Anonymous activist groups don't fit into the real world's established ways of changing things - they'd need a new method, new rules, and it doesn't exist yet. For example, anonymous groups have no member list. That means that anyone can do anything in the movement's name, and belong to it. If a troll says he is part of GamerGate, he is. There's no list of members and no list of rules that would disqualify trolls. If there is, that is a golden calf at the very least, a precious idol, but it's also likely the result of a figurehead and a representing central site.Phoenixwarrior141 wrote: This is actually a concept that GamerGate holds near and dear. It never wants to go outside gaming and into the other media. It never has it's own unanimous "Voice" (Unlike feminism, which has important figureheads that most people look up to, while GG holds everyone equally). So when Anita goes onto ABC and says a lot of anti-gamergate shit. GG just raises it's shields and waits for the normals and outsiders to come into gaming. Only to get bashed by people who know what they're talking about.
GamerGate already has representing voices and figureheads. Support of figureheads rarely is unanimous, and isn't here. When some GG speaks, few people notice. When a big name speaks, hundreds of people take immediate action.
Normals and outsiders got into gaming years ago. 58% of USA plays video games, but they're not into the gamer culture. There's been talk about how the gamer demographic doesn't have to be the game devs' audience ("gamers are dead") any more, there's new options now available. If gamer culture adapts, it might become a huge, influential way of life across the Western world. If not, games will be influential and powerful media-slash-entertainment, but gamers will stay a marginal group.
As long as that is true, I cannot in good conscience support GamerGate. That is a harmful stance, liable to hurt people.There's a difference. GG doesn't care about ethics outside of journalism, it only cares about journalistic ethics. Anything else is entirely secondary.
Journalistic ethics govern only journalists. Every single person needs to follow some ethical rules. If GG ignores that, their own actions may, as a congregate effect, end up hurting more people than games journalism does.
A good cause does not justify unethical means.
Not really. I didn't get any new information. The diversity paper I still haven't completely digested, though.I am aware of the term (Thank you Spec Ops!), you're probably feeling it now.