Friday, 13 March 2015

No Brianna, it's not law enforcement; it's you.

In response to this:

>I need to tell you something terrifying. If someone threatens to murder you on the Internet, the odds are all but certain that law enforcement will do nothing. It doesn’t matter who you are, it doesn’t matter how serious the threats are. Help is not coming.

This is because law enforcement needs a reasonable threat, something called "clear and present danger." Words on the internet don't really amount to much, and for you to want help on a non-existent threat is a waste of everyone's time. You surely cannot be this stupid after all these threats.

If someone truly wanted to murder you, 1) they wouldn't tell anyone, and 2) they'd have already tried. Isn't too hard to figure this whole process out, but maybe I've read too much murder mystery and real crime stories to deduce this.

>I should know, I’ve had 49 death threats in the last six months. My name is Brianna Wu, I’m the head of development of Giant Spacekat. We are a team of mostly women that make story-based games. Since October, I’ve been targeted relentlessly by the hate group known as Gamergate, a mob of extremist fringe gamers hellbent on silencing prominent women in the game industry.

a) Anyone popular, or anyone who's had anything to say on the internet gets death threats, like myself, and many other youtubers, people with blogs, columns, etc.
b) Twitter is not exactly a place of sound mind and calm debate. Medium is the message, and all that. Best not to take it so seriously.

And for you to make these claims, you must:
I) First prove that Gamergate is a hate mob
II) Then prove that it's full of fringe gamers
III) Then prove that it's hellbent on silencing prominent women in the game industry. Also explain how it intends to do that, since I haven't heard or seen that happening at all for 7 months.

You also might want to stop harassing yourself.

And if you think you're a "prominent woman in the game industry"? I believe you've already listened to Roberta Williams

I've oodles of evidence showing it's a diverse group of men and women from all sorts of sexual and ethnic backgrounds, but I believe you're already aware of that.

No one is stopping women, or men, or anyone for that matter, from allowing prominent women in the game industry to...communicate? I don't know what you're talking about, and I'm sure social media platforms would like to know how this is even possible.

Please explain to me, how, a bunch of internet trolls, are stopping you, or any other women in gaming, from doing your job. Cause the only thing I see is your patreon, and your professional victim complex.

>As my dog Crash was dying in December, Gamergate sent me pictures of mutilated puppies and kittens to emotionally terrorize me. They threatened to detonate bombs at PAX East if I attended. When I speak at colleges, I look under the stage with a flashlight. Between Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian, and myself, they have sent hundreds of specific, violent death threats.

Evidence, please.

>If someone threatens to murder you on the Internet, the odds are all but certain that law enforcement will do nothing.

This is because they're trolls. They're just trying to get a rise out of you. It seems to be working. Usually, an experience that is repeated over a large period of time decreases it's emotional reaction. So unless you're having nervous and psychotic fits of epilepsy every morning, I suggest you go back to game making, and provide some evidence on your claims.

Here are the facts:
1) 100% of those messages are untrue.

Here's my suggestion:
1) Stop listening to 100% of them.

>Even more disturbing than the threats is the reaction from law enforcement, which has been nothing. Justice for all does not apply when women use the Internet.

As I stated before in my first response, law enforcement needs to be able to see a reasonable threat. Anyone on the internet has the freedom to say whatever they like (within the Community Guidelines/ToS of that communication service provider, e.g. Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, etc.) The laws on the books are very clear regarding freedom of speech. This means, yes, they can make death and bomb threats, as ugly as that is.

Now, if you're implying that that shouldn't be allowed? You need to target specific platforms of such communications, or, try to get the 1st Amendment amended.

>That may be about to change. My Massachusetts house representative, Katherine Clark, has had enough. A former prosecutor who has dealt with domestic violence cases, she heard my story and wondered why nothing had been done. Recently, she held a meeting with the FBI, trying to assess how seriously they were taking my case.

Mostly a waste of time which will do absolutely nothing, but I'm curious what kind of grand plan they think they'll have. I'm sure the taxpayers will love it.

>Her message for law enforcement is clear, “The FBI needs to make Gamergate a priority.”

