Wikipedia Banning Editors Over Gamergate Controversy

[Ducman69]

Easy to tell people looking at this from the outside. The LWs have nothing to do with GamerGate, but the reason you think it does is because everytime you look at the news you see these people inserting themselves into the conversation. We refer to them as "Literally Who" for a reason: Because they don't matter in the grand scheme of things. But when they go on a platform like ABC to spread misinformation the community has to react to it and call them out on their bullshit.

Unfortunately since Wikipedia has an arbitrary vetting process as to what constitutes a reliable source you had editors like Ryulong using the contrarian rules of Wikipedia to shout down all those trying to keep the article "NPOV" by citing their sources as "unreliable," "biased," "right-wing," "agenda-driven," etc. And because of cronyism any complaints of his battleground tactics were often ignored or brushed aside. Thankfully the ArbCom saw reason and banned the most egregious violators on both sides of the issue to varying degrees. Unfortunately along with these sanctions came an indefinite arbitration remedy that will prevent the article from coming to some sense of sanity any time soon.

The cronyism continues as Ryulong's buddies watch after his pet articles in clear violation of meatpuppetry and WP:OWN. An editor was indefinitely banned from the EN Wikipedia for the horrible atrocity of daring to correct a translation error.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Review_Block_of_DarknessSavior

Some reading and viewing material of GamerGate for the uninitiated:
https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/wiki/index
http://wiki.gamergate.me/index.php?title=Main_Page
http://blogjob.com/oneangrygamer (frequently posts news stories relating to GamerGate)
https://twitter.com/TheFartRises (tweets/retweets misconduct found in the gaming industry)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipcWm4B3EU4 (60 second explanation of GamerGate)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy9bisUIP3w (Projects and successes)

Excellent post and a treasure of information there. Thanks again for also bringing this thread back on topic, since some were trying to get stuck on label tangents to distract from and bury the core issues raised by GG.

So sadly from a broader viewpoint, we may simply have to write off the Wiki concept in its entirety as unfixable at its core when it comes to anything remotely controversial.

 

[heatlesssun]

So sadly from a broader viewpoint, we may simply have to write off the Wiki concept in its entirety as unfixable at its core when it comes to anything remotely controversial.

Thus is the nature of controversial subjects. If you were to fix it according to your views or I mine it would still be controversial and nothing fixed.

 

[Ducman69]

Thus is the nature of controversial subjects. If you were to fix it according to your views or I mine it would still be controversial and nothing fixed.

Ideally there would simply be two sections summarizing the arguments of each side. However, we don't see that, with all information and links explaining the grass-roots creation of the entire GG movement and all its sources censored, and the only even remote glossed over position of the GG side is followed by an explanation that its nonsense and should be dismissed.

Furthermore, facts of a case aren't open to opinion or interpretation, yet we're seeing mass censorship in the article to bury this information. So its not that reasonable people and moderate observers can't create a summary snapshot of what the controversy surrounds and stick to the facts, but rather that the specific Wiki model of allowing extremists to vandalize a page and turn it into a propaganda piece removes any possibility of a "group consensus" of what its all about.

So inherent to wiki sure, but inherent to any controversial subject, absolutely not as facts are facts.

 

[CreepyUncleGoogle]

Um, you do realize you can't just invent facts and make up a new reality:
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/gamergate

Cliffs Notes Version in red:

All those red things are unsupported claims just like everything else. *shrug* I'm gonna go with it not happening and this being a jealous xbf. Anyone who's ever seen what happens after a dumping knows that there's very little emotional control and lots of, "I'll get her back for figuring out that I'm a loser."

 

[Armenius]

And when have civil rights activists been anymore more popular with those that use the SJW acronym than social justice warriors? A rose is the same by any other name.

It's because we don't have to be reminded every waking minute of what the civil rights movement has done over the years. Deflection by third-wave and intersectional feminists to focus on first-world "social" issues is what has made "SJW" and "SocJu" pejorative terms. Political correctness aiming for considering a person's feelings over facts, or demanding a "guilty before proven innocent" policy in certain criminal legalities by using sociology pseudoscience, is what has made "SJW" and "SocJu" pejorative terms.

