Slashdot Mirror


Doxing Victim Zoe Quinn Launches Online "Anti-harassment Task Force"

AmiMoJo writes: On Friday, developer and doxing victim Zoe Quinn launched an online "anti-harassment task force" toolset, staffed by volunteers familiar with such attacks, to assist victims of a recent swell of "doxing" and "swatting" attacks. The Crash Override site, built by Quinn and game developer Alex Lifschitz, offers free services from "experts in information security, white hat hacking, PR, law enforcement, legal, threat monitoring, and counseling" for "victims of online mob harassment."

They have already managed to preemptively warn at least one victim of a swatting attempt in Enumclaw, Washington. As a result, the police department's head e-mailed the entire department to ask any police sent to the address in question to "knock with your hand, not your boot."

54 of 693 comments (clear)

  1. address in question by fche · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "the police department's head e-mailed the entire department to ask any police sent to the address in question to "knock with your hand, not your boot."

    That sounds like appropriate advice for apprx. all addresses.

  2. Slashdot stance on #gamergate by lgw · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Slashdot has been fairly in the bag for the SJWs over the whole #gamergate thing, but this is a bit much. Really, we need be a advertizing platform for pet projects of the SJW crowd now? A "gender equality in tech" story 3 days a week wasn't enough? WTF happened to Slashdot? Broad political clickbait was a bit understandable but this is starting to look like a Gawker site.

    We miss you Taco, but it's becoming clear why you left.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    1. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Presto+Vivace · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you are using social justice warrior as a perjorative, you might want to consider adjusting your view of the world.

    2. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Other than the gg connection, it's actually an interesting idea. Internet harassment can get really bad, this has some examples. This might be an interesting attempt to improve the situation.

      So, they have "experts in information security, white hat hacking, PR, law enforcement, legal, threat monitoring, and counseling" to help people after they've been swatted.

      On the other hand it doesn't look like they've set up a non-profit or any structure whatsoever. They registered through domainsbyproxy.com, so they aren't trying to be transparent.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Iamthecheese · · Score: 3, Insightful

      GamerGate is lashing out against bad journalism, and it's doing so with a boycott and letter writing campaign. You pretend to have spoken to enough GamerGate supporters to have formed a solid opinion, but the fact that you think GamerGate harasses people determines that to be a lie.

      --
      If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
    4. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by tsotha · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's probably the most polite way to describe people who are, at their core, fucking fascists.

    5. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Kielistic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a subcategory of keyboard warrior- which has always been a pejorative. People that lash out at pointless things in pointless arenas and think they're heroes. Nobody likes sanctimonious blowhards.

    6. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh please. My view of the world is fine. SJWs are a rotten lot in general, caring more about the status being for or against something, than the actual issue itself.

      For instance, Zoe Quinn here, ruined an actual event for female programmers trying to make games, because she didn't get her payoff. She and Anita Sarkessian aren't about games, they're about themselves. And the crowd laps it up everytime.

    7. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Karganeth · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Not really. Much like how calling someone a "keyboard warrior" doesn't imply keyboards are bad, calling someone a "social justice warrior" isn't meant to imply that social justice is bad.

    8. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Boronx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's your fucking scandal? The entire gamer media is in the tank for in AAA game, and your scandal is an indy dev who fucked some guys? I'm starting to think this gamer gate is just another grouping of right wing nuts.

    9. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by russotto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Social justice IS bad, though. Social justice is to justice the way People's Democracy is to democracy. Most of what Social Justice Warriors do is supported by the insane philosophy of Social Justice.

    10. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by AK+Marc · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Social justice is demanding that you serve Blacks at the same tables as Whites, not out in the alley. It's a shame that you think that's a bad thing.

    11. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by russotto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Social justice is demanding that you serve Blacks at the same tables as Whites, not out in the alley.

      That's just racial equality. Social justice says you can toss the whites out in the alley and spit in their food and they can't complain because there's no such thing as racism against white people.

