What the...? This thread is still alive?! People still talk about GamerGate?!

There are still people banging on against vaccination. Nothing should really surprise anyone after that.

That's a great point.

Gamergate is still alive and kicking. No matter how much the opposition want it to Gamergate isn't going away anytime soon - unless game journalists adopt and adhere to an ethics policy of course.

I wondered if this was being discussed here. Seems like Pinsof may not have been entirely truthful:

http://kotaku.com/gamergates-latest-conspiracy-theory-doesnt-hold-up-1684012308

I wonder if the #gg people will get as angry at Pinsof for telling porky pies as the get when they consider certain other people do...

Pinsof is a world-class tool, but someone with as little credibility as Jason Schreier has to have their "reporting" taken with a grain of salt, too. Just saying, it might carry a little more weight if it wasn't coming from this guy or Kotaku.

It's pretty sad to see him ignore all of the good points to jump on a few shaky ones as proof that the whole thing is a giant witch hunt, but not really surprising. Even months ago there was proven impropriety at his site that he and others promptly ignored. At this point it's like watching climate change deniers jumping on any mistake a scientist makes while ignoring everything else they do in order to try and vindicate ridiculous beliefs.

Personally I don't consider any of the sites that took part in the attempted ending of the "Gamer" identity all that credible anymore & less so when when talking about #Gamergate

Edit:
Sargon of Akkad's take of the Pinsof Interview

That article seems to "prove" very little. So one woman denies she said something does not equal proof as the article claims. If anything that article proves how crappy and biased games journalism is. Of course, "now" she would deny it even if she did say it at the time.

Kotaku proved there was no blacklist? Did you read the GameJournoPros posts? Clearly there was proof of some level of blacklisting. Blacklisting doesn't require every magazine to still be blacklisting.

That author is hardly a journalist. Maybe, Pinsof got some facts wrong about Fez, but most of what he said is still debatable.

If anything that article proves how crappy and biased Kotaku is...

Those comments are even stupider. Koataku is shit; but their supporters seem even stupider.

Seriously, did you even read past the title of your link? If you think that Kotaku article is convincing journalism, you are a poor judge of quality journalism. Watch the Sargon video...if anything the article you linked proves how corrupt games journalism actually is...

mmm, new way of doing game promo: say you got inspired by AS for your game character even if it doesn't really look like her :
https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/564924583254294528/photo/1
(Towerfall btw)

I made no mention of blacklisting. I wasn't suggesting that everything Pinsof was saying was untrue. I said "not entirely truthful".

We have the option of believing the "one woman" or Pinsof, and you choose to not believe the woman. Not really surprising I guess. We then have the option of believing McGrath "one man" or Pinsof. I guess that choice is a bit harder.

Maybe Pinsof recalls things better than both Chow and McGrath. I find that people generally tend to have a better recollection of their own words than third party's do, however.

Interestingly, according to Pinsof, his allegations that the Jurors selected Faraway for reasons other than they liked that game, may have just been a "misunderstanding". It also seems like some of the things that he attributed to McGrath were a "misunderstanding" or an "exaggeration": http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1skget9

Its interesting to me that he is willing to admit that some aspects of what he said were misunderstandings or exaggerations... I wonder why that would be...

A quote from his twitlonger:

"My main point from the start of bringing this up is that in 2012 a developer presented me with allegations that implicated a notable developer and the media and indie scene that surrounds him in taking someone's personal work without permission and profiting off it."

Isn't it at least curious, that he didn't bring this up in 2012 or 2013 or 2014? He has had plenty of time to do so since he was fired.

You are offensive. How dare you claim I don't believe the woman just because she is a woman. Fuck you! Who the hell do you think you are? But that's the problem with you SJW types, you think you know what everyone else is thinking and why.

The conversation is over. Go back to your bridge, troll!

I think it's terrible that those developers put her in a game that's designed so that characters attack each other, furthering patriarchy by allowing gamers—naturally, an exclusively male fraternity that women aren't allowed into—to mirror their systemic subjugation of women. It's terrible that these developers have put her in the game to market the game based on the male gaze and allow manchildren to live out their perverse fantasies with a cluster of pixels representing her.

(Look, I can be a catchphrase-addicted pseudo-intellectual, too!)

Don't be disingenuous. You have to know by now that this has never been a "men versus women in gaming" thing despite the media's attempts to portray it as such, so the gender of the two in question is completely irrelevant.

What's important is that GG has been built up to be so political that most people don't want to touch it or anything tangentially related to it with a ten foot pole, so having Schrier show up and ask questions becomes a question of either denying anything he says in order to stay as uninvolved as possible or potentially being thrown to what Kotaku and others have spent months characterizing as a pack of ferocious wolves (and of course, potentially burning industry bridges in the process).

The point is that Pinsof isn't the only one with a motive to twist the truth here, so their accounts (especially as distilled by Scheier's "reporting") have to be taken with a grain of salt, as well.

I'm htown1980!

Well in fairness, I did say that you chose to believe Pinsof rather than both Chow and McGrath ( but I think that you probably found it easier to believe Pinsof ahead of McGrath as Pinsof had already beaten the "one woman" so he probably levelled up after that).

You do open yourself up to those kind of implications when you write like that but hey, doesn't bother me if the conversation is over.