Letter from the Editor - 07/02/2014

Keep on keeping on, Giantbomb.

I bet that's very true for a lot of people (myself included, admittedly). But when people who speak out when it comes to these issues are met with rape/death threats and general internet bullshit and then this sort of article has to be posted, it's not hard for me to see why more people don't speak out.

Well said! It's sad that it needed to be said, but I still believe 99% of the community is alright and 1% assholes can make a lot of noise on the internet.

Thanks Jeff. I didn't see anything nasty but this community has a history of bullying and aggression and it's sad to see.

@mister_snig: Very true, (thanks for the article) but these deeper issues are often ignored and whilst many people say they care about under representation, some are only interested whilst the controversy around a specific thing rises then forget about it. It seems fewer people are interested enough when it comes to representation on a larger scale. :(

That's not it at all.

Allow me to speak from personal experience. Growing up, I was bullied at school pretty much constantly from first grade to the end of high school. That includes verbal abuse in addition to the occasional beating. And it came from all quarters; boys, girls, upperclassmen, underclassmen, people who I knew, people I didn't know. It sucked. And you know what made it worse? Lashing back at them. Because that's what they wanted to see. I was left a paranoid wreck by the end of high school because I honestly didn't know who at school I could trust. I only ever felt safe being away from everyone else because even when punishments were doled out, I would still have to face those people again. And sometimes my lashing out only succeeded in getting myself in trouble.

That's where the whole mentality of taking the high road comes from. Responding to shit with shit only leads to more shit, and it'll probably get sprayed right back in your face.

Here's another example of something I had to deal with, right here on Giant Bomb. A number of years ago, there was a user that, for whatever reason, picked me as a target to harass, going so far as to stalk my profile, post insults and threats against me in my profile wall, and engaged in various other actions up to and including photoshopping my head into an image meant specifically to mock me.

Did all of this upset me? Yes it did. It was quite unnerving in fact. But I did my best not to play into his hands by not responding to him directly in anger. When it became evident that he wouldn't stop, I contacted the moderators and he was banned. Then he made a second account to spam that ridiculous photoshop across as much of the forums as he could before he was given a full IP ban. That guy was an abusive lunatic. But because the moderators were able to act, I haven't had to deal with him since.

Responding to him with anger wouldn't have helped my situation at all, just like responding with anger back when I was in school did nothing to help. But the main difference here, on the website, is that the moderators have tools that can remove truly problem users from the community permanently. That is why I recommend not responding with anger. That is why I recommend taking such incidents straight to the moderators. If that "proper" action is somehow insulting, I have no idea what else to tell you.

This is a really good comment, and for that I applaud you.

@sweep: Fair enough. Just because I'm almost done with my drink and ready to stumble home doesn't mean the whole bar has to be on last call. I've been pretty impressed with how open and willing you and Rorie and the rest of the mods have been in this whole process, by the way. Excellent work.

Man does anyone else picture a salt and pepper Jeff with a real sharp looking tracksuit sitting behind a desk typing this in an office with blinds and old file cabinets around him, like an old school editor-in-chief vibe?

On a real note, I'm glad more people are taking the time out to address the outright bile that people have become accustomed to seeing be spewed on social media and on boards. It's really unsettling to see that there are people that think that shit is ok. Freedom of speech wasn't intended with the intent to hurl shit at each other verbally.

GLHB <>

No. Not any more than Glenn Beck's questions are asked in good faith.

And no. This isn't a tone argument. This isn't even remotely equivalent either. If you want to read arguments about why the troll is wrong, there's plenty of links posted everywhere. This is somebody telling a troll to get stuffed. Stop defending trolls.

I don't know that I'd say that those snarky, passive aggressive tweets were really "discussing" inequality. More like trying to rile up their twitter followers to shame Giant Bomb because they hired a man.

The problem with just saying "we need more of you!" is that a lack of representation in a field really does have an effect on people. When girls and kids of color watch TV, their self-esteem is lowered, while white boys see an increase in self-esteem. This might not be exactly the same example, but it speaks to the effects of not being represented in media. It basically comes down to a subconscious feeling of exclusion.

@crushed: So respond to extreme outbursts on either side with peaceful language and topic over substantive. That seems reasonable and good advice in general. People on any side if they're acting over the line tend to be completely willing to hang themselves with their own rope. Good advice.

So, on a related note, for a more personal tack I worry because as someone who wants to see the future of feminism healthy, I feel the need to caution people against extreme outbursts that's going to make the movement look bad (or at least be pointed at as ammunition for the other side.) Yet if I say "Hey, maybe tone down the assumptions and accusations against these people you don't know?" I feel I'm going to be met with further outburst, which (I think) is further damaging to the movement as a whole. (Or be seen as opposition, which doubly sucks.) Any advice there?

And this is why Giant Bomb will always be the best. Keep on the good work guys!

@dhomochevsky:

You're right about one thing: there is no such thing as reverse racism.

