Enforcer84

Right now I'm listening to the insane yorballing of a really lovely young lady who gave my brother a job as a backing musician in her band. She is a country singer, a genre which I dislike and her voice drives me nuts. As do some of the lyrics. However, the band is great (and I'm not just saying that) and she lets the boys do a couple of songs. She's a great girl even if I don't care for her singing and it's a fun show. 

"Keep It To Yourself" by Amy Rigby
 

 
 

Still thinking about the Rush concert last night. It was excellent, easily one of the best concerts that I've seen.

I see your cutest captain america and raise Little girls R better at designing superheroes than you
 

 
 
 

Here's some public domain characters I commissioned from an artist named James Shields. From left to right: Zog, prince of Mars, The Thinker, The Stellar Man, and an Aldebaran:

One group I'm working on are 4 deities from various pantheons who have been brought together a powerful being (whose identity is currently unknown). These 4 deities are filling the roles of the 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse. I've had Brian Brinlee doing the art, and so far he's completed 3 of them. This is Aray (Armenian War God), Lamashtu (Mesopotamian Demon/Goddess of Disease) and Bres (Celtic/Formorian God of Agriculture). 
 

Ok let me see if I can get this straight. She manufactured outrage where there was none? Or she used the very real, alarmingly aggressive reaction to her opinion on women in video games to become famous? Thereby having her address posted on the internet, having people threaten to harm her physically and sexually...and this was her plan from the beginning? It's all a sympathy rap? 
 
Here's what I know about her. She crowdfunded her video series. Therefore there was a number - a rather large number of people willing to donate money for her to buy dozens of games and critique them. She was NOT a person who was famous before this. She was, as you said, an anonymous critic at a second rate magazine. So the fact that she funded on her rather lofty goals says something. There were people willing to put up over $200,000 (in admittedly small increments) to see her views on sexism in video games. It might not be a majority of gamers but it was more than one wealthy individual - she had hundreds of people interested in her project. 
 
The minute she started her campaign she started getting attacked. The MINUTE. And when she funded the attacks increased and became more personl I remember this because for a few dark months in 2013 I subscribed to r/gaming and they lost their collective poop. She had yet to release one video, mind you. 
 
in fact, the attacks originally centered around her being a "scam-artist" because she hadn't produced a video within two weeks of her funding. They called her a thief and a fraud and crowed that she'd stolen the money and gone away. 
 
And then she put out her first video. Oops. Ok well then she's an attention whore! I mean we called her a thief but she made good on her offer. Great. She's still bad. And then they got some wonderfully pretentious "Professor" to "Destroy" her videos. And he countered her criticism of Princess Peach being nothing more than a prize to be won with, "She is a PRINCESS! She's special! Girls should want to be a princess!"...and thus made her argument stronger. 
 
Look, I've seen all of two of her critiques. And I played Dead or Alive in bounce mode so I harbor a bit of guilt I don't agree with her or anyone on all issues, and even if I thought she was the biggest attention whore out there (I personally think that's the Kardashian clan, and if we're going to stay in technology Kim Dotcom.) she is a critic doing what she is paid to do and therefore her voice is worth as much as any other critic out there (ie Not much) but there's really been no reason for the outrage and vitriol blasted in her direction. Unless you count being a woman reason. 
 
I can find her sanctimonious and not get much out of her videos without resulting to threats on her person but there are quite a few who can't and THEY are the reason she's famous. Not because she's a sanctimonious, self-satisfied critic of a form of entertainment but because the lunatic fringe of that form of entertainment couldn't be talked to like that by a woman. There are Thousands of Pop culture and game critics who didn't get threatened like she did who didn't have a firestorm erupt and they said much the same things she did. 

That's bull.
 
Even when I disagree with her assessment, I've watched the "Debunking" videos and they're horsecrap as well. It's hard to look at the industry and not see how female characters are crapped on or objectified or that the industry treats women who make games as well as who buy them with disdain - even moreso than they do the penile bearing gamers. It's not as pervasive and overreaching (in my opinion) as she says it is, but it's also pretty flipping blatant and has been for about 30 years. 
 
