Quinnspericy: Mod of /r/gaming el_chupacupcake pushed to step down after Zoe Quinn update.

[kaloszer]

Are you done?

 

Now you are talking to Linus, who heads the entire LMG, in case you did not know. Not only does he understand the business side of things, he also knows how the internet, as a society, functions. And you are giving him flak for it... there is something wrong here.

 

If you want to find me calling out the pseudo facts, then please read back on the thread. There is more than plenty of cases.

 

Now, before you blow any more steam, I am going to leave you to celebrate that imaginary victory of yours, Sir Narcissus.

 

And @LinusTech, this kind of discussion never ends well. I have explained what you said, with extra details on top. I have even elaborated on other issues. Then I get called a "Zoe supporter", by the people who refuse to read what I said. It would be nice of you to lock this thread before it truly gets out of hand.

Damage control at its finest, can't disprove arguments ? Better ignore them and belittle the problem.

 

<yawn>

 

<look at wrist watch>

Are you twelve or euphoric ?

[Scionyde]

So let's look at something here...

 

 

What Linus (and @bogus and myself) is saying, is that the "deeper" issue is not exclusive to anything. At the end of the day, this is indeed slut-shaming.

 

I'm not sure I agree with Linus' analogy. If it was something along the lines of Bro A giving Bro B a gift, followed by Bro B promoting Bro A in an article, I'd think people would take notice of that.

 

In my mind, the other half of the issue is the censorship of criticism, and the possible false claims of being doxxed in order to garner sympathy. Admittedly, we have more concrete proof of the former rather than the latter. But still, neither of those has anything to do with slut-shaming. 

[kaloszer]

So let's look at something here...

 

 

What Linus (and @bogus and myself) is saying, is that the "deeper" issue is not exclusive to anything. At the end of the day, this is indeed slut-shaming.

So are you suggesting that when a person is in a relationship with someone and is sleeping around with multiple or a single person outside of said relationship is completely normal from the moral, cultural, standpoint?

You're sick in the head.

 

Also, it is you who is derailing the discussion back to Zoe one after another, trying to include sexual intercourse as the main argument. This really feels like a half assed passive aggressive PR control.

[ZeroBreaker]

<yawn>

 

<look at wrist watch>

 

Are you done?

 

Now you are talking to Linus, who heads the entire LMG, in case you did not know. Not only does he understand the business side of things, he also knows how the internet, as a society, functions. And you are giving him flak for it... there is something wrong here.

 

If you want to find me calling out the pseudo facts, then please read back on the thread. There is more than plenty of cases.

 

Now, before you blow any more steam, I am going to leave you to celebrate that imaginary victory of yours, Sir Narcissus.

 

And @LinusTech, this kind of discussion never ends well. I have explained what you said, with extra details on top. I have even elaborated on other issues. Then I get called a "Zoe supporter", by the people who refuse to read what I said. It would be nice of you to lock this thread before it truly gets out of hand.

 

Dude.

 

You seriously think i don't know who linus is? Mate. Mate. Id say whats on my mind but no doubt i'd get banned.

 

And Linus isn't god. Slick is the only one worthy of worship. Previously, i mentioned RTU who initially had the same mindset as you until he read up on the issue and did a 180. I would hope linus would do the same. As you clearly saw, I gave him 'our' points on this topic which, you may notice, had fuck all to do with zoe quinn's sexual life. It was about censorship on reddit. Either linus skimmed or didnt read, which i dont blame - the thread was bloated way too much with yours, mine and others' posts arguing on this topic. Notice your argument boils down to 'slut shaming', which is not at all what has been done here - show me where this so called slut was shamed for her actions. She did shitty things. She is probably a shitty person. We didnt call her names or harass her, we discussed the wider issue.

 

Notice how i mentioned that every time we talked about the wider issue people got silenced or censored.

'It would be nice of you to lock this thread before it truly gets out of hand.'.

Well done mate, youve successfully proven how thickheaded you really are.

 

Now please, PLEASE, fuck off. I really can't be bothered to read another post by you, because you seem to be taking shit from your rear end and smearing it on your keyboard.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

Damage control at its finest, can't disprove arguments ? Better ignore them and belittle the problem.

 

Are you twelve or euphoric ?

 

Funny you say that... you haven't really proven the arguments either, buddy.

 

All the accusations you have thrown at me goes back to you, with the way you are talking.

 

 

 If it was something along the lines of Bro A giving Bro B a gift, followed by Bro B promoting Bro A in an article, I'd think people would take notice of that.

 

In most cases, that never happens. On the other hand, when it involves a woman, everybody brings out their revolvers. There are strong parallels with the Michael Brown and Treyvon Martin cases.

 

 

In my mind, the other half of the issue is the censorship of criticism, and the possible false claims of being doxxed in order to garner sympathy. Admittedly, we have more concrete proof of the former rather than the latter. But still, neither of those has anything to do with slut-shaming.

 

Again, this is assuming that nobody else does this, which is factually incorrect. The NSA is an obvious example of this. Politicians do this on a regular basis, but neither get nearly the same level of attention.

 

 

So are you suggesting that when a person is in a relationship with someone and is sleeping around with multiple or a single person outside of said relationship is completely normal from the moral, cultural, standpoint?

You're sick in the head.

 

Also, it is you who is derailing the discussion back to Zoe one after another, trying to include sexual intercourse as the main argument. This really feels like a half assed passive aggressive PR control.

 

Read the phrase again. You are missing the point.

[ZeroBreaker]

 

Again, this is assuming that nobody else does this, which is factually incorrect. The NSA is an obvious example of this. Politicians do this on a regular basis, but neither get nearly the same level of attention.

 

 

The NSA did it behind peoples backs for a fucking reason. They have been scorned and forced to be more transparent for a fucking reason. You think the NSA doesn't have fucking attention? Which la-la land are you living in?

 

The only way people can be this retarded and yet still know how to post is if they are pretending. I can only hope this is the case. If not, seek help.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

-empty accusations-

-empty accusations-

 

Thank you for proving my point... genius! Just because you believe in something, that does not make it an absolute fact. You are even contradicting your own signature. Get over yourself!

[kaloszer]

Funny you say that... you haven't really proven the arguments either, buddy.

 

All the accusations you have thrown at me goes back to you, with the way you are talking.

 

 

 

In most cases, that never happens. On the other hand, when it involves a woman, everybody brings out their revolvers. There are strong parallels with the Michael Brown and Treyvon Martin cases.

 

 

Again, this is assuming that nobody else does this, which is factually incorrect. The NSA is an obvious example of this. Politicians do this on a regular basis, but neither get nearly the same level of attention.

 

 

 

Read the phrase again. You are missing the point.

You're still implying it's slut shaming even though it's not. Arguments you've put up before have been disproved by others, so what's the point of repeating them.

The argument with linus dudebros was adressed in my previous posts.

 

As if with Trayvon Martin or Brown there had not been revolvers, I don't live in the US or Canada (thank god) but the flak that each side was/is getting disproves that (Ex:. current indiegogo for the officer in question). Compared to women, where there are white knights blindly defending them and the rest who is trying to get past that wall.

About politicians, surely Clinton, Berlusconi did not have any media attention, give me a break.

 

Your 5 previous posts (excluding 1 line) was damage control, not bringing any counter-arguments to the table, but whining and trying to move goalposts. I refuse to even consider your legitimacy when it is so blatant that all you are here for is trolling or white knighting. 

[ZeroBreaker]

Thank you for proving my point... genius! Just because you believe in something, that does not make it an absolute fact. You are even contradicting your own signature. Get over yourself!

 

Wow. Honestly, how childish do you have to be to replace my quote content with the phrase empty accusations? You do realise that the quote system is there to a. notify me of a reply, and b. to allow other forum readers to follow the conversation clearly. By replacing my comments with this, you are actually showing that you either cannot comprehend how a forum works, or simply know how shit your argument is and don't want people to follow the argument to it's inevitable conclusion.

 

And to quote you from several pages ago:

 

'You can bring as much of this supposed "evidence" as you wish; you are not going to change my mind.'

 

You goddamn fucking hypocrite.

[IdortMasterRace]

Reddit is awful in the first place though.

 

So is Kotaku.

[kaloszer]

Reddit is awful in the first place though.

 

So is Kotaku.

It might be, but it doesn't mean that can't be changed completly. 

It's not like SomethingAwful went from pants on edgy to pants on social justice.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

-more blank accusations-

 

You are quite a self-righteous prick, kiddo!

 

That quote was in reference to the habit of bringing arbitrary or irrelevant information, which you did not listen to.  In fact, you did not even provide much of anything. All you did was throwing vile comments all over the place, hoping that you can somehow "outman" me. You sound more childish than anybody else here.

 

I have no respect for you; look at my status update.

[ZeroBreaker]

You are quite a self-righteous prick, kiddo!

 

That quote was in reference to the habit of bringing arbitrary or irrelevant information, which you did not listen to.  In fact, you did not even provide much of anything. All you did was throwing vile comments all over the place, hoping that you can somehow "outman" me. You sound more childish than anybody else here.

 

I have no respect for you; look at my status update.

 

Dude. Again. You fail to point out where my irrelevant information is. If you want a concise description of my point, look at my reply to Linus. Show me the fucking irrelevant information and stop pulling these claims out of your arsehole.

 

Do you genuinely think i give two shits about your respect for me? Really? honestly mate, you are getting more and more desperate with every comment. I get the feeling you ignore the content of my posts as well, you certainly havn't brought up any inconsistencies in my argument, or anyone elses in this thread. Please, if im in the wrong, do show me so i can learn, oh wise one.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

Dude. Again. You fail to point out where my irrelevant information is. If you want a concise description of my point, look at my reply to Linus. Show me the fucking irrelevant information and stop pulling these claims out of your arsehole.

 

Do you genuinely think i give two shits about your respect for me? Really? honestly mate, you are getting more and more desperate with every comment. I get the feeling you ignore the content of my posts as well, you certainly havn't brought up any inconsistencies in my argument, or anyone elses in this thread. Please, if im in the wrong, do show me so i can learn, oh wise one.

 

PLEASE

READ

BACK

ON

THE 

THREAD

 

You accuse me of not reading... look at yourself.

 

Woo hoo mom look I can ad hominem too.

Fuck off.

 

Continue your snide comments, see where that gets you!

 

So you admit that you started the ad hominem...

Contradiction of the century.

[kaloszer]

No you didn't; don't fool yourself.

 

Your hostility is the cancer of the internet; let that sink in for a minute.

 

 

One again, you paid no attention what I said, and repeated the same nonsense that I have debunked a long time ago. Don't spout nonsense about proven facts when you do not understand what credible sources even means.

 

If you want to show something to me, then bring something new.

 

Otherwise my original offer remains: CTFD or GTFO.

Come on now, stop nitpicking.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

Come on now, stop nitpicking.

 

Once again, that goes back to you. You are not only dealing with me, but also ionbasa, bogus, AngryJoe, TotalBiscuit, and now Linus. Linus may not be a "god", but he has some business and social experience on his back.

[LAwLz]

Once again, that goes back to you. You are not only dealing with me, but also ionbasa, bogus, AngryJoe, TotalBiscuit, and now Linus. Linus may not be a "god", but he has some business and social experience on his back.

Linus was completely missing the point as many people, including me, has already pointed out. You don't get rid of corruption by ignoring it. You don't get rid of thieves by ignoring them.

