What's nice about this is that you can still find these comments on Kotaku, under the cornfield hash tag. I edited out the profanity, but the point rings clear.
"What is this ( ) doing on Kotaku? What ( ) justification do you still have to call yourself a gaming blog?
Pathetic click-(seekers) just like the rest of Gawker. A disgrace to what Kotaku used to be.
And before I get flamed by a thousand new(bies): You're just as bad. You come here acting all high and mighty and have been posting here for a few weeks. Go ( ) yourselves, you probably don't even know how deliciously puke-green coloured Kotaku used to be back in 2006.
If you're wondering if I wanna get banned or something, the answer is crushingly simple: I don't (care) anymore. This site has turned to the absolute worst on the Internet and I would gladly sacrifice my account with 200+ followers. It means nothing. Kotaku is dead and the Gawker CEO is ( ) its dead corpse like the ( ) he is." --Momohime
That's a bit strong obviously, but is there a valid point hiding in there? Is Kotaku slipping?
"I'm sick of Kotaku's misinformation these days. Last time I'm commenting on this site ever, what a big waste of sensationalism journalism Kotaku has become. And it's not just one particular editor, all the editors are to blame in this process.
Farewell Kotaku, I'd rather check Eurogamer, at least I can get proper reviews and interesting articles from time to time." --Darkos87
Does Kotaku know what it is? Does it care? Should it care? Is it too quick to punish commenters who disagree?
"Cornfielding people for posting a #correction in an article? For having an opinion that differs from the writer's? For voicing even the slightest of criticisms, no matter how well thought out or true?
This is bullshit. The writers here are a bunch of manchildren that are too eager to ban. One of them tweets a downer about reddit, and someone questions and it gets banned. It's like Gawker's actively trying to make everyone stop viewing their site. You fellas are losing the last dying bit of your userbase to Joystiq, Rock Paper Shotgun, and other far better websites where people can actually have an opinion.
You can go ahead and ban me (like you wouldn't have anyways), since I'm just gonna use the aforementioned sites instead.
Stay classy, gentlemen." --Flyentology
I can't say that Kotaku still knows what it is. I know what my blog is: A mix of my everyday life with some reviews and recommendations thrown in, ultimately inspired by gaming. I don't receive any sponsorships or endorsements. Should a site that does remain as personal? Is that irresponsible? If their main business is games, should they post about sports and culture as much as they do? Natural Disasters, sure, but is personal commentary part of the blog-style? Is it fair for them to choose when to be a self-respecting, all-out news site and when to be an indulgent editorial blog?
I recently mentioned that Jalopnik, another Gawker media site, aimed to refocus itself to an aspiration higher than page clicks. Is this something Kotaku needs to do too? I think I remember that the Kotaku of a few years ago had a little more heart and soul... Are they reaching and odd adolescent period where they aren't sure who or what they are anymore? Or are they exactly what they want to be? Who am I is not just a question for individuals, it's a question for companies and organizations, so I wonder what Kotaku's answer would be if you asked them, "Who are you?"
