533 Comments
Posted by Bipa

I see a lot of comments saying how awful this particular comment section is, but I'm not seeing it this time. Just a few people expressing their opinions, I don't see anyone saying anything particularly hateful. If this is the level of discussion that people consider "vile", "sad" or "hateful" then this community may be heading in a direction I'm not comfortable with. There has been some horribly hateful things said in comments and the forums before, but this time I think people are over-reacting

Posted by BeyondStrange

@cronodyne: Listen to the podcast before you say stuff like that and put a foot in your mouth. The discussion of gender issues is limited and she is far from militant about it. In the same vein as your accusations, you can care and be an advocate about this stuff without being super preachy. Samantha Kalman is definitely both of those things.

Posted by Resmi

I really enjoyed the programming talk toward the start of the episode. Thanks, Samantha.

Edited by BeyondStrange

So, do they actually talk about Harvest Moon on this podcast unironically? I hope this is something my ears will partake in soon. That would be the best thing.

Posted by benpicko
Posted by FinalDasa

@bipa said:

I see a lot of comments saying how awful this particular comment section is, but I'm not seeing it this time. Just a few people expressing their opinions, I don't see anyone saying anything particularly hateful. If this is the level of discussion that people consider "vile", "sad" or "hateful" then this community may be heading in a direction I'm not comfortable with. There has been some horribly hateful things said in comments and the forums before, but this time I think people are over-reacting

Some of the worst ones have been removed. I think the confusion in the comments comes from an early comment implying this episode was politically charged since Samantha was on it. More comments said they would skip this week's because of who was on.

To everyone else who's listening they know almost no charged or controversial discussion occurs. They discuss Gaymer X, praise how open and great the community is, and move on to games. In fact so far, as I'm listening, it's been 95% game talk.

So we see this group of comments completely writing off this episode and the guest is disheartening. They'd rather believe this episode is full of "militant feminism" than listen to it themselves. As a fellow user and member of the community I find this silly and sad.

Moderator
Posted by billyok

I came here solely to ask Dan to do a Rocket: Robot on Wheels Encyclopedia Bombastica. That game was an insane physics jankfest back in its day. I can't even imagine how it looks through a 2014 lens. Please find out for science.

Positivity, people!

Posted by Sparky_Buzzsaw

New exercise - before you post something, take five deep breaths, then calmly ask yourself if you're about to either add genuine constructive comments to a conversation or not. If you are being overly negative to staff, guests, users, or are acting like a jerk in general, your comments will be deleted. So relax. Listen to the Bombcast. Or don't. But please, be civil either way.

Moderator
Posted by CustomOtto
Posted by boxing_hobo

Just got to say drew was on fire this podcast

Edited by jimmyfenix

@sparky_buzzsaw: Thanks Sparky!!

Enjoying the Bombcast so far Sentris looks interesting.

Posted by Rorie

Guys, keep in mind that anyone being a jerk in these comments, or anywhere else, will see their comments deleted or themselves being moderated. What constitutes "being a jerk" is left to the ultimate discretion of the moderators.

Staff
Edited by KirkDouglas

Dan expressed his love for 'Night Moves' the other day on twitter, so that guy has a special place in my heart. I'm just going to throw out to Dan that Mainstreet is also a great Seger song.

#SEGERFEVER

Posted by BeyondStrange

@boxing_hobo: I don't think drew gets enough credit for his pointed wit and a kind of calm craziness. He is the Fonz of the Bombcast... both pre AND post-shark. So, cool and insane.

Posted by hkr

Samantha is awesome and Sentris is going to be great. You should get in on the developer builds here, it is well worth it.

Posted by Julius

@rorie: No disrespect, but I really hope there is moderation on both sides of the argument. Why do we have comments calling people "bad people" because they're choosing not to listen, or saying that others "don't deserve to listen" because of their opinion?

Posted by Resmi
Posted by Bipa

@rorie said:

Guys, keep in mind that anyone being a jerk in these comments, or anywhere else, will see their comments deleted or themselves being moderated. What constitutes "being a jerk" is left to the ultimate discretion of the moderators.

Fair enough, as long as "being a jerk" doesn't actually mean "has a different opinion", but good job removing the actual shit nice and quick.

Posted by Milkman

@gasparnolasco: I defer to Jeff.

http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/letter-from-the-editor-07-02-2014/1100-4948/

Giant Bomb is, by design, an inclusionary place. When we originally built the site back in 2008, it was originally thought of as a place where our audience could contribute in meaningful ways. Or, if they like, they can just sit back and enjoy our various productions. When I say "inclusionary," I mean exactly that. No person should be excluded from our site. The fact that some people have been resistant to people based on their gender, religion, race, creed, or anything else like that is not acceptable. Even less acceptable are people who make their exclusionary beliefs known (repeatedly and often aggressively) and then attempt to say that those viewpoints are valid and, thus, must be allowed for us to remain inclusionary. That is bad logic. That is a bullying tactic, and that style of intimidation will not be tolerated.

Part of being inclusionary is allowing this discussion to take place. If that's an issue for you or anyone else, I suggest you take it up with the staff.

Posted by NMRTech
@julius said:

@rorie: No disrespect, but I really hope there is moderation on both sides of the argument. Why do we have comments calling people "bad people" because they're choosing not to listen, or saying that others "don't deserve to listen" because of their opinion?

Because it's a position the moderators agree with. Moderation of different opinions is their prerogative. He said so himself - "What constitutes "being a jerk" is left to the ultimate discretion of the moderators."

Posted by Keynwar

@cronodyne: @cronodyne:

You might want to look up "militant" or start listening to the podcast, because Samantha seems to be a pretty nice lady. Of course, you'd have to really try listening to what she's saying instead of just assuming that she's a "militant feminist" (wherever those are supposed to be hiding in this industry) because she kind of likes GaymerX2 and disagrees with you on several subjects.

Might wanna try that out.

Really liked the change of pace and themes for this podcast, keep up the great work! And please never, ever let comments like cronodyne's bring you down.

Posted by Rorie

@julius said:

@rorie: No disrespect, but I really hope there is moderation on both sides of the argument. Why do we have comments calling people "bad people" because they're choosing not to listen, or saying that others "don't deserve to listen" because of their opinion?

We moderate anything that we deem to be in violation of the community rules. That includes a wide swath of inflammatory arguments. If you see something that you think is offensive, feel free to flag it.

Staff
Edited by DannyHibiki

Apparently, I've just completely missed something because I'm pretty deep into this episode and I completely fail to see what's making people so angry...

Well...there is one thing: HARVEST MOON 64 WAS AMAZING.

RIGHT ON!!!

Posted by MasterBrief

@gasparnolasco: This is something I've been thinking a lot and I don't think they should be dominating like it has been but that is what off topic is for right? Stuff not game related? Everything just goes political and devolves into this pointless arguing we have seen for weeks. Really sad to see this happening honestly.

Posted by hippocrit

@babychoochoo: I think some people are pre-worried before they listen. I haven't heard anything crazy. Samantha is just a regular person who loves games and happens to be tuned into a section of the culture that gets people heated.

Edited by mrfluke

@bipa said:

I see a lot of comments saying how awful this particular comment section is, but I'm not seeing it this time. Just a few people expressing their opinions, I don't see anyone saying anything particularly hateful. If this is the level of discussion that people consider "vile", "sad" or "hateful" then this community may be heading in a direction I'm not comfortable with. There has been some horribly hateful things said in comments and the forums before, but this time I think people are over-reacting

Some of the worst ones have been removed. I think the confusion in the comments comes from an early comment implying this episode was politically charged since Samantha was on it. More comments said they would skip this week's because of who was on.

To everyone else who's listening they know almost no charged or controversial discussion occurs. They discuss Gaymer X, praise how open and great the community is, and move on to games. In fact so far, as I'm listening, it's been 95% game talk.

So we see this group of comments completely writing off this episode and the guest is disheartening. They'd rather believe this episode is full of "militant feminism" than listen to it themselves. As a fellow user and member of the community I find this silly and sad.

thank you for this information, i already see im going to be labeled terrible, but i was planning to skip a good portion of this weeks podcast. good to hear its majority game talk.

Posted by Borp

I don't really care for the "serious" video game talk. I'm not saying that it's not important to talk about that stuff but it's not why i come to the bombcast. And it's why i don't care for a lot of the stuff Patrick is doing. Anyways, it still seems like a good bombcast. It's fun to hear Brad host!

Posted by CustomOtto

@kakak120: you're literally complaining about them having a woman on the bombcast

Posted by Rorie

@cronodyne: If you want to discuss issues other than the content on this podcast, discuss them elsewhere. The issue you're referring to is off-topic here.

And while we don't discuss moderations publicly, I guarantee you that we moderate people with a wide swath of opinions on social matters every day.

Staff
Posted by mmorpgal

Did they record the Audio somewhere different this

WWeek, the audio sounds almost as if they were in a convention hall or something...maybe I'm crazy :s.

Edited by BlaineBlaine

@julius:

It'd be nice. I have no problem with lbgt folk. My sister is gay, married and I love my sister-in-law with all my heart. And I have a dislike of the "social justice" language. It makes me cringe the same way business men make me cringe with "brand synergy" and "core competency". Doesn't make me anti-capitalist. Just don't like phrases like "brand aware" used earnestly.

Edited by ManlyPup

I guess I have been fortunate in the respect that I have never read a Giant Bomb comment section that has made me shake my head more than this one. Those of you making sure we all know you're skipping the Bombcast this week, are saying more about yourselves than you are showing your dissatisfaction with the topics and guest.

Posted by GasparNolasco

@milkman said:

@gasparnolasco: I defer to Jeff.

http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/letter-from-the-editor-07-02-2014/1100-4948/

Giant Bomb is, by design, an inclusionary place. When we originally built the site back in 2008, it was originally thought of as a place where our audience could contribute in meaningful ways. Or, if they like, they can just sit back and enjoy our various productions. When I say "inclusionary," I mean exactly that. No person should be excluded from our site. The fact that some people have been resistant to people based on their gender, religion, race, creed, or anything else like that is not acceptable. Even less acceptable are people who make their exclusionary beliefs known (repeatedly and often aggressively) and then attempt to say that those viewpoints are valid and, thus, must be allowed for us to remain inclusionary. That is bad logic. That is a bullying tactic, and that style of intimidation will not be tolerated.

Part of being inclusionary is allowing this discussion to take place. If that's an issue for you or anyone else, I suggest you take it up with the staff.

It's an inclusionary place to talk about videogames. With personality based entertainment. If I want to hear about gender issues I can check it on the appropriate column on polygon or the escapist, or even take a deep breath and dive into tumblr.

GB will hardly have the deepest discussion on the matter.

Posted by Julius

@nmrtech said:
@julius said:

@rorie: No disrespect, but I really hope there is moderation on both sides of the argument. Why do we have comments calling people "bad people" because they're choosing not to listen, or saying that others "don't deserve to listen" because of their opinion?

Because it's a position the moderators agree with. Moderation of different opinions is their prerogative. He said so himself - "What constitutes "being a jerk" is left to the ultimate discretion of the moderators."

@rorie would you say that saying "Wow. You're a bad person" to another member who decided not to listen is a position you agree with, like nmrtech is asserting?

Edited by Rorie

@blaineblaine said:

@julius:

It'd be nice. I have no problem with lbgt folk. My sister is gay, married and I love my sister-in-law with all my heart. And I have a dislike of the "social justice" language. It makes me cringe the same way business men make me cringe with "brand synergy" and "core competency". Doesn't make me anti-capitalist. Just don't like phrases like "brand aware" used earnestly.

Usage of pejorative terms intended to dismiss or insult, like calling people neckbeards or SJWs or redpills or hipsters or what have you, is not appreciated and will lead to moderation.

Furthermore, any "I don't see why people need to talk about this stuff" or "guess I'm skipping this bombcast" comments will be considered dismissive and deleted. If you don't want to join discussion about whatever's discussed in this podcast, then don't.

Staff
Posted by DansMoM

Dan...if you ever get the chance to meet The Rock..you better invite me along!!!

Posted by FinalDasa

@mrfluke said:

@finaldasa said:

@bipa said:

I see a lot of comments saying how awful this particular comment section is, but I'm not seeing it this time. Just a few people expressing their opinions, I don't see anyone saying anything particularly hateful. If this is the level of discussion that people consider "vile", "sad" or "hateful" then this community may be heading in a direction I'm not comfortable with. There has been some horribly hateful things said in comments and the forums before, but this time I think people are over-reacting

Some of the worst ones have been removed. I think the confusion in the comments comes from an early comment implying this episode was politically charged since Samantha was on it. More comments said they would skip this week's because of who was on.

To everyone else who's listening they know almost no charged or controversial discussion occurs. They discuss Gaymer X, praise how open and great the community is, and move on to games. In fact so far, as I'm listening, it's been 95% game talk.

So we see this group of comments completely writing off this episode and the guest is disheartening. They'd rather believe this episode is full of "militant feminism" than listen to it themselves. As a fellow user and member of the community I find this silly and sad.

thank you for this information, i already see im going to be labeled terrible, but i was planning to skip a good portion of this weeks podcast. good to hear its majority game talk.

Eh, you have a right (of course) to curate and enjoy what you'd like to. Personally I don't think it's wrong to want to listen to your favorite gaming podcast just discuss their usual nonsense and games. But to entirely reject this episode because of who is on (not because of what she says or does) is kind of shortsighted in my opinion. I will say if anything, check out her game Sentris (you can download a demo free I believe) cause it's fun!

Moderator