Gazz

Again, let me reword this: I'm just saying, if you excuse the issues in games media as being "it's just video games", then you can excuse the sexism and misogyny by also saying "it's just video games". Sure, it's just video games, but why settle for shittiness in video games when we can not? That works for both ethics in journalism, and issues of sexism and exclusion. I think you're missing my point, Gamergate suggests that it is fighting to eradicate nepotism and cronyism from video game journalism, but these are inherent human social constructs, we inherently favour people we like, it's part of our social make up. To attempt to eradicate it is as nebulous an idea as fighting a war on 'terror' or thinking that one day humankind will eradicate racism. It won't happen, these things, however socially unacceptable they are, will always exist in some form. I really don't think you can equate sexism, misogny and transphobia, ideologies that ruin people's lives and actively oppress minorities with someone giving a favourable review for someone they like's game, in a sea of video game review websites, magazines, Steam, Twitch, Youtube and all the other platforms that you yourself can review a game before you purchase it. Dead Island went platinum on preorders alone off of a trailer and that game was shit. Everyone is guilty of so called 'unethical' bias, if I were a game reviewer I might give a Crusader Kings III a better review that in deserves because of how much I played CK2. Conversely I might give the latest COD a shitty review because I hate that genre of game or I might give a bad review to WWE 2K16 becase CM Punk was once a dick to me at Comic-con. Absolutely impartial subjectivity is impossible. Gamergate is wasting it's time.

There's not an industry or area of life that doesn't suffer from nepotism, cronyism or inherent bias (look at politics for example), pretty much all of human civilisation is based on 'if I scratch your back, you'll scratch mine', why does anyone expect video game reviews to be any different?

Stoker's dream...

I think the ref screwed Man City last night, it should have been at least 9-0.

My question would be if Gamergate is so passionate about ethics in journalism, why are they so concerned with gaming journalism, literally the lowest rung on the journalistic ladder. Why aren't they storming the battlements of the major news channels or Rupert Murdoch's skull shaped volcano lair?

We donators don't have ethics so we will cheer and maybe club some baby seals in celebration.

The more ridiculous thing is since he wasn't booked, he can be retrospectively suspended. If he'd been booked, no action could be taken.

Everyone knows Austrians don't like Serbians...

It's reviewing video games, it just simply doesn't matter. There are far, far, far more important issues to deal with in the world than if some dude is getting a backhander to give a review. What score Kotaku gave 'Super Army Shooter XIV: War Bastards' is so unbelievably inconsequential to anything. Personally, I think it's a lot of people who have gone far too deep down the rabbit hole of 'Computer games put me as the all powerful centre of the universe and that is an addictive feeling' that when they come up for air and realise how utterly insignificant they are in the real world, they try and shout really loudly to make themselves seem important.

See ya next weekend lads, yeah?

I feel, since my treble today was Villa/Chelsea/Blackburn, I should apologise to you all. I should have cashed out after 20 minutes and doubled my money.

It's a bit like an online drop in game, everyone is rated 90, there's 2 defenders and 9 attackers, everyone's trying to score and do stepovers and there's no teamwork at all.

Ivanovic, the fox in the box!

ISIS

Less than zero

#BenAffleckghazi

Someone needs to start a zero ethics games review website. 'The game is a pile of shit but the developers took me to Maui' 10/10 or 'I won't review your game unless it comes wrapped in furs, preferably Panda'.

This is how this is going to work, your going to make some terrible points and use the smiley a lot. Mad Jack and Skummy are going to take your arguments apart if they can be bothered. Your going to retort by strawmanning, attacking the argument and several other methods of avoiding addressing their points and then you're eventually going to get banned, preferably by Srar, who has one of those vaginas you're all really scared of. Then you'll probably toddle off to TRP or 8chan and identify us a 'feminazi danger zone' or something equally as stupid. Now, is some game developers sexual proclivities really the hill you want to die on?

In FM, the supplemental draft is for 23 year old players with a 2 star potential who get released after a year and disappear.

And the 48 team World Cup, which appeals to nations that rarely/never make the finals. I would imagine Figo will end up pulling out later on anyway, he doesn't have the administrative experience to take on the role. If he gets any decent backing, he'll probably form an alliance with someone to transfer over his votes in return for a cushy position at FIFA.

Was it David Mellor? Or David Baddiel?