    12. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It might be an interesting idea, but Ms. Quinn seems to be prone to exaggeration - as anyone who actually goes and plays "Depression Quest" will see - it's something I'd expect from a kid in high school who decided to "mess around with computers" - not a game developer. I'm not saying it's bad ... bad would be an improvement.

      So when she claims to have "experts in information security, white hat hacking, PR, law enforcement, legal, threat monitoring, and counseling to help people after they've been swatted", without names I'd take that with a whole box of salt.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    13. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by vux984 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's recap here. Zoe Quinn slept with all the major game reviewers and/or their editors. She gets rave reviews for a game people who actually bought have panned mercilessly. Literally caught with their pants down, they point to their customers and scream "sexist!". That's the point of the scandal. You can dress it up however you like, but at the root it's about corruption in the gaming press.

      This sounds about right to me. The only takeaway question I have from it though; is how does anyone give a shit about Zoe Quinn?

      The reviewers and the editors were corrupt; and its their corruption that is unacceptable. The guy offering the police a bribe is a douche... but its not newsworthy unless the police accept the bribe, and the story is about corrupt police.

      Ditto for journalists; or so-called gaming "journalism". Zoe's merely the catalyst; but her integrity is irrelevant - who really cares whether she offered the journalists a free game, a free lunch, or a free blowjob? What matters is that the journalists, who wish to be viewed as having some sort of journalistic integrity, demonstrated a decided lack thereof. So why is this story about Zoe Quinn instead of the editors and reviewers?

      Is it some form of sexism that we can't be properly indifferent about Zoe and level the real scathing criticism at the utter lack of journalistic integrity of her partners? That would be ironic.

    14. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The word "SJW" literally exists specifically to refer to the people who use social justice as a smokescreen for bigotry and even violence, it was created as a direct response to the incessant cries of "but that's not TRUE feminism".

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    15. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't forget she was also caught retweeting offers from GNAA trolls to pay for fake harassment tweets directed against her.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    16. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Kielistic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is incredibly disingenuous to claim ownership of people's actions in the past. They had nothing to do with you and you do not get to leech from their accomplishments.

      It is that exact fallacious and dishonest nonsense that got SJW labelled as a pejorative. You are transparently trying to say "these people did good things and I say I do good things therefore we are the same and you are bad". You aren't nearly as clever as you think you are.

      People loudly proclaiming they are doing things for the "greater good" or "social justice" rarely are. Every horrible asshole in the history of civilization claimed to be doing things because they were righteous.

    17. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Kielistic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It was a miniscule event that would have meant nothing in a week if it were handled with even a "woups, sorry". The scandal was a small group of media friends decided to instead start promoting that a large chunk of their audience were misogynist, horrible, racist, homophobic, right wing, terrorist (you get the idea) to deflect blame from a complete nonevent that shouldn't have even mattered.

      You can guarantee that very few people cared about some extra press some lame game got. What they did care was being called some pretty vile and untrue names.

    18. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Mashiki · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't forget the other faces of anti-GG. Like Wu, who just turned around and supported the doxer of Milo Yiannopoulos. These people and their CON are just plain fucked up in the head.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    19. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Kielistic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not really at all, no. I was merely pointing out the term "social justice warrior" refers to sanctimonious blowhards more concerned about their own egos than than anything that could possibly be defined as "social justice". Which is why the term causes such a fuss in some folk that feel the need to reply to it with petty insults and empty regurgitated statements they think make them sound profound like "[challenging] their comfortable world view". Which is exactly how a sanctimonious blowhard would react when someone questioned their position.

      Trust me pal- nothing you can say challenges my world view, comfortable or otherwise. You are completely vacuous. You fit nicely into my world view under the category of extremely insecure people that latch onto something arbitrary that they think projects their superiority to the world.

      You are more than welcome to post your drivel here. Just don't expect everyone to pretend you aren't a fool. I am really unsure how you thought that post wouldn't make you look like an insecure infantile loudmouth. But I guess you sure showed me?

    20. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by vux984 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      probably because Zoe Quinn supposedly unfairly profited from the corruption.

