SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Brianna Wu, head of the independent gaming studio Giant Spacekat, was the target of a series of tweets containing death threats on Friday; one published her home address (since redacted). The poster's Twitter account has been disabled.
Wu responded on Friday night with the tweet:
Brianna Wu @Spacekatgal
The police just came by. Husband and I are going somewhere safe.
Remember, #gamergate isn't about attacking women.
GamerGate supporters denounced the threats and "doxxing" against Wu and disavowed the poster. However, several suspected that the tweets were a false flag created by anti-GamerGate forces:
Sun Knight @SunKnightO
@Sen_Armstrong @Spacekatgal @chatterwhiteman It's clearly either a troll or false flag shame that people actually think its legit.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:14PM
> Well if you wrote clearly the first time no one would misunderstand.
How could you possibly think her sex life was at all relevant?
Really, what part of "ethics" do you think might possibly apply?
> I never claimed I was in gamergate, or a gamer at all.
Two can play that game. I never claimed you were in gamergate.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:40PM
Being in gaming development and having any sort of personal relationship with games journalists is clearly an ethics violation. Why put ethics in quotes. It is not a scary word. It is not made up. It is the study of what is right and what is wrong. Conflicts of interest are thought of as wrong, therefore if someone's sex life and professional life overlap, then it is unethical.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:55PM
> Being in gaming development and having any sort of personal relationship with games journalists is clearly an ethics violation.
How so? Seriously. I expect you to claim the extremist position that any relationship is defacto evidence of an "ethics" violation. Which is just bullshit. Ethics violations actually require a violation. Unless the reporter actually gives favorable coverage to the person they are involved with there is no "ethics" violation.
> Why put ethics in quotes.
I put it in quotes to make it evident that I think the definition people like you are using is absurd.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:58PM
Wrong. People can have relationships with whomever they want. Reviewing your partner's or ex-partner's work is an ethics violation, but that didn't happen here, so its irrelevant, nothing more than a red herring.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:11PM
How DARE you bring common sense and responsibility into this discussion!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:15PM
Responding to yourself is stupid and easy to spot. You can sock puppet all you want, but its pretty obvious.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:19PM
I don't think it is a sockpuppet. I think there really is more than one person who thinks that logic is impeccable.
There are a whole bunch of them in gamergate. It's kind of a requirement to join.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:27PM
Nah, I'm pretty sure its all that one guy who thinks every AC poster is Tork. Even this post is by him, and yours definitely is.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @08:41PM
That's just ridiculous. By that token, it seems like no two people in the same professional field should be allowed to communicate outside of job. Ethics, or at least publishing ethics, isn't about building impersonal walls between humans, it's about managing your relationships to avoid conflicts of interest.
Sleeping with the person who recommends your product, or who recommends you for promotion: conflict of interest. Recusing yourself from reviewing your girlfriend's product: ethical. Quitting your job because you're attracted to someone who works in the field: Hollywood melodrama.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @05:50PM
Maybe we're asking the wrong question.
How about, why did 5 game journalists sleep with her?
That way all of the blame is on the corrupt male game journalists.
Better?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:01PM
> Maybe we're asking the wrong question.
You are indeed.
> How about, why did 5 game journalists sleep with her?
Nope. Still the wrong question. But points for realizing that what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
> That way all of the blame is on the corrupt male game journalists.
Except there was no corruption.
Any hypothetical motivation is irrelevant when there is no crime.
I keep waiting to see evidence of a crime and there has been none.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:08PM
If it looks like a duck...
Why did she choose to cheat/sleep with only those in the game Journal Industry?
I never said it was a crime, (that I know of anyways), I only wanted to know her motivation.
If they're "too sexy it hurts", then I'm not bothered by it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:11PM
> I only wanted to know her motivation.
None of your fucking business.
Really. Why do you think you are entitled to know why someone decides to sleep with anyone?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:17PM
Because it shines a light on a larger issue that should be addressed. Women in the gaming industry shouldn't have to sleep with game Journalists to promote their work.
Why did you think I cared?? Asshole.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:25PM
> Women in the gaming industry shouldn't have to sleep with game Journalists to promote their work.
Who says they have to?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @09:34PM
Um, we're trying to find out if that is what happened.
Except every time we ask a question we get a shitstorm of OMG sexists assholes!!!! as a response.
Which only makes us believe more in the likelihood of a coverup.
The slander articles and their "coordinated" timing seem suspicious as well.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Monday October 13 2014, @06:05AM
No-one should have to sleep with journalists to obtain favorable reviews. However, five journalists (who may or may not enjoyed sexual relations with one woman) gave dis-proportionately good reviews for a "game" which consists of stateless HTML wrapped with a full-screen web browser.
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @06:16AM
"Good reviews exist for a game I personally thought was shit!" is not proof of anything, except that the reviewers apparently like visual novels. Visual novels are pretty big in Japan, and have a niche market here in the US; so what? Where are these five reviews along with the proof that the game's creator fucked them within a week - or hell, a month - of the review? Without that, all you have is proof that your tinfoil hat is on too tight.
(Score: 3, Informative) by cafebabe on Monday October 13 2014, @07:20AM
It would be an improvement if it was a visual novel.
I've done game testing professionally and I've seen the effort that goes into games that flop. I've also seen how developers react when a reviewer doesn't understand a feature in a game. And I would hope that it is generally understood that game reviews are critical in some area even when a game pushes boundaries in many areas. However, if someone publishes a few webpages, they can expect most influential Steam reviews to contain the following:-
You may imply that I am a conspiracist but this is not a game which obtained distribution through intrinsic merit.
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @04:52PM
The 1st Amendment allows me to ask whatever I like. You can also run your mouth protecting sluts as much as you like too.
Why is this slut shaming anyway? Is she ashamed of sleeping with 5 game journalists?
I actually wish more women slept around, because you really need to get laid!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @04:58PM
Now imagine your wife slept with 5 mob bosses.
It's none of your business, she can sleep with whomever she likes.
So I won't advice you to flee the country, just stay put like the good little doggie you are.
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:02PM
No, not better. That position doesn't fucking fix anything.
I don't give a shit who she's slept with. I've slept with a lot of guys! It's easy to do! What fucking difference does it make?
The problem here is that an entire demographic is being blamed for the actions of a few individuals. We know who they are! Cut off their balls and inject them with estrogen! Be done with it.
Except we won't. We'll go after every 3rd party who is assigned the male gender on a legal document who likes to play games. How the hell does that fix anything?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:13PM
You slut! Go die in a hole as filthy as you are! Oh wait, you're a guy, aren't you? High Five bro! ^5
(Score: 2) by velex on Sunday October 12 2014, @08:09PM
Thank you for identifying a big issue of sexism.
Thank you also for identifying a big issue of cissexism that you white knights can't seem to get past.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @06:07PM
Who cares? Its got nothing to do with this, merely a red herring and strawman used as an excuse to justify slut shaming, an inherently misogynistic action.