Helen Lewis

News and views about writing, eating, gaming and watching

Gamers Against Bigotry is hacked... by gamers in favour of bigotry

A site which opposed racist, sexist language in online multiplayer is repeatedly taken down by hackers.

By Helen Lewis Published 24 July 2012 11:59

Gamers Against Bigotry: the restored site.

Today's instalment of "you can't have anything nice" comes courtesy of Texan comedian Sam Killermann. At the end of June, he set up a website with a simple aim: to allow the vast majority of decent, good human beings who enjoy videogames a forum in which to register their views.

The site was called Gamers Against Bigotry, and it asked readers to sign a simple pledge:

As a gamer, I realize I contribute to an incredibly diverse social network of gamers around the world, and that my actions have the ability to impact others. In effort to make a positive impact, and to create a community that is welcoming to all, I pledge to not use bigoted language while gaming, online and otherwise. Bigoted language includes, but is not limited to, slurs based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and disability.

Killermann added in an interview with The Mary Sue:

At times, and depending on the game you’re playing, it can feel like you’re the only one who is put off by the bigoted speech that’s tossed around in game chat. Every additional pledge is another person speaking up, publicly, that bigoted language isn’t okay.

He clarified elsewhere on the GAB site that he wasn't against angry swearing, just angry swearing that targeted other gamers for their race, gender or sexuality: "The pledge doesn’t preclude you from making sailors blush, provided you’re making them blush with non-identity-specific four-letter words."

Or, as geek idol Wil Wheaton put it when he posted a link to the pledge on his Tumblr: "In other words, Don’t be a Dick."

Killermann backed up his pledge with an IndieGoGo project to raise funds for GAB, expressing his hope of funding attendance at PAX (the Penny Arcade Expo) and creating an app to allow gamers who prefer not to have a side order of rape jokes with their COD multiplayer to find each other.

You know what comes next, don't you?

The same small sub-group of gamers which tried to silence Anita Sarkeesian for wanting to make some videos exploring sexism was roused again. The stamp of their tiny, privileged feet echoed round the internet.

Within days of launch, Gamers Against Bigotry was subjected to repeated hacking and DDOSing. When I spoke to Killermann yesterday he told me that the big attacks all appeared to come from the IP address 69.69.69. Gamers might not be adolescent boys any more, but some of them like their jokes fairly adolescent.

On 22 July, the hackers took over the site, posting an image all over it (graphic screenshot here). I'll give you a hint about what that image might be with this delicious cupcake:

There was also some freestyling racism:

Even more dickishly, the hackers used a code exploit to wipe the database of the 1,500 pledges which had been collected.

At the time of writing, the problem still hasn't been solved. As Killermann told me: "They've gone through and cleared out the database at their own whim a few times these past 20 hours. We racked up 100 new pledges, wiped clean; 20 pledges, wiped clean; and so on. I can't figure out how they're doing it, but I'm trying to get some security specialists online to help."

Whoever was behind this also targeted all of Killermann's personal sites (his blog and portfolio) with DDOS attacks which overloaded the server.

It's bitterly inevitable that this has happened - after all, one of the incidents which pushed Killermann to set up Gamers Against Bigotry was the hounding of Anita Sarkeesian for wanting to explore sexism in gaming. But apparently, there are some people out there for whom even having these issues discussed poses an enormous threat.

Happily, Killermann is continuing with the project, and is trying to get hosting for the site which will better stand up to these kind of attacks. He told me: "I really think that the culture has to shift. Right now, 'trolls' are celebrated. There are entire social networks dedicated to it. For culture to shift, behavior has to shift. That's where GAB, and other organizations that will likely follow in our footsteps, comes in."

More from Helen Lewis

View the discussion thread.

59 comments

Tue, 2012-07-31 18:55 — Happy Gilmore (not verified)

@Pavlova. I had a rant all prepared for this and found that you had already said it all. These idiots need to do some research before shouting 'freedom of speech'.

Pride without prejudice.

Alex Baldwin (why is the NS site tech so bad?)'s picture

Wed, 2012-07-25 23:14 — Alex Baldwin (why is the NS site tech so bad?) (not verified)

Can anybody else hear the faint rustling of jimmies?

