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."

101 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.

    1. Re:address in question by puzzled_decoy · · Score: 2

      RIGHT??! Why is that not the standard policy?

    2. Re:address in question by stephanruby · · Score: 4, Funny

      "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.

      Assuming police officers are as good at reading inter-office emails as I am, there is really only one piece of advice I'd give people.

      Prepare yourself and prepare your home for imminent Swat arrival. Give away the dog (if you have one). Evict your roommate (if you have one). Keep all the doors to the outside wide open (so that they don't break them). Keep some fresh coffee in the pot and some fresh cookies on the table (so that the Swat team doesn't get low blood sugar and cranky by the time it reaches your bedroom). And sleep with handcuffs already on (so that they don't think you're trying to resist arrest). Also, it probably wouldn't hurt to pepper your walls leading to your bedroom with portraits of Ronald Reagan, George Bush, and Dick Cheney.

    3. Re:address in question by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Funny

      Interesting that the advice to prepare for both Santa and SWAT are identical... Hmm.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    4. Re:address in question by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 2

      Also, it probably wouldn't hurt to pepper your walls leading to your bedroom with portraits of Ronald Reagan, George Bush, and Dick Cheney.

      Hell, if you want to get laid, that's just good advice in general.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  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: 2

      Yeah, this place is like a SJW commune sometimes. The GG stuff is laughable given the actual facts.

    5. 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.

    6. 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.

    7. 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.

    8. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by firex726 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Don't like what they say?

      They have flat out said that DOXXING is acceptable, that it's only a matter of wrong targets, not methods.

      Hell, ZQ has retweeted doxxes of Wiki editors, including trans minors.

      Tweet:
      http://i.imgur.com/k96uLWF.jpg

      The referenced doxx (censored):
      http://i.imgur.com/He7UCVW.png

      OR how as part of the gag order, she claimed that Gjoni spread internet links to nude pictures of her, while failing to mention these were images she had made public of her own volition, while working as a model/camgirl.

      And claimed that he and Milo, are part of some professional doxxing organization, despite in reality they had never spoken prior to GG.
      http://theralphretort.com/wp-c...

      *Police report obtained via FOIA

    9. 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.

    10. 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.

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

      I'm starting to think this gamer gate is just another grouping of right wing nuts.

      No, that's been researched. GG is mostly left of center. This is authoritarian left (SJWs like Quinn, Alexander, Grayson, McIntosh, Chu, etc) vs libertarian left (GG).

    12. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      The submission process heavily favours previously accepted submitters. I've seen a number of times where a "new" person posted something that just happened, but it wasn't until one of the regular posters posted it days later until it was accepted. There are complaints that only the same submitters are on the front page, but only the same submitters are accepted, so the others give up and stop trying.

    13. 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.

    14. 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.
    15. 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.

    16. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't think we're talking about the same thing at all.

      Most SJWs are somewhat counter-intuitively white men. Which is hilarious, because they're generally working against their better interest.

      Take the submitter of this article, AmiMoJo. He's a white British man (no doxxing here, that's according to his own posts). Yet here he is, on Slashdot, fighting the "good fight" against the "evil white men" who rule the world. Pretty much all of the other persistent SJWs here have also outed themselves as being white men.

      I mean, sure, there are women SJWs and minority SJWs too (and minority women SJWs), but most of the SJWs you encounter will be white men trying to make up for their white male guilt that they themselves are trying to force on everyone.

      It's even funnier when you realize a common complaint of feminists are men who try and "speak for them" and the majority of the Internet feminists you find will be men speaking for women.

    17. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by russotto · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Underground Railroad was run by abolitionists. Even John Brown, bombthrower though he may have been, was not an SJW. "Social Justice" is all this shit about privilege and oppression olympics and progressive stack. It holds that discrimination against a privileged group (white males) is not only benign but beneficial and that members of that group should shut up and accept it as their due.

