Slashdot Mirror


FBI Confirms Open Investigation Into Gamergate

v3rgEz writes In a terse form letter responding to a FOIA request, the FBI has confirmed it has an open investigation into Gamergate, the loose but controversial coalition of gamers calling for ethics in gaming journalism — even as some members have harassed and sent death threats to female gaming developers and critics.

26 of 556 comments (clear)

  1. Who? by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Which ones are they investigating? The drama-mongers or the drama-mongs?

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Who? by Schadrach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not really accurate. Mostly because you're pretending that #gg is doing all the threatening and doxxing.

      Even if we utterly "listen and believe" the folks who claim to have been threatened and then whip out their "donate to me to show how non-sexist you are" buttons that it's exactly as bad as they claim it is, you still have more people being threatened by anti-GG folks than by GG. Of course, many of those don't count because they have the wrong genitals to count as victims, and the rest don't count because women who don't agree with anti-GG folks aren't *really* women, such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      Or to put it another way, no one in GG has sent filled syringes or dead animals to the anti-GG crowd, or called their employers to try to get them fired from jobs wholly unrelated to the topic at hand (this is actually a surprisingly common tactic from the SJW crowd when someone disagrees with them). The anti-GG crowd has done those things.

      Though I'll admit, asshole that he is, I still find it funny how many times Roguestar has been suspended from twitter.

      The only things anti-GG can claim against GG are people saying mean things over the internet, and a school shooting threat that both didn't claim to be related to GG (and let's face it, there are plenty of folks who hate Anita Sarkeesian in particular and feminist speakers in general who are wholly unconnected from GG), and was deemed not to be a credible threat by law enforcement.

    2. Re:Who? by Schadrach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I, and most other pro-GG folks you'll find online will entirely agree with you that everyone that has engaged in threats and doxxing against anyone need to be tracked down and punished. I'm not worried, because I haven't done those things, nor have most other GG.

      I'd love to see some kind of evidence linking the USU threat to GG though, because the threat certainly didn't mention it, and a *lot* of people hate Sarkeesian that aren't part of GG. I know you want to make every time someone says something mean to a woman a case of GG being evil, but then you have all the women that are part of GG and also get harassed (and men, but I don't think you'd consider them important enough to care about as victims). Guess who's doing that harassment? Hint: It's not GG.

    3. Re:Who? by Zephyn · · Score: 4, Funny

      Being a victim requires actual harm. What actual harm does a threat from some chickenshit web troll really do you?

      In all fairness, they have been known to cancel the occasional movie.

  2. Re:Sounds good. by Luckyo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Some were admitted to have been fabrication. Some have been real but police advised people threatened that they were not credible, only to have those people go to the media claiming they were serious.

    And then there were probably a few real psychos.

    The saddest part is that most of the actual victims appear to be people who took part in the #notyourshield tag. The folks that basically made a point that "we're those minorities you opponents of #gamergate claim to be "protecting" and we're telling you under our own names - we need no protection from you". They and their families were brutally harassed and some were actually driven out of work.

    It's going to be interesting to know if FBI is going to actually look at the whole thing rather than just #gamergate and what they will find out.

  3. cowardice by Iamthecheese · · Score: 4, Informative

    This isn't even the use of weasel words. The FBI is investigating *opponents* of GamerGate for lying about threats and third party trolls for making other threats while the summery claims the investigation is about threats made by proponents. I really, really hope whoever made the threats and whoever lied about them is caught. I hope this because I know damn well GamerGate did not make these threats.

    The entire case against GamerGate is built of press pushing talking points off of empty claims made by professional victims. That's the start and end of the "threats and harassment" side of the story. Meanwhile a consumer movement against, ironically, corruption in the press is being libeled to suit political agendas.

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
    1. Re:cowardice by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Informative

      The problem is GamerGate started with the attacks on Zoe Quinn, which turned out to be complete fabrications. The alleged positive review of her game doesn't exist, there was no conspiracy. It was all just some jilted lover's blog post and all the asshats who jumped on to the bandwagon by spreading lies and rumours about her.

      When it became apparent that the whole thing was bullshit, GamerGate moved on to other targets. By that point it was too late though. The "Gamer" tag was poisoned beyond recovery, and the alleged journalistic impropriety was all just innuendo and thinly veiled outrage that women were demanding respect and fair treatment as gamers.

