3 ms·

The question is, why does "#gamergate" get the blame for this? This trend of vilifying any group one disagrees with based on the actions of individuals with no

The question is, why does "#gamergate" get the blame for this? This trend of vilifying any group one disagrees with based on the actions of individuals with no indication they are even connected to the group is pretty disturbing. Remember when Jack Thompson got death threats? Remember how it was not acceptable to pretend "gamers" were at fault for that, but rather the individual people committing those crimes were at fault for their own behavior?

PhasmaFelis 12y ago
Because #gamergate is a name that was created to attack one woman based on completely spurious claims. If you really care about corruption in games journalism (and I do) then it makes no sense to continue rallying behind this banner that was tainted from the start.
- imanaccount247 12y ago
  >Because #gamergate is a name that was created to attack one woman based on completely spurious claims. No it was not. Again, where are people getting this bizarre idea? It was created by Adam Baldwin, on twitter, specifically about games journalism and the game websites silencing discussion of games journalism. It seems really hard to believe that these constant claims that #gamergate was started to attack someone (who?) is all honest ignorance rather than deliberate dishonesty.
- EvenThisAcronym 12y ago
  That doesn't make any sense. "Some people said before that Gamergate was about harassing women, I guess this woman must've been harassed by Gamergate as well, although there is no proof, and Gamergate supporters decried the threat and reported it, which is all they could do."
XorNot 12y ago
There's a strain of activists which like to operate to by rallying a crowd to shout down their opposition, rather then negotiating policy or changing minds. It works well on college campuses and the internet when targeted at individuals. It doesn't work against anything else. The type of articles which try to group and target blame at "gamers" are exactly this type of thinking: they're written on the assumption that "gamers" is a small group that can be shamed into going away. It's telling that they're written with the usual "can't get laid" smarm which fundamentally fails to understand modern demographics, and has a lot to answer for about how exactly one wants to help guide and shape a generation moving into adolescence who'll be wrestling with understanding a lot of these types of issues. Conversely, they're not entirely wrong in this assumption if you consider the actual demographic audience either: the group of people who know or care about the blogs and personalities involved is tiny if you're not in it. It is not mainstream news. No one outside of the relevant forum communities knew or cared.

PhasmaFelis 12y ago

Because #gamergate is a name that was created to attack one woman based on completely spurious claims. If you really care about corruption in games journalism (and I do) then it makes no sense to continue rallying behind this banner that was tainted from the start.

imanaccount247 12y ago
>Because #gamergate is a name that was created to attack one woman based on completely spurious claims. No it was not. Again, where are people getting this bizarre idea? It was created by Adam Baldwin, on twitter, specifically about games journalism and the game websites silencing discussion of games journalism. It seems really hard to believe that these constant claims that #gamergate was started to attack someone (who?) is all honest ignorance rather than deliberate dishonesty.
EvenThisAcronym 12y ago
That doesn't make any sense. "Some people said before that Gamergate was about harassing women, I guess this woman must've been harassed by Gamergate as well, although there is no proof, and Gamergate supporters decried the threat and reported it, which is all they could do."

XorNot 12y ago

There's a strain of activists which like to operate to by rallying a crowd to shout down their opposition, rather then negotiating policy or changing minds. It works well on college campuses and the internet when targeted at individuals. It doesn't work against anything else. The type of articles which try to group and target blame at "gamers" are exactly this type of thinking: they're written on the assumption that "gamers" is a small group that can be shamed into going away. It's telling that they're written with the usual "can't get laid" smarm which fundamentally fails to understand modern demographics, and has a lot to answer for about how exactly one wants to help guide and shape a generation moving into adolescence who'll be wrestling with understanding a lot of these types of issues. Conversely, they're not entirely wrong in this assumption if you consider the actual demographic audience either: the group of people who know or care about the blogs and personalities involved is tiny if you're not in it. It is not mainstream news. No one outside of the relevant forum communities knew or cared.