User talk:Player 03

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


New logo large.png Welcome to RationalWiki, Player 03!

Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards!

Tell us how you found RationalWiki here!

If you are interested in contributing:

A bit belated, but hey! FuzzyCatTomato (talk/stalk) 00:27, 20 April 2015 (UTC)


Because of your edits to and time on the wiki, Autopatrolled has been added to your user rights. This lets you bypass most of the abuse filters, bypass the CAPTCHA, and edit more frequently. If you have questions, bleat ask away.

We hope you enjoy your newfound POWER — and these external tools:

Locked page (Talk:Gamergate)[edit]

So I'll post my responses to your comments now while the page is locked down.

  1. So she only responds to you and constantly pushes my responses to you and her further down so she need not pay it any heed. She's admitted as such.
  2. The "ethical violation" being referred to is questionable at best as well. "People have a mailing list" isn't an ethical violation. Journalists personally knowing their subjects isn't an ethical violation either as it's expected for a journalist and their subject to set up some sort of raport.
  3. Also, I can explain the issue of Gamergate's size. They're a minority in size compared to the whole population that plays video games. They're at best 40k people, if Reddit's /r/KotakuInAction's subscriber count is to be believed (no knowing how many deleted accounts or sockpuppet accounts are blowing up that number). In comparison, /r/Gaming has 7.8 million subscribers. The power of Gamergate, as a whole, comes down to the volume of their echo chamber. They're statistically insignificant, but they're a textbook vocal minority (when it comes to opinions).

Ryūlóng (琉竜) 07:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I believe you about #1. I just like to consider alternatives whenever possible; it's a healthy habit (metaphorically speaking). I kind of suspect she's doing it because you come off as an antagonist, whereas I seem to be considering her points. Doesn't justify it, but it's entirely natural.
For #2, I don't actually believe the "ethical violation" thing, I just don't feel like arguing that particular point. Even assuming Sarah was right, it would only be a small issue, and Gamergate would still be making mountains out of molehills.
I'm not sure I believe that all (or even a majority) of them are subscribed to KiA, but then you also have to subtract out the sockpuppets and anyone who isn't really on board. (Maybe they subscribed to "keep tabs on the enemy," I don't know.) But it's probably the right order of magnitude, so 10k-100k sounds like a good range. Even 100k is, as you said, a tiny fraction of gamers in general, but then, even 10k would be enough to require statistics. (I've mostly given the "statistics" thing up as a pipe dream at this point.) Player 03 (talk) 07:45, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
100k is overestimating. The twitter block tool is only at around 10k. So we're talking insignificant in numbers, but loud and obnoxious nonetheless.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 07:49, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I should probably look these things up myself, but it's so much easier to make the claim and then let you contradict it. :P Player 03 (talk) 07:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm only speaking from personal experience. Also there's another nutjob on the loose at Talk:Anita Sarkeesian if you're up to the challenge.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 08:25, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I'll need to discuss Anita if I want to write about Gamergate, so I'll take a look tomorrow. Player 03 (talk) 08:31, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
IrrationalWiki is farting up as storm at Talk:Feminism too.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 10:17, 15 June 2015 (UTC)