We have users!

Join a laid-back, close-knit community of mixed interests Get a free account!

InsaneBoredGame
99th percentile


InsaneBoredGame joined on Aug 26th, 2010, since that has made 856 posts that are still accessible today, 15 of which are threads. Helping shape the community, InsaneBoredGame has given 1068 upvotes, and was last online on Nov 22nd, 2014.


  • In How much do you know about the CL members

    @DarkChaplain Tally's a wonderful person. The passive-aggressive thing is an in-joke that I tweeted about people assuming I was actually kind.

  • In How much do you know about the CL members

    @Farris Ah sorry, my cell phone must have auto corrected. Death Knights.

    I'll fix the post.

  • In How much do you know about the CL members

    is not actually a Good Girl, but instead is passive aggressive

    Spread your lies won't you, Tally? Anywho:

    • College Freshman
    • Is definitely not a Good Girl
    • Is unable to appreciate the gift that is the Operation Overdrive theme song
    • Handles horror well. Too well. Must be investigated.
    • Owns a 3DS
    • Was interested in playing Madolches but that went nowhere
    • Somehow shares the same garbage yugioh ships as me
    • Somehow up to date with said crazy fruit show
    • Is a Slytherin and plays Death Knights in WoW.

    EDIT: Has screencapped everything. EVERYTHING.

  • In How much do you know about the CL members

    Has delivered terrifying news. Also probably has bookmarked hundreds of Final Fantasy music things and owns a library's worth of Warhammer books.

  • In The Grand #GamerGate Thread

    @DarkChaplain I have read, I have acknowledged. The thing is that I believe, given GamerGate's power structure, the only thing that can speak for it as a movement, is the tweet that made it.

    Otherwise, the whole "this isn't a harassment campaign" is about as reliable as the people who post rape and death threats in the hashtag.

    Given that it's a mass of individuals, where there is complete refusal to exhibit any kind of control, one cannot acertain any kind of common ideals outside the first tweet. You can't declare who is and who isn't an "Actual Gate" unless if you judge by that first tweet.

    You speak of moving on, but the truth is that you have moved on. The people who agree with you have moved on. The people who posted that they moved on have moved on.

    I beat the dead horse as often as the whole "Not an Actual Gater" thing.

    There is a definite problem with the power structure, and until you can find a way to clear that up everywhere, police and force the doxxers and harassers out of your movement, it's going to be continually filled with misogyny.

    Because yeah, you can say that they're not part of GamerGate but the way things are, it's simply your words against theirs.

    To speak of more recent incidents, let's talk about Felicia Day. She was doxxed for speaking out against GamerGate so one can only assume that the doxxers considered themselves part of GamerGate. And why not?

    The only solid requirements seem to be "something something journalism ethics" and the use of the hashtag. Yes, I've seen the "I support" picture, but once again, you can't really use it to define the whole movement.

    I repeat and I'll repeat it again. It's easier to say we aren't misogynistic because you personally aren't misogynistic that confront the whole problem over there.

    And for the ethics thing, I believe that I've made my opinions clear on that. Simply put, I don't care. I don't care about the gamer identity and I sure as hell don't care about clickbait.

    I see GamerGate as inherently sexist and thus I'm against it. It's as simple as that.

    That said, this is your thread DC and I'll respect your wishes. I'll be bowing out of this thread.

    Nice arguing with you all.

  • In How much do you know about the CL members

    SobKnight has one of the best usernames I've heard in a while.

  • In How much do you know about the CL members

    So you are a pirate then? My apologies.

  • In The Grand #GamerGate Thread

    @Cenica @Kip @hellstorm901

    I'll admit the objectification thing is off topic (I only really talked about it in response to a comment of people accusing Bayonetta of being sexist and it kinda took off from there).

    Here you are, hitting the same points, without basis, and ignoring once more the questions I have addressed to you mulitple times. You are repeating a monologue I have heard so many times I'm beginning to wonder if people aren't being brainwashed. Zoe Quinn is not relevant. Apart from the question I asked you in my post neither I nor Helly brought her up. You did. You're the one that keeps pointing your finger at the scandal. Nobody is denying that it happened. Nobody is denying that it got people's attention, but she is not the driving cause behind GamerGate.

    I apologize for the ad hominem beforehand. Same thing for the repetitiveness.

    The thing with all movements, is that they're defined by their moment of inception, GamerGate especially, since with all the misogyny, hate-fling, and denials of others being "actual GamerGate", it's the only reliable thing that can tell us what the movement was meant to be.

    The first tweet using the hashtag was by Adam Baldwin (of Firefly, Fullmetal Jacket, and other fame).

    In it, are links to two youtube videos by InternetAristocrat, aptly titled "Quinnspiracy Theory: The Five Guys Saga" and "Quinnspiracy Theory: In-N-Out Edition" respectively.

    In it we've got the usual stuff: Five Guys jokes, "I don't care what kind of person she is but I'm going to spend this entire video calling her out", and how her relationship with Nathon Grayson (a journalist who didn't even review her game and has Kotaku's investigation pretty much clear him ) obviously means she's been sleeping around for good publicity.

    Of course, he does talk about Ethics and why they're needed. To quote Mr. InternetAristocrat,

    “Gaming Journalism has reached a low point over the last five years. It started with pieces that had nothing to do with gaming or game reviews, nothing to do with software or hardware, nothing to do with events or expos. It started to travel off into the areas of social justice and feminism and opinion pieces and op ads that had nothing to do with gaming. It started to have authors who were writing pieces condemning the gaming audience as being sexist and misogynistic, as being racist and bigoted, as being overly violent rapists.”

    What I'm getting out of this is that, simply put, Mr. InternetAristocrat wants feminism, social justice, etc out of his gaming news. So does Adam Baldwin. So does GamerGate.

    They don't want to hear about how this game is sexist, how that game objectifies women, or how countless about shooting the "other" (be they middle eastern or russian) is problematic. This video (the five guys one) calls for change while condemning it. Talks about their voices being silenced while they champion silencing others. Complains about them being oppressed by accusations of oppressing others.

    Hypocrisy? Hell yeah. Sexism? Also yeah.

    They are long 24ish minute videos, the first one which ends up bioling down to a rage filled rant of this.

    “How do I know? Maybe Zoe Quinn fucked Phil Fish. They seem to have been at a wedding together. Phil Fish seems to know her quite well, and judging by Zoe’s behavior and the favors she’s curried, it’s really not far out of the ballpark for me to say that perhaps Phil Fish is defending her because of a relationship. Hell, what about Patrick Klepek? Remember those conventions they did together and the speeches in the Internet is Serious Business? Who knows, maybe Patrick slept with her. In fact, given that this is the reality of how these people behave, they have no separation as professionals. Let’s says that Steven Tolito of Kotaku had sex with Anita Sarkeesian. Why not? You’re letting somebody on staff at Kotaku, who has a sexual relationship with somebody he writes about and you don’t have any problem with that. So judging from that, I guess you wouldn’t have a problem doing it yourself. So, maybe Steven is having sex with Anita. Maybe that’s why Kotaku keeps writing all those articles. It all makes sense now.”

    Please feel free to defend this statement. I don't feel the need to comment on it. Y'know besides the whole implication that no man would care for feminism unless if he was getting sex out of it.

    So yeah, that's what GamerGate stared out as, and that's what I feel GamerGater still is. A misogynist harassment campaign. Now, the general regard for the doxxers and the ones sending out rape threats is that they aren't "Actual Gaters" (because that is so easy to say and less of a bother than actually policing your own movement or switching to a structure that doesn't make their voices that loud) but I suppose anyone who said anything sexist isn't an "Actual Gater". Like this InternetAristocrat guy whose videos kinda started this thing off or Milo Yiannopoulos who stated that "We shouldn't be apologising for having fewer women in a sector in which men naturally perform better".

    And of course can't forget wonderful 8-chan which stood by the poor oppressed gamers.

    Now, if you're in it for just wanting better journalism, good for you. Just please realize who else you stand with when you wave that GamerGate banner of yours. Because honestly, compared to sexism, I don't give a fuck about butthurt over clickbait or unacceptable insults to the gamer identity.

    Gaming Journalism doesn't matter when people are terrified of returning to their own homes.

    And yes, I still maintain that Anti-GG is a stance against GamerGate, not a movement. I dislike Obama because of the thing with drone warfare and another person dislikes because they don't believe the poor should be able to afford healthcare.

    A movement is a call for change, against the status quo, not a disapproval of a movement.

  • In The Grand #GamerGate Thread

    @awkwardangels

    I'll repeat it again so...

    With Bayonetta, objectification and the male gaze are problems. I'll repeat that sex-positivism is one thing but having her fall out of the sky to land in a position where the camera just kinda pans over her legs and butt? It's cheap, and encourages players to view her more as a sex object (the whole passiveness versus being a sexuality reclaiming woman), instead of the interesting character she is.

    Sex positivity doesn't equal objectification. A woman owning her sex vs objectification is the active vs passive thing. A woman who owns her body may actively flaunt it, using gestures to draw attention or whatnot.

    An objectified woman falls into these poses unaware, sometimes uncomfortable and ridiculous but meant to appeal.

    (The landing after fall for example... )

    (This is going to be Kill la Kill all over again, isn't it?)

  • In The Grand #GamerGate Thread

    @hellstorm901 @Cenica

    How exactly can you brand GamerGate a sexist movement which bullies women and insists on ensuring no women ever picked up a controller or plays a gamerwhen we have people like @Cenica running around waving support for the movement?

    What of it? What she does is completely up to her, her reasons are her own, and I don't believe that it makes the GamerGate movement any less sexist. I don't know Cenica that well, barely to be honest, and cannot speak or make any judgments regarding her.

    Simply put, I maintain that GamerGate is sexist (and continues to be so) because it arose from the Quinn thing (whether you want to deny it or not) and the hashtag was first used by Adam Baldwin to link two different youtube videos about Quinn by the InternetAristocrat guy.

    I went through the videos (hell of a lot of extrapolation they did there) and one of them ends up becoming a paranoid rage filled rant about how "everyone is fucking everyone" and how hypocritical it is or whatever.

    The fact is that they whine about "SJW like Sarkeesian who are ruining everything" and yeah, I believe that it's sexist. I've spent a while scrolling through twitter and this thread and the fact is that an overwhelming majority of GamerGate believes that gaming news shouldn't have things pointing out how sexist a game it or whatnot in gaming journalism. That they are your enemies instead of the harassers who send out rape threats in your own movement.

    The fact is that people like Zoe Quinn, Brianna Wu, and Anita Sarkeesian are dismissed as "professional complainers" when they speak up about harassment.

    The fact is, that despite calling for change and ethical revision, a majority of GamerGate want things, and I quote InternetAristocrat "to be like five years ago", when it wasn't the norm for people to speak up about sexism in the industry, when people just accepted that you had to stare at Meryl's ass like a creep to tell how she walked.

    The fact is that dismissing women's concerns about sexism, saying that it wasn't meant to pander to them, is sexist.

    That said...

    There are no leaders in GamerGate. It is a movement of individuals.

    Which is one of the problems here. Since it has what I like to call "no fucking organization", it's far too easy for anyone to defend it by claiming anyone with a problematic opinion isn't really part of GamerGate. The way I see it, is by simply continuing to use the hashtag (which I'll repeat was first used in a post about Quinn), you stand with those people, ally yourselves with them, taking advantage of the messes they make, the aura of fear they create.

    It's a bunch of individuals and by refusing to put one overall authority, it only welcomes more assholes.

    A position on a movement would be an opinion. This was a counteraction. It is an action. Not a stance. The age of the tag...I'm really not sure how that is relevant? Or the size of the movement? Still not relevant.

    It is when you claim that GamerGate and StopGamerGate2014 are equivalent. The GamerGate tag is filled with "do this and change this", the StopGamerGate2014 tag right now has "what the hell is wrong with you people, you doxxed Felicia Day."