Gamergate is long dead so why is it still banned from /v/?
>>461166
If nobody talks about it why do you care if it's unbanned or not?
>>461168
Plenty of people still talk about it
>>461166
Because it still is a very popular subject on /v/ and it's not video games.
>>461173
> not video games
Yes it is
>>461166
Because it absolutely ruined 4chan as a whole.
Post-GG 4chan is doubtlessly the most cancerous thing to have happened to 4chan since Chanology. Cancerous cross-boarders, "ironic" shitposters, people shilling their sociopolitical shit everywhere, all thanks to GG.
>>461180
People were posting vidya politics since day 1.
It’s vidya and should be allowed
>>461171
schizophrenia is not a joke, senpai, seek medical assistance
it isn't
the daily censorship and "she" threads prove this.
>>461187
>the daily censorship and "she" threads prove this.
what are you talking about?
why wouldn't it continue to be banned?
>>461190
Same reason anontalk isn't banned anymore
>>461171
Then it sounds to me like it isn't long dead.
>>461180
If that's the way you feel, then why are you still here, Anon? Are you a superhero who fights crime and their superpower is that they don't have the will to leave 4chan?
>>461188
>>the daily censorship and "she" threads
>>461176
No, it's not.
>>461212
the culture that surrounds video gaming is not 'video games' enough for you?
>>461213
Oh, you're one of the twitter thread posters
Lmao
>>461212
Yes, it is.
Things that impact vidya is vidya.
>>461219
According to whom?
>>461227
The rules of /v/.
>>461230
Obviously not. It seems you've misinterpreted the rules.
>>461231
wew lad
>>461235
video game activism =/= video game culture
get over it or else go back to twitter, faggot
>>461166
GG became a Reddit thing.
So why invite Reddit?
>>461242
>Video game related topics.
Which means what specifically?
>>461245
Why are you purposely being obtuse?
>>461247
Why are you purposely refusing to define the terms you're talking about? As was pointed out above, the obvious assumption is not that video game culture = video game activism. Not to mention that the activism in question was in practice only tangentially related to video games.
>>461248
If it involves video games, it's video game culture whether you personally like it or not.
>>461250
All video games are played on devices composed of atoms. Does that mean atomic physics is an appropriate topic on /v/?
I think it's just hilarious that these people apparently think making generals threads over and over in which they post a bunch of clickbait stories and twitter hashtags, just to have the same painfully obvious 5 faggots who keep the threads going repeatedly hit those hashtags on twitter with regurgitated 4chan memes, bringing tons of cancer and scrutiny here. Somehow they think this is desirable to have on any board on 4chan, whether it's on a clusterfuck of a board like /v/ or not.
>>461166
Because someday some stupid person may revive the """""""""movement""""""""" and the shitposting would be rampant
>>461250
In the end it's mods who decide what you're allowed to discuss, as evidenced by civil vidya discussion disappearing for no fucking reason whatsoever while at the same time they or some other mod/jan is busy babysitting a shitty thread and deleting all the dubs/crapflooding/derail out of a shitpost thread, literally aiding and abetting shitposting for shits and giggles and keeping the thread alive.
>>461269
>people should be allowed to spam threads I don't like
>>461276
I mean literal shitposting threads like the ones Barneyfag starts, or the several times daily ruggarel/foolz shitpost raid threads
I've seen mods/jans literally sitting their fat ass in a thread and delete posts but leaving the original shitposting and further contributions completely untouched, when it should have been deleted on sight.
>>461166
I was looking up this Alison Rapp person on Twitter earlier today because people have been talking about her a lot and I wanted to find out why. I saw the #Gamergate hashtag a LOT, so I highly doubt it is anywhere near dead.
>>461166
moot is long dead so why are doubles still banned from /v/?
>>461197
Oh trust me faggot, it doesn't take that much of a will to leave your little Anonymous Reddit.
I'm glad you can try to control the narrative with retarded snark though, really shows the average age around here to be lowering by the day.
All chans are cancer, I'm starting to realize.
>>461240
agreed, threads made about the latest tranny tweet have no place on muh vee, but discussion of gamergate as a whole does.
now where to draw that line? probably just delete the shit tier no-effort threads that are just "here's anthony burch's latest emasculating display. LOL." get deleted and anything that remotely promotes discussion can stay.
>>461342
>All chans are cancer, I'm starting to realize.
then why are you here, leave anytime.