 

[Ducman69]

All those red things are unsupported claims just like everything else. *shrug* I'm gonna go with it not happening and this being a jealous xbf. Anyone who's ever seen what happens after a dumping knows that there's very little emotional control and lots of, "I'll get her back for figuring out that I'm a loser."

Fine, lets say its a jealous XBF, how does that have any effect whatsoever on everything else? Does that affect the admitted relationship between a developer and journalist? Does that invalidate the journalists financially supporting the people they are writing about, without any sort of disclosure? What does it have to do with the collusion and attack of gaming journalists on the gaming community and culture? What does it have to do with the being fed up with the relentless politicisation of gaming journalism? How does it relate to the mass censorship and obfuscation of these facts? The backlash from gaming consumers against the journalists is mountain built up of many rocks piled on of various sizes. Even if you pick up a pebble and toss it aside, the mountain didn't go anywhere.

Perhaps you'd be more open to listening to a Democrat voter feminist who calls herself the "factual feminist" that has the audacity to stick to, brace yourself, facts:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RVlCvBd21w

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Can't we just all agree that Feminism is now a hate group?

This pretty much sums it up.

Feminism isn't a hate group, SJW's on the other hand are though

The problem is that what once was feminism no longer exists. It has all been absorbed by the "SJW" looney bin agenda.

(I hate the term SJW, as I am a strong believer in social justice, but for lack of a better description, there it is.

In the 90's I would have (and did) call myself a feminist. Today feminism is the SJW's and their gamer-gate type hate speech. It simply isn't possible to make a clear distinction between the two anymore.

The sad part is that the SJW's have alienated the one group of people who were on board with feminism and ideals of equality than any other in society, the white nerd.

This well thought out blog post is really the end all of any discussion on this topic.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

And he's a cancer survivor.

This is relevant, how?

 

[thejokker]

The girl, being a crazy" feminist" ( not really a feminist, but more of a sociopath)
tl;dr

All feminists are sociopaths...

 

[Ducman69]

The sad part is that the SJW's have alienated the one group of people who were on board with feminism and ideals of equality than any other in society, the white nerd.

Well, they still have the trenchcoat and fedora wearing sub-niche to cater to m'ladies, no matter how virulent their rhetoric is.

 

[heatlesssun]

The sad part is that the SJW's have alienated the one group of people who were on board with feminism and ideals of equality than any other in society, the white nerd.

Every time these subjects come up tech forums, let's just say I'm not so sure about your assessment.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Every time these subjects come up tech forums, let's just say I'm not so sure about your assessment.

it has been well published that the white male nerd demographic when polled on the issue have a higher level of agreement with equality and what used to be feminist ideals, than even white college educated women. Just Google it.

I think the problem is that all the hate speech in the form of weaponized shaming and bullying from the radfem groups that have taken over the feminist movements have alienated so many and put them on the defensive that they say things they don't really mean, because they are angry.

Even with that, the majority of posters here are trying to go for a factual representation of events. Only a small minority - from my reading of a few pages - have said anything I would even remotely associate with misogyny.

 

[heatlesssun]

it has been well published that the white male nerd demographic when polled on the issue have a higher level of agreement with equality and what used to be feminist ideals, than even white college educated women. Just Google it.

Younger people regardless of race tend to be more open about issues of race, gender and LBGT. I agree there. However if I were to direct members of my family to threads in various forums on these subjects, they would overwhelmingly not agree with a lot of what's said, including the younger ones.

I know that a lot of folks love to blame the media for the way people think, but when it comes to these matters, I think it has mostly to do with who your parents are. And by that I mean both the physical characteristics that we inherit from them as well what they teach us about these matters as children.

 

[Kelby]

Are you people still arguing over "gamergate?"

 

[heatlesssun]

Are you people still arguing over "gamergate?"

#gamergate is alive and well. I've looked through it a few times and just today. It's such a conflated and confusing mess that most people have far more important things to worry about.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

I know that a lot of folks love to blame the media for the way people think, but when it comes to these matters, I think it has mostly to do with who your parents are. And by that I mean both the physical characteristics that we inherit from them as well what they teach us about these matters as children.

When you are younger maybe, but if kinds by necessity took after their parents as they got older, the whole "dreaded thanksgiving table political and religious conversation" wouldn't be a thing

People tend to find their own way to what they believe is right, and those with open minds will likely change their minds on a vast number of issues over their lifetimes.

Personally I am a recovering ex-catholic ex-"liberatrian laissez-faire capitalist conservative", who has essentially rethought everything in his life

Instead I come at the world from a compassionate humanism perspective, and tend to fall on issues somewhere in what used to be the center (before the right hopped on the train to tea-party-ville and moved the goal posts )

 

[CreepyUncleGoogle]

Fine, lets say its a jealous XBF, how does that have any effect whatsoever on everything else? Does that affect the admitted relationship between a developer and journalist? Does that invalidate the journalists financially supporting the people they are writing about, without any sort of disclosure? What does it have to do with the collusion and attack of gaming journalists on the gaming community and culture? What does it have to do with the being fed up with the relentless politicisation of gaming journalism? How does it relate to the mass censorship and obfuscation of these facts? The backlash from gaming consumers against the journalists is mountain built up of many rocks piled on of various sizes. Even if you pick up a pebble and toss it aside, the mountain didn't go anywhere.

Perhaps you'd be more open to listening to a Democrat voter feminist who calls herself the "factual feminist" that has the audacity to stick to, brace yourself, facts:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RVlCvBd21w

Isn't this a free game, by the way? It was Depression Quest and it's free on Steam. I kinda doubt even if there was something going on between the dev and a journalist (which is still not proven and all just hearsay) who cares? I don't think anyone here is planning to play it and anyone who does is out a massive no money at all for messing with it. Where is there possibly an issue worth all the dedication you're showing to this cause of video game justice? It seems obsessive.

 

[pxc]

Was it the crazy one?

/read the article, don't hold it against me

After quickly reading through GG controversy article after OP's link, it does look like the chan-related/inspired trolling was on the losing side. The "crazy one" is probably close to correct, closely followed by people who have zero social skills (not implying those are exclusive categories).

• 11 topic bans applied to editors on various sides of the dispute,
• an endorsement of 40 or so existing community sanctions on combative parties on various sides,
• roughly 100 community warnings/notifications,
• an extension of all community topic bans and restrictions from editing articles related to the Gamergate controversy article to include restriction from participation in any gender-related dispute, for editors on various sides, and
• the introduction of discretionary sanctions for any gender-related dispute, which can be imposed by any uninvolved administrator when useful for stabilising a topic, empowering the community to deal with disruption quickly.

The current majorities on the proposed decision are not in favour of banning any editors from Wikipedia.

 

[Fix Me]

#gamergate is alive and well. I've looked through it a few times and just today. It's such a conflated and confusing mess that most people have far more important things to worry about.

That's where I am. I don't know what to believe, but I can't and won't follow gossip about people I don't know. What I do know is that people are being harassed by a movement that is supposed to be about civil rights (for white males because we all know how repressed they've been...oh wait) by violating others civil rights (doxxing, threats, etc). The whole thing is all kinds of ridiculous and isn't being taken seriously by anyone I know. Keep digging your holes guys and good luck with getting ethics in entertainment "journalism" while part of your "movement" continues harassing people and blaming the victims.

 

[Jagger100]

That's where I am. I don't know what to believe, but I can't and won't follow gossip about people I don't know. What I do know is that people are being harassed by a movement that is supposed to be about civil rights (for white males because we all know how repressed they've been...oh wait) by violating others civil rights (doxxing, threats, etc). The whole thing is all kinds of ridiculous and isn't being taken seriously by anyone I know. Keep digging your holes guys and good luck with getting ethics in entertainment "journalism" while part of your "movement" continues harassing people and blaming the victims.

Because the millions of you don't walk perfectly across the arbitrary tightrope I have decreed, all or your opinions are invalid!

 

[mope54]

Because the millions of you don't walk perfectly across the arbitrary tightrope I have decreed, all or your opinions are invalid!

I suppose one could argue that I've set my threshold arbitrarily high, but most sensible people I've encountered would disregard online ramblings from jilted ex-lovers with the appropriate handfuls of salt so I'm ok with that.