Wed, 2012-07-25 21:03 — Clamidia Staines (not verified)

Well this is a jolly conversation!! Seems to me like you lot need a laugh so come over to my blog at www.clamidiablog.com (adult humour) Lots of hilarious agony problems to put a smile on your face and a warm glow in your pants. Keep venting. Love you all Clamidia Staines agony aunt & sexpert. xx

Wed, 2012-07-25 17:27 — Bibitybob (not verified)

"the stamp of their tiny, privileged feet echoed round the internet."

Oh, shut the fuck up.

Of you a) think Anita is any kind if credible or reputable voice on anything and b) think that she hasn't deliberately blown any criticism she's received way out of proportion for the attention then you're an idiot. Plain and simple. All of her videos have moderated comments and she deliberately disregards and dissenting viewpoints to her idiocy, and then deletes the videos which obviously show her ignorance.

Want to know where your £160k went? She bought several hundred videos games, including ones she claimed to have owned and played. She hasn't shown any sign that she's even held a controller before this generation, and seeing what all of her videos are like, and that she now has to play several hundred games she didn't own before (and hence holds her already determined position on her own idiotic assumptions than actual experience) the videos aren't going to explore any issues; they'll just create imaginary and reactionary ones as talking points for idiots like yourself.

As for Gamers against Bigotry? It's called a mute button. If you're incapable of ignoring or laughing at purile teenagers you come across in video games then you should probably be doing something else.

Mon, 2012-07-30 07:44 — Justaris (not verified)

I happen to disagree with several of the points raised in the Feminist Frequency videos myself and I fully expect to disagree with points made in her new Tropes vs Women in Games series when it manifests. That doesn't make the diatribe of hate speech excusable in the least.

The 'mute button' argument is patently ridiculous - so the solution is just to ignore this sort of behavior, to write it off as "Oh, that's just how video games are"? XBox Live is already a cesspool thanks in no small part to that sort of thinking. Small wonder that non-gamers and mainstream media have such an easy time applying negative stereotypes to gamers - the rest of us are too busy with our fingers in our ears and our mute buttons toggled on to notice how out of control this has become.

The solution here is more exposure, not to bury our heads in the sand and abdicate our responsibility here. This is only going to get better if we stop tolerating it in our midst.

Wed, 2012-07-25 21:08 — Pavlova

Calm down.

And no, I don't want to know where $160k went. It's none of my business. I hope she spends it on law suits against rage boys or on launching a feminist summer camp.

Wed, 2012-07-25 17:27 — Bibitybob (not verified)

"the stamp of their tiny, privileged feet echoed round the internet."

Oh, shut the fuck up.

Wed, 2012-07-25 21:09 — Pavlova

If you don't like this blog, Bob, don't read it : )

Wed, 2012-07-25 12:48 — VB (not verified)

Straw poll - how many hours on average do you spend on any of the major gaming networks (PSDN, Steam, xbox live etc.) playing against strangers? Just trying to find out if any of these opinions are actually based on personal experience as I have been gaming online for years and as yet have shown no negative psychological effects.

Wed, 2012-07-25 14:38 — Helen Lewis

Hey VB,

I use Steam and Xbox Live, but never really used PSN when I had a PS3. I'd estimate that I spent hundreds of hours playing games online - I played more Halo multiplayer than perhaps I should have done, but also a fair bit of Battlefield, COD. I am one of a few people who loved BioShock 2 multiplayer (RIP).

Here's an article I wrote for Edge about the crap I got for that -http://www.edge-online.com/opinion/sexist-bigots-must-not-define-gaming- which was written in response to this BBC documentary, which has audio recordings of the kind of language used. This definitely exists.

Wed, 2012-07-25 14:37 — Pavlova

"Straw poll - how many hours on average do you spend on any of the major gaming networks (PSDN, Steam, xbox live etc.) playing against strangers? "

Absolutely none. I used to play computer games until the graphics got better and they went the same way as the movie industry (ie. objectifying all the women and bigging up all the men) and I lost interest. They no longer represented my perspectiive.

I have spent enough time online to know what the bigotted dynamics are. I have precisely no intention of inflicting that on myself in stereo and in person. I've been successfully driven out of the arena. Well done all the free speechers, obviously my free speech isn't required.

Wed, 2012-07-25 14:32 — Pavlova

@"I have been gaming online for years and as yet have shown no negative psychological effects."

Are you
a) Female?
b) Obviously from an ethnic minority?
c) Openly gay?

Well then, why would you?

Wed, 2012-07-25 14:34 — Pavlova

Unless of course, you count lack of empathy as a negative psychological effect.

Wed, 2012-07-25 11:12 — Middle Ground (not verified)

Also, whatever happened to 'being the bigger person'; that's always what my mum told me to do when faced with potentially offensive language. Not runaway and get the authorities to intervene on your behalf. Just as with annoying siblings that'l surely only encourage them?

How childish and petty is the judicial system?

Wed, 2012-07-25 15:30 — Pavlova

@That's all very well when one person is calling you an unimaginative idiot. Not so easy when dozens are tormenting you for being one.

Wed, 2012-07-25 12:44 — VB (not verified)

Sticks & stones! After 6 million years of brutal, ruthless evolution we are now apparently so weak that being abused by pre-pubescent kids over a mic is psychologically disturbing. STRENGTH THROUGH ADVERSITY!

Wed, 2012-07-25 13:12 — Pavlova

@VB

"Sticks & stones! "
This rhyme was always a lie, probably made up by bullies. Names most definitely do hurt people, drive them to personality disorders, mental illness, crime and suicide.

"After 6 million years of brutal, ruthless evolution "
Evolution that has favoured the strong species over the weak species. Not necessarily that has favoured the strong (e.g. male/high status/majority) member of a species over the weaker one (e.g. female/lower status/minority) member of it.

Although admitting that the past was brutal and ruthless leaving billions of talented members of the species thwarted, doesn't sound like a great advert for carrying on in the same way.

"we are now apparently so weak that being abused by pre-pubescent kids over a mic is psychologically disturbing. STRENGTH THROUGH ADVERSITY!"
We were always that weak. Speak to anyone being tormented in their home by gangs of pre-pubescent boys, or anyone who was relentlessly bulled by them at school,or people who had abusive siblings.
It's not really weakness. It's social dynamics. The pre-pubescent boys do what they do because they know they will have a psychological effect, they will ramp it up until it does have that desired effect, and then they accuse their victims of being weak when it does have that effect.

Abuse doesn't make you stronger, it makes you weaker.

Wed, 2012-07-25 15:07 — Pavlova

"Sticks & stones!
Said Goebbels to the Gypsy

Wed, 2012-07-25 11:06 — Middle Ground (not verified)

I just wish that instead of pointlessly trying to regulate and ban speech online that some people find offensive, and thus effectively just trying to pretend it doesnt exist, we should tackle the root cause of why people use such words. As someone with a family member who loves to use the word n*gger and f*ggot to describe just about anything online whilst playing COD4 (and i must confess, don't see the connection to racism there as anything other than historical) i wish you the best of luck with that, as i think in the long run your just going to have to accept that there has always and will always be ssome people who just like to be offensive, and criminilising them seems so petty and, as i say, futile. They're will be new offensive words they can use.

Wed, 2012-07-25 10:14 — Pavlova

Hate speech is illegal. Simple as that.

People need to start reporting it to the police. Because it does matter. We have plenty of examples from history of what negative propaganda against particular groups can cause the population at large to do. Not least the example of our own age with its rampant and aggressive misogyny and the piles of dead female bodies each year.

Wed, 2012-07-25 09:43 — Pavlova

@Anthony

" what people say into their headset they already have the option of a mute button, jeez. . Please you crack me up. serfdom here we come come !"

Well firstly the laws are already there, so if serfdom it is, then we're already there. It's just that they aren't being enforced on the net for some reason. Probably because the older generation don't understand the environment.

Secondly, your idea of muting is a poor solution, because as a society we accept that people repeat what they hear. You cannot press mute in the street and workplaces and schools, etc, but the language leaks out from video gaming to those places.

Thirdly, your concept that language is the limit of it, is ill-informed. Language shapes culture which shapes behaviour. It's known as propaganda and is an established reality. Mute doesn't work when you're getting harassed and attacked, deprived jobs, deported, followed, hissed at, spat at, are too afraid to use public transport, live in a ground floor flat, get out of your car on a motorway when it breaks down, work late in the evenings, go out alone, take the dog for a walk, live alone, turn off the lights at night, park your car where you want to, post a video on YouTube, write a blog under your real name, express certain ideas, etc, etc.