      Look at the nonsense GamerGate spouted about Anita Sarkeesian, for example. You may not agree with her points, but that doesn't excuse endless fake accounts, fake posts about her using the Kickstarter money to buy expensive shoes, weaponized pornography etc. You could argue that it was only a few on the fringes doing all that, but that's just a No True Scotsman argument.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  4. Most Unbiased Slashdot Gamergate Article by Kunedog · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Slashdot's coverage of Gamergate has been abysmal. Every other summary has followed the template "harassment, misogyny, threats, harassment, misogyny, threats . . . oh btw Gamergate."

    Sad as it is, this shitty summary is still the most "unbiased" simply because it straightforwardly mentions the movement as the topic of the discussion. The attempt to imply that the FBI said they were investigating pro-Gamergate people has already been destroyed in the comments (thank fuck users are still in control of the discussion here).

    Four months later, there still hasn't been a single /. thread about the Gamergate scandal itself: the journalistic lapses, the universal news media blackout and user forum/comment censorship (including reddit and 4chan of all places), and the still-ongoing coordinated smear campaign that was launched on August 28 with the "Gamers are Dead" shotgun blast of hit pieces. All of those milestones should have gotten at least one article here each.

    1. Re:Most Unbiased Slashdot Gamergate Article by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Funny

      All of those milestones should have gotten at least one article here each.

      Please no.

      What we really need is an opinion piece by Bennett. Then the circle will be complete.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Most Unbiased Slashdot Gamergate Article by Noah+Haders · · Score: 5, Funny

      Then the circle will be completely jerked. Ftfy.

    3. Re:Most Unbiased Slashdot Gamergate Article by DogDude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's because none of that little shit matters. Nobody really cares about a bunch of guys who live in their parents' basements arguing about video games. People do care when a bunch of people threaten other people with bodily harm.

      Get some perspective, moron.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    4. Re:Most Unbiased Slashdot Gamergate Article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Are you serious?

      We have logs proving collusion, we saw sites getting censored the day Total Biscuit brought this to light,we have over a dozen websites publishing attack articles on the same day.

      I do not give two shits about ethics in journalism, it's a pointless battle. But what I do care about is people denying the fucking obvious because it conflicts with their personal politics. Game journalism is corrupt as shit and used SJW bullshit to defend themselves - whether you think that's justified, whether you think the gamergate response of harassment and threats is the bigger story, fine I have no opinion. But denying the objective fucking truth is horseshit, and I can't believe /. stands for it.

    5. Re:Most Unbiased Slashdot Gamergate Article by sinij · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I personally believe that this issue is worthwhile of further attention. Why? Because as a gamer that does not associate with GG, I still don't care to have gaming turned into radfem 'mandatory inclusion' platform.

      If you thought Jack Thompson was bad, read up on what radfem thinks about boys and gun play. If they have their way with gaming, next BG of CoD will have pink waffle bats and dolls instead of guns.

    6. Re:Most Unbiased Slashdot Gamergate Article by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you troll all of your customers, don't be surprised if you end up with a few wing nuts going off the deep end.

      The "journalism" response to this entire affair has been shameless pandering to some notion of political correctness and shameless exploitation of the situation. That's been true pretty much across the entire media spectrum starting with the very first set of trolling click-bait articles generated by the gaming and tech press.

      Anyone that disagrees is branded as some sort of anti-feminist misogynistic scum who's opinions don't matter.

      It's a perfect example of the "liberal media" that tea baggers like to whine about. The dogma behind the narrative is more important than anything else.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  5. "gate" by skam240 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Can we please stop adding gate to the end of any controversial subject? It was barely clever the first time it was done and it's gotten to be pretty much the polar opposite at this point.

    --
    I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    1. Re:"gate" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Agreed. Watergate had NOTHING to do with water.

    2. Re:"gate" by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I hope not, it's been a pretty good label to identify the importance of a "crisis". As soon as -gate is added, you know you can skip the story without missing anything worth your time.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:"gate" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, the only sensible thing to do is to retrofit "Watergate" to "WatergateGate". Totally with you on this one.

  6. Re:Excellent! by epyT-R · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Large amorphous groups like gamergate (and yes, feminist groups and organizations as well) all have a few crackpots making threats. I am sure a few will be found, but that does not alter the legitimacy of the arguments made. I wouldn't be so quick to believe what three letter agencies put out either, especially since they are beholden to political bodies with interests in specific outcomes for the sake of image.

