Talk:Support List

Archives

 * September 2014 - February 2015

FAQ

 * On Adding Neutrals:
 * Devs: Agree that GamerGate is not a harassment movement
 * Sites: Update their ethics policy [without directly mentioning GamerGate]


 * On Non-gaming related Support adds: Make a note of whom are not related to games at all in their respective "Reasons" section


 * On Adding Developers:
 * Only use their last initial, some developers have been harassed outside of the internet

Studios

 * Snazzlebot Games
 * Super Awesome Hyper Dimensional Mega Team

Devs

 * jmjanetmars: account deleted, no archive --> Isn't this her account? @mjanetmars Conrad1on (talk) 09:03, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Bmikes1988: no mention of GamerGate in feed, no sourcing

Potential Additions

 * I looked into the websites you mentioned. RPGamer writer Trent Seely mentioned GamerGate neutrally on a column in October 2014 and has some general anti tumblrette and anti man hating posts on twitter, but I'm not sure that's enough to add him. Cubed3 and My Nintendo News have never mentioned GamerGate. Psycho Robot (talk) 20:20, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Well I wasn't really sure what the criteria for inclusion was; personally I'm just happy to promote sites that haven't been dickish, regardless of whether they've mentioned #GamerGate at all. Conrad1on (talk) 01:06, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd like to do that too, but if we do that, we wind up having a list of most gaming sites on the internet. The general criteria so far have been 1. supportive of GamerGate or 2. exceptionally pro-consumer in opposition of the anti-consumer practices of the sites on the boycott list. Still, that's not written in stone and if people want the list could include any non-bullshit site, but then I wonder what use it will wind up being. Psycho Robot (talk) 04:45, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I think demonstrating there are many more choices available than just the handful of larger sites that turned on their userbase is no bad thing, and all the sites I've supplied for review come from #GamerGate sources, namely the other list on the main gamergate.me site (http://gamergate.me/approved/), the image used on this wiki page (http://wiki.gamergate.me/index.php?title=File:Support_List.png), and an early support list from Reddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2fcb16/good_times_people_heres_a_comprehensive_faq_about/). The list I use for my Site of the Day thing is a combination of the ones on this wiki and the other places I've suggested for review here previously, and that amounts to 65 sites, so it's still not too unwieldy really. Although admittedly I prefer more sites just because it means I'm not promoting the same ones over and over. Should this mean anything though, when I do promote sites very often the official Twitter account of that website will retweet it, as happened just yesterday in fact with Cubed³, so they don't seem to mind the association at least. Conrad1on (talk) 13:53, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * In that case I suppose we could add any website that's not full of shit, and just leave it up to the reader to decide if that's enough for their personal support. Psycho Robot (talk) 23:16, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't really mind either way to be honest. The original reason I mentioned all of these sites was to try and clear up any discrepancies between the various sources. I'll probably stick with the extended list for my promotion thing, but if anyone knows of any reason why any of the sites I use shouldn't be included, feel free to let me know. Conrad1on (talk) 00:08, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

http://vgrhq.com/ This one's interesting, as it's not a traditional games site, rather a collection of reviews of reviews from other sites, as well as interviews with games critics. It seems quite #GamerGate-y in theme at least. Conrad1on (talk) 08:29, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Cubed³, RPGamer and My Nintendo News are already on the list. Is this an oversight, or are they back under review? Conrad1on (talk) 22:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Hadnt realised they had been added --SoggyKnees (talk) 10:45, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Is the issue with Geek.com that Ziff Davis also owns IGN, or is there a more specific reason? Conrad1on (talk) 22:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Ziff Davis owns PC Magazine and askmen.com, who (amongst other things) promoted Ms. Sarkeesian as "an outstanding woman of 2015". Personally, I would boycott their other properties based on nothing more than this affiliation, because my view is that Ziff Davis is awful. But the other fact of the matter is that searching Geek.com for the word "gamergate" comes up with zero results. I should have specified "They don't support Gamergate" in my edit, sorry. Fitzgerald (talk) 00:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, fair enough. I might just keep them on my extended list though (unless a specific reason turns up why I shouldn't), as the criteria I use is somewhat looser, namely sites that haven't been actively awful. Conrad1on (talk) 01:34, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

At GDC, Tim Schafer called everyone who tweets NotYourShield sockpuppets and pissed off a lot of people who are now calling him out, BadSeedGames among them. They never explicitly say they're Pro-GG, but basically repeat one of the tenets (let devs make what they want). So is BadSeedGames neutral or pro? AmazingAnimals (talk) 05:13, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Definite Additions
As according to the chart above. Anything else is your call, really.

Site Reason Research
The following sites (at the time of writing) have no reasons listed. I provide links, and the community will come to a consensus whether or not they should be included. As for the 'Further Research Needed" entries, no related articles/op-eds were found, but I shall look into them further. --Zettou (talk) 12:18, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

According to the FAQ, a site/owner must be against unethical practices or at least neutral of Gamergate For cases where they don't mention gamergate at all, I look into that "unethical practices" thing. As for those who haven't mentioned it (in any stance), I suppose you'll just have to ask them directly what they think of gamergate. I checked their twitter for good measure but that also turns up nothing, --Zettou (talk) 13:14, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Descriptions

 * I copied over your findings to the main page, thank you for digging up what you could find --SoggyKnees (talk) 09:13, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Who did the actual descriptions?, Obviously I'm not able to make the reasons sound professional. --Zettou (talk) 16:44, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Past Removals
List of sites that have been added and since removed in the past, reasons appreciated but not required.

RealGamerNewz
The Editor-in-Chief said back in December he was 'quitting' #GamerGate (http://realgamernewz.com/42511/asdfasdrgasdfgsertgh), but he didn't do it in an unreasonable way, and one of their contributors had previously been supportive. There's now this though: http://realgamernewz.com/46187/why-i-quit-gamergate-by-alexander-hinkley so at best I think you'd have to say they'd not be keen on the association. Conrad1on (talk) 13:55, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Someone could reach out and ask him if he wants to be removed; personally Im fine with leaving it on there, criticism of the revolt grounded in reality shouldnt be grounds to remove someone from the list. --SoggyKnees (talk) 09:44, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I talked to the Editor when he wrote the first piece I linked. I told him if he'd rather not be on the list he'd have to ask, but he didn't give an indication that wanted to be removed. I have to say though, there's a difference between the first article and the second one, where the writer trashes #GamerGate seemingly on the basis that he didn't get a job that he for some reason believed was owed to him. Conrad1on (talk) 14:09, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Cubed³ [Closed/Removed]
Recently, Cubed3 was caught shilling his reviews fairly hard on Gamefaqs using a sockpuppet, even challengingother reviewers. Im pretty sure thats grounds for removal, but Ill wait a day to see if anyone wants to defend the sites inclusion. --SoggyKnees (talk) 03:23, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Why is it always sites I've *just* promoted? Talk about the Reverse Midas Touch. Conrad1on (talk) 09:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Cubed3 has now been removed, so marking this as closed --SoggyKnees (talk) 22:54, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

GoodGamers
GoodGamers have announced they've shut down: https://twitter.com/goodgamersus/status/585439383710498816 Conrad1on (talk) 19:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Youtuber Additions
This page seems to be missing a lot of YouTubers to support other than Totalbiscuit. How about shoe0nhead, Mundanematt, The Amazing Athiest, Sargon of Akkad, MrRepzion, Thunderf00t? Hell even DramaAlert is pro-gg.
 * You raise an interesting problem. I don't think we can list every YouTube channel that's pro GamerGate. Listing the most notable is subjective which could be problematic. I don't really know how we should handle this. I mean I suppose we could just have a long list of pro-GamerGate channels but that would be a lot of work to maintain and not much use to anyone. Psycho Robot (talk) 21:09, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
 * We could do YouTubers that generally do series content, have made a video that is fairly popular, and talks regularly about both Gaming and GG-related topics in general, this includes people like Action Points and MM, but helps keep it focused on gaming, (So while Thunderf00t is great at youtube, he wouldnt be added because its not gaming-centric.) Exceptions could be made for videos/YTers we find "important" like shoe (or tf00t), but this would help cut down on maintenance and effort --SoggyKnees (talk) 11:22, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
 * It should also be people who spoke out against people like Sarkessian "prior" to GG, or people who were put under pressure from the Anti side and it didn't shut them up nor make them change or retract their opinion. Also, try to add people who are Gamers, not just talking about gamergate. It's why I'm hesitant to add Sargon of Akkad to this list. Not to downsize his contribution, but I feel too large a percentage of his work is more blatantly anti-them than Pro-games. I don't doubt for even a moment he's a gamer, but his body of work is too little pro-game. Army Guy (talk) 20:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe we can find objective criteria to distinguish major YouTubers from minor ones, like video views, likes on the video or linked from KiA + number of upvotes of the op? --JTRetrogamer (talk) 21:43, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I understand adding the big guys just because it gives Pro-GG a larger microphone by borrowing their's. I'm actually not for adding them however on that basis alone. They already have a following, and don't need our help. They will get the message out even if we don't advertise for them. This is the opportunity to advertise for people who don't have that microphone yet. The problem we run into there is that a lot of them are opportunists, so there is no perfect way to go about this. That being said, I say we all go out and find people, and nominate them here. I don't care if they have 100K subscribers or 100, what they are saying is more important than how many people listen. We can't just tear the sytstem down, we need to replace it. That takes time, money, and the people to do it.Army Guy (talk) 18:40, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I'll start by nominating Orichalcum Road. Less than 100 subscribers, kind of artsy fartsy guy, and has a taste for Lovecraftian horror. Games are art kind of guy.

Army Guy (talk) 18:51, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Badly.Productions
I've noticed this guy Andy Frogman (@andyfrogman on Twitter), he was previously posting on #GamerGate topics as The Priest Of Gamers, basically doing the sort of thing that the Hug Patrol are doing. While his website http://badly.productions isn't strictly a pro #GamerGate website, it's clear that Andy himself is, and from what I've garnered from some articles on the site, others have a similar opinion. The articles are certainly interesting, and there is a good variety of topics and contributors. I was thinking maybe we can help out the site by showing our support, or at least having someone talk to Andy, to get information, and put badly productions on the list of supported sites.