kreuzritter wrote: ↑
Sun May 27, 2018 8:05 pm
First I've heard about the FBI thing, but the RPG.net community have had a number of bad experiences with GG/Redpill, such that this has been the forums standing policy for a couple of years now
"Cleared" might have been too strong a term, but the FBI did investigate Gamergate due to alleged threats and harassment.
Apparently the FBI released its findings on Gamergate, and there wasn't sufficient evidence to label the group/movement a hate group, nor was there enough evidence to prosecute anyone.
https://www.oneangrygamer.net/2016/12/f ... nce/18282/
https://www.theverge.com/2017/1/27/1441 ... ds-release
I've also heard Youtubers like MundaneMatt claim the FBI cleared Gamergate, which might just be his interpretation of the above info.
The whole Gamergate controversy itself seems best summed up by this one video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STl7-_f4_eA
There were a not inconsiderable amount of people involved who legitimately wanted to make it about ethics in games journalism, but mostly it was a shouting match between two groups of people, and as with anything, both sides had a vocal minority that would take things way too far, actively trolling the other side in various ways. There is a legitimate faction of Gamergate that does deserve the vitriol they get, but I think labeling the entire group a hate group is disingenuous at best. It'd be akin to labeling the entire Catholic Church a group of pedophiles.
As for the Red Pill/Mens Rights Activist movement, it's much the same in that you've got some entitled guys using it be misogynistic, but I'd say the larger group are people trying to address issues that men face and inequalities that exist today, such as the higher suicide rate, lack of support structure for male victims of domestic abuse, and other factors. I mean, there are toxic Red Pill/MRA types, but I'd say they're no more prevalent than the toxic aspects of Feminism or other groups.
Basically, if someone considers themselves a Feminist or a MRA, I don't think that's enough to label them as any kind of hateful individual or some kind of supremacist. I need to hear what their opinions are and make my decision on a case-by-case basis.
Now, RPG.net is its own entity and it has the right to set whatever rules they want regarding conduct and speech. I just think that a lot of the terminology they use and what they disallow make it seem like they're dangerously close to turning their forums from some place to discuss RPGs freely to being a platform for certain things while alienating actual diversity of thought and preventing actual debates from happening.
no, just keep people here from acting like Kameha King or other internet douchecanoes
Nah, that was never going to happen here. I encourage actual civilized debate, but I take any problems people come to me with seriously and have a low tolerance for people insulting each other. Granted, some of the debates have gotten close to heated and there's a lot of folks here who disagree about a lot of things. But I like to think that makes this place better, and hopefully everyone can actually learn to agree to disagree and still be civil. It seemed like there was a time when folks could actually do that.
Batgirl III wrote: ↑
Sun May 27, 2018 8:28 pm
How many of these “bad experiences with GG/Redpill” were caused by someone taking offense at an innocuous comment, demanding a retraction/apology over the imagined slight, and then going apoplectic when someone refuses to comply?
I hate to keep bringing up The Incident, but that whole mess started when I said it didn’t bother me that women in comics and video games wore sexy costumes. Which led to a ridiculous series of escalating ad hominem
attacks (of which, I will confess, I threw a few of my own), that ultimately led to my getting banned from an online community I had been an active part of for nearly fifteen years.
In a world where law students in criminal law classes — thus aspiring criminal defense attorneys or prosecutors — demand that rape law not be taught
; a scientist announcing a major scientific accomplishment is denounced as a misogynist
for a tacky shirt; and a thousand and one other examples of the Perpetually Offended Crowd and their crybully tactics...
I would normally assume that in an incident where I don’t have any firsthand knowledge, that I should gather more facts before forming a conclusion. I’d give both sides the benefit of the doubt. Gather facts. Weigh the evidence. Then decide. Not anymore. Nope. I’m done.
They cried “Wolf!” (or should I say “Wolf Whistle!”) too many times for me to ever trust them again. I now default to actively disbelieving them
instead of defaulting to neutral skepticism.
Kreu didn't set the policy for RPG.net, BG, nor does he likely have an encyclopedic knowledge of every incident that happened there. He's just explaining and elaborating on them to me because I asked a question about it, likely from stuff he's just heard over the years while there.