>>461352
There is no discussion to be had. A typical gamergate thread involves some faggot posting a clickbait article in the OP post that outrage a few people and then the rest of the thread is spent looking for and posting hashtags in order for people who give a shit to harass people who they disagree with, for great justice. That's why they get banned: because they aren't about video games at all and are in fact actually about activist faggotry.
>>461352
>but discussion of gamergate as a whole does.
No it doesn't. It's activism. If you allow the discussion of activism that /v/ermin involved themselves in, you are just going to reignite the engine. There is nothing to discuss on gg and only stupid niGGers want it to return so they can shitpost again.
>>461353
Don't know why you have so many Lain reaction images. Everyone hypes her up but she's kind of a nothing character. She just wanders around and listens to people talking and doesn't really say much. Then at the end she does that thing that Gen Urobuchi decided to rip off when he wrote Madoka because he's an unoriginal hack artist. Really, I bet none of those people who hail Madoka as the best thing since sliced bread have ever even HEARD of Lain. And they think it's so original. Despite what I just said about Lain the character it's a good show, but it's not a show about characters, it's a show about delivering a message to the viewer. And you don't seem to understand. A shame, you seemed an honest man.
>>461383
I save these images because I enjoyed the show, simple as that.
I don't go around worshiping her or claiming her as my waifu, the message was thoroughly delivered and I wholeheartedly agree with (almost) everything you said.
and I don't just save the reaction images.
>>461242
>>461355
The reason GG is still banned is because it's not about vidya games. That's a myth, a meme, and a lie. If it was ever about "ethics in gaming journalism", then that was before people actually started calling it "GamerGate". I'm not sure if it ever really was. For the longest time it has been about bashing women in the gaming industry for their perceived intrusions on the boy's club, and then about bashing feminists in general. It's /r9k/-/pol/ level retardation, and that is also where it rightfully belongs.
>>461180
It is pretty fucking awful yeah.
Same reason why gun control isn't on /k/.
It's video game politics. /pol/'s territory.
it's also a flaming shitflinging polarizing drama magnet. Which is also /pol/ territory.
>>463017
Spinning it that hard hurts your credibility. It takes two sides to polarize a political issue like that. This is not hard to trace, if anyone actually gives a fuck.
I don't care if you call it video games, or cocaine dealing, or what ever. It's cancer. It attracts a lot of idiots. It's one more thing that makes 4chan worse.
>>461194
Hitler confirmed for being alive.
>>461253
This tbqh, the more /v/ posts places the more they prove that everyone is right about them.
>>463017
You're such a big faggot, you retarded namefag
I assume most of the people complaining about gamergate posting don't even browse /v/, they just want to control what is allowed to be discussed on 4chan. If /v/ is fine with it, then why shouldn't they be allowed to post about it?
>>463092
I speak for /v/.
WE are not fine with it.
Thanks to GG there will always now be a 'Anti-GG.'
And they're shitposting on /tg/ and /a/ baka desu senpai.
>>463096
>Europeans brush their teeth with mashed up crab instead of fluoridated toothpaste
This explains the English
>>463017
I love how these kinds of posts show the kind of people who are butthurt by "GG".
Fucking everything is "GG", "/r9k/" and "/pol/" nowadays if it pisses off brainwashed redditors. You can't talk about anything without someone bringing it up.
>>463017
>Bashing women in vidya
>Not about women bashing vidya for attention
Dumb nameposter
>>463310
Hi 8gag.
You always have a shithole known as 8gag.
>>463321
>8gag
Oh yeah, that too.
You faggots just use these terms to kill any discussion of anything, even though they were regular subjects of discussion before any of these boards or terms even existed. You should probably end your life if its only purpose is to prevent people from talking about anything that triggers you.
>>463323
No really, what's your point?
Because you guys fucked the whole board up with that shit.
Never again!
>>463336
>!
Very convincing.
>>463340
>istockphoto
dude at least make an attempt
GG invited in /pol/, reddit, twitter, and even a little tumblr to /v/. You guys even actually fucking reached out and tried to coordinate with other websites, breaking the long tradition of 4chan being an isolationist website. And it did irreparable damage to the community. Ever since GG invitied the twitter crowd in, the use of shitty twitterspeak garbage like "tbqh" etc. has spread across the entire website. It should be banned under the "lol u tk him 2da bar|?" clause of rule 3, but it's just too fucking prevalent to get rid of. I don't even go to /v/ anymore simply because it's practically unusable, and quite frankly I blame GG, in part, for the shift in the community which led to that. So no, fuck GG and fuck you.
>>461166
Because it's cancer.
>>463355
>breaking the long tradition of 4chan being an isolationist website.
/b/ has been coordinating shit with Ebaums, SA and other sites since at least 2005.
I won't deny that GG (the biggest influx was from Fappening though) shat up the site, but the problem is that people call everything "GG", so you can't fucking talk about anything on /v/. Also /pol/, reddit and tumblr were on /v/ way before all this shit, they just didn't have a name for their drama.
>>463355
except it was /v/ that flooded /pol/ with their GG shit when mods started acting... and /pol/acks drove them out to cripplechan...
>>463092
This 100%.
I've seen so many threads on this board about moderation in /v/ where posters will go on and on about how videogames are puerile and gamers are manchildren etc.
Bashing videogames in a thread about moderation of the fucking videogames board! If you don't like videogames, why do you care what goes on in /v/? If you don't care what goes on in /v/ then why are you shoving your nose into discussion of the board's moderation policies?
MAYBE if /v/ was organising raids on other boards or something like that, but that's never the complaint. It's only: "I've never been to your board but here are some rules for it..."
And I swear it's the same people who complain about politics ruining everything, as though it's not the only reason they come to 4chan.
>>463436
If Gamergate discussion stayed entirely inside /v/, never claimed to be anything more shitty latter-day activist /v/ garbage, and all the shitters who flocked to 4chan for Gamergate never ever left /v/, I would not care (and probably would not know) about it.
None of these three premises are true in the slightest.
>>463310
If you let your house fill up with garbage don't be surprised when the whole place gets condemned.
That said, derp commander is still an extraordinary retard.
>>463441
>If you let your house fill up with garbage don't be surprised when the whole place gets condemned.
They're not my houses. They're just boogeymen you invoke when you read something you don't like.
>>463445
>They're just boogeymen you invoke when you read something you don't like.
GG, /r9k/, and /pol/ don't exist? Mind fucking blown.
>>463445
i'm pretty sure in this analogy /v/ was standing in for the house and GG + /r9k/ + /pol/ were standing in for the garbage
>>463449
They exist, but any criticism of either game journalists or industry practices becomes "GG" according to the retards who whine about it.
Better to just allow it and keep it in a general; if nothing else it gets turbo-offended tumblr types to stay away.
>blaming /pol/ for or connecting it to gg
false flag'd hard
>>463439
The Gamergate "activist" phenomenon isn't remotely new to 4chan and probably would've blown over long ago if there hadn't been a huge coordinated (and massively obnoxious) attempt to shut it down.
All the damage control people who came on 4chan to trash gamers and racists and decry /v/ and /pol/ and /r9k/, they only provoked a backlash that derails threads on virtually every board to this day. It's the Streisand effect on steroids.
Remember the "Pedowood" threads that were prevalent on /x/ and /pol/ a few years ago? hundreds and hundreds of threads were made over a six month period, 24/7 serial threads that hit bump limit every time. Names were named, videos, articles and documents were linked, dozens of people took part. Those boards were buzzing with activism then. What happened to that? It fizzled out overnight. People eventually lost interest. There was talk of shills etc. but no real censorship happened.
If Gamergate had been allowed to die naturally, we wouldn't be talking about it now. Every time you try to censor something on 4chan, the Streisand effect rears it's head. People become twice as vocal, twice as convinced they're onto something. More people take notice because if they can censor X then what happens when they come for our Y? People who had no interest in the original cause suddenly take a side, the side of free speech.
I never really gave a shit about Gamergate, but when people suddenly started telling me what I couldn't and shouldn't talk about on 4chan, I picked a side. And I have to admit, once I pick a side, I'm stubborn as fuck. I'm not pro-GG but I'm very anti-anti-GG.
>>463488
I imagine you are also a furry, a brony, and a pedophile.
>>463504
I'm none of those, and I often report those threads if I see them where they don't belong. I support freedom of speech on principle. If anyone has ulterior motives, it's the people who want to censor us.
As long as the discussion is within the rules and on topic, 4chan is a great place for hearing all sides of controversial subjects and that is vital to forming an objective view. Where else can you go to experience both sides of a debate these days? Reddit is divided into subreddits that act purely as echo-chambers. Dissenting voices are downvoted into obscurity if they're not deleted and banned by moderators.
Sure, 4chan's "anything goes" atmosphere attracts some very negative elements. That can make the experience uncomfortable, especially for new users who aren't used to seeing such extreme views or intense conflict in a forum. But even if it were beneficial to the community, supporting one point of view with bans and deletions won't make anyone change their mind.
More importantly, censorship limits our experience of the world and denies us all the opportunity to base our views on the full range of available information.
