How corporations percieve gamers

 Pages PREV 1 2 3
 

Jamcie Kerbizz:
Can't believe you could be that disingenuous trying to excuse such BS. Deeply disappointing.

Dude, you're getting weirdly personal about this. The publishers see us as lowest common denominators, children easily distracted and parted from their money. And yeah, that's bullshit. Still, there is a difference between contempt and disdain. One is to have malign regard for and the other is to have no regard for. It's not that they hate us. They just assume we're all stupid because they think bigger and dumber is the only way to get a return on investment at this scale.

Jamcie Kerbizz:

kurokotetsu:
SNIP

I do not have such proof but you seem to concede requirement of it, since you already provide excuse why such proof would be irrelevant, due to how corporations work.

I can re-iterate everything with 'absolutely coincidentally' MS owned media outlet attacks MS owned communicator direct, fastest growing competitor. I'd expect though people would just take that as being needlessly snide.

Please do not put ords on my mouth. There is proof you can give me that this is a smear job. You can produce internal company evicence that this think piece as directed against Discord, you may produce testimonies, you may provide several data points at a enght of time by different MS outlets (or even one very, very insidious one) that in a consistent manner reflect a possible correlation beteen MS and an organized Discord smear, with the number to back up that is. Just as an example of a single video is no proof. It is very easy for it to be a coincidence, a low hanging fruit, an unitended "victim" (since the report focuses more on "Gaming" than Discord) or a number of things.

You may re-iterate, but re-iteration is no proof of wrong doing.

Jamcie Kerbizz:
This is highly devious attempt at manipulation Silvanus.
This is 4 seconds remark, dropped by person with distorted voice on the phone, not brought up at any point by the narrative throughout the video. Video which in its almost 4 min duration remains in direct opposition of that remark. Not to mention, that this remark is immediately followed with so 'what happens when these behaviours move from gaming world to real world (kkk guys being showed on the screen)' as if gamers suddenly were a source of murderous idiots and NOT murderous idiots ALSO playing video games were ceating a possibility to encounter them while you play online video games with social interactive elements in them.

Can't believe you could be that disingenuous trying to excuse such BS. Deeply disappointing.

Very happy to disappoint you.

You made various claims about what the video said, which were factually untrue. I directly quoted a line from the video. And I'm being disingenuous, eh.

Silvanus:

Jamcie Kerbizz:
This is highly devious attempt at manipulation Silvanus.
This is 4 seconds remark, dropped by person with distorted voice on the phone, not brought up at any point by the narrative throughout the video. Video which in its almost 4 min duration remains in direct opposition of that remark. Not to mention, that this remark is immediately followed with so 'what happens when these behaviours move from gaming world to real world (kkk guys being showed on the screen)' as if gamers suddenly were a source of murderous idiots and NOT murderous idiots ALSO playing video games were ceating a possibility to encounter them while you play online video games with social interactive elements in them.

Can't believe you could be that disingenuous trying to excuse such BS. Deeply disappointing.

Very happy to disappoint you.

You made various claims about what the video said, which were factually untrue. I directly quoted a line from the video. And I'm being disingenuous, eh.

Not really surprised you have no argument to defend your petty manipulation beside repeating it.
At the very least you show your intent and integrity with that initial remark.
On most boards such form of posting you perpetuate goes strictly against the rules, since it's simply trolling. Unfortunatelyy Escapist doesn't have any clear regulation in this regard.

@BeetleManiac You misundertood me. I am deeply disapointed, that such practices are left unmoderated (still). Not personally and/or as you imply emotionally disappointed in this specific person. My wording could have been more precise in this regard.

Back in my day, they didn't have video games. Damn kids these days.

Jamcie Kerbizz:
@BeetleManiac You misundertood me. I am deeply disapointed, that such practices are left unmoderated (still). Not personally and/or as you imply emotionally disappointed in this specific person. My wording could have been more precise in this regard.

No, you're making it personal. The first sentence to Silvanus just above this bit to me was you making it personal. You lied about the content of the video, got called out on it, and now you're attacking people's character for it. Get over yourself, bro. Do not bullshit a bullshitter.

kurokotetsu:

Jamcie Kerbizz:

kurokotetsu:
SNIP

I do not have such proof but you seem to concede requirement of it, since you already provide excuse why such proof would be irrelevant, due to how corporations work.

I can re-iterate everything with 'absolutely coincidentally' MS owned media outlet attacks MS owned communicator direct, fastest growing competitor. I'd expect though people would just take that as being needlessly snide.

Please do not put ords on my mouth. There is proof you can give me that this is a smear job. You can produce internal company evicence that this think piece as directed against Discord, you may produce testimonies, you may provide several data points at a enght of time by different MS outlets (or even one very, very insidious one) that in a consistent manner reflect a possible correlation beteen MS and an organized Discord smear, with the number to back up that is. Just as an example of a single video is no proof. It is very easy for it to be a coincidence, a low hanging fruit, an unitended "victim" (since the report focuses more on "Gaming" than Discord) or a number of things.

You may re-iterate, but re-iteration is no proof of wrong doing.

O-K so using your words, bolded ones. You expect me to send you internal company evidence with proof of a planned smear campaign against Discord = someone in power signed document, or some form of recording where it is clear who personally planned and launched such attack = incriminating evidence and you would like me to post it for you on this board or you will not believe that this is MS organised hit vs Discord. Correct?

You do realise that again as previously (you contradicted your requirement for proof with proclamation why any such proof is irrelevant cause corporations are so spread people may not know what others do so corporation as a whole can't be blamed) now you made an additional last requirement for multiple MS outlets to launch such campaign, cause one isn't enough. How worried are you that such proof exists and could be brought up that you make this insecure interjections?

answer: Don't worry. As I said before

I do not have such proof

Please continue to think this is NOT MS organised smear campaign vs Discord. It was just a random case in which absolutely coincidentally MS owned media outlet attacked MS owned communicator's direct, fastest growing competitor.

BeetleManiac:

Jamcie Kerbizz:
@BeetleManiac You misundertood me. I am deeply disapointed, that such practices are left unmoderated (still). Not personally and/or as you imply emotionally disappointed in this specific person. My wording could have been more precise in this regard.

No, you're making it personal. The first sentence to Silvanus just above this bit to me was you making it personal. You lied about the content of the video, got called out on it, and now you're attacking people's character for it. Get over yourself, bro. Do not bullshit a bullshitter.

Did you even watch the video? I linked in the OP, original material. Not some angry YT commentary.
I did not lie about the video,
Silvanus lied about it, trying to take single line out of context and manipulate it as its message, which is simply BS.

As to taking something personal. Fortunately even if you keep on insisting here for days, in the end I get to decide that. And this here is not. Calling yourself a bullshitter isn't the greatest way to establish your credibility either
but I'd like to thank you for your honesty at least.

Go on keep on trying to push this with Silvanus, if that entertains you.
You can't take the NBCN video down though, so for anyone willing to spend 4 min watching, it will be obvious who lies.

Jamcie Kerbizz:
Calling yourself a bullshitter isn't the greatest way to establish your credibility either
but I'd like to thank you for your honesty at least.

I used to be a professional street magician. I was a professional liar. I have no illusions about that, so to speak. So when I say not to bullshit me, it's because I have hard-won experience in bullshitting. You'd be surprised how handy a life skill that has proven to be.

Shouldn't this be on the Gaming Industry Discussion forums?

Jamcie Kerbizz:

Not really surprised you have no argument to defend your petty manipulation beside repeating it.
At the very least you show your intent and integrity with that initial remark.

Just as much as you showed your own intent and integrity with that patronising, sneery remark about disappointing you in the first place.

I laid out my argument quite clearly: I directly quoted a line, whereas you made a claim about the video that was demonstrably untrue. Frankly, that should be enough.

Jamcie Kerbizz:
As I said before

I do not have such proof

Please continue to think this is NOT MS organised smear campaign vs Discord. It was just a random case in which absolutely coincidentally MS owned media outlet attacked MS owned communicator's direct, fastest growing competitor.

I don't have any proof at all of the conspiracy that I'm claiming, but you totes have to believe me because I have a hatred of MS and need to feel part of a persecuted minority!

When you are at the point that you have less "proof" than flat-earthers and believers in Nazi molemen in the center of the earth, you really need to examine what you are doing wrong.

Avnger:
I don't have any proof at all of the conspiracy that I'm claiming, but you totes have to believe me because I have a hatred of MS and need to feel part of a persecuted minority!

When you are at the point that you have less "proof" than flat-earthers and believers in Nazi molemen in the center of the earth, you really need to examine what you are doing wrong.

Eh.. how about this? https://products.office.com/en-us/microsoft-teams/group-chat-software


Seems somewhat feasible that Microsoft might see Discord as competition on their upcoming Office-cloud software there. Although admittedly, it's still debatable as to whether or not Microsoft had a direct hand in NBC's recent series of hitpieces. Still, it's a rather uncanny resemblance.

Avnger:

Jamcie Kerbizz:
As I said before

I do not have such proof

Please continue to think this is NOT MS organised smear campaign vs Discord. It was just a random case in which absolutely coincidentally MS owned media outlet attacked MS owned communicator's direct, fastest growing competitor.

I don't have any proof at all of the conspiracy that I'm claiming, but you totes have to believe me because I have a hatred of MS and need to feel part of a persecuted minority!

When you are at the point that you have less "proof" than flat-earthers and believers in Nazi molemen in the center of the earth, you really need to examine what you are doing wrong.

You quote me telling you, you don't have to believe me and follow with claim I require you to believe me, followed up by outlandish, riled up loonacy about mole man.

How about you take your own advise and examine what you are doing wrong.

Silvanus:

Jamcie Kerbizz:

Not really surprised you have no argument to defend your petty manipulation beside repeating it.
At the very least you show your intent and integrity with that initial remark.

Just as much as you showed your own intent and integrity with that patronising, sneery remark about disappointing you in the first place.

I laid out my argument quite clearly: I directly quoted a line, whereas you made a claim about the video that was demonstrably untrue. Frankly, that should be enough.

You're still flat on your face with your argumentation. You took a single line out of context. You keep ignoring direct quote of the lines that put it back in context as well as entriety of the video.

This exposes your cheap, devious manipulation, no matter how you will squirm around it.
Speaking of which. Now you try to invoke feelings and emotions, which I already precisely, clarified are not the case. Wonder what form of posting exactly follows this scenario... but nope not gonna take the bait.

Ender910:

Avnger:
I don't have any proof at all of the conspiracy that I'm claiming, but you totes have to believe me because I have a hatred of MS and need to feel part of a persecuted minority!

When you are at the point that you have less "proof" than flat-earthers and believers in Nazi molemen in the center of the earth, you really need to examine what you are doing wrong.

Eh.. how about this? https://products.office.com/en-us/microsoft-teams/group-chat-software


Seems somewhat feasible that Microsoft might see Discord as competition on their upcoming Office-cloud software there. Although admittedly, it's still debatable as to whether or not Microsoft had a direct hand in NBC's recent series of hitpieces. Still, it's a rather uncanny resemblance.

Thank You but you try to pander to insincere query.

I could have left out pointing finger at Microsoft property tags on these entities and just ask a question 'why would they do that?' repeatedly,

i.e. like Troy Leavitt did. Though he is a game developer himself so taking a pot shot at MS publically could have nasty career prospect consequences.
In comments Richard Robertson, chimes in but he also starts with 'I have to be very careful here because I'm on the board of directors of a gaming company' which is both understandable but also pretty sad that professionals need to be that indirect and delicate about it instead of being able to discuss facts openly when not anonymous.


Troy went through digging out who exactly phd candidate is which was 'used' as an expert and breaks down points of entire video fitting them vs. facts and his personal insight from within the industry.

I picked straight forward captain obvious approach, rather than feigning ignorance.
Again repeating ad nausem, it's my opinion. I'd appreciate people just not be ignorant about subject at hand = watch the original video and look up who are actual owners of parties involved.

This belongs in Game Industry Discussion, as it is about games and the industry. Mods, please put it there.

Ender910:

Seems somewhat feasible that Microsoft might see Discord as competition on their upcoming Office-cloud software there.

It would seem unlikely since Teams is business only and not available to home users, plus it released months ago and is more designed as a competitor for Slack. Discord has some feature overlap with Teams in terms of bots and such but Discord isn't really designed for deployment inside a business.

Jamcie Kerbizz:
You're still flat on your face with your argumentation. You took a single line out of context. You keep ignoring direct quote of the lines that put it back in context as well as entriety of the video.

This exposes your cheap, devious manipulation, no matter how you will squirm around it.

Nothing in the video says that being a gamer automatically makes one "evil", as you claimed. You cannot merely appeal to "context", without any detail or direct quote whatsoever, to claim the video says something it factually does not say.

Jamcie Kerbizz:

Speaking of which. Now you try to invoke feelings and emotions, which I already precisely, clarified are not the case. Wonder what form of posting exactly follows this scenario... but nope not gonna take the bait.

"Invoke feelings and emotions"? What the hell are you talking about? You've been precisely as emotive as I have (or more so, with the inane charge that I disappointed you).

Jamcie Kerbizz:

kurokotetsu:
SNIP

O-K so using your words, bolded ones. You expect me to send you internal company evidence with proof of a planned smear campaign against Discord = someone in power signed document, or some form of recording where it is clear who personally planned and launched such attack = incriminating evidence and you would like me to post it for you on this board or you will not believe that this is MS organised hit vs Discord. Correct?

You do realise that again as previously (you contradicted your requirement for proof with proclamation why any such proof is irrelevant cause corporations are so spread people may not know what others do so corporation as a whole can't be blamed) now you made an additional last requirement for multiple MS outlets to launch such campaign, cause one isn't enough. How worried are you that such proof exists and could be brought up that you make this insecure interjections?

answer: Don't worry. As I said before

I do not have such proof

Please continue to think this is NOT MS organised smear campaign vs Discord. It was just a random case in which absolutely coincidentally MS owned media outlet attacked MS owned communicator's direct, fastest growing competitor.

That is not correct. I do not need that you personally present that memo or that recording. But you can quote an investigative reporter that does. You can quote a source. But you are unable to. OK.

Microsoft has more than one outlet and you finding that several are doing similar pieces in a similar amount of time would be more conclusive than a single one doing so, as it would show that all related news outlets are doing something similar and reduces the chance of it being coincidental. That is why I told you about mega coorporations. There is a sayin "The left hand does not now what the right hand does", which is the core of this specific complain as a mega coorporation a specific part might have some autonomy from the parent. So the right hand does things that the head isn't aware of, so to say. But if you were to show several parts show casing the same behavior, well it is the hand the feet and the body all moving in accordance which will probably the head is involved too. But you don't have that. OK.

You may also find more videos of NBC talking avout the issue. Make it insiduous. Hell, even show that they made it their main focus of one news show. But you are showing one video, of about five minutes, and that it might be produces in droves, by the hundreds kver the year. You are able to find a single video of this "smear campaign". Retur ing to the body, this isn't aomething the hand is doing all the time, it is a single gesture between hundreds a day that may be completely autonomous and without involvement of anyome else. It might even be just a finger.

I have no investment in this issue. I use Discord, I also use Skype. I have no involvement with either side. You are interpeting something from my statements that I didn't put there. What I do have is that I abhorr shody reasoning and faulty proofs. I think my last ten posts in this forum have been to critize the logic and evidence presented rather than discuss an specific issue. And considering my post count in 9 years that is no small amount.

I will continue to be skeptical. I was raised that way. I studied Math and Physics and a healthy dose of skepticism is good in my book. Find more proofs that MS is indeed doing something instead of a single sad video and I will change my mind. But seeing your reluctance you probably won't either find proof or change your mind.

Addendum: I might even find issue with the wording of "direct competitor" as Skype seems to be marketed more towards a wider audience and not gamer specific interactions in a different way from Discord that is mainly a platform for gaming. A difference i nthe audience is pretty apparent in a subjective way where all of my non-gaming girlfriend and family is aware and uses Skype as a means of communicating over seas and none are aware of Discord as a platform for that. That includes a Master's degree in Computer Sciences with a deep dialike for MS. So even the "motive" might be under questioning at this time, but this is just a hypothesis on my emd and I do not have the demographical proof required to have some certainty on it. But it would be interesting to see if even the alleged reason fails a basic questioning. (And if you are so insecure in you hypothesis that it can't stand some probing, it might be healthy to consider ditching it)

Addendum 2: I believe Avngr was just pointing out that you are providing less evidence than conspiracy theorists, which is sad. Also you claim.of not having us to believe you was clearly in a faticious tone, from the clearly sarcastic wording.

Jamcie Kerbizz:
This exposes your cheap, devious manipulation, no matter how you will squirm around it.
Speaking of which. Now you try to invoke feelings and emotions, which I already precisely, clarified are not the case. Wonder what form of posting exactly follows this scenario... but nope not gonna take the bait.

So what was that about not making personal lines of attack?

Ender910:

Avnger:
I don't have any proof at all of the conspiracy that I'm claiming, but you totes have to believe me because I have a hatred of MS and need to feel part of a persecuted minority!

When you are at the point that you have less "proof" than flat-earthers and believers in Nazi molemen in the center of the earth, you really need to examine what you are doing wrong.

Eh.. how about this? https://products.office.com/en-us/microsoft-teams/group-chat-software


Seems somewhat feasible that Microsoft might see Discord as competition on their upcoming Office-cloud software there. Although admittedly, it's still debatable as to whether or not Microsoft had a direct hand in NBC's recent series of hitpieces. Still, it's a rather uncanny resemblance.

When did our standards of evidence lower themselves to "somewhat feasible" and "debatable"?

I mean my elementary school principal having been a prototype android developed by DARPA is "somewhat feasible," and we definitely used to debate whether she was a robot back then. She also used to tell us to avoid videogames and tv and go play outside more. Maybe I should go and make a thread about the android menace indoctrinating our children against gamers...

Jamcie Kerbizz:
Snippy-snap

With the sarcasm removed, my point, which flew way over your head, was pretty much exactly what kurokotetsu noted:

kurokotetsu:
Addendum 2: I believe Avngr was just pointing out that you are providing less evidence than conspiracy theorists, which is sad. Also you claim.of not having us to believe you was clearly in a faticious tone, from the clearly sarcastic wording.

BeetleManiac:

Jamcie Kerbizz:
This exposes your cheap, devious manipulation, no matter how you will squirm around it.
Speaking of which. Now you try to invoke feelings and emotions, which I already precisely, clarified are not the case. Wonder what form of posting exactly follows this scenario... but nope not gonna take the bait.

So what was that about not making personal lines of attack?

'Devious' because this manipulation preys on the sole premise, that someone will not bother to check the context and watch full material and rely on single sentence.
'Cheap' because this source material has 4 min, so not really that hard to just check and see.
'Exposed' because it has been called out for what it is.
'Yours', because that was Silvanus who did that.

If you want to ascribe this description as 'personal' all I have to add here,
is you or anyone else taking it personal doesn't make it personal.
I can't forbid you to do so though but I am not responsible for something out of my control.

@Avnger You just repeat my answer conflating it with something which it isn't. Other words you have no point of your own.

@kurokotetsu Glad you clarified but answer remains the same.

@Silvanus I don't appeal to context, I provided it in reply to your manipulation.
Having done that and calling out manipulation while inviting all to actually watch the source will frankly suffice here. The source is in OP and is merely few minutes long.
As to 2nd part feigning ignorance in one and repating actions you feign to be oblivious to in next sentence is quite a feat.

Jamcie Kerbizz:
'Devious' because this manipulation preys on the sole premise, that someone will not bother to check the context and watch full material and rely on single sentence.
'Cheap' because this source material has 4 min, so not really that hard to just check and see.
'Exposed' because it has been called out for what it is.
'Yours', because that was Silvanus who did that.

If you want to ascribe this description as 'personal' all I have to add here,
is you or anyone else taking it personal doesn't make it personal.
I can't forbid you to do so though but I am not responsible for something out of my control.

If you're going to make personal attacks, then own it.

Jamcie Kerbizz:

@Avnger You just repeat my answer conflating it with something which it isn't. Other words you have no point of your own.

I keep repeating it because you haven't taken the few seconds of introspection to realize its importance. YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE. Your claims in this thread are based purely on already held biases, and you're grasping onto literally nothing to feed a hate boner.

How are you not seeing the meaning of admitting you have no evidence? The flat earth nutters at least claim to have some evidence on their side. The comparisons that I'm making are for a very specific reason. It's to show you what other conspiracy theories that have no evidence behind them look like. Until you find something, anything, you are just as believable as the person standing on a corner in Grant Park shouting about lizardmen aliens having infiltrated the government to bring about a new world order.

BeetleManiac:

Jamcie Kerbizz:
'Devious' because this manipulation preys on the sole premise, that someone will not bother to check the context and watch full material and rely on single sentence.
'Cheap' because this source material has 4 min, so not really that hard to just check and see.
'Exposed' because it has been called out for what it is.
'Yours', because that was Silvanus who did that.

If you want to ascribe this description as 'personal' all I have to add here,
is you or anyone else taking it personal doesn't make it personal.
I can't forbid you to do so though but I am not responsible for something out of my control.

If you're going to make personal attacks, then own it.

I agree.
When I actually make personal attack, I'll own it.
When someone takes something said about their actions as personal attack, I don't.
You are welcome to keep hollering 'confess and repent!' thou.

@Avnger You just repeat yourself. Again. At least this time you swapped moleman with lizardmen in your conflation.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here