@shingro: Well, what I find helpful is, when a person is discussing inequality, you can try and acknowledge that they're angry and then move on by continuing to discuss the inequality. Somehow in these discussions, there always seems to be a trend of people seeing a woman/LGBT person/person of color talking about inequality, and then the subject of the discussion always shifting to judging that person's behavior and attitude and personal life and lecturing them on how to act "properly" as if that's the real important thing to discuss here.

You'll first need to send me this post card with your name, address, and a check and/or money order for $24.95.

i love this place and i love you guys.

The GB community is really the only one that I interact with online. I think it is great there are not many but you do still find the odd person that thinks "you are cool! You must think they same way as me... What do you mean its not cool to shout at and or threaten people that are different to me?!". All I can say is that these people should be beaten with the ban hammer.

@metallicsheep:

Protip: there is no such thing as reverse racism only racism. Second you are “criticizing” them there is no mistaking that, but your criticism shows you prejudice against a group of people because of their gender and race. That somehow sense the two who were hired are white it’s a bad thing for the website or that they should not have been considered for hire because of their gender is prejudice even if it is your criticism.

Keep being fuckin' rad Jeff.

I believe in Giant Bomb.

@crushed: I can understand the problem, but what is your solution. If someone "Slips up" and vents saying horrible things, being irrational and savage against a target that doesn't deserve it based on this history of bad experiences, what is the right thing to do? For people seeing it and for that person?

I usually think it's a silly-ass sentiment when I see it expressed by others on other message boards, but it's worth using here:

I would "like" this a thousand times if I could.

Well put, thanks Jeff.

The problem is that marginalized people, when they get angry, aren't usually getting angry at just one person; they're getting upset at an entire lifetime's worth of people (usually people in the majority) insulting, belittling, dehumanizing. At times, anger is their best weapon and only defense when it becomes overwhelming. "Slipping up" by venting that one time is now enough for many people to dismiss them as just "angry" and "hysterical" and "just as bad" as the people who think them as sub-human. When you step back and look at it that way, it comes off as if you're robbing them of that because you're not used to hearing people say angry things to you, even when they've had to put up with far, far worse for their whole lives.

To use it in a allegory, imagine you've been robbed and left for dead in the desert. It's dozens of miles away from the nearest town. No matter how far you walk, people keep passing you on horseback telling you to stop whining and walk more, or laughing at your plight, or slinging insults and threats at you. Then one guy rides up next to you and asks whether it's fair to give you a free ride on his horse when he bought and paid for that horse with his own money; isn't that a logical question? wouldn't that be true inequality?

Then he turns and rides off because he's not really interested in your answer, just like the last 20 guys who asked the same thing. When he turns around, he sees you flipping the bird at him.

"Wow, rude!" he says "You're stooping to the same level as the robbers and people insulting you! Here's a helpful tip, maybe don't get mad at people offering honest helpful advice! Both sides are at fault here! Not blaming you, but your nasty attitude is probably why you got robbed."

Thanks for the update Jeff. Hope the new moderation policies roll out smoothly.

Can we just go back to the 90s, when we talked about video games?

I really don't get the controversy surrounding the hiring of white people. Noe one should hire people based on sex or ethnicity, it should be who is best for the job, and if it so happens that the best person for the job is a white male then its silly to then ignore them based on gender and race to hire someone who is worse! Also I would imagine the demographic for game journalists is overwhelmingly white males, which gives less choice within other groups. So come on non whites and females, we need more of you!

Well written Jeff! Keep up the good work.

"Don't be a dick." How tough can it be?!

If that's proven (it is), I think it's fair to assume or at least look into the idea that sexism and racism are everywhere in the employment process. If women are less payed than men, there's probably a bigger issue at hand than just this only fact.

Sorry for misinterpreting what you said, though.

I did some gender studies myself, so I might have a different background than many here. I think gender bias is proven but the only way I can express that is by countless studies, philosophers and history lessons.

I could be proven wrong. What I find depressing here is that many seem to completly disregard the problems that were raised against Giant Bomb. While lot of hate came from other communities than Giant Bomb's, looking at the comments right here shows that many don't even want to engage with the critics. I would say that it is highly problematic and is totally part of our community, so acting like it all came from the outside is not the way to go.

I'm not saying I'm spotless here. I'm part of the same community, albeit not a very active member. It's on me like on any other to try to make it better.

How sad and embarrassing for those implicated that Jeff has to do something like this.

I don't know what all went on. But I'll continue to do everything in my power to keep GB within Vinnernet's "Good Internet." I really believe GB is good at its core, so it's a shame there's such intolerance and hostility trying to taint that.

I really have to give it up for the staff and mods for doing such a great job on the daily. It's been a while since I've said it, because frankly I take the smooth running tech/mod stuff for granted... it's just generally so damn good! But thanks! All y'all are awesome at making my experience better.

I just hope to see good, funny video content in the future, and that seems to be Jeff's main goal too with the hires. That's kinda always been the point of the site. They already have different opinions on games/genres.

Off the top of my head: Brad is the only one that likes MOBA's. Vinny cares a lot about story in games. Jeff cares about gameplay and mechanics the most. Patrick likes horror games and a few other genres the other guys don't like. Alex is the only one that will touch a sports game. Dan seems to like Nintendo stuff more than the other guys.

