Did anyone else find the exchange between Nilay and John awkward and a bit harsh?

[G+_Dean Barnard]

Did anyone else find the exchange between Nilay and John awkward and a bit harsh?  I just listened to it and it seems that Dvorak was right when he beleived that Nilay called him a racist for not liking the "big cans" for headphones and saggy pants.  Or am I reading into it?  Probably the most heated exchange between 2 guests that I can remember

[G+_Spike Spikerson]

No, you're not reading into it. Did you see the video or just listen. The video was a little more telling. JCD sorta turned it into a joke but Nilay is still a child looking for approval where ever he can.

[G+_Tim Allen]

I listened to the audio and then had to go to the video to see John's reaction.  I see enough of that behavior in real life, I'm not interested in it on a tech show.  I hope that was Nilay's last appearance on the network.

[G+_david wayne]

Perry Thomson Tim Allen I have to agree with both of you. Watched the video and after the exchange, I will not watch anything with Nilay. After His comments, I heard nothing valid.

[G+_Joe Phelps]

Patel is an arrogant ass. His sole purpose of being on the show was to promote The Verge. I'm not a Dvorak fan but Patel insulted him thoroughly and Leo Laporte let him get away with it.

[G+_Blake DeVoss]

I disagree. I didn't even think about it being a racial comment until John mentioned it. Patel was simply pointing out that "big cans" are a style choice just like "saggy jeans". It's a choice made due to style rather than a sense of practicality.

 

John takes the worst possible meaning of any statement and jokes about it. Some people take claims like this seriously instead of jokingly.

[G+_Tim Allen]

Nilay started out and ended by talking about 'walking away from the conversation.'  Intent was clear.

[G+_Eng. Jorge Santana]

Completely disagree Nilay was right that it's a style that's hot right now the racist comment from John was ridiculous I still love both and the entire show content wise was very good. Very good disscussion on all topics IMHO great panel...

[G+_Peter Phillips]

I think it was a generational difference on the role of technology.

[G+_Jonathan Jesse]

I just listened to it on audio as a podcast

[G+_Jonathan Jesse]

I was very disappointed in how it sounded via the audio. Patel sounded very offended about any criticism of his site. His comments lost credibility for me

[G+_Paul Franz]

Sounds like an episode that might want to miss

[G+_Shane Simmons]

That's when I almost quit listening to the show; I stopped when Nilay gave the synopsis of Gamergate.  I'm sorry if this whole thing sounds like "mansplaining" and I know it's overlong and rambling, but I've read up on it, have some personal insight into one aspect of it (depression),  have tried to cut through the crap on both sides, and Nilay, being with The Verge, is apparently physiologically incapable of delivering a story without major bias.

 

The thing is...he's not wrong.  Sexism plays a big part in Gamergate, as does corruption.  Full disclosure: I'm not a hardcore gamer, but I followed it enough to know that Nilay is full of crap here.  The sexism on both sides got heated when Anita Sarkeesian threw in public support for Zoe Quinn.

 

The thing is, that's not the whole story, and the fact that Sarkeesian became a part of the story is such a load of crap.  The real story here, IMHO, is how destructive the Internet Horde can be, no matter what its political agenda, whether it's sending rape and death threats to keep gaming an All Boys Club, or sending death threats to Stephen Moffatt because Peter Capaldi is an old white guy.

 

In 2013, Zoe Quinn released a Choose Your Own Adventure style game called Depression Quest.  It got press attention, even getting pulled out specifically by one outlet when it got greenlighted on Steam.  This raised eyebrows.  

 

Again, I'm not a hardcore gamer, but I know something about the genre:  Interactive Fiction was really popular in the early 80s.  I realize retro games have seen a resurgence in the last few years, but IF never really made a strong comeback.  Furthher, it's done on a platform called Twine.  If you're not familiar with it, it's a lowish-effort platform for writing interactive fiction which spits out a webpage based on TiddlyWiki's code.

 

I have depression, and I've played it.  Yes, it reads like my life: I have a series of choices, and I choose not to choose.  The main character is just like that.  And it's like that: you just keep clicking...and clicking...and clicking...meh.

 

I'm sure it was very cathartic, and it's not like it's bad...but it's not that good, either.  There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of IF stories released every year, many of them by women, some of them quite good, and they never get any attention.

 

It raised eyebrows.  It caused murmurs.  And the shitstorm happened when Quinn's former boyfriend accused her of having sex with some of the journalists who gave her favorable coverage.

 

And that's when all rational discourse ended.  There are scores of guys who accused her of "fucking" her way into game development, and all manner of shitty ways of handling it.  Why was she the primary target?  Not many good reasons; the only good one I can think of is that she, if it's true, took advantage of The Patriarchy to get ahead.

 

But why weren't the guys subjected to the same level of grilling?

 

Anyway, for that reason, I just sorta tuned out.  It was clear Nilay was doing the same thing outlets like BoingBoing and Gawker are doing, declaring the issue to be 100% about sexism, with Jezebel going as far as labeling gamers as a "hate group".

 

After all that, to a certain extent, I wish people luck when they try to do away with gatekeepers of any kind.  Here I am, straight white dude, 39, and I would have loved to have been into Magic: The Gathering, would have loved to have been into roleplaying, LAN parties, and all manner of geeky things, but I can't stand gatekeepers.  Look, if I have Magic cards and I want to play, I play to have fun.  I don't play to prove myself or to demonstrate how much better my deck is than yours; I want to win or lose, and not have a fight over whether I should be playing this card or that.

[G+_Jonathan Jesse]

Shane Simmons when he started off with the "I'm not biased as I have friends who are being attacked with death threats etc." Leo should have cut him off and stopped him from presenting one side of the story.  SOmeone should have given the "Gamergate" summary and then allowed for opinions to happen

[G+_Shane Simmons]

I don't think Leo would have done that.  I mean, yeah, in the past, he's tried to have more women on the show and he goofs by saying sexist stuff, but he's an older guy.  The important thing is that he's trying, of course; but because of that, I think he wants to err on the side of not being sexist, even if that means letting the bias happen.

[G+_Dave Trautman]

Jonathan Jesse — listen again.  Nilay says is is biased because his staff and friends... etc.  He did this twice.

 

As to the rest of the gamer-gate thing I appreciated someone providing an explanation which was rooted in the "identity" part of the controversy.  A very small group of people who closely identify with games and gaming itself seem to have decided to defend to the death their right to claim this identity and defy anyone who would deem to criticize.

 

I've been trying to learn more about this controversy from a number of other reporters but I felt I learned more about the underlying issues from this exchange than I have from any other source.  For this I think this episode of TWiT was worth watching.

[G+_Shane Simmons]

Dave Trautman Not sure I agree; I detect fallacious logic in Nilay's setup but don't remember enough about that part of my undergrad days to put my finger on it.  There's more to it than what you say, but yeah, what you said unfortunately does figure heavily into it.