Home
M KELLY
XBL -NONE-
PSN -NONE-
WII
-NONE-
STEAM -NONE-
M KELLY'S SPONSOR
POST BY THIS AUTHOR (0)
COMMENTS BY THIS AUTHOR (2)
"e best way to prove that games are good and worthy are to prove that gamers are wise and well-adjusted."
And we do that by making our wise and well-adjusted more visible, to drown out the loons- as you've said, there's nothing we can do about the existance of trolls apart from neutralize and then bury them- and you can't do that facing inwards, telling ourselves that [i]"they"[/i] don't get it- that way Comics lies. It's not "us" that need to consider lawyer, Lieberman and Clinton (And Vaz, and Atkinson, and Chavez) as jokes, it's the people that are otherwise innocently swallowing their nonsense.
There is a line between "not rising to the bait" and "not having a voice"- and to stop acknowledging the powerful people (who Lieberman was, and Clinton is) gets us on the wrong side of that line.
As the saying goes, attack is the best form of defence- the question is, how do we get the wise and well-adjusted "us" out there, when we don't have the same platform "they" do?
...I've just fallen into my own trap by responding, haven't"
Thursday, January 21, 2010
"'t say I agree with the bulk of the article- while I do think that perhaps rebuttals should be a little more targeted and considered, to stop fighting is going to be more detrimental than even the worst of death-threatening trolls.
(And it's also worth pointing out that it's only critics that don't have reasoned criticism that get lambasted- nobody with a valid criticism has seen anything even resembling a comeback, never mind vitriol)
It is, as Alex Gagne pointed out, when it's politicians, pressure groups and other decision makers, the people with the power, that are getting it wrong that it needs to be fought against- we need to be working with these people, and getting them on side- and that can only start with telling them that they're wrong. (And even then, part of that is picking up on the media outlets spreading the mistruths- bad journalism affects everyone regardless of subject)
I think one thing we need to look at as well, considering we're basically discussing perspective, is that we can see significantly more of us than not only we can of the people in the same boat when film or rock and roll was under attack, but also that they could see of [i]themselves[/i] at the time- there is no discussion taking place in reaction to a game critic that didn't take place in reaction to a rock and roll critic at the time, the only difference is that their discussion took place in a bar over a table, drowned out to all but the next table over (where the same discussion was probably taking place) by the jukebox- whereas our discussion is between an American and a Brit, saved to the public internet for the entire population of Australia to chime into later on.
Because of this, we appear much more defensive than we are, for better or for worse. But then, who can blame us for being defensive? We are, after all, under a"
Thursday, January 21, 2010