Even if you don't like her, think everything she's doing is dumb, let's be honest: she critiques video games, that's it. She's done nothing to warrant death threats, rape threats and flash video games made of punching her face. Having a bunch of jacked up ninja wannabe game defenders throwing her home address on the internet and treating her worse than we do CONVICTED murderers is something I expect from 4chan and the mentally challenged. 

Ok let me see if I can get this straight. She manufactured outrage where there was none? Or she used the very real, alarmingly aggressive reaction to her opinion on women in video games to become famous? Thereby having her address posted on the internet, having people threaten to harm her physically and sexually...and this was her plan from the beginning? It's all a sympathy rap? 
 
Here's what I know about her. She crowdfunded her video series. Therefore there was a number - a rather large number of people willing to donate money for her to buy dozens of games and critique them. She was NOT a person who was famous before this. She was, as you said, an anonymous critic at a second rate magazine. So the fact that she funded on her rather lofty goals says something. There were people willing to put up over $200,000 (in admittedly small increments) to see her views on sexism in video games. It might not be a majority of gamers but it was more than one wealthy individual - she had hundreds of people interested in her project. 
 
The minute she started her campaign she started getting attacked. The MINUTE. And when she funded the attacks increased and became more personl I remember this because for a few dark months in 2013 I subscribed to r/gaming and they lost their collective poop. She had yet to release one video, mind you. 
 
in fact, the attacks originally centered around her being a "scam-artist" because she hadn't produced a video within two weeks of her funding. They called her a thief and a fraud and crowed that she'd stolen the money and gone away. 
 
And then she put out her first video. Oops. Ok well then she's an attention whore! I mean we called her a thief but she made good on her offer. Great. She's still bad. And then they got some wonderfully pretentious "Professor" to "Destroy" her videos. And he countered her criticism of Princess Peach being nothing more than a prize to be won with, "She is a PRINCESS! She's special! Girls should want to be a princess!"...and thus made her argument stronger. 
 
Look, I've seen all of two of her critiques. And I played Dead or Alive in bounce mode so I harbor a bit of guilt I don't agree with her or anyone on all issues, and even if I thought she was the biggest attention whore out there (I personally think that's the Kardashian clan, and if we're going to stay in technology Kim Dotcom.) she is a critic doing what she is paid to do and therefore her voice is worth as much as any other critic out there (ie Not much) but there's really been no reason for the outrage and vitriol blasted in her direction. Unless you count being a woman reason. 
 
I can find her sanctimonious and not get much out of her videos without resulting to threats on her person but there are quite a few who can't and THEY are the reason she's famous. Not because she's a sanctimonious, self-satisfied critic of a form of entertainment but because the lunatic fringe of that form of entertainment couldn't be talked to like that by a woman. There are Thousands of Pop culture and game critics who didn't get threatened like she did who didn't have a firestorm erupt and they said much the same things she did. 

That's bull.
 
Even when I disagree with her assessment, I've watched the "Debunking" videos and they're horsecrap as well. It's hard to look at the industry and not see how female characters are crapped on or objectified or that the industry treats women who make games as well as who buy them with disdain - even moreso than they do the penile bearing gamers. It's not as pervasive and overreaching (in my opinion) as she says it is, but it's also pretty flipping blatant and has been for about 30 years. 
 
Even if you don't like her, think everything she's doing is dumb, let's be honest: she critiques video games, that's it. She's done nothing to warrant death threats, rape threats and flash video games made of punching her face. Having a bunch of jacked up ninja wannabe game defenders throwing her home address on the internet and treating her worse than we do CONVICTED murderers is something I expect from 4chan and the mentally challenged. 

Ok let me see if I can get this straight. She manufactured outrage where there was none? Or she used the very real, alarmingly aggressive reaction to her opinion on women in video games to become famous? Thereby having her address posted on the internet, having people threaten to harm her physically and sexually...and this was her plan from the beginning? It's all a sympathy rap? 
 
Here's what I know about her. She crowdfunded her video series. Therefore there was a number - a rather large number of people willing to donate money for her to buy dozens of games and critique them. She was NOT a person who was famous before this. She was, as you said, an anonymous critic at a second rate magazine. So the fact that she funded on her rather lofty goals says something. There were people willing to put up over $200,000 (in admittedly small increments) to see her views on sexism in video games. It might not be a majority of gamers but it was more than one wealthy individual - she had hundreds of people interested in her project. 
 
The minute she started her campaign she started getting attacked. The MINUTE. And when she funded the attacks increased and became more personl I remember this because for a few dark months in 2013 I subscribed to r/gaming and they lost their collective poop. She had yet to release one video, mind you. 
 
in fact, the attacks originally centered around her being a "scam-artist" because she hadn't produced a video within two weeks of her funding. They called her a thief and a fraud and crowed that she'd stolen the money and gone away. 
 
And then she put out her first video. Oops. Ok well then she's an attention whore! I mean we called her a thief but she made good on her offer. Great. She's still bad. And then they got some wonderfully pretentious "Professor" to "Destroy" her videos. And he countered her criticism of Princess Peach being nothing more than a prize to be won with, "She is a PRINCESS! She's special! Girls should want to be a princess!"...and thus made her argument stronger. 
 
Look, I've seen all of two of her critiques. And I played Dead or Alive in bounce mode so I harbor a bit of guilt I don't agree with her or anyone on all issues, and even if I thought she was the biggest attention whore out there (I personally think that's the Kardashian clan, and if we're going to stay in technology Kim Dotcom.) she is a critic doing what she is paid to do and therefore her voice is worth as much as any other critic out there (ie Not much) but there's really been no reason for the outrage and vitriol blasted in her direction. Unless you count being a woman reason. 
 
I can find her sanctimonious and not get much out of her videos without resulting to threats on her person but there are quite a few who can't and THEY are the reason she's famous. Not because she's a sanctimonious, self-satisfied critic of a form of entertainment but because the lunatic fringe of that form of entertainment couldn't be talked to like that by a woman. There are Thousands of Pop culture and game critics who didn't get threatened like she did who didn't have a firestorm erupt and they said much the same things she did. 

Oh...and now that my righteous rage has ebbed. I don't think that she deserves your praise, I can totally understand not liking her and suspecting her motives is a fair cop. I just can't see how she deserves the crap that she's gotten for essentially talking about video games. 
 
Don't give me the whole nerdrage thing, it's not nerd rage, I'm a nerd I don't rage at her, it's just rage.
 
I apologize if I came across acidic to you guys. 

Ok let me see if I can get this straight. She manufactured outrage where there was none? Or she used the very real, alarmingly aggressive reaction to her opinion on women in video games to become famous? Thereby having her address posted on the internet, having people threaten to harm her physically and sexually...and this was her plan from the beginning? It's all a sympathy rap? 
 
Here's what I know about her. She crowdfunded her video series. Therefore there was a number - a rather large number of people willing to donate money for her to buy dozens of games and critique them. She was NOT a person who was famous before this. She was, as you said, an anonymous critic at a second rate magazine. So the fact that she funded on her rather lofty goals says something. There were people willing to put up over $200,000 (in admittedly small increments) to see her views on sexism in video games. It might not be a majority of gamers but it was more than one wealthy individual - she had hundreds of people interested in her project. 
 
The minute she started her campaign she started getting attacked. The MINUTE. And when she funded the attacks increased and became more personl I remember this because for a few dark months in 2013 I subscribed to r/gaming and they lost their collective poop. She had yet to release one video, mind you. 
 
in fact, the attacks originally centered around her being a "scam-artist" because she hadn't produced a video within two weeks of her funding. They called her a thief and a fraud and crowed that she'd stolen the money and gone away. 
 
And then she put out her first video. Oops. Ok well then she's an attention whore! I mean we called her a thief but she made good on her offer. Great. She's still bad. And then they got some wonderfully pretentious "Professor" to "Destroy" her videos. And he countered her criticism of Princess Peach being nothing more than a prize to be won with, "She is a PRINCESS! She's special! Girls should want to be a princess!"...and thus made her argument stronger. 
 
Look, I've seen all of two of her critiques. And I played Dead or Alive in bounce mode so I harbor a bit of guilt I don't agree with her or anyone on all issues, and even if I thought she was the biggest attention whore out there (I personally think that's the Kardashian clan, and if we're going to stay in technology Kim Dotcom.) she is a critic doing what she is paid to do and therefore her voice is worth as much as any other critic out there (ie Not much) but there's really been no reason for the outrage and vitriol blasted in her direction. Unless you count being a woman reason. 
 
I can find her sanctimonious and not get much out of her videos without resulting to threats on her person but there are quite a few who can't and THEY are the reason she's famous. Not because she's a sanctimonious, self-satisfied critic of a form of entertainment but because the lunatic fringe of that form of entertainment couldn't be talked to like that by a woman. There are Thousands of Pop culture and game critics who didn't get threatened like she did who didn't have a firestorm erupt and they said much the same things she did. 

Ok let me see if I can get this straight. She manufactured outrage where there was none? Or she used the very real, alarmingly aggressive reaction to her opinion on women in video games to become famous? Thereby having her address posted on the internet, having people threaten to harm her physically and sexually...and this was her plan from the beginning? It's all a sympathy rap? 
 
Here's what I know about her. She crowdfunded her video series. Therefore there was a number - a rather large number of people willing to donate money for her to buy dozens of games and critique them. She was NOT a person who was famous before this. She was, as you said, an anonymous critic at a second rate magazine. So the fact that she funded on her rather lofty goals says something. There were people willing to put up over $200,000 (in admittedly small increments) to see her views on sexism in video games. It might not be a majority of gamers but it was more than one wealthy individual - she had hundreds of people interested in her project. 
 
The minute she started her campaign she started getting attacked. The MINUTE. And when she funded the attacks increased and became more personl I remember this because for a few dark months in 2013 I subscribed to r/gaming and they lost their collective poop. She had yet to release one video, mind you. 
 
in fact, the attacks originally centered around her being a "scam-artist" because she hadn't produced a video within two weeks of her funding. They called her a thief and a fraud and crowed that she'd stolen the money and gone away. 
 
And then she put out her first video. Oops. Ok well then she's an attention whore! I mean we called her a thief but she made good on her offer. Great. She's still bad. And then they got some wonderfully pretentious "Professor" to "Destroy" her videos. And he countered her criticism of Princess Peach being nothing more than a prize to be won with, "She is a PRINCESS! She's special! Girls should want to be a princess!"...and thus made her argument stronger. 
 
Look, I've seen all of two of her critiques. And I played Dead or Alive in bounce mode so I harbor a bit of guilt I don't agree with her or anyone on all issues, and even if I thought she was the biggest attention whore out there (I personally think that's the Kardashian clan, and if we're going to stay in technology Kim Dotcom.) she is a critic doing what she is paid to do and therefore her voice is worth as much as any other critic out there (ie Not much) but there's really been no reason for the outrage and vitriol blasted in her direction. Unless you count being a woman reason. 
 
I can find her sanctimonious and not get much out of her videos without resulting to threats on her person but there are quite a few who can't and THEY are the reason she's famous. Not because she's a sanctimonious, self-satisfied critic of a form of entertainment but because the lunatic fringe of that form of entertainment couldn't be talked to like that by a woman. There are Thousands of Pop culture and game critics who didn't get threatened like she did who didn't have a firestorm erupt and they said much the same things she did. 

That's bull.
 
Even when I disagree with her assessment, I've watched the "Debunking" videos and they're horsecrap as well. It's hard to look at the industry and not see how female characters are crapped on or objectified or that the industry treats women who make games as well as who buy them with disdain - even moreso than they do the penile bearing gamers. It's not as pervasive and overreaching (in my opinion) as she says it is, but it's also pretty flipping blatant and has been for about 30 years. 
 
Even if you don't like her, think everything she's doing is dumb, let's be honest: she critiques video games, that's it. She's done nothing to warrant death threats, rape threats and flash video games made of punching her face. Having a bunch of jacked up ninja wannabe game defenders throwing her home address on the internet and treating her worse than we do CONVICTED murderers is something I expect from 4chan and the mentally challenged. 

That's bull.
 
Even when I disagree with her assessment, I've watched the "Debunking" videos and they're horsecrap as well. It's hard to look at the industry and not see how female characters are crapped on or objectified or that the industry treats women who make games as well as who buy them with disdain - even moreso than they do the penile bearing gamers. It's not as pervasive and overreaching (in my opinion) as she says it is, but it's also pretty flipping blatant and has been for about 30 years. 
 
Even if you don't like her, think everything she's doing is dumb, let's be honest: she critiques video games, that's it. She's done nothing to warrant death threats, rape threats and flash video games made of punching her face. Having a bunch of jacked up ninja wannabe game defenders throwing her home address on the internet and treating her worse than we do CONVICTED murderers is something I expect from 4chan and the mentally challenged. 

That's bull.
 
Even when I disagree with her assessment, I've watched the "Debunking" videos and they're horsecrap as well. It's hard to look at the industry and not see how female characters are crapped on or objectified or that the industry treats women who make games as well as who buy them with disdain - even moreso than they do the penile bearing gamers. It's not as pervasive and overreaching (in my opinion) as she says it is, but it's also pretty flipping blatant and has been for about 30 years. 
 
Even if you don't like her, think everything she's doing is dumb, let's be honest: she critiques video games, that's it. She's done nothing to warrant death threats, rape threats and flash video games made of punching her face. Having a bunch of jacked up ninja wannabe game defenders throwing her home address on the internet and treating her worse than we do CONVICTED murderers is something I expect from 4chan and the mentally challenged. 

That's bull.
 
Even when I disagree with her assessment, I've watched the "Debunking" videos and they're horsecrap as well. It's hard to look at the industry and not see how female characters are crapped on or objectified or that the industry treats women who make games as well as who buy them with disdain - even moreso than they do the penile bearing gamers. It's not as pervasive and overreaching (in my opinion) as she says it is, but it's also pretty flipping blatant and has been for about 30 years. 
 
Even if you don't like her, think everything she's doing is dumb, let's be honest: she critiques video games, that's it. She's done nothing to warrant death threats, rape threats and flash video games made of punching her face. Having a bunch of jacked up ninja wannabe game defenders throwing her home address on the internet and treating her worse than we do CONVICTED murderers is something I expect from 4chan and the mentally challenged. 

In Norway, all tax returns are public. Anybody can see what anybody else earns. Doesn't seem to have caused a problem. Some companies have an open pay policy. It also doesn't seem to cause problems. Many companies and institutions have fairly tight salary bands and which band you sit in is public.
 
The obsession with pay secrecy is an artifact of a system that rewards those who control often arbitrary pay awards. It's not naive to note that other systems are possible and appear to work as well or better - that's just recognition of reality. My last job was one were both payscale and bonuses were largely transparent (meaning pay grade and annual bonus were public, though the precise figure was not). My colleagues knew I earned more than they did, but there was no resentment because they also knew why. I knew who earned more than I did, and approximately by how much, but the same applied. So no, not naive - just aware.
 
Just because something is the status quo does not make it inevitable or the best system. I admit I'm hard pressed to think of a good reason for pay secrecy, even though I understand why it's a sensitive topic.
 
Blaming her for the fact that someone else might (but in fact, did not) take her initiative and use it wrongly smells strongly of grasping for a reason to blame her for something. You could use exactly the reason to claim that the accounts department should not release figures internally, because hey, what if someone leaked the company accounts?
 
When a group decision is made (for example company policy), of course there is pressure to join in. That is equally true of the "don't discuss salaries” rule.
 
I'm guessing from what you wrote, that you didn't read anything about this situation before posting, which to be honest, is a bit of a disappointment. To spell it out, the bonus she was denied WAS RECOMMENDED BY HER PEERS PRECISELY FOR SETTING UP THE SALARY SPREADSHEET. The colleague who worked with her to set it up WAS RECOMMENDED THE EXACT SAME BONUS FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON. There is, in this case, not the slightest shred of a reason to assume that he did something different to get his bonus - in fact, we are explicitly told the opposite. And to honest, the amount in question was utterly trivial, which means this whole discussion is almost certainly not about the money but about fairness.
 
To me, it doesn't look like what she did was counter to the company's wishes, but I can see reasonable grounds to disagree. But when one colleague gets a bonus for an initiative, and the other is denied a bonus for doing the exact same thing, that starts to smell a bit dubious. At the very least, it strongly supports her claim that pay is not being awarded on the basis of merit.
 
Cheers, Mark

Men who harass women online are quite literally losers, new study finds
 

http://krebsonsecurity.com/2015/07/online-cheating-site-ashleymadison-hacked/
 
This morning, 37 million sphincters tightened all at once.

Batman rescues Toddler from Overheating Car.

Boy, what a joker
What a funny, funny guy
I'll never forget about Larry
No matter how I try