GamerGate's Latest Conspiracy Theory Doesn't Hold Up

GamerGate's Latest Conspiracy Theory Doesn't Hold Up

Last night, members of the GamerGate campaign exploded with glee as they read through a brand new set of damning, dramatic allegations that seemed to prove serious wrongdoing in the indie game scene. Here it was. A smoking gun.

But like with many of the red-lined imgurs and conspiratorial posters that have fuelled this controversial group for the past few months, all it takes is a little digging to uncover that this week's big GamerGate freakout is based on half-truths, flimsy evidence, and claims that are, at best, totally misleading.

Let's rewind a bit. Yesterday, the GamerGate-friendly website TechRaptor published an interview with Allistair Pinsof, an ex-reporter who was fired from Destructoid in 2013 after publishing parts of a story on his personal Twitter against his boss's orders. Over the past few months, Pinsof has re-emerged as a GamerGate advocate, taking to platforms like Reddit and Twitter to attack the games press on various issues, including what he said was a blacklist against him conducted by various gaming media outlets due to his history with Destructoid. (Which, as best we can tell, is not true -- in fact, Kotaku was fielding freelance pitches from Pinsof way after the Destructoid incident.)

In the TechRaptor interview, Pinsof says a few interesting things, laying out allegations that A) Independent Games Festival chairman Brandon Boyer helped his friend's game win an award in 2011; and that B) indie developer Phil Fish reneged on an agreement with former partner Shawn McGrath to not release the game that would eventually become Fez.

GamerGate ate it up -- last night, prominent members of the movement were trying to get "#PinsofInterview" trending on Twitter, and the official GamerGate subreddit was flooded with threads about what Pinsof had said. The movement already had vendettas against the games press, the IGF, and Phil Fish, so this was perfect for them. Says one popular thread: "How important is #Pinsofinterview? REALLY FUCKING IMPORTANT. We need to get the word out about this."

Despite my distaste for almost everything GamerGaters have said and done over the past few months, a story is a story, and these seemed like allegations worth investigating, so I've spent the past day looking into Pinsof's claims. They're… well, let's take this one at a time.

First there's the accusation of award show collusion. To quote Pinsof:

In 2011, at Fantastic Arcade, I was talking to a former game journalist Tiff Chow who I recognised from her work at Destructoid in 2008. I asked what she thought would win the Best Game Award, she flippantly bragged that her boyfriend is friends with Brandon so he'll win... I took it as a bad joke. Next day, sure enough, he won Best in Show for Faraway, against games such as Fez (which won audience award), Skulls of the Shogun, Radical Fishing, and Octodad. It seemed fucked up, but it was such an insignificant show and I depended on Brandon as a local journalist so I stayed silent. Looking back now, it definitely makes me question how the IGF is run.

The anecdote is damning. But is it true? Tiff Chow says otherwise -- when I reached out to her last night to fact-check Pinsof's accusation, she denied saying what Pinsof claimed she said.

"I do remember this conversation explicitly," Chow told me in an email. "I remember Allistair asking how I knew Brandon, and I told him we were friends. At the time I was beaming with pride about Steph's game being featured in the show. I am positive I said something along the lines of 'I hope Faraway will win, but I'm biased -- he's my husband.'"

"Just so I'm 100% clear," I asked, "was that all you said or did you also tell Allistair that your husband was friends with Brandon and therefore he'd win?"

"I definitely did not say that," Chow said.

I reached out to Boyer to ask for more details about potential wrongdoing there. Although Boyer didn't want to comment on some of Pinsof's specific allegations, he did send over a statement about the Fantastic Arcade awards show:

There seems to be some conflation here of how Fantastic Arcade awards work, compared to a competition like the IGF. There *is* one similarity: both awards are chosen by a panel of jurors. In Fantastic Arcade's case, that year the jury was made up of three Arcade attendees who had an hour or two to come up with their funniest fake-award categories to give out to all eight of the Spotlight games.

You can see the full list of awards pasted in here. Octodad, for instance, won "The Implied Cephalopod Intercourse Award", and Jesus Vs. Dinosaurs won "The Teach the Controversy Award".

All three of those jurors liked Faraway the most of all the eight games, so they awarded it Best in Show, for which Thirion won the grand prize: a glass boot filled with beer. (pictured here.) All the other seven honourees won toys: Jesus Vs Dinosaurs, if I remember right, got this set of Darwin Action Figures and someone had a friend make a Lego model of Gomez for Fez's award (which you can see pictured in that G4TV post).

That tradition of having a panel come up with "funny" "everyone's a winner"-type awards to give to all eight of the games has continued since, for better or worse (here's 2012's, and 2013's, and 2014's), and so to an extent, I agree: it *is* all a joke.

Boyer added that there were no cash or other incentives involved in this particular award show -- "Fantastic Arcade spends whatever tiny budget it has on making those eight Spotlight arcade cabinets look super nice every year," he said.

Pinsof's interview -- and subsequent Twitter rants about the issue -- allege broader, more subtle collusion between Boyer and members of the gaming press, which is difficult if not impossible to prove or disprove. Boyer was a member of the oft-cited "Game Journo Pros" message board -- a list I was also on -- and although that group was mostly used as a forum for members of the press to swap 3DS codes and commiserate about industry issues, there's certainly a whiff of appearance of impropriety there. Still, the claims about this specific award show seem misguided at best.

The second major allegation in Pinsof's interview initially seemed to be more concrete. Says Pinsof: "One of the more interesting things I heard was a notable indie developer tell me that Phil Fish significantly stole from their code, projects and ideas to create Fez. When I questioned why they won't sue, they said they were in fear of being ostracