Thanks.

Trolls seek attention, whether positive or negative. You are trying to make a point, the same rules do not apply.

*citation needed*

And this is just a pretty straight forward narrative: accuse a group of a crime so much that when it occurs again in the future, the crime is already associated with them.

Even though he has, on several occasions recommended GamerGate focus solely on the ethical breaches of games journalists rather than the wider topic of social justice in the industry?

The only people I know who are into elf-maidens are female gamers.

Just a heads up: had a GamerGate supporter sent this series of replies to a critic, they’d be accused of harassment.

“Known troll” - noun - a term given to those who should not be listened to for fear of disrupting the narrative.

There’s a considerable amount of evidence that she actually did try to crash that show when it wouldn’t accommodate her demands, but that’s beside the point.

That’s Baphoment. The board attacks gamergate supporters too. One woman had the floor plans to her house posted on there. She hasn’t used the tag since.

No YOU are!

Quintessential GamerGate: be unaware that a threat has occurred. Only find out when articles start blaming you for it.

And here is the automatic blame of GamerGate we were all expecting.

If the grievances never occurred why did Polygon and Kotaku have to update their ethics policies regarding financial conflicts of interest? Why did Patricia Hernandez’ old articles have to be retroactively flooded with disclosures?

You would have to demonstrate that they actually ever did any of that for your paper to hold any weight.

GGers are the people accused of doing this to Clarke, despite no evidence.

Am I supporting this comment by replying to it?

Is asking to provide evidence that GG had anything to do with this mansplaining?

“known to be used by gamergaters.”