hey gawker dudes. what the fuck is wrong with you?

yes

my heart was going like mad

Conde Nast cfo was in on it too obv. he's not even gay but was willing to do anything for gamergate.

the gay prostitute was a gaymer and this was all a setup
--iatee

:-O

But there were only two shots from the book depository!

gamers and mras so obsessed w/mad max: fury read

http://avp.wikia.com/wiki/Mother_Ship

gamers and mras so obsessed w/mad max: fury read

― nomar

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/cd/22/8b/cd228b13df9f5a0cdde0d6f5d7c005cd.jpg

"Didn't you ever stop to consider what he was feeling?"

Conde Nast cfo was in on it too obv. he's not even gay but was willing to do anything for gamergate.

― iatee, Wednesday, July 22, 2015 6:42 PM (52 minutes ago)

lol

that denton baby name thing is incredible

xps I don't really think video games in general are stupid and some games I remember playing as a kid were immersive and even sort of magical. It's really hard for me to pay attention to whatever goes on in that world now though. Even before gamergate I was turned off by the idea of "gamers," or a subculture built around consuming these mainstream products. It seemed like such a cultural dead end.

Maybe I just don't understand the medium/why these games are so important to people that they want to keep "outsiders" away

Shake Shack

I didn't ever consider myself part of a shake shack subculture i owned up to the fact that i was just a consumer.

I like a lot of stuff other ppl like. The issue with gamers is they are cultish

i am one of the best resogun:survival mode players in the world. also demolition mode. fyi. i do not know any other gamers other than my children though. they bug me sometimes.

Danny's vision of Enlightened Hospitality guided the creation of the unique Shake Shack culture that, we believe, creates a differentiated experience for our guests across all demographics at each of the 62 Shacks around the world.

i try not to be a cult about games

Maybe I just don't understand the medium/why these games are so important to people that they want to keep "outsiders" away

here's the thing, I'm friends with a lot of hardcore gamers and game makers, and exactly NONE of them think like that (and all are embarrased/angry about GG)

Oh no I know that the culture isn't that homogenous. My best friend since like 6th grade is now an indie game developer. I was just trying to be provocative with my first post I guess.

and look where it got you

nah just kidding keep games real noobs get fucked #ethicsinjournalism

i may never get over that t-shirt

xp where can i purchase this post in bumper sticker form

this is what I mean by the completely fake, insincere SJW tone of nu-vice

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/internet-trolls-convinced-a-kid-to-cook-his-laptop-424

I know I'm breaking a cardinal rule here by feeding the trolls with this article, but this video chipped away a bit more of my faith in humanity and needed to be addressed. Bullies will always bully, and there will always be a group of toadies there to goad them on. The most one can do is not participate in the menacing mockery, and express disdain at those who do. Hopefully, as this video gets more and more views, some of the kinder souls on the web can track this kid down and not just hook him up with new tech, but more importantly show him that not everyone online is this evil.

ten years ago vice would have given this kid a new laptop themselves and all he'd have had to do was drink the contents of the gross jar

ten years ago we had Bob Gawker, Steve Vice, and Johnny Rotten

wait

Yeah, that piece is unreadable but at 9 paragraphs it's 9x longer than the average Gawker piece, which should maybe count for a little?

"our writing is shit, but we make up for it in quantity"

o sweet satan

take me now

kyrie eleihoos

we now return to your ongoing "what the fuck is wrong with you" cavalcade, already in progress

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/22/i_was_slimed_by_gawker_in_the_worst_year_of_my_life_i_became_a_regular_target_%E2%80%94_and_it_was_devastating

nolan's already written his response

http://gawker.com/writing-and-what-comes-with-it-1719700870

tbf, it's less "gawker dudes" and more just this one guy who has a clear issue with her
http://gawker.com/tag/mary-elizabeth-williams

I read the Salon piece, then read the opening sentence of Nolan's response:

Should the published writing of professional writers be subject to any criticism? I believe yes. At least one professional writer disagrees.

And that was so far off base and wtf enough for me to disregard anything else he wrote, bcz it was clear to me that he had his head up where the sun doesn't shine.

shrug

never having read either half of this hatebath i guess i don't have a firm opinion on who's right

"The alternative to talking freely [i.e., actually thinking before you speak] is much worse"

shrug

casual indifference?

one writer hating another is not a civilizational crisis

even granting the characterization that he "hates" her or slimed her or w/e

the cancer photo thing was a reach

this was the photo

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--ZzJsBReh--/18k22i5kuvhl3jpg.jpg

http://www.salon.com/writer/mary_elizabeth_williams/

nolan's thesis is that MEW is a conveyer belt of softly right-on liberal media fake-controversy explainer pointlessness and this scroll of headlines is not dissuading me of his position

agreed. writers have been sniping at each other forever, sometimes just in conversation or personal letters, sometimes in print. doesn't change that Nolan's head is deeply inserted.

Williams is every bit as awful a writer as Nolan's four articles, from four years ago, make her out to be. And the fact that she decided now, at a time when people are maximally ready to think the worst of Gawker, to pop up and say, "They were mean to me, too, once! Look how evil they are! I had cancer!" is...well, it's exactly the kind of thing I'd expect from her, and Salon, which is probably the worst it's ever been right now.

For Mary Elizabeth Williams, a critique of a bad piece of writing is an ominous and outrageous act that produces a “chilling effect.” On this, I guess I would agree with her—anyone who writes something arguing that a bad writer wrote a bad thing is probably holding out hope that as a result there might be less bad writing in the future. It rarely works, but there’s nothing wrong with being optimistic.

one writer hating another is not a civilizational crisis

― goole, Thursday, July 23, 2015

We weren't alive when Mailer, Sontag, Rahv et al published nasty letters in the NYROB.

i am hella glad the internet wasn't around when i was young but my god, to have had norman mailer in full flower online would've been a thing