/gamergatehq/ - GamerGate Headquarters

https://twitter.com/4EverPlayer2/status/723720676457123841

I wonder who triggers the spergs more Rogue or netscape?

>>322850

That is some nice OC.

The artist known?

>>322851

>600x407

shame

>>322855

Ashion101

@skuldarfin on twatter is the Artist he does quite a bit of Vivian Fanart i recognize his art style.

>>322888

Dubs/Trips checked

Feel free to resize em anytime i would get around to doing it myself eventually

>>322900

>>322910

She deleted the tweet. It's not illegal to wear a hat. I believe it is against PAX rules to take pictures without consent in order to incite hostility.

>>322917

Deleting tweets is a very good way to show guilt,good thing we have archiveis to remind people of the stupid shit posted on twatter, some of the twatter retards are going is fleetcom out yet,hurr durrr fleetcom muh meme duhhhhhh slade/rogue driveby duhhhh nichegamer is a sellout,ethics in game journalism guise and general mental retardation. They think rogue is some kind of top gg e-celeb when he hasn't done anything gg related in months

>>322917

> it is against PAX rules to take pictures without consent

Bullshit. A convention, while being a private event, is still a public space where consent is implied unless specifically revoked or otherwise in specific areas considered to be private (bathrooms, changing areas, green room, ect), there's a line on the convention registration paperwork that spells this out.

The SJW "cosplay is not consent" loonies were trying to create a problem at conventions where none existed.

…besides, did this guy give HIS consent to be photographed? No. "…but it's fine when WE do it"

>>322900

He wears hat, put him into concentration camp!

>>322944

Nigger did you just ignore the rest of the sentence and cut out "in order to incite hostility?"

Fuck outta here.

>>323087

Let me say the same thing a different way: "photography is permitted unless in a private area or when someone makes a point verbally revoke consent" irregardless of "Intent".

Again, "Cosplay is not consent" is bullshit and confuses people on what their photography "rights" really are. You get the fuck out.

>>322910

>I like how the romanticize the rentacops there by calling them enforcers

Enforcers are volunteers, not professional security guards.

>>322917

PAX is enforcing rules evenly, instead of having different rules for favored SJWs? That's a positive sign.

But a rule banning pictures at cons without permission? That's an SJW thing, as part of their general goal to restrict freedom and the specific goal of going after the cosplay and con photography communities next. (All those pretty women in skimpy costumes is TRIGGERING.)

>>322944

>>323125

This guy gets it.

A con, as a privite event, can limit photography anyway they want. But most cons have always had rules expressly permitting photography.

But then the SJWs attacked…