They need to monitor the hashtag daily? Don't they do that already? Unless a new bill is being introduced to start policing the internet, nothing's going to happen. (I hear those SOPA/PIPA bills aren't very popular with the electorate.)

And what about people not under the FBI's jurisdiction? Shall this be a global policing of free speech? How far are you willing to go before the FBI "does something"? Let's protest outside the next G8 or what not.

And what exactly do you want the FBI to do? Find people who wrote negative Tweets and charge them with...what, exactly?

>The hate group Gamergate exploded

Prove to me it's a hate group, when they've donated to charities (some promoting women in gaming) and have fought for ethics in journalism since the beginning.
Notice the list of accomplishments are all related to charity, the removal of funding from certain sites, bad characters and catching their behavior (see Zoe Quinn, and of course, ethics in journalism

>in the national consciousness in October when they made threats against me that went viral. This group promising to restore ethics in game journalism vowed that my dead,

Prove threats were made by members of #gamergate.

Promises? Where and when did anyone promise? While some small victories have been achieved in the policies being changed on certain websites (see the link above), it's an ongoing, watchdog-like struggle. Which is why #gamergate is still going strong.

>mutilated corpse would be on the front page of Jezebel. They swore that I would be choked to death with my husband’s severed genitalia.

Stop listening to the trolls.

>Gamergate is so infamous that they’ve even made a Law and Order: SVU episode, “The Intimidation Game,“ where a character based on me, Sarkeesian, and Quinn that is kidnapped and sexually assaulted. The most surreal moment of my life was seeing a character based on me get my same death threats word for word.

And anyone with half a brain, or even a causal gamer, can see just how ridiculously bad the plot and references were. It was more of a parody than an infamous depiction of anything resembling gaming, gamers, or whatever gamer culture is. (My opinion on prime time police procedurals having anything to do with reality is a whole other topic.)

Additionally, you need to get over yourself and this professional victim blaming. I would think if you're that serious you'd be better than that.

>Here’s what the public doesn’t know about this threat. I know who sent it to me. The Saturday after this happened, I was contacted by an extremely credible source. Their voice shook with fear as they told me this person was “fucking psychotic.” They told me they were terrified and hoped law enforcement would act quickly for their safety and mine.

>I know the name of the man that sent me the “dead mutilated corpse,” threat. I have specific information about this man’s location police can use to prosecute him. I contacted the FBI with this information the Saturday after these tweets went viral, expecting a quick arrest.

>But nothing happened. That was six months ago. Their continued inaction is absolutely unacceptable.

Why? What's the story you're not telling us? How is it "absolutely unacceptable"?

...wait, are we talking about that poor excuse for a comedy routine? AKA, a hoax, by Jace Connors?

>On my hard drive sits this case and five others like it, all meticulously documented. All with names, all with ample evidence for prosecutors to act on. I’ve repeatedly sent this information to law enforcement. There’s an entire employee at my company whose job it is to document these threats and respond to requests from law enforcement.

So you're paying someone to...copy and paste screen caps of people saying bad things to you? Jesus, how much money do you have?

Brianna, here's an idea. Stop giving a shit. Make your games. Don't listen to anyone else except yourself. You'll lead a much happier, productive live. We'd all appreciate it.

>A look at the statistics on online harassment is depressing. Legal expert Danielle Citron has documented only 10 cases of law enforcement prosecuting cyber-stalking between 2010 and 2013. That’s out of 2.5 million estimated cases, according to Department of Justice statistics.

>This isn’t a situation where we need new laws passed. According to Citron, the laws are very clear here. It is a crime “to transmit threats of bodily injury in interstate commerce.” The problem is that law enforcement has no idea how to react to these crimes.

So you don't want new laws or stricter rules on websites or communication want what, exactly? Police to just start arresting people for saying mean things?

>I now know more police officers that work in Arlington, Mass., than I do people that live on my block. They’ve been extremely polite and professional when I contact them with threats, but it’s also clear they’re not in a position to act. Many do not even know what Twitter is or what an IP address is. And, to be fair, local police are understandably focused on keeping local order.

Yes, police, FBI, follow strict guidelines and don't act on personal vendettas, moral codes, or other such nonsense.

>That leads to the question: Whose job is it to prosecute these threats? As a former prosecutor, Rep. Katherine Clark seems to feel this is the jurisdiction of the FBI. But among the FBI’s 15,000 agents that are funded through your tax dollars and mine, there doesn’t seem to be any division specifically tasked with prosecuting these crimes.

Considering the threats aren't credible, no one. If you've been getting so many threats and sending them to authorities, and they haven't acted: doesn't that tell you that professional law enforcement doesn't see a problem? Are you not listening to them?

If you're trying to tell me the FBI are wrong, in what way? You haven't explained that at all. It's just your opinion, and you're not even offering an alternative. You just want senders of negative Tweets to be "prosecuted".

So, let's say these people are "prosecuted". What are these people going to be charged with?

>There should be. Gamergate has grown into a hate group that threatens the stability of the $60 billion a year game industry. They stopped the women of my company, Giant Spacekat, from showing our upcoming game Revolution 60 at PAX East.

1) Prove Gamergate has grown into a hate group. First to yourself, oh logical game developer.

Also, $80 billion. That's a lot of money, and one of the the many reasons #gamergate wants ethics in journalism.

Brianna, if you want to know why people get harassed online, it's this: when they say and do stupid shit. (Hint: mirror.) Other reasons involve being popular, being controversial, being for or against something, or having a pulse. Which category do you think you fit into?

>The FBI is tasked with prosecuting domestic terrorism. Tech journalist Peter Cohen quite correctly called the actions of Gamergate “emotional terrorism,” the idea being to intimidate, bully and silence anyone speaking out for diversity in games until they quit. It’s a playbook they’ve run on countless women now.

Luckily, emotional terrorism isn't a thing, nor is it a law that can be broken. See how wonderful English is? You can't prosecute someone for a law that doesn't exist.

And many other "tech journalists" say many other differing things. Are they wrong?
Erik Kain
Allum Bokhari
Kelly Maxwell
Chris von Csefalvay

>After Representative Clark met with the FBI, she called their reaction “disappointing,” but there’s a glimmer of hope on my side. Since that meeting, the FBI has massively stepped up communication with me. They tell me to be patient, as these cases take time to build.

>Prosecuting Gamergate is not about justice for me or the women of Giant Spacekat. It’s about introducing consequences into the equation for men that treat harassing women like a game. In Grand Theft Auto, if you threaten to murder someone, police will pursue you, you’ll get “busted,” and lose $100.

>It’s sad when Grand Theft Auto has more consequences for criminal behavior than real life.

(aside: just so you know, Brianna, Grand Theft Auto is a crime, in reality. In the game, you can get chased by cops for many more heinous crimes. See how art mirrors reality?)

I think your last sentence says it all: your grasp on reality isn't quite the same as it is for the rest of us. Definitely not the same as what the police, FBI, or any other professional law enforcement agency believe, and therein lies your apparent problem: acceptance.

One might say you need to accept that people are going to disagree with you, in less than rational ways. And that nothing is stopping you from doing your job.

But until someone points a gun to your head, you're nothing more than the Boy who Cried Wolf.

In reality, you like this. Why wouldn't you want your narrative of GamerGate being a hate group? Of course you think that the women in SVU is a depiction of you. It's all about you, Brianna.

It's all about you and your ego. Oh, and money.

Why would you want to stop being an entitled rich kid? After all, as a result of GamerGate, and patreon, you're making over $3,400 a month. Why not make money off your invented pain, or whatever you call poo-poo emails? Considering your Revolution 60 game was nothing more than an offensive joke, and did nothing to promote women or make them look strong or whatever feminist ideology you and your writers believe in (A Mike Tyson tattoo? Wow. Progressive), how else are you gonna make a buck?

Keep on trolling (yourself), Brianna. We're keeping tabs.

Wednesday, 11 March 2015

Finish him? Honey, you haven't even started.

The fine ladies at Ubisoft Montreal. You can't tell, but they're being harassed.

Originally I called out the author ("HIGH INQUISITUR SJW") on the article of this post on twitter in a polite manner stating it to be "opinionated and baseless." She immediately responded saying I should "eat a bag of dicks." I was then dogpiled by her followers, as I simply asked for references and links to the articles she apparently did her research on. The dogpiling was done by her children-like followers, who, mostly just swore and acted like children. These were by apparently older gentlemen and ladies. Quite appalling behavior.

The author holds a PhD. Apparently not in science or English/essay writing.

All I wanted was evidence for the claims this person made. And to hopefully add said evidence as links within the article, so I can understand what she was talking about.

After she swore at me, and continuously showed off her childlike maturity, she eventually produced links to various articles, then retreated back to her childish antics. This is too little, too late; revealing yourself first to be an ad hominem-spewing invalid earns you no points; I expected an apology first. One doesn't reluctantly answer a simple question after repeated asking and being treated like the target of a schoolyard bully, and expect me to respect such a person. As well, these links must be associated with the opinions involved within the claim, like, linking directly from a statement, or a citation, or a biolography, a hyperlink, etc. She could've been talking about the flying spaghetti monster and then just mentioned "Read X book by Lovecraft" and it would have had the same value.

So, I decided to analyze the baseless, opinionated article itself on its own merits.

>The feminist battle for Gamergate victory isn’t done
And what is this feminist battle for Gamergate? Did it ever start? Which campaign? How's the campaign going? And which flavor of feminism? When did it even have a victory? What are you even talking about?

#NotYourShield, which has several examples of women, minorities, feminists, those of various sexualities and beliefs, et al, are all in support of #GamerGate

(There's dozens of these, but I found these all in under a minute.)

Now, the 3rd wave of feminism, or radical sex-negative feminists, are a whole other ball of looney. If that's the flavor of feminism you're referring to, I must simply ask: who are you kidding?

>When it comes to feminism and Gamergate, I want to say that feminism—unquestionably—won. But then I think: at what cost? Maybe it’s better to say: we know unequivocally we are on the right side of Gamergate.

Again, what type of feminism, when, and what was the struggle? And how is it she, or people are on the "right side of Gamergate?"

Whenever a radical feminist does something, she reveals herself to be a radical: off. Generally, not very rational. Lacking evidence, relying on dogma. So the cost must be from her own validity, character, and generally the amount of laughter the average person generates.

Or perhaps the author is referring to feminists in #GamerGate who are in the "right side of Gamergate", somehow? What's the "wrong" side of Gamergate? Again: what are you even talking about?

Let's keep in mind there are actual feminists who are pro #gamergate. Christina Hoff Sommers being one of the more well known.

So really -- and this is no surprise when talking to opinionated ideologues with no references to the articles they post -- I have to ask again: what are you even talking about?

>There was a Mission Accomplished moment in October 2014, when the New York Times published an article that seemed confused about what Gamergate was and why it was happening—not in a fumbling, tech-illiterate sense, but more of a sense of incredulity. The writer, Nick Wingfield, appeared to be saying: “So you’re harassing women … for liking video games. Huh.”

You mean this article?

Yes, and Nick gets it wrong. As most SJWs and feminists seem to get it (opinions) wrong.

So how is a confused writer/journalist/whomever...making a "Mission Accomplished" moment, referring to what mission we still don't know of, when he's not even clear what he's talking about? Because he's a writer in the New York Times? Are you "feminists" (of unknown denomination) have any concept of (again) what you're talking about?

This article, which came out at about the same time, explains this, or Nick's folly:

Now if you don't know what #gamergate is, there's plenty of evidence to show you. Simply go on twitter and search the hashtag. The link below goes into detail, but it really comes down to ethics in not just gaming journalism, but journalism in general.

>The article was published right after Anita Sarkeesian, a feminist critic best known for her YouTube series “Tropes vs. Women in Video Games,” cancelled an appearance at Utah State University after she received an anonymous threat of a shooting massacre were the talk to go ahead (as a concealed carry state, security at the event could not guarantee no one with a gun would be allowed in the building while Sarkeesian was speaking).

Yes, and that was, as stated by Utah Police, that "there was no threat to students, staff or the speaker, so no alert was issued."

There was no reason to worry. As 100% of every threat she's gotten has been. Baseless trolling.

And what's wrong with a state that has a concealed carry law? Wouldn't she feel even more safe if those who wanted to see her speak had shown up with guns to protect her? Arguably, Utah seems to have a rather decent gun crime rate in comparison to other states (2011):

>Sadly, Sarkeesian has long been the target of sexist attacks—ever since she first launched a Kickstarter campaign in 2012 to support the series. “The threats against Ms. Sarkeesian are the most noxious example of a weeks-long campaign to discredit or intimidate outspoken critics of the male-dominated gaming industry and its culture,” Wingfield wrote.

And where's the evidence for this claim? How does this have anything to do with #gamergate? Anita Sarkeesian has had critics since her original stint on youtube, and with the Tropes series, even more. Nick goes on, quote:
The instigators of the campaign are allied with a broader movement that has rallied around the Twitter hashtag #GamerGate, a term adopted by those who see ethical problems among game journalists and political correctness in their coverage. The more extreme threats, though, seem to be the work of a much smaller faction and aimed at women.
Yet he himself offers no evidence to show this is a part of #GamerGate. He continues:
While the online attacks on women have intensified in the last few months, the dynamics behind the harassment go back much further.
Oh, so it started before Ms. Sarkeesian and other women were being "threatened"? GamerGate never existed then. So it seems (from what Nick's telling us) that #GamerGate had nothing to do with these so called threats in the past or present.

>New York Times may have been removed from the specifics and scope of the Gamergate conflict, yet it was clear the only response could be “this is baffling and terrible.”

What's so baffling?
  1. We don't know who's causing these attacks.
  2. The attacks themselves are nothing more than negative messages, sent over twitter. Considering the volume of them, whose effects have amounted to nothing more than mean spirited language -- who cares?
>As an outsider’s perspective, it was invaluable and it illuminated something that was at once crucial and deeply disheartening: that it was even more terrible, and equally baffling, for the women caught up within Gamergate—we are on the wrong end, in the middle of something incomprehensible and horrific. And since October, Gamergate has only become more ridiculous.

The only thing ridiculous is your reasoning here.
  • There's no evidence showing #GamerGate is behind any of these attacks (at least, none that the article, or you, have shown.)
  • Who is "Gamergate-we"? Feminists? Which? Considering there are feminists in GamerGate, I fail to see what you're talking about, let alone how it's incomprehensible and horrific.
  • What happened since October that's become more ridiculous?
Here's a timeline in case you need some help there, chief:

Now, go through all that and tell me what you're talking about.

>Even former avowed Gamergaters have hung up their trilbies and abandoned their positions as everything became more extreme and untenable—or they suddenly found themselves on the opposing side of the harassment campaign.

And these people are...?

And again: what harassment campaign? Saying things doesn't make them true.

>Those within the industry openly made statements against Gamergate, including: gaming companies such as Blizzard and the Entertainment Software Association (commonly know as the ESA and gaming’s top trade group);

And there have been many developers who are for and against #GamerGate, with varying (and sometimes ignorant) positions.

So...what's your point?

And here's Blizzard Matthew Schnee retracting on statements made of #GamerGate

And here's Blizzard's Mark Kern (of #LetMarkSpeak) in support of #GamerGate, and denouncing the anti-gamer SVU episode
Mark Kern, who wants harassment to stop on all fronts, and as a result was slammed by Ben Kuchera.

Oh yeah. No problem with game journalists here.

As for ESA, the only publication I can see regarding them is from gamasutra:

Gamasutra. Home of Leigh Alexander. Ms. "Gamers are Over"/"I am game journalism". Part of the giant "Gamers are Dead" articles that happened in August 2014. No kidding they would be against #GamerGate -- a movement about ethics in journalism -- when they're the exact part of the problem.

>publications like Game Informer, Polygon, and Giant Bomb;

Polygon. Home to Chris Plante, also part of the "Gamers are Dead" articles. No kidding?

Game Informer, Giant Bomb, IGN, as stated by Brianna Wu -- "They are the primary reason this problem exists."

She's out to lunch anyway, but after Coffee and Apologizing, and being attacked by her own extreme-feminist followers, who can follow any of this crap?

>and creative luminaries such as Tim Schafer

Creative luminary? The only thing that guy needs to be creative over is a new sock drawer. (He'll just have to ask Wu, Quinn and Sarkeesian.) Oh right, and those games he was working on that have gone way over schedule. Gotta love those Kickstarter people who can't seem to manage all that money, and fail to deliver when over paid, huh? (HINT: Anita Sarkeesian)

Oh right, and apologize for being a racist bigot.

>and Damion Schubert.
Not exactly winning any points for any side. He seems more like a confused fellow as to what GamerGate actually is.

>Some statements where measured, like the ESA’s assertion that “There is no place in the video game community—or our society—for personal attacks and threats.” But others weren’t. Schubert called it “an unprecedented catastrofuck,” which remains one of my favourite combinations of words ever. Even the vaguest of questions about the legitimacy of the movement seemed to evaporate.

Schubert is confused what it is, and the ESA doesn't like harassment. Great. Well, none of us like harassment, but we all know what #GamerGate is -- it's about ethics in journalism. (Unless, someone has ample evidence to show otherwise.)

What is "the vaguest of questions about the legitimacy of the movement seemed to evaporate."? How did it evaporate? Coming from Damion? Seriously, how can you not even know "what gamer gate is" when we're constantly telling you it's about gaming journalism, when our goals have always been about gaming journalism, and our achievements been been about gaming journalism?

We also like giving to charities. Some in support of women to the game industry. We're nice like that.

>And yet—and yet—it is still happening. On January 11, Zoe Quinn wrote a piece called “August Never Ends” on her blog Dispatches from The Quinnspiracy. It charted her struggles to get the legal system to do something about the avalanche of hate spewing her way. She talked about how demolished her life was and continued to be by the campaign. She wrote, in full: “The same wheels of abuse are still turning, five months later. I’ve been coming to terms that this is a part of my life now, trying to figure out what to do about it, and how to move forward with so many people trying to wrap themselves around my ankles. It’s been hard to accept that my old life is gone and that I can never get back to it. But I’ve found purpose in the trauma, in trying to stop it from happening again, to use my experience to show how these things are allowed to happen, and to further a dialog on how to actually stop it. If I can’t go home, maybe I can at least get out of this elevator shaft. Maybe I can help end August. Maybe you can, too.”

Trauma from...tweets? Are you serious? Ever heard of the block feature? (Of course you did, dear. You blocked me.)

ZQ literally made and slept in her bed (all 5 of them -- those with connections to games and games journalism.) Her harassment of those in Wizardchan. The money she stole for her own Game Jam that never happened, etc. She is an unethical, horrible person.

It's called: you reap what you sow.

While no one here advocated harassment, shall we now give sorrow and support to adulterers, thieves, nepotists, and those who doxx themselves and cry "I'm being harassed!"?

>As much as there is hope here, and grim determination, and a strength of will that is barely fathomable, there is also so much pain and loss. Quinn’s piece is not the sort of thing that gets written looking back on a hard and well-fought victory—it’s the barest beginning, starting to see the light at the end of the darkest tunnel, the way out of the elevator shaft. Quinn has since gone on to found Crash Override Network, an anti-harassment network that attempts to help victims of Gamergate rebuild their lives and careers after the threats, doxing, and sabotage—a way to provide the support Quinn found lacking in the community. Today, she is taking the extra step to help others. That is victorious. That is what willpower is.

Yes, a completely useless site with no legal power, so people can whine to others about how they feel about some dingbats on twitter. Because they're too stupid to put their phones down, or use the block option, or learn to read and argue properly (instead of acting like disgruntled children. Ring a bell?)

And now she's started another site with Randi "This is all intentional" Harper called OAPI, another person who's doxxed herself, so they can talk to people have harassed online (presumably also by themselves.) Which is supposedly the same thing, only it'll "study" abuse patterns...probably so they can whine about being abused more believably in the future. In their totally not biased metrics.

>But the cost—my god, the cost. Crash Override Network and services like it are necessary. Certainly, people are going to be suffering the ramifications of this trauma for years, if not their entire lives and careers.

Crash Override is necessary for who?

The ramifications and truama of...twitter...for years? What?

If anyone's seriously being threatened or harassed online, we have the police and the FBI. Till then, it's just words. Use the block feature. Get over yourself.

>In the games publication Giant Bomb’s discussion forums, game developer and tech writer Brianna Wu wrote “I was talking to Zoe Quinn this week, who told me about a folder on her computer called, ‘The ones we lost.’ And it was young girls that wrote her saying they were too scared to become game developers. I started crying because I have another folder just like it.” Wu went on to excoriate those who had not yet spoken out about Gamergate or who were not actively making policies to hire, support, and defend the women targeted, stating “I would suggest every man in this industry has a hell of a lot of soul-searching to do about the part they played in creating this situation.”

Absolute nonsense.

Nothing is stopping women, men, boys, girls, etc., from either going to school to get into gaming, or to actually being game developers, designers, artists, animators, etc. Nothing. No one.

Hello, Ubisoft:
(The image I used at the top.)

I really like this quote on the post, directly from JJB of Deus Ex:HR fame:
Jonathan Jacques-BelletĂȘte LOL, See here's what's funny. You guys actually think that what is written or happens in the gaming press and what goes on in video game dev studios are one and the same. The reality is that they are worlds apart. All the girls in this picture had their jobs way before the events or the people you guys are mentioning here. Some of them, whom I know really well, I used to work with as far as 12 years ago. Never forget this kids: what game studios and game developers do is pretty much always completely different from how the gaming media perceives it. We're on the inside. They are not. They can only speculate.
GamerGate has actively supported and donated to causes that want females in gaming.

>For every visible woman who has stepped away from their platform, how many less vocal or less well-known participants have we lost? In the wake of Gamergate,

The wake? It ain't dead, honey.

>for instance, Kathy Sierra, a tech writer who was once the target of hacker and horrible person weev, walked away from the online persona she’d built as Serious Pony to insulate herself from further violence. Jenn Frank, who had built a nine-year career out of writing about games and was deluged with hatred for a Guardian piece about how women in the games industry are attacked, announced publicly that she was leaving the industry out of fear for her family’s safety. How many young women have chosen not to enter the industry at all? How many game developers have left the industry? How many journalists? How many women stopped participating in online communities and massively multiplayer online and co-op games? How can we possibly know the real numbers of the ones we lost?

Not sure how Sierra is related to #Gamergate, but harassment is bad regardless.

As for Jenn Frank:

>The thing is, we can’t. It’s going to take years to sort out the impact on the industry, on the community, on the way games are made and played.

Why are you even bothering to "sort out" the impact on the industry, et al? What does that even mean? What's the scope?

>Years before we figure out what games journalism can possibly look like in a post-Gamergate world.

Hopefully more ethical and with journalists being called out for their infractions. Like, actually getting fired, how any other actual journalist would in any news publication for breaking rules in journalism.

>Years before we can even begin to get a grip on the personal trauma suffered by so many after such a massive campaign of harassment and violence.

It's called being a pro victim and making $$$ in the process.

>And before any of that work can be done, Gamergate has to end first. It’s an inevitable victory, perhaps, but one that’s going to leave deep, presently unfathomable scars.


#GamerGate is for ethics in journalism. The metrics seem to show it isn't dying anytime soon.

And again, what is a "victory"? How is it inevitable? If #GamerGate really was about harassment, really was a hate movement, and they did all these evil, illegal things, they'd have been found, rounded up by the FBI and charged.

But that never happened. And it's not.

It's about a bunch of gamers fighting for ethics in journalism.

It's about a bunch of gamers arguing with ideologues who want to force their agenda where it shouldn't belong.

People of various creeds will continue to fight against marxist-feminist beliefs regardless of the topic or context. As for actual sex-positive feminists, egalitarians, and the like, they don't seem to have a problem with #GamerGate.

But to paint everyone with a broad brush just because professional victims say "GamerGate is harassing me"? Sorry, anecdotal evidence doesn't cut it. The legal world doesn't work like that, nor does the physical one.

And those that do use the #GamerGate hashtag and harass people? There's already a method by using the hashtag with "harassment patrol" associated with a user. It does not discriminate pro or anti, and simply group reports the harassing party.

So good luck on your writing skills. You're going to need (any) evidence and more than shoddy articles that don't amount to much to prove anything.