I think you need to start joining up the dots Anthony, people's actions affect one another. And discrimination isn't okay. It's so not okay, it's illegal.

Wed, 2012-07-25 09:19 — Somebody (not verified)

Guys...for all your talk about free speech yuo seem to forget that they did a remarkable job at censoring people who just expressed their right to not offend and pledge that. It goes both ways...and just because the cause IS in fact, utter crap, it doesn't give anybody the right to start blocking or "censoring" them.

Wed, 2012-07-25 10:07 — Pavlova

What crap about the cause? Many online, privately-run discussion forums have similar rules about not using illegal discriminatory or legal offensive language. The BBC for example. It's a perfectly legitimate way to run their games forum. I'm sure they will have a big take up from all the groups who don't want to be subject to discrimination. That is all the groups in the world, apart from young, white males (who incidentally run ALL their forums that way).

Anthony (Little Englander and Proud)'s picture

Wed, 2012-07-25 00:45 — Anthony (Little Englander and Proud) (not verified)

Oh please spare me your self righteous crap, and to answer your question "Yes" i would , i can say and think what the hell i like , and who is to decide what words offend not you, not the recipient of those words and not some man in a suit sat in Whitehall . and to answer your last point , well you have the same option as long as their is no physical violence then there is no problem . its called freedom of speech and is the cornerstone of a healthy society , like i said to Helen get over it or move to somewhere where they practice such curtailing of liberties.

Wed, 2012-07-25 04:25 — No time for your nonsense (not verified)

Christ above, you really don't understand freedom of speech, do you.

That provision allows citizens the right to speak against the government freely. That's it. That's all it does.

It doesn't guarantee you any right to be a bigoted piece of waste, doesn't prevent anybody from censoring you on, say, their website or their game.

If New Statesman deletes your comment, you don't get to go crying censorship to the government. You have to deal with it like the piece of excrement you are.

Now go cry to mommy somewhere else.

Wed, 2012-07-25 03:21 — PhantomStranger (not verified)

The same freedom of speech that allows you to be willfully dense allows other people to call you out on the type of language you use. Why is one okay, but seemingly not the other? People telling you to shut up because you're a bigot is free speech too.

Tue, 2012-07-24 22:04 — Pavlova

You get offended by an idea. You get threatened by a verbal attack or negative stereotype. They are different things.

Tue, 2012-07-24 22:01 — Pavlova

@anthony

Nobody has the right not to be offended, but we all have the legal right not to be discriminated against or to have discrimination incited against them. And that is what sexist, racist, homophobic language and bullying is. It

It's bad enough when the object of bigotry isn't there, but when they are there it's worse still. Companies ban this language for a reason because they recognise it would create a hostile and less productive environment for the targets, nations ban propaganda for the same reason, online gaming should be subject to both company regulations and national
Legislation. .

Wed, 2012-07-25 00:54 — Anthony (Little Englander and Proud) (not verified)

What like the word "Nig*er" in rap music or "Fag*ot" in William Burroughs novel "Junky" ? regulate the Internet and what people say into their headset they already have the option of a mute button, jeez. . Please you crack me up. serfdom here we come come !

Wed, 2012-07-25 09:34 — Pavlova

@Anthony

"What like the word "Nig*er" in rap music or "Fag*ot" in William Burroughs novel "Junky" ? "

Okay I'm glad you asked this because I think it's important.
Firtly to give this some context, the laws around freedom of speech do two things: firstly they protect a free market place of *ideas*, secondly they protect *people*.

So for example:
1) while it is legal to defame a dead person, it is illegal to defame a live one. Because a dead person cannot be harmed by defamation and is only an idea now. A live person is real and can be harmed.
2) It is legal to say "I hate Jews", it is illegal to say "You should hate Jews".
Because the former is expressing an opinion that arguably doesn't harm Jews, the latter, if followed, could harm Jews.
3) It is legal to say "Conservatives/Christians/Muslims are repellent", it is illegal to say "Jews/Black people/disabled people/women/homosexuals" are repellent.
Because the former categories are allegiances to ideas that people may change and we may discriminate against people's ideas, the latter are innate characteristics that people cannot change and we cannot discriminate against people's innate characteristics without a valid reason (e.g. a female worker in a female required for cleaning a female changing room).

In a public space at least. The rules for private spaces are different, there we can discriminate on innate characteristics and only marry people of our own race, religion, etc.

To put it another way, the law doesn't limit speech, but it does limit actions. And discrimination is not speech, it is an action.

The word "N*gger" can be both an idea or an action. Used in a fictional book, with a small and intelligent readership, in the mouth of a character, in a responsible way not intended to incite hatred or discrimination of real people, it remains an idea. Likewise in the mouths of black people exploring its use to discriminate against them, it is an idea. But used in the street, or online by a white person against a black person in a way intended to cause or incite hatred or discrimination it becomes an action.

When computer gamers use bigoted language intended to harass and intimidate other gamers because of their innate characteristics, they are not expressing ideas, they are carrying out actions. Actions intended to discriminate against those gamers, actions that arguably encourage others to do so as well. It is a public space. It is illegal.

The web site described in this article appears to be trying to create a space where the law is obeyed by preventing discriminatory actions, but also going one step further and limiting the types of ideas that are expressed. That is their right, nobody is being forced to join it. It's a club.

Wed, 2012-07-25 12:33 — VB (not verified)

Being Jewish is an "innate characteristic that people cannot change"? Really? I say bolloxs

Wed, 2012-07-25 13:14 — Pavlova

"Being Jewish is an "innate characteristic that people cannot change"? Really? I say bolloxs"

Yes. Jewish is an ethnicity. Unlike Muslim or Christian or Conservative or Socialist.

Wed, 2012-07-25 04:45 — scottw4353 (not verified)

no one is attempting to "regulate" the internet you deranged idiot. and OBVIOUSLY there is a assload of difference between meaningful artistic expression, and sheltered straight white man-children shouting hateful obscenities into the internet

Tue, 2012-07-24 18:55 — Max S (not verified)

Great article. If you have some spare time, check out my blog & comment or tell someone else about it - http://liberatedthinking.blogspot.co.uk/. You may learn something, or change your opinion on an issue. Thanks.

Tue, 2012-07-24 18:44 — Anthony (Little Englander and Proud)) (not verified)

No one has the right not to be offended , get over it and well done the hackers !

P.S - you have a great rack Helen !

Tue, 2012-07-24 22:45 — Pavlova

"you have a great rack, Helen"

Since when was it acceptable to make personal physical comments about other people's bodies? Do you go p to people and comment on their noses? Would you go up to a Jew and comment on his nose? Or a black man and comment on his? Or his nice curly hair? Or maybe a disfigured person and tell them what you think of their face? Or an amputee? If you don't have breasts Anthony, you have no business commenting on other people's. That's less about offence ands more about not being a harasser impinging on other people's civil rights.

Wed, 2012-07-25 00:43 — Anthony (Little Englander and Proud) (not verified)

Wed, 2012-07-25 09:57 — Pavlova

@Anthony

"Oh please spare me your self righteous crap, and to answer your question "Yes" i would ,"
You would go up to a Jew and say "Nice nose", or a black man and say "Nice curly hair" would you, in your own inimitable sarcastic way? Somehow I doubt that. Maybe you'd only say it to a small man, or maybe a woman or a child? Or a big man on the internet? Or maybe you wouldn't say it at all?

"i can say and think what the hell i like ,"
Wrong I'm afraid. You can think what you like, but you categorically cannot say what you like. Certain things like those above, when said in a public space, are illegal. Tough breaks, but the world of discriminating against others is a hazardous one and could wind up with you having your freedom discriminated against.

"And who is to decide what words offend not you, not the recipient of those words and not some man in a suit sat in Whitehall."
That's right. It's parliament and the juries and judges. Not you.
You still are confusing offense with discrimination. If you pick a type of human being out of the crown and make them feel terrible or afraid because they happen to be that type of person, then you are guilty of discriminating against them, not offending them.

