In 1999 there was a newsgroup for people who in all earnestness believed the world was going to end in 2000. They were completely wrong. The KKK was completely wrong. People who believe the moon landings were faked are wrong. I'm sure you can think of many more examples yourself. Especially if you think back on conspiracy theories in general.

If Gamergate is two bottles of wine, the anti-GG movement is a whole liquor store because the biggest bull I've been reading lately all came from that side. You got some serious blinds on there if you believe that nonsense. Heck, that forum post you posted to? 90% BS. Here's why:

- most people don't claim at all that Nathan wrote articles because he slept with her - people said that it's wrong for a dev and a journalists to "hook up" without there being a disclosure about their relationships in the articles mentioned.

- there IS evidence that Zoe Quinn faked threats - people just choose to ignore it because it doesn't suit their rhetoric. She accused people on a forum of making death threats against her which was shown to be completely false. There's also the very interesting tale of a female photographer who got screwed over by Zoe which sheds some light on her personality.

- people contacted the charity to make sure Zoe Quinn had made the donations she had promised. Charity said they hadn't received any donations:
http://theflounce.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/questifred.png
People confronted Zoe who could have told them right there and then that she had made the donations in her own name (which is not legal by the way but that's another matter). But did she? No, she wanted to fan the flames a little more by deflecting questions and making crude comments before revealing proof. It was a game to her.

- GamerGate did NOT attack the charity - perhaps some lone nut case did but I never saw a single threat anywhere. I saw a few people who were miffed thinking the charity had lied to gain more donations but no threats.

- that post hilariously tries to downplay the Game Jam situation. First of all, if you read her Tweets, you can easily see she was being pretty horrible:
http://i.imgur.com/n8EvAsb.png
She went on the offensive, created a shit storm and what a surprise it caused a sponsor to pull out ... and of course Zoe is innocent. The fact that she started a game jam of her own shortly after is COMPLETELY unrelated *facepalms*

- Anita Sarkeesian was accused of faking threats for a reason - the Twitter screencap was very suspicious and her claims of going to the police were denied by the police itself. The fact that she asked for donations right after doesn't help her case. Also, the writing style is said to be more similar to that of an educated woman and not a man. FBI did NOT confirm the threats were real - they confirmed that they were going to investigate.

- In fact, the police and FBI said the latest threat at the university was harmless. Funny how that post didn't mention that, eh?

- the mailing list consisted of journalists pressuring other journalists to behave in a certain way as well. Also, people have been blacklisted through this same mailing lists without even knowing its existence. Not a big deal? Are you kidding? Not to mention such a thing as this being completely unethical from a journalism point of view.

I'll stop here since it's not worth any more of my time. Suffice to say, there's plenty of evidence around to prove just about any point of that post wrong, incomplete, and exaggeration (one or two people = NOT GamerGate) or misleading. Not to mention the whole situation is begging for trolls to fan the flames by making fake posts in the name of GamerGate or anti-GG so you shouldn't attribute single Tweets to the entire movement.

That's a reasonable explanation. And a much more believable one than a feminist conspiracy.

Media usually does talk about the same issues at the same time. It's not a proof of a conspiracy, it's just the topic of the day. It happens all the time.
What questions? GG has brought up all sorts of claims that have been debunked.

It's past bedtime in Finland. So long, guys.

the debunkers are on it says the "feminist" wimin in the industry. Hey lady you need some good ole spank and begone are your silly ideas i promise ;)

Certainly sounds like the lack of a leader is a talking point that all gamergates are embracing. So what are you personal grievances? What specific things made you personally a gamergater?

which articles? what is the evidence? Not true. She donated in her name not as Depression Quest.
http://i.imgur.com/zmAyaud.png
http://ohdeargodbees.tumblr.com/post/97275528664/depression-quest-donations The FBI never confirms or denies treats, only that it investigates. However -
"University spokesman Tim Vitale says the FBI told school officials the threat is consistent with ones Sarkeesian receives when she gives speeches elsewhere." - AP Do you have a source for that?

from Washington Post: Utah State wasn't calling it harmless Is there evidence for this?
A mailing list of industry professionals is common. What is the evidence that is was abused? Can you post some?

Dear lord, do your own homework. I already took the time to paste two links - the rest is out there and can be found with not much effort. The mailing list, for example, had its logs posted on several sites. Go read them - it will take you an hour but you'll see evidence of what I said. And then there's the Allistair Pinsof case who got blacklisted thanks to that mailing list. Go look it up yourself - I'm not gonna waste more time on something that has been posted many times over because people are too lazy to look it up. But the evidence is there.

Also, are you blind? You just partially repeated what I said about the charity thing and then called something untrue when there was a link RIGHT BELOW that shows I'm right *facepalms*. Her company collected the money so the company was supposed to make the donation. Because of the way taxes work in the US, what she did was illegal since she can use the donation as a tax deduction on her personal taxes whereas it should have been a tax deduction on her company.

By this definition, Germans should denounce their national pride because of the Nazis. The US? Oh dear god in recent years yes. Christians? I won't even start. Same with the Japanese, the Chinese, the Russians, The Britians, the French, Spanish. Actually by this point I should just say why do you identify as human?

We don't let the worst of people define us, because by moving to something else we've just done that. We take our licks, denounce the problem people, and move on. Bad people do not stop good things unless good people LET them stop good things. And you know what? Even if we were to move to something else, the bad would follow us just as well, it would be tainted by people simply brushing us off.

Now, what I said in the first paragraph sounds totally absurd, yeah, I know it does, but that's the same thing, you'd let a small amount of bad outweigh the good.

And now we are just wackos, or like the KKK. Fuck you, you are just offensive. Stick it where the sun don't shine. You don't like what someone says, so compare them to racists. -1 downvote. You deserve it.

If you believe in these points why not be prepared to show the work? Do you not want to talk about anything specific in those logs? Not one example?
Here, how about I post James Fudge's reply. We'll start there instead.
http://www.gamepolitics.com/2014/10/15/editorial-truth-about-gamergate-and-gamejournpros

and here's the collation of Pinsof and co. from gaf. What is it that you want to discuss specifically?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=558898 Then what are you trying to say? She made us think she didn't donate on purpose? Oh, so that isn't another matter. The issue is that you are saying Quinn is committing tax violations, not defrauding a charity. Tax violations. That's what gaming journalism is supposed to be about?

Red_Avatar's post contains some wonderful examples of why it is easy to be against the idea of corruption in games journalism and against #gg:

1. They say Zoe Quinn traded sex for positive publicity. We find out that is in incorrect. Then they say its about disclosure of relationships in articles, notwithstanding there were no significant articles published about Zoe Quinn.

2. They say Zoe Quinn lied about giving to iFred. Then when we find out that is incorrect, they say its Zoe Quinn's fault for not saying that she made the donations in her own name (I pause to note that iFred has not stated that the mix up was because of the name of the donor). Now it is Zoe Quinn's fault that she did not immediately clear up the error, rather than the fault of the person who asked terribly worded questions to an iFred intern and the people who immediately accepted that FB conversation as truth without allowing some time for it to be looked into.

3. Anita Sarkeesian is threatened. She is accused of faking threats. That is her fault because the screencap is suspicious, she shouldn't post suspicious screencaps (as if it would be possible for her to post screencaps that would not be questioned by a huge number of people).

4. They say that the police and FBI said the threat at the uni was "harmless". Seriously? Yeah, police and the FBI are always saying, "hey don't worry about that threat, it's nothing".

5. They mis-characterise a discussion amongst gaming journalists as journalists pressuring other journalists.

Read the damn thread...
You can't expect everyone to re-explain everything just for you.

I'm still waiting for a first explanation. What is the issue with Quinn and the iFred charity? Tax violation?

Let's address some of this...
First, some people talked about the sex, others feel the connection is too close. In truth, Nathan did name drop his friend Zoe and her game in his article. Second, we actually do not know that to be true. Two people know, Nathan and Zoe, and it is in both their interests to claim nothing happened until after all articles were posted. Not saying it did, not saying it didn't, but the truth is not so clear. There were what 16 people involved in the Game Jam and he chose to mention her among a handful. Not brought up much, but it's also interesting that the only reporter at that event was a close friend of Zoe's where she says herself she'd crash at his apartment quite often after a long day or some such. No, they questioned the donations after asking iFred and being told there were no donations. When they tried to contact Zoe, that day, she mysteriously changed the name of the charity she was donating money to. But no, somehow, that is all Gamergate's fault. And why exactly is one accepting charity in one's own personal Paypal account anyway? There are still questions of how much money was received and how much Zoe actually contributed to the charity. Was it 1%, 1/2%, 1/4%? We don't know and that was never stated. You call it mis-characterization, I disagree. It's not cut and dry. Some on the list advocated strong censoring of each other's forums. And some forums were censored. And the discussion list showed these journalists were in regular communication lending credence to the idea the half dozen plus articles calling gamers dead was a coordinated effort of some sort.

To me, just in your 5 examples, 3 I find unconvincing. A 4th, law enforcement actually does say that, they say it all the time. Harmless, not exactly, but they often will downplay such things.

Read the thread!

http://blogjob.com/oneangrygamer/2014/10/gamergate-destructoid-corruption-and-ruined-careers/

I strongly suspect that some of this recent arguing is the result of not everyone having read this. Interestingly enough, Patricia Hernandez is the only one who comes out of the whole thing looking good. What a world.