      So does the guy bribing policemen. But they still aren't the story.

      those willing to engage those journalists in corruption are just as bad

      No. Because I have no real expectations of integrity on the part of the people whose product is being reviewed.

      With journalists the quality and integrity of the reviews. Its on them to say no and remain impartial; whether its an offer of a free laptop or a lapdance. And if they do accept the laptops or lap dances then its on them to make full disclosure of that fact.

      Whether or not the developer offers laptops or lapdances to the reviewers really is irrelevant to me. I judge the developer on the game. And I rely on the reviewer to maintain the integrity of the review.

      Judging the developer for the integrity of the review is as idiotic as judging the football players for the integrity of the referees.

      her role became exacerbated by her lack of grace and social skills in dealing with this in a constantly escalating war of words from arsehats on both sides of the fence.

      I think we're interested in Zoe because she's female. If a male developer had fucked his way to some good reviews... I'd bet anything we'd blame the reviewer. (which is what we SHOULD be doing here.)

      Hence my suggestion that there is an ironic sexism at play here after all.

    21. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by vux984 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Meh, I've seen the announcement the he made where he didn't actually review the title but did manage to call it out as a stand out title from a list of 50 steam green-lit games, not once but at LEAST twice in an article not more than 3 paragraphs. The other 49 titles ... well one or two others got a mention, and the rest made an alphabetical list.

      It was unprofessional, to say the least, and I agree that the author violated his ethics and integrity by not mentioning that he also happened be having a relationship with the developer of one of the games he just happened to feel was such a 'standout games'.

    22. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Kielistic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It didn't work before so you'll try again, huh? You've got one tactic and you'll flail away with it until everyone just gets bored and you feel vindicated. You don't get to just conflate two completely different things. You know exactly what people mean when they say "social justice warrior".

      No one is "resetting" any term but you. You are well aware people are using it as a sardonic pejorative. Your response of "these people did things that some random person might have called social justice and therefore they are social justice warriors so you can't use social justice warrior as a pejorative" is humorously asinine. The abolitionists had nothing at all to do with the current culture of what people pejoratively label "social justice warrior". Stop trying to defend your vacuous moral preening using the accomplishments of others. And that is exactly what you are trying to do.

      I never said anyone else is bad. That is purely a fabrication by those who hate equality, progress and politeness.

      I'm not saying anyone is bad; I'm passive aggressively saying they are bad. That's what makes me morally superior!

      No one hates equality you imbecile. I don't have to make you look bad. Your pathetically transparent attempts at grand-standing do that all on their own.

      Let me spell it out for you. You are exactly what people mean when they use SJW as a pejorative. A pious fool that thinks they're profound. A person that immediately labels anyone that disagrees with them as some list of non-sequitur horrible things because you are too intellectually stunted by cognitive dissonance to actually handle a dissenting opinion. "Could I be wrong? No, that person just hates puppies and probably kittens too."

    23. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by LaurenCates · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Rosa Parks was an activist, not a Social Justice Warrior.

      The difference (alas not mine):

      An activist fights for a ramp into a building for handicapped people.

      Social Justice Warriors fight to remove the stairs, for the misbegotten fear that someone might be offended because a handicapped person can't use them.

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    24. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Vanderhoth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except when people attack the issue, Ethics in Gaming Journalism, the SJW turn around and claim it's an attack on women. Anita Sarkeesian, as an example, has a horrible argument, not evidence to back up her claims and steals footage and doesn't even play the games she claims to "critique" yet when someone points out how terrible her argument is, "SHUT UP!! HARAZZZMENTZ!!! MUH SOGGY KNEES!!!"

      Oh and for the shining example of what an SJW is. Look up Jonathan McIntosh, the white guy that writes Anita's material. A whole hash tag was spawned around his stupidity #FullMcIntosh

    25. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Vanderhoth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There was also this article that PROMOTED her game. The only people that call it a "review" are people trying to derail the conversion. Calling it a "review" allows them to argue about semantics if/when someone posts the actual article. Oh, and Nathan Grayson ADDMITTED to sleeping with ZQ, but claimed it happened several days after the last article (GameJam) he wrote featuring her... Never mind the fact that Nathan Grayson is thanked in the credits of ZQ's game this whole mess started over. So even if he didn't sleep with her, he didn't disclose he was friends or that he was essentially promoting a game HE worked on.

      This conversation usually goes:
      aGG: Why do you hate Zoe? Her sex life blah blah blah, journalist never slept with her or wrote about her. (denies articles exist)
      GG: Here are the articles
      aGG: Well he never reviewed her game so :P (argues about "review")
      GG: I didn't say he did, but he did write about it and did suspiciously choose it out of 50 other steam greenlite games
      aGG: Well it's not a review and he only mentioned the game (claims it's insignificant)
      GG: Nathan is also thanked in the games credits as someone that worked on the game he mentions.
      aGG: *BLOCKED* (blocks after being proven wrong)
      aGG: You're just a stupid misogynerd neck beard (Continues insulting and taunting...)

    26. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Vanderhoth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      SJW is more than that though "authoritarian leftist hypocrite" I'm libertarian left, maybe a hypocrite (I don't think most hypocrites are aware they are). SJW is someone that claims to be for some form of equality, but will turn around and tell women they've internalized misogyny or call a black guy a "house nigger" for disagreeing with them. I've literally seen this happen to members of #NotYourShield who support #GamerGate. I've also seen a conversation between several "SJW" who were upset minorities would were disagreeing with them, and I've seen a Reddit ban notice to a transgender where the admin banned her because the trans "owed" cis-white people for fighting for their rights.

      I don't think Social Justice is bad in theory, but the vocal people pushing for it and the methods they use (Shame, Berating, Slander) are the absolute worst. Strictly in GamerGate the SJW opposition is made up of pedophiles, animal abusers, ex-neo-nazis, people who saw rape as it was happening and decided not to intervene or report it. Their basically "born again Christians" who are making up and fighting extra hard against invisible boogie men to atone for being terrible people themselves in the past.

      It is a shame because Social Justice like Religion is good in theory, but the wrong people get a hold of it and it becomes a weapon to be justifiably more evil and bigoted to everyone else.

    27. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Totenglocke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Anita has even openly stated that she hates video games, she uses them as a method of getting popularity.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    28. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, people advocating for greater parental involvement for men are called "MRAs". The people who claim to be "helping men" but actively fighting against any attempts to improve family court, divorces, or paternity leave are SJWs like the N.O.W.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    29. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Vanderhoth · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Sex was inconsequential. Nathan was friends with Zoe going back as far as 2012, twitter history proves that. On top of that Nathan was thanked in the games credits, so even if they weren't having a sexual relationship, he was promoting his own game without disclosure and was friends with the dev he was writing about, without disclosure. Even if it was two days after he'd written about her, it's still proof their relationship was close enough he should have recused himself or disclosed the relationship.

      Also the whole mess with Nathan Grayson was only the tip of the iceberg. Milo Yiannopoulos released the GameJournoPro mailing list, which was based of the JournoList mailing list that was a huge scandal in the mainstream media and got people fired back in 2010 for blacklisting and collusion, but hey didn't work for them lets start anther one. For the most part the GJP was harmless, but they did discuss blacklisting people, donating to patreons of gamedevs, how to narrate the GamerGate story, what game developers to suppress and what ones to promote, which is all collusion.

      Then there's the "Gamers are Dead" articles, which discuss the death of the "Gamer" identity. 10+ nearly identically worded articles all released in 24 hours, sorry but if that doesn't prove collusion I don't know what does. These articles are ACTUALLY what got GamerGate going. I could have cared less about Zoe Quinn and Nathan Grayson, but the gaming media slandering an entire demographic that's supposed to be their customers? To what end? In defense of their poor behaviour and being asked to be more ethical? Yeah that didn't fly with me, and if you look at the Topsy graph you can see August 28th is where GamerGate starts to go in to full swing.

