so there's no instance in which somebody could say, "Look, I mean, we got too many people of huge wealth who are having too much influence."


    Jean Case: Well, Charlie. Think about Bill and polio, for instance. Bill and Melinda's work in polio. I mean, they're coming close to eradicating polio on the face of the Earth. I think when we have a couple of examples like that, people will see, that's not power being used for personal purposes. That's really leveraging everything you have to change the world to make it better. [sidestepping the question!]
    Because they have money, and power, and they're smarter than everyone, they're uniquely qualified to solve all of our problems. Oh good.
    Last edited by gwathdring; 29-08-2014 at 02:02 AM.
    I think of [the Internet] as a grisly raw steak laid out on a porcelain benchtop in the sun, covered in chocolate hazelnut sauce. In the background plays Stardustís Music Sounds Better With You. Thereís lots of fog. --tomeoftom

    You ruined his point by putting it in context thatís cheating -bull0

  3. #303
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Bishopric of Utrecht
    Posts
    2,238

  4. #304
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus soldant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Terra Australis Incognita
    Posts
    4,525
    An associate of Quinn leaked FB details leading to harassment.

    Well, so much for the moral high-ground!
    Nalano's Law - As an online gaming discussion regarding restrictions grows longer, the probability of a post likening the topic to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea approaches one.
    Soldant's Law - A person will happily suspend their moral values if they can express moral outrage by doing so.

  5. #305
    Obscure Node
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    6
    I don't care about the issue of one woman and gaming journalism, to me the most tragic part of all this is the fact these people wanted to do some good and got dragged into a shitstorm and then ignored as the rest raged on, no one in the gaming media made any attempt to get their side. They are the biggest casualty in this ridiculous fool's farce. reading that message I can feel how worn down this person is and defeated by the very people who should be celebrating his and his colleagues work.

    His videos on influential women have done more to open my eyes to what women have accomplished and can in this field than anyone else, this is the person people should be looking to and we've all failed.

    I'm not well known nor do I have a large post count. I'm just someone who has watched this whole thing unfold and pitied them. make of that what you will.

  6. #306
    Quote Originally Posted by soldant View Post
    Well, so much for the moral high-ground!
    No side could ever claim the moral high ground, at least legitimately.

    Total Biscuit has written a worthwhile article/blog/whatever on the polarisation on this issue and why the terms SWJ and MRA have no real meaning. Its a bit long though.

    http://blueplz.blogspot.ca/2014/08/t...o-players.html I don't know how to make nice looking links, sorry.

  7. #307
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,768
    Quote Originally Posted by Kadayi View Post
    In an industry with a few hundred players I'm amazed that you somehow think ten incidents qualifies for a pass. Exactly how many bad apples are you OK with letting slide?
    Fewer than ten accusations. That's not stuff that is fishy, just stuff that looks fishy and hasn't been investigated yet. I'd be interested if anyone has a list actually. It might not be more than five.

    I'm not suggesting we let it slide either. I'm suggesting people look into it, determine if there was a breach, and hold the people who commissioned/employed them to account *for that instance*.

    I don't seen any epidemic though.

    Well that statement contradicts what others have said, and based on duplicity on other fronts I'm inclined to put more faith in their opinions than yours at the end of the day.
    Not an opinion, just a statement of what was happening in the thread when it was shut down. Believe it or not I don't mind.

  8. #308
    Quote Originally Posted by deano2099 View Post
    Not an opinion
    Yes its an opinion given that it wasn't what was actually happening in that thread. Repeating yourself doesn't make it true.

  9. #309
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,768
    Quote Originally Posted by palindrome View Post
    Yes its an opinion given that it wasn't what was actually happening in that thread. Repeating yourself doesn't make it true.
    No, I'm reporting fact. Whether you trust my reporting or not is up to you, but it's in no way 'an opinion'.

    People made accusations about NG, someone asked for evidence, Jim seconded it, someone provided a link to something that didn't fit the timeline, Jim said if that was the only evidence the discussion was pointless, the thread vanished.

