- Status
I hope you can reconsider this. Whatever he said, it was as an individual (as was Guy's expression of his own views).
The problem throughout Gamergate is the readiness to extend "Someone says/does this" to "Everyone who supports them says/does this". As someone who is pro-gamergate, I've been offended enough in the past by such comments, but by the same extension, I hope that people can recognise the difference between "Chris said this" and "CDPR said this", as it clearly wasn't in his official capacity.
As forum moderators, we are not CDPR staff. We moderate the forum, including this thread, in accordance with forum rules. But we're also forum members, with opinions, and will continue to exress those.
I heard the sounds of forum conflict and came as swiftly as I was able! Two things:
1.) A lot of people clearly haven't heard of the GG harassment patrol that goes out of their way to report harassers (even when they claim to be a part of GG), nor do many people seem to be aware that a portion of the most notable harassment has been the work of sympathetic elements of Anonymous, trolls from SomethingAwful, and in the case of Sarkeesian's abuse, an obsessive game journalist in Brazil (who GG tracked down; turns out he also harassed Kevin VanOrd, though you're not going to hear about this because it doesn't tie into that side's harassment narrative). Just because you haven't heard that GG distances themselves from a harassing fringe doesn't mean it doesn't happen, and if anything, things like this being covered up by anti-GG media who find it inconvenient to the one-sided portrayal they're peddling only reinforces GG's necessity.
2.) Priestly should be fired. Not for his opinion, which is totally his right to have, but because he's vastly inferior to Marcin Momot. Vastly. Besides, a community manager should probably try to avoid pissing off parts of the community. One would think that's like, part of his job, and it doesn't take a heroic amount of foresight to see that posting what he did would end up upsetting a lot of people.
1.) A lot of people clearly haven't heard of the GG harassment patrol that goes out of their way to report harassers (even when they claim to be a part of GG), nor do many people seem to be aware that a portion of the most notable harassment has been the work of sympathetic elements of Anonymous, trolls from SomethingAwful, and in the case of Sarkeesian's abuse, an obsessive game journalist in Brazil (who GG tracked down; turns out he also harassed Kevin VanOrd, though you're not going to hear about this because it doesn't tie into that side's harassment narrative). Just because you haven't heard that GG distances themselves from a harassing fringe doesn't mean it doesn't happen, and if anything, things like this being covered up by anti-GG media who find it inconvenient to the one-sided portrayal they're peddling only reinforces GG's necessity.
2.) Priestly should be fired. Not for his opinion, which is totally his right to have, but because he's vastly inferior to Marcin Momot. Vastly. Besides, a community manager should probably try to avoid pissing off parts of the community. One would think that's like, part of his job, and it doesn't take a heroic amount of foresight to see that posting what he did would end up upsetting a lot of people.
Which as users we must understand. GuyNwah and I talked in a PM and we better understand each others point of view.
That is how adults solve things. Not running away, nor bashing a company for one rogue employee's comments.
The moderators here do an almost perfect job. What else can anybody, myself included expect. Everybody can not agree on every issue. In fact that would feel like a bad hangover during a Twilight Zone like moment.
As a supporter of GamerGate and a supporter Gog and CD project player i do expect a retraction or a apology for this statement biz@cdprojektred.com, and free speech is fine but public statements do reflect on the employer, and their employee linked me to the kkk and a menace to safety and all the while decrying free speech. Free speech is a poor defense in this case. Specialy when the addendum was added after he made the acusation.
Pretttty sure both CDPR and Witcher 3 will be fine, do well financially and go on to become even more successful. So, yeah, if one member of CDPR's massivr staff saying something politically incorrect or out of proportion offends you that much, by all means cancel your preorder. The only person you harm will be yourself.
Witcher 3 is really for you, the player. The -money- and -fame- is for CDPR, but the game, that's for you. You aren't going to change CDPR policies because you get upset one Community Manager, (read: guy who gets to clean up forum shit a lot), made a Godwin's-scale comparison. On Twitter, a medium where you "tweet" shit you think of. Serious stuff.
What you will do is deprive yourself of the enjoyment that comes from playing a game made by, arguably, the finest gaming studio of our time and it's 200+ employees.
My Mum called this "Cutting off your nose to spite your face."
On the other hand, depending what you say and how you say it, you might self-terminate your ability to say anything on these forums. Which, I guess, would be one way to conclude your time here. Know then, that I will -still- be amused. Because all this shit is petty, petty stuff compared to true horror and loss.
Play the game. Enjoy the game. Post about it here, amongst similar-minded friends. Don't lose your head.
Witcher 3 is really for you, the player. The -money- and -fame- is for CDPR, but the game, that's for you. You aren't going to change CDPR policies because you get upset one Community Manager, (read: guy who gets to clean up forum shit a lot), made a Godwin's-scale comparison. On Twitter, a medium where you "tweet" shit you think of. Serious stuff.
What you will do is deprive yourself of the enjoyment that comes from playing a game made by, arguably, the finest gaming studio of our time and it's 200+ employees.
My Mum called this "Cutting off your nose to spite your face."
On the other hand, depending what you say and how you say it, you might self-terminate your ability to say anything on these forums. Which, I guess, would be one way to conclude your time here. Know then, that I will -still- be amused. Because all this shit is petty, petty stuff compared to true horror and loss.
Play the game. Enjoy the game. Post about it here, amongst similar-minded friends. Don't lose your head.
Anyone interested, here's what happened at the Expo. Apparently someone challenged someone resulting in kick from the expo. Correct me if I'm wrong
https://twitter.com/naughty_nerdess/status/589111020364238848
https://twitter.com/naughty_nerdess/status/589111020364238848
Well, then maybe my face shouldn't have been such a jerk. IT GOT WHAT WAS COMING TO IT.
Also, when did you get the ability to add those moderator comments? That's awesome, though hopefully it doesn't mean that you'll stop randomly editing my posts to change pictures and words. I think I'm close to a
If you look at this as one thing, sure it seems petty. Here's a small sample of what those in GG have had to put up with daily over the past 6-8 months, though:
That's just over a few of the early months; I haven't been keeping up to date these days because of how exhausting it is dealing with that level of hatred. Some people are no doubt seeing this through the prism of those things and a CDPR employee siding with all of that, so a little understanding might be called for instead of "QQ" baiting.
Last edited by a moderator:
From my understanding they were Blacklisted from going back to the expo. They wont even refund the money to get in or the vendor fees.
20 counts of harassment my ass.
EDIT: So i response to the moderators comments... the one to far right is Big Macintosh, The one in the center is Sweetie bell. I forget the far left ponies name. Yeah I am a Brony... deal.
Last edited:
Thank you, Clot of Head. Those Pony names are actually code names, though. In actuality, one is 227, one is Sard and one is Our Bloth, (gone-but-never-forgotten).
Also, you may call me, "Sardukhar", "Sard" or "Sardikins". "Dr. Sardkenstein" is also acceptable. "Moderator" is so impersonal. I don't call you, "poster", "forumite" or "victim", do I? Don't answer that.
I'd say we should go back on topic, but hell, this topic sucks. About as non-constructive as I've seen. Manager Downgrade Thread.
Let's pretend there is value here. Somewhere. Um. Uuum. "Should your ability to communicate in every medium, regardless of that medium's significance outside a certain following, be curtailed once you accept a position with a firm that does business in or around said medium?"
I say, "depends on your position". If you are a Chairman or CAO, ( Chief Accounting Officer), or the like, you have an automatic link to that firm that transcends those who follow your company all the way to investors and general consumers, then sure, watch what you say. Richard Branson, Bill Gates, ummm...Peter Molyneux? Ahahaha. Ah, Pete. So gloriously insane.
Nearly everyone else, say what you like on your free time. If you piss your boss off, you might get fired, but that's a risk every one of you employee filth must take. Muwahahaha!
Now, excuse me while I go sharpen my Payroll Flensing Knife.
Wait wait wait wait wait—what happened to Bloth? His continued presence is necessary for the continued existence of Dirk Thrustington (more needed now than ever), and if he's not here anymore, then... that's a serious time paradox.
And I want to be the purple pony. It calls to me.
"Shakeweight," Sharkbait," "Sadpanda," "Saltpeter," and other approximations also suffice.
Is it really being curtailed? He has every right to say whatever he wants just like the rest of us, but that doesn't mean that people can't hold him accountable for the things he says. Free speech doesn't preclude experiencing consequences as a result of that free speech.
Well, since the name change, he disappeared. If he's here, he's incognito. BLOTH! Say something incomprehensible but somehow funny!
It would.
Well, if you threaten a man's employment, or suggest he be terminated from said livelihood, then, yes, that is a powerful financial incentive to curtail his speech. If you consider tweets and posts harassing and full of hatred difficult to deal with, as your links and comment indicate, then that is another incentive to curtail your speech.
