Stop Killing Games fails to secure EU law despite 1.3M signatures

Post by joxdosba » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 8:30 AM UTC

eptcyka wrote: post #330

joxdosba wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t suggest that the two were directly related.

You made the association. You literally brought them up yourself.

Post by joxdosba » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 12:23 PM UTC

eptcyka wrote: post #332

joxdosba wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I simply pointed out that gaming and especially gamers have some pretty extreme negative connotations, which is true. I could dump you links to research detailing the connections between the online gaming community and right wing extremism, but I’m pretty sure you know what I’m talking about. “Gamer” is basically synonymous for “neo-nazi incel”, and GSK refers to itself as a “global coalition of gamers”. That’s a pre…

Have you ever touched grass? You could also argue that posting in an online message board is linked with right wing extremism because there are right wing extremists posting stuff online.

Post by joxdosba » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 5:38 PM UTC

skotobaza wrote: post #334

joxdosba wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sure the preservation folks will tend to be older, but they’re still going to end up grouped with all other gamers. It’s a deeply unfortunate association. The “gamer” identity is toxic to the point where “gamer word” means “racial slur”.

I think with younger generations the perception shifted quite a bit. Gaming has become so normal that people with "radical" views and behavior are now in minority. Also the other aspects affected this - livestreaming is a good example where you need to be on your best behavior to not get banned or canceled.

Post by necovek » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 6:07 PM UTC

keybored wrote: post #285

hobofan wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's reasonable to at least expect that. It's their job after all, while for any single voter there is a lower standard you can realistically hold them too and less time available to verify/debunk claims. On top of that, there are also instruments that help the voters track whether politicians are engaging in corrupt lobbyism like voting records + donation / campaign contribution records, though few countries do that…

> On top of that, there are also instruments that help the voters track whether politicians are engaging in corrupt lobbyism like voting records + donation / campaign contribution records, though few countries do that to a degree that it forms a cohesive anti-corruption framework. None of those measures exist for individual voters. Corruption by definition is intentional, compare getting hoodwinked by "misinformation…

Post by l23k4 » Sat, Jun 20, 2026, 12:17 PM UTC

skotobaza wrote: post #338

skotobaza wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because businesses just love to turn down free money Unfortunately, yes. Example - try getting publishing rights to No One Lives Forever franchise (GOG already tried that). It's not rare for publishers to sit on their IPs without doing anything with them. And it's not exclusive to videogames as well. > make them last longer You can look at it differently. "Last longer" can mean "getting support from the publisher f…

I also want to add that proposing people to buy an IP from a company (or pay it to keep supporting it) is very disingenuous and even borderline trolling. That's not how it works even remotely. Companies do not "negotiate" with consumers about it. So even bringing this up shows the amount of dismissiveness and bad faith that SKG "deniers" bring to the discussion. Utterly baffling...