    That you don't understand the difference between reporting fact and opinion is probably why you're so confused on this matter. You can choose to disbelieve a report of the facts, but you can't choose to disagree with it.

  10. #310
    Quote Originally Posted by deano2099 View Post
    People made accusations about NG
    I hate having to repeat myself but rest assured that if you fail to grasp this yet again I won't bother a 3rd (or is it 4th?) time. Someone asked for evidence about NG's possible conflict of interest, some links were provided to articles which predated the start of the ZQ incident and that was about it. People were not making allegations.

    Someone ASKED IF THERE WAS ANY EVIDENCE and at least 2 people said that there wasn't any, one of which was myself.

    I am not confused on this matter, not in the least but I do find that you have a nasty habit of being disingenuous.

  11. #311
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Bishopric of Utrecht
    Posts
    2,238
    Actually, I do seem to recall that someone was making allegations, as to which I replied asking for evidence for that. So you are both right.

  12. #312
    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly View Post
    Actually, I do seem to recall that someone was making allegations, as to which I replied asking for evidence for that. So you are both right.
    I have no recollection of any allegations being made, certainly nothing overt.

  13. #313
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Grizzly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Bishopric of Utrecht
    Posts
    2,238
    No point in arguing, the thread is gone.

  14. #314
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Stockton-on-Tees, UK
    Posts
    2,492
    Somebody posted a link to something that they claimed had Evidence of some wrongdoing or other, but since I'm not going to follow any of the links in these discussions I can't say what was in it.
    Irrelevant on further examination of the rest of the thread.

  15. #315
    Lesser Hivemind Node strange headache's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    540
    Here is another statement by the feminist activist that advocated for trigger warnings in literature and movies a couple of months ago.

    The truth is, opportunists have a lot to gain right now. We are looking at the same system of corruption that has led to academic imperialism among radicals in the States. Allies and activists who are acting in good faith have just started to make baby steps in institutions that are classically engrained in Old Boy clubs, and the fruit is ripe for the picking for huge activist support, if you have the right connections and the motivation. And, what happens is, social justice activists bite into the fruit that they originally aimed to destroy. Instead of demolishing the institutions, why not just join them and try to benefit from them? Why not forward your own liberation, while remaining radio silent on the plight of others? We don't simply bite into that fruit: we devour it. And we grow fat on the gains.

    [...]

    And because so many people equate actions with personal compassion, we begin to hero worship. We throw out the phrase "your fave is problematic." Hell, we throw out the idea that EVERYONE is problematic. We assume that anyone fighting the good fight can be given a little leeway. Who cares if a white male equates gamers with "ISIS with Steam accounts?" Who cares if you call someone a "scummy neckbeard with Cheetos," because it's all in good faith, huh? Who cares if a critically acclaimed writer says "I hope you die," because, hey, they're fighting the good fight - right? It's our side, so those kind of comments are A-OKAY, right?

    [...]

    This is not fighting the good fight. This is not positive. This is not liberation. This is harassment. It is not just interpersonal, one-to-one harassment. It is often oppressive, because it promotes oppressive hegemonies that exist regardless of your "intent." Hateful vitriol can come from anyone. You can defend Anita Sarkeesian, and still be a shitty person. You do not get a free pass just because Anita has valid points. Sending harassment is sending harassment; let's be honest with ourselves. And the way that many people have conducted themselves in the past two weeks have been shameful, with people comparing us to ISIS and claiming we have sent bomb threats to SONY.
    Here is the full statement: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1s6j3sh

  16. #316
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,768
    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly View Post
    No point in arguing, the thread is gone.
    No it isn't.

    Zoe Quinn slept with people in the industry (lets ignore that she cheated on someone). One of those people was a reporter who wrote stories on her.
    Wonderful to see we have Kadayi and Palindrome demonstrating exactly how right John Walker was.

    Phase two is repeating the same lie so many times that it becomes accepted by the followers of the event, becomes received information, passed on as fact, no one actually checking.
    Although I imagine now I'll be told I manipulated the Google cache or something as I can't possibly be right. I'd suggest people here that were starting to think Kadayi and Palindrome had a point to make a note of the confidence and assuredness they stated that the thread definitely had no accusations in it, despite Jesus Phish's quote saying it right there in black and white, and start to wonder exactly what else they're making up.

