BBC World Service gets trolled by fake SJW

[-1=e^ipi]

So apparently SJWs are so radical that they are being trolled by 4Chan.

4Chan started the hashtag #pissforequality and the SJWs have been quite supportive of it...

http://www.infowars.com/pissforequality-feminists-fall-for-4chan-troll-campaign-by-peeing-themselves/

[Black Dog]

Man with brain damage gets trolled by 4Chan.

Edited October 27, 2015 by Black Dog

[-1=e^ipi]

Man with brain damage gets trolled by 4Chan.

What?

[Black Dog]

What?

If you really think those were legit accounts, you're more gullible than anybody.

The #pissforequality hashtag on Twitter is populated almost entirely with people talking about how stupid women are for falling for the joke, but there doesn't seem to be a single tweet from a woman who peed herself in earnest for the cause. The accounts that do exist with purported pee-pants photos are obviously fake, without followers or previous tweets (like this account and this account); of the "numerous feminists on Twitter posting images of their stained and soiled pants" listed in this article, not a single one of the accounts has existed for more than a week. It's straight-up trolling.

Edited October 27, 2015 by Black Dog

[-1=e^ipi]

"almost entirely" is not the same thing as entirely.

4Chan users made fake accounts to trick people. How else are they supposed to start a hashtag like that?

That doesn't somehow discount the SJW idiots that fell for it.

[Black Dog]

"almost entirely" is not the same thing as entirely.

4Chan users made fake accounts to trick people. How else are they supposed to start a hashtag like that?

That doesn't somehow discount the SJW idiots that fell for it.

How many is that, exactly, then?

[-1=e^ipi]

How many is that, exactly, then?

I don't know, it's an anonymous internet forum. More than zero, that's for sure. That's like asking me to determine how many of the misogynistic comments made under #gamergate are done by trolls, done by SJWs or done by actual gamergaters; Of course according to the MSM and our new prime minister, it's 100% the later group because apparently trolls and SJWs posing as gamergaters for the cause don't exist.

[Black Dog]

I don't know, it's an anonymous internet forum. More than zero, that's for sure.

So if it`s, say, two, what doe sthat prove, exactly?

That's like asking me to determine how many of the misogynistic comments made under #gamergate are done by trolls, done by SJWs or done by actual gamergaters; Of course according to the MSM and our new prime minister, it's 100% the later group because apparently trolls and SJWs posing as gamergaters for the cause don't exist.

Perhaps you could provide some examples, then?

[-1=e^ipi]

So if it`s, say, two, what doe sthat prove, exactly?

That some SJWs satisfy Poe's law.

Perhaps you could provide some examples, then?

Apparently you don't understand how online anonymity works.

[Black Dog]

That some SJWs satisfy Poe's law.

Or that some people, regardless of political affiliation, are gullible and stupid. But you don't need a bunch of 4chan losers to see that, do you?

Apparently you don't understand how online anonymity works.

LOL at Mr. Unfalisfiablity over here with this unfalisfiable bullshit.

[-1=e^ipi]

LOL at Mr. Unfalisfiablity over here with this unfalisfiable bullshit.

Wow really?

People that post misogynist comments under #gamergate could be in category A, category B, or category C.

I claim that due to online anonymity, I cannot know which tweets correspond to which category.

You then ask for proof of people in category B or category C, with the implication that tweets are from category A if I cannot prove otherwise.

I then point out that due to anonymity I cannot do this.

And now you call my position of 'I don't know' unfalsifiable? Where is the proof that all these people are in category A, which you, Anita Sarkeesian and Justin Trudeau seem to take?

What I can do is point to people that are NOT anonymous, identify with #gamergate and are in category A. Karen Straughan, Alison Tieman, Christina Hoff Sommers, Milo Yiannopoulous, Cathy Young, etc.

Edited October 27, 2015 by -1=e^ipi

[kimmy]

It's GamerGate's favorite shell game. They're almost certain that all of the negative stuff attributed to Gamergaters were actually "false flag" operations by SJWs done to discredit Gamergates. And yet they're almost certain that all the supposed threats directed at Gamergaters come from real SJWs.

-k

[-1=e^ipi]

It's GamerGate's favorite shell game. They're almost certain that all of the negative stuff attributed to Gamergaters were actually "false flag" operations by SJWs done to discredit Gamergates. And yet they're almost certain that all the supposed threats directed at Gamergaters come from real SJWs.

Could you please prove that 'they're almost certain'? How are you determining this?

I don't identify as a gamergater but personally I think most of the hateful comments are from trolls.

If I find hateful tweets under the hashtag #blacklivesmatter, does that mean I can label the entire movement as a hate movement? No. Same with #gamergate.

[Black Dog]

Could you please prove that 'they're almost certain'? How are you determining this?

I don't identify as a gamergater but personally I think most of the hateful comments are from trolls.

How are you determining this? Can one not be both a gamergater and a troll?

If I find hateful tweets under the hashtag #blacklivesmatter, does that mean I can label the entire movement as a hate movement? No. Same with #gamergate.

Except unlike #GG, #BLM didn't start out as an explicitly misogynist hate movement.

[-1=e^ipi]

How are you determining this?

I never said 'I know', I said 'I think'.

Except unlike #GG, #BLM didn't start out as an explicitly misogynist hate movement.

Arguably, neither did gamergate. Some argue that it started due to a desire for greater ethics in gaming journalism.

[Black Dog]

I never said 'I know', I said 'I think'.

And I'm asking why you think that.

I think, based on my observation of self-identified GGers, that the trolléGGer distinction is practically non-existent.

Arguably, neither did gamergate. Some argue that it started due to a desire for greater ethics in gaming journalism.

Only the very ignorant or very gullible who never heard of Zoe Quinn would buy this.

There are, no doubt, some people who are sincerely concerned with ethics in games journalism (though why anyone would trouble themselves with such an inconsequential subject is beyond me). For the most part, though, it started as a troll/harassment movement and gained steam when it was co-opted by right wing anti-SJW types who themselves couldn't give a shit about gaming.

[-1=e^ipi]

it was co-opted by right wing anti-SJW types who themselves couldn't give a shit about gaming.

To be fair, that was inevitable given the reaction of anti-GGers slandering all criticism as hate/misogyny by straight white males and given that the people with bad ethics in gaming journalism were primarily SJWs.

[cybercoma]

There are, no doubt, some people who are sincerely concerned with ethics in games journalism (though why anyone would trouble themselves with such an inconsequential subject is beyond me).

It's a billion dollar industry with publishers buying out reviewers, which has real-world consequences for people who spend upwards of $80 on a new release that ends up being a buggy pile of hot garbage on release day. Ethics in video game journalism is a big problem, but it sure as hell isn't what GamerGate spends its time addressing. Instead they care more about women's sex lives and abusing women who dare to stand up for demeaning portrayals of women in games.

[kimmy]

Could you please prove that 'they're almost certain'? How are you determining this?

I don't identify as a gamergater but personally I think most of the hateful comments are from trolls.

If I find hateful tweets under the hashtag #blacklivesmatter, does that mean I can label the entire movement as a hate movement? No. Same with #gamergate.

Every gamergate FAQ I have ever seen allows the possibility that there may be a few "bad apples" in the movement, then claims that other harrassment is being created by antigamergaters who just want to discredit them, then immediately moves on to positing that gamergate supporters also receives threats, without mentioning the possibility that these were invented by gamergaters to make themselves look like victims.

Same with the "bomb threats" against the radio show that was going to discuss gamergate. Is it more likely that these threats came from dainty Tumblrinas who get "triggered" by the mere mention of violence, or the deviants over at 4chan who cheered on the guy who said he was going to go on a shooting spree in Oregon?

Gamergate is more full of True Scotsmen than Edinburgh.

Arguably, neither did gamergate. Some argue that it started due to a desire for greater ethics in gaming journalism.

Gamergate's other favorite shell game. It's most visible spokespeople, like Breitbart's Milos Yiannopoulos, American Enterprise Institute's Christina Hoff Sommers, and porn-star Mercedes Carrera, are all candid about their disinterest in games and their interest in beating down feminists. And yet when asked about that, Gamergaters are all "no! we just want integrity in gaming journalism! It's not about feminists!"

-k

[Black Dog]

To be fair, that was inevitable given the reaction of anti-GGers slandering all criticism as hate/misogyny by straight white males and given that the people with bad ethics in gaming journalism were primarily SJWs.

Just like the Holocaust was an inevitable reaction to the outsized role of Jews in global finance, right?

Edited October 28, 2015 by Black Dog

[-1=e^ipi]

And yet when asked about that, Gamergaters are all "no! we just want integrity in gaming journalism! It's not about feminists!"

To be fair, only some gamergaters take that position. Again, it is a diverse group of people, same with blacklivesmatter.

without mentioning the possibility that these were invented by gamergaters to make themselves look like victims.

That's a possibility, so is the possibility that the flying spaghetti monster made those death threats. But given the intolerance of dissenting opinion that we see from SJWs, especially on universities, I'm inclined to believe it is primarily the SJWs.

[Black Dog]

That's a possibility, so is the possibility that the flying spaghetti monster made those death threats. But given the intolerance of dissenting opinion that we see from SJWs, especially on universities, I'm inclined to believe it is primarily the SJWs.

Christ, it's like you've never heard of 4Chan.

[cybercoma]

Christ, it's like you've never heard of 4Chan.

The internet. It's serious business.