    18. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by hermitdev · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think "Crash Override" is an extremely poor choice of names. I mean, who in the community doesn't know 1995's "Hackers"? Johnny Lee Miller's character had a handle "Crash Override". He spent the entire movie trying to get into Angelina Jolie's character's pants (and succeeded), and he (the actor) married Jolie in real life, if only for a few years. If you want to talk "messages", what does choosing such a moniker for this movement represent? At its best, willful ignorance (which I doubt) or an alternate purpose, which then begs the question of for what? I'm not going to go so far to say Quinn is either stupid or ignorant, so that again beg's the question: why "Crash Override"?

    19. 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."
    20. 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."
    21. 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.

    22. 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.

    23. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by russotto · · Score: 2

      Do you have any evidence that people actually supporting GG were making those threats?

      Ha ha, no. In fact, they like to post screencaps about doxxing and swatting from different boards on 8chan and claim those are from Gamergate. If you call them on their lies they claim all of 8chan is Gamergate, or they claim the other boards are Gamergate because they targeted people who were attacking Gamergate. They fail to mention that the people who were attacking Gamergate also attacked 8chan as a whole.

    24. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by x0ra · · Score: 2

      freebsdgirl self-declare herself being a SJW, though, you're still right pointing out she's an idiot.

    25. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      after a brief google, information points to it being a scam, and information also points to it being legitimate and scam info being bogus. So...

      [citation needed]

    26. 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...
    27. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Perhaps the real reason AAA hasn't been hit by this is because when people accuse them of this shit they don't throw a fit, call their consumers msygonistic shitlords, start printing out articles about how they are dead as well as try to censor everyone on multiple websites.

      Really, this could have died out in it's infancy if moot didn't ban discussion on 4chan. it could have died out if Nathan Grayson had of admitted it and said my bad like PCGamer recently did. Instead the so called games media acted in the most aggressive and juvenile way possible and they have gotten aggressive and juvenile back.

      Also I know you don't care about this because it's pretty obvious you're going to keep thinking the way you do but Nathan Grayson spoke glowing of a game that he was thanked for in the credits, apparently he helped with the beta. That should have been disclosed.

    28. 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?

    29. 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'.

    30. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Locando · · Score: 2

      Let me see here... rabtech said:

      To a letter, every single person I've talked to who is supporting gamergate is spouting lies and half-truths.

      And then you translated that as:

      You pretend to have spoken to enough GamerGate supporters to have formed a solid opinion,

      And then:

      Maybe there was a legitimate point buried in there, but it's long been lost in the random mob attacks.

      Somehow became:

      you think GamerGate harasses people

      (Emphases mine, of course.) Is there some secret way to reinterpret these lines that I'm missing?

    31. 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."

    32. Re: Slashdot stance on #gamergate by cyber-vandal · · Score: 5, Funny

      Every time I pass a white male homeless person (by far the majority of homeless people in my city) I tell him to check his privilege and they are most grateful for my concern about social justice and the oppression of rich white women.

    33. 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.
    34. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by LaurenCates · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've waffled for years about whether or not I should consider myself a feminist, especially considering the personal stakes involved (female, engineer).

      The GamerGate business shoved me the hell out of it, particularly since I have Atheism+ bullies as friends-of-friends. They're the type who are not gamers, have done no research into gaming journalism, but sure-as-hell sided with Quinn without so much as a lick of involvement in gaming culture (or science fiction, BDSM, Heavy Metal music, etc...).

      They're the kind of SJWs who squat on any subculture with whom they can come up with a beef that on the surface looks like sexism, and rely on the subculture under scrutiny to be too far into the realm of "the other" for normal people to disagree because of stereotypes. So, people without the time or the inclination to research, or find it terribly inconvenient just fall in line, or in the case of ABC's Nightline profile last week, just keep mentioning things in the same breath to reinforce the association without there actually being a tangible association to make.

      (I defy anyone who watched Nightline's "harassment in gaming story" to truly PROVE that gaming culture as a whole is really behind the harassment without cherry-picking examples from games.)