    Mods - linking to a cached version of a deleted thread is totally breaking the rules, and I'm sorry, but I couldn't let this slide. Ban me for a while for it if you want, it's worth it. I'm tired of some posters hiding behind the rules to avoid being accountable.

  17. #317
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,034
    Quote Originally Posted by gwathdring View Post
    Because they have money, and power, and they're smarter than everyone, they're uniquely qualified to solve all of our problems. Oh good.
    I don't mind they think that. But they have the power to act in these words, and maybe push somebody else from the arena, If they disagree with them.

    Also messianism is a serius mental problem.
    Abandoned PC gaming for good. Now rest in a better place. psn:Teikman

  18. #318
    Moderator QuantaCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    7,158
    Quote Originally Posted by deano2099 View Post

    Mods - linking to a cached version of a deleted thread is totally breaking the rules, and I'm sorry, but I couldn't let this slide. Ban me for a while for it if you want, it's worth it. I'm tired of some posters hiding behind the rules to avoid being accountable.
    Im not here, but if I were, Id tell you to keep that link -it is available to all of us here anyway- if you tone down the paranoia. People arent trying to flee from being held accountable, internet users have a short attention span especially if the stuff is highly emotional, which it is for some.

    Actually everyone should tone down the paranoia and assume that rps members are being nice. Maybe they are forgetful. Maybe they are wrong. That doesnt mean theyre saying stuff out of spite

    Quanta out..
    - Tom De Roeck.

    verse publications & The Shopkeeper, an interactive short.

    "Quantacat's name is still recognised even if he watches on with detached eyes like Peter Molyneux over a cube in 3D space, staring at it with tears in his eyes, softly whispering... Someday they'll get it."

  19. #319
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by deano2099 View Post
    I'd suggest people here that were starting to think Kadayi and Palindrome had a point to make a note of the confidence and assuredness they stated that the thread definitely had no accusations in it, despite Jesus Phish's quote saying it right there in black and white, and start to wonder exactly what else they're making up.
    What exactly is your claim? The Chief Editor of Kotaku pretty much confirmed that the claim is true, he just said that the timeline is supposedly off by a few days (which nobody can really prove or disprove entirely): http://kotaku.com/in-recent-days-ive...pos-1624707346

    Regarding harassment, I'd like to point this out which has nothing to do with this recent matter regarding Brad Wardell of Stardock:


    He also wrote two articles, one just a few days ago and another a few months ago that are probably worth reading:
    http://www.littletinyfrogs.com/artic...dia_more_toxic
    http://www.littletinyfrogs.com/artic..._with_misogyny

    This was also really great, but long:
    http://nastythingssaidabout.wordpres...ames-industry/

  20. #320
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,768
    Quote Originally Posted by harbinger View Post
    What exactly is your claim?
    That in the thread that was deleted, someone made a direct accusation of an RPS writer. On the RPS forum. Other people denied vehemently that this accusation happened, and accused me of making it up, or it just being my opinion, and they were entitled to disagree with it.

    If someone went on your Facebook wall and accused you of being corrupt in your job, would you delete it? Can you understand why someone would?

    The Chief Editor of Kotaku pretty much confirmed that the claim is true, he just said that the timeline is supposedly off by a few days (which nobody can really prove or disprove entirely):
    Oh god. For those playing along, remember to translate properly:
    "pretty much confirmed" = "didn't confirm"
    "nobody can really prove or disprove" = "I can't prove my accusation"

    You can't say it doesn't matter because it's off by just a few days! Because that's when it happened! I don't really know how I can explain this...
    'We accuse you of unlawfully entering the shop premises at 3am and leaving with a Playstation 4'
    'err, In my defense, I went in there when it was open at 3pm, and bought one'
    'There you go, your honour, he pretty much confirmed it, the timeline is off by a few hours, but no-one can really prove or disprove that, send him down'

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •