Gamergate as a hate-group

[CaptainPedge]

What is the source of that image? If it has been posted somewhere, it can be traced. it might be difficult, but it can be done.

[anon50609448]

@Thebarton_Gamer

So, to me, it really does look like many of the GGers receiving harassment are probably victims of “friendly” fire. Their peers see a woman talking about GG - and they must harass!

I’m sure this is happening. Imagine a women posted a blog post that was called something like “What you need to know about gamergate” that was in support of gamergate. Even ignoring the possibility that there are people who would attack her for being a woman who was infiltrating their cause, how much abuse would she take by people who just plain didn’t read the content?

But we also know that there are people on the side of gamergate who use multiple accounts with apparently conflicting points of view to create a narrative. That makes it really hard to sort out what’s legitimate from that side at all - a problem that doesn’t arise when a known person is really leaving their home to avoid physical danger. One thing I’ve heard more than once is that someone (or more than one person) called the boss of a gater (or more than one gater) to tell them that said gater was a rapist. That sounds completely credible and awful to me and if a person who did such a thing is found then they should be prosecuted (I’m pretty sure that’s criminal most places in one way or another). Of course, I’d really like it if police took online harassment seriously*, maybe they could spend some time finding people making threats as well.

* Even though I’m usually pretty down on police, I completely understand why they don’t devote many resources to these kinds of things. They know they are in over their heads. I wish that wasn’t the case and there were resources available to find and stop this behaviour, but I don’t think local police departments are equipped to deal with it, so they don’t prioritize it. It’s a sad state of affairs.

But, yeah, terrorism.

Look, Al-Qaeda has some really good ideas when you look past the flying planes into buildings stuff.

[dacree]

[FoolishOwl]

@thadboyd

The way he sees it, Gamergate really IS about corruption and collusion in the gaming press and this is a valid issue that needs to be addressed – and from his perspective, it’s unfortunate that the whole thing came to light because a vengeful ex-boyfriend was spreading lies about his ex-girlfriend’s personal life.

The way I’d explain it to your co-worker is that Gamergate, from the beginning, was an effort to hijack a legitimate issue in order to push a misogynist and bigoted agenda, and that some of the targets have been fighting corruption in gaming journalism long before this happened. There’s no reclaiming #Gamergate, and if you want to focus on the corruption while not condoning misogyny, it would be better to cut all ties with #Gamergate and start fresh.

[anon50609448]

Things authorities can do:

• Make sure no one is wearing a backpack

Things authorities can’t do:

• Make sure no one is carrying a gun

Hooray for sense!

[gwwar]

This wouldn’t be the first time someone blamed feminists for ruining his life:

École Polytechnique massacre

Here’s something to cheer you up after reading:

(Bot account is https://twitter.com/ElizaRBarr)

[OtherMichael]

@dacree

While I am quite sure you have followed the minutia of this story from the beginning, most of us out in the big wide world have not.

I’m going to let this stand on its own, but remind you to to actually look up what ad hominem really means.

@dacree

the stories about Ferguson, Dallas ebola, North Korean military takeovers (they have the bomb), and all of the other terrible things out there are on our mind as well.

Anybody who posits that US Ebola is a more important threat than, say – death by cow – has a poor grasp on statistics. (This is not an ad hominem attack, as you really didn’t say that those issues were more important and worthy of our time, I’m sure. Just that they are are more important and worthy of your time, and you are commenting in here only… because… uh… kindness of your heart?)

@dacree

Because if attacking people is all you have, then you can fuck right the hell off.

Shoe Fits, @dacree. Drink your own concern-trolley medicine.

[PatRx2]

I don’t think very many people who resort to violence or threats of violence are all that tightly hinged, do you? Most, however, are considered competent enough to stand trial. There has been a mort of really nasty threats tendered to people like Sarkeesian, Quinn et al recently, and I suspect that most, very likely all, of the authors of those threats have been, for all legal purposes, mentally competent. It’s time to throw the book at them.

[anon73430903]

@PatRx2

It’s time to throw the book at them.

Do we know of anyone involved in the threats who lives in the UK? I hate to create a martyr for their cause but ignoring them is an even worse option.

[PatRx2]

I don’t know anyone but their sock puppets at the moment (and there is an incredible load of those - I have yet to see a discussion, including this one, where one doesn’t show up). I have very little doubt that they could be tracked down, but that would take a little work on the cops’ part, and they seem to be in over their heads, as @anon50609448 stated.

[dacree]

@PatRx2

I suspect that most, very likely all, of the authors of those threats have been, for all legal purposes, mentally competent. It’s time to throw the book at them.

You may very well be right. I’m not well versed in the mental health discipline. I would like them held for a few days for observation in any case. Of course, being legally competent doesn’t preclude mental illness. From what I’ve read, sociopaths can be very sharp and often pass as a normal person without problems. I just fall on the side of healthcare before incarceration but I’m perfectly happy to lock them up in jail if found competent enough.

The local cops might be in over their head but there is no reason for the FBI to be sitting on their hands for this.

[PatRx2]

@dacree

I just fall on the side of healthcare before incarceration but I’m perfectly happy to lock them up in jail if found competent enough.

I’m Canadian - I don’t like to incarcerate to any great extent at all by US standards, but this has got serious enough that people should be held to account.

@dacree

The local cops might be in over their head but there is no reason for the FBI to be sitting on their hands for this.

On that we agree. The problem there is probably straight inertia.

[anon50609448]

@PatRx2

I don’t think very many people who resort to violence or threats of violence are all that tightly hinged, do you?

Well, there is a big difference between colloquial crazy, actual mental health issues, and legally responsible for your actions. It may be “crazy” to issue threats like this, but it’s unfortunately well within the range of how people without any kind of mental illness act. Mental illness isn’t actually associated with higher likelihood of being violent.

As for legally responsible, you pretty much have to be completely disconnected from reality when you commit the crime to avoid that. I don’t mean doing things that don’t make sense to the rest of us disconnect-from-reality, I mean don’t know who you are/where you are/what you are doing/what the consequences of what you are doing are disconnected-from reality. If the person was sleep walking when they wrote that then that’s one thing, but I think it’s pretty hard to compose a letter like that that explains your targets and your reasoning without being legally responsible for doing so.

[Jehovazilla]

Throwing them “under the bus” how? Didn’t I mention reporting threats to the proper channels? The police, and the people who administer whatever service used, namely. Telling me that you got a threat is rather pointless, since I can’t do anything about it.

Did you also miss my “I am speculating” caveat on my post? I don’t know the solution to online hateful idiots. I never claimed to. I was just pondering if all of this nonstop coverage was helping or legitimizing them.

[PatRx2]

Yup. C’est ça.

[WalterPlinge]

I’m actually curious about what the right way to approach this should be; I don’t just mean that specific threat, but rather all of “Gamergate”. How does one dismantle/destroy a group that uses the safety of (online) anonymity to avoid taking responsibility for its disgraceful behavior?

[PatRx2]

Proper and thorough investigation with ensuing arrests, Walter. These people aren’t rocket scientists: if they were, they’d never have left such a smoking gun as the chat logs that showed just how much of a manufactured social movement this was. Even if the threats were VPN’ed and “torrified”, it’s still a safe enough bet that the culprits opened their yaps elsewhere.

[popobawa4u]

@Nonentity

just who do you think holds the responsibility for taking action to clear up the issue?

That was precisely my point - there isn’t anybody obliged to do so. It’s great that you feel entitled to judge other people, but that doesn’t compel others to make their motives or actions easier for you to understand.

[WalterPlinge]

As cathartic as it would be for these people to get their comeuppance, I’m not sure how much that would do to stop the entire “movement”. I mean, periodically somebody goes after specific members of Anonymous, but it still has an online presence.

[popobawa4u]

@Kris_Asard

Really now? If this is some weird attempt at “concern driving trollies”, I think you´re doing it wrong. You should look into “victim blaming” instead, that might be more of your forte.

How am I blaming anyone for anything? Or are you just lashing out at me because you imagine that I am unsympathetic?

How? Because, like I was saying, both pro-terror AND anti-terror groups encourage people to be afraid. Terror is not a defense or safety problem, it is an emotional problem. If somebody’s goal is to change what you do by using fear, and you react with fear, then you perpetuate the problem. You can choose to not be made the victim. Because each of us has direct control of our own responses to social stimuli, while not having direct control over the actions or words of other people. Even if we can’t “make them stop”, we have control over what we do about it. If you don’t put your buttons out there for people to push, then they’ll need to try something else.

In biological terms, both the perpetrators and victims have succumb to amygdala activation. In one group this means “fight”, in the other it means “flight”. But both groups are suffering from the same problem, and meanwhile unable to think clearly about it.