http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Gamergate_claims&diff=1587662&oldid=1587661

https://archive.is/X75r5

Continued from:

https://medium.com/@infiltrator7n/a-point-by-point-analysis-of-rational-wiki-s-list-of-gamergate-s-claims-part-1-2249404f6a97#.ml8j6pz5u

Gamergate isn’t misogynistic

Claim “[The first sentence of Gamergate on RationalWiki] implies everyone who is, was, or ever will be a member of pro-GamerGate hates women and opposes diversity in gaming culture. As someone who recently joined the pro-GG side, I have no hatred of women and believe women deserve the same dignity and respect men are entitled to, and that men and women in the gaming industry should be judged on the merits of the abilities and contributions to that industry, not their genders, though I also believe gender should never be used by either an excuse, moral absolvation, or justification for any act that diminishes their integrity.”

……Wow RationalWiki you actually sourced a quote I made on your own website, props for getting it right.

Rebuttal Congratulations on being the True Scotsman. We’re sorry to inform you that when a so-called “movement” is started from a bunch of false allegations regarding one woman’s sexual life, it paints the group as a whole as misogynistic. As Gamergate progressed, the misogynistic descriptor was only enforced as more and more women were disproportionately attacked verbally, emotionally, and financially for not agreeing with Gamergate. Even when Gamergaters managed to convince a few journalists to try to understand what Gamergate was actually about, those journalists only saw intense vitriol against the very women that Gamergate constantly claims they do not actually care about.

So you quote an article by Jesse Singal to make your point I’m full of shit, eh? I’ve spoken with him personally via email, even thanking him for getting right something Milo got wrong at one point, but still, you’re going to use one article alone to dismiss everything I say?

This is a case when adding a secondary source with an impartial viewpoint to confirm things would make your argument airtight, or at least hard to criticize.

So Gamergate simultaneously does not care about Zoë Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian, Brianna Wu, et al., but still came up with slang terms to bring them up repeatedly but not by name? Just admit it already. Gamergate also has been, from day 1, a harassment campaign that solely exists because Zoë Quinn is a woman. The claims of anything other than that were from the start a smokescreen for the group’s true intentions.

And your second source is a storify link, which strings together a bunch of tweets to form a story. No secondary sources confirm it from a third party perspective, you just plan to use this as gospel without secondary verification?

Also, most of cites are cherrypicked 4chan posts. Great evidence there, why not link to the actual content so the storify can be verified?

Again, I’d like to point out YOU USED A QUOTE BY ME AND TRIED TO MAKE IT SOUND LIKE IT PROVED YOUR CASE WHEN I AM ONE PERSON AND I OBVIOUSLY DO NOT REPRESENT EVERY VOICE IN GAMERGATE.

Even Wikipedia doesn’t try to do something this foolish.

“Literally Who?”

Claim Gamergate is not about Zoë Quinn. Rebuttal So why do Gamergaters like to meet up at a restaurant that was used by Eron Gjoni to call Zoë Quinn a slut? Why has Eron Gjoni been given tens of thousands of dollars to fight Zoë Quinn in court? If Gamergaters truly want people believe that they don’t care about Quinn, Gamergaters should probably stop doing shit just to spite her.

Again, citation of biased sources, Margaret Pless has a clear bias against Gjoni, using third party verification here would have been advisable.

Second, not everyone in GamerGate supports Eron, but if we go by these biased sources alone, RW tries to claim we all do. Even I’m not totally sure on all of Gjoni’s motives and am pretty sure he isn’t a total saint in all this, so thanks RW for making us all sound like we support him as a body.

Oh yeah, and great correlation equals causation fallacy: Because SOME GGers met at a restaurant and agreed with him and SOME (I was not one of them) gave him legal funding, we’re all guilty?

BULL. SHIT.

Again, even Wikipedia isn’t this dishonest.

Harassers don’t represent Gamergate

“Gamergate doesn’t harass people. Just check the #Gamergate hashtag. No harassment there.”

Fallacy right there: Twitter hashtags can be reused and created by any user, and any hashtag can be reused for good or ill. Anyone with basic knowledge of how hashtags works knows this, so this segment is blatant bullshit and poses a false lead.

Claim “If only the harassers are representative of Gamergate, then […] Randi Harper and others represent all of anti-Gamergate,” RationalWiki pro-Gamergate editor Naqoyqatsi

Rebuttal The aim here is to absolve the whole of Gamergate from blame for harassment, often deflecting blame on “third-party trolls”. The problem is that Gamergate was founded on a case of harassment,

If referring to the Zoe Post, this statement assumes Eron Gjoni was an evil asshole from the start and NOTHING he had to say was valid, which seems to be the line of thought RW is using here.

and has since continued with a heavily documented track record of harassment. Gamergate began because of Eron Gjoni’s desire to ruin Zoë Quinn’s life for leaving him, even going so far to desire that she should end up so emotionally broken that she needs therapy.

Read Pless’ work, needs secondary verification due Pless’ obvious bias against Gjoni.

Gamergate supporters equate “Gamergate as a whole is responsible for harassment” with “all members of Gamergate harass”, arguing that because the latter is false, the former is too. Of course it’s improbable that all 10 thousand or so people in Gamergate on Twitter have harassed people, but that doesn’t mean you can therefore say, “that person who harassed you isn’t a Gamergater” when someone who has specifically gone after another person for Gamergate-related reasons is called out on it.

So RW isn’t claiming GGers are a monolithic group of evil assholes bent on harassment, except when they do.

Great job with the BS argument here. You just admitted it’s improbable, but assume it’s true anyway.

Name dropping individuals like Randi Harper or Phil Fish is several fallacies: nutpicking, false equivalence, tu quoque and two wrongs don’t make a right. Neither Harper or Fish have done anything at all like the harassment caused by Gamergate, if they had people would have rightly disclaimed them, and even then it still wouldn’t justify Gamergate’s harassment, let alone somehow cancel it out. Also, Randi Harper’s public feud with Vivek Wadhwa, a man despised by women and feminists in the tech industry, which predates Gamergate and was only highlighted by Stop the GoodReads Bullies, doesn’t mean anything. Stop the GoodReads Bullies is essentially the Gamergate for book reviews (doxxing people who leave negative reviews and directing readers to harass them), and instead of Milo Yiannopoulos they have Anne Rice. Despite all this, when statistical studies come out that show how disproportionately responsible Gamergate is for harassment, all hell breaks loose in haphazard attempts to spin the results in Gamergate’s favor.

Cite the studies, RW. Also, you used WP articles for your citations, not rational. Even Wikipedia does not source itself except when commenting on internal matters, and even then they try to secondary source themselves, so got any third party sources, or are we using even worse sourcing than Wikipedia’s own rules to make these claims hold water?

Newsweek

Claim Newsweek’s analysis of Gamergate tweets showed that there’s barely any harassment coming from Gamergate and most of the discussion is positive or neutral. Rebuttal Of about 250k Tweets analyzed by a company hired by Newsweek, 85–90% were neutral towards their subject, 0–5% were positive, and 5–10% were negative. The majority of posts (which come from both GG and some “anti-GG”) at first glance don’t appear to be doxxing, harassing, etc. Gamergate claims this analysis proves that most Gamergate activity and discussion on Twitter and elsewhere is also “neutral”. Gamergaters used the “neutral” description to falsely claim 90–95% of Twitter responses were “neutral or positive” in terms of sentiment, when instead they were “the software can’t determine from the words used if user sentiment was positive or negative”. For example:

“I like dogs.” (Positive)

“Dogs are mammals.” (Neutral)

“I hate dogs.” (Negative)

The Newsweek analysis in question is flawed and automated — Mike Williams, the Brandwatch data scientist who generated the data for Newsweek, confirmed that the “neutral” tweets should have been labeled “undetermined” instead. A hand-sorted analysis of a (admittedly smaller) selection of those same tweets found it was closer to 75% negative (25% positive, 10% neutral/undetermined) — and 95% of all tweets took a clear stance for or against Gamergate. Why the difference? Many Gamergate supporters use terms that will thwart an automated analysis (“narrative” isn’t usually negative, but Gamergaters use it in a negative way), and automated analysis ignores details that a human might find threatening, such as images (which may contain sensitive data/libel/nudes), dogpiling certain users, and “polite” trolling, also known as “sealioning”. Also, this analysis is only based on Twitter mentions and avoids analyzing Gamergate on other sites, such as 8chan, where moderation is lax, to say the least (and the content is far more offensive/hateful/negative than Twitter itself will allow).

Hoo boy, RationalWiki cites a tweet, a Newsweek article, and a Medium article to make a case based on statistical data, and while the articles are decent enough, both admit they used limited sample sizes from a specific point in time. GamerGate is STILL ONGOING, and if you want to make a statistical argument, you need updated sources added to prove a consistent pattern.

As for the tweet, here it’s is:

RationalWiki, you should be ashamed, this is a clear case of “appeal from authority” argument, in which “I do X, so take y as gospel”.

WAM!

Claim The study performed by Women, Action, and the Media (WAM!) proves that only 0.66% of Gamergaters are responsible for harassment.

Rebuttal WAM!’s study was simple: for two weeks in November 2014, Twitter users who sent in abuse reports to staff could optionally send their report off to WAM! to vet it first and then escalate it if necessary.

RW admits up front their rebuttal is based on limited data with known flaws.

WAM! recorded the nature of the report and whether or not Twitter acted on it. Their analyzed data was released the following May, showing a disparity on Twitter’s part in responding to particular types of harassment. WAM! also acknowledged that Gamergate was happening during their study (it hasn’t really ended yet) and compared their data with Randi Harper’s Good Game Auto Blocker (GGAB) tool, and found that 12% of the reports they handled were on accounts blocked by GGAB. As for the “0.66%” claim, it is of course a vast underestimation, only really proving Gamergaters don’t understand statistics. Sure, according to their calculations, 12% of WAM!’s data is 65 accounts, and those 65 accounts account for 0.66% of the GGAB account list. However, WAM! only analyzed a small fraction of Twitter harassment: the survey only lasted two weeks, and contributing was optional. Claiming that the 65 accounts represent the full extent of Gamergate harassment is incredibly disingenuous.

Again, they admit their own argument is based on limited data with known flaws and yet are trying to claim GamerGaters make bad arguments while trying to prove their point?

At the time of the analysis, Twitter had ~288 million monthly users, yet somehow 12% of the reported harassment came from the 9844 accounts on the GGAB blocklist. Yes, it’s true that the study was biased against Gamergate, thanks to selection bias and false positives (which are only there to protect their secret blends of herbs and spices).

Yet more admittance this data would be crap as evidence, with some attempt at humor at the end.

Once again, Gamergaters make up about .004% of the population on Twitter, and they accounted for 12% of the abuse reports that WAM! was sent. There’s no knowing how many support tickets were not part of the trial period, but even with a very generous fudge factor it’s clear that Gamergate has an unusually large number of harassers in its ranks considering they make up more than 1 out of 10 reports in a voluntary study.

A study done on limited data with known flaws produced flawed data, which RW admits numerous times, yet they still try to use this flawed information to make an open-shut case?

*FACEPALM*

Zoë Quinn and Phil Fish doxxed themselves

Claim Zoë Quinn and Phil Fish being doxxed was a false flag operation. Rebuttal If Quinn and Fish were going to perform a false flag operation, they certainly could have done it better. Why would Quinn want people to find her old nude photos, when she could easily have gotten attention without any such release? Why would Fish want to destroy his own business and force his departure from gaming, just for publicity? Gamergate has yet to answer, other than asserting that Phil Fish and Alex Lifschitz are the same person.

The source link only tells events as reported, but does not make any assertions one way or the other, but as seen above, RW is not shy in making assertions themselves not supported by the source they used, and which they do not cite themselves.

What Gamergate decides to use as evidence is how no one could have possibly been able to post damaging things to Quinn’s personal Tumblr as she claims happened despite her security precautions. This ignores how Tumblr has a post-by-email feature

So they link to Tumblr’s feature, with no secondary source to back up the nuts and bolts of their statement.

and the randomized email address set to her account was more than likely uncovered in the hack to her contacts list.

Again, a Tumblr citation, real quality sourcing here RW. A secondary source would do a better job of vetting something from Tumblr, of all places.

Anita Sarkeesian sent death threats to herself

Claim “The death threats against Anita Sarkeesian are cleary fake, and most likely made by Anita herself,” — Return of Kings Rebuttal This argument is based solely on several “odd” things in a screencapture Sarkeesian took of the doxxing.

Keep in mind all the above cited has no sources used below to prove or disprove the claims, merely unsourced rebuttals trying to disprove things.

“Screencap [was] taken only 12 seconds after last post.”

The “12 second” tweet was the last in a line of 10 tweets, of which the first had been three minutes prior. If someone were to have clicked through to the account from one of those tweets, then that 12s tweet would still be there, and a new tweet might have been posted right after the image was taken. It should also be noted that Twitter timestamps aren’t up-to-date by the second, but update every few minutes. Further, time is utterly meaningless due to Twitter allowing a live search.

So, there is a margin of error that muddies the water.

“Anita [was] logged out.”

Consider the simplicity of non-false-flag yet logged-out scenarios: Sarkeesian could have (a) forgotten to log in (totally never happens), (b) not wanted to be logged in while browsing mean tweets (yes, this is a common thing people do), (c) logged out before realizing that someone was being a shithead, or (d) had a lengthy block list and would rather log out than unblock people to see the tweets.

So, all assumption on what Sarkeesian theoretically did, but does not prove anything one way or the other.

“[The tweets were found] without performing any search.”

There’s a simple explanation for this. Open up Twitter in Firefox. Do a search. Middle-mouse click or ctrl+click on a date, as if you were opening several tweets in succession. Look at the search bar.

Twitter’s search metrics do tend to work this way, but sourcing the nuts and bolts with a technical source explaining this further would have been recommended.

“Perfect capitalization, spelling, and punctuation.”

… Because nobody can do that.

I’ll give RW this one, it’s really nitpicky.

“Neck biting and blood drinking is a feminine vampire fantasy. [….] In Anita’s fantasy, her stalkers are men overpowered by her beauty, who want to dispose of her beta provider and fulfill her darkest rape fantasies.”

There’s no possible way that somebody could send sexually threatening tweets to another person, so obviously it’s Sarkeesian sexually harassing herself with her fantasies.

And we conclude with no proof one way or the other, just blind “well, it must be bullshit” with no citations used to prove or disprove things.

I’d cut this entire section as unsourced bullshit.

Gamergate has support from game developers

Claim All of these game developers are pro-GG! We’re defending what they want to do! Rebuttal Yeah. There are a handful of game developers who seem to have chosen Gamergate as something they want to rally behind. Let’s look into them.

Slade “RogueStar” Villena: Developer of FleetCOMM, a video game that despite multiple attempts at KickStarter, has yet to get off the ground. He has it in for the Independent Games Festival because in 2012 FleetCOMM, then known as Vigrior, lost to Phil Fish’s Fez. Villena was also one of the earliest proponents of Gamergate when it was still just the #BurgersAndFries IRC channel, expressing a desire to falsely report Anita Sarkeesian to the IRS and saying, “NONE of this would have happened if [Zoë Quinn] kept her vagina shut”.

So they source r/GamerGhazi and a storify link, one of which has an obvious bias and the other is built on making a story with cherrypicked citations of tweets and screencaps. Outstanding evidence, RW, got any third party stuff that proves things, or are we using cherrypicking as gospel truth?

James “Grimachu” Desborough: A tabletop game designer. His creations include Nymphology, a Dungeons & Dragons supplement that feature sexual violence as the punchline to a joke; The Slayer’s Guide to Female Gamers, a book that is allegedly a joke but is full of the usual “female gamers are fake” sentiment; Hentacle, a card game about tentacle rape; Privilege Check, a card game to mock “social justice warriors”; and an article titled “In Defence of Rape” concerning the use of rape in fiction. He also crowdfunded a Gorean RPG, which was supported by Alexander Macris of The Escapist, who also interviewed Desborough and never bothered to disclose this fact.

So because you don’t like what he does, you assume his position is shit. The other half cites a Tumblr link again? Got actual news sources, or is Tumblr the go to for verification of EVERYTHING?

I mean, come on, IT’S TUMBLR, RW, you can modify your own posts and delete them at any time, not exactly very reliable source material.

Benjamin Daniel “Bendilin” Spurr: He made Beat Up Anita Sarkeesian. Enough said.

Alright, it’s in shitty taste, granted. Does it make his support invalid? By RW’s apparent stance, yes.

Ryan Koons: Developer of HuniePop, a pornographic Candy Crush clone with a visual novel aspect that he has provided an unofficial patch to the game to unlock nudity, which was barred from its official release on Steam. After Koons released the game and gave out free review copies to various websites that requested them, he was not pleased with one of them that called the game out for the pandering pornographic garbage it is. Gamergaters like to claim that the majority of the developers on the game were women, when in fact Koons just listed all of the voice actresses and female voice he hired as members of the development team. A video exists of Koons using pick-up artist techniques on unsuspecting women in public, dubbing it “Field Research” for his game.

As someone who PLAYED HuniePop, holy shit they got this wrong. It has a censored Steam release and an uncensored version, which added some naked “after sex” pictures to the ecchi level artwork present in the censored version, the porn is a small sample of the game and can be left out entirely without harming it’s content in any meaningful way. Also, a twisted retelling of Koons own words and a r/GamerGhazi link do not prove anything RW.

I mean, damn, r/GamerGhazi is on the same level of Tumblr as trustworthiness and has a flagrant anti-GG bias. Seriously, are you guys incapable of making arguments that DON’T rely on biased sources without neutral verification?

Mark Kern: One of the team members on World of Warcraft and several other games. Kern was never actually involved with hands on development of the game despite what he wants you to believe. He was “Team Lead” which amounts to little more than a producer. He is also responsible for the failure of Red 5’s FireFall, where he put millions of dollars into promoting the game while it wasn’t even in an alpha release, including buying a bus and refurbishing it for US$3 million to tour gaming conventions. He was also revealed to be verbally abusive to his staff members at Red 5, as revealed by a former employee on Reddit. The employee went into detail of how Kern would yell at the developers and there had to be a “safe word” distributed throughout the office to get him to stop. In the end, Red 5 ultimately voted him out of the company he co-founded. Kern seems to only be in Gamergate to get back at the games press who panned FireFall.

Disclosure: I am friends with Kern, so I have an obvious bias, be warned in advance.

Anyway, the source used for this is decent enough, but needs independent verification, especially given it’s mostly citation of the words of a bitter ex-employee.

He first got on Gamergate’s radar after accusing Kotaku and Polygon for being to blame for the then recently aired Gamergate-themed episod of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, for which he was rightfully criticized.

The source used to back this claim up are two blog posts from the same blog with a clear bias. No third party verification is ever used.

He in turn demanded the right to response on these websites, despite owning his own blog (without a comments section) and the fact that Gamasutra allows developers to post their own blogs. Also he seems to think all game developers actually support Gamergate but don’t say so publically because they’re afraid of being pussywhipped by their wives.

While they do get some facts right, such as Kern’s tweets, all of these sources are biased against GamerGate and none have neutral verification.

Denis Dyack: Former president of the Silicon Knights studio, with several popular games under his belt like Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain, Eternal Darkness: Sanity’s Requiem, and the GameCube port of Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes. However, the studio’s follow up Too Human was in development for 10 years and upon release was panned by critics. And then they took on X-Men: Destiny on top of Too Human, and it too bombed. Kotaku ran a massive exposé on the company from former employees who all pinned the blame on X-Men’s failure on Dyack’s ineffectual leadership, which apparently came from treating the company like a high school P.E. class and demanding ridiculous requests for miniscule game features (demanding a truck in the background be recolored red) when the whole of the game was unplayable. Silicon Knights eventually went under because Dyack had led a team to illegally use Epic Games’s Unreal Engine without a proper license, requiring the company to pay US$9.2 million in damages. His attempt to use Kickstarter to fund a new game with a new studio (with all of Silicon Knights’ assets) also failed.

The sources do tend to bear out the claims here.

Derek Smart: President and lead developer of indie studio 3000AD, Inc.. Their flagship game Battlecruiser 3000AD is described on Wikipedia as being, “noted for its long, troubled development history,” and having, “generated one of the longest and largest flame wars in the history of Usenet,” before it was even released. The follow-up game Universal Combat was also deep in development hell, and Smart sued the publisher DreamCatcher for discounting the price, which DreamCatcher felt was suitable due to the game’s mediocre quality. During all this time, Smart became known for his online combativeness in the face of criticism, with Computer Games Magazine remarking, “over time, his reputation as an online defender of his games and unabashed pistol-whipper of his enemies overshadows the games themselves.”

One source used here is a biased blog post, but the other sources do back up the claims.

Most recently, Smart has been attacking the ambitious Kickstarter project Star Citizen, deeming it as both a Ponzi scheme and vaporware for what he accuses are unattenable project goals and false advertising. In reality, this is part of a 30 year feud between Smart and Star Citizen’s creator Chris Roberts which stretches back to Roberts successfully releasing Wing Commander in 1990 and Smart threatening to sue him over copyright infringement over his planned release of Battlecruiser 3000AD to which Roberts said the legal threats were baseless as he had never heard of Smart or his project. Battlecruiser 3000AD would not be released for another 5 years (and it was broken as hell upon release), while Roberts and his team cranked out 3 sequels to Wing Commander. In the present day, Smart demanded that Roberts step down as CEO of his own development studio, a US$1M audit of the company (paid by Smart), a refund for every Kickstarter donor. Roberts’ team responded by refunding Smart’s initial $250 donation to the Kickstarter, accusing him of drumming up controversy to promote his own unreleased (presently in early access) video game. Since his current crusade against Roberts and Star Citizen began, Smart has been trying to pull Gamergate in as his personal army, but no woman is presently involved in the dispute so Gamergaters don’t give a shit. However, Smart did get picked by Michael Koretzky to serve as a “neutral” voice at the disaster SPJ-tangential AirPlay panel. After AirPlay, Smart got totally burned by RSI/CIG in a letter sent by their legal counsel, which revealed that they had proof Smart never even installed the demo game engine they released to Kickstarter donors to test the game and also included the statement, “The complete absence of any functioning or successful game having ever been released by [Derek Smart] in his 20+ year ‘career’ of game development further raises the question why he would consider himself qualified to cast any judgment on Star Citizen.” Smart is also believed to be behind a hitpiece published on The Escapist by (former) Gamergater Lizzy Finnegan which made several claims that Roberts sent a response to debunk 3 hours before the article went up, but was absent from the original posting. Evidence against Smart in this is that he is buddy-buddy with Finnegan on Twitter (to Gamergaters this is a cardinal sin for anyone “unethical” but this isn’t a problem here) and Smart has displayed knowledge of the alleged “anonymous sources” for the article being disgruntled former employees mere hours before the article was published. And a fun fact from this is that one of the pieces of evidence Finnegan claimed to have received to vet the anonymous sources was an employee ID badge, which Roberts and his legal counsel and cofounder Ortwin Freyermuth say they don’t use in their studios.

The sourcing is decent here, most to all of this checks out.

Adrian Chmielarz: Founder of People Can Fly, studio behind Painkiller and co-developer of Bulletstorm and Gears of War, and after selling his shares in People Can Fly founded The Astronauts. He’s written a lot of posts on Medium.com being a contrarian like “I Want to Murder Some Nazis and Save a Damsel in DDistress [sic]”, “The Boy Who Cried White Wolf: On Polygon’s The Witcher 3 Review”, and “The Truth About E3 2015 and Female Protagonists” James Murff very easily tore these apart.

Some guy publishes op-ed pieces on Medium, some guy posts rebuttals on his own blog. Okay.

Daniel Vávra: Co-founder of Warhorse Studios, and lead developer of Mafia: The City of Lost Heaven and Mafia II. He seems to be edgy on purpose, mocking requests for non-white characters in video games and has mocked Zoë Quinn and others for having received death threats. All in all, he just seems to be a reactionary who happens to make video games (although Mafia’s console releases were panned and Eurogamer panned Mafia II). Also his latest project Kingdom Come: Deliverance has been in development for 6 years.

So he’s apparently an asshole edgelord. The sources are his own words and tend to verify that.

Christian Allen: Game designer at Red Storm Entertainment, lead designer on Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon 2. Later released Takedown: Red Sabre after a Kickstarter campaign. Takedown was panned for being unfinished at release. He was one of the first developers to be interviewed by pro-Gamergate site Niche Gamer where he was asked several leading questions. Chmielarz and Dyack were interviewed after he was.

We need sources for the Nichegamer article in question and these “leading questions”.

Brad Wardell: CEO of Stardock. The studio’s most recent game Elemental: War of Magic received terrible reviews due to its poor implimentation at release. Wardell also (rightly for once) has a beef against Kotaku for publishing a story regarding a sexual harassment lawsuit against him that was dropped after he appeared to have filed a retaliatory countersuit. However, this doesn’t excuse the fact that he extended a job offer to a man who drew a comic strip where he drew himself getting oral sex from a caricature of Zoë Quinn for a review of her game.

Alright, guy did something in shitty taste, granted, but your only source is Quinn’s own Twitter? It make him look like an asshole, but we need a less biased secondary confirmation. Also, why can’t you cite the original comic in full to prove your point? Also, while in shitty taste, it’s legal parody under US law, so what does this prove aside from the fact he’s got an extremely tacky sense of humor?

Michael Lawson: A developer who previously worked on The Sims. He has not worked in the video games industry since 2011. His Twitter timeline is full of anti-Black Lives Matter and anti-Planned Parenthood propaganda.

I can’t just take your word here, RW, SOURCE YOUR CLAIMS! And boo-hoo, he goes against causes you appear to support, whoop de shit, what the hell does have to do with his ability to speak on the games industry, for which even you guys confirm he did work for in some capacity at one point.

Jason Truman: A developer who claims to have worked on a game in the Operation: Flashpoint series. A profile of his shows the last video game he worked on was in 2009. He supports UKIP.

Alright, decent citation, but what does his support of UKIP have to do with anything regarding his developer credentials?

There’s a lot of commonalities on this list. Games that got panned for being shit.

Fair, but they do have developer credentials, so they can speak on the gaming industry,

Games that never came out.

Point, but it’s confirmed they worked on them, so they still have some right to speak on their game dev experience.

People who lean right.

Why does this matter? Are you saying anyone who doesn’t lean left is full of shit?

People who are just straight up assholes.

Opponents of GamerGate aren’t angels in this department either.

People who haven’t properly worked in the video game industry for several years.

Though they still have experience they can speak about, do they not?

People who want to take revenge on someone else.

One of your own cited sources is the words of a bitter ex-employee, RW. Pot and kettle.

What a lovely group to all fly the Gamergate banner.

Again, the opponents of GG aren’t angels either.

Meanwhile Gamergaters all go apeshit over extremely minor animation changes in the fighting game Skullgirls to remove some overt panty shots and how major studio Capcom changed how the camera acts in Street Fighter V with regards to two female characters that removes overt sexualization while the game is still in beta.

Good source, but it has been confirmed those cases of censorship will be in the final products now, mind adding updates to source this?

It’s not censorship if a video game’s creators decide to change something on their own, particularly in an unfinished product like a beta version. It wouldn’t be censorship if a shirt color is changed, but the second a character’s asscrack changes from being dead center on the screen to slightly off to one side then suddenly “the SJWs have gone too far” despite not being involved at all.

This is an embarrassing argument that ignores official confirmation (at least on Street Fighter V’s side of things) they self-censored due to perceived public reaction, so it’s still censorship, just self-imposed. Second, bad argument, they censored potential sexual imagery, as confirmed by official sources, and they did it in response to those who complained about said sexual imagery, and the “SJWs” are the one who complained. This is confirmable through official sources, none of which RW cites at all.