If you think one 4chan idiot is bad, just imagine the entire /b/ nation.

No, I don't think we do. We're all juvenile at heart, only our hatred and bitterness age.

So, if I was a crazy lunatic and I hated your opinion that you're expressing right here, right now, you feel I should be able to find out where you live and "do something about it?"

Sadly that's what people want.

Also, being paid to moderate might help prevent echo chambers forming. Usually volunteers feel they have more at stake and help "cultivate" the community to the point their BFFs message them and say "So and so is an asshole, can you please ban them?" and bam, it's done without any review.

Someone may not like what I'm saying, but Jezebel pre-kinja was very much mean girl territory. And then that continued even into Kinja with their petty sub-blogs about how ugly people and the like simply because they felt the person was an asshole.

Part of the issue is there is no notice that your comment has been "vanished" off a page. So people keep spouting drivel thinking its getting attention even if it is gone. That's a double-edged sword.

You may agree or disagree, but I'm a burner account and I get plenty of recommendations and always attempt to provide though-provoking content.

They began using those in the first place so that Gawker isn't responsible for your passwords. Because they got hacked. Had nothing to do with accountability of commentators.

If the person isn't refreshing or spoofing their IP, sure. But guess what? IPs are reusable and change. They aren't all static pieces of identity like a social security number.

When Google forced linking a Google+ account to ranking apps in their play store, I stopped rating apps. I'm not playing their game, no matter how much they want me to. Same will go for Gawker.

The burner accounts weren't used in this fiasco but still, burn them all, right?

Joel, just a question. I've posted this before but why wouldn't Gawker Media want to go in this direction than back to a system that no one really liked? Because you already have the code so you can just plug it back in?

Why, there is never an over zealous concern troll willingly to abuse such a system. Nope, not ever, nu uh, no way.

Conspiracy time! (Someone has probably already posted this but I'm not reading all 1,077 comments to find it)

As an older video game player (both age and experience) I'm so over local multiplayer.

I have always found those youtube videos of people throwing knives as the start of a match and killing someone to be hilarious. Because of how difficult it is and how impossible it would really be.

I have no problem with COD AW to be a knock-off Titanfall clone. I'll probably play AW, as well. But for the developers to state it isn't a clone? That they were in development before Titanfall? That's so horrendously stupid and offensive I almost want to tweet about it.

Indeed, many of the better players are using the SMGs up close simply to beat the carbine. I hate those fuckers, too.

Ya'know, in a game that has mechanized behemoths that fall from the sky, smart pistols that can curve bullets, backpacks that allow double jumps, and not to mention interstellar space travel, I think that civilization could somehow have made an assault rifle that has figured out a way to stop bullets from tumbling…