      In all fairness, harassment is wrong, and Quinn should not have received it, but the correct response would have been "find the individuals responsible and hold them responsible to the fullest extent of the law", not "WAAAAAH! Neck-bearded man-children want to keep me...umm, US, I mean, US, that's right, WOMEN out of gaming because they hate WOMEN. MISOGYNY! MISOGYNY!", while using their sympathetic media friends to bolster their story.

      Victims, of course. Victims who happen to have the media on their side already.

      They aren't gamers. They just want the moral high-ground over low-hanging fruit.

      And that's lazy. That's not hard work.

      Feminism, if it were truly about the equality that women just don't have yet, should be about hard work. About changing the perceptions of what women are and what women want, not about scolding men until they're cowed into the "right" way of thinking by blunt-force messaging or peer pressure.

      So, I'm a gender egalitarian, and anti-feminist. There.

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    35. 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

    36. 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...)

    37. 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.

    38. Re: Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Vanderhoth · · Score: 2

      I'm not the original AC, but here are a couple links. Make up your own mind if she's just blissfully unaware of her actions or if she's malicious.

      Dave Pakman interview with TFYC - https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
      Forbs article discussing the event - http://www.forbes.com/sites/er...

    39. Re:Slashdot stance on #gamergate by Vanderhoth · · Score: 2

      Too late, there have already been supporters of GamerGate who have lost their jobs, had threats e-mailed to their employers and been swatted at home. Too bad the media won't report it. https://jennofhardwire.wordpre...

    40. 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
    41. 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."
    42. 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. misspelling by Lehk228 · · Score: 5, Informative

    you misspelled "doxxing perpetrator"

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    1. Re:misspelling by AndIWonderIfIWonder · · Score: 2

      No. Zoe didn't doxx anyone http://idledillettante.com/201...

      And it doesn't even look like there was a SWATing attempt http://idledillettante.com/201...

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

    She personifies everything wrong with the gaming media.

  5. Better Late Than Never by Kunedog · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Gamergate's Harassment Patrol has been decrying, detecting, and reporting such behavior for months, no matter which side it came from. Glad to see someone from the anti-GG side finally express willingness to follow their lead (this is an anti-harassment operation and not just a partisan anti-Gamergate PR stunt, right?).

    1. 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.
    2. Re:Better Late Than Never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Actually from a completely outside perspective, GG has been overwhelmingly on the correct side of history on misogyny, harassment, maturity and ethics.
      But if you want to candidly investigate how deep the corruption goes in the press, you're not going to be short of powerful enemies with all the shoutting power and whose best ally is the overwhelming laziness and outrage-now-factcheck-never attitude in today's clickbait audience.

      It's quite difficult for me to come to terms with the fact that anyone who has sincerly given an effort to find out the truth behind the GamerGate scandals could possibly then proclaim to support the side that's practically extorting corroboration at ad-hominem-point over the side that's encouraging you to think for yourself and treat people decently despite being treated like shit.

      This is sad, not funny.

    3. Re:Better Late Than Never by NiceGuyVan · · Score: 2

      For an organization with no goal, we sure have forced a lot of sites to make ethics policies. For an organization about harassment, we sure have been victims of a lot of it.

    4. Re:Better Late Than Never by NiceGuyVan · · Score: 2

      Comparing us to racists is what started this mess and is intellectually dishonest.

  6. Task Force 2.0 by GrandCow · · Score: 5, Funny

    Crash Override being the 2nd version of the task force's site. Version 1 was ZeroCool. Zoe will be running under an admin account named AcidBurn.

    Don't forget to type cookie.

    --
    "Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try." -Homer Simpson
    1. Re:Task Force 2.0 by epyT-R · · Score: 2

      All her fellow warriors will also need new gfx cards so they can find those garbage files.

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

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

  8. 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.
  9. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    She doxxed and harassed the shit out of people before all of this happened. She's an oldschool SA forum troll. She's no fucking saint.

  10. Re:Who cares? by Iamthecheese · · Score: 2

    It's marginally tech related (internet trolls and all that) but it's on Slashdot for the twentieth time because someone is pushing an agenda. I'm about one socjus story from permanently closing my Slashdot account.

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
  11. 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.

