At 11/18/13 05:03 PM, TomFulp wrote:
YES, NG came up out of celebrity killing, seal clubbing and even making light of school shooting but shit evolves. The NG you knew and loved just MIGHT be dead. I didn't even know anyone gave a shit about that Anita Sarkeesian game until today but it really was a shitty game with no effort (sorry whoever made it, if it wasn't by a PR team). And maybe the flippant removal of that game was the beginning of the end times for NG. Or maybe it was the first hairs growing on NG's chest because it's growing the fuck up. OK probably end times. Think of NG as entering a chrysalis and now we all get to wait and see what comes out on the other side.
If NG is able to age, it's also able to die. Though some change is obviously for the better, a change of vision like this makes the site loose a big chunk of it's appeal, it feels more like a mid-life crisis than chrysalis. Though maybe this is the one exception and such tragic breaches on freedom of expression won't occur for at least many years to come...
At 11/18/13 06:05 PM, TomFulp wrote:
1) Continue to support Group #2. Struggle with revenue. Have my name and NG slandered in the press (ouch there's my ego). Be confronted about controversy when making public appearances. People from Group #1 feeling shitty when they link their work to friends who say "What are you doing on a site like this?" (awkward, although I hate those JUDGY FUCKS)
2) Cut off Group #2 and support Group #1. Bring back the animators and game developers who left and help them thrive with better paying ads. Yes, they will leave if something better comes along but Group #2 probably would too if the opportunity presented itself. SIDE EFFECT: NG could get really boring if Group #1 doesn't make awesome shit.
As I see it group #1 already invests the majority of their time with YouTube, because that's where the bigger audience exists, and with Google's funds they'd be able to match any payouts if they had to. I don't see how NG could be able to compete in terms of audience, thus the only strong standpoint remaining seems to be that freedom of artistic expression that this place represents. Which is not something to be taken lightly. I'd believe both serious and unserious artists would appreciate the potential to do whatever they like (within the limitations already outlined), whereas the larger social communities are all out to censor. I do appreciate the fact that this censorship on NG is open for debate, whereas censorship on these other sites is usually automatic; reason or purpose often not even provided.
How about re-instating the Bastards section, to distance administration from submissions you don't support, but still keep them on-site to be fair towards the users? You could even cut off ad-revenue to the authors for submissions included within this section, to enforce the notion that these submissions are not supported, and combined with an age limit and a fair warning there would be no reason for anyone to accidentally wander in and watch something that may offend them.
At 11/18/13 07:10 PM, Rustygames wrote:
http://www.rustyarcade.com/games/play/2298/The-Slaying-of-Sandy-Hook-Elementary
I don't want to put it on the front page because I don't actually think it's that good. But I wouldn't remove it if my site was an open portal, nor will I remove it now I've decided it's a piece of art that needs to be preserved.
A truly honorable act. :)
At 11/18/13 05:10 PM, tox wrote:
if it all comes down to it, i personally will pay for legal fees for the site
If there's really need for it, I'd be happy to contribute as well. No doubt lots of users would show their support if rough times become an actuality. How about starting a fund of user-based contributions which can be used if financing does actually run out? Judging by previous comments, it seemed ad-revenue was the real issue. But then PsychoGoldfish seems to crack down on that theory. If it's not about keeping the business afloat, it feels like this is being taken too personally. Don't want to seem insensitive but policies are important in maintaining a solid foundation for a community; the impression of freedom is important!
At 11/19/13 10:40 AM, Catalyste wrote:
To be honest, I wouldn't create a poll knowing full well there are a bunch of kids on this site who want to keep pretending that freedom of speech = freedom from accountability.
The thing is there's nothing illegal about this game (or am I missing something?), so accountability shouldn't be an issue. And responsibility should lie with the uploader, not with the founder of the site.
At 11/19/13 02:01 AM, RealFaction wrote:
I do agree with the fact this game was EXTREMELY offensive, but I think parents would feel better with age restricted accounts and not just warnings. I think you should make it so if someone is under 17, they can't play mature games.
Sounds like a great idea.
At 11/19/13 01:09 PM, CypressDahlia wrote:
Oh my god the hypocrisy. If you're going to whine about this, also mourn every submission you've decided to blam because you sure as hell didn't help those artists enjoy their creativity or freedoms either. Jesus.
Blamming a submission is like a majority vote, it takes more than one user to decide the fate of a submission. In most cases the work that's been blammed is effortless; useless, not because it's obscene and tasteless... as was the case with this one. It's a rather big difference.
At 11/19/13 12:51 AM, King-Duckford wrote:
Great stuff
A sad but inspiring message.
At 11/19/13 01:51 PM, Elitistinen wrote:
If NG have a poll system then I think we shall not keep fighting on settled matters like this. Vote for what you believe like the true democracy.
There's this: http://strawpoll.me/732754