@stryker1121: Exactly. And look at that, it's one of the members of the corrupt games press pointing out actual corruption. Not GamerGate. Surprise, surprise.
Milkman's forum posts
Is it normal for enthusiast press to have some sort of ethics policy to follow? I'm a journalist, been in the business for 15 years (freelancing now), and my old newspaper adopted an ethics policy about six or years after I was hired. It followed SPJ guidelines, with addendums concentrating on conflicts of interest, like having a political sign in your yard. We weren't even allowed to sign petitions of any sort, which twisted some knickers. Has GB ever put a stance out there on this topic, officially or otherwise?
Every site I've written for has had a policy (which mostly mimics SPJ guidelines). Not all of them are public. I've actually seen a lot of people saying GG might go away if sites would "post an ethics policy and stick to it," but Polygon has a link to their ethics policy at the bottom of every review and they've remained one of GG's primary targets regardless. (Joystiq is another site that comes to mind with a detailed policy that's online.)
Did polygon have that before Ben Kuchera covered depression quest without saying anything about supporting her through Patreon? Was Kotaku's in place before Patricia wrote about a bunch of Anna Enthropy's stuff without mentioning they were roommates?
I know someone will tell me that it doesn't matter but let's look at this realistically. Depression Quest (and all of Zoe Quinn's games) are free. All of Anna Anthropy's games are free. 99% of people who play games have never heard of, much less played, any of these games. I can not fathom why anyone would get worked about these games receiving allegedly "corrupt" promotion. It's insane. Who cares?
@stryker1121: Wow... are you serious? Coincidence would be a couple man, but 12? Think about it, you're telling me 12 completely different people all decided, on their own, to essentially write the exact same article, the exact same day linking to the exact same blog post? Some of the leaked JournoGamePros emails showed a lot of them (not GiantBomb) talking about how to pissed they were about ZQ's personal life being exposed and how to deal with it and how to respond. Look, you're entitled to your own opinion, but I'm entitled to mine as well. I'm just saying look a little deeper. Am I connecting dots that really aren't there? Some might say that, but if it turns out I'm wrong someday I'm more then willing to admit it.
Besides what everyone else has already said, the idea that all these games sites wrote the same "gamers are dead" articles isn't even true.
Rusev (and everyone involved in the feud, really) needs to change the way they're pacing their dialogue. They basically invite stupid, abusive chants by taking five minute breaks between every... "WHAT"... word.
See, I disagree. Harshly. Sternly. Fervently.
Crowd participation is sorely lacking in a lot of areas with the current WWE product. People go to wrestling to have a good time and not to sit on their hands. They want to cheer, boo, shout and even sing along with wrestlers. Even if you personally find "What?" annoying, the crowd enjoys it.
Seriously. Go watch Seth Rollins stumble through a promo about how he bought in or how he's going to be world champion someday and then watch Enzo Amore and Big Cass have a room of 500 people eating out of their hand because they have familiar, crowd-friendly stuff that is easy to memorize and easy to participate with. One of the big things missing in wrestling for awhile now is the lack of audience participation. Career Midcarder Jack Swagger looks like he's one of the most over guys in the company because he slaps his chest and says "WE, THE PEOPLE." Daniel Bryan has the "YES!" chant. Give the crowd something they can do with you and you'll find that, slowly but surely, their support will grow. It's all about connecting with the audience, and too few wrestlers in the WWE are allowed to do that.
I kind of agree and disagree. On one hand, you're right. Crowd participation is great with people like Enzo and Bryan and it's something that's probably missing a lot from the current WWE. But at the same time, in the right situation, I can appreciate when a crowd just shuts up. You saw it a lot with Punk's promos and obviously, Rusev is no Punk but I think there's value in both whipping the crowd in a frenzy and enrapturing a crowd to actually listen to what you're saying. And with the "What?" chants in particular, it always sent the message to me of "we don't care about this." I don't think those chants are helping Rusev connect with the audience. You could swap him out with anyone else and still get those same chants.