Of course, I do not believe in free speech. Ridiculous notion, like "human rights". The degree to which we allow, restrict and enforce certain activities in various cultures is more a reflection of those cultures than any Truth the universe cares about. Do I think the ideas of same have value in my culture? Absolutely.
"Free speech" is a slippery concept. Different people apply it different ways. Here in Canada, a Much Better Place Than Wherever You People Are, we limit your speech in many ways. Hate speech, prohibited. Libel and slander, ( one is in print, one is oral) are punished. Theoretically.
And yet a very bright teacher friend of mine, ( also the finest Cyberpunk Ref all of you will never meet), points out that allowing people to say really stupid hurtful shit is an important part of any healthy "free speech" platform. That you should -not- be punished financially or legally because you say whatever racist or anti-group nonsense crosses what passes for your mind. He has a point.
You're going to think it regardless, but if "we" decide you can't say it, or you should be punished for syaing it, then who are "we"? The majority? The police? Joseph McCarthy? Isn't that simply a culture of majority approval?
Of course, as any political or legal student knows, the idea of "free speech" isn't that you can say what you want, consequence free. It is that you can say what you want, in order to spread your ideas, without government interference.
That's really important, but in this day and age of instant-media and powerful corporations, perhaps that principle is too limited?
In any case, anyone arguing with me will be banned. Some of you, twice.
From my understanding of GamerGate, I would assume that theEvilChris wasn't referring to people who were interested in decent games journalism, but the people who were heatedly sending death threats and harrassing the game developer who had slept with the journalist. Those being actually on par with the KKK is obviously untrue, but given those specifc -- how should I say? --extremist GamerGate-ers actions and threats, I'd say a hyperbolic comparison is probably legitimised. It's like Godwin's law, except you'd use it among friends in an informal setting (i.e. the current Australian government reminds me of McArthurism, but I don't actually believe that they're doing that and I wouldn't voice that sort of opinion anywhere other than in this example and with friends who know I'm being hyperbolic).
It's the same as people saying 'FEMINISTS ARE MAN HATING" when they are referring to a specific set of humans who use a shadow of the ideology behind feminism to push a different agenda or get their way using extreme methods. I am a feminist, but I don't get offended when people scream at Anita Saarkesian or those rugby-mums who got GTAV pulled from Australian shelves. It appears that GamerGate folks are experiencing what feminists (for example. you could also use other ideologies and find extremists - e.g. Islam is a common victim where I am right now) have been experiencing for a very long time.
This being said, theEvilChris probably should have been more cautious with his use of words, particularly the ones with a heavy weight. Clearly the abuse of that game dev leaves a greater imprint in his mind of what GamerGate was/is about that the message about how games journalism ought to be. As a PR, he should know much better than that.
TL;dr, I don't think theEvilChris hates the people in these forums who identify as being a part of the GamerGate movement. I believe he was referring to extremists and being hyperbolic.
It's the same as people saying 'FEMINISTS ARE MAN HATING" when they are referring to a specific set of humans who use a shadow of the ideology behind feminism to push a different agenda or get their way using extreme methods. I am a feminist, but I don't get offended when people scream at Anita Saarkesian or those rugby-mums who got GTAV pulled from Australian shelves. It appears that GamerGate folks are experiencing what feminists (for example. you could also use other ideologies and find extremists - e.g. Islam is a common victim where I am right now) have been experiencing for a very long time.
This being said, theEvilChris probably should have been more cautious with his use of words, particularly the ones with a heavy weight. Clearly the abuse of that game dev leaves a greater imprint in his mind of what GamerGate was/is about that the message about how games journalism ought to be. As a PR, he should know much better than that.
TL;dr, I don't think theEvilChris hates the people in these forums who identify as being a part of the GamerGate movement. I believe he was referring to extremists and being hyperbolic.
Hyperbole on the INTERNET? That has never and will never happened. Ever. Everything said here is perfectly reasonable and accurate. Anyone failing to meet that standard should be punished, fired, flogged and kissed.
Or, maybe, instead, just teased, laughed at and made fun of, not too nastily, until we have enough to make a good gif meme.
Here's one! A classic.
It's an incentive for self-censorship, same as how people typically don't play the Penis Game in fancy restaurants for fear of being kicked out and not being able to eat there. That's not really curtailing speech, though, is it? Otherwise I have a serious first-amendment case against a number of restaurants and the hoity-toity bastards who work there.
