Official #GamerGate Discussion & News Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Keep in mind we only know that DDOS is happened. Nobody is saying who does it yet. And everyone is waiting for more details to come out.

I wonder, did you read the whole mailing list? One of #gamergate's conspiracy theory is that the journalists are colluding with each other, and the mailing just proved that there's collusion between them. The initial leak is showing that there's rampant censorship going on and it is massive echo chamber in there. I mean we had Ryan Smith got dogpiled on because he saw where the lines drawn, and Ben Kuchera dogpiled on Greg Tito for unwilling to censor his forum. With some new detail and leaks coming out the conspiracy theory would only get flesh out even further. I am looking forward to the part about 11 articles and such.

The current radio silence from everyone from the other side is to me at least indicated that they realized they are colossally fucked from the leaks. Anymore defense (like Kyle Orland and his diatribe) is just gonna make them look worst.

He mentions letters SEEN by Breibart London, but not shared on there at least any where I can find on top not seeing anything I'd call dogpiling in the link provided and most of what they seem to be discussing is how to cull the abusive harassment and the parts from Jason Schreier about Grayson are true since he mentioned Quinn's name in an article, but that was purely because she happened to be part of a Game Jam along with several other indie devs that had gone sour(which was the actual story and had little to do with Quinn) and the mention of her game was that it had simply been greenlit along with several others, but never reviewed the game itself. One BIG issue I notice in the link provided is that all of it's sources are from itself as in other pages on Breibart, but no other sources are listed except the mailing list in question which can't be opened unless you belong to it and the Kotaku link about the Gamer Jam. This is REALLY not a good sign as it means that all citations are from the same source a and it just feeds back into itself instead of going to more authorative sources. And no, the big major sites that he mentioned at the end are hardly big and major except USA Today and Yahoo and even THEN it's hardly as sign that

video game journalists operate with one voice and collude on major issues to distort coverage of ethics violations and to support figures to whom they are politically sympathetic.

The bolded part is VERY important as none of this really has anything to do with politics or anything of the sort just videogames and opinions are very subjective and the opinion of ONE writer doesn't necessarily reflect that of the entire site.

Edit: I should also note that writers and editors of gaming sites knowing one another and having each others contact info is hardly the sign of some dark shady conspiracy. Shit, pretty much every MMA writer has the mailing address of other MMA writers.
 
Last edited:
He mentions letters SEEN by Breibart London, but not shared on there at least any where I can find on top not seeing anything I'd call dogpiling in the link provided and most of what they seem to be discussing is how to cull the abusive harassment and the parts from Jason Schreier about Grayson are true since he mentioned Quinn's name in an article, but that was purely because she happened to be part of a Game Jam along with several other indie devs that had gone sour(which was the actual story and had little to do with Quinn) and the mention of her game was that it had simply been greenlit along with several others, but never reviewed the game itself. One BIG issue I notice in the link provided is that all of it's sources are from itself as in other pages on Breibart, but no other sources are listed except the mailing list in question which can't be opened unless you belong to it and the Kotaku link about the Gamer Jam. This is REALLY not a good sign as it means that all citations are from the same source a and it just feeds back into itself instead of going to more authorative sources. And no, the big major sites that he mentioned at the end are hardly big and major except USA Today and Yahoo and even THEN it's hardly as sign that

The bolded part is VERY important as none of this really has anything to do with politics or anything of the sort just videogames and opinions are very subjective and the opinion of ONE writer doesn't necessarily reflect that of the entire site.

http://yiannopoulos.net/2014/09/19/gamejournopros-zoe-quinn-email-dump/

Search for the part with Mike Futter, Ryan Smith and Greg Tito. And nobody denied the mailing list. NO ONE. Instead we have Jason Shreirer whined about not getting contacted by Nero and then had to backpedal like a mofo when it is proven that Nero DID contact him.

And here's IA's breakdown on the email chain on why it is discriminating:

dd2.png


That's the first part of the dump. And are you surprise that Breitbart is the only source atm? With the amount of smear campaign that had been going on i'd be surprise that you are surprise about it.
 
So supporters of GamerGate are now blocked from the Mighty Number 9 twitter, even the ones who gave money to the project.
 
[YT]oOEDXEqA6rw[/YT]

This was put together nicely!
 
Holy Fuck. I just looked up Breibart and I REALLY can't believe you guys are using them as a source of legitimate journalism and journalistic ethics with all the shit they've pulled.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breitbart_(website)#Controversies

In this entire thread, there hasn't been one single poster who commented about how awesome Breitbart has been at political journalism. Not one. If anything, when most of us heard Breitbart was on the case, we rolled our eyes and expected a load of horseshit to soon follow. So in that regard, you are right to be hesitant to trust anything Breitbart reports.

However, Milo didn't just resort to the typical ad hominem attacks that have plagued the opposite side of GamerGate. Instead of resorting to victimization and red herrings, he gave specific details, details that have not once been called into question by the other side up to this point. I know that's subject to change, but so far, he's been almost the only person in this matter providing sources and facts backing up his stance.

It's obvious why Breitbart is in this matter, and most of us know why. Breitbart is on the far right of the political spectrum, and SJWs are on the far left. He's not doing this as some sort of defense for video gamers, he's doing it to attack a political ideology that greatly differs from his own. So if you are going to call Breitbart into question because of their extreme ideology and stupid dealings in the past, at least be fair and treat the SJW crowd on the other side with equal skepticism.

As you make up your mind, go where the facts lead you. When this whole thing first started (or I guess I should say when ZQ's ex released that info and stoked a fire that had been brimming for a very long time), I was skeptical of the whole soon-to-be GamerGate movement. I thought it could have been a bunch of immature 4channers overblowing the whole issue because a woman was involved. Over time, my whole opinion changed, and the two main pieces of evidence were the revealing and subsequent email releases of the mailing list, as well as a host of SJW sites all releasing articles attacking gamers within a day or two of each other. That doesn't happen amongst competing sites. If anything, at least one of them should have ran a contrary opinion, but none of them did. So as someone who has bashed the retarded Illuminati lizard people conspiracy theorists in this site, I was very hesitant to support GamerGate, even if it was going against a group of people I hated (SJWs). However, evidence is what won me over. I now support GamerGate. If the information provided to me was bullshit, I will drop my support. But given the fact that the other side has tried every which way to attack GamerGate except through facts (red herrings, playing the victim card, and major suppression from a variety of sites), I will stand with the side I feel is correct.
 
And that's why he gains mine. There is NOTHING to be gained from throwing your lot into this whole gross fiasco and I honestly doubt the prolonged radio silence from site to run this story not as some symbol of a dark conspiracy, but more unwillingness to run a story until ALL the facts are in and frankly not wanting to delve into peoples private affairs when dirty laundry is being aired and neutrality is never bad thing and in turn may actually be better as it gives perspective to judge and criticize both sides(which he actually has). To me the mailing list doesn't mean much other than some sites were discussing shutting down threads discussing all of this(which given how vile it gets and how fast I can't blame them) and we ultimately don't know who caused the DDOS attack(false flags can work both ways) and I'm going to wait until things clear up. Can there be legitimate mature discussions about corruption in the gaming industry? Yes of course, but this has NOT been it.

Until all the facts are out? If these accusations were lies, there would be lawsuits pending. These people are out to make a buck, you can bet your ass if they've been legitimately libelled against that the courts would be their first recourse. Instead, all we see from them is spin, damage control, victim cards, and attacks. No, this has been proceeding on a predominantly factual basis.
 
Until all the facts are out? If these accusations were lies, there would be lawsuits pending. These people are out to make a buck, you can bet your ass if they've been legitimately libelled against that the courts would be their first recourse. Instead, all we see from them is spin, damage control, victim cards, and attacks. No, this has been proceeding on a predominantly factual basis.

The most damning recourse the SJWs have taken was not anything you listed (though you are completely correct), it was the attempt to suppress any discussion about GamerGate across a bunch of popular websites that have ties to the major players on the other side of GG.
 
In this entire thread, there hasn't been one single poster who commented about how awesome Breitbart has been at political journalism. Not one. If anything, when most of us heard Breitbart was on the case, we rolled our eyes and expected a load of horseshit to soon follow. So in that regard, you are right to be hesitant to trust anything Breitbart reports.

However, Milo didn't just resort to the typical ad hominem attacks that have plagued the opposite side of GamerGate. Instead of resorting to victimization and red herrings, he gave specific details, details that have not once been called into question by the other side up to this point. I know that's subject to change, but so far, he's been almost the only person in this matter providing sources and facts backing up his stance.

It's obvious why Breitbart is in this matter, and most of us know why. Breitbart is on the far right of the political spectrum, and SJWs are on the far left. He's not doing this as some sort of defense for video gamers, he's doing it to attack a political ideology that greatly differs from his own. So if you are going to call Breitbart into question because of their extreme ideology and stupid dealings in the past, at least be fair and treat the SJW crowd on the other side with equal skepticism.

As you make up your mind, go where the facts lead you. When this whole thing first started (or I guess I should say when ZQ's ex released that info and stoked a fire that had been brimming for a very long time), I was skeptical of the whole soon-to-be GamerGate movement. I thought it could have been a bunch of immature 4channers overblowing the whole issue because a woman was involved. Over time, my whole opinion changed, and the two main pieces of evidence were the revealing and subsequent email releases of the mailing list, as well as a host of SJW sites all releasing articles attacking gamers within a day or two of each other. That doesn't happen amongst competing sites. If anything, at least one of them should have ran a contrary opinion, but none of them did. So as someone who has bashed the retarded Illuminati lizard people conspiracy theorists in this site, I was very hesitant to support GamerGate, even if it was going against a group of people I hated (SJWs). However, evidence is what won me over. I now support GamerGate. If the information provided to me was bullshit, I will drop my support. But given the fact that the other side has tried every which way to attack GamerGate except through facts (red herrings, playing the victim card, and major suppression from a variety of sites), I will stand with the side I feel is correct.

Well said. It's an enemy of my enemy situation and most gamers are cognizant of that.
 
Well said. It's an enemy of my enemy situation and most gamers are cognizant of that.

I remember some #gamergate members getting a bit spook out because of Breitbart, but retrospectively it was one of the best ally we could have ever gotten. He's far from the actual battlefield, gay, doesn't give a flying fuck to any of his death threats. He had actually have the balls with grits to publish his shits, unlike Erik Kain who decided to be neutral instead of fighting for the consumers. Hence why now people are coming to him for proofs and leaks, because he can publish it and bleed those fuckers dry.

Also, you know who's disappointed me most throughout this? Jim Sterling. For all his talk about the consumers getting angry and defend their hobby with all that rhetoric he like to spew, he decided to turn his back to the consumers to serve his indie overlords instead. At one point where the mailing list was reveal he's one of the people who goes "so what?". The amount of mental gymnastic and hypocrisy of him still made me mad. I was an avid fan of him till now. He had turn full on shill.
 
It's obvious why Breitbart is in this matter, and most of us know why. Breitbart is on the far right of the political spectrum, and SJWs are on the far left. He's not doing this as some sort of defense for video gamers, he's doing it to attack a political ideology that greatly differs from his own.

There us no doubt attacking SJW's suits his politics.

But let's be honest the rest of the media have dropped the ball on this issue. If it takes a right winger to call down some well deserved smack on those protected by the ultra left, then bring it on .
 
There us no doubt attacking SJW's suits his politics.

But let's be honest the rest of the media have dropped the ball on this issue. If it takes a right winger to call down some well deserved smack on those protected by the ultra left, then bring it on .

I'm waiting for the moment the rest of the more mainstream media that smeared #gamergate to change their tune once the cat is fully out of the bag.
 
There us no doubt attacking SJW's suits his politics.

But let's be honest the rest of the media have dropped the ball on this issue. If it takes a right winger to call down some well deserved smack on those protected by the ultra left, then bring it on .

Put another way - Imagine that real journalists had no idea about GamerGate, so they decided to weigh in on the subject one way or another.

Are they:
1. Going to go after the supposed collaborating, agenda-driving journalists? A group of people who are supposedly fellow professionals in the same field, have a platform in the media to attack back, and a group of people who are masters at playing the victim and rallying an outcry from the masses of the uberhypersensitive pussies.
or
2. Go after gamers? A group of people who aren't organized, who don't have a platform from which to speak, who are probably not that politically or socially active, and a significant amount who can't even vote and aren't savvy enough to create a platform to voice their concerns.

Which side do you think they're going to roll with? They're going to go with the easiest narrative out there and side with their fellow "journalists." GamerGate is a huge uphill battle, but right now it looks like the truth is magnetically strong on the side of the gamers.

That is why someone like Milo from Breitbart is needed, someone with the balls to stand up against the SJWs. Even if I disagreed with Milo on every political issue, he's in the right here and I'm going to support him until I find evidence that he's nothing but a bullshitter on this topic. And there's been no such contrary evidence.
 
Put another way - Imagine that real journalists had no idea about GamerGate, so they decided to weigh in on the subject one way or another.

Are they:
1. Going to go after the supposed collaborating, agenda-driving journalists? A group of people who are supposedly fellow professionals in the same field, have a platform in the media to attack back, and a group of people who are masters at playing the victim and rallying an outcry from the masses of the uberhypersensitive pussies.
or
2. Go after gamers? A group of people who aren't organized, who don't have a platform from which to speak, who are probably not that politically or socially active, and a significant amount who can't even vote and aren't savvy enough to create a platform to voice their concerns.

Which side do you think they're going to roll with? They're going to go with the easiest narrative out there and side with their fellow "journalists." GamerGate is a huge uphill battle, but right now it looks like the truth is magnetically strong on the side of the gamers.

It is a massive story for anybody who actually wants to do so some proper investigative journalism.

The problem is that these days journalism is actually cross promotion and PR.

So, unless gamers push this issue it could still get buried
 
It is a massive story for anybody who actually wants to do so some proper investigative journalism.

The problem is that these days journalism is actually cross promotion and PR.

So, unless gamers push this issue it could still get buried

Yep. If GamerGate ever dies down, the SJWs will declare victory and continue to do business as usual. In fact, they will be embolden and their influence will grow. To hell with that.
 
I'm waiting for the moment the rest of the more mainstream media that smeared #gamergate to change their tune once the cat is fully out of the bag.

The problem is, very rarely do MSM outlets up and completely reverse course on an issue once it has been reported. That would be used against them by their competitors, so they stay the course almost no matter what - even if they know they're wrong. They'll just quibble and red herring their way until the noise dies down.

I love Vice. I've been following them well before they even had a YouTube channel. But I was disappointed as hell at their article about GamerGate and Zoe Quinn. I would love for Vice to see the light and address the real issues, but I highly doubt they will. Like other media outlets, once a pathway has been chosen, they don't want to admit they were wrong and reverse course. And if I'm not mistaken, Vice has a conflict of interest here, as one of the biggest people to be exposed in GamerGate is Leigh Alexander, who (if I'm not mistaken) has written for Vice before.
 
The problem is, very rarely do MSM outlets up and completely reverse course on an issue once it has been reported. That would be used against them by their competitors, so they stay the course almost no matter what - even if they know they're wrong. They'll just quibble and red herring their way until the noise dies down.

I love Vice. I've been following them well before they even had a YouTube channel. But I was disappointed as hell at their article about GamerGate and Zoe Quinn. I would love for Vice to see the light and address the real issues, but I highly doubt they will. Like other media outlets, once a pathway has been chosen, they don't want to admit they were wrong and reverse course.

Vice is a part of the Gawker media that have been smeared #gamergate left and right though. So there's no way in hell anyone do a reverse. The best we could hope for is a new articles of some other newspaper and examine this again through the lens of new information.
 
I don't think Vice is part of Gawker. I'm not 100% sure on that, but Vice has been in operation for awhile and the only link I've seen of Vice to Gawker is Leigh Alexander (I didn't ninja edit my previous post in time).

Anyway, I love Vice but it really pisses me off that for all their brilliant journalism, they chose to be water in this particular incident - taking the path of least resistance without even trying to address the issues.
 
And that's why he gains mine. There is NOTHING to be gained from throwing your lot into this whole gross fiasco and I honestly doubt the prolonged radio silence from site to run this story not as some symbol of a dark conspiracy, but more unwillingness to run a story until ALL the facts are in and frankly not wanting to delve into peoples private affairs when dirty laundry is being aired and neutrality is never bad thing and in turn may actually be better as it gives perspective to judge and criticize both sides(which he actually has). To me the mailing list doesn't mean much other than some sites were discussing shutting down threads discussing all of this(which given how vile it gets and how fast I can't blame them) and we ultimately don't know who caused the DDOS attack(false flags can work both ways) and I'm going to wait until things clear up. Can there be legitimate mature discussions about corruption in the gaming industry? Yes of course, but this has NOT been it.

This is exactly it, you haven't been paying attention or you're a SJW trying to not be too obvious.

The only side that hasn't been civil has been the SJWers, Gamergate has been incredibly civil and has done the most important thing and that's present the facts. I'm not white and I definitely lean left but the way SJWers have conducted themselves has been nothing but pathetic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top