FBI is investigating #Gamergate


#1

[Permalink]


#2

Since very public death threats were made, wouldn’t it be more surprising if the FBI wasn’t investigating.


#3

Actually, it’s about ethics in law enforcement.


#4

Hadn’t we been told that the FBI was investigating some of the threats?


I… what?


#5

Right now some FBI intern is typing furiously to finish up before the weekend: “It’s about ethics in gaming journalism.”

“There,” he sighed, stepping out to the Flavia, “that should satisfy The President.”


#6

You realize gamergate has known about this for months and we filed the same requests in fact we welcome the FBI.

Jesus you people are slow.


#7

Oh, good, they’re identifying themselves now.


#8

Well, you know what they say – the early bird gets the feminist-free games.


#9

Yes, this is definitely great news for John McCain’s campaign.


#10

Well, of course you do! Nothing to see here, because actually it’s about ethics in game journalism.

(I can almost type that with a straight face… <snort> Wahahaha! No… No, I can’t.)


#11

Speaks to how you treat slow people, dunnit?

:raspberry:


#12

Remember, Gamergate’s not an organized group, so anyone making threats can’t be said to be speaking for Gamergate.

But, of course, Gamergate as a group speaks out against the threats and welcomes the FBI.


#13

But, of course.


#14

You need enemies, don’t you?


#15

No… No, stop! I’m going to piss myself laughing! That’s GG doublethink in a nutshell!


#16

Over on slashdot, the discussion (when I last saw it, anyway) seemed to be centered on arguments about how GG are the REAL victim and what the FBI is investigating is certainly all these women who have been faking all the death threats they’re getting for attention. The facts prove it! Here are links to five grubby neckbeard youtube videos that PROVE it.

Urgh.


#17


#18

The thing about an unorganized group is that it is nearly impossible for it credibly distance itself from any member of it, because there is no process for identifying what who is or isn’t representative of the group, especially when members are mostly anonymous.


#19

Thanks for reminding me why I stopped visiting Slashdot.


#20

I saw that too. The cognitive dissonance was staggering.