 

[Jagger100]

I suppose one could argue that I've set my threshold arbitrarily high, but most sensible people I've encountered would disregard online ramblings from jilted ex-lovers with the appropriate handfuls of salt so I'm ok with that.

sorry, do you have two accounts here?

 

[DocSavage]

#gamergate is alive and well. I've looked through it a few times and just today. It's such a conflated and confusing mess that most people have far more important things to worry about.

+1

Even if everything #GG'ers claim is true, who cares? Does anyone really think all reviews are unbiased? OMG someone may have slept with someone! Oh, the scandal!

 

[Staples]

Gamergate is nothing but a struggle to see who is the least pathetic in an industry full of ass hats. Even the so-called victims are pieces of shit with mental health issues.

Agreed.

 

[Fix Me]

I suppose one could argue that I've set my threshold arbitrarily high, but most sensible people I've encountered would disregard online ramblings from jilted ex-lovers with the appropriate handfuls of salt so I'm ok with that.

Yes, exactly. It's really hard for me to take the whole GG seriously since a jilted former lover spurned the whole thing.

 

[Raudulfr]

Yes, exactly. It's really hard for me to take the whole GG seriously since a jilted former lover spurned the whole thing.

Not sure if trolling...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

 

[GearChoices]

oh man, you guys sticking up for him like this really take the cake.

he was so full of shit through this whole thing and is about as far away from ethical behavior as one can be it's hilariously delicious to see people hoodwinked by him

Link to his unethical behavior, please?

This is relevant, how?

I do not see the post you are quoting, but personally attacking (as in, not just debating/arguing) someone because they are speaking out in favor of ethics, raising awareness of facts, and proving false information is bad. When it is a cancer survivor that is actually still in the process of fighting the remainders of the cancer, it's even worse. Sure, keep arguing/debating against an honest person if you want, but it shows how heartless the anti-GG side is when they even go after the people actively fighting cancer just because he is honest and they are not. They cannot even temporarily ignore him and launch their unjustified personal attacks against him after he is better.

I don't know what label you should use. I look at the term SJW as slight to folks that fought a lot of tough fights and sacrificed greatly so that I and many others could simply live a life relatively free of legal and rampant discrimination.

I mean, just look at the term you're using. Social Justice Warrior. You're trying to turn a positive trait to everyone (social justice) into a bad thing, like there exists people that want too much social justice in the world--as if that's a thing!

I won't use the SJW label, just as I rarely use "liberal" or "progressive" to refer to what the mainstream media calls "liberal" and "progressive." All three used to be honorable labels decades ago, but liberal/progressive has been increasingly corrupted over time, and now so has "social justice" at least within the gaming industry/community. I do not know how SJW began as a label, but when I see people use it now, it does not raise the image of people past/present fighting for REAL social justice.

For me it raises the image a young (btw I am young too), ignorant, hateful person with not much of a life, and certainly no understanding or true passion for the actual concept of social justice, desperately trying to give random purpose to his/her life by attaching themselves to a self-proclaimed "movement" so that he/she can be popular with others in the movement. And of course, the mission they are given is to attack/hurt others, not to accomplish any honorable objective.

Essentially, they are saying "I need purpose for my pathetic life" so they essentially treat life as a game, load up an issue (GamerGate debate), and select for their class, instead of Wizard or Samurai or whatever, they choose "Social Justice Warrior." So to me, the term is mocking THEIR mocking of the term social justice, by lowering it to the level of a game for their life. They do not care about social justice, they do not know what social justice is in the first place, but they take it as a banner and start attacking people without question, just as you would when selecting a class in a game.

Maybe I am in the minority with that interpretation? Possibly. When I see the term used, that's how I interpret it anyway, unless someone actually starts saying things against social justice itself.

The positive term you're looking for is "Civil Rights Activist" because social justice has little to do with civil rights. I would go so far as to say that the platform of social justice is the antithesis to civil rights.

Social justice is a broader term that includes civil rights, at least it was outside of the GG debate. I guess it is only a matter of time before the term is completely corrupted in the mainstream as well.

Wikipedia is so fucking corrupt. I have their obnoxious money begging divs all adblocked. When they actually start being neutral, I'll start donating.

Unfortunately since Wikipedia has an arbitrary vetting process as to what constitutes a reliable source you had editors like Ryulong using the contrarian rules of Wikipedia to shout down all those trying to keep the article "NPOV" by citing their sources as "unreliable," "biased," "right-wing," "agenda-driven," etc. And because of cronyism any complaints of his battleground tactics were often ignored or brushed aside. Thankfully the ArbCom saw reason and banned the most egregious violators on both sides of the issue to varying degrees. Unfortunately along with these sanctions came an indefinite arbitration remedy that will prevent the article from coming to some sense of sanity any time soon.

The cronyism continues as Ryulong's buddies watch after his pet articles in clear violation of meatpuppetry and WP:OWN. An editor was indefinitely banned from the EN Wikipedia for the horrible atrocity of daring to correct a translation error.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Review_Block_of_DarknessSavior

Wikipedia is garbage as far as I am concerned. Yes, I still use it sometimes until a better replacement comes along. But it is definitely garbage, just the best garbage we have right now (to my knowledge). If I had spare change, I certainly would not give it any either. A little while back I was trying to get information on a part. I came across what used to be a wikipedia page that listed all types of that category of parts along with information.

There had been a debate between editors/mods/whatever, because a random WW (Wiki Warrior) had came across the page and marked it for deletion. His claim was that although the entire page had official links/sources, that everything in it was accurate and not biased or contested by anyone, that no one else had complained about the page besides him, and that there were an unimaginable number of similar pages on wikipedia that served as a precedence for this page that simply conveyed accurate, useful information, it was outside the mission of being an online encyclopedia.

There was nothing particularly wrong with the page according to him, and he himself agreed with all the points I just mentioned that the defenders of the page was making. So why delete a useful page that people were visiting and using, when countless others like it would still be around after this one was deleted? Because he came across it, and his life purpose is a Wiki Warrior. Instead of trying to hunt down and correct or delete inaccurate information, he took pride in hunting down and deleting ACCURATE information - he was on a big power trip (this information is below us, as judged by me, so I shall have it deleted, just because my eyes happened to come across it as opposed to all the other information "below us" that my eyes have not come across).

Wikipedia approved the deletion. Just a bunch of pseudo-academics.

Ideally there would simply be two sections summarizing the arguments of each side. However, we don't see that, with all information and links explaining the grass-roots creation of the entire GG movement and all its sources censored, and the only even remote glossed over position of the GG side is followed by an explanation that its nonsense and should be dismissed.

Furthermore, facts of a case aren't open to opinion or interpretation, yet we're seeing mass censorship in the article to bury this information. So its not that reasonable people and moderate observers can't create a summary snapshot of what the controversy surrounds and stick to the facts, but rather that the specific Wiki model of allowing extremists to vandalize a page and turn it into a propaganda piece removes any possibility of a "group consensus" of what its all about.

So inherent to wiki sure, but inherent to any controversial subject, absolutely not as facts are facts.

100% correct. When I was first looking into GG and saw that completely one-sided page, that was another piece of evidence that made me start to realize there was more to it than I thought, and that it was definitely starting to look like, excluding the trolls on both sides, there was ONE side trying to censor the other because they were on the losing side of truth and reason. Someone trying to censor other people is never a good sign that the person has a valid argument.

 

[Fix Me]

Not sure if trolling...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy

So, I should judge it by its current merits of being for civil rights while violating the civil rights of those who speak against the "movement"?

 

[GearChoices]

I do not see the post you are quoting, but personally attacking (as in, not just debating/arguing) someone because they are speaking out in favor of ethics, raising awareness of facts, and proving false information is bad. When it is a cancer survivor that is actually still in the process of fighting the remainders of the cancer, it's even worse. Sure, keep arguing/debating against an honest person if you want, but it shows how heartless the anti-GG side is when they even go after the people actively fighting cancer just because he is honest and they are not. They cannot even temporarily ignore him and launch their unjustified personal attacks against him after he is better.

I was editing this part and accidentally made it less clear. I was saying it is fine to keep debating/arguing with TB while he is fighting cancer if that is all they were doing, but that it is especially bad to organize a collective and continuous barrage of unjustified personal attacks and lie spreading while he is fighting cancer (despite that being pathetic even when your target does not have cancer).

