Just going to say that quite a few GamerGate forums covered the IGN story, praised IGN for getting rid of the guy and basically slammed the hell out of Filip Mi

Just going to say that quite a few GamerGate forums covered the IGN story, praised IGN for getting rid of the guy and basically slammed the hell out of Filip Miucin for copying other people's work. https://old.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/search?q=Filip+Miucin https://old.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/search?q=Filip+Miuci... The idea that they're quiet on actual ethics issues while making a mountain out of a molehill on localisation ones is false. As for collusion, well it's questionable whether it occurred, but at least a bit suspicious that many sites suddenly turned out their audience mid controversy. Imagine if someone else did that. Like, an agency dev called their clients morons online, or a retail worker said their customers were malicious/trolls/sociopaths to their face. Would they still have a job? Probably not. But that happened, it shouldn't have happened, and it's being justified somehow. It's also worth pointing out that quite a few smaller sites and YouTube channels with GamerGate... tendencies or neutrality are actually pretty damn reliable, and that most aren't exactly Breitbart or fake news esque. Stuff like Techraptor or Niche Gamer or what not isn't exactly unreliable. Stuff like SidAlpha's YouTube channel isn't unreliable. The issue is that what Wikipedia considers a reliable source is very much tilted in the large corporation/academia direction and misses the point in what reliability actually is. This isn't the 60s/70s/80s/whenever when being reliable only meant being a full time employee for a major newspaper or television network or publishing your work in an academic context. Many smaller blogs and creators (even under pseudonyms or anonymity) have equally good or better records now, and standards should change to accomodate that.