Some transsexuals are extremely transphobic. They are so fearful of anyone knowing that they go out of their way to put down anyone trans-related who doesn't measure up to their "standards of purity." Being open about the fact that you're trans is a huge no-no to them - "real women wouldn't act that way" and all that garbage. To them women like Lynn Conway are not "real women." They won't be seen in public with another trans because they're afraid that someone will speculate. They make public pronouncements that nobody would expect a transsexual to make, to further obfuscate the truth. Rather than just being themselves, they do everything to be a caricature of what they see women as - which brings us back to the portrayal of women on her game website; the characters look like they were designed for horny teenage boys, by horny teenage boys.
So it's kind of ironic to see you write:
identifying common themes in video games that might be problematic to women
Ms. Wu's actions in trying to develop and market a game which reinforces those "common themes in video games that might be problematic to women" makes her part of the problem, not part of the solution.
The counter-argument, "well, we need to cater to what the market wants" is giving license to unrealistic portrayals of women's bodies that even the major fashion magazines have had to rein in. Ironic for someone who claims to be a victim of misogamy, perpetuating the same stereotypes. But hey, throw out your principles if it means maybe making a buck, because you can't actually design a game the masses want otherwise (even though plenty of others have).
But it gets whackier still. In this interview, Ms. Wu claims that before becoming a game developer, she was a journalist who also studied law. Failed at that too, btw, if you care to do any research. And she makes the crazy claim that web sites are responsible for the content users post. So why doesn't she go after Twitter? Oh, because (as the admin of 8chan pointed out) the Communications Decency Act, section 230, provides immunity from prosecution for user-posted content. It's called barking up the wrong tree for a reason. That dog just don't hunt.
while Wu does seem to have a hostile edge to her - albeit it's difficult to find out what she was like before the abuse started.
Seek and you shall find. The truth is out there (cue x-files music:-)
If you can't call a group made up of people who abuse women, and people who support such abusers, without being told you're criticizing "anyone" who "disagrees" with SJWs, then what hope is there?
There are tens of millions of gamers. Half of them are women. The problem now is the exact reverse - criticize any of the main players by pointing out their wrongs and their lies and you become the target. The SJWs and their White Knights need to do a hard reset. There are creeps on both sides - Wu on one side, the threateners on the other. They kind of deserve each other, because at this point it appears both sides need the other. Typical dysfunctional co-dependent relationship, where each gets something they need from the other party.
And people are listening to her about sexism in gaming.
If she were talking about sexism in gaming... but she's not. And her acts speak louder than words - the artwork on her website and game promote sexist tropes.
Now if the bounty were being promoted by someone with more credibility, or even a corporate sponsor, sure, why not? But Ms. Wu?
Today Gamergate is not about sexism in the gaming industry. It's also not about misogamy. Or journalism. It's about hype, page views, pot-stirring, and in the instant case getting as much attention as possible to self-pr
So now everyone has your home address and email address (barbarahudsononline@gmail.com). Along with your real name that's enough to set up quite a few online accounts and apply for various services IRL. Combined with a fake bank statement I could apply for a mobile phone contract in your name, or put your house up for sale.
Actually, you can't. My bank account is safe. I'm not with some craptastic American bank. The Canadian banking system is rated #1 in the world for a reason. We had zero bank failures in the Great Depression, zero bank failures in the Great Recession. Actually, there have only been two failures (both minor) in all that time.
So, someone's going to fake up a bank statement (from another bank, because the branch I deal with knows me personally) and apply for a mobile phone contract. So what? Bank statements are not considered ID up here, so good luck with that. Both drivers licenses and our universal medicare cards are plastic credit-card-like photo ID and signature directly on the card when they're made (you provide the signature at the time of application, and it gets incorporated into the card, same as your photo). Can they be faked? Sure, but the next gen Medicare cards coming out will also have chips.
Of course, that's not to mention the risk of having someone get pissed off at you in the future and deciding to pay you a visit.
I'm not going to worry about hypotheticals, such as "someone paying me a visit." The last time someone tried that was this spring - a couple of construction workers banging on my door trying to convince me to move out because I was delaying the job and they were going to get laid off. Didn't work - maybe because of my dog, who people keep asking me how come I get to illegally keep a wolf.
I did move this summer, and here I always have my dog. The lab mix from next door is here a lot as well, since I walk him whenever I walk mine, and then he comes in and eats my dog food and steals bananas off the kitchen table. The dog from downstairs practically lives here (yesterday he was here from 8 am to 11 pm, I brought him downstairs, 15 minutes later he was back at my door).
Besides, I've been through a lot worse. I'm still here.
I posted the list of known side effects here. There is NO way that I'm swapping 4 shots a day for this. It's not like the shots are all that bad - it's the glucose monitoring that's the pain. If a dog can sniff my blood sugar level, why can't we have a non-invasive glucometer?
Type 1, actually. They've found a pathway that is involved in triggering beta cell death and a drug that supresses that pathway, leading to regeneration of beta cell mass in animal models. They're literally looking at a way of making the type 1 pancreas work again, which even if it's a little bit, will be able to do the fine-tuned control of insulin better than you ever can with a pump or injections. This is fantastic.
It is, except that EVERY medication has side effects. Thanks, but I'm going to stick with insulin injections.
Gastrointestinal side effects have included constipation (up to 11.7%), nausea (up to 2.7%), dyspepsia (up to 2.7%), and diarrhea (up to 2.4%). Nonobstructive, paralytic ileus (reversible upon discontinuation) has been reported infrequently. Diarrhea, dry mouth, gastrointestinal distress, and gingival hyperplasia have been reported.
Cardiovascular side effects have included hypotension (up to 2.5%), new or worsened congestive heart failure (CHF) or pulmonary edema (negative inotropism; 1.8%), bradycardia (heart rate less than 50/minute; 1.4%), atrioventricular (AV) block (first-degree; up to 1.7%), AV block (total first-, second-, and third-degree; 1.2%), AV block (second- and third-degree; 0.8%), and postural hypotension (up to 0.4%). Symptomatic hypotension (1.5%), bradycardia (1.2%), and severe tachycardia (1%) have been reported with intravenous verapamil. In studies related to control of ventricular response in patients taking digoxin who had atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter, ventricular rate less than 50/minute at rest (15%) and asymptomatic hypotension (5%) were reported. Dizziness, hypotension, peripheral edema, and headache are not uncommon and are related to vasodilation of vascular smooth muscle. Verapamil may accelerate conduction of anomalous AV conduction tissue, as in the Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome, which can result in worsened tachycardia, including malignant ventricular tachyarrhythmias or accelerated junctional tachycardia. Because of this potentially fatal side effect, verapamil is not recommended in patients with atrial fibrillation and premature ventricular depolarizations. Angina pectoris, AV block (second- and third-degree), atrioventricular dissociation, CHF, pulmonary edema, abnormal ECG, chest pain, claudication, hypertension, myocardial infarction, palpitations, and purpura (vasculitis) have been reported during open trials/postmarketing experience.
CHF or pulmonary edema may be particularly important in patients with poor left ventricular function.
Various conduction disturbances have been reported with verapamil therapy, including bradycardia, AV block, first-, second-, third-degree heart block, and left bundle branch block.
Nervous system side effects have included headache (up to 12.1%), dizziness (up to 4.7%), lethargy (up to 3.2%), fatigue (up to 4.5%), sleep disturbances (up to 1.4%), paresthesia (up to 1%), and rare neurologic complaints (including paresthesias, sleeping problems, and tremors; less than 1%). Dizziness (1.2%), headache (1.2%), sleepiness, vertigo, and rare cases of seizures during injection have been reported with intravenous verapamil. Rare cases of muscle fasciculations in patients with underlying neuromuscular diseases, stroke associated with verapamil-induced hypotension, exacerbation of myasthenia gravis, and myoclonic dystonia have been reported. Cerebrovascular accident, confusion, equilibrium disorders, extrapyramidal symptoms, insomnia, paresthesia, shakiness, somnolence, syncope, and tinnitus have been reported during open trials/postmarketing experience.
Other side effects have included flu syndrome (up to 3.7%), peripheral edema (up to 3.7%), edema (up to 3%), pain (up to 2.4%), fatigue (1.7%), accidental injury (up to 1.5%), ankle edema (up to 1.4%), and flushing (up to 0.8%).
Immunologic side effects have included infection (up to 12.1%).
Hepatic side effects have included elevated liver enzymes (up to 1.
Too often, people wish that a member of a minority group would speak up and say something, because "outsiders" can't say it without having accusations thrown at them.
I wasn't aware of it (Wu being trans) until this thread started. At first it was irrelevant, but not any more - not when she, after surgery - mocks gays and members of the trans community. Look at the descriptions of her surgery in the LJ entries. They're the same ones many transsexuals use who don't want to discuss the issue point-blank:
Friday morning, my life decided to dive straight into a rushing waterfall. The doctor called me and said there was a cancellation - I could either wait until 2009 for surgery, or be ready in two weeks. I had just two weeks to prepare to spend the next 2-3 months infirmed and recuperating.
I've been arranging this surgery for the better part of a year. I'd rather not talk about my medical health in direct terms on LJ, but I will say it's major, involves internal invasive surgery and is going to hurt like hell. It will take me at least 8 weeks to get back to work, and at least 12 to feel close to normal.
... and then...
I've just suffered the worst 3 days of my life recuperating from this radical surgery to correct a long-standing birth defect to my urinary tract. I imagined that the pain would be a 7 out of 10, but it's definitely been a 10 out of 10. It's been constant stabbing pain all through my pelvic structure all day long for days now.
"Long-standing birth defect?" Where have I heard that before? Oh, right! There's not much room for doubt now, is there?
She's a little aggressive, driven in part by anger, but quite honestly, if you'd had to put up with months of being called a cunt (and similar) by anonymous strangers on Twitter or email, and then suddenly found that abuse turning into doxxing with death threats, you'd be a tad testy too.
Months by anonymous strangers on Twitter or email? And some anonymous death threats? That's nothing. Seriously. There are plenty of people who get that as part of their job. You don't see them going "OMG I HAZ 2 MOVE!!!" Anyone with any experience on the internet knows that if you take a stance, you're going to offend some kook out there who's going to start making stupid threats.
You also then don't see them going on TV claiming to know ALL the women in gaming. Oh, such self-aggrandizement. She's starting to sound like Florian Mueller.
if she has the money to put a bounty on the heads of these a-holes, more power to her.
She doesn't. Some was put up by family, but the bulk by an anonymous donor. Please read the posts she wrote about it.
That may be what the police advise. But a society in which people live in fear too scared to speak about controversial issues (FUCKING HELL, THIS IS CONTROVERSIAL? SERIOUSLY? WOMEN IN GAMING??!) is a society that's seriously screwed up. If the police are advising this, we need to rethink law enforcement.
Nowhere have the police advised anything of the sort. You can be sure if they did, she'd be telling us all about how it's so bad that the police want to discourage blah blah blah.
I noticed that you failed to address the degrading graphic portrayals of women on her website, which is certainly how she feels today. We've been trolled, but good. This is NOT about women in gaming. This is about a failed game developer trying to get attention, any attention. Now, I have nothing against that, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone, but this is beyond ridiculous. Beyond ludicrous. It's gone PLAID!
So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, but in the big scheme of things, it's not that big a deal. Wu's 15 minutes of fame are almost over, and then we'll have to pick up the mess she's done giving the public the impression that everyone who disagrees with her the other members of the (very small, very very small) band of SJWs is a misogynistic net-kook.
Really? Is that the best you can do? Come on, tell us how you really feel.
Seriously, is it because of your upbringing, your religion, a fear of castration that you never got over, your politics, hidden worries about your own identity (that last is a frequent issue).
I only found this earlier today, but it pretty much tears it for me. For a transsexual, Ms. Wu makes some rather odd observations. From her Livejournal account
I watched LOGO, our nationwide channel for gay issues, for the first time this morning. I walked away from the experience feeling it was incredibly pandering and solipsistic. It got me thinking about voices in the media and minority rights.
Let me preface this blog by saying that I think gay rights are the preeminent moral issue of our time, the modern equivalent of slavery. It's one of the top three issues I vote on, and I fully intend to go to demonstrate in Denver's gay pride parade in two weeks. It bothers me deeply that 1/10th of America's population are treated like 2nd class citizens.
That said, I think it's an error to see women's issues and gay issues as synonymous.
I don't especially feel that gays are allies when it comes to women. I think that we usually get along well, but I have occasionally felt that gays see us primarily as competition for the penis. When I watch drag queens, I can't help but feel insulted - as if that offensive cartoon is what they think feminine truth is.
There are so many issues women have that gay men never have to think about. Our increased health care costs, equal pay issues, access to reproductive health care and the threat of rape and violence. Concordantly, there are many gay issues that don't affect me - I've never had to worry that society didn't approve of my sexuality or marriage rights.
It does help that our enemies are the same, the fundamentalist conservatives that would deny us the right to make our own choices. The lunatic fringe would deny me the right to make choices about my body, and they'd just as quickly send the gays off to sexual reeducation camp. We are united against the patriarchal oppressors that think they know what's best for us.
There are some transsexuals who go to the extreme of trying to conform to what they see as "real woman's behavior" (which means adhering to stereotypes), by criticizing others in the LGBTt community, so as to deflect suspicion away from them. Same as there are gay politicians and preachers who get up on the pulpit and denounce same-sex marriage and homosexuality as sins.
This is not over-compensation. This is a dysfunctional behavior - putting down others so as to fit in with the crowd is the least part of it.
And for someone claiming to be trying to stand up for women, have you seen the hypersexualized women characters on her own web site? Skinny waists that would beat a Barbie Doll, overly-broad hips, at a time when we're trying to encourage girls (and women) to have more realistic expectations by not photoshopping 50 pounds off here, 20 pounds on there... and she's offended by the way drag queens portray women???
Say someone emailed you a picture of your house with an accompanying threat against your life? Such things are trivial to do to day, and could even be done in an somewhat automated fashion. Still, from that day on you'd be looking over your shoulder, wondering where the attack would come from. How well would you sleep? Who would you trust? Would you sleep with a firearm under your pillow?
What a load of nutjob absolutist crap (gonna mail me a picture of my house and a threat now? My home address is posted elsewhere in the thread).
All death threats are to be taken seriously. End of discussion.
No they aren't. Not all threats are created equal - see next:
Even empty threats constitute significant harm to the life, safety, and wellbeing of the victim.
If it's an empty threat, by definition it doesn't constitute ANY harm to the life, safety, or well-being of the victim. The problem is discerning what is a non-credible threat. Hint - anonymous trolls on the internet are way down the list when compared to, say, someone you know making threats.
Say someone emailed you a picture of your house with an accompanying threat against your life? Such things are trivial to do to day, and could even be done in an somewhat automated fashion. Still, from that day on you'd be looking over your shoulder, wondering where the attack would come from. How well would you sleep? Who would you trust? Would you sleep with a firearm under your pillow?
No, I wouldn't be worried in the least. The last time someone threatened to take their gun and "put a cap in my head" I told him "you and what army?" Didn't even report it to the police. THIS, on the other hand, is what a real threat looks like.
Here's the thing - there's a bit of hyperbole involved in all this, and it seems that every time it dies down, someone (in this case the "victim") stirs it up again. I'm putting "victim" in quotes because the more I dig into it, the less I buy into it. At this point the evidence says we're being trolled (Wu, in troll fashion, looking for emotional rather than rational responses from us).
There is a difference between having your address available somewhere, and it being brought to the attention of an angry mob.
What angry mob (mob: crowd of people)? A bunch of individuals too scared to even identify themselves, sitting at keyboards in basements all over the country, is scarcely a mob.
I sympathized with Ms. Wu's initial reaction, because, as I said, sometimes the people around you over-react and you get caught up in it. However, it's been months, the "threats" weren't real (Wu's still unharmed, right?), and there's no excuse, after the first few hours, for a 50-something developer who's supposed to have a bit of savvy in the way the internet works, to continue to act like a 20-something soccer mom.
And the latest "initiative" is equally lame. The money for the "bounty" is being put up by others, and the idea that she'll also create some sort of "legal defense fund" to:
the fund will pay lawyers to find cases on libel and defamation and prosecute them in civil court. These cases might be mine, or they might be other women targeted by Gamergate
... is equally dumb. If civil penalties worked, nobody would be breaking any civil laws. Civil cases aren't a deterent, and most of the time they send NO message - because something like 90% of all civil cases are settled by mutual agreement, which includes a confidentiality clause. Name-and-shame works better, you don't have to waste money on lawyers and a long-drawn-out court process that will probably never see the light of day, and there's NO question that maybe you're doing it as a cash grab. If it looks like a money grab, talks like a money grab, walks like a money grab...
There is no way to prevent this from happening again, same as any other crime. Instead, we should be helping people to look at things in a more realistic light. Feeding panic doesn't help any more than feeding trolls. Of course, helping people look at things more realistically is a long process, without the drama that seems to be the main point of all this.
Ms. Wu's way isn't working - nobody is afraid of being prosecuted, the police are treating it the same as every other anonymous internet threat that doesn't have any credibility, and it is painfully obvious Ms. Wu is looking for more opportunities to do more interviews to once again hype a crappy game. She's doing more harm than good to women in general, and especially to other transsexuals.
Since it's decentralized, they'll have to go after the actual users. Maybe throw some of them in jail. And since the network will survive, they can generate a steady stream of arrests, rather than shutting down the network and having to find out where all the users have buggered off to.
Making publicly available info public? Oh, I'm soooo scared.
Okay, post your home address here. If it's no big deal, put your money where your mouth is.
I've already done that elsewhere in the thread. And in squiggie's journal when we discussed this earlier. Or for a better take on where I'm coming from and why I'm so blase about Internet threats, why not read today's journal entry?
Please read the rest of the thread. As one poster pointed out using a real-life example, if you own a business, own a property, pay municipal taxes, etc., it's quite easy to find out where you live - its already public info. You used to have to walk down to city hall to look it up in the rolls, but now you can do it right from your mobile phone. No "hacking" or "social engineering" required. No "risk of getting caught."
Same with registering a copyright, patent, or trade mark. Arrest records, trials, convictions and acquittals. Name changes (as is the case with Ms. Wu). I'm sure that a few moments thought will produce other easily-searchable public records that don't require a FOI request or any sort of social engineering.
It's not a question of "impressing anyone." It's "what the heck is wrong with *everyone* being so timid nowadays? If our ancestors had been like that we'd still live in caves or trees in one tiny corner of the planet."
Or to Godwin it, if our ancestors had been so timid 100 years ago, we'd all be saluting the Fuhrer, Jews (along with Romanians, the LGBTt, etc) would have been wiped out, and blacks would be considered an "inferior race."
I am not trying to make this into a pissing contest, but there are lots of people who have a lot to lose by having their personal information exposed and anonymity removed. Like, anyone who has had an unpopular opinion and is realistic about how their corporate HR department would react to bad PR.
Then they've traded their freedom, life, and right to their own opinion for a set of lies and a paycheck. It's gotten so bad that people self-censor themselves, same as the media did in the run-up to Gulf War 1, and this is seen as normal because too many people are sheeple, so anyone who stands out looks like a nail, and HR is the hammer.
This (technology giving others more tools to delve into our lives) is an evolving situation and if we're not careful it's going to get worse. Whatever happened to "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it?" Has it well and truly become "HR *might* disagree with you, so screw your principles and shut your pie-hole or you're on your own?"
When anyone talks about "Putting it to career choices, to pay and employment, have a huge upside if we do it right" wrt people's pay, it's more like "they won't quit even if you tell them they're going to have to take a cut in pay" than "offering a raise to keep them happy." Anyone who thinks it won't be sold as a cost reduction method is a fool.
If you honestly believe that Internet threats are bogus, even when they produce credible forensic evidence to the contrary, post your real physical address so I can come kick your ass and prove you wrong. Double-dog dare you!
Oh, the irony of someone posting that anonymously...
The slashdot user who posted this story also has a journal, where we've already discussed this, and where I already posted my address to show that I'm certainly not afraid of Internet trolls, but here it is again:
What am I advocating? Good question, and darned hard to come up with a comprehensive easy-to-understand answer in a short post.
I would say "let the trolls make death threats." To quote Napoleon, "Never interrupt your opponent when they're making a mistake." And as I've pointed out elsewhere, what's the big deal about doxxing? Making publicly available info public? Oh, I'm soooo scared. The info is already out there. It's only a threat if the recipient perceives it as such, so the real problem is changing the perception of the recipient so that they realize it's no big deal, the info is already public, and nobody really gives a you-know-what.
It's like someone being afraid of being outed. It might happen, and if it does that's just one thing less to worry about. It's rude (and illegal) to out someone, but it's also an opportunity to address your fears wrt that scenario. And of course to find out who your real friends are:-)
The rewards program is, to say the least, misguided. Unfortunately, putting up rewards never discourages the next perp. The jails are full of people who thought they'd never get caught. So it's an after-the-fact band-aid, not a preventative measure. Doesn't matter if you catch 1 or 100, the next one will still think "I'm not going to get caught because..."
The trolls making the threats know this, and they're seeing just how much of a reaction they continue to get, way beyond their wildest dreams. So the whole reward program is actually counter-productive, and just more feeding the trolls. At a certain point, you stop feeding the trolls and get on with your life. Otherwise, you're living their dreams, not yours, and that's dysfunctional as all heck. You can still go back and poke them once in a while to keep them busy so they don't attack someone else or eat more lead paint chips or something, but even that gets boring after a while:-)
I would let the police do their job when it comes to threats. Live your own life. Encourage other women (and men) to do the same. And if you're up to it, eschew the fictitious pseudo-anonymity of the net. Being totally open about who and what you are is pretty good inoculation against threats of doxxing, as well as sending the message that you, unlike the trolls, don't need to hide.
Doxxing automatically turns any "joke" into a serious matter. Nobody would DOXX anyone if they knew the consequences for both the victim and the person releasing the information. Go read https://twitter.com/a_man_in_b... to see how often GG's have been doing it. There is one guy who says he's a lawyer who repeatedly threatens to use LexisNexis to DOXX anyone who talks trash about GG.
Doxxing: "the Internet-based practice of researching and publishing personally identifiable information about an individual"
Oh, I'm SO SCARED. Someone might publish my name (hint - it's my handle). Or my address (hint - I've provided a link to it elsewhere in the thread). Or that I'm a transsexual (hint - read my sig, which I'll repeat here for those who aren't logged in:
this post brought to you by the letter ' t ' in LGBTt (Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Transgender, transsexual)
The real hint - all this stuff is already public knowledge, so why worry?
The threats were not serious. Going "OMG they have my ADDRESS!!! I have to move out!!!" She reported it to the police (the right thing to do) but temporarily moving was HER decision, not a police recommendation.
Proving you have researched your target and showing you have the means to locate and attack them is pretty much the definition of a serious threat. Any court of law would look at the pre-meditated nature of the threats and the fact that the perpetrator had the means to carry them out and send them to jail.
What they did is a crime and temporarily moving out is a sensible and proportionate response.
Yes, what the perps did was a crime, and yes, if caught they should be punished.
That being said, you're going to have to do better than getting my home address (link posted elsewhere in this thread for anyone who wants to mail me some not-so-nice anonymous threats) and use google streetview to get a pic of where I live to even start to make me worry.
If moving out WERE the sensible and proportionate thing to do because of the seriousness of the threat, then the ABSOLUTE STUPIDEST BONEHEADED thing to do would be to let the whole world know that's what you've done. Talk about feeding the trolls... if Wu, a dev, hasn't figured that out after half a century on this crazy planet, there's no hope. Or we're all being trolled.
Easy prediction - the reward will do nothing except garner yet more publicity. And we are being trolled. And people are figuring it out and reacting accordingly.
"Would they actually go and DO something physical? Of course not - that would risk the very anonymity that allows them to act like punks in the first place. "
Unfortunately, some people are punks in real life, too. Men stalking women and murdering them is kind of a thing, in fact.
I've been stalked on-line and in real life. It's hard to take the on-line anonymous stalkers too seriously. The real-life ones... the ones you probably already knew before they went nutzo... that's different. Anyone who can't tell the difference between the two might just have a problem:-)
how the fuck do you know that? YOU can't, so stop making shit up. DO I really need to hold you hand to teach you how to use google to see the myrids of attacks that has happened after threats where made?
We KNOW because nothing ever came of them. Even the cops didn't tell Wu to vacate temporarily. For every threat (on or off the net) that actually came to fruition, there are $REALLY_BIG_NUMBER that are bogus, and these were bogus on their face.
.... more of the same...
"But doesn't there come a time when you should stop feeding them by showing how seriously you take them? "
That did not work. They only used silence as a tool to get more aggressive.
Not feeding the trolls does not work.
I wasn't referring to the immediate aftermath - I'm talking about NOW. Wu continues to feed the trolls months later, trying to maintain that the threats were dangerous in order to continue pot-stirring.
As I've pointed out elsewhere, it's one thing for a soccer mom whose only experience with the Internet is facebook and twitter, to freak out over an anonymous threat, and quite something else for a 50-something dev to fall for the same crap. I originally bought into the whole mess, but I feel, like a lot of people, that I've been trolled by both / all sides. If this continues it's going to get to the point where most rational people are just going to tell all the drama queens looking for yet another 15 minutes of fame to just go DIAF.
This was definitely not a real threat. Wu is still alive, right?
I've posted a link to my address. Anyone can use google earth to get a picture of where I live. Am I going to worry about any anonymous threats on twitter or facebook? No - because I won't even see them:-)
I'm starting to ask myself, why does Wu continue to feed the trolls months later?
Slashdot Mirror
Some transsexuals are extremely transphobic. They are so fearful of anyone knowing that they go out of their way to put down anyone trans-related who doesn't measure up to their "standards of purity." Being open about the fact that you're trans is a huge no-no to them - "real women wouldn't act that way" and all that garbage. To them women like Lynn Conway are not "real women." They won't be seen in public with another trans because they're afraid that someone will speculate. They make public pronouncements that nobody would expect a transsexual to make, to further obfuscate the truth. Rather than just being themselves, they do everything to be a caricature of what they see women as - which brings us back to the portrayal of women on her game website; the characters look like they were designed for horny teenage boys, by horny teenage boys.
So it's kind of ironic to see you write:
identifying common themes in video games that might be problematic to women
Ms. Wu's actions in trying to develop and market a game which reinforces those "common themes in video games that might be problematic to women" makes her part of the problem, not part of the solution.
The counter-argument, "well, we need to cater to what the market wants" is giving license to unrealistic portrayals of women's bodies that even the major fashion magazines have had to rein in. Ironic for someone who claims to be a victim of misogamy, perpetuating the same stereotypes. But hey, throw out your principles if it means maybe making a buck, because you can't actually design a game the masses want otherwise (even though plenty of others have).
But it gets whackier still. In this interview, Ms. Wu claims that before becoming a game developer, she was a journalist who also studied law. Failed at that too, btw, if you care to do any research. And she makes the crazy claim that web sites are responsible for the content users post. So why doesn't she go after Twitter? Oh, because (as the admin of 8chan pointed out) the Communications Decency Act, section 230, provides immunity from prosecution for user-posted content. It's called barking up the wrong tree for a reason. That dog just don't hunt.
while Wu does seem to have a hostile edge to her - albeit it's difficult to find out what she was like before the abuse started.
Seek and you shall find. The truth is out there (cue x-files music :-)
If you can't call a group made up of people who abuse women, and people who support such abusers, without being told you're criticizing "anyone" who "disagrees" with SJWs, then what hope is there?
There are tens of millions of gamers. Half of them are women. The problem now is the exact reverse - criticize any of the main players by pointing out their wrongs and their lies and you become the target. The SJWs and their White Knights need to do a hard reset. There are creeps on both sides - Wu on one side, the threateners on the other. They kind of deserve each other, because at this point it appears both sides need the other. Typical dysfunctional co-dependent relationship, where each gets something they need from the other party.
And people are listening to her about sexism in gaming.
If she were talking about sexism in gaming ... but she's not. And her acts speak louder than words - the artwork on her website and game promote sexist tropes.
Now if the bounty were being promoted by someone with more credibility, or even a corporate sponsor, sure, why not? But Ms. Wu?
Today Gamergate is not about sexism in the gaming industry. It's also not about misogamy. Or journalism. It's about hype, page views, pot-stirring, and in the instant case getting as much attention as possible to self-pr
So now everyone has your home address and email address (barbarahudsononline@gmail.com). Along with your real name that's enough to set up quite a few online accounts and apply for various services IRL. Combined with a fake bank statement I could apply for a mobile phone contract in your name, or put your house up for sale.
Actually, you can't. My bank account is safe. I'm not with some craptastic American bank. The Canadian banking system is rated #1 in the world for a reason. We had zero bank failures in the Great Depression, zero bank failures in the Great Recession. Actually, there have only been two failures (both minor) in all that time.
So, someone's going to fake up a bank statement (from another bank, because the branch I deal with knows me personally) and apply for a mobile phone contract. So what? Bank statements are not considered ID up here, so good luck with that. Both drivers licenses and our universal medicare cards are plastic credit-card-like photo ID and signature directly on the card when they're made (you provide the signature at the time of application, and it gets incorporated into the card, same as your photo). Can they be faked? Sure, but the next gen Medicare cards coming out will also have chips.
Of course, that's not to mention the risk of having someone get pissed off at you in the future and deciding to pay you a visit.
I'm not going to worry about hypotheticals, such as "someone paying me a visit." The last time someone tried that was this spring - a couple of construction workers banging on my door trying to convince me to move out because I was delaying the job and they were going to get laid off. Didn't work - maybe because of my dog, who people keep asking me how come I get to illegally keep a wolf.
I did move this summer, and here I always have my dog. The lab mix from next door is here a lot as well, since I walk him whenever I walk mine, and then he comes in and eats my dog food and steals bananas off the kitchen table. The dog from downstairs practically lives here (yesterday he was here from 8 am to 11 pm, I brought him downstairs, 15 minutes later he was back at my door).
Besides, I've been through a lot worse. I'm still here.
They say that the effect was transient. Are you really going to inject yourself with BCG vaccine for the rest of your life?
I posted the list of known side effects here. There is NO way that I'm swapping 4 shots a day for this. It's not like the shots are all that bad - it's the glucose monitoring that's the pain. If a dog can sniff my blood sugar level, why can't we have a non-invasive glucometer?
Type 1, actually. They've found a pathway that is involved in triggering beta cell death and a drug that supresses that pathway, leading to regeneration of beta cell mass in animal models. They're literally looking at a way of making the type 1 pancreas work again, which even if it's a little bit, will be able to do the fine-tuned control of insulin better than you ever can with a pump or injections. This is fantastic.
It is, except that EVERY medication has side effects. Thanks, but I'm going to stick with insulin injections.
Gastrointestinal side effects have included constipation (up to 11.7%), nausea (up to 2.7%), dyspepsia (up to 2.7%), and diarrhea (up to 2.4%). Nonobstructive, paralytic ileus (reversible upon discontinuation) has been reported infrequently. Diarrhea, dry mouth, gastrointestinal distress, and gingival hyperplasia have been reported.
Cardiovascular side effects have included hypotension (up to 2.5%), new or worsened congestive heart failure (CHF) or pulmonary edema (negative inotropism; 1.8%), bradycardia (heart rate less than 50/minute; 1.4%), atrioventricular (AV) block (first-degree; up to 1.7%), AV block (total first-, second-, and third-degree; 1.2%), AV block (second- and third-degree; 0.8%), and postural hypotension (up to 0.4%). Symptomatic hypotension (1.5%), bradycardia (1.2%), and severe tachycardia (1%) have been reported with intravenous verapamil. In studies related to control of ventricular response in patients taking digoxin who had atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter, ventricular rate less than 50/minute at rest (15%) and asymptomatic hypotension (5%) were reported. Dizziness, hypotension, peripheral edema, and headache are not uncommon and are related to vasodilation of vascular smooth muscle. Verapamil may accelerate conduction of anomalous AV conduction tissue, as in the Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome, which can result in worsened tachycardia, including malignant ventricular tachyarrhythmias or accelerated junctional tachycardia. Because of this potentially fatal side effect, verapamil is not recommended in patients with atrial fibrillation and premature ventricular depolarizations. Angina pectoris, AV block (second- and third-degree), atrioventricular dissociation, CHF, pulmonary edema, abnormal ECG, chest pain, claudication, hypertension, myocardial infarction, palpitations, and purpura (vasculitis) have been reported during open trials/postmarketing experience.
CHF or pulmonary edema may be particularly important in patients with poor left ventricular function.
Various conduction disturbances have been reported with verapamil therapy, including bradycardia, AV block, first-, second-, third-degree heart block, and left bundle branch block.
Nervous system side effects have included headache (up to 12.1%), dizziness (up to 4.7%), lethargy (up to 3.2%), fatigue (up to 4.5%), sleep disturbances (up to 1.4%), paresthesia (up to 1%), and rare neurologic complaints (including paresthesias, sleeping problems, and tremors; less than 1%). Dizziness (1.2%), headache (1.2%), sleepiness, vertigo, and rare cases of seizures during injection have been reported with intravenous verapamil. Rare cases of muscle fasciculations in patients with underlying neuromuscular diseases, stroke associated with verapamil-induced hypotension, exacerbation of myasthenia gravis, and myoclonic dystonia have been reported. Cerebrovascular accident, confusion, equilibrium disorders, extrapyramidal symptoms, insomnia, paresthesia, shakiness, somnolence, syncope, and tinnitus have been reported during open trials/postmarketing experience.
Other side effects have included flu syndrome (up to 3.7%), peripheral edema (up to 3.7%), edema (up to 3%), pain (up to 2.4%), fatigue (1.7%), accidental injury (up to 1.5%), ankle edema (up to 1.4%), and flushing (up to 0.8%).
Immunologic side effects have included infection (up to 12.1%).
Hepatic side effects have included elevated liver enzymes (up to 1.
Too often, people wish that a member of a minority group would speak up and say something, because "outsiders" can't say it without having accusations thrown at them.
I wasn't aware of it (Wu being trans) until this thread started. At first it was irrelevant, but not any more - not when she, after surgery - mocks gays and members of the trans community. Look at the descriptions of her surgery in the LJ entries. They're the same ones many transsexuals use who don't want to discuss the issue point-blank:
Friday morning, my life decided to dive straight into a rushing waterfall. The doctor called me and said there was a cancellation - I could either wait until 2009 for surgery, or be ready in two weeks. I had just two weeks to prepare to spend the next 2-3 months infirmed and recuperating.
I've been arranging this surgery for the better part of a year. I'd rather not talk about my medical health in direct terms on LJ, but I will say it's major, involves internal invasive surgery and is going to hurt like hell. It will take me at least 8 weeks to get back to work, and at least 12 to feel close to normal.
I've just suffered the worst 3 days of my life recuperating from this radical surgery to correct a long-standing birth defect to my urinary tract. I imagined that the pain would be a 7 out of 10, but it's definitely been a 10 out of 10. It's been constant stabbing pain all through my pelvic structure all day long for days now.
"Long-standing birth defect?" Where have I heard that before? Oh, right! There's not much room for doubt now, is there?
She's a little aggressive, driven in part by anger, but quite honestly, if you'd had to put up with months of being called a cunt (and similar) by anonymous strangers on Twitter or email, and then suddenly found that abuse turning into doxxing with death threats, you'd be a tad testy too.
Months by anonymous strangers on Twitter or email? And some anonymous death threats? That's nothing. Seriously. There are plenty of people who get that as part of their job. You don't see them going "OMG I HAZ 2 MOVE!!!" Anyone with any experience on the internet knows that if you take a stance, you're going to offend some kook out there who's going to start making stupid threats.
You also then don't see them going on TV claiming to know ALL the women in gaming. Oh, such self-aggrandizement. She's starting to sound like Florian Mueller.
if she has the money to put a bounty on the heads of these a-holes, more power to her.
She doesn't. Some was put up by family, but the bulk by an anonymous donor. Please read the posts she wrote about it.
That may be what the police advise. But a society in which people live in fear too scared to speak about controversial issues (FUCKING HELL, THIS IS CONTROVERSIAL? SERIOUSLY? WOMEN IN GAMING??!) is a society that's seriously screwed up. If the police are advising this, we need to rethink law enforcement.
Nowhere have the police advised anything of the sort. You can be sure if they did, she'd be telling us all about how it's so bad that the police want to discourage blah blah blah.
I noticed that you failed to address the degrading graphic portrayals of women on her website, which is certainly how she feels today. We've been trolled, but good. This is NOT about women in gaming. This is about a failed game developer trying to get attention, any attention. Now, I have nothing against that, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone, but this is beyond ridiculous. Beyond ludicrous. It's gone PLAID!
So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, but in the big scheme of things, it's not that big a deal. Wu's 15 minutes of fame are almost over, and then we'll have to pick up the mess she's done giving the public the impression that everyone who disagrees with her the other members of the (very small, very very small) band of SJWs is a misogynistic net-kook.
Freak.
Really? Is that the best you can do? Come on, tell us how you really feel.
Seriously, is it because of your upbringing, your religion, a fear of castration that you never got over, your politics, hidden worries about your own identity (that last is a frequent issue).
I only found this earlier today, but it pretty much tears it for me. For a transsexual, Ms. Wu makes some rather odd observations. From her Livejournal account
I watched LOGO, our nationwide channel for gay issues, for the first time this morning. I walked away from the experience feeling it was incredibly pandering and solipsistic. It got me thinking about voices in the media and minority rights.
Let me preface this blog by saying that I think gay rights are the preeminent moral issue of our time, the modern equivalent of slavery. It's one of the top three issues I vote on, and I fully intend to go to demonstrate in Denver's gay pride parade in two weeks. It bothers me deeply that 1/10th of America's population are treated like 2nd class citizens.
That said, I think it's an error to see women's issues and gay issues as synonymous.
I don't especially feel that gays are allies when it comes to women. I think that we usually get along well, but I have occasionally felt that gays see us primarily as competition for the penis. When I watch drag queens, I can't help but feel insulted - as if that offensive cartoon is what they think feminine truth is.
There are so many issues women have that gay men never have to think about. Our increased health care costs, equal pay issues, access to reproductive health care and the threat of rape and violence. Concordantly, there are many gay issues that don't affect me - I've never had to worry that society didn't approve of my sexuality or marriage rights.
It does help that our enemies are the same, the fundamentalist conservatives that would deny us the right to make our own choices. The lunatic fringe would deny me the right to make choices about my body, and they'd just as quickly send the gays off to sexual reeducation camp. We are united against the patriarchal oppressors that think they know what's best for us.
There are some transsexuals who go to the extreme of trying to conform to what they see as "real woman's behavior" (which means adhering to stereotypes), by criticizing others in the LGBTt community, so as to deflect suspicion away from them. Same as there are gay politicians and preachers who get up on the pulpit and denounce same-sex marriage and homosexuality as sins.
This is not over-compensation. This is a dysfunctional behavior - putting down others so as to fit in with the crowd is the least part of it.
And for someone claiming to be trying to stand up for women, have you seen the hypersexualized women characters on her own web site? Skinny waists that would beat a Barbie Doll, overly-broad hips, at a time when we're trying to encourage girls (and women) to have more realistic expectations by not photoshopping 50 pounds off here, 20 pounds on there ... and she's offended by the way drag queens portray women???
Enough is enough.. We've been trolled.
"And may the Swartz be with you."
Say someone emailed you a picture of your house with an accompanying threat against your life? Such things are trivial to do to day, and could even be done in an somewhat automated fashion. Still, from that day on you'd be looking over your shoulder, wondering where the attack would come from. How well would you sleep? Who would you trust? Would you sleep with a firearm under your pillow?
What a load of nutjob absolutist crap (gonna mail me a picture of my house and a threat now? My home address is posted elsewhere in the thread).
All death threats are to be taken seriously. End of discussion.
No they aren't. Not all threats are created equal - see next:
Even empty threats constitute significant harm to the life, safety, and wellbeing of the victim.
If it's an empty threat, by definition it doesn't constitute ANY harm to the life, safety, or well-being of the victim. The problem is discerning what is a non-credible threat. Hint - anonymous trolls on the internet are way down the list when compared to, say, someone you know making threats.
Say someone emailed you a picture of your house with an accompanying threat against your life? Such things are trivial to do to day, and could even be done in an somewhat automated fashion. Still, from that day on you'd be looking over your shoulder, wondering where the attack would come from. How well would you sleep? Who would you trust? Would you sleep with a firearm under your pillow?
No, I wouldn't be worried in the least. The last time someone threatened to take their gun and "put a cap in my head" I told him "you and what army?" Didn't even report it to the police. THIS, on the other hand, is what a real threat looks like.
Here's the thing - there's a bit of hyperbole involved in all this, and it seems that every time it dies down, someone (in this case the "victim") stirs it up again. I'm putting "victim" in quotes because the more I dig into it, the less I buy into it. At this point the evidence says we're being trolled (Wu, in troll fashion, looking for emotional rather than rational responses from us).
There is a difference between having your address available somewhere, and it being brought to the attention of an angry mob.
What angry mob (mob: crowd of people)? A bunch of individuals too scared to even identify themselves, sitting at keyboards in basements all over the country, is scarcely a mob.
I sympathized with Ms. Wu's initial reaction, because, as I said, sometimes the people around you over-react and you get caught up in it. However, it's been months, the "threats" weren't real (Wu's still unharmed, right?), and there's no excuse, after the first few hours, for a 50-something developer who's supposed to have a bit of savvy in the way the internet works, to continue to act like a 20-something soccer mom.
And the latest "initiative" is equally lame. The money for the "bounty" is being put up by others, and the idea that she'll also create some sort of "legal defense fund" to:
the fund will pay lawyers to find cases on libel and defamation and prosecute them in civil court. These cases might be mine, or they might be other women targeted by Gamergate
... is equally dumb. If civil penalties worked, nobody would be breaking any civil laws. Civil cases aren't a deterent, and most of the time they send NO message - because something like 90% of all civil cases are settled by mutual agreement, which includes a confidentiality clause. Name-and-shame works better, you don't have to waste money on lawyers and a long-drawn-out court process that will probably never see the light of day, and there's NO question that maybe you're doing it as a cash grab. If it looks like a money grab, talks like a money grab, walks like a money grab ...
There is no way to prevent this from happening again, same as any other crime. Instead, we should be helping people to look at things in a more realistic light. Feeding panic doesn't help any more than feeding trolls. Of course, helping people look at things more realistically is a long process, without the drama that seems to be the main point of all this.
Ms. Wu's way isn't working - nobody is afraid of being prosecuted, the police are treating it the same as every other anonymous internet threat that doesn't have any credibility, and it is painfully obvious Ms. Wu is looking for more opportunities to do more interviews to once again hype a crappy game. She's doing more harm than good to women in general, and especially to other transsexuals.
Since it's decentralized, they'll have to go after the actual users. Maybe throw some of them in jail. And since the network will survive, they can generate a steady stream of arrests, rather than shutting down the network and having to find out where all the users have buggered off to.
Making publicly available info public? Oh, I'm soooo scared.
Okay, post your home address here. If it's no big deal, put your money where your mouth is.
I've already done that elsewhere in the thread. And in squiggie's journal when we discussed this earlier. Or for a better take on where I'm coming from and why I'm so blase about Internet threats, why not read today's journal entry?
Hate to reply to myself, but also dog licenses, birth registrations, marriages and divorces - all public records.
Please read the rest of the thread. As one poster pointed out using a real-life example, if you own a business, own a property, pay municipal taxes, etc., it's quite easy to find out where you live - its already public info. You used to have to walk down to city hall to look it up in the rolls, but now you can do it right from your mobile phone. No "hacking" or "social engineering" required. No "risk of getting caught."
Same with registering a copyright, patent, or trade mark. Arrest records, trials, convictions and acquittals. Name changes (as is the case with Ms. Wu). I'm sure that a few moments thought will produce other easily-searchable public records that don't require a FOI request or any sort of social engineering.
It's not a question of "impressing anyone." It's "what the heck is wrong with *everyone* being so timid nowadays? If our ancestors had been like that we'd still live in caves or trees in one tiny corner of the planet."
Or to Godwin it, if our ancestors had been so timid 100 years ago, we'd all be saluting the Fuhrer, Jews (along with Romanians, the LGBTt, etc) would have been wiped out, and blacks would be considered an "inferior race."
I am not trying to make this into a pissing contest, but there are lots of people who have a lot to lose by having their personal information exposed and anonymity removed. Like, anyone who has had an unpopular opinion and is realistic about how their corporate HR department would react to bad PR.
Then they've traded their freedom, life, and right to their own opinion for a set of lies and a paycheck. It's gotten so bad that people self-censor themselves, same as the media did in the run-up to Gulf War 1, and this is seen as normal because too many people are sheeple, so anyone who stands out looks like a nail, and HR is the hammer.
This (technology giving others more tools to delve into our lives) is an evolving situation and if we're not careful it's going to get worse. Whatever happened to "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it?" Has it well and truly become "HR *might* disagree with you, so screw your principles and shut your pie-hole or you're on your own?"
