Ah, another person who justifies this kind of abuse because someone points out a few bad things with their hobby.
Welcome to my ignore list.
The problem is calling this "abuse" in the first place.
She got up on a soap box in the center of town and started telling a bunch of insulting lies after stealing money from them...
She does not have the right to cry 'abuse' when the townsfolk start hurling vegetables at her.
ACCOUNTABILITY.
Ah, another person who justifies this kind of abuse because someone points out a few bad things with their hobby.
Welcome to my ignore list.
Difficult to get the cops all hot and bothered over the fact that some kids on the Internet weren't nice to you.As expected, there have been no police reports filed in connection with all the "threats" AS has received.
Well said.There is a market for comics/graphic novels for women and girls. In Japan, there is manga for every demographic so there is no reason why it can't be the same here.
I'm inclined to tell people like her that instead of complaining so much, complain a little and actually go out and make games/comics/etc.
It's like women who complain about the lack of female engineers, and then go out and get sociology degrees.
Ah, another person who justifies this kind of abuse because someone points out a few bad things with their hobby.
Welcome to my ignore list.
I view her as mostly being a publicity stunt. We're talking about the "feminist" here who took Hitman, looked at the area where some women are putting on makeup that you're MEANT to sneak by (and most playthroughs of that level online DO sneak by) and asserted that the game was all about abusing women.
isn't this what people do when people try to point out obvious faults in ones argument?
it's the same as louder is not more right.
just shut everyone off and stay in your little bubble, right?
What's surprising here? I see nothing to chase her from her home.
I view her as mostly being a publicity stunt.
So anonymity somehow makes death threats (where her address was posted) and people posting child porn on her timeline acceptable?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papers,_PleasePaperwork Simulator 2014!
Person A was given money from supporters. No stealing went on (though there is the whole unattributed video use thing...).
And no, no one deserves possible threat of harm for twisting 90% of their used content to match their views, for any views which themselves are not threatening (FI, exceptions for white supremacists might be deserved).
Right, the people she's accountable to are the people who funded her. Anyone who doesn't like the content of her videos are welcome to fund their own.
Regardless, though, backers after she exceeded her goal knew the goal had been exceeded, and had no expectation that the dded money would be going to other projects, plus there wasn't too much additional production value to create. There was no stealing, merely people willing to give her that much money to do what she did, and/or support her in general.
Godwin's law applies especially to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one's opponent) with Nazis – often referred to as "playing the Hitler card". The law and its corollaries would not apply to discussions covering known mainstays of Nazi Germany such as genocide, eugenics, or racial superiority, nor, more debatably, to a discussion of other totalitarian regimes or ideologies[citation needed], if that was the explicit topic of conversation, since a Nazi comparison in those circumstances may be appropriate, in effect committing the fallacist's fallacy. Whether it applies to humorous use or references to oneself is open to interpretation, since this would not be a fallacious attack against a debate opponent.
While falling foul of Godwin's law tends to cause the individual making the comparison to lose his argument or credibility, Godwin's law itself can be abused as a distraction, diversion or even as censorship, fallaciously miscasting an opponent's argument as hyperbole when the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.[10] Similar criticisms of the "law" (or "at least the distorted version which purports to prohibit all comparisons to German crimes") have been made by Glenn Greenwald.[11]
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost...&postcount=260
Really? Because I would call myself amongst that number. That does not justify attempting to retcon reality, though.Right, but that doesn't fit the narrative of those who want her to shut up.
Regardless, though, backers after she exceeded her goal knew the goal had been exceeded, and had no expectation that the dded money would be going to other projects, plus there wasn't too much additional production value to create. There was no stealing, merely people willing to give her that much money to do what she did, and/or support her in general.
I don't agree with your premise. You're saying they just threw money at her that she could spend as she pleases (like those $1000 shoes on her blog?)
I, and many others, feel that money was meant for the purpose of creating her hate-spewing videos, not "lifestyle support".
Now, semantics aside... still think she's being "abuuused" over getting the same backlash EVERYONE ELSE GETS for being political on the interwebs?
The Amazing Athiest gets the same kind of hate mail every day... should he run fleeing from his home, crying to the media about the bad, bad people coming to get him?
For a woman whose career is based on "battling sexism", she sure enjoys it when it benefits her. :hmm: