Gamergate, Feminisim, and Journalistic Ethics

[Gauthier]

And that's exactly what's happening. 99% of gamergate supporters are horrified by these threats. But the media narrative is that they support it and encourage it.

Then why are we not hearing any of this?

If gamergaters would come out in public and issue a public apology for certain of their members doing this perhaps people would have more faith in you.

Muslims are held over the grills when they don't apologize within 30 minutes of Al'Qaeda or ISIS doing something, but RapeHerGaters get leeway with rape and murder threats apparently.

[Beta Test]

And that's exactly what's happening. 99% of gamergate supporters are horrified by these threats. But the media narrative is that they support it and encourage it.

Then why are we not hearing any of this?

If gamergaters would come out in public and issue a public apology for certain of their members doing this perhaps people would have more faith in you.

Why should people who did nothing wrong apologise? They can't control idiots on the Internet who use their hashtag for their own nefarious purposes.

[Gravlen]

And this pertains to gaming journalistic corruption... how?

It pertains to one of Gamergate's biggest goals; getting advertisers to not involve themselves with the corrupt sites.

You seem to have misunderstood what "corruption" means.

[Beta Test]

It pertains to one of Gamergate's biggest goals; getting advertisers to not involve themselves with the corrupt sites.

You seem to have misunderstood what "corruption" means.

Yeah I know the difference between bullying and corruption.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Then why are we not hearing any of this?

If gamergaters would come out in public and issue a public apology for certain of their members doing this perhaps people would have more faith in you.

Why should people who did nothing wrong apologise? They can't control idiots on the Internet who use their hashtag for their own nefarious purposes.

Because even I have the decency to apologize if someone from my family does something wrong to someone else?

If you don't want to do that, that's fine, but be aware that as long as some of these members keep doing stupid shit, everyone in the gamergate community pays for it if they don't come out in public and issue a statement.

[Gravlen]

How is Gamergate a failure? It's still going strong after two months and it's making progress. It's done much better than #StopGamergate2014, whose popularity was largely inflated by ISIS bots.

Certain gamergaters issuing threats, or being put in the spotlight for allegations of threats, don't help their credibility; it rather damages them.

I'm sorry for being so skeptical, but I cannot take seriously people who issue threats to people they are against or put themselves in that sort of vulnerable position. If you want to be seen as people aiming towards something positive you have to weed out the negative and not defend it, it is perhaps the only way people are going to take you seriously.

I think this individual says it well:

That’s my view of GamerGate, and the more reasonable-sounding defenders of the movement have failed to convince me otherwise. No doubt I’ll get a lot of responses claiming that I just can’t see it from the perspective of a GamerGate supporter, to which I reply that most of those involved in GamerGate seem to have zero awareness of how it looks to anyone outside of it.

I was going to end by just encouraging the more reasonable supporters to think about what it is they’re supporting, rather than actively try to push people away from the GamerGate label (as in my experience that just causes people to dig their heels in). However, in light of recent news regarding full-blown terrorist threats made against Anita Sarkeesian, I honestly don’t care anymore. After such a threat, GamerGate officially died. I’m sorry if you’re involved in the movement for benign reasons, but if you’re a reasonable person and genuinely believe in journalistic ethics, you’ll divorce yourself from the movement. It’s too toxic now, even moreso than it ever was.

No excuses. No false equivalences. No ‘this doesn’t represent us’. No false flag accusations. People have now officially put GamerGate in the same bracket as domestic terrorists, and that is now how the movement will forever be perceived.

If decent people really want to get some positive change out of all this, they first need to let GamerGate die.

Why I can’t support GamerGate

[Beta Test]

Why should people who did nothing wrong apologise? They can't control idiots on the Internet who use their hashtag for their own nefarious purposes.

Because even I have the decency to apologize if someone from my family does something wrong to someone else?

If you don't want to do that, that's fine, but be aware that as long as some of these members keep doing stupid shit, everyone in the gamergate community pays for it if they don't come out in public and issue a statement.

Okay I see your what you're saying. Answer me this then. Who's going to be the one to apologise? Gamergate has no leader, it has no central organisation. Who's going to issue a statement when no one has the authority to do so?

[Gravlen]

You seem to have misunderstood what "corruption" means.

Yeah I know the difference between bullying and corruption.

The problem is, you don't know what "corruption" means.

Writing something you don't like isn't corruption.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Because even I have the decency to apologize if someone from my family does something wrong to someone else?

