Great channel, love it.

it's really good you focus on building collaborations

@People below expressing various critiques on the hate speech video: The research conducted there, it seemed clear to me, was not meant to be a scientific study, but a means to quickly later numerous examples of some of the worst hate speech that the gaming community has to offer. It's not meant to calculate numerically how much hate speech there is, it's meant to have something to show to people (especially gamers) so we understand the problem.

Dismissing hate speech in games and online as "trolling" and "just how the medium works" is exactly the problem. Hate speech, whether motivated by actual bias or simply being juvenile, reflects poorly on us as gamers, and we have a responsibility to be less apathetic about it.

This is one of the worst channels I've ever seen. If you're going to do a study, do it correctly. Not just look for people who will be assholes, and lurk forums until you find a bad post. I garentee 98% of all of those forums are fine, you just went through and found hateful ones (which let me add where all jokes, not to be taken seriously. But you idiots who have no idea how the world works took it seriously.) Then disable comments so people can't point out the GIANT flaws in the "study". Horrid, that's all it was, just horrid.

Disabling comments on videos = lame.

The hate speech video was not a good example of how to run a study. It was basically people inciting negative comments through playertags and responses that people knowingly feed off of, and the forum topics were just a joke.

Why did you disable comments on the hate speech video?

Hello there. I just thought i would give my input on your "The Singapore-MIT GAMBIT Game Lab Hate Speech Video"

You see i noticed that during your experiment you selected chatty to find more talkative players, this is fine.
However the moment i saw you select the rowdy feature of the player filtering system i was rather displeased. You see as im sure you know the definition of someone who is rowdy is "A cruel and brutal fellow" this means that the game would filter people to be cruel and brutal.

In conclusion i do not believe this was a fair test in gauging the frequency or severity of hate speech in online video games. perhaps better parameters would be talkative and no-preference?

Thank you for reading.

In response to "The Singapore-MIT GAMBIT Game Lab Hate Speech Video"

I have been gaming for a long time and I have to agree with billybobbobbobbilly. As a reason for this I partly blame the fact that the internet is somewhat anonymous but I also think that this has to do with other factors. For example, in real life people can use body language in order to threaten people or show dominance. In videogames however this is not really possible (or only partly), therefore causing people who want to show dominance to use words instead of body language.

Also, words like "nigger" or "fag" (just to name some examples from the video) tend to be used in the same fashion as the word fuck. They are not necessarily meant to be that negative. It's just a way of speaking.

In response to "The Singapore-MIT GAMBIT Game Lab Hate Speech Video"

People have been talking smack on the internet for YEARS. It's called trolling, schadenfreude, etc. This is what happens when a person can say anything with little to no chance of repercussions.

Casual gamers may be new to the concept, but anyone who has played nearly any competitive online game will be able to tell you the exact same thing I'm telling you now.

In my opinion the only point of this video is shock value to the average person who either does not play or casually plays video games.