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

A Natural A/B Test of Harassment

developers.kongregate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 158 posts

Re: A Natural A/B Test of Harassment

#51

Post by wismer »

paulnechifor wrote: post #42
vacri wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The impassioned hysteria over 'ethics in video game journalism' is the problematic part, not the issue itself. And, to be frank, that ridiculous level of hysteria makes it clear that it's not really about ethics in video game journalism. No-one is dead or has been maimed by it. Lives aren't destroyed by it. Basically, it's a good example of dog whistle politics, using a term that is more palatable to push a less pala…

> The impassioned hysteria over 'ethics in video game journalism' is the problematic part, not the issue itself. The fact that people like you are saying that others have no right to be concerned and angry about unethical journalism is the reason for the impassioned hysteria in the first place. > And, to be frank, that ridiculous level of hysteria makes it clear that it's not really about ethics in video game journal…

"It's about ethics" yet most of the moderators of the subreddit /r/KotakuInAction are also moderators of distinctly misogynstic subreddits http://i.imgur.com/3j7uzXZ.jpg

EDIT: You might be taking downvotes too personally.

Re: A Natural A/B Test of Harassment

#52

Post by silencio »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #44
JulianMorrison wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One every 50 days is 1) The absolute, lowest, background radiation level, of men hassling women. 2) Even despite that, demonstrably worse that what men get. This is not the norm. This is what's still left when the volume of a woman's public presence is dialled down to infinitesimal above zero. Normal is way worse.

So the average woman gets more harassment than a woman running a popular gaming site? That seems to contradict the narrative that gaming is full of trolls. Do you have data suggesting that the average woman receives anything close to recruiter levels of unwanted mail, or is this just a guess?

I get recruiter spam and harassment alike. How's that for fun?

There is no way they're on the same level. The worst recruiter I've had to handle is way easier than the tamest of harassers. It's not about frequency in the slightest.

Re: A Natural A/B Test of Harassment

#53

Post by defen »

knowtheory wrote: post #45
defen wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The extreme nutshell version is that a female indie game developer supposedly slept with a male video game journalist, and this supposedly let to favorable coverage for her game that would not have happened otherwise. The surface phenomenon is that a lot of people united under the banner of #gamergate to protest this breach of journalistic ethics. The dark side is that it seems like it's really just a bunch of people…

Those are the stated reasons. It's worth noting no such review was ever written for Zoe Quinn's game. GamerGate has now doxxed and threatened a number of women in the gaming world (developers, critics, actresses) and Phil Fish the creator of Fez. They publicly organize to drive advertisers away from publications which disagree with them or call Gamergate out as misogynistic or threatening.

Right, that's why I said "supposedly".

Re: A Natural A/B Test of Harassment

#54

Post by timmclean »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #50
timmclean wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The psychological impact of "I'll drink your blood out of your c--- after I rip it open" [1] is very different from that of recruiter spam. [1] https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/504718160902492160

Tl;dr its all in the mind of the receiver (aka psychological). Though I suspect that by rephrasing the exact same thing you said, I shall be down voted to [dead] shortly.

The implication that psychological damage is not "real" damage is false.

Re: A Natural A/B Test of Harassment

#56

Post by aptwebapps »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #50
timmclean wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The psychological impact of "I'll drink your blood out of your c--- after I rip it open" [1] is very different from that of recruiter spam. [1] https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/504718160902492160

Tl;dr its all in the mind of the receiver (aka psychological). Though I suspect that by rephrasing the exact same thing you said, I shall be down voted to [dead] shortly.

"its all in the mind of the receiver (aka psychological)"

Two points:

1) Except when it isn't. 2) Isn't that enough? What are we, robots? It's true that some people might be able to treat the two things the same and not be affected, but they're a tiny minority. Harm is harm, even if you think that everyone should have thicker skin.

Re: A Natural A/B Test of Harassment

#57

Post by jzwinck »

Disclaimer: I agree there is a real social problem here. The rest of this message is solely about statistics (inspired by the language of statistics used in the article, like "A/B Test," "statistical significance," and "99.9% confidence level").

The article opens with an analysis of messages to one male and one (self-selected) female from a community which has a large male majority.

Most people in the world are heterosexual, and in my opinion people are more likely to sexually harass the gender they "like." Let's say 3/4 of people are straight and 1/4 are gay. Let's also say that 2/3 of sexual harassment is directed at the "preferred" gender" of the perpetrator.

Imagine a population of 80 boys and 8 girls, all equally "good." Half of them never say a bad thing to anyone. The other half lash out once a month and say something disgusting.

Now, we have 60 straight boys, 30 of whom behave badly once a month. That's 30 nasty messages a month, 20 of which go to girls and 10 to boys. We also have 20 gay boys generating 10 nastygrams monthly, 7 to boys and 3 to girls.

As for the girls, there are 6 straight ones, 3 of whom are bad, so they send 2 threatening topics to boys and 1 to a girl each month. Of the 2 gay girls only one is malfeasant, so let's say she sends her only "love letter" to a girl.

How many total bad messages are sent each month? 20 + 3 + 1 + 1 = 25 to girls, and 10 + 7 + 2 + 0 = 19 to boys. With 80 total boys, each will receive about one salacious message per four months. But each of the 8 girls will absorb, on average, just over 3 per month.

I tried to use conservative numbers here, and still the girls in a male-majority group get 13 times as many unwanted notes as boys. This is deplorable, but it is also unsurprising given the population.

Re: A Natural A/B Test of Harassment

#58

Post by aptwebapps »

droopyEyelids wrote: post #22
chiaro wrote: post #2

A shame the point needs to be repeatedly made. A five minute foray into the wasteland that is twitch chat will show some pretty stark differences between how men and women become targets for trolling and vitriol. While some of the concerns of the whole gamergate mess were perhaps reasonable at some point in time, the whole thing has disappeared under a huge number of people who see their any supposed righteousness as…

I'm commenting to register my frustration with what I call the "harm reductionism fallacy". At it's most extreme point, it can be parodied to something like "You have no right to complain about a problem in your privileged life because people are starving in $COUNTRY" In all it's forms, it's a sort of ridicule directed towards people trying to make their lives better. I believe people have the right to complain about…

You can be concerned about ethics in game journalism and try to do something about it even though other injustices exist, by my book at least. But the gamergate tag has been effectively taken over by the misogynists and haters. That may not be fair, but it's a fact. If people in the first group continue to use that umbrella they are aiding the people in the second group. Again, not fair, but that's the way it is.

Re: A Natural A/B Test of Harassment

#59

Post by towaway5098 »

andrewvc wrote: post #28

What I urge people in this thread to do is not to pick up a google search, or read a book, but to just go out and ask a few female friends what their thoughts are about being online, being safe, and being respected, and to listen with an open mind. I see a lot of denial in here, people rooting around for reasons to think that there isn't a serious fucking problem with intimidation and psychological violence taking pl…

Look to women in the industry and ask what they think. And not just the indies who are outside the industry.

https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2jk2rq/ama_...

If you have a twitter account, go ask #NotYourShield what women think of this as well.

Don't just take any single persons word on this. Also, is this being downvoted because you don't want to read it?

Re: A Natural A/B Test of Harassment

#60

Post by knowtheory »

defen wrote: post #53
knowtheory wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are the stated reasons. It's worth noting no such review was ever written for Zoe Quinn's game. GamerGate has now doxxed and threatened a number of women in the gaming world (developers, critics, actresses) and Phil Fish the creator of Fez. They publicly organize to drive advertisers away from publications which disagree with them or call Gamergate out as misogynistic or threatening.

Right, that's why I said "supposedly".

Yes, but saying "supposedly" is leaving the door open. The door is not open. No such thing ever happened.
Post reply on HN