If you don't want to do that, that's fine, but be aware that as long as some of these members keep doing stupid shit, everyone in the gamergate community pays for it if they don't come out in public and issue a statement.

Okay I see your what you're saying. Answer me this then. Who's going to be the one to apologise? Gamergate has no leader, it has no central organisation. Who's going to issue a statement when no one has the authority to do so?

And my question to you is this: if you are supporting gamergate (presuming that you actually are, if not, this is a question to a hypothetical gamergater) why haven't you made an organization or put your name out in the public as an authority on the movement?

A disorganized movement is like a lynch mob, an organized movement can be more effective and more swift in how they deal with situations like this. The fact the gamergaters who are ethical haven't figured this one out speaks volumes about the movement.

[Beta Test]

Yeah I know the difference between bullying and corruption.

The problem is, you don't know what "corruption" means.

Writing something you don't like isn't corruption.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/17/Exposed-the-secret-mailing-list-of-the-gaming-journalism-elite

Here we go! Found the article I was looking for! Here's the corruption.

[Beta Test]

Okay I see your what you're saying. Answer me this then. Who's going to be the one to apologise? Gamergate has no leader, it has no central organisation. Who's going to issue a statement when no one has the authority to do so?

And my question to you is this: if you are supporting gamergate (presuming that you actually are, if not, this is a question to a hypothetical gamergater) why haven't you made an organization or put your name out in the public as an authority on the movement?

A disorganized movement is like a lynch mob, an organized movement can be more effective and more swift in how they deal with situations like this. The fact the gamergaters who are ethical haven't figured this one out speaks volumes about the movement.

Gamergate is far from disorganized. However it is a deliberate decision among the community to not appoint a leader or a group of leaders in order to maintain it's grassroots origins.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

And my question to you is this: if you are supporting gamergate (presuming that you actually are, if not, this is a question to a hypothetical gamergater) why haven't you made an organization or put your name out in the public as an authority on the movement?

A disorganized movement is like a lynch mob, an organized movement can be more effective and more swift in how they deal with situations like this. The fact the gamergaters who are ethical haven't figured this one out speaks volumes about the movement.

Gamergate is far from disorganized. However it is a deliberate decision among the community to not appoint a leader or a group of leaders in order to maintain it's grassroots origins.

They do need to appoint voices for them though.

Without a voice for you guys everything is not going to be okay. It is going to be a disaster. Being decentralized only works for so long, eventually you have to make the consensus that centralizing your voice is important. People want to know there's agency in the movement, not just a bunch of voices put together.

[Beta Test]

Gamergate is far from disorganized. However it is a deliberate decision among the community to not appoint a leader or a group of leaders in order to maintain it's grassroots origins.

They do need to appoint voices for them though.

Without a voice for you guys everything is not going to be okay. It is going to be a disaster. Being decentralized only works for so long, eventually you have to make the consensus that centralizing your voice is important. People want to know there's agency in the movement, not just a bunch of voices put together.

Indeed that is an issue that many have brought up. So far it has been resisted, although you might be right if the movement's going to survive in the long term.

[Tahar Joblis]

It's the job of the FBI to investigate threats. TJ is saying that Sarkeesian has a tendency to overreact to things that "aren't even threats at all". The FBI thinks this incident qualifies as a threat, and treats it as credible. That's my point. This cannot be ignored as something concocted in the mind of a hysterical feminist.

Like I've said, RapeHerGate is basically Quinn's ex bitching about her online, and then 4chan latching on nursing butthurt grudges because Quinn happened to torpedo their pet Fine Young Capitalists.

I don't know if it's a legitimate threat, as in, whether the likelihood of it being carried out was high or not. But that doesn't matter.

It's obvious the FBI has been infiltrated by penis-hating SJWs. *nod nod*

And as I pointed out so many times despite what the MRAs like to think, the only notable events pertaining to RapeHerGate were threats made to three women and their relatives. No new revelation of journalistic nepotism, just more "bitches ruining gaming" being threatened with rape and/or murder.

As far as I'm concerned, there are three really notable events that you just overlooked (again).

1. A man posted a detailed story that described a perfect textbook example of an abusive relationship.
2. Some people, mostly but not only men, were enraged, mostly without identifying it as an abusive relationship and mostly for reasons other than abuse.
3. Feminists rallied to defend the abuser, entirely ignoring the fact that this all started with a description of the abuser being abusive.

I don't really care very much about the purported (and definitely low) integrity of gaming journalism. I care, however, about men being overlooked as victims of domestic abuse; and about feminists not really working on behalf of gender equality, but instead reflexively on behalf of the perceived interests of women.

[Uiiop]

How is Gamergate a failure? It's still going strong after two months and it's making progress. It's done much better than #StopGamergate2014, whose popularity was largely inflated by ISIS bots.

Any significant revelations other than Bitching Ruining Gaming threatened with rape and/or murder?

That Let players have a deal with shadows of Mordor's PR company that will let them have pre-release codes as long they as are positive about the game, gave out calls to action telling viewers to click the game's offical website, Not show glitches and bugs,not talk about any other LOTR related work, and that the company has final approval of it and the video must be sent to2 days(Which occurs during the week of venganence.) before posting of it.

Kinda odd though that it's a neutral(Well i try to be...there's probably some leanings against but i like to take it by a person to person and community by community basis) party to post a link to a anti-gamergate person to show that one of them(and yes it does seem that death threats and the whole "Gamergaters are ISIS" thing converted TB to the pro-movement side of thing judging from his twitter and all that) found something when something that's this revelant should have already(Although tbf that's because a little bit skeptical at the bullying charges at Gawker atm. only a little bit though so that and the fact my views are possibly someone limited may mean that this entire 2nd paragraph is just ego rasing bollocks . )

[Soldati Senza Confini]

They do need to appoint voices for them though.

Without a voice for you guys everything is not going to be okay. It is going to be a disaster. Being decentralized only works for so long, eventually you have to make the consensus that centralizing your voice is important. People want to know there's agency in the movement, not just a bunch of voices put together.

Indeed that is an issue that many have brought up. So far it has been resisted, although you might be right if the movement's going to survive in the long term.

Yea, gamergate is not anonymous. Their goals and structure are different. While Anonymous can afford to be decentralized gamergaters cannot. I'm still behind my assertions that leaving the tag is for the best. Make a new tag, make something that you guys have a voice for.

If you want this movement to survive and be taken seriously you really are doing yourselves a disservice by going the way you've been going. Public reaction doesn't hinge upon a mob, because we don't know what the hell is going on or who is a legit voice in the movement. Being centralized and having voices and leaders in the movement helps with that.

Gaming journalism is important, and I am not bashing the more rational heads over this. However, letting yourselves be dragged down along with the misogynist characters and the other less savory characters that join the movement for nefarious reasons makes it a matter survival to actually do something about it. The public doesn't trust gamergate because of this, and you are trying to convince us, the general public, this is an issue. You're not trying to convince yourselves this is an issue.

[Xomic]

The FBI thinks this incident qualifies as a threat, and treats it as credible. That's my point.

And the FBI likely treats all death threats against a public figure as 'credible' until proven otherwise, so the fact that they're treating it as credible doesn't mean very much at all. That's my point. Of course, the same FBI believed the threat wasn't dangerous enough to make the lecture unsafe for her.

[Gravlen]

The problem is, you don't know what "corruption" means.

Writing something you don't like isn't corruption.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/17/Exposed-the-secret-mailing-list-of-the-gaming-journalism-elite

Here we go! Found the article I was looking for! Here's the corruption.

Where, specifically?

Let’s look at what GG has proven, shall we? The GameJournoPros list is the big one. Of course, ask GG to point to what actual collusion they’ve seen happen on there, and you’ll get very little beyond ‘they decided not to cover the Quinnspiracy stuff’. This is barely a conspiracy. What’s more interesting is that the writers that wrote the notorious ‘gamers are over’ articles are mostly not on that list. So the claims that those articles were co-ordinated via that list? Sorry, wrong.

http://theflounce.com/gamergate-seem-understand-ethics-nearly-well-thinks/

If you consider yourself a GamerGate moderate, and are genuinely concerned with ethics in journalism, then I have some perhaps surprising news for you — you'd be hard-pressed to find a more interested party than the games press itself. Topics of ethics and disclosure are ... err, were frequently discussed on the GameJournoPros message board, of which I was a member. Disagreements were often the norm. Enough people had a differing view that someone shared the board's contents with a particularly one-sided journalist (who proceeded to publish the unedited logs, with email signatures and phone numbers for some members intact). Are critics of the list aware that journalists have "conspired" in this way for, literally, over a century? I live in Philadelphia, home of the Pen & Pencil Club, a similarly private social club for journalists that's been in existence since 1892. This is where journalists from the Philadelphia Inquirer, a newspaper that won 17 Pulitzers in 15 years, would get drinks with journalists from competing papers and discuss, what else? Work.

The existence of familiarity among the games press is an issue, but not for the reasons GamerGate would argue. It's an issue insomuch as it inhibits new and diverse voices from joining the fray — I myself was taken to task by many of the people being attacked now over just this issue when we launched Polygon, and you know what? They were exceedingly right. But this isn't just an issue in the gaming press; it's an issue in journalism everywhere. Read this update from BuzzFeed's Ben Smith on how one of the fastest-growing media companies is tackling this challenge.

So yes, we take and have taken accusations of ethical impropriety seriously, and still find the accusations from GamerGate wanting.

http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/17/6996601/on-gamergate-a-letter-from-the-editor

[Gravlen]

The FBI thinks this incident qualifies as a threat, and treats it as credible. That's my point.

And the FBI likely treats all death threats against a public figure as 'credible' until proven otherwise, so the fact that they're treating it as credible doesn't mean very much at all. That's my point. Of course, the same FBI believed the threat wasn't dangerous enough to make the lecture unsafe for her.

Again, I was responding to TJ. TJ claims Sarkeesian overreacts to rudeness, claiming threats were they aren't. I pointed out that the FBI doesn't think this is an overreaction to rude remarks. If they did they would not say that they're investigating the threat. THAT's what it means.

[Gauthier]

And the FBI likely treats all death threats against a public figure as 'credible' until proven otherwise, so the fact that they're treating it as credible doesn't mean very much at all. That's my point. Of course, the same FBI believed the threat wasn't dangerous enough to make the lecture unsafe for her.

Again, I was responding to TJ. TJ claims Sarkeesian overreacts to rudeness, claiming threats were they aren't. I pointed out that the FBI doesn't think this is an overreaction to rude remarks. If they did they would not say that they're investigating the threat. THAT's what it means.

And TJ just stated in replying to me that he doesn't give a shit about gaming journalism, he just wanted to whine about another supposed round of penis pogroms.

[Gauthier]

It's obvious the FBI has been infiltrated by penis-hating SJWs. *nod nod*

And as I pointed out so many times despite what the MRAs like to think, the only notable events pertaining to RapeHerGate were threats made to three women and their relatives. No new revelation of journalistic nepotism, just more "bitches ruining gaming" being threatened with rape and/or murder.

As far as I'm concerned, there are three really notable events that you just overlooked (again).

1. A man posted a detailed story that described a perfect textbook example of an abusive relationship.
2. Some people, mostly but not only men, were enraged, mostly without identifying it as an abusive relationship and mostly for reasons other than abuse.
3. Feminists rallied to defend the abuser, entirely ignoring the fact that this all started with a description of the abuser being abusive.

I don't really care very much about the purported (and definitely low) integrity of gaming journalism. I care, however, about men being overlooked as victims of domestic abuse; and about feminists not really working on behalf of gender equality, but instead reflexively on behalf of the perceived interests of women.

Clearly it was a mistake to let women out of the kitchen to begin with eh? Maybe if Bottle had stayed in the kitchen making sammiches and babies she wouldn't have been allowed to hurt your feelings in the first place.

Nice to know you can't resist any opportunity to whine about the impending Peniicaust, at least you're more upfront about your agenda than the countless 'Gaters who keep claiming it's about gaming journalism.

[Tahar Joblis]

And the FBI likely treats all death threats against a public figure as 'credible' until proven otherwise, so the fact that they're treating it as credible doesn't mean very much at all. That's my point. Of course, the same FBI believed the threat wasn't dangerous enough to make the lecture unsafe for her.

Again, I was responding to TJ. TJ claims Sarkeesian overreacts to rudeness, claiming threats were they aren't. I pointed out that the FBI doesn't think this is an overreaction to rude remarks. If they did they would not say that they're investigating the threat. THAT's what it means.

Which was walking right by my point without addressing it.

That Sarkeesian has claimed a threat to be a threat does not contradict the fact that 95+% of what Sarkeesian claims to be a threat isn't.

And TJ just stated in replying to me that he doesn't give a shit about gaming journalism, he just wanted to whine about another supposed round of penis pogroms.

Compared to the issue of failing to recognize roughly half of the victims of abusive relationships, I think the state of clickbait websites talking about games isn't really that important.

Obviously, there are people who feel otherwise.

Nice to know you can't resist any opportunity to whine about the impending Peniicaust, at least you're more upfront about your agenda than the countless 'Gaters who keep claiming it's about gaming journalism.

From what I've seen... some of them do care about gaming journalism.

And there is, quite clearly, an interaction between feminism and gaming journalism. If your primary concern is journalistic integrity, the idea that a [primarily feminist, partially Gawker-owned] clique controls some segment of gaming media, and uses that as a platform to advance their ideology can, in fact, be an honest concern of yours. I don't doubt that we're dealing with a heterogeneous group here. It's a sensationalist issue and different people have different priorities.

As far as I'm concerned, using Zoe Quinn's situation as a vehicle to talk about feminism in gaming is like using Michael Vick getting charged with dogfighting as an opportunity to talk about [anti-black] racism in sports. That isn't necessarily inappropriate, but you need to do so with careful nuance. The correct response to "VICK R INHUMAN DOG KILLER NIGGER!" would not be "VICK IS GREAT! STOP MAKING VICK SAD BY CALLING VICK BAD!" but rather "I admit that dogfighting is inhumane and wrong, but please don't call Michael Vick a nigger; dogfighting is wrong whatever the skin color of the people involved are, and the term you used is unnecessarily offensive."

[Gauthier]

And TJ just stated in replying to me that he doesn't give a shit about gaming journalism, he just wanted to whine about another supposed round of penis pogroms.

Compared to the issue of failing to recognize roughly half of the victims of abusive relationships, I think the state of clickbait websites talking about games isn't really that important.

Obviously, there are people who feel otherwise.

This thread is about the nontroversy that is RapeHerGate and how it supposedly pertains to issues of feminism. If you want to whine about how Men Are Always the Real and Only Victims of Mean Feminazis Who Want to Stage a Peniicaust to Honor Their Matron Saint Valerie Solanis then you can start your own thread.

Nice to know you can't resist any opportunity to whine about the impending Peniicaust, at least you're more upfront about your agenda than the countless 'Gaters who keep claiming it's about gaming journalism.

From what I've seen... some of them do care about gaming journalism.

And there is, quite clearly, an interaction between feminism and gaming journalism. If your primary concern is journalistic integrity, the idea that a [primarily feminist, partially Gawker-owned] clique controls some segment of gaming media, and uses that as a platform to advance their ideology can, in fact, be an honest concern of yours. I don't doubt that we're dealing with a heterogeneous group here. It's a sensationalist issue and different people have different priorities.

As far as I'm concerned, using Zoe Quinn's situation as a vehicle to talk about feminism in gaming is like using Michael Vick getting charged with dogfighting as an opportunity to talk about [anti-black] racism in sports. That isn't necessarily inappropriate, but you need to do so with careful nuance. The correct response to "VICK R INHUMAN DOG KILLER NIGGER!" would not be "VICK IS GREAT! STOP MAKING VICK SAD BY CALLING VICK BAD!" but rather "I admit that dogfighting is inhumane and wrong, but please don't call Michael Vick a nigger; dogfighting is wrong whatever the skin color of the people involved are, and the term you used is unnecessarily offensive."

Except nobody in this forum has seriously claimed Zoe Quinn was great. The general consensus was she made at best a mediocre game that would have faded into obscurity if not for the neckbeardfest of her ex ranting on a blog combined with 4chan seizing on a chance to get even with Quinn for her sinking their pet project The Fine Young Capitalists.

It's just like how nobody would have given a shit about The Satanic Verses if Ayatollah Khomeini hadn't issued a fatwa calling for the death of Salman Rushdie.

[Tahar Joblis]

This thread is about the nontroversy that is RapeHerGate

Renaming things to suit yourself in that fashion is puerile.

and how it supposedly pertains to issues of feminism.

Which means that everything in the whole sequence of events is relevant. Which includes TheZoePost, since that started everything.


Since abusive relationships are commonly coded as a feminist issue, this is doubly relevant.

Since the invisibility of male victims is a problematic element of feminist discourse, and this is an example thereof, it's also triply relevant as a point of criticism of feminism demonstrating that it's not about Saint Equality.

If you want to whine about how Men Are Always the Real and Only Victims of Mean Feminazis Who Want to Stage a Peniicaust to Honor Their Patron Saint Valerie Solanis then you can start your own thread.

Men are neither always the real victims of "feminazis" nor the only victims of "feminazis." Whether you mean "feminazi" to refer to radfems or to all feminists, there are some women, children, and animals who are harmed by some feminists, acting either as individuals or acting as feminists.

Except nobody in this forum has seriously claimed Zoe Quinn was great.

Hm? Page believes that Quinn is innocent.

Quinn was innocent. The misogynist mob was not. It's not a two way street. Whatever acts of retribution against the gamergate crowd, are in my opinion very well deserved.

Except she actually didn't, and the problem is that even people who aren't up in a shitstorm over this seem to take that at face value. She had an ex-boyfriend who made a libelous forum post and all of the internet's misogynists ran with it.

For the most part, Zoe Quinn's supporters on this forum have mostly been just appealing to ignorance and saying that it can't be proved that Zoe Quinn is guilty of any real wrongdoing, and that exposing her personal life (or, in my words, an abuse victim talking about the abuse he experienced) was a wrong done to her.

What this amounts to is a denial of the series of wrongful things that Zoe Quinn has done, ranging from cyberbullying of Wizardchan to driving her boyfriend to a nervous breakdown.

The general consensus was she made at best a mediocre game that would have faded into obscurity if not for the neckbeardfest of her ex ranting on a blog combined with 4chan seizing on a chance to get even with Quinn for her sinking their pet project The Fine Young Capitalists.

1. The "4chan is t3h 3bUL NECKBEARD CONSPIRACY DRIVING ALL OF THIS!" narrative just doesn't hold up that well.
2. "Neckbeardfest?" Can you get through a substantive post without dropping unsubstantiated insults every other sentence?

There isn't a general consensus. The two positions mostly collect around:

• Zoe Quinn is innocent and everybody but approved feminist-friendly media should go home and shut up about feminism in gaming.
• Zoe Quinn is guilty of a significant amount of wrongdoing, and so are the other people on her side, and this should not be tolerated.

The consensus position of your side, in this thread, at this moment, basically amounts to:

"OK, maybe there are some problems in gaming, but you should all go home and shut up because some of the people complaining about the problems are evil misogynist pig-dogs."

As I've pointed out, I don't find that convincing. From what I've seen so far, the "GamerGaters" have done more to try to distance themselves from the author of the USU threat than feminists have done to distance themselves from Valerie Solanas. From what I've seen, nobody has really done anything to show misogyny at the core of the movement past showing hostility towards feminism. I also don't see why anyone else should find it convincing. There are some angry misogynists out there, and to the degree that they are willing to display their unpopular opinions, they will line up to condemn feminist wrongdoing as reliably as the KKK will to condemn wrongdoing by black celebrities.

Feminists can (and have) done wrong from time to time, and Michael Vick did do wrong. The anger that Zoe Quinn has inflamed is if anything less potent and enduring than the anger Vick stirred up. He routinely gets death threats. (Note that both examples in that article are, in fact, actually threats.) And guess what? Not many people care about that, because they recognize his guilt. Yeah, it's sorta bad that he gets death threats, but nobody's rallying about how horribly racist animal rights activists are because Michael Vick is getting death threats.

As far as I'm concerned, your side is still in denial over the fact that Zoe Quinn is - irrespective of her skill as a game dev or lack thereof - someone who has done wrong, and the unwillingness to acknowledge that is tied to deep-rooted sexist attitudes.

[Dyakovo]

Hm? Page believes that Quinn is innocent.

Quinn was innocent. The misogynist mob was not. It's not a two way street. Whatever acts of retribution against the gamergate crowd, are in my opinion very well deserved.

Except she actually didn't, and the problem is that even people who aren't up in a shitstorm over this seem to take that at face value. She had an ex-boyfriend who made a libelous forum post and all of the internet's misogynists ran with it.

For the most part, Zoe Quinn's supporters on this forum have mostly been just appealing to ignorance and saying that it can't be proved that Zoe Quinn is guilty of any real wrongdoing, and that exposing her personal life (or, in my words, an abuse victim talking about the abuse he experienced) was a wrong done to her.

What this amounts to is a denial of the series of wrongful things that Zoe Quinn has done, ranging from cyberbullying of Wizardchan to driving her boyfriend to a nervous breakdown.

So let's assume for the moment that all of the allegations made against Zoe Quinn by her Ex- are true...
What does that have to do with game journalists integrity/ethics?

Now keep in mind before you answer that her Ex- never accused her of sleeping with journalists to get good reviews, that was entirely made up by the people who read his blog.