"and to answer your last point , well you have the same option as long as their is no physical violence then there is no problem ."
Sorry, but wrong again. Speech can be considered a type of attack. Hate and discriminatory speech as well as action is a crime. Because hate and discriminatory speech has a proven ability to cause hate and discriminatory actions.

"its called freedom of speech and is the cornerstone of a healthy society ,"
No, I'm afraid it isn't called freedom of speech. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the law. It's called a verbal assault.

"like i said to Helen get over it or move to somewhere where they practice such curtailing of liberties."
I could say the same to you. Your liberties aren't king, other people's liberties to go about their business without being discriminated against are every bit as important as your liberty to say what you want to. They trump your liberty to discriminate. Sorry if you don't like it, but there are plenty of countries you can move to if discriminating against other genders, ethnicities, homosexuals, disabled people, etc is your thing.

Tue, 2012-07-24 20:57 — Sandgolem (not verified)

My philosophy is, everyone has the right to offend, or to be offended. No one has the right to censor others.

These people didn't just express their own views, they did it by damaging the site and tampering with payment and records data.

Instead of sticking up for free speech all they did was show they are nothing but petty strong arm robbers.

Wed, 2012-07-25 10:10 — Pavlova

Indeed. The only self-righteous ones around here are the censorious heresy-hunters who can't bear to have their methods and ideas challenged. Not only are they censors, they have broken numerous laws by accessing and vandalising other people's content.

Tue, 2012-07-24 19:21 — Helen Lewis

Why thank you for the lovely compliment, Anthony (Little Englander and Proud)!

Here is a picture of my great rack:

http://bit.ly/LpCOG2

Wed, 2012-07-25 00:19 — ThatCamel (not verified)

Wow, what a nice and firm rack. It's very exotic. I'm sure it will be very nice for a long time and I hope that you are proud of your beautiful rack.

Tue, 2012-07-24 20:02 — Anthony (Little Englander and Proud) (not verified)

Would take a peep at the link but don't have the thyme !

Tue, 2012-07-24 18:10 — VB (not verified)

This sounds like an awful lot of trouble to go to when there is a mute button no? As much as we may not like it xbox live is packed to the rafters with young males and this is generally how they talk to each other when out of earshot of mummy. I was playing GTA recently and was 'fortunate' enough to have a team mate with the gamer tag 'COMBAT18BNP'. Turned out he was a schoolboy with a well to do accent who was fond of using racial slurs as commas - MUTE!

Tue, 2012-07-24 18:10 — VB (not verified)

Tue, 2012-07-24 22:49 — Pavlova

Well yes I suppose it would be easier not to talk to other people or listen to them talk to you. If you know, you want to live in isolation with your civil rights intact. But what happens When one of the people who doesn't purée the mute decides to pay you a visit one day and the mute button no longer works?

Wed, 2012-07-25 12:52 — ndn (not verified)

online =/= real life

Wed, 2012-07-25 13:24 — Pavlova

NDN

"online =/= real life"

Why not?

Wed, 2012-07-25 12:40 — VB (not verified)

yes because thats EXACTLY what I said isn't it? Are you being a complete prat on purpose? How is a 30+ year old man muting an irritating 14 year old boy "living in isolation with my civil rights intact?" What absolute clap trap, seriously I hope you never accidentally walk into a working mens club or some equally repellant place, you may not survive the ordeal.

Wed, 2012-07-25 13:20 — Pavlova

@VB
"yes because thats EXACTLY what I said isn't it? Are you being a complete prat on purpose? How is a 30+ year old man muting an irritating 14 year old boy "living in isolation with my civil rights intact?" What absolute clap trap, seriously I hope you never accidentally walk into a working mens club or some equally repellant place, you may not survive the ordeal."

He's not, clearly. But a woman who can never take part in online chat during gaming sessions, but instead has to mute the conversation to avoid being verbally attacked, harrassed and persecuted is going some way towards that. Especially if this is an important method of social interaction for her. And especially if she also cannot write blogs under her real name, or post videos showing her face, or raise money for research projects, or attend conferences, or get a job in the industry. Then it's starting to look an awful lot like a serious attack on civil rights by other citizens.

No, I wouldn't go to a working men's club, becuase as a female, I would be expected to put up with discrimination. I expect black people avoid them too for the same reason. Well done you! You've earmarked your rights, to hell with everyone else's.