This article is going to focus on the recent micro-controversy-gone-nuclear concerning Techraptor and why I feel the aforementioned term is an apt descriptor for the event. I will also focus on why the criticism that resulted from the outrage was helpful for no one.

Before I go into this issue, three links are necessary for context and fairness to all parties involved: JKelly’s Criticism of Techraptor, Techraptor’s Official Response, and The Livestream that Settled the Event For Me.

Note: Going forward I speak using the hashtag as a collective to address criticisms without playing the call-out game on twitter anons. A hashtag does not have a single mind, I recognize this.

This event represents for me a serious problem I have had with many fellow #GamerGate supporters for a very long time: We, as a collective hashtag, are terrible at criticizing our own. Now before anyone goes for my throat claiming that #Gamergate always criticizes its own: When I say we are terrible at criticizing our own, I mean that we are actually too destructive in how we treat those few who actually are covering the hashtag. Whether that is result of a feeling of insecurity and mistrust towards all news, or a desire to overcompensate in order to counterbalance the disgusting corruption of the big players of the opposition, I do not know.

The biggest problem is simple and clear: the exaggeration and outrage present in #gamergate-on-#gamergate conflict is out of control. This last week I swear that I have needed a customized version of Godwin’s Law where instead of Nazi or Hitler comparisons we have comparisons to the GameJournoPros.

JKelly’s original article was titled “Seeds of Impropriety,” which to me seems like a flourish of sensationalism. JKelly, thankfully, addresses this in the stream I linked above, stating that it was not his intention to overstate the conflict of interest accusations. But with a title like that, how could that not happen? The accusation starts before the piece even begins. I do not believe that Jkelly is to be blamed for other people’s reactions after his piece by any means. He is responsible for his own mistakes: sensationalist title, accusatory article, factual mistakes. And, likewise, individual users in the tag are responsible for their own actions which is where the brunt of my frustration lies.

The tag really went apeshit with this article. Repeatedly, on twitter, KiA, 8chan, and beyond I saw people saying things like “we are becoming what we hate” and “they are circling the wagons just like GJP did.”

No. Not even close.

GJP and the websites associated with it have run a months-long campaign to push an agenda that involved deliberate, knowing massage of numbers, misrepresentation of statistics and arguments, and outright fabrication. They have communicated for months at the least on a secret mailing list which was obvious collusion and contained bullying and pressuring of other writers and professionals. They have employed circular sourcing, dirty smear tactics, anti-consumer advertising policies, lax ethics policies, and yellow journalistic principles for years to churn a profit at the expense of the gaming public. They have taken money for scores. They have padded scores for clicks. When they “circled the wagons” it was anticompetitive – multiple magazines owned by different companies all defending each other conveniently.

At the very worst, Techraptor was, four months ago, guilty of having a bias among their writer base towards #Gamergate. Bias is not completely erasable. That is not to say that objectivity is a bad goal. It is a fantastic thing to strive for, but mistakes will occur and bias will exist. This is why disclosure is very important, as is criticism. However, burning and salting the earth beneath any site that makes a mistake is a tactic beyond foolish, and will ultimately end with a victory for actually malicious and corrupt sites like Gawker, Kotaku, Polygon, etc.

Take a look at the stream I linked above. Both Jkelly and Rutledge were palpably nervous, and ended up being very amicable to one another. This is because, in the end, there was no need whatsoever for the level of exaggeration, outrage, panic, and fighting that came after that piece. A simple discussion would have been fine. A stream, or a reach out by email.

If individuals within #gamergate hope to build a new, healthier industry, we have to build it on a different foundation than the last one flourished on. Cut out the outrage, learn to work together – publication and reader – to build trust, critique with the intent to improve, not with the intent to make a big show.

Last I checked, the vast majority of #gamergate stood against the outrage-baiting, journalistic slap-fights that make up modern games media. I urge every one using the tag to keep that in mind. Do not excuse mistakes, but approach them constructively. Please.

Thank you very much for reading.