[Grizzly]

The whole situation seems to revolve around attacking the other side, rather than promoting the agenda of your own, and this is speaking for both sides

The whole *point* of Anti-GG is to attack the other side. That's why it is called "anti-GG". GG has particular goals and particular methods, and "anti-gg" are those who don't like those particular goals or particular methods (or both).  Your point of a battle of public perception is spot on.

However, I disagree with your branding of the sides. Anti-GG is not the "feminist" side - sure, GGs most prominent targets happen to be feminists - but a lot of anti-ggers are not feminists persé. On the flipside, there are some within GG who are feminists.

One thing though: Gamergate *always* had a bad rep: It's roots in the Quinnspiracy bull**** ( as shown and discussed in The great Zoe Quinn Firestorm thread down below) have never really gone away. It *never* could have been a genuinely positive movement.

All that being said, there's plenty of people within GG who can make such a genuinely positive movement - but this particular bunch has just too many rotten apples.

[Mr. Vega]

You can't rebrand GG because the scum that joined at the start aren't going to leave. You can't put that toothpaste back into the tube.

[AdmiralRalwood]

All that being said, there's plenty of people within GG who can make such a genuinely positive movement - but this particular bunch has just too many rotten apples.

Or to put that another way, "There may be ethical, honest people involved in #GamerGate. But a few good apples won’t magically make a rotten barrel edible. And #GamerGate is rotten to the core."

[Mr. Vega]

What puts me into a rage are the number of women and girls who have either left or been scared away from the industry because of this stuff. I've seen multiple designers post that they want to make a game of their own but are afraid of the attention they'd attract. As far as I'm concerned everything else is a minor issue by comparison.

[SypheDMar]

The whole situation seems to revolve around attacking the other side, rather than promoting the agenda of your own, and this is speaking for both sides, it's not really a question of false balance, it's a question of no balance whatsoever because everyone is so busy attacking the other view, rather than representing their own.

That is what I'm seeing here too. Nobody has discussed the issues and concerns relating to Gamergate. The discussion gets reframed to the same circle jerk.

I'll admit that I agree with Anita Sarkeesian, Brianna Wu, et al, and I find the misogyny disturbing.

Apparently at some point, gamers became an exclusive club of people. I guess I'm no longer a part of it.

[Lorric]

All that being said, there's plenty of people within GG who can make such a genuinely positive movement - but this particular bunch has just too many rotten apples.

Or to put that another way, "There may be ethical, honest people involved in #GamerGate. But a few good apples won’t magically make a rotten barrel edible. And #GamerGate is rotten to the core."

So all you need is to find 20 people to prove that a whole Worldwide movement is rotten to the core. I wonder how you'd feel about a list of 20 feminists and a claim that that proves most feminists and organised feminism is rotten to the core.

[AdmiralRalwood]

So all you need is to find 20 people to prove that a whole Worldwide movement is rotten to the core. I wonder how you'd feel about a list of 20 feminists and a claim that that proves most feminists and organised feminism is rotten to the core.

These aren't just people plucked at random, you know.

[Mr. Vega]

Note to self: don't ever state a conclusion without posting every scrap of evidence I've ever posted previously that goes with it, because Lorric will get mad I didn't.

[Lorric]

So all you need is to find 20 people to prove that a whole Worldwide movement is rotten to the core. I wonder how you'd feel about a list of 20 feminists and a claim that that proves most feminists and organised feminism is rotten to the core.

These aren't just people plucked at random, you know.

I know. It's still nowhere near enough for the claim you're making. Just as I would think 20 equivalent feminists wouldn't be enough to prove the claim in reverse.

Note to self: don't ever state a conclusion without posting every scrap of evidence I've ever posted previously that goes with it, because Lorric will get mad I didn't.

Poor form.

[Mr. Vega]

Lorric, you've been reading our stuff. You can remember what we've posted earlier.

[Lorric]

Lorric, you've been reading our stuff. You can remember what we've posted earlier.

Yes, I have.

Mixed in with these cretins are, to what extent we can't tell because we don't know the extent of the astroturfing, some people who are genuinely concerned about ethical issues in the press. Now GG hasn't exposed much of anything real, but undoubtedly some were sincerely attracted to that platform. Maybe they're a small minority amidst the hate mob, maybe they're a more substantial component, I'm not sure.

Even you aren't taking that strong of a view.

[Mr. Vega]

Sorry, I don't see the disagreement between his statement and mine in its totality.

[AdmiralRalwood]

Game Informer denounces GamerGate.

[...]If journalistic ethics was all GamerGate was about, then it would be a movement worth discussing.

However, from the moment of its inception, GamerGate has been associated with harassment of women in the games industry, and has since repeated that pattern with Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian (both of whom have endured being driven from their homes due to death threats). While the harassment may only be from a minority, it is harassment nonetheless and unacceptable at any and all levels when people fear for their safety.

Game Informer's stance on the issues is clear. The term GamerGate however is mired in confusion and is one that we reject. We have not covered the movement at Game Informer up to this point because we feel that the moniker misrepresents the issues. The GamerGate hashtag hides the true meaning of the speaker, muddying the water and giving defenses to the indefensible.
[...]
We implore all involved to let "GamerGate" go, because GamerGate is not an issue. It is a nebulous term that has served no master, but has been misused by those who wish to divert us from the real issues that the game industry faces as it evolves from its humble beginnings to a place where gamers of all types are accepted. All it has done is furthered stereotypes of violence and misogyny that have set the video game industry back further than any other issue this century, and has once again created an environment where the fanatics have marred the image of gamers everywhere.

[Mongoose]

Here's the main thing for me: if GG is really concerned about "ethical issues," then someone explain to me...what are those issues exactly?  Where's the evidence for them?  In this entire massive cluster****, I've yet to see anyone on that supposed "side" bringing up any legitimate problems in gaming journalism.  There's been a ****load of self-righteous "well that's not what the movement's REALLY about!" going on, but precious little (if any) concrete details on what it actually IS about.  I mean, the fact that the person on the receiving end of the most egregious corruption example in gaming news has been actively vilified by the movement purportedly fighting against said corruption really tells me all I need to know.

[AtomicClucker]

So, to put this topic on track.

Ethics. Yep, that little and stupid word.

One reason GamerGate got started was the bruhahaha over the Quinnspiracy. However, despite the entire debacle (and I won't go into for obvious reasons because I think its a cluster**** into itself) and some revelations about the shenanigans between varying journalists behind the scenes as espoused by the GameJournalistPros e-mail, how much of a "Code of Ethics" do we actually expect from our media and publications?

If one thing I stand with Jim Sterling on is that too often, journalists, publishers and devs get a little too cozy, and there's quite a difference between meeting friends in the industry at the bar for a drink and attempting to coerce others into towing a "party line." While I find Breitbart stupid as hell and chalk full of stuff that's conspiratorial or downright dismissive, some of the **** coming out of the leaks was, well to put it, unnerving.

I'm not opposed to games journalists supporting causes, developers, or movements, as long as a clear statement and objective distance is established and those endorsements or ties are disclosed to the audience and they do try to "keep" an aspect of distance between the subject and themselves. I constantly cite Totalbiscuit and Boogie2988 as good examples: they admit either they are fans or not, and disclose to us if their content was paid promotion or they had any ties to it.

A number of publications changed their ethics code as a result, but does these measures go enough, and should we expect more punitive measures to journalists/bloggers/youtubers who cross ethical lines?

Edit: Linking to Breitbart Article: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/17/Exposed-the-secret-mailing-list-of-the-gaming-journalism-elite and http://www.brightsideofnews.com/2014/09/19/inside-the-secret-world-of-games-journalism/

[Grizzly]

So all you need is to find 20 people to prove that a whole Worldwide movement is rotten to the core. I wonder how you'd feel about a list of 20 feminists and a claim that that proves most feminists and organised feminism is rotten to the core.

I can't believe this keeps getting brought up. "Gamergate" is notan ideology. it's a very specific campaign steered by several people. The whole Zoe Quinn debacle wouldn't have happened if it wasn't for Internet Aristocrat's videos.

An (obviously rather extreme) analogy: Stalin is not an example of socialism being rotten to the core - it is, however, an example of the USSR being rotten to the core.

some revelations about the shenanigans between varying journalists behind the scenes as espoused by the GameJournalistPros e-mail,

I doubt this actually. For all it's talk about "the leaked gamergate email list that has journalists colluding to control the narrative!", and claims that people were "attempting to reshape the gamer identity in their own image" and ... well.
The lists were leaked. From the screenshots, it is obvious that people had full acces to that. They could see posts and everything.
Yet they haven't been able to screenshot any posts that showed exactly that happening. The only pictures that they have shown actually shows... people discussing and disagreeing with each other.
Like we do on this forum.

[Mr. Vega]

The only pictures that they have shown actually shows... people discussing and disagreeing with each other.
Like we do on this forum.

Yo Josh, is the meeting to control the media tonight or tomorrow? I'm the one bringing blood for the ritual sacrifice this time.

[SypheDMar]

Here's the main thing for me: if GG is really concerned about "ethical issues," then someone explain to me...what are those issues exactly?  Where's the evidence for them?  In this entire massive cluster****, I've yet to see anyone on that supposed "side" bringing up any legitimate problems in gaming journalism.  There's been a ****load of self-righteous "well that's not what the movement's REALLY about!" going on, but precious little (if any) concrete details on what it actually IS about.  I mean, the fact that the person on the receiving end of the most egregious corruption example in gaming news has been actively vilified by the movement purportedly fighting against said corruption really tells me all I need to know.

I keep bringing up that same point! It's like I'm not even here.

[Mr. Vega]

The last 20 hours of Gamergate tweets, plotted by the month the account was created:

[Mr. Vega]

https://plus.google.com/u/0/+DavidHillJr/posts/dBBUpZFtchW

https://8chan.co/gg/res/206389.html#206419

Do you not understand why we've opted for the just-kill-it strategy? If someone wants to talk about ethics, they can leave these monsters' tent and start their own one.