When anyone talks about "Putting it to career choices, to pay and employment, have a huge upside if we do it right" wrt people's pay, it's more like "they won't quit even if you tell them they're going to have to take a cut in pay" than "offering a raise to keep them happy." Anyone who thinks it won't be sold as a cost reduction method is a fool.
If you honestly believe that Internet threats are bogus, even when they produce credible forensic evidence to the contrary, post your real physical address so I can come kick your ass and prove you wrong. Double-dog dare you!
Oh, the irony of someone posting that anonymously ...
The slashdot user who posted this story also has a journal, where we've already discussed this, and where I already posted my address to show that I'm certainly not afraid of Internet trolls, but here it is again:
Ms. Barbara Hudson,
1312 Hyman, #301,
Dollard-des-Ormeaux, Quebec,
Canada
H9B 1M7
So come on down and try to "kick my ass". My dog could use a more varied diet :-)
What am I advocating? Good question, and darned hard to come up with a comprehensive easy-to-understand answer in a short post.
I would say "let the trolls make death threats." To quote Napoleon, "Never interrupt your opponent when they're making a mistake." And as I've pointed out elsewhere, what's the big deal about doxxing? Making publicly available info public? Oh, I'm soooo scared. The info is already out there. It's only a threat if the recipient perceives it as such, so the real problem is changing the perception of the recipient so that they realize it's no big deal, the info is already public, and nobody really gives a you-know-what.
It's like someone being afraid of being outed. It might happen, and if it does that's just one thing less to worry about. It's rude (and illegal) to out someone, but it's also an opportunity to address your fears wrt that scenario. And of course to find out who your real friends are :-)
The rewards program is, to say the least, misguided. Unfortunately, putting up rewards never discourages the next perp. The jails are full of people who thought they'd never get caught. So it's an after-the-fact band-aid, not a preventative measure. Doesn't matter if you catch 1 or 100, the next one will still think "I'm not going to get caught because ..."
The trolls making the threats know this, and they're seeing just how much of a reaction they continue to get, way beyond their wildest dreams. So the whole reward program is actually counter-productive, and just more feeding the trolls. At a certain point, you stop feeding the trolls and get on with your life. Otherwise, you're living their dreams, not yours, and that's dysfunctional as all heck. You can still go back and poke them once in a while to keep them busy so they don't attack someone else or eat more lead paint chips or something, but even that gets boring after a while :-)
I would let the police do their job when it comes to threats. Live your own life. Encourage other women (and men) to do the same. And if you're up to it, eschew the fictitious pseudo-anonymity of the net. Being totally open about who and what you are is pretty good inoculation against threats of doxxing, as well as sending the message that you, unlike the trolls, don't need to hide.
Doxxing automatically turns any "joke" into a serious matter. Nobody would DOXX anyone if they knew the consequences for both the victim and the person releasing the information. Go read https://twitter.com/a_man_in_b... to see how often GG's have been doing it. There is one guy who says he's a lawyer who repeatedly threatens to use LexisNexis to DOXX anyone who talks trash about GG.
Doxxing: "the Internet-based practice of researching and publishing personally identifiable information about an individual"
Oh, I'm SO SCARED. Someone might publish my name (hint - it's my handle). Or my address (hint - I've provided a link to it elsewhere in the thread). Or that I'm a transsexual (hint - read my sig, which I'll repeat here for those who aren't logged in:
this post brought to you by the letter ' t ' in LGBTt (Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Transgender, transsexual)
The real hint - all this stuff is already public knowledge, so why worry?
The threats were not serious. Going "OMG they have my ADDRESS!!! I have to move out!!!" She reported it to the police (the right thing to do) but temporarily moving was HER decision, not a police recommendation.
Proving you have researched your target and showing you have the means to locate and attack them is pretty much the definition of a serious threat. Any court of law would look at the pre-meditated nature of the threats and the fact that the perpetrator had the means to carry them out and send them to jail.
What they did is a crime and temporarily moving out is a sensible and proportionate response.
Yes, what the perps did was a crime, and yes, if caught they should be punished.
That being said, you're going to have to do better than getting my home address (link posted elsewhere in this thread for anyone who wants to mail me some not-so-nice anonymous threats) and use google streetview to get a pic of where I live to even start to make me worry.
If moving out WERE the sensible and proportionate thing to do because of the seriousness of the threat, then the ABSOLUTE STUPIDEST BONEHEADED thing to do would be to let the whole world know that's what you've done. Talk about feeding the trolls ... if Wu, a dev, hasn't figured that out after half a century on this crazy planet, there's no hope. Or we're all being trolled.
Easy prediction - the reward will do nothing except garner yet more publicity. And we are being trolled. And people are figuring it out and reacting accordingly.
"Would they actually go and DO something physical? Of course not - that would risk the very anonymity that allows them to act like punks in the first place. "
Unfortunately, some people are punks in real life, too. Men stalking women and murdering them is kind of a thing, in fact.
I've been stalked on-line and in real life. It's hard to take the on-line anonymous stalkers too seriously. The real-life ones ... the ones you probably already knew before they went nutzo ... that's different. Anyone who can't tell the difference between the two might just have a problem :-)
The threats were not serious."
how the fuck do you know that? YOU can't, so stop making shit up. DO I really need to hold you hand to teach you how to use google to see the myrids of attacks that has happened after threats where made?
We KNOW because nothing ever came of them. Even the cops didn't tell Wu to vacate temporarily. For every threat (on or off the net) that actually came to fruition, there are $REALLY_BIG_NUMBER that are bogus, and these were bogus on their face.
"But doesn't there come a time when you should stop feeding them by showing how seriously you take them? "
That did not work. They only used silence as a tool to get more aggressive.
Not feeding the trolls does not work.
I wasn't referring to the immediate aftermath - I'm talking about NOW. Wu continues to feed the trolls months later, trying to maintain that the threats were dangerous in order to continue pot-stirring.
As I've pointed out elsewhere, it's one thing for a soccer mom whose only experience with the Internet is facebook and twitter, to freak out over an anonymous threat, and quite something else for a 50-something dev to fall for the same crap. I originally bought into the whole mess, but I feel, like a lot of people, that I've been trolled by both / all sides. If this continues it's going to get to the point where most rational people are just going to tell all the drama queens looking for yet another 15 minutes of fame to just go DIAF.
This was definitely not a real threat. Wu is still alive, right?
I've posted a link to my address. Anyone can use google earth to get a picture of where I live. Am I going to worry about any anonymous threats on twitter or facebook? No - because I won't even see them :-)
I'm starting to ask myself, why does Wu continue to feed the trolls months later?