 

You still haven't pointed out the "logical loopholes" in my arguments by the way.

I posted a bunch of arguments for why you're wrong and you refused to answer them. Instead you just went "let's call it a draw then!".

[Scionyde]

Once again, that goes back to you. You are not only dealing with me, but also ionbasa, bogus, AngryJoe, TotalBiscuit, and now Linus. Linus may not be a "god", but he has some business and social experience on his back.

 

What has AngryJoe said about the issue? As for TotalBiscuit, last I checked, his blog post seemed to lament cronyism in the gaming industry, and criticize Zoe Quinn (or whoever is using her name) for abusing DMCA complaints to silent dissent. That doesn't seem too far removed from what some of us are arguing. Hell, it caused Zoe Quinn to call him a parasitic Youtube personality and Phil Fish to call him 'just another gross Youtuber'.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

What has AngryJoe said about the issue? As for TotalBiscuit, last I checked, his blog post seemed to lament cronyism in the gaming industry, and criticize Zoe Quinn (or whoever is using her name) for abusing DMCA complaints to silent dissent. That doesn't seem too far removed from what some of us are arguing. Hell, it caused Zoe Quinn to call him a parasitic Youtube personality and Phil Fish to call him 'just another gross Youtuber'.

 

AngryJoe had quite a mouthful of a rant with the general premise of the issue (it this case, he was talking about the attacks against Anita Sarkeesian).

 

["Top 10 Gaming Controversies of 2013!", number 3, 24:31]

 

As for totalBiscuit, he himself admits that there is too much noise about the issue.

 

 

The problem is this. Even after reading a ton of info on this, I still have no idea how much of it is true, how much of the controversy is genuine concern about the state of the industry and how much is just rabble-rousing for the sake of it.

[ZeroBreaker]

PLEASE

READ

BACK

ON

THE 

THREAD

 

You accuse me of not reading... look at yourself.

 

 

Continue your snide comments, see where that gets you!

 

So you admit that you started the ad hominem...

Contradiction of the century.

 

You said my points had no evidence or merit. I repeated them with the evidence, and repeated them again in my reply to Linus. I say your points are non-existant. You refuse to provide any points full stop. I can't FIND any legit points in your posts in this thread. I already replied to pretty much every post you made on this thread. So fuck off, don't think i'm as retarded as you seem to be.

 

Linus was completely missing the point as many people, including me, has already pointed out. You don't get rid of corruption by ignoring it. You don't get rid of thieves by ignoring them.

 

You still haven't pointed out the "logical loopholes" in my arguments by the way.

I posted a bunch of arguments for why you're wrong and you refused to answer them. Instead you just went "let's call it a draw then!".

 

Alas, the bountiful god of wisdom has yet again seen fit to deny you the answers you seek. Despite our begging, he refuses to impart his knowledge. We can only pray that someday he will heed our prayers and enlighten us.

Or pray that he fucks off

[ZeroBreaker]

-double post-

[Mysticode]

Can a mod either lock/move/delete this thread? It is not relevant to the sub-forum.

 

Thanks.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

You said my points had no evidence or merit. I repeated them with the evidence, and repeated them again in my reply to Linus. I say your points are non-existant. You refuse to provide any points full stop. I can't FIND any legit points in your posts in this thread. I already replied to pretty much every post you made on this thread. So fuck off, don't think i'm as retarded as you seem to be.

 

You say my points do not exist, and I say that "your" points miss the mark. It goes both ways.

[ZeroBreaker]

You say my points do not exist, and I say that "your" points miss the mark. It goes both ways.

 

I had the courtesy to repeat my points over and over and over. Yet you still refuse to tell me exactly how they 'miss the mark'.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

I had the courtesy to repeat my points over and over and over. Yet you still refuse to tell me exactly how they 'miss the mark'.

 

You are using arbitrary sources to draw parallels where they do not exist. I have said this form the beginning. You were the one disputing them.