patrickklepek's forum posts

#1 Posted by patrickklepek (3522 posts) -

Wait a minute: Giant Bomb contributions can get on Worth Reading now? I'd better get to work on that "Objectively Good' blog I've been considering writing.

Yes! I'd like to highlight more from the community. If you have something to share, PM me.

#2 Edited by patrickklepek (3522 posts) -

@julius said:

That's a great idea. Maybe I'll look into that as my Chrome extension project instead of the other idea I discussed earlier.

Part of the point of saying that the discussion doesn't need to be right there in the Bombcast thread is that it's on the internet, not in a physical space. You have an audience of very internet-savvy people who view a great many different parts of even your own website. Fracturing things off a URL away is only in the slightest of ways going to affect peoples' ability to seek out that content if they want to, provided, as @rorie pointed out, that the moderators have the tools to easily do so.

Part of what we need to do in the future is set a tone for the comments when the content--podcast, article, whatever--goes live. That didn't happen with the Bombcast this week. Had we nipped a certain style of commentary in the bud, we wouldn't have eliminated where the thread ended up going, but we would have been able to let people know what wasn't going to be tolerated. (Or taken to PM, where more useful, thoughtful conversations can happen.) Instead, a set of criticisms lead to another set, and locking the thread was the only way to cool it down. Rorie and the other mods are aware of this, and part of the burden is one us to make sure we're active and consistent.

#3 Edited by patrickklepek (3522 posts) -

@julius said:

@patrickklepek: I understand what you're saying, but I feel like having these complex discussions in only somewhat-related threads like the Bombcast or Dan/Jason hiring threads leads to both sides getting called out and then afterwards feeling hurt and like they don't want to talk. Having a space where people aren't upset at them simply because they're in the way of other discussions might just be beneficial to both parties, and right now the alternative to that is bogged down moderation and a locked Bombcast thread. Who does the current situation help in terms of discussion?

Some of that is heightened by the way our comments are displayed. If we had something like Shacknews, for example, in which comments within a topic were threaded, so that people could have individual discussions about a part of the podcast, it wouldn't derail the entire thread. We don't have that kind of technology, though, so what ends up happening is that only a few bad apples end up spoiling the whole bunch--the topic eats itself. Giant Bomb isn't unique in that aspect. That's a problem in all sorts of places on the Internet with comments.

You're right that this hasn't lead to particularly fruitful discussion, but saying "hey, go have that discussion over there" seems dismissive.

#4 Edited by patrickklepek (3522 posts) -

@julius said:

The internet is only as powerful as we allow it to be. "I won't concede something so powerful to such a vocal minority that doesn't deserve it," says Patrick Klepek in the wrap-up of his PAX East talk on internet bullying alongside Zoe Quinn. In the talk, Klepek spoke of how we should vocalize our approval of friendly posters and also vocalize our disapproval of unkind posters, something that one could find is already happening in most comment sections. Klepek concludes that this tactic could help make online bullying "socially unacceptable," which misses the point. First, bullying people online is already socially unacceptable -- it's certainly not something you would speak of to a family member or a prospective mate or even a stranger. Also, the conversations on social topics that Patrick himself likes to talk about, and that generate a lot of bullying, are also broadly socially unacceptable. Would you chew out a stranger who said something that doesn't agree with the current state of internet-gender-politics issues? I mean, maybe you would, but the other party involved would not be very receptive, and it would be very easy to see it as socially unacceptable.

We're talking about the broader trend of tone and topic policing. Dismissing a discussion out of hand isn't bullying, but it does set a particular tone that loudly says "please stay out of this discussion if you don't agree, you aren't welcome." When that snowballs, why would someone with a dissenting viewpoint want to come in and make an argument? Often, I end up privately hearing from members of the Giant Bomb community who do want to hear about these topics, thanking me for making them a part of the site, even if they are afraid to publicly vocalize their support. Vocalizing support makes you a target, and not everyone wants to fight the good fight. I don't blame 'em. Part of what I'm suggesting here, and it might not come across as clearly as I was hoping, is to make spaces safer for people to express their opinions.

Giant Bomb's community is big, diverse, and growing really, really rapidly. We're happy about that, could not be more excited about that, but we also need to make sure those people want to stay and participate. It's the only that Giant Bomb continues to be amazing--and changes.

Change is weird, hard, and often frustrating, but we're usually better for it, even if it doesn't feel that way at the time. It's not 2008 anymore.

It's possible for Giant Bomb to talk about topic X without losing its identity in the process. We, as staff members, are changing, too. As a site that reflects the people who created it, that seems like a pretty natural evolution, even if there are some bumps in the road.

I've certainly tried to pick my battles. Some were better fought and argued than others, but I've always tried to keep this principle in mind: honesty. The authenticity of Giant Bomb is central to its success, and I've kept that in mind when bringing up topics, even ones that divide us.

#5 Posted by patrickklepek (3522 posts) -

He also didnt have another niece, that was his nephew. I'm gonna just put this down to you typing furiously Patrick due to your hatred of Aiden lol

Personally I didnt have the issues you had but to be honest I never really thought all that hard about it either. I enjoyed the game enough but I'll admit I never connected with Aiden at all.

Yeah, just fixed that. Thanks!

#6 Posted by patrickklepek (3522 posts) -

"but the infamous video game crash of 1983 forced a major split that divided the company"

Great to finally have some sense where all the different versions of Atari have come from, but I wish you had gone into some detail as to why exactly the crash would have caused a split.

I know you (Patrick) were trying to keep it lean, but to anyone who wants to take a deeper look at it, there is a whole lot more to the story particularly after the Infogrames buyout. I tried to make sense of it all, but there isn't any real point to it, and I went cross-eyed.. Infogrames bought out Atari Inc and made Atari Group private, including renaming all of Infogrames regional divisions into Atari (e.g. Atari Melbourne, Atari UK, Atari Nordic, etc), except for Atari europe which it sold to Namco Bandai. Yea, it's ridiculous.

I spent more than an hour trying to make sense of what happened to Atari after the crash. It easily could have been its own story! But I tried to keep it limited to a highlight real. The amount of buyouts is crazy, though.

#7 Edited by patrickklepek (3522 posts) -

@freedomtown said:

Why would Patrick say this is frustrating? It is only frustrating if you think this is some sort of game, which it isn't.

Honestly, this really shouldn't even be on a video-game site. The whole exchange came off as horrible because we have someone making this out to be more then it is, asking questions which the creator doesn't want to answer.

Even the creator is kinda like, "look man this isn't even a video game, why are you asking me these questions"

I don't think that's fair at all. He announced Mountain at a video game press conference called Horizon, and Double Fine helped release Mountain.

#8 Edited by patrickklepek (3522 posts) -

O'Reilly should release an update that changes the title to add the word Dew under the word Mountain and instead of a mountain, you rotate around a Mountain Dew can. I'd buy that.

#9 Posted by patrickklepek (3522 posts) -

And he did it with keyboard controls, madness.


#10 Posted by patrickklepek (3522 posts) -

@mrsmiley said:

@patrickklepek if you pre-order from amazon, you don't pay a dime until it is shipped. most games have reviews out a few days before launch, which allows you to see if it's something you really want to spend money on. if it looks like crap, just cancel the preorder. i actually pre-ordered destiny WAAAY back in the day just so i could get into the beta to test it out. if i don't like it after playing the beta, i can cancel the pre-order. no harm, no foul. :)

You, my friend, have figured this out.