 

[mope54]

Link to his unethical behavior, please?

https://medium.com/@SvizraLion/everything-totalbiscuit-got-wrong-in-way-too-many-words-4df407e8113c

since you seem predisposed to consider him an ethical person, you're likely to unswayed by what many of us would consider an apparent contradiction between claiming that "journalists" should be held to standards that he doesn't adhere to because he's not a "journalist"
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/...he_ethics_of_paying_for_YouTuber_coverage.php

he regularly claimed he was "neutral" while arguing pro-goofygoober arguments
even then I merely decided to not follow his reviews anymore. it wasn't until he posted this horrific statement that I finally tossed him into the rest of the shitpile as simply another asshole not worthy of any level of respect
https://twitter.com/untimelygamer/status/530083537761107968

 

[Ducman69]

That's where I am. I don't know what to believe, but I can't and won't follow gossip about people I don't know.

Summaries have been made for you, and most of it is simply facts. Its really not confusing.

What I do know is that people are being harassed by a movement that is supposed to be about civil rights (for white males because we all know how repressed they've been...oh wait) by violating others civil rights (doxxing, threats, etc).

You don't know that, the threats are what are "gossip", as originally she said she had to go to the police regarding death threats, then wasn't able to supply those, and it was verified she had nothing filed, likely because if she or her cronies did try to fabricate something as serious as a death threat, then there would have been an investigation and possible jail time for filing a false report. Secondly, how in the heck do you still understand that gamergate is about civil rights? I can only surmise you haven't even skimmed this thread, as there's even a "gamergate in 60seonds" breakdown for the extremely lazy, and it has nothing remotely to do with civil rights.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipcWm4B3EU4

Again, its a grass-roots consumer boycott/protest against several major gaming journalism outlets that escalated. The accused and SJWs tried to confuse and distract from the issue by playing the victim, and claiming its about harassment and misogyny since there was absolutely no way to refute the major breaches in journalistic ethics and consumer confidence.

I refuse to believe that anyone is honestly so obtuse as to not understand what sparked GG, and buying into the "harassment" distraction technique to play the victim...

 

[lilbabycat]

https://medium.com/@SvizraLion/everything-totalbiscuit-got-wrong-in-way-too-many-words-4df407e8113c

since you seem predisposed to consider him an ethical person, you're likely to unswayed by what many of us would consider an apparent contradiction between claiming that "journalists" should be held to standards that he doesn't adhere to because he's not a "journalist"
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/...he_ethics_of_paying_for_YouTuber_coverage.php

he regularly claimed he was "neutral" while arguing pro-goofygoober arguments
even then I merely decided to not follow his reviews anymore. it wasn't until he posted this horrific statement that I finally tossed him into the rest of the shitpile as simply another asshole not worthy of any level of respect
https://twitter.com/untimelygamer/status/530083537761107968

First link, is arguing the information as he knew it with minor technicalities incorrect but then misconstrued as the entire argument being false, AKA the propaganda writer strikes again

Second link, He is public about his sponsors. That is literally 99% of what gamergate is about. The people throwing out this propaganda bullshit are incapable of doing this because of HOW MUCH money is exchanging hands for promotion/ratings/etc. This is projecting and deflection at best.

Third link, Good job, you yet again took words out of context, You hold that crown of willfull ignorance well.

 

[TheOneKnownAsMe]

Agreed.

x2.

 

[GearChoices]

https://medium.com/@SvizraLion/everything-totalbiscuit-got-wrong-in-way-too-many-words-4df407e8113c

since you seem predisposed to consider him an ethical person, you're likely to unswayed by what many of us would consider an apparent contradiction between claiming that "journalists" should be held to standards that he doesn't adhere to because he's not a "journalist"
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/...he_ethics_of_paying_for_YouTuber_coverage.php

he regularly claimed he was "neutral" while arguing pro-goofygoober arguments
even then I merely decided to not follow his reviews anymore. it wasn't until he posted this horrific statement that I finally tossed him into the rest of the shitpile as simply another asshole not worthy of any level of respect
https://twitter.com/untimelygamer/status/530083537761107968

I read TB's whole linked original post in that first link - did not find anything unethical there. I then began to read the writer's response to see what this was even about that was supposedly unethical. I got half-way through the article and found nothing pointing out TB was doing something unethical...it was simply one of thousands of GG vs AGG articles. I asked for at least one specific example of him doing something unethical. Oh and I stopped reading the article halfway through after the writer stated for a second time that ethics were not important in the gaming industry as long as they follow the standards set by the mainstream media (which is little to no ethics at all)

The second example is about the most ridiculous possible thing you can post in response to my request. Its like knowing a giant ball of flame is coming your direction, and instead of putting on some futuristic heat-resistant armored suit standing nearby, you start covering yourself with dry grass and leaves.

He has repeatedly held himself to standards even higher than the ones he has criticized anyone else for not meeting:

He has turned down certain lucrative brand deals because he felt uncomfortable with them due to certain reasons, even if he fully disclosed them.
He has gone back through all his past videos and increased the visibility of disclosure for videos he had already disclosed.
He has criticized the multi-channel youtube network (now owned by Disney) of which he is a member for not adequately disclosing paid-for videos.
He professionally stated that another member of the network (Yogscast), which he himself played a significant role in helping grow into a successful sub-network, did not adequately disclose their videos. His own former friends turned on him just for holding them to the same standards to which he holds himself and others, because they thought he should have one policy for others and another for his "friends."
He has made NUMEROUS (i know, as i actually watch them) videos, where he has called for more disclosure by YouTubers and based his arguments on both ethics and FCC regulations. He has made both videos dedicated to this subject and regularly brought it up during videos about related subjects.
He apologized for doing a fully-disclosed paid-for promotion with PlanetSide 2 because after-the-fact he felt ethically uncomfortable having done it because he had done a video praising it in the past.
He criticized Chivalry: Deadliest Warrior for gameplay-reasons, despite the fact he was partaking in a paid-for promotion for it (which he fully disclosed and did not endorse the game during it).

This is THE issue he is most out-spoken about and most consistently ethical about more than any other, and more so than the vast majority of others. Yet this is the example of his unethical behavior? Talk about "lawl."

Third link: another BS taken-out-of-context statement as appears to be the norm with anti-GG. Here was the full context:
https://soundcloud.com/totalbiscuit/a-response-to-yts-senior-curator-re-gamergate

And despite it being clear what his intent was, he still apologized for the wording:
https://twitter.com/totalbiscuit/status/530125037937106945

 

[Madoc]

Steve needs to start sleeping around with game journalists. Then we could have... [H]ardGate.

 

[TheOneKnownAsMe]

Steve needs to start sleeping around with game journalists. Then we could have... [H]ardGate.

Or hardware engineers.

 

[bastage]

wow.. this thread is almost enough to convince me to do enough googleing to find out what gamergate is...

 

[Staples]

wow.. this thread is almost enough to convince me to do enough googleing to find out what gamergate is...

I've done that a few months ago. There can mean more than one thing as I have found out.

Anything from I hate women and how dare they make a logical argument claiming that women are under represented in games to gaming journalism sucks (most people will point to some incident of a WOMAN developer sleeping with a game reviewer who by the way never reviewed her game.

 

[heatlesssun]

I've done that a few months ago. There can mean more than one thing as I have found out.

Anything from I hate women and how dare they make a logical argument claiming that women are under represented in games to gaming journalism sucks (most people will point to some incident of a WOMAN developer sleeping with a game reviewer who by the way never reviewed her game.

GG is like Seinfeld. About nothing.

 

[CreepyUncleGoogle]

I've done that a few months ago. There can mean more than one thing as I have found out.

Anything from I hate women and how dare they make a logical argument claiming that women are under represented in games to gaming journalism sucks (most people will point to some incident of a WOMAN developer sleeping with a game reviewer who by the way never reviewed her game.

And said game is availble for free on Steam, so the aforementioned non-existent review wouldn't have been profitable to her anyway. All because of an upset, recently dumped ex boyfriend of the developer. The stuff that happened after that was just people yelling at each other using that as an excuse to push their agendas as legitimate no matter how stupid they seem.