davidn: (rant)
[personal profile] davidn
[Title stolen from Twitter and I’m sorry]

There’s some sort of war between a Beer and a Fish going on just now and I know little about either one of them so I can’t comment on who is the greater-proportioned of the two arses in this argument, but the whole thing brings to mind just the… ridiculous immaturity of the Internet.

The trouble is, on the whole... gamers are idiots. I’m sorry, but they are. I’ve spent a lot of my life doing what I can to disprove the “gamers are shut-ins with no idea how to interact socially" stereotype, and it feels like most of the Internet is going a long way to justify it. This is a world in which you can adjust the weapon reload times in a popular game by a tenth of a second and you get death threats! Even after releasing a low-key game for people to enjoy I got a few emails from people who could neither spell nor type that simply alluded to how bad my graphics were or that $5 was an outrageous capitalist price to pay for a game.

Even outside abuse that creators suffer, I saw an article a few days ago about someone logging into his wife’s PS3 account by accident and playing on that, and the article and especially the comments were… enlightening, to say the least. There’s a thread down there somewhere that predictably says “But EVERYONE gets talked to like this, it’s your thin skin, that’s how gamers work" (in much cruder ways than I’ve just paraphrased it). First of all, that’s untrue, I’ve never seen anything like the instant abuse that women get for daring to be part of this hobby - and second, why does that justify it! Why do people in these communities regard comments like “go and kill yourself" to be par for the course instead of completely unacceptable and borderline psychotic?

I suppose - like a lot of the community now seems to be - I’m just sick of people saying whatever the hell vitriol they like about anyone on the Internet and expecting it to be okay. And for them always blaming the people who want them to be civil to one another for taking some sort of moral high ground (an interesting phrase, that - it’s used exclusively to shame people when they’re right).

As for Fez II’s revival - I give it a week.

Date: 2013-07-30 02:10 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] crassadon.livejournal.com
If someone isn't able to use grammer well, then they likely aren't worth listening to. .

Date: 2013-07-30 08:32 am (UTC)
premchaia_pre4: (akari)
From: [personal profile] premchaia_pre4
Your rainbow is suspicious. Friend Computer thinks you are trying to confuse the matter of your security clearance.

Date: 2013-07-30 09:00 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] crassadon.livejournal.com
Isn't that what I should be doing??

Date: 2013-07-30 03:59 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ravenworks.livejournal.com
It was "beer battered fish" ;) Like the food!

Yeah, the weird thing in this story is that they were both gross and horrible to each other.... but if it gets people talking about the problem in more general terms, then great!

"You could benefit from having a thicker skin about these things" is fairly reasonable advice for one person to give to another who's being bullied....... but the idea that bullies would say that about dealing with their own behaviour...... what kind of weird compulsion is this, that they can't see anything strange about that idea?

It's definitely made me think very carefully about being an 'auteur'..... I'll never stop making stuff, and the idea of making something without sharing it has always driven me crazy.... but there might be something to be said for publishing art anonymously after all. (Or at least, through an alias.) Or at least, not socializing in the same place that you do your work!

I dunno. Have things always been this bad and the internet has just made the problem more visible? Is this a product of some societies and/or subcultures more than others, or is it just human nature? Can something be done to mitigate it, either at the source, or before it reaches its target?

Blah, just thinking out loud, sorry. :)

Date: 2013-07-30 08:31 am (UTC)
premchaia_pre4: (akari)
From: [personal profile] premchaia_pre4
Never underestimate the psychological attack multiplier of doing someone harm and then attributing it to someone else, or them, or no one at all, or rationalizing away that if you hadn't, someone else would have. “You're just not adapting to the environment [by not giving in].” “Oh well, that's life.” “It wouldn't have happened if you'd just kept your mouth shut.” “Now look what you made me do to you.”

That said, disallowing “you seem to be overreacting” entirely allows the opposite bogosity where any critical opinion can be immediately silenced, in the general case (albeit that's not necessarily applicable in this case).

These are partly tied to the fragility of agency in the inherently-coercive physical world in general.

There's another element where many-to-one non-peer-visibility communication channels create a non-self-regulating funnel with nonlinear effects: a million sources can independently decide that their individual piece of hate mail is small enough that the target should be able to handle it. Certainly peer visibility is at least very incomplete over channels like Twitter.

Date: 2013-07-30 02:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ravenworks.livejournal.com
The funnel thing is definitely a problem, but the inverse is also true-- in a comments thread where you can see tons of people piling hate onto someone, adding a little more venom might seem like a harmless drop in the bucket to someone looking to blow off some steam.

Date: 2013-07-30 02:16 pm (UTC)
premchaia_pre4: (akari)
From: [personal profile] premchaia_pre4
Yes, or you get the mob effect, which is the opposite-mode source of the same thing.

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

May 2020

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
1011121314 15 16
171819 20 212223
24252627 28 2930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Page generated Jun. 26th, 2025 07:22 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios