Some Tips for Supporters

by @MaxShilling4u

After watching #GamerGate activism for the past several weeks, I see its adversaries are becoming more complex with their tactics. Interestingly, I observed that they seem to be the most active on Sundays. In this discussion, I list a few examples of what I have noticed (minus some obvious trolls/fallacies) and how best to handle them.

1. Association Fallacy Through Reductio ad Hitlerum

The sole purpose of this slander is to paint #GamerGate activism as villainous to the public. It is often disregarded by even the most intellectually impaired, for obvious reasons.

Example(s):

“Gamers are just like Nazis!”

“GamerGate activism is no different than the KKK.”

Suggested response(s):

Say “Not true.” or ignore.

Further reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

2. Association Fallacy Through Argumentum ad Misericordiam

This is a bit more creative than just an association fallacy, as it tries to manipulate the #GamerGate activist into feeling guilty. The actor attempts this by stating that #GamerGate activism has made innocent people suffer. This is usually delivered via loaded questions.

Example(s):

“How can you support a hate group like #GamerGate activists? They made so many innocent people suffer!”

Suggested response(s):

Say you do not believe that to be true and ask for proof. Counter with how #GamerGate activists helped with charities, and that you are supporting #GamerGate activism with ethical viewpoints.

Further reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_pity

3. Association Fallacy Through Enemy-of-My-Enemy Logic:

A great espionage tactic, I have seen it work many times on unsuspecting targets. Basically, what it does is generate an illusion of association on a target with another group that already has aggressive adversaries. This is different from generic villainization via association fallacy, as it generally doesn't affect the public at large, but rather a specific group of people.

In terms of logic:

“A” wants to target “B”.

“A” knows of a feud: “C” attacking “D”.

“A” generates a false association between “B” and “D”.

“C” begins attacking “B”.

Example(s):

“#GamerGate activism is just a platform for MRA/conservatives/Republicans/American traitors.” (Naturally, this gets followed by their respected opposition targeting #GamerGate activism.)

Suggested response(s):

“No, that has nothing to do with #GamerGate activism. Stop derailing with off-topic associations.”

4. Baiting for Screenshots

These are people who ask a seemingly sincere question, then pathologically respond with “Stop harassing me!” once you engage in dialogue.

Example(s):

John: “I don't think #GamerGate activism is such a great thing, what do others think?”

Alex: “Well, here's a video that give a brief synopsis.”

John: “Stop harassing me, get out of my mentions!”

Suggested response(s):

Say you're sorry they feel that way and disengage, or just disengage.

Sadly, there is always an idiot that keeps dragging on with it, despite the fact that they are talking to an actor. Advise that person (without the bait caster in the mentions) that this is just a troll who needs to be ignored.

A more villainous version of this are the suicidal ones, which, from my experience, tend to show a history of this type of behaviour, usually followed with discussion on how to give them money. These must to be treated more delicately.

Example(s):

“I am going to kill myself because of #GamerGate activism, do not respond to me.”

Only response:

Don't respond to them.

Simply flag this post (and all similar posts) on this user's account (CTRL+F is your friend). Report it under Abusive → Self Harm.

Do not retweet or share suicide-threatening posts publicly.

Remember, this is bait and it will attract trolls. The best method to get more people to flag these posts is via direct messaging only.

5. Fallacy of Composition

Probably the oldest I have seen running. It is simply meant to fragment #GamerGate activists by stating that there are objectively immoral components under the #GamerGate hashtag that people should distance themselves from. This tactic insinuates that the actions of a few represent the whole. Sometimes, it is even ironically reinforced with the admission that it is a fallacy, but suggested nonetheless.

Example(s):

“You have to distance yourself from #GamerGate activism because there are some bad people in it.”

Suggested response(s):

State that, even if the claims about the individuals were true, the argument is a fallacy of composition, and therefore false. Declare that you practice #GamerGate activism for ethical reasons, just like many others, which was the intention since the hashtag's conception.

An even more sinister version I have been seeing is where the actor targets people with autism or people with some other form of mental disorder. It is meant to demoralize and fragment #GamerGate activists by claiming that #GamerGate is unintelligible, and by isolating said people. It also completely dismisses the biased coverage that #GamerGate has gotten in the media.

Example(s):

“People are not understanding #GamerGate activism because it contains people with autism.”

Suggested response(s):

Again, state how that's a fallacy of composition even if it were true, and also blatantly ableist. Show that there is a clear message with examples, and that #GamerGate activism is being intentionally misrepresented.

Further reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition

There are a lot of manipulative people out there, many of whom are very experienced. Your best bet is to keep spreading positivity and verified information. Stick to people who are willing to discuss in a constructive manner. Also, do not view all critics as hopeless trolls/shills, some of them are just misinformed people, use your best judgment.

Try not to let people get to you emotionally. Like I always say, “Avoid applying more emotion to someone else's words than the person that is saying them.”, because if you do, you are vulnerable to antisocial manipulation.

Suggested reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_techniques

If you feel more adventurous (This requires a lot of self discipline.):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterintelligence