Hello fellow gamers,
We're the people who will be implementing the next chapter for OAG.
As many of you have noticed, there is a lot of controversy and concern about the site's future under new management. This, in part, is owed to how we went about announcing the next chapter of our journey together. For this, we apologize and are here to dispel any and all rumors going around as well as address any questions you our audience have for us.
We will show you with our action and our product's quality that we are serious about our mission and respect for you - the consumer. To begin this process, we are setting up an AMA to answer questions you have about the transition, staffing, what is going on, or who is best girl and why traps are most assuredly gay. Anything you are curious about, we will attempt to answer.
Ask us anything!
Proof: https://twitter.com/OneAngryGamerHD/status/1323646163317383169
We'll start answering your questions in 3 hours.
https://kotakuinaction2.win/u/OneAngryGamerHD/ ( Lead Editor ) https://kotakuinaction2.win/u/Kevin_Green/ ( Legacy Writer ) AKA Kevin : )
Why do you think it's appropriate to take a site that was staunchly pro-free speech and shitting all over the idea of free speech?
We did not " take " it, it was coughing up its last breaths. We do not look to censor free-speech ourselves (the new management), but the site has to live one way or another. The over-romanticization of free-speech is something that is not sustainable once the website reached the traffic that it is at. We believe that we can keep free-speech alive and well with the next chapter of OAG. If people are not able to express their opinions without using N***, F*** etc., it's not censorship to blame.
While I don't respect your PR work here, I do appreciate you shining light on some of the ugly truths of this matter.
You're making a serious argument against free speech - in a gamergate community! It's quite something.
Speaking personally and not in a professional capacity I find there are very very few people who are true absolutionists when it comes to Freedom of Speech. Most refuse to even stop the government from passing obscenity laws, hate speech laws, or hate crimes laws that often require presumption to be made about motivation thus regulating thought itself.
Further porn is legally classified as speech and how many of you are willing to defend Child Pornography? Well that’s different because children are being harmed in the creation. True, but they’re not harmed in the possession, but that’s a moral argument for a different day. (For the record I am against Child Pornography, I am using it in an intellectual capacity and this statement in no way, shape, or form advocates for the production or ownership of CP.)
How about libel and defamation laws? Those with wisdom will also agree we need Truth in Media laws, but that restricts their capacity to speak as they would desire. We don’t permit shouting fire in a crowded building or incitement anywhere even if it is justified. The reality is most people do not believe in freedom of speech until they want to say something and then they find they cannot say it. The smart among us wisely realize the censors will come for us if we let them take an inch so we defend the right as best we can.
That being said we are not the ones who woke up one day and went, yeah I really want to create an arbitrary nanny state system that restrict what people says so everyone can feel included and not discriminated against. Society did that and when Google and Silicon Valley expanded it no one had a single issue until it became a problem.
Do we want to limit what you all say? No. There is no profit in doing so. There is no emotional gain from wielding such petty power. All of us have better things we could be doing with our time than doing so. Yet we are forced to abide by Googles terms and we came to our established audience to explain what was going on. We aren’t here to beg you or coddle you. This is the reality and until Silicon Valley’s monopolistic grasp is destroyed it will remain the reality.
Now you can hate us for that reality or understand that we can continue delivering truth to more people by bending the knee to a small demand and in the grander scheme of the culture war it is a small demand, a petty victory that etches away at their support. I hope you give us a chance, but I understand if you won’t. That is your right, but if you won’t at least send us tips on juicy stories. Anyway, that’s just my two cents on the matter.
I'm only gonna argue for pushing free speech absolutism on the internet because it's way easier to try to create a bunch of sites with wild west rules from 10+ years ago than it would be to try and establish a legitimate and fully-functional libertarian/ancap paradise in real life. So I don't have much internal conflict for taking a hard stance for it online. I can defend pedos online without worrying about being assaulted or abducted, unlike real life public spaces, for instance. Same with other highly volatile topics. Free market of ideas, and all that.
I appreciate the argument about losing one battle in a bigger war you're trying to win, but I want you to not attribute all possible bitterness the OAG brand receives towards idealism. There's another major factor, in that OAG was a figure of hope (maybe not a top10 hope, but still) for people who are feeling trapped in demoralization, but the leadership has changed hands and there's little reason to expect the same under new leadership. Such an audience has been burned too often to have use of promises; all you can do for them is make a good product, consistently (which was hopefully already a goal).