It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

As I said in the other thread, I'm firmly in the "Eh" camp.

I'll go fetch my post.

Or not, seems that thread was wiped.

But basically what I said was that he was a good moderator and community manager, but GOG's social media presence was laughable/awful, and that GOG should stick a straight faced social media presence.

To make it clear: if Linko was dismissed, it was business. While there was no ill intent behind many of the things on social media, they were still embarrassing in 90s gaming mag kinda ways. But Linko was a much needed mod. So if he's still around, I'll happily accept his moderation presence.
Post edited October 27, 2018 by Darvond
MarkoH01: ...
I fully agree, bad moderators/moderation can easily ruins a community (look at a certain ...era forum ) more than no moderation IMHO, so I was a little worried when Linko arrived.

But in the end my fears were unfounded, he was present and doing his job but I didn't find he gone overboard, and globally I think his presence was positive for the forum, giving the forum some much needed moderation without making it feel like some sort of totalitarian regime (unlike, again, some ...era forum).

Like I said multiple times, Gog should stop trying to be the next Wendy on Twitter, especially now with so many peoples looking for blood, but I think that on the moderation part they were on the right track with Linko.
Speaking of doxxing, I'd like to thank Linko and elcook and Judas and several of the forum members for helping me out with the guy/girl who showed up every few weeks doxxing me.

Looking back on it, I maybe should have embraced it as free advertising for my B&B, but still, thank you.
high rated
Too many rumours, speculations, hearsays, assumption. Due to gog (and/or linko's) choice to keep things foggy. Causalites out of reach. Still, comments.

1) Linko was a good moderator, and these forums needed/need that. No tweeter activity can cancel this. What is the current narrative ? That he is a terrible internet alt-right troll who was detested on the gog forums by the alt-right trolls that he was moderating and banning ?

2) The tweet was blown out of proportion. Being outraged by tweets, jokes or smelly marketing is perfectly okay (the clunky, deliberate or accidental, gamergate support half-hidden in the Postal screenshot deserved a reaction), but it has to be legitimate and proportional. This recycling of a serious hashtag in a nonserious tweet is no big deal, and is not univocally politically oriented (it is not anti-LGBT per se). I've given the opposite exemple : if a gog tweet had jokingly used a maga hashtag to promote a game (either keeping the acronym or changing its meaning), would it have been interpreted as derisive of Trump's campaign or supportive of it ? The is no logic behind it. The taboo on merely winking at serious matters in off-beat light contexts is based on the same principle as blasphemy : blasphemy punishes the mere association of the Sacred with the secular mundane ("not take the name of God in vain"), with the idea that this mere association is an inacceptable attack on its sacrality. And blasphemy is a very unhealthy notion, always, anywhere - be it about gods, flags, identities, norms, or righteous combats. It's an extremist perversion of the notion of respect, even where respect is genuinely due.

3) Doxing and harassing (if it happened) a human for that sort of "sin" is unforgivably disproportionate, and is illustrative of the toxic volatility of the internet. It is also a reminder that awful people seeking for a cause to justify their sadism will find such causes anywhere, they may instrumentalise good ones or bad ones alike (and sometimes even hop from one to the other). What matters to them is the legitimacy of physical and symbolic violences. Such people should be denounced on all sides. All sides should denounce such people within their own ranks. Partisan complacency is, on all sides, a disgusting phenomenon. That being said, *if* gog has added, to this unfair disproportion, the unfair disproportion of Linko's dismissal, it has made a problem even worse.

4) While basically supportive of Linko here, for these reasons, I wish not to associate with people who support him on very different grounds (even if they hypocritically refer to similar reasons). What I mean here is that if Linko's tweet had been, in my eyes, a direct attack on pro-trans movements in the USA, my stance would be partially different (I would be against Linko, and even if not accepting the doxing and harassment, I would be more accepting of his removal). Many people who support Linko here would have no issue with that, and are actually supporting him *because* his tweet is being interpreted as anti-trans. One reason why I respect Linko, is because I believe that (whatever his supposed personal stances) he was or would have been doing a good job at moderating transphobic posts in this forum. Which would mean going against some of his current supporters.

So, count this as default support, on my side, for Linko in the current situation. And wishes that he's okay.

And I also hope Fables is too. Her departure sure didn't shock as many people (I wish she had benefitted from such a thread), but she was also doing a great job. And it's distressing to see how short the stay of decent gog moderators tends to be.
Post edited October 27, 2018 by Telika
Without more details, it's hard to take a clear and hard stance. However, if it is indeed true that Linko was fired, and also for making a silly tweet, then he's more a patsy: the linko on the forums seemed to hesitate on anything that could harm the company's image. The tweet in question was most certainly tone deaf, as were the reactions to it (no movement owns phrases).

