Fucking Kotaku

[fuchikoma]

I worded it as "jumping to their defense" because you've been consistently downplaying this inflammatory and controversial move they've taken, and even carried it to a pretty far fetched level, like implying that Gawker's data mining is somehow equivalent to Google or Facebook's - or that you don't care if these third parties get to know more about you (so no one else should?)

 

Other sites to require things like this, and it's shitty there too, though there's usually an alternative or five. Discussing them here just wouldn't be very relevant since this isn't a thread about Facebook, it`s about Kotaku. Like I said, some people don't like being tracked everywhere they go by these giants. If you're sick of hearing people complain about Gawker, maybe "Fucking Kotaku" isn't the ideal thread for you?

[fuchikoma]

I think a big part of it is the question of why these guys even need to know you`re signing in to a Gawker site. Do you tell Google every time you drive somewhere? When you buy a plane ticket? When you mail someone a letter? Of course not (...on purpose anyway) - it's irrelevant. Gawker's not owned by any of these companies. There's no technical requirement for them to handle your login. It's just nosy and invasive and it's getting harder to avoid it no matter where you go.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

It's only controversial because it's Gawker. Engadget relies entirely on third parties and no one is bitching about that. Oh no, they're making you log in using the most used services in the world.

 

If you don't want to be tracked then make a throw away account. I don't see what's so hard about that.

 

I think a big part of it is the question of why these guys even need to know you`re signing in to a Gawker site.

 

I don't think you understand what Gawker has done. You don't log in via Gawker anymore. You have to use one of the services so security is through them rather than Gawker handling it. Hell, didn't they get compromised a while back?

Anyways, you're assuming tracking is going on here. Frankly, I don't see why it matters. Even if you aren't using any of the services Google is still tracking you just by going to the site. You use Ghostery, you know what I mean. You are always being tracked. Always.

[deanb]

Probably worth noting that this just automates the process. Even before they brought this in they were having a nosey at commenter facebook profiles.

[fuchikoma]

I don't think you understand what Gawker has done. You don't log in via Gawker anymore. You have to use one of the services so security is through them rather than Gawker handling it. Hell, didn't they get compromised a while back?

Anyways, you're assuming tracking is going on here. Frankly, I don't see why it matters. Even if you aren't using any of the services Google is still tracking you just by going to the site. You use Ghostery, you know what I mean. You are always being tracked. Always.

 

I can't tell if you're contradicting yourself here or not. Yes, I know they're using these services to vet logins for them, but your accusation that I don't understand what they've done goes against your assertion that you're always being tracked... So I don't understand because they don't actually know you're logging in when you log in through them? You're saying I'm assuming tracking is going on... then you stated it always is, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, unless it's that we're all already beaten so we should just give up and let everyone see everything?

 

But to bring it back, the problem is that you're not just being tracked by easily defeated semi-anonymous usage trackers that could only know you through correlation of disparate datums - you're going "hey, (third party): I, (first name, last name, user history) would like to log into this site now..." and all of the choices are companies that make their fortune off analyzing customers to sell them shit on behalf of advertisers. It's like showing your driver's license to shop at a convenience store. It doesn't become alright because you can make a dummy account and cheat the system.

 

It's really ridiculous to think this is a problem because it's Gawker. I'd say it's completely backwards - it's a problem because it's not Gawker. Actually, I don't see why I should retype it all...

Other sites do require things like this, and it's shitty there too, though there's usually an alternative or five. Discussing them here just wouldn't be very relevant since this isn't a thread about Facebook, it`s about Kotaku.

 

To paraphrase, it's not cool when sites - whether or not Gawker has anything to do with them - require you to sign in through the private entities most commonly cited as "big brother."

 

For the record, Gawker was hacked... Also, a Google engineer stalked some kids, Twitter got owned, and while Facebook has been hacked here and there, its name is synonymous with arbitrarily redefining their privacy policies and oversharing users' data - the most infamous of which... involved sharing user data with third parties!

So yeah... I think you're either jumping to their defense with tenacity you wouldn't expect from a non-employee, or you must not understand the difference between data mining by one of many media companies vs the biggest players on the Internet, or the difference between "anonymous" data and logging in directly with a personal user account that usually includes your real name and other personal info collected through its use. It's an invasive practice, and being able to hide from it or outsmart it doesn't make it fine for everyone, even if you're personally ok with it.

Edited March 30, 2012 by fuchikoma

[TCP]

Here's a pretty interesting interview: http://kotaku.com/5900812/an-illuminating-conversation-on-games-writing-and-kotakus-secrets

Stephen is a hard guy to dislike.

[deanb]

http://kotaku.com/5900685/anti+gay-star-wars-complainers-now-complaining-about-spambots

 

Anti-Gay Star WarsComplainers Now Complaining About Spambots

Who is waging the public opinion battle between anti-gay "family values" groups and the video game creators who dared to allow same-sex romance in their massive new Star Wars game? The anti-gay crowd says the Star Wars defenders are getting help from spam-bots. (Would they be spam-droids?)

Oh Kotaku. And this I feel belongs here more than it does in the other thread, though I think I might have a nosey about other sites on the topic and see if it becomes "complaining about EA potentially using bots to augment petitions" = "these people who are homophobic" across the board or if this is just one of those cases of Kotaku being effing retarded.