      What's really funny though is at the end of the graph where #GamerGate is still getting 20K-25K tweets a day, most of the people I got into #GamerGate with aren't even using the tag anymore. We're all mostly following each other now, so using the tag to talk is pointless, we just read our regular twitter feeds, or spend time on KiA, or 8Chan. I'm pretty much just a twitter user myself, but I'm warming up to KiA. It's really easy to miss info on twitter and 140 characters sucks and encourages people to get into on sentence slap fights. Which is pretty much all you see on the #GamerGate tag now.

      The big issue is people are SOOOOOOO hung up on Zoe Quinn, most of us didn't care about her in the first place, but we're forever stuck explaining the origins rather than talking about what's happened since. GamerGate has already been successful:
      • It had several sites update their ethical policies, The Escapist, IGN, and PC Gamer.
      • Journalist ARE using disclosures now.
      • It helped point out blacklisting and collusion in the industry, like the blacklisting of Allistair Pinsof.
      • Pushed the FTC along in updating their guidelines and they're investigating sites like Gawker.
      • Cost Gawker Media millions in lost ad revenue and forced them to retroactively update articles with associated links
      • As a bonus GamerGate's donated over $120K to various projects to get women into the industry (TFYC & BasedGamer), and charities (anti-bullying, suicide prevention, UNICEF, GamerFruit, etc..) http://gamergate.me/charity/

      So whatever happens to GamerGate from here on out, it's already a win. People can throw all the crap they want at Gamers. Where people sit around and complain about the media or just accept it's corrupt and there's nothing to be done, we stood up and made an ACTUAL difference, even if people don't want to recognize it.

  3. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    She personifies everything wrong with the gaming media.

  4. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doesn't mean she deserves harassment. Condemnation maybe. Harassment no.

  5. Re:life on the wrong side of an online hate mob by Iamthecheese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't believe this biased drivel is modded informative. The only evidence that GamerGate is about harassing people are the unsubstantiated claims of certain people who are profiting from the "harassment" amplified and echoed manifold by an agenda pushing media. I implore anyone who reads this to read the actual voices of GamerGate and to withhold judgement until they have. Go to 8ch.net/gamergate and see how many posts support harassment. Look at the ethics policies we've brought about. Look at what we do and not what the media says we do.

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
  6. Re:Better Late Than Never by Iamthecheese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    GamerGate runs a harassment patrol, tracked down a harasser in Brazil, and generally loudly shouts down any support of doxxing and harassment. The behavior does not come from within GamerGate.

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
  7. Re:life on the wrong side of an online hate mob by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Oh please, I'm not going to even give boingboing, who've been in bed with Zoe Quinn since day one.

    I am against doxxing, but Quinn has ruined lives and events on her own.

    I wish we wouldn't give this this coverage or clicks.

  8. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by Presto+Vivace · · Score: 1, Insightful

    and the evidence for this would be?

  9. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by kentrel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Judging by her online postings she doesn't seem all that different to this new wave of internet troll that we're getting these days. A whole lot of name calling, revelling in drama, and taunting her "haterz", and that kind of thing. It's a bit cringeworthy.

  10. Chelsea Van Valkenberg's not a victim, but a perp. by sethstorm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For a known harasser, Chelsea Van Valkenberg's quite odd for wanting to stop something she has practiced often.

    Never mind that she's more than happy to see that opponents swatted (like Mike Cernovich) or gagged (like Eron Gjoni) - both cases based on falsified information.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  11. Re:life on the wrong side of an online hate mob by kentrel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've looked into this too. There are certainly threatening comments on twitter, but these get labelled as "By Gamergate" without any kind of awareness of the association fallacy. A threatening comment is always the responsibility of the individual. There are threatening comments all over social media, and anyone can be a victim of it. The media have been parroting this online harassment as fact without distinguishing it from criticism or just rudeness, and also without any acknowledgement of the same harassment on the other side. Active Gamergate supporters seem to vastly outnumber the anti Gamergate crowd by an order of magnitude, so I wonder if that makes it seem worse.

    After 5 months of "GamerGate" there's been no arrests, no serious evidence of any imminent threat published or connection to any organized "harassment" campaign. Gamergate supporters themselves have been harassed, swatted, sent malicious objects in the mail and this is largely ignored in the media. Possibly because many of them took a different approach, and didn't kick up that much of a fuss about it, or perhaps because it doesn't fit the media's narrative.

    This is my personal experience only, but the vast majority of gamergate supporters I spoke to were laid back, intelligent, friendly, and positive. There was the same ratio of weird but nice people that you'd find in any group really. However, many of Zoe Quinn's supporters ranged from being rude to abusive to authoritarian. They had an air of mocking superiority that gets old really quickly, and why I stay away from twitter.

  12. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by bloodhawk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    She personifies grace under pressure.

    really? I would have said she personifies the exact opposite and displays a heap of ignorance in dealing people socially, her responses to some of the attacks on her are what helped escalate the situation. She doesn't seem to understand social media at all or how to handle it.

  13. Re:life on the wrong side of an online hate mob by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    OK, so why do you bring up Gamergate out of the blue? Neither the article above nor any of the things it links to mention it at all.

    This is one of those situations like when a stranger on the street walks up to you and says "I'm not drunk!" -- you might not have even had an opinion on the matter before he opened his mouth, but the very act of denying it creates suspicion.

    If you want people to not associate Gamergate with harassment, you're shooting yourself in the foot by bringing up Gamergate whenever someone talks about harassment.

  14. Women in Technology by billstewart · · Score: 1, Insightful

    And did your post just make technology look like a more friendly place for half the population to work, or less friendly?

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  15. It Remains a Journalism Scandal. Deal With It. by Kunedog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The cover-up didn't work.
    The week-long gaming press news blackout and user comment/forum censorship didn't work.
    The coordinated, ongoing smear campaign that began with the "Gamers are over" articles hasn't worked.
    The doxxing and harassment of pro-GG folks hasn't worked.
    The endless train of embarrassingly desperate counter-hashtags hasn't worked.
    The Wikipedia and Nightline hit pieces only destroy those outlets' credibility for short-term effect.

    Last week PC Gamer became the latest games journalism site to update its ethics policy in the wake of Gamergate, joining IGN, the Escapist, and of course Kotaku/Gawker (though in Gawker's case, they put up more of a fight and the Gamergate pressure to be ethical had to be routed through the FTC). And there are probably more I'm forgetting.

    Gamergate also got Brad Wardell (CEO of Stardock) some long-overdue apologies for hit pieces run against him:
    https://twitter.com/iamDavidWi... [twitter.com]
    http://www.gamepolitics.com/20... [gamepolitics.com]
    http://www.zenofdesign.com/in-... [zenofdesign.com]

    Ask yourself how much of this you've seen reported in the corrupt media (which at this point, sadly, clearly includes Slashdot). The anti-GG side thrives only in an environment of propaganda and censorship, and evaporates when faced with integrity and transparency. They prove the need for Gamergate every time they write an article based on the assumption that terrorism and child porn^W^W^W^W misogyny and harassment have become the root passwords to the Constitution^W^W journalistic ethics.

  16. Re:Who cares? by russotto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Posting this to the front page really isn't supporting them if the tone of the comments is anything to go by.

    YouTube: Never read the comments.
    Slashdot: Never read the article.

    So it is written, so it shall be.

  17. Re:life on the wrong side of an online hate mob by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because it is ZOE QUINN, her entire life is one big shitstorm brawl over gamergate. She fires insults and threats at them, they respond and she claims harassment. everything she is involved with publically in this area is to boost her profile and to keep this whole shitstorm going as without it she sinks back into obscurity. It is kinda amusing and sad really, she has some legitimate complaints, but her complete lack of grace and inability to socially interact with people except in slinging matches completely obscures anything she has to say. She seems to be a truly nasty vicious piece of work that is as bad as those that attack her.

  18. You Been Misinformed on Purpose by Kunedog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you want people to not associate Gamergate with harassment, you're shooting yourself in the foot by bringing up Gamergate whenever someone talks about harassment.

    Try this: link to the /. article that covers the Gamergate scandal without screaming about misogyny and harassment. You can't. And that's because overall, the Slashdot readership doesn't buy the "misogyny and harassment" narrative for one second. The editors quickly discovered that the discussion thread for any article that straightforwardly mentions Gamergate--even if it's one-sided--couldn't be trusted to go the way the editors demand.

    For a while, they found limited success by posting articles with the template "misogyny, harassment, threats, misogyny, harassment, threats . . . oh btw Gamergate" (i.e. a br But even that's not working anymore, and the editors' credibility on this issue is shot. Permanently.

    Slashdot wants desperately to cover Gamergate, but doesn't want to be honest and up front that it's doing so, and especially that it's taking the pro-corruption side. In the early weeks, they even tried to participate in the blackout, which led to almost every article about gaming at all becoming a Gamergate thread. The editors/ownership knew damn well what they were doing, and it's silly to blame anyone else for the consequences of refusing to cover Gamergate, except with propaganda.

  19. Re:The police are terrified by onepoint · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You are correct. most people have never really faced a real threat, and walking into a house where a "person with perceived hostile intent" is just about as insane as it can be.

    if you did not grow up around violence, you might not understand what that cop is thinking, but I bet he's crapping in his pant's when he's got to use the foot instead of knock. like everyone, he just wants his shift to end and go home.

    --
    if you see me, smile and say hello.
  20. Re:The police are terrified by Pfhorrest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because the radar just gives them the results of kicking the door down without them having to lift a boot. It's not the kicking that people want to stop, it's what the kicking is done for: invading the privacy of their homes, without due process or even the decency to show proof that due process has in fact been done before invading. Cops being able to see into your house from the outside whenever they want is just as bad as cops being able to bust into your house whenever they want. Both breech the expected and due privacy of the home.

    --
    -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
    "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
  21. http://tech.slashdot.org/~AmiMoJo by Tasha26 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    developer? Please go to her shitty website and show me where she held a developer or programmer position?

    doxing victim? She re-tweeted a dox and it was a made-up address but never told her followers. She is known to send herself threats & ddos and will then blame others (TFYC, Wizardchan and now GamerGate). This is what we call a professional victim.

    Are you Zoe Quinn or her friend ShitLipz? You pathetic person.

  22. Re:life on the wrong side of an online hate mob by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    sighborg @TheQuinnspiracy Jan 12
    If you continue to be neutral of or in support of gamergate KNOW you're silently approving of attempted murder by cop pic.twitter.com/ehrtTT1eUs
    0 replies 330 retweets 141 favorites

    Carpet statements like this piss me off... I don't even support doxxing, but oh, because I believe in proper gaming journalism and disagree with forced cultural arm bending to get my group (be it feminists, LGBTs, asexuals, or whatever) included in video games, represented exactly how I want, I'm supporting MURDER. Great.

    I'm bisexual, and I wouldn't want support (caveat: from my limited understanding) in the way the so called SJWs seem to believe in. I'm against the tactics of individuals on both sides of the aisle.

  23. Re:life on the wrong side of an online hate mob by NiceGuyVan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because no one will listen to any gamergater reporting harassment.

  24. Re:The police are terrified by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, fortunately we don't just have to make judgement calls based on gut feelings on this one.

    There's an awful lot of other police forces in the world which don't feel the need to go in in full armour and with guns blazing at the slightest opportunity. For example, I think the US is the only place where a SWAT-like force is used to serve warrants against nonviolent offenders.

    The thing is from the point of view of the rest of the world where such things don't happen, it looks awfully messed up.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  25. Re:She doxxed people as well... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Your comment sums up all the allegations made by GamerGate against her. No evidence, no proof, just allegations and an assumption of guilt repeated over and over until it becomes fact in your mind.

    Post your evidence, or better yet hand it to the police. If the guy was a civil rights lawyer surely he would have used his legal skills to do something about it. A police report, or a lawsuit maybe?

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