First day?

We’ve already had threads in kbinmeta about a guy running an account ring to upvote his stuff, and we’ve already seen numerous rep farmers here.

@Kayzels I know I can, but I’m just curious why I can’t log in to any of these sites all with the same behaviour. If they sent me an e-mail I would have clicked it. I signed up a few days ago though I don’t think I got an e-mail and going to sh.itjust.works shows the e-mail field as optional, so I can’t really see it requiring a verification.

Edit: Found the issue. The site must have obviously lost my information. Despite the account being created, and me having a saved username/password, I’ve just discovered that there is no account. Recreated it and it now works. Absolutely no feedback from the site at all in regards to this.

He’s sharing data, that his company collected, but there remains the question of what the data exactly is. I mean, I don’t think any of us were born yesterday, and we’ve seen ‘science’ and ‘studies’ in journalism and how they’ll massage statistics and use vague terms to make specific claims. My favourite of this was years ago a study about cosmetics, which includes things like sun cream, was used to paint the narrative that all Korean men were walking around with make-up. While make-up was a subset of cosmetics, when you actually looked at it, it didn’t really support the claims they were making in the articles about it. For the most part I rarely trust anything like this being shared unless I can have a look at the whole package.

There are real studies and real science behind all these stories, but the journalists and middle men can rarely be trusted to present them in an unbiased manner that can be verified.

so I’d think it’s likely that he’s reporting it accurately

That’s not really a safe assumption to make. Even though they shared their methodology they don’t seem to have shared the questions or the data. Misleading survey questions aren’t uncommon.

No Kotaku is acting like this. There was a distinct lack of evidence in their article

Some suggested the data is wrong or that the owner stats are skewed by moms buying consoles for boys

This isn’t acting poorly, this is just questioning the methodology, which is a good idea, because a lot of these surveys are very poorly done or have obvious holes in them like that one. .

They later shared the methodology, but it still isn’t clear what the exact questions were.

The rest of the article is the Kotaku writer speaking very vaguely about people. Was it 2? 200? 2000? who responded like this? You certainly wouldn’t know from that article, but Kotaku isn’t shy about painting all gamers with the same brush in the headline.