 

edit: d'toid n Joystiq haven't even ran an article on it. In fact seems hardly anyone has, even to mention the petition is now down.

[deanb]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/apr/12/gawker-fox-mole-legal-action?newsfeed=true

[Strangelove]

http://gawker.com/5902688/greetings-todays-the-day-all-starred-commenters-will-die

 

Im not sure I quite understand. Are they removing the star thing entirely, or removing them from people who had them? And then they have to get them all over again? Kotaku commenters are some serious angry assholes. Im sure they wont like this one bit.

[fuchikoma]

Sounds like stars are just being reset and discontinued...

Haha - still looking for a way to clean things up since they opened the floodgates to let absolutely everyone in. Heavy-handed moderation used to work as a small community, but now they just can't bring the quality of their comments up so they have to try new arbitrary measures.

[Strangelove]

What do you mean? Was it different before? Was it harder to leave a comment?

[deanb]

Seems they're removing it entirely then comments will be promoted on an individual basis ran by some kind of algorithm.

 

edit: @SL: In the past you could only comment if you sent in a tip and were approved to comment. Then they changed it so you could comment as a pink commenter before being approved by a mod or Star. And I guess now, especially with the social integration, anyone can comment.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Things got boring after I lost my Giz star anyways. Those guys were always mad as fuck. I mean, they still are, now it's harder to bait them without a star. My io9 star I was always proud of though. Sigh.

[Strangelove]

I visit Gawker every once in a while(but never leave a comment) and the writers there are all pretty snarky and dickish. Theyre all a bunch of Plunketts.

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

For a short period, there was peace in the Gawker kingdom as the star system actually seemed to work. Comments were generally well thought-out, and trolls were kept to a minimum (at least on Kotaku). Then they started handing out stars willy-nilly (I was actually starred at the beginning of that influx), and the system began to collapse as some who were clearly trolls got starred. The comments have been totally busted for a long while now; they're just finally admitting it it seems.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

I think that's where the "we'll be better, too" part comes in. We'll see how it goes. It's not like 99% of blog comments aren't cluster fucks anyways.

[TheRevanchist]

P4, I remember your arrival, and it was great! I hadn't seen anyone earn a star that quickly, and that star was earned, as you had a lot of good comments and gaming insight.

 

After Denton's memo about the viewership all being "sheep", the redesign and it's many flaws, and the letting go of the mods (who were good guys, Alex Hayter being my favorite), no one was awake at the helm. Trollpatrol was not being watched, though people would report some pretty foul things.

 

Really, they had to hand out stars to get their readership back up a little.

[TheFlyingGerbil]

I don't understand why they go to so much trouble? Don't most sites just let anyone post and then delete stuff that's abusive or spam. Then maybe some will add a like/recommend button. I don't see why they go to so much trouble it doesn't reduce the number of stupid comments and it alienates a whole load of people.

[TheRevanchist]

Speakup and the Open Thread posts are going away under the new system. I am sad to see that happen, as that was those are the best places to comment and gab with others.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

I don't understand why they go to so much trouble? Don't most sites just let anyone post and then delete stuff that's abusive or spam. Then maybe some will add a like/recommend button. I don't see why they go to so much trouble it doesn't reduce the number of stupid comments and it alienates a whole load of people.

 

I think they just care more than other sites. Perhaps they see it as a huge way to boost ad revenue.

[deanb]

Denton has made it pretty clear he finds commentors annoying and don't add anything to the site. Given most of their focus is on ad-revenue, I doubt he'd call commentors worthless if there's an explicit cash value tied to them.

[fuchikoma]

I got a star on Kotaku fairly early on, so it counted across the whole network. Then I was destarred and banned on Kotaku when Kirk took over the same time I came here. I mostly used it to read and promote thoughtful comments, and like I told Kirk, it's up to him whether he thought they'd be better off without that.

 

After the ban, I was still allowed and starred on all other Gawker sites, but now that you can only sign in through a third party company's ID, it's a moot point anyway - the whole network is dead to me for commenting. So... even if I had still intended to comment there, the scrapping of the star system makes no difference because I'm already locked out, haha. It's like they're trying to push themselves into irrelevance. Still, in theory the end of stars sounds like a good idea because it implies actually taking some responsibility for user comments on there, which stars clearly did not do for long.

[fuchikoma]

Denton has made it pretty clear he finds commentors annoying and don't add anything to the site. Given most of their focus is on ad-revenue, I doubt he'd call commentors worthless if there's an explicit cash value tied to them.

 

Spot-on, sadly. After he told everyone that it wasn't pageviews that mattered, but unique pageviews (ie. from people who don't even visit the site normally) it was apparent the core readership wasn't the main focus.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Denton has made it pretty clear he finds commentors annoying and don't add anything to the site. Given most of their focus is on ad-revenue, I doubt he'd call commentors worthless if there's an explicit cash value tied to them.

 

What are you talking about? That sounds exactly like something he'd do.

[Toshi]

I checked Kotaku for the first time in a while and was going through comments, and whoever that Steve Climaco guy is is pretty bad at moving/deleting threads. Reading the one for the feminism in that jrpg, he moved comments that were not really offensive and kept the actually offensive ones