But that would require them to do actual journalism/research

because it tends to get people who like to be offended, to start harassing them and trying to get the game banned, just like they did over accusations of misogyny

can we keep you? You seem like a better reviewer who can actually review a game rather than tell us how offended you got

" It's especially jarring with characters of color"

"If you're told something repeatedly, it's hard not to get it stuck in your head. It's hard not to believe the most awful things people say about you, simply because they've said it enough times. And that's the trickiest thing about bullying"

No one is against female representation in gamergate. Signed: a female in gamergate

because believability is something we need in fantasy games :/

We aren't obligated to like them. And lying about it won't motivate her to get any better. Some of them were downright horrible and she needs improvement

agreed.

that's like saying the USB port makes PCs incomplete

"Some likened the soft ban to censorship."

"additionally failed to report conflicts of interest in his own research."

agreed

They didnt mean it that way. Just that the person who made these structures would see them as more deserving

I just rewatched that ep recently. Good catch

You again. Making another intelligent comment. I like you.

such an appropriate name. Agreed

this is the first article you've written since the start of gamergate that I feel deserves to be shared without using archive.today links. Its about time you show some empathy. Keep it up.

You have the order of events backwards. She attacked first

So attacking a random person on the street isn't asking for trouble? She did that. She attacked first