>>463488
I'm anti-GG and anti-anti-GG, if that makes any sense. I disapprove of it, but like that old Voltaire misquotation says, I'll defend the right of people to talk about whatever they want, no matter how retarded.
That does NOT mean they get to use whatever forum they want, and it does NOT mean they get to harass people at random, like a traveling gang of thugs.
>>463551
Some of the people who want to censor GG may indeed have ulterior motives, but I suspect that most of them are simply tired of putting up with bullshit. Their impulse to censor is understandable, even if misguided.
Conflicts of interest in gaming journalism is something I've known about since long before I even came to 4chan. GG however wasn't really about that. It was first about Zoe Quinn, then the feminists used the harassment of her (and why her and not the alleged boyfriend anyway?) to confirm their existing belief that the entire gamer community consists of sexist pigs. Then the GGers proceeded to do everything to prove them right.
There were some, I think, who tried to handle things adults, but sadly they were few and far between. Now they've made it virtually impossible to have a serious discussion with anyone about actual ethics in gaming journalism for the foreseeable future.
They belong on /pol/ where the rest of their kin belong, and that's the end of it as far as I care.
>>463639
>they belong on /pol/
no, fuck off
t. /pol/
>>461180
All of those problems existed long before Gamergate. The fact that you believe those things have gotten worse or just started post-GG tells me you're a newfag.
>>461166
its not dead if your still bringing it up
>>461166
Because it's not video games and is essentially the right-wing equivalent of radfems at this point. It (and all the other "lol look at this twitter nobody with a shitty opinion" threads) belong on /pol/, /b/, or preferably 8gag.
>>463719
>GG
>right wing
No.
>belong on /pol/
No.
>>463639
The idiots who broke the story should've waited till they had dug up all the shit they had later and released it all at once in a professional and controlled manner, rather than digging it up overtime and letting idiots hijack things bitch about wimminz.
If they'd broken the story and had all the shit on the nepotism that came to light later at the beginning it wouldn't have been a gender issue at all and the people responsible would've burned on the pyre of public opinion.
The moment it was about some talentless 'game designer' using her female parts to get ahead, was the moment the movement lost.
>>463639
>Some of the people who want to censor GG may indeed have ulterior motives
You're an autistic tripfag crying about "harassment", "boy's clubs", "/pol/" and whatever the fuck, that's your motive.
All your talking points are shit I'd hear on feminist websites.
>They belong on /pol/ where the rest of their kin belong, and that's the end of it as far as I care.
No. /pol/ doesn't want it, and a lot of it doesn't have anything to do with /pol/. People should be able to talk about gaming websites, or cut content without some sperg crying about the "GG" boogermanz.
>>464016
>He's still doing it. >>463323
This shit doesn't work on /qa/ faggot.
Originally it was banned because moot SJWs friends got triggered. Not long after the incident and combined with the fappening moot sold us out. As to why it continues to be banned well, you tell me.
>>464258
>you tell me.
Because it's activist faggotry, which has been banned on 4chan since the days of Hal Turner.
>>464264
4chan has always have an activist side to it. They just banned GG because moot's "friends" call him a meanie.
>>464268
>4chan has always have an activist side to it.
No, it hasn't. You must be thinking of 711chan.
>>464268
>4chan has always have an activist side to it
Maybe back in 2007, but not now. Raiding and doxing and the stuff that comes with the 4chan flavour of activism has been a bannable offence for quite a long time now.
>>464287
>but not now.
Yes, even now. What do you think /pol/ is partly about?
In 2010 /b/ attacked the Australia government for trying to censor the internet and OWS was a big subject.
Also talking about something isn't necessarily "activism". If some company executive makes a comment about something that will fuck over consumers, is it "activism" to say people should voice their discontent to that company? Is it "activism" to just talk about it here?
>>464299
>/pol/
can't you faggots false flag as something else? /pol/ can tank or deflect a lot of damage, true, but don't think it's your personal shield you can hide behind with your bullshit "activism" every time it backfires on you...
>>464299
>2010 /b/
You know that was six years ago not "even now"? And wasn't that led by Anonymous? which isn't the same as /b/ but had some people on /b/ be a part of it. Also a lot of the raiding shit they try on /pol/ gets deleted as well since you mentioned /pol/.
>Also talking about something isn't necessarily "activism"
While true in a normal case, this is 4chan. Even more so for things people get emotionally charged up for. It would be a lie to say things like gamergate didn't have elements that revolved around people doxing and asking to raid twitter and tumblr and shit. And unfortunately that is the kind of focus most of the threads ended up going as it gets more drama and hype out of it as people love "happenings", which left the real discussion to die in some ditch somehwere.
You can't even really trust the site to good out of the things it tries either example being when /v/ tried to some some kind of good with sending support to the WataMote mangaka and they ended up sending dick pics and shit. Only way to allow things would be to have mods babysit threads, but that is the reason why they were purged since moot went out and said it was so much hassle it was just easier to stop the discussion.
>>464315
I'm just pointing out that the idea of "activism" not being allowed on 4chan is pretty vague. I wasn't even part of GG.
Even m00t was lamenting how there was less effective activism on 4chan a few years ago.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2012/12/18/4chans-moot-laments-the-death-of-internet-culture/#4adf15c8d74d
>Perhaps something happened in the last year or two. “People are fatigued,” said Poole. “Last year was really remarkable, but if [any other bill like] SOPA had come out six months later, would there have been the same response?” Poole believes that average users of the Internet also don’t have the same level of energy for activism that they did five or even two years ago, simply because there are too many of them.
>In the mid-to-late-2000′s, it was easier to galvanize digital activists through online communities like 4chan and wider networks like Anonymous. As these communities have become bigger and more unwieldy, less exclusive, the more impassioned supporters for a free web are being drowned out by mainstream users who are not. As for any culture, the Internet is facing that longstanding problem of scale.
>>464323
>You know that was six years ago not "even now"
I was just bringing up prominent examples after 2007. The SOPA fight, and ShekelShoah are another two.
>Also a lot of the raiding shit they try on /pol/ gets deleted as well since you mentioned /pol/.
So it's not "activism" then, it's just "raids".
>>464335
>So it's not "activism" then, it's just "raids".
Way to ignore the rest of the post of why it ends up boiling down to that.
>>464335
Wow what revisionist history in this post.
First of all, don't pretend like ShekelShoah was welcomed or championed by the mods, or even by a majority of /pol/. Don't mistake mods for not cracking down on that cancerous twitter crusade until the 210th thread. That was apathy on their part, not an endorsement. Also what you call "the SOPA fight" amounted to moot telling people to call their congressman in the news announcements. That's it.
>>464336
It boils down to:
>people shouldn't be allowed to talk about something because maybe probably they'll raid someone at some point
>"raiding" possibly meaning "posting a link to some site so the posters in the thread might go to that link and maybe post things there"
>also some people send dick pics on the internet
It's hilarious how you people talk about "moralfags" and "activists" but you act like them. Except your activism and moralfaggotry is about preventing certain discussion on 4chan and fighting against such serious business as "internet harassment", "raiding" and "sending dick pics".
>>464338
>telling people to call their congressman in the news announcements.
He still allowed people to talk about it on every board for weeks, not even just /pol/ or /b/, and do """activism""". Just like he let all the threads about journalism on /v/ for years before they started being called "GG" in 2014.
Nothing good has ever come out of obsession with individuals on 4chan, except possibly in so far as that individual was a media creator discussing said media.
>>464343
I like how you can't deny that most of the activism here doesn't devolve in to that shit, but instead just try to pull the "stop trying to oppress the discussion" argument. That is the problem, the discussion ends up always turning to that shit just because that is how it is here on 4chan, so is best to just keep that shit away. If you want to discuss it go to reddit or something as they actually have the moderation team active and willing to stop that shit which allows the real discussion to happen.
>inb4 freespeech on 4chan argument
Pic related.
>Just like he let all the threads about journalism on /v/ for years before they started being called "GG" in 2014.
Those weren't activism threads, they were just people saying that the ethics are fishy and that review scores were rigged. There was no effort or motion to do anything about it at that time other than a few threads here and there that would voice a complaint. Then came the whole 5 guys thing and then the whole thing turned to shit with people trying to dox everyone related.
>>464358
So many lies and so much retardation. People like you make it hard to believe that the babies who are still butthurt about this aren't all from tumblr.or reddit.
There really is no reason it should be banned anymore at this point. Most GG supporters left the movement because they didn't want anything to do with it. GG in itself is pretty much a empty shell, its mostly used as a symbol now, not a movement. People who still keep using the "GooberGate" insult are just triggered whiny little brats
>>464414
>Most GG supporters left the movement because they didn't want anything to do with it
and should never be able to live it down
>>464452
Indeed fellow anonymous poster... those GoodooGubdeloo should be reminded about how they said bad things about journalists... We Do Not Forgive, We Do Not Forget...
