Because you're effectively herding a group of cats, and coming up with a new name with a new cause every time someone tries to slimeball and gaslight you is a good way to lose momentum.
But here's the thing, while the original allegation of her sleeping with Nathan for reviews is bullshit, that doesn't clean up the fact she entered a romantic relationship pretty much right after Nathan published his piece.[1]
On March 31, Nathan published the only Kotaku article he's written involving Zoe Quinn. It was about Game Jam, a failed reality show that Zoe and other developers were upset about being on. At the time, Nathan and Zoe were professional acquaintances. He quoted blog posts written by Zoe and others involved in the show. Shortly after that, in early April, Nathan and Zoe began a romantic relationship. He has not written about her since. Nathan never reviewed Zoe Quinn's game Depression Quest, let alone gave it a favorable review.
Nor does it excuse the fact that she was actually covered by Patricia Hernandez, a close friend of hers, a long while back without disclosure either. The update at the bottom happened after the fallout.[2]
The harassment that she received that prompted her game to be taken down from Steam Greenlight in Particia's article was also proven to be false.[3]
The only other source of a decent timeline is KnowYourMeme of all places.[3]
The escapist at the very least decided to apologize for reporting on her original harassment on Steam Greenlight without doublechecking[4]
"But to explain is not to excuse. Our editor-in-chief, Greg Tito, having reviewed the facts at hand, concluded we ourselves have been imperfect in maintaining journalistic standards. A particularly problematic article, the one which generated his review, was about the alleged harassment of an indie developer by a forum community which denied the allegations but was itself victimized as a result of them. The article failed to cite the harassment as alleged, failed to give the forum community an opportunity present its point of view, and did not verify the claims or secure other sources. Mr. Tito has personally updated the article and spoken to all our editors about the importance of adhering to standards that will prevent such bad incidents from happening again."
Even the most polite and level-headed Gamergate fans seem to spend far more energy defending the Gamergate name than they do attacking actual corruption. It makes you look like you care more about a snappy name than about getting your message heard; frankly, it makes you look like dupes for a small group of misogynistic trolls.
It's to be defended because the movement doesn't stand for misogyny, and changing the name is effectively admitting to something that it didn't do.
Hello my friend. I'm actually present in the logs. And we do talk quite a bit about how to spread awareness towards the corruption in video game journalism.
The logs aren't for the fainthearted because people say stupid things and spout memes, myself included. But everything is there.
Trying to say "look! it's in the logs!" then linking to thousands of lines of text is kind of silly.
The logs will also prove that the logs Zoe Quinn is spreading around are cherrypicked and edited. But that would require actually reading thousands of lines of text, which I'm sure neither you nor anyone willing to listen to the opposing viewpoint is willing to do.
The "secret club" is on rizon, in the #burgersandfries channel, and yes, we kept the old name. You're free to drop in and chat any time.
"You can't just claim one sick person's actions are the fault of some other group of people.
Actually I can. That group of people acts as an enabling environment, making the behaviour seem less extreme to those associated in that group.
Do you seriously not have any moral qualms about lying about millions of people and claiming they target and intimidate people?
I don't see these "millions of people" actively working to make sure the person making those threats is found and brought to justice.
I'll condemn that behaviour all day (behind the safety of my throwaway account)"
The actions of a few do not invalidate an entire group of people.
Take a step back, and realize that you are literally using the same exact argument as islamophobes.
And no, I'm not saying this behind the safety of a throwaway account because I'm not afraid of you, or random internet trolls willing to call me names.
As they say, you do not bite the hand that feeds you. I doubt Snowden was particularly happy about doing that interview, but considering his circumstances he didn't really have a choice.
This mentality tends to protrude in a lot of non-software related fields as well. There are many times for example where I question the layout of the instruments in my car or why my local grocery store stocks items the way it does. When you work with software/ui a lot, you tend to develop an internal organizational logic that's very different from normal users. This influence becomes quite noticeable when you have to respond to unfamiliar tasks.
Quite simple actually. These books contain big meaty subject matter. Not fucking glossed over topics like a ted talk or wiki entry.
The laws of thermodynamics cannot be condensed down into a 14 minute video.
The internet has cheapened both the access and depth of knowledge. There are a lot of internet commentators out there who barely grasp a briefly summarized topic yet assume an expert position.
So true. The amount of dross one has to wade through on the internet to find something worth the reading can be huge. Whilst being printed in paper format at the end of a chain of editors, proof-readers, financial outlay and vast amounts of effort on the part of the original author (generally quite qualified, and even then you can double check this yourself before you read) doesn't guarantee a good result, the odds are much better.
They picked some good authors to start with; Ha-Joon Chang's previous book for the general audience was a good read from a good writer.
But here's the thing, while the original allegation of her sleeping with Nathan for reviews is bullshit, that doesn't clean up the fact she entered a romantic relationship pretty much right after Nathan published his piece.[1]
On March 31, Nathan published the only Kotaku article he's written involving Zoe Quinn. It was about Game Jam, a failed reality show that Zoe and other developers were upset about being on. At the time, Nathan and Zoe were professional acquaintances. He quoted blog posts written by Zoe and others involved in the show. Shortly after that, in early April, Nathan and Zoe began a romantic relationship. He has not written about her since. Nathan never reviewed Zoe Quinn's game Depression Quest, let alone gave it a favorable review.
Nor does it excuse the fact that she was actually covered by Patricia Hernandez, a close friend of hers, a long while back without disclosure either. The update at the bottom happened after the fallout.[2]
The harassment that she received that prompted her game to be taken down from Steam Greenlight in Particia's article was also proven to be false.[3]
Unfortunately, since Wikipedia's WikiProject Feminism is brigading the article (which is now locked) http://puu.sh/bZri1/121afb137b.png
The only other source of a decent timeline is KnowYourMeme of all places.[3]
The escapist at the very least decided to apologize for reporting on her original harassment on Steam Greenlight without doublechecking[4]
"But to explain is not to excuse. Our editor-in-chief, Greg Tito, having reviewed the facts at hand, concluded we ourselves have been imperfect in maintaining journalistic standards. A particularly problematic article, the one which generated his review, was about the alleged harassment of an indie developer by a forum community which denied the allegations but was itself victimized as a result of them. The article failed to cite the harassment as alleged, failed to give the forum community an opportunity present its point of view, and did not verify the claims or secure other sources. Mr. Tito has personally updated the article and spoken to all our editors about the importance of adhering to standards that will prevent such bad incidents from happening again."
[1]http://kotaku.com/in-recent-days-ive-been-asked-several-time...
[2]http://kotaku.com/depression-quest-the-thoughtful-game-about...
[3]http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/quinnspiracy
[4]http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/ed...
Even the most polite and level-headed Gamergate fans seem to spend far more energy defending the Gamergate name than they do attacking actual corruption. It makes you look like you care more about a snappy name than about getting your message heard; frankly, it makes you look like dupes for a small group of misogynistic trolls.
It's to be defended because the movement doesn't stand for misogyny, and changing the name is effectively admitting to something that it didn't do.