  12. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    curious too. but i've got to say, it's sad, but i find it all too easy to believe all the folks involved in this mess are generally horrible people. most allegations are very likely patent nonsense all around, and yet... i still find myself concluding that i am so glad i don't know any of them, or anyone like them. there aren't two side to annoying dipshit.

  13. 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.
  14. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Someone made a couple of posts on Wizardchan an off-topic comment about Zoe Quin being the cause of their sorrow and calling for revenge. No one did anything at all. Zoe and her clique got Wizardchan (a lonely guy support group) harrassed by falsely claiming these posts on a site she doesn't even go to were harassment from a hive of terrible neckbeard misogynist nerds.

    More? Google "The Fine Young Capitalists" - These are feminists who ran a gamejam to get girls into game development / design and it was shut down by Zoe and her clique of slanderous trolls. The #GamerGate folks of /v/ and /pol/ on 4chan found out (they who supposedly hate women) and so they got the feminist pro-women gamejam funded.

    I ask you, Presto Vivance, what evidence have you ever sought out about the #GamerGate affair? Would you believe KKK propaganda that they are fair and just and just want to inform you of the "inherent evils of blackness" without fact checking? No? Then why would you believe SJW propaganda that they are fair and just and just want to inform you of the "inherent evils of maleness" in games without fact checking?

    It wouldn't matter if I posted any evidence showing ties to SA forrumites, or links to anything else, since you don't matter, you aren't interested, you don't fact check, can't do a single google search and instead beg for facts on slanted media outlets like Slashdot. But you've got to be kidding me if you think, "She's no fucking saint" isn't spot on.

  15. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    A quick google search returns the following:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2014/09/04/gamergate-a-closer-look-at-the-controversy-sweeping-video-games/
    http://www.crimeandfederalism.com/2014/12/margaret-pless-zoe-quinn.html
    http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2fvt9n/zoe_links_a_doxx_to_wikipedia_editors_who_tried/

    I don't make any claim whatsoever about whether thats factual or a fabrication, but Zoe Quinn rises all flags for professional con artist.

  16. 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.

  17. 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.

  18. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by bloodhawk · · Score: 5, Interesting

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

    Very true, but the same can be said of her victims.

  19. 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.

  20. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yep, the 'feminist' game jam where the woman involved doesn't learn anything about how to code games at all, and is allowed to just submit an idea while men do all the work for her, because she shouldn't worry her pretty little head about the hard code stuff, right?

    The same feminist game jam that she did not, in fact, shut down - she linked to it on Twitter and it went down due to traffic. That hasn't stopped them from trying to exploit that for publicity, of course. /v/ and /pol/ only helped fund it to try and 'gotcha' Zoe in the middle of her being harrassed and threatened by the exact same boards.

    Don't have to listen to me though - her side of the story is documented here. It paints a very different picture than your average Gamergate proponent would have you believe.

  21. She doxxed people as well... by Karmashock · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... So I really don't see why she's in any moral position to judge anyone else that doxxes.

    I forget who it was, I think it was a civil rights lawyer from Los Angeles... so we'll hear more about this as that breaks down.

    But ol' Zoe has some esplaining to do.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:She doxxed people as well... by gl4ss · · Score: 2

      she's not going to explain anything.. why? because she has a job now.

      not as a games developer(and really calling herself based on that game then my high school in '90s had 30 game devs), but you know, as a professional money asker/victim. that's pretty much it.

      much easier than developing actual games anyways.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  22. Re:Link please? by russotto · · Score: 4, Informative

    Brianna Wu? Brianna "I don't know when I can return to my home, from whence I am giving this interview" Wu?

  23. 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.

  24. 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.

  25. 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.

  26. 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.

  27. Re:Link please? by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 2

    The "review" is a straw man made up by the very people being protested to try and spin out on a technicality. She very clearly got disproportionately favorable publicity and coverage from Grayson.