  7. Re:Excellent! by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Informative

    How internet fighting works:

    http://www.smbc-comics.com/ind...

  8. Re:Media blackout by dave420 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The initial corruption turned out to not exist, so it's no wonder it wasn't reported on. After that the hate-train was already at top speed and it was too late to stop it.

  9. Re:Ethics? by dave420 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Calling something "social justice" does not immediately relegate it to obscurity. "Social justice" is just a term to mean "admit less-than-stellar behavior towards minorities or the underrepresented, and earnestly try to improve it". Unless you'd call Rosa Parks a SJW you really should stop trying to use terms like that pejoratively - it makes you look like a tiny-minded, scared child, who is worried their favorite toys aren't as awesome as they always thought, and lashes out at anyone who might point that out to them.

  10. Re:Media blackout by silentcoder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That is because the "corruption" never happened, there is no evidence that it ever happened - on the other hand, the death threats and harassment was very, very real.

    --
    Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  11. Re:Sounds good. by Vintermann · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just shows how crazy it is to rely on Wikipedia these days.

    By the way, anyone else missing comments they recall making in this thread?

    --
    xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  12. Why what police force get involved when... by tlambert · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well, that was mostly the cynic in me writing, but on the other hand, isn't a threat made against a single individual typically handled by the police? Why would FBI feel the need to get involved? Or is this on of the "because it happened on the Internet it's different" kind of situations?
    Government agencies overstepping their boundaries and getting involved in things that aren't their business is certainly a reason for concern.

    Why what police force get involved when...

    This is a basic, 50,000 foot view; it's not intended to cover all the details, and corrections gratefully accepted, but I believe this covers the gist of it...

    It's pretty clear that the threats, particularly against the appearance of Anita Sarkeesian at Utah State University were, at a minimum, interstate.

    When the threats cross a state line, the move from local police jurisdiction to federal police (FBI) jurisdiction, since police forces may only operate within their own jurisdictions. If the crime spans larger jurisdictions, such as adjacent cities within a county, or adjacent counties within a state, then it may be handled by an inter-agency task force. If it gets bigger than that, then the next larger jurisdiction encapsulating the jurisdictions involved takes ownership. The jurisdictions and agencies, are as follows:

    Within a city: The city police force
    Within a county: The county sheriff
    Within a state: The CBI (California Bureau of Investigation - agency name varies by state)
    Interstate: The FBI
    International: Interpol

    Within these classifications, inferior jurisdictions are often acted to cooperate/participate in the investigatory legwork, arrest operations, searches, evidence gathering, forensic work (autopsy, crime scene investigation, and so on).

    Exceptions:

    When a crime occurs on a federal lands or reservations, the FBI always has jurisdiction. For "indian reservations", investigator power lies in both the FBI and in the tribal police force (depending on the nature of the crime).

    When a crime occurs on a military base, the investigatory power lies within the branch of the military; for most crimes, this is the MPs or Military Police. For more serious crime, or crimes involving military personnel not on base, or non-military and military personnel both, it goes by branch of service:

    Navy, Marine, Coast Guard: NCIS - Naval Criminal Investigative Service
    Army: USACIDC or CID - Criminal Investigation Division of the Army Provost's office
    Air Force: AFOSI or OSI - Office of Special Investigations

    Generally, anything involving a civilian, or occurring off base, ands up being a joint investigation with local authorities, which can include authorities in other countries (e.g. naval bases in Japan, air force bases in Germany, etc.).

    For terrorist threats, USDHS - DHS - the Department of Homeland Security - gets involved. They are probably already involved in the Utah State University threat. At that pint, they can call on the capabilities and services of agencies such as the DOJ (Federal Marshals office), the NSA (which is allowed to operate domestically), the CIA (which is allowed to operate extranationally), the DIA (which is allowed to operate with regard to foreign military), and so on.

    All in all, the more something escalates in terms of geographic reach, or in terms of threat level, the higher up the food chain you go, further and further into territories where you do not want to be. At some point in the escalation process, you get to the stratospheric regions where people simply "disappear" (otherwise known as "extraordinary rendition").

    Does that answer your question?

  13. Re:Ethics? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Post a link to the positive review she received due to her relationship with a journalist. I dare you. I double dare you.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC