[Grizzly]

I mean, a guy wrote an article about how rape is something you can use in fiction, it's absolutely just to hate this dude and defame him for all to see how a scumbad he is. But don't worry if you think that her defamation of this guy seems as bit as unfair as my own take on Quinn. After all, the guy has defended the worst crime imaginable in the history of mankind: writing about rape. Compared with actual feats of manipulation, lying, cheating, sabotage, and now defamation, I mean, can we even compare? Let that guy rot in hell for all I care.

Once again, you are providing an unsourced argument to add on another pile of unsourced arguments. You only fortify my opinion that gamergate is not a talk about ethics in game journalism but rather just another witch hunt.

[Bobboau]

And, of course, in the thread with Zoe Quinn's personal info: https://www.dropbox.com/s/6le26eqhbgc8n92/ogodwhy.png?dl=0

OMG drop box, my company uses dropbox, my company supports harassment campaigns!

[The E]

That's a screenshot I made myself and uploaded to my own dropbox.

[Bobboau]

my point was, this war board is a separate board that the people running /gg/ have absolutely no power or control over. it can just as easily be construde as an attack on /gg/ because it's now being used as a weapon against them in attempts at guilt by association.

[Bobboau]

here let me put it to you this way

https://8chan.co/hlp/

anyone who wants to be a mod on 8chan ask and I'll give you the keys to the kingdom via PM.

[The E]

Yeah, that's kinda the problem with amorphous movements like gamergate and cultures like 4chan. People point towards the bad parts and say "That's your movement too!", and people in the movement will, with complete honesty, say "No, those are just trolls!". As long as those trolls are still the center of the discussion, nothing productive can come of it (not that there was ever much chance of it in the first place).

Also, "the people running gg"? For all I know, it's the trolls running the show. The complete ineffectiveness of gamergate in making any real change in games journalism certainly makes it seem like it's just a smokescreen for some assholes to bully and harass people.

Bob, my point here is that anyone who associates with gamergate does also associate with all the negative bits in some way. There is no way to purge those elements now, and any attempt by gamergaters to get back to the core message (ill-defined as it is) is immediately undermined by the fact that anyone can adopt gamergate and use it as he or she wants. There is no organization here that is actually able to make demands.

[Bobboau]

I said the people running /gg/ I meant specifically the board on 8chan.

[The E]

Which I assume you have personally vetted and found to be good and upstanding members of internet society.

[Bobboau]

no idea, doesn't make any difference to the point you were making, I just wanted to make sure I wasn't misunderstood.

[The E]

Let's get back to another question about gamergate. Has anyone who believes in and supports its cause ever compiled a list of actual infractions that happened? Actual, real ethics violations? And I do mean actual instances of corruption, not just "this reviewer has promoted a game I don't like, therefore he must be corrupt"-style allegations.

[Mr. Vega]

Yeah, that's kinda the problem with amorphous movements like gamergate and cultures like 4chan. People point towards the bad parts and say "That's your movement too!", and people in the movement will, with complete honesty, say "No, those are just trolls!". As long as those trolls are still the center of the discussion, nothing productive can come of it (not that there was ever much chance of it in the first place).

Also, "the people running gg"? For all I know, it's the trolls running the show. The complete ineffectiveness of gamergate in making any real change in games journalism certainly makes it seem like it's just a smokescreen for some assholes to bully and harass people.

Bob, my point here is that anyone who associates with gamergate does also associate with all the negative bits in some way. There is no way to purge those elements now, and any attempt by gamergaters to get back to the core message (ill-defined as it is) is immediately undermined by the fact that anyone can adopt gamergate and use it as he or she wants. There is no organization here that is actually able to make demands.

The amazing thing is they could just ditch the hashtag for another, but they've decided the name is more important than any of the issues they claim it stands for. The refusal of GG 'moderates' to even consider abandoning the name and its connotations is pretty damning evidence against the actual existence of any real moderates in GG.

Compared with actual feats of manipulation, lying, cheating, sabotage, and now defamation

Don't try to put out the claim she doxxed TFYC. They confessed that she did nothing other than criticize them.

And afterword went back to claiming she was responsible.

[Bobboau]

feminism has been poisoned by the extremists. moderate feminists should abandon the label and go with something else, like gender egalitarian.

[Mr. Vega]

Let's get back to another question about gamergate. Has anyone who believes in and supports its cause ever compiled a list of actual infractions that happened? Actual, real ethics violations? And I do mean actual instances of corruption, not just "this reviewer has promoted a game I don't like, therefore he must be corrupt"-style allegations.

Oh look, the hated Leigh Alexander did just that.

[The E]

I know about that list, but I was wondering what gamergate's perspective was. Surely, with a movement that big, someone must have come up with something more substantial than "That Journalist that Zoe Quinn slept with mentioned her in a few articles".

[Mr. Vega]

Here is an excellent overview of the early history of GG and its corruption claims, for Dias' benefit since he can't seem to get his timeline right.

[Luis Dias]

Once again, you are providing an unsourced argument to add on another pile of unsourced arguments. You only fortify my opinion that gamergate is not a talk about ethics in game journalism but rather just another witch hunt.

https://twitter.com/TheQuinnspiracy/status/520712625152614400

Oh good one of the other people in @TheEscapistMag's article is a rape apologist https://twitter.com/HandsofaDream/status/520688001899573248 …

Here is an excellent overview of the early history of GG and its corruption claims, for Dias' benefit since he can't seem to get his timeline right.

Twitter stats show gamergate exploded after the gamers are dead articles, not before.

[Grizzly]

QUUUUUIIIIIINNNNN

So... Someone calling someone else a rape apologist because he wrote about how "rape is a ****ing awesome plot element", someone who asks "Can love emerge from a violent encounter?" and "Well, depending which study you read somewhere between thirty and fifty percent of women have rape fantasies." is somehow... an argument against Quinn.

Right. So now your argument is sourced! Now it's a baseless argument thrown upon a pile of unsourced arguments. After all, there's still:

Compared with actual feats of manipulation, lying, cheating, sabotage, and now defamation, I mean, can we even compare?

What has this woman done that half of gamergate keeps ranting about her?

[666maslo666]

Here is my list of ethical infractions:

- a wave of offensive and idiotic "gamers are dead" articles
- inability to separate gaming culture from trolling/4chan/anti-feminist culture and unfairly associating the two
- https://i.imgur.com/2o6lNXc.jpg  <-- this ****ing picture showing certain people from big tech/gaming media to be major assholes
- political/social ideology or favoritism being pushed into gaming news (this one is a bit debatable, but it is certainly a valid concern)

Also rape is usualy OK as a plot element in fiction and stating so is not rape-apology.

[Luis Dias]

@Joshua, You were up in flames because I dared express my dislike of Zoe Quinn, a person who had no qualms of defaming someone as a rape apologist on twitter for thousands of her followers (and storifies and so on) with no more evidence than an article she clearly didn't read past the title.

This is evidence of two things: your ridiculous double standards and confirmation that Zoe is not the best person in the planet.

What has this woman done that half of gamergate keeps ranting about her?

I have a feeling they are ranting about her because for many, she's a symbol of the mediocrity level that is the end result of the feminist revolution in games. Personally, I don't care about her. At most, I just hope none of these people actually get harmed in any way, both for themselves and for the obvious escalation of warfare that would entail.

[AdmiralRalwood]

@Joshua, You were up in flames because I dared express my dislike of Zoe Quinn, a person who had no qualms of defaming someone as a rape apologist on twitter for thousands of her followers (and storifies and so on) with no more evidence than an article she clearly didn't read past the title.

And apparently you didn't read this part of his post:

QUUUUUIIIIIINNNNN

So... Someone calling someone else a rape apologist because he wrote about how "rape is a ****ing awesome plot element", someone who asks "Can love emerge from a violent encounter?" and "Well, depending which study you read somewhere between thirty and fifty percent of women have rape fantasies." is somehow... an argument against Quinn.

Right.