Just a random group of angry people, same as any group that dislikes what someone says. The reverse happened not so long ago with Australian K-Marts removing Grand Theft Auto 5 from their stores after a petition. Incidentally, I was fine with that (but some other GGs thought it was censorship, which was... kind of ironic given past incidents where the shoe was on the other foot, but I guess it's a varied enough group to allow for a bunch of different perspectives like that). So long as it's just a bunch of normal people and not government-level, can it really be considered to be curtailing speech? We don't have that ability. I really wish I did, though. I would abuse it so hard.
But if you're against that kind of pressure, would you say you're also against the people EvilChris railed against being "looked into" by the convention and ultimately forced to leave? I won't pretend to be familiar with the incident, but from other posts, it sounds like it was purely because of what they said and/or stood for, which could be construed as curtailing their speech in much the same way.
But isn't that a double negative that would result in someone being unbanned?
Sure it is - only a lot more powerful. Getting kicked out of a restaurant is one thing, getting fired is another. Very much another. As soon as you "incentivize" someone seriously enough, yeah, you are part of a pressure group curtailing their speech. Absolutely. And restaurants are a much lesser matter than speaking your mind without punishment.
Well, what defines a random group of angry people? How much power they have? How many of them there are? How angry they are? To me, Gamersgate means nothing - I consider it ephemeral to my life, hobbies, etc. To you, it's important. It's not just some random group of angry people, it's a justifiable movement? I guess? Enough that we are having this conversation, anyway.
My Mum doesn't care what Chris said about the KKK. She's not in his consumer group. My friends found it ridiculous and mildly amusing - they are in his consumer group. Neither knows or cares of this GG thing, though. How do we define reach and effect?
Suffice to say, if there are enough angry people in this random group, enough to apply significant pressure upon someone's employment or social life, then, yes they are curtailing that speech effectively.
The thing about speech, relatively free or not, is that if you apply a standard to one person, you are kind of tricked into applying it to another. Everyone is pro-censorship, we just differ on the degree and particulars.
"My name is a Killing Word." - Muad'Dib, the Traitor.
You're banned for that.
But it happens. All the time, too. Haven't you seen articles about people getting canned because they said something mean about their boss or job on Facebook? At this point, there's no excuse for not taking great pains to separate the two and avoid situations like that.
I wouldn't say "important" so much as I enjoy conflict and have a complex about lies/misleading statements that I'm sure plenty of people around here between 2011-2012 would be willing to attest. And to answer your question, they have exactly as much power as they're afforded by whoever they're lobbying. If CDPR goes, "Hey, these people are mad and we should do something" and fire him, then the angry people have that much power. If CDPR ignores the whole thing until it blows over and do nothing, then they have less.
That's... weirdly insightful. And no pony pics? I'm so confused right now. But yeah, I agree.
But... but... YOU WUBBED ME!
Well, exactly my question. Should this be the state of things? Is it fair or moral? Can we make it a part of your employment and/or the social contract? Do we or should we have that power.
I'm from a small, rural area, where everyone knows everyone. Cousins literally marry cousins. Hilarious, I know. Anyway, back when I lived there and ran a business there, I had to brief my new drivers on their responsibilities. Working in a small community where we serve all sides in all the many disputes, petty and otherwise, that arise, you have to be careful what you say and who you say it to. Or it could cost us a lot.
But I never thought it was very fair, nor an easy burden to bear, that speaking your mind and making politically incorrect statements or comparisons could be inflated to a degree far beyond their intrinsic value.
Moral? Not really, in my book. Should it be the state of things? Probably not—in a perfect world, people could say whatever they wanted without consequences. The racial slurs of idiots would be shrugged off, those people at the convention would have been able to stay no matter what they said, and Chris wouldn't have people demanding an apology and threatening to cancel their preorders.
Buuuuuuuuut we don't live in a perfect world and as much as I adore being all bright-eyed and idealistic, this is the world of movements and public pressure that we're stuck with. For better or worse, anyone could have seen this coming, and that Chris either didn't or didn't care doesn't speak very well of his abilities as a community manager (which should be able to predict and/or avoid something so obvious). Like I said, I don't think he should be fired for what he said. I think he should be fired for sucking at his job both here and at Bioware. He hasn't exactly inspired many people to respect him in either place, so anyone with a lick of sense would have known to walk on eggshells and not kick an eight-month-long hornet's nest of bitterness and spite.
- Status