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
  28. Re:The police are terrified by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 2

    And yet, when they try to get radar so they can see inside houses before/instead of kicking down the door, people react like the fucking sky is falling.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  29. Re:Link please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    "Do all the reviewers in "the best presses in the United States" bang the same girl and give her pathetic game good reviews?"
    "Can you link to a review of DepressionQuest that Zoe got in exchange for sex?"
    "Review? Who said it was a review?"

    Are you dense?

  30. 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."
  31. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    The irony in your post is highly amusing. The old everyone that says something different to me is an intolerant ignorant asshole, but I am just a confident person with a view that is different to yours. Your attitude is the problem and sadly I don't think you are capable of even seeing the ignorance and intolerance you are displaying all the while saying how much you hate it.

  32. 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.

  33. 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.

  34. wat. by lucm · · Score: 2

    I tried to read that page but this is like listening to teenage girls arguing about who saw that pair of jeans first at wal-mart the week before homecoming. The level of mental confusion and social ineptitude displayed in those messages is mind-blowing.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  35. 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.

  36. Re:"Quinn ruined lives", yeah right by NiceGuyVan · · Score: 2

    His friend, a woman, said he didn't post it to multiple forums like you suggest. That he wrestled with the decision to even post it in the first place but SHE decided it was best to help others avoid an abusive woman.

  37. Re:It Remains a Journalism Scandal. Deal With It. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The central allegation no-one made?

    "They claim it was for a review but there's no review!" is the oldest of the cover-up's lies. It was for EXPOSURE. And in an article on -50- upcoming Twine games, Depression Quest was
    a) the only game sourced for a screenshot, despite being an unattractive text adventure
    b) used as inspiration for the title of the article
    c) mentioned first
    In merely ONE of his several articles mentioning what is frankly a cripplingly unimpressive game even for Twine.

    So sure, you can count cheating on someone five different times (constituting rape by your personal definition), isolating them from their friends, inducing panic attacks when they rightly suspect your infidelity, and any of the rest of the abusive acts found in the Zoepost as "not a great girlfriend for Eron", I guess implying that some people LIKE being abused?, but that's not really going to remove Grayson's positive coverage for a dev who has cheating with him, it's not going to have her not sleep with an IGDA staffer who is now in bed with a known harasser's anti-harassment (of her friends, I don't trust her involving "white hat hackers", someone who criticized her is getting doxxed inside 3 months GUARANTEED) initiative, and it's not going to have a reddit mod not delete 15,000+ comments after she made the personal request to censor the discussion by email.

    It will still be an ongoing consumer revolt regarding the anti-consumer nature of the gaming press as it stands, including its backroom collusion with Silverstring Media and their ideological partners. A lot of the people watchdogging the press now don't even know who Chelsea is. Keep pushing your genetic fallacy though, it certainly created a temporarily effective smokescreen in the beginning.

    I don't normally bother using Slashdot, so forgive my lack of login. ThisIsFrigglish on Reddit, if you'd like to follow up directly.

  38. Re:It Remains a Journalism Scandal. Deal With It. by NiceGuyVan · · Score: 5, Informative

    > because the guy never wrote an article about zoe's game! Yes he did. http://wiki.gamergate.me/index... FFS, he's even in the credits for the game. http://theralphretort.com/zoe-...

  39. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by NiceGuyVan · · Score: 2

    Confidence is not screaming "I'm a victim" anytime anyone points out she's wrong.

  40. 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.
  41. Re:life on the wrong side of an online hate mob by markass530 · · Score: 2

    The money has gone to professional victim Anita Sarkeesian

  42. Re:"Quinn ruined lives", yeah right by LaurenCates · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As someone who's both read "The Zoe Post" and who has been in abusive relationships before (which is ultimately how she came to my attention, not the gaming stuff), let me offer a different perspective.

    It seems to me that Quinn was a rather nasty piece of work. Putting aside anything to do with gaming journalism, I'd say she was a full-on sociopath. And it isn't misogyny to point out that she was an emotional abuser. Based on everything I've seen, and lack of refutation on her part, or anyone else's for that matter, to the contrary, I can't even give her the benefit of the doubt.

    Now, you can err on the side of "personal business, don't air dirty laundry" here, but the thing about sociopaths is that they know there is always someone around the corner to manipulate.

