Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Feminist video-games talk pulled after massacre threat

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–348 of 348 posts

Re: Feminist video-games talk pulled after massacre threat

#341

Post by meowface »

archagon wrote: post #193
marknutter wrote: post #118

These days isn't receiving death threats on the internet kind of par for the course? How many internet death threats have actually resulted in deaths? I think the answer is zero. Why even pay them any attention?

Not only do these women receive orders of magnitude more death threats than your typical online celebrity, but people do in fact come to their homes, contact their relatives, harass them at work, mail them stuff, etc. Consider also that some studies have shown that more than a third of all women have been sexually harassed or assaulted at some point in their lives, which is mostly invisible to guys like me[1]. That m…

The comment you linked was quite excellent and changed my perspective a bit. I read the whole thing.

However, I'm not sure I'm convinced that someone like Anita necessarily has gotten more death threats than someone like Jack Thompson, and I also don't know if her being a woman plays a significant factor. I'm willing to accept that's true with evidence, but there isn't really evidence (and no easy way to find or gather such evidence). Death threats are unacceptable but the kind that have been sent to Anita seem to be more of the Internet troll variety than anything else.

Re: Feminist video-games talk pulled after massacre threat

#342

Post by Argorak »

Houshalter wrote: post #318
Argorak wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if they were poor or badly researched, death threats are just way out of scope. Like: NEVER, EVER, IN ANY INTERACTION ARE THEY OKAY, NO POINT TO ARGUE. They are also no joke. (sorry for using all caps for once) (I take explanations for downvotes)

Saying that death threats are bad is not something anyone disagrees with, as far as I know. It's just an applause light ( http://lesswrong.com/lw/jb/applause_lights/ ) at best.

This very page has people arguing that death threats are par for the course on the internet and should be ignored as well as others trying to contextualize them.

There is a reason why I wrote this sentence on this very page.

Re: Feminist video-games talk pulled after massacre threat

#343

Post by Houshalter »

Argorak wrote: post #342
Houshalter wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that death threats are bad is not something anyone disagrees with, as far as I know. It's just an applause light ( http://lesswrong.com/lw/jb/applause_lights/ ) at best.

This very page has people arguing that death threats are par for the course on the internet and should be ignored as well as others trying to contextualize them. There is a reason why I wrote this sentence on this very page.

You said that making death threats was bad, which everyone agrees on. Some people disagree that they are as significant as made out to be. Almost all controversial figures get death threats. Obama gets 30 a day, about 40,000 in total. Yet assassinations and mass shootings are extremely rare.

Re: Feminist video-games talk pulled after massacre threat

#344

Post by Argorak »

Houshalter wrote: post #343
Argorak wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This very page has people arguing that death threats are par for the course on the internet and should be ignored as well as others trying to contextualize them. There is a reason why I wrote this sentence on this very page.

You said that making death threats was bad, which everyone agrees on. Some people disagree that they are as significant as made out to be. Almost all controversial figures get death threats. Obama gets 30 a day, about 40,000 in total. Yet assassinations and mass shootings are extremely rare.

No. I said that they are never okay and no joke, which people disagree with (including you, just now, you argue that they are ignorable). Don't rephrase or interpret.

Yes, Obama gets 30 per day. What a sad world we live in, in which people are okay with that. Also, Obama can pay for bodyguards.

The goal of a death threat is not necessarily the killing, but insecurity and psychological effect.

Re: Feminist video-games talk pulled after massacre threat

#345

Post by x0x0 »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #327
dalore wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safer only because the criminals also have guns. But not actually safer at all. I'd rather the UK where people don't carry. Much safer there. Just look at the number of gun deaths in the UK vs the US.

SO what replaces "gun deaths" in the UK? Bullying, physical violence? To call it 'safer' you'd have to talk about actual public safety, not just cherry-pick one stat.

Yes, a stat like people being shot and dying. 8.8k firearm related homicides in 2012. Plus 20k firearm-related suicides in 2010, the last year I can conveniently find numbers.

Your post may seriously be the stupidest thing I've ever read in my life.

Re: Feminist video-games talk pulled after massacre threat

#346

Post by kelvin0 »

CocaKoala wrote: post #261
kelvin0 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, so buy me a beer I will explain in person. Much simpler. I stand by my original comment, but this was never meant to be 'backed up' by any facts. Somewhere along this thread people are talking about conceal carry weapons, this is off topic. At least my comment had the merit of considering the topic at hand with a hypothetical scenario that got waaaay to much attention. I am always surprised by some reactions on H…

What? Why would I buy you a beer? You've done nothing but lie to me and skate around your words in what can only be either an attempt to spread doubt on the validity of a horrifying situation, or a manifestation of an appalling lack of self awareness. How are you standing by your original comment? edit: What I'm really looking for is any evidence at all that you're trying to debate in good faith. All of you've done i…

Breathe in, breathe out. The universe still hums, regardless.

Re: Feminist video-games talk pulled after massacre threat

#347

Post by kelvin0 »

CocaKoala wrote: post #261
kelvin0 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, so buy me a beer I will explain in person. Much simpler. I stand by my original comment, but this was never meant to be 'backed up' by any facts. Somewhere along this thread people are talking about conceal carry weapons, this is off topic. At least my comment had the merit of considering the topic at hand with a hypothetical scenario that got waaaay to much attention. I am always surprised by some reactions on H…

What? Why would I buy you a beer? You've done nothing but lie to me and skate around your words in what can only be either an attempt to spread doubt on the validity of a horrifying situation, or a manifestation of an appalling lack of self awareness. How are you standing by your original comment? edit: What I'm really looking for is any evidence at all that you're trying to debate in good faith. All of you've done i…

You are creating a tornado in a cup of tea. Please refrain from such emotions, they only shorten your lifespan.

Re: Feminist video-games talk pulled after massacre threat

#348

Post by JoeAltmaier »

x0x0 wrote: post #345
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SO what replaces "gun deaths" in the UK? Bullying, physical violence? To call it 'safer' you'd have to talk about actual public safety, not just cherry-pick one stat.

Yes, a stat like people being shot and dying. 8.8k firearm related homicides in 2012. Plus 20k firearm-related suicides in 2010, the last year I can conveniently find numbers. Your post may seriously be the stupidest thing I've ever read in my life.

There were 70,000+ cases of violent crime in the UK in 2014. Which of those replace the so-called gun crimes? Without knowing that, you've got nothing to compare to.
Post reply on HN