Hey Milo: I'll publish your #GamerGate book!

Let me start off by saying this: To be fair to him he just announced it and that could mean anything.

However there’s usually a few right-wing publishers that would jump at the chance to give someone like him all the money they can spare, and people who write an article announcing that they are planning to write a book without having a publisher already lined up usually mean “I want you, yes you the reader to send me money for that book” Meanwhile he may or may not have screwed investors, employees and customers out of money, which true or not sets off more than one red-flag among publishers. I’m not saying his GG book won’t see the inside of a brick-and-mortar store, but I am saying the odds of that happening are against him.

> Meanwhile he may or may not have screwed investors, employees and customers out of money, which true or not sets off more than one red-flag among publishers.

It’s pretty well documented that he did precisely this. http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/mar/01/the-kernel

I’ll go make some popcorn!

Quick, minions! Too the comfy chair!

From the introduction by Luigi:

Hello, itsa me, Luigi. My brother Mario was asked to write this introduction but was too busy. It’s ok. I’m used to subsisting on the crumbs from his table. Totally cool with it.

What really matters is that I am passionate about the issue that Milo is writing about: gates in games. Every year, untold millions of video game characters die in falls that could have been avoided had a simple safety gate been in place. Likewise, if vicious animals and mobsters were held in properly gated pens, many many needless fatalities could have been avoided.

As three dimensional human beings, perhaps you have come to take gates for granted. That’s understandable. They do such a great job of protecting you that you don’t even remember that they’re there. We games need them though. This book will, I’m sure, explain the need to code them into future mazes and dungeons.

It may also explain the need to tar and feather those sadistic bastards who design games.

Luigi, 2014

Wow, I have to go for the twilight one, just because Milo looks right at home among the cast. Just do a tiny bit of color correction and he’s another sparkly vampire!

So, I went and skimmed the Breitbart article. And a few of the comments. Not really sure what compelled me to do that.

On the other hand, that did lead me to watch Jonathan Mann’s “Beta as Fuck“, so I guess I’ll consider the whole thing a net positive.

I wanted to shop something, but the Twilight one is already perfect.

Grace Lynn – I love the “just finishing the interview with Aurini” one! 😀

I couldn’t resist.

http://i.imgur.com/Sf3wkhO.png

Totally off-topic, gomen. Had to post this somewhere, though, because it was burning up my head-brains somethin’ fierce. TWs: Sexual assault. Victim denial.

USA Today: “The Great Campus Rape Hoax”
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/12/14/campus-rape-uva-crisis-rolling-stone-politics-column/20397277/
Published today (the 15th) in USA Today. Writer doesn’t understand the difference between annualized rates or aggregate numbers. I do, and I’m a damned journalism major, for cripes’ sake. Back to the salt mine with the author, imo.

Here’s the DOJ report mentioned in the USAT column.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf
You’ll note that, while there’s a 20ish% rate difference in both the rates of unreported assaults and the rates for reported assaults for nonstudents and students, students are more than twice as likely to say their assaults weren’t important enough to report. There’s several possible interpretations for that. Despite what some talking heads are saying, one of those interpretations is that sexual assaults against students are underreported compared to ones against nonstudents. Of course, this report isn’t fine-grained enough for us to say much of anything with confidence. It’s just a starting point, and it demands follow-ups (if that’s possible, I don’t know how finely tuned the DoJ’s data is).

And, because I like you guys, I tried to dig up the 1-in-5 study. I didn’t find it (to be honest, I didn’t dig that deep), but I did find an editorial by two of its authors:
http://time.com/author/christopher-krebs-and-christine-lindquist/
You’ll note that they’re doing typical scientific hedging. To paraphrase: “These numbers are accurate, but they’re not solid enough to say, ‘This is the reality across the nation.’ ” They haven’t repudiated their figures, they haven’t stepped back from the study. They are reporting that the numbers are being misused (the figure is that 1-in-5 college women in the study were assaulted, but “only” 1-in-7 will have suffered forced penetration, aka the classic definition of rape) — but you’ll note that the author of the USA Today article similarly mischaracterizes both the study and the authors’ rebuttal to smear political opponents. (The reason the author doesn’t link to either the study or the rebuttal has to be simple oversight, not evidence of conscious lying, right? Right?)

Anyway, apologies again for off-topic posting. This editorial just pissed me off somethin’ fierce, and I had to share.

https://twitter.com/athenahollow/status/544637707839102976