And if the diverse opinions people want are on social issues , then there are other sites for that. Going by the response to those Patrick articles, most people on here don't seem to care if a Dead Island pre-order statue is sexist because it's wearing a bikini or not,(though I'm not saying this type of article is something that's inherently bad) they want to watch funny videos about (mostly) recently released games. So, with that in mind Dan is perfect.

<>

UK! UK! U...ah fuck it, just doesn't work.

LOVE AND PEACE.

Totally man. Fuck those guys.

@rm082e: The "lack of politeness" stems from being ignored or harassed every single time they voice their concerns, no matter how considerate and civil their tone. This pressure has built up over a long period of time, the better part of a decade or more in some cases, and the past few weeks in particular have seen a lot of exchanges about these issues.

I'm too depressed and anxious to devote much time to this kind of conversation, but in the very limited time I started wading into these waters I've been met with an astonishing amount of vitriol simply for expressing my disappointment as non-confrontationally as possible. When my hands start shaking and my teeth start chattering, it gets hard to keep an even keel when I suspect the words I'm writing or saying are directed at a brick wall.

Is being infinitely patient with even the worst people the best strategy? Probably. But that's not a realistic expectation to hold anyone to when they're the target of personal attacks and threats. After a short time participating in these conversations, it becomes apparent that a disturbingly large percentage of people replying to you are more interested in anonymously throwing abuse your way (often with rather obvious dummy accounts) than honestly engaging you and trying to learn about your perspective.

I've had productive discussions with people who genuinely wanted to do that over the past couple of days, and that's felt great. I've also quickly learned of the relief that comes from cutting off contact with hateful people who believe defend the status quo at all costs is the most intelligent and noble goal possible.

<>

Well said Jeff!

It feels to me like because of the horrible people reacting to that (rape threats, etc) we can't even say "Hey, even if you want diversity, that's going too far and not a nice thing to say."

The ends to not justify the means. Enshrining any ideology, good or bad against criticism makes me feel incredibly uncomfortable. Is that wrong?

@crazylittle: The guy's comment history is irrelevant, as is whether or not she was being harassed by others. The guy had a valid counterargument to her post (I hesitate to even use the word "argument", cause there was no legitimate argument there), and got told off in just about the rudest fashion possible. That's both juvenile as hell, and unacceptable.

And the question posed does in fact have a legitimate premise, because Dan could have been the most qualified person. We weren't reviewing the applications, so we don't know, but it's a perfectly legitimate point to make. One should never assume that bias was involved in the hiring process solely on the basis that a "white guy" was hired. It is simply not sufficient evidence of bias, despite Samantha's thinly veiled accusations to the contrary.

So yes, everyone involved behaved extremely badly here. Samantha was way out of line, a bunch of anonymous internet tough guys were way out of line. Nobody in that situation acted the least bit like an adult.

@homelessbird: Ahh people acting the proverbial fool again. Some times this community can get real crazy!

Also, I think people should be able to criticise the site without being ripped into a thousand pieces. You can have legitimate concerns about things on the site and you should be allowed to express them. If you are a paying customer, love the site and feel you have something to contribute which you believe will make things better, there should be an avenue to express that.

I too have thought..."better not write that criticism" in fear of having my digital anus ripped out.

That's not really a fair analysis of Samantha Allens' criticism of the hiring, nor fair analysis of her telling trolls to go fuck themselves. The person she responded to wasn't asking sincere questions in good faith, and that's even more readily apparent if you read that guy's twitter history. This coupled with the large amount of threats she had already received lays out a clear path to curt replies. There's no reason at all why anyone should respond to low-effort/no-effort trolling with sincere and well-thought responses if they're only going to be met with more low effort trolling. That said, twitter's 140 characters isn't exactly the time or space to engage in well constructed debate.

The question posed was something to the tune of, "what if a white guy is the best qualified candidate" which is based on a false premise anyways, because it ignores the rolodex effect. People are more likely to hire people they already know, and if that's the "best qualification" then we'll never be as inclusive as we aspire to be. http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/JennFrank/20140327/214022/The_Rolodex.php

@brenderous: You confuse diversity of opinion with diversity of skin color and gender. The two can be related, sure, but not as directly linked as some people are claiming.

The bombcast has had clashes of radically different opinions, because they aren't as homogenous as it appears superficially. You can't really get as different as California, New York and North Carolina (now Minnesota as well? I forget), without going outside the States. Another option are people of a different economic class, but that gets a bit tougher.

But claiming they all think the same because they're white males begets the question - do all women think the same, do all black people have the same opinion? Or is it just one group that can be homogenized without repercussions.

The only thing they all share is love for video games and I hope the amazing job they do. (Maybe also being really liberal, with Vinny possibly having a drop of Libertarian in him)

@jonnyblunts: And my axe!

Good post Jeff, keeping it real.

As for the hires, it's Jeff's site, he can damn well hire who he likes. He doesn't require the consent of others.

My heart still belongs to Giant Bomb!