Good luck, Linko, and anyone else who has been booted out of GOG due to political controversy, and/or harassed by hate mobs. These same people equate words with violence, so they choose not to fight with words, but fight with that which flirts with the line between that which could be considered violence. These are cheap tactics used by people who will to win "at any cost." I wish to cry "havoc," but only adds to the hate, but solves nothing, but sometimes it gets all the more tempting.
Pheace: Considering the latest tweet itself implied a purposeful use of the hashtag and if it was really a 'third strike' as was mentioned above then i can only assume it was intentional so for that alone I'd say whomever it was should be removed from twitter duty.
the only purpose there was to jump on a trending hash tag to raise the visibility of your marketing tweets. If you read through GOGs twitter account a bit you'll see that there is a constant pattern of embedding the latest hashtags & memes. The alleged narrative that this one tweet was purposely crafted to promote a political message is hilariously far fetched when looking at GOGs twitter history. It's just that nobody cares if GOG repurposes #WhyIWrite or #HowISurviveIn4Words for their marketing needs.

That being said, even if unintentional, in light of the current debate that tweet was terribly insensitiv and out of place. GOG definitely deserved being criticized for that. Especially since this wasn't the first time that their social media team was this tone-deaf and careless in their choice of words. If you work in the PR/advertising department you should do better than this.

However the problem is that the outrage went far beyond any acceptable level of criticizm.
You can't possibly give GOG shit for their insensitive tweets and then be silent about the personal attacks & open harrassment against GOG employees that even extend to their family. It is infuriating to see that this kind of abusive behaviour is accepted, or even nurtured and cheered on, just because it happens under the banner of a good cause.
Accepting these kind of attacks under your banner does more harm to your good cause than any shitty advertising tweet that GOG can make.

Aside from all the twitter drama I can only echo the sentiment that Linko did a good job on moderating the forums. It would suck to lose that just because of this, because it is badly needed. And given how little luck GOG had with their previous attempts to bring in a moderator/community manager, they may want to think twice about throwing the current one away.

( I wouldn't really expect any immediate response from GOG on this matter. Any further comment they will make, will just help to keep the drama going, bringing more misery for everyone involved. The best course of action might be just to go silent, let the flames fizzle out and wait for the internet mob to find fresh blood elsewhere. That unfortunately seems to be the way the internet/society works. As sad as that may be. )
Little question: What does "doxxing" mean?
Maxvorstadt: Little question: What does "doxxing" mean?
documents → docs → dox

Posting documentation about someone online, with the implication of being personally identifiable information in connect to their alias, such as address, phone number, real name, etc.
Doxxing is used as an intimidation tactic to silence/harass someone who has comitted some 'sin' against a political or ideological group.

People who are doxxed are often harassed then by phone along with relatives and employers in an attempt to ruin their lives. It's pathetic and disgusting, usually done by zealots.
Ah, so doxxing means to use Stasi tactics online.
Maxvorstadt: Ah, so doxxing means to use Stasi tactics online.
No, a little different from my understanding of the stasi. You'll find that doxxers dox with the intention of washing their hands of whatever happens with the information they released. The doxxer will say they committed no violence. They flirt with the slippery slope fallacy. A phone company might post address and phone number "legitimately" in a "phone book," and this is not doxxing, since the purpose wasn't to connect them to some "sin." Doxxing, as far as i can tell, seems to be a way that certain people can take violent action against someone without directly committing violence, allowing them to keep peace with themselves and/or position themselves better with associates or potential associates.

What boggles my mind is that they usually use such justifications, but turn around and say they were justified in doing it because the "sin" committed inevitably leads to some form of violence (usually governmental policy) against a particular person or group.
Maxvorstadt: Ah, so doxxing means to use Stasi tactics online.
More like online stalking. But instead of doing it to privately jerk off on the found pictures they jerk off on the damage they do to the doxxed by putting all info for all to see and yell "burn the witch!" (figuratively).

... well... probably the Stasi comparison ain't that far off. They lack the authority to bring in the doxxed and his family for torture though.
Post edited October 27, 2018 by Anothername
low rated
Sorry if Link being fired, but I also was not fun of his approach.
I'm generally now disgruntled by GOG and stopped shopping here.

Post edited October 27, 2018 by OldOldGamer
low rated
GreasyDogMeat: Doxxing is used as an intimidation tactic to silence/harass someone who has comitted some 'sin' against a political or ideological group.
It's also used just to pester someone.
tinyE: It's also used just to pester someone.
So is SWATing.

I'd hope that you'd be against both 'tactics'.