It's popular EVERYWHERE. And I hate it every time it happens, on either side and in either situation. I'm telling you this in good faith, people are trying to pin "truegendering" ('uber doxxing') on gg supporters right now, and I haven't joined in the pinning because I don't see sufficient indication of this being wide spread enough to warrant being called out as "something gaters do".

A lot of things need to stop, doxxing and swatting first and foremost. There's no disagreement here, and also no opportunity to make one side look worse.

I learned about doxxing a few months ago and was utterly disgusted, it does seem to be an internet trend indeed.
Good thing that I terminated most of my board memberships and have intensified my offline and offcomputer life again, because I am an activist, just for something as good as nobody cares for anymore. :/

Thanks for pointing that out, perhaps that should tell you something? So because the anti side picks them out for having a narrative they do not like that makes them part of GG?
Just because they have an opinion about GG which they express and which the opposing side does not like. Despite themselves saying they are not "members"? Interesting strategy.

I did not say - and you know it - that feminist critics are the corruption in the industry because SJW. So do not try to shift the discussion to that point, it never was about that and I give a fuck about Aurini's argument and as I said he is not part of the GG movement
he does his own stuff for years. Just because somebody says something against feminists, that makes him not part of GG, although it seems the opposing side uses this tactic a lot (look above).

Nobody says corruption in gaming journalism is everywhere, the initial complaints were directed against specific sites and a specific circle of people. That was before the all gamers are ... answer to that critique.

Surely an art critique does not encompass saying that art has to change, so that it fits into the moral/ethical/political framework of a specific group of people.

I did not say that journalists destroy video games. I pointed out that GG started as a consumer revolt against specific practices that from a journalistic viewpoint are questionable.
Can you perhaps tell us here why you try to shift the narrative and try to escalate the topic into dimensions that this is not about?

Well, it is a hashtag campaign, there is no hierarchy. There is no membership, which makes it easy to pick targets. Although there are some that identify themselves openly as GG members, but I guess most
of them do not have the weight to be useful for the anti side.

But I wonder, when you do not like the SJW narrative, why do you try to shift the discussion to the SJW narrative? Why do you try to escalate it to the anti-feminist-political level. The SJW stuff was the answer to
the critique, not the point of the emergence of GG. Perhaps you should see a psychologist.

Well that swatting stuff I saw, which was not related to GG as far as I know, is quite frightening. The people which initiate such stuff should be behind bars for a long time.

I didn't even know about swatting and had to look it up.
I've read articles about trigger happy police squads who killed little children and innocent people only because they had entered the wrong house and am surprised nobody died because of this yet as it seems.

Has anybody doing this been caught and arrested by now?

As far as I know, nobody initiating swatting has been arrested. Such actions are despicable as is doxxing.

On the other hand doxxing may be frighting, but what do you lose when your real name, address are public? You have to take responsibility for what you say and did say. Perhaps some people would not express themselves in such a aggressive manner.

Think about the online harassment. Do you think that people would do that if their real name would be posted with it?

I was just wondering what Jordan Owen and Davis Aurini get in their daily E-Mails.

That's what the StaSi said. Coming from a family that had massive problems with spying and in the end had to leave the country (not only because of it, but it was a central part) I can think that many people see this in a different light.

The problem is not the name but the address (which involves the whole family, neighbors etc...) and the ones being threatened are usually not the people harrassing anyone themselves or do you think lizzy could have ever done this to anybody? From the doxxing I've seen so far, there was not only a full name but usually an address, former schools and sometimes detailled information about the house (including the rooms) and people living in it, although the one with lizzy was probably one of the most extreme ones, making the address official seems to be a regular thing.

That is the side I had not considered. You got a point there, especially since it seems that states try to get a grasp of the information flow in the WWW and try to identify dissidents. At the moment that is all for the good of the public as they claim and to catch criminals, but it is step closer to the STASI.

https://netzpolitik.org/2015/geheime-referatsgruppe-wir-praesentieren-die-neue-verfassungsschutz-einheit-zum-ausbau-der-internet-ueberwachung/

Did Lizzy actually express what happened? If I remember it right she did not say what happened, just that she takes a step back.

I remember her writing in response to some (now invisible) comments here:
http://www.reaxxion.com/4352/interview-with-the-influential-gamergate-defender-lizzyf620

I think she wrote something about a thorough job (most likely paid) including the sketches of her house, routines of her children leaving the house, etc... if I remember correctly. Of course she was scared, this is f*ing terrorism.

Aye, that sounds like a serious threat. I can't remember any aggressive statements from her against the feminist or anti GG side and wonder how she did get into the target of someone.

Hi Vaina,

It's been a long time since I had 12hour workdays... and I still owe htown a reply... so this will be short, plus I have not read the rest of the thread... sorry.

I'm replying to you post 2847. As far I can see you're basically saying: 1) That Sarkeesian is in the center of it because Gaters put her there. 2) That the truth of Gamergate is that you know the truth of Gamergate better than Gamergaters. :) Fair summary?

If you engage me in good faith we will get to objectivy and misogyny eventually... let's check some premises. Just my usual caveat that I am not sure I can advocate for GG 100%, but I can do it well enough I guess.

Regarding Sarkeesian, and using charged language on purpose: She chose to educate a community about a topic, and found said community mostly disagreed with her narrative. In the GG lens, she is a symbol of the corrupting motive that influenced gaming journalism. So she was always at the center so to speak, and she put herself there by choice. Please note: I am not YET saying if I agree with any of this, nor commenting on root causes. Do we agree so far this is how "the other side" sees this?

Then on the problems of the industry... If you can't even agree that the problems of the "industry" to the "other side" are to any degree sincerely believed as I stated above, and further insist on a priori reducing ALL the problems to economical and class oppression angles, without any ideological component around "ethics of journalism", then of course you are right. But you are right by your own defintion of right that has not been agreed. Can't you self examine enough to notice how you subtly, yet constantly shift the discussion to a battlefield where your ideology has more traction?

You're a smart guy. Why not stop strawmanning the other side and refusing to consider their perspectives?

Edit: I see MaGo72 was trying the same tack as me. I see you dismissed it based on two new points: 1) that art and its critique are inherently ethically neutral. Which seems to me kind of like saying art is never political... 2) that the GG perception is exaggerated, though the way you point this is via a huge strawman: "conspiracy theory".
We can talk aesthethics and critique. We can discuss perception vs reality and how shared bias can appear to be collusion. Do you want to?

(firearm part warning: Sargon)

gamergate might very well have won

Community manager for CDPR compares gamergate to the KKK
As a custome of CD Projekt RED and a huge fan of the Witcher series i'm shocked bu these kind of comments.
I hope CDPR will do the right thing and fire or punish these community manager.

Chris Priestly was a perfect fit for today's BioWare, and making him a representative of CDPR wasn't the best idea in the world. He just went out and proved it again.