

Recently there was a very vicious, very *frightening* attack on Brianna Wu. I watched it go down in real time.

I've seen her ripped into by third-party-trolls. For those who think she is not real, I'm not going to post doxx just to satisfy your curiosity. Rexia is a courageous woman who was willing to put her head on the chopping block to prove GG's innocence, and she'll probably get targeted for it again. I am actually humiliating my own self by disclosing this: that is how much it upsets me when people lie about others. If something is true, it's true no matter who says it or what their POV is. GG is not the people you are stating they are. This is not really up for dispute. The fact that people on here do not even view GGers as human beings is not my concern. You can hate all you want. But it doesn't give you the right to libel an entire group of people simply because you don't view us as people.Recently there was a very vicious, very *frightening* attack on Brianna Wu. I watched it go down in real time. https://twitter.com/TechyFolks/status/598487313690304512 I've seen her ripped into by third-party-trolls. For those who think she is not real, I'm not going to post doxx just to satisfy your curiosity. Rexia is a courageous woman who was willing to put her head on the chopping block to prove GG's innocence, and she'll probably get targeted for it again. I am actually humiliating my own self by disclosing this: that is how much it upsets me when people lie about others. If you can't support your position with some refs, regardless of whatever paranoid delusions you feel justify that decision, then there's no hope it's gonna make it into the article. Tielec01 (talk) 07:22, 15 May 2015 (UTC) The section you added Parogar has nothing to do with the article as a whole. It does not matter if you have a collage of screencaps of /baphomet/ posts out of context to prove your point. There's no purpose of adding your paragraphs to the article. There's no functional difference between Gamergate and /baphomet/, ayyteam, etc., because Gamergate has no structure to denounce their actions. And no, Parogar, there's no point in not attributing this shit to you when anyone can go in the history and see it for themselves.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 07:29, 15 May 2015 (UTC) I can, though. Just read the attack thread in real-time. If I link to it and they find out, I'm fucked. (please leave unsigned). There's a very real and very clear difference between the average GGer such as myself and between the people who keep going after Sarkeesian and Wu. And I don't want my life to be destroyed any more than you or anyone else does. I have already sustained too much abuse from mobs of people on the other side to want to invite something like this. That Tweet I linked contains a screenshot that shows them snickering at how GGers get the blame. What you need to understand is that they are **NOT** doing this because they hate women. They may or may not hate women. I don't know. They're doing this because it's funny to them. That's literally the *only* reason. What you need to understand is that they get 2 times the laughter out of it by blaming GG. The first set of laughter is from doxxing Miss Wu and then having her life thrown into chaos, and then the second set of "lulz" comes from tricking Brianna Wu into thinking we did it. Okay, for example. They snicker and talk about how they're going to call Brianna Wu (AND THEY DID CALL HER THERE IS A RECORDING!!) and saying, "GamerGate doxxed you and it's been posted on Reddit" (It has NEVER been posted on Reddit). Then Brianna Wu tweets out: "GamerGaters are calling me and bragging about how they posted about me on Reddit"). This creates confusion. Confusion = fun. This is how these things usually happen. Look, I can't say for sure that no one in GG has *ever* done bad things, but I can tell you right now that we sure aren't responsible for any of the things I've seen us blamed for. You won't believe that because it doesn't fit your narrative. You won't even consider the fact that I *MIGHT* actually be telling the truth, because to do so, like I said, would not fit your narrative. But the even sadder truth is that none of this shit is even hidden. Actually, just about everyone in GG "gives a fuck" about ethics in game journalism. We also give a fuck about SJWs and feminism. And some people claim we don't, but that's bullshit. We do. We absolutely do give a fuck about SJWs and feminism, especially since many times the most unethical journalists turn out to be SJWs. But that's not the point. The point is that you are blatantly mus-characterizing us to fit your narrative. Ethics in journalism plays a tremendous role. Parogar (talk) 07:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC) What ethics in what journalism? The goal of journalism in a capitalist society is to sell as much journalism as possible in whatever way possible so that it makes the most profit for the originating media company. So long as it's legal, it's legit. And a lot of this damn "ethics" mumbling I see is just "Dudebro was friends with dudebro two in grade school and this was not disclosed so ETHICAL CONFLICT.", which is just so much bullshit in and of itself even in basic Journalism Ethics 101 classes (not that those are worth much anyway). That's not the point, Parogar (also anyone can look at the page history and see it was you). Your contribution to the page had no purpose. It doesn't matter how many times one person can go "its not Gamergate it's /baphomet/". Gamergate is a hate mob formed when 4chan became Eron Gjoni's personal army and it's evolved into the tangled bullshit it is today. No one in Gamergate gives two fucks about "ethics in video game journalism". Gamergate is simply "how to get feminists and liberals out of making or writing about video games". There's no need to point out that some random thread on /baphomet/ has people laughing that they're doing shit to make Gamergate look worse than it already is.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 07:40, 15 May 2015 (UTC) Fine. I just don't want to start trouble with them. I'm telling you straight out that your article is bullshit. You accuse people of shit with no evidence whatsoever. Your logic is that we're the same because we don't stop them. Why don't YOU fucking stop them? It's not GG's responsibility to save Brianna Wu from people we've got fuck-all to do with. If you're so concerned about them, then you deal with them. Why should we make enemies with a group who does not represent us? Parogar (talk) 07:42, 15 May 2015 (UTC) The article accurately depicts Gamergate for what it is. There's plenty of evidence against Gamergate for everything they've done and it's sourced to various pieces of actual news media stating it. Just because you, the Gamergater, want to deny the events of the past 9 months as doing anything but making Gamergate look the fool, is not my problem.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 07:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC) You can't prove that GamerGate is responsible, but I can prove we're not. But you don't accept any evidence that doesn't go along with your narrative. Parogar (talk) 08:37, 15 May 2015 (UTC) Anyone who says they're GamerGate, is GamerGate. GG is leaderless, so you refuse to disavow them. Baphomet has claimed to be GG, and so they are. If you don't like that, organize, and start throwing out your problem people. --Castaigne (talk) 16:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC) Quote - "That Tweet I linked contains a screenshot that shows them snickering at how GGers get the blame." And it can't be used as a source. It's anonymous people, can't be linked to anyone real, no one identifiable. You can identify what Wu says on Twitter. You can identify what Randi says on Twitter. So, you can't even tell if this is real or bullshit. It's anonymous, so they could be GG or they could not be GG - but it's Baphomet, and Baphomet has identified itself as GG in the past, so it is reasonable to assume they are GG now. --Castaigne (talk) 16:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC) And for the last time, it's not fucking libel. Learn what libel actually IS. Christ. --Castaigne (talk) 16:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)