    Maybe what Gjoni did was wrong, and maybe the response to it was disproportionate (and NO, I am not anti-GamerGate; in fact, I have a problem with every single woman who's come out and said "it must be GamerGate" every time they are threatened...I am a believer in personal responsibility, and with that comes assignment of personal responsibility to others as well).

    BUT, let me pose this question: how do you fitfully punish a sociopath so that the consequences take real effect? Particularly since emotional abuse is difficult to prosecute and damn near impossible when it's a woman committing the offense (yes, dammit, women CAN be abusers, and it is deeply frustrating when I see so-called "feminists" hide behind "misogyny" and the "weak little woman" stereotype to get out of jail free; it's truly funny how feminism is about equality but not at all about personal responsibility)?

    Well, if you let a sociopath know that there's nobody left to manipulate, that they ALL know now what your game is, maybe they have incentive to change, to seek help, to become better people?

    It's a dream, of course. It's a dream of abuse victims like me. That abusers have no outlets left. That all potential targets are now on their guard and won't play the game. That abusers get frozen out and realize that it is upon them to change. That there's a true reckoning involved, not more potential victims down the road.

    You may not like what Gjoni did, that's certainly your right. But remember, when you deal with sociopaths, the ideal of a polite society flies right out the window.

    --
    Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
  43. Re:Three Cheers for Zoe Quinn by Vanderhoth · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm really tired of that line, "Doesn't mean she deserves harassment"

    I've been in GamerGate now for almost six months. What I've seen is people like Zoe Quinn, Brianna Wu, Anita Sarkeesian and Randi Harper harassing people then claiming they're the ones being harassed. Other than Anita Sarkeesian, I'd never heard of any of these other people before GamerGate.

    Wu for example, created a twitter account BROLOLZ and used it to mock and harass GamerGate back in the beginning. When no one responded she created the "Oppressed Gamer" meme. Someone took that meme and ran with it, then she claimed people using her meme was harassment. Then she got threats from a zero day twitter account called "DeathToBrianna", there was no mention of GamerGate, but she screen capped it and sent it flying around twitter as evidence GamerGate had a hate on for her, that's what got her on a media tour.

    I don't believe anyone deserves harassment, but what I'm seeing is people purposely going in and kicking bee hives, then calling for the extermination of bees when they get stung by a wasp. It's ridiculous, the media is eating it up and plastering it all over as, "these poor, poor innocent souls."

    So yeah, I'm about to victim blame. If you poke a bear, it's your fault if you get bitten. I've lost all sympathy for people living under the double standard that it's ok for them to lie, cheat, steal, defame, dox, harass and threaten people, but then turn around and play the victim and advertise their patreons. Check the patreon accounts for anyone of the three I named above:

    Randi Harper (antagonist, creator of the GGAutoblocker blocks GamerGate, which is fine. Continues to tweet at GamerGate and bullied an anti-GamerGate person off twitter for not being anti enough):
    $2,422.86 a MONTH https://www.patreon.com/freebs...

    Zoe Quinn (abuser, antagonist, liar, trust fund baby. Frankly we'd all be happier NOT talking about her because she's not relevant beyond the people that were involved around her [journalist, indi devs, indi judges], but every time she's forgotten she pulls some crap like this article to reinsert herself. She got in a twitter slap fight with Brianna Wu over who was the most harassed):
    $4,000 a MONTH https://www.patreon.com/zoe

    Brianna Wu (antagonist, liar, trust fund baby. She answered someone questioning her saying GamerGate was only 350 people with, "Thanks for the sexists remark" and accused David Pakman of running a hit piece on her for asking her how she knew it was GamerGate harassing her:
    $13,000 a MONTH https://www.patreon.com/user?u...

    ^ this ^ is what a professional victim looks like.

    I got into GamerGate because I was tired of the media BS about gamers being cis-white-male shitlord misogynerds. I won't lie, in the beginning, I didn't think GamerGate was important, it's about frigg'n video games. I thought it'd be like a week long thing, we'd write some letters to advertisers and the journalist involved would just apologize for being idiots, but it's just been one thing after another after another. The opposition to GamerGate is full of ex-neo-naizs (Ian Miles Cheong), pedophiles (Shara Butts), animal abuses (Randi Harper, Shara Butts), rape apologists (Author Chu) and professional victims (Anita Sarkeesian, Brianna Wu, Zoe Quinn, Randi Harper, Grace Lynn) all sexists, racist, homophobic, hateful people who pretend to have the high moral ground because they alone are allowed to speak for women and minorities (Look up #NotYourShiled). All pointing fingers at a largely harmless group of people that are just tired of being demonized for a hobby that doesn't hurt anyone, and the media eats it up. You can look into the background of just about any of the major GamerGate "targets" and se

  44. Re:life on the wrong side of an online hate mob by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

    When Islamist terrorists murder people we expect Muslims to respond. It was done in the name of their religion. They could try to stop it, they could argue strongly against it. It's blackening the name of their religion, after all. When they don't they receive criticism for it.

    In the same way, if you head over to 8chan's GamerGate board you won't see many "real" GamerGaters trying to steer things in a more productive direction. Like it or not, your argument is basically the No True Scotsman one. If you really care about what you claim the GamerGate issues really are you should either try to fix GamerGate or do what other groups, particularly religions, do in this situation and split off with a new identity. Like it or not GamerGate is what 8chan is using, and they seem to be dominating at the moment.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  45. Re:The police are terrified by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 2

    They do have to follow due process with radar. The Supreme Court ruling that guarantees you need a warrant (or exigent circumstances) is old enough to date. Or listen to Justin Beiber. Or whatever teenager-related thing you want to use. I understand that most people assume the worst, but there's definitely a legal requirement that exists that people assume doesn't.

    Neither the radar nor the kicking isn't being done to invade privacy. The kicking is being done because they believe there is an armed assailant attacking the family, and they are coming to help. I don't know what world you want to live in where "dear police, please help keep someone from killing me" gets a response of "I'm sorry, that would interfere with your civil liberties to... fight the invaders off yourself."

    At least with the radar, the police are less likely to have to bust down the door. At least with the radar, the police^H^H^H^H^H SWAT team is less likely to get surprised rounding a corner and shoot someone. Heck, it may even turn more attempted SWATings into "hostage negotiation"ings.

    Bottom line: When someone calls 911, the police are supposed to respond. We can obviously say that bad responses are bad. But you need to provide a better alternative solution. Because otherwise, what you are arguing for is "the police shouldn't respond to 911 calls". And I think you have an insurmountable burden to demonstrate that, and haven't even begun to attempt to meet that burden.

    (To preempt a deliberate misreading:) Not that people should be forced to rely on the police, they should be able to defend themselves. But some people opting to defend themselves shouldn't release society (thru the police) from an obligation to assist.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  46. Re:The police are terrified by fche · · Score: 2

    "seem like"

    There's the problem there. The burden of proof for "seeming" is pathetically low, and yet the police create huge risks to the lives of the people they raid, and their own lives, by acting on such impressions.

  47. Re:life on the wrong side of an online hate mob by Coren22 · · Score: 2

    Rather than a wall of text claiming to refute his claim, how about you link to twitter harassment that is actually able to be tied to gamergate instead of just saying that they are tied to gamergate. The claim was that harassment was being falsely attributed to gamergate, and you attributed harassment to gamergate without any evidence to back it up. If there is so much evidence that gamergate people support harassment, it should be quite easy to post links to it.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  48. Re:The police are terrified by Totenglocke · · Score: 2

    This...this is so horribly uninformed. Yes, there are technically warrants issued for all of the raids, but they're rubber stamped and even can go get a warrant AFTER they already shot up your home just to cover their ass. We went from around 50 SWAT raids per year in the 80's to dozens PER DAY in the present, you cannot possibly be such a boot-licker that you think the current "Send in a two dozen man hit squad, guns blazing and don't even check the address, every time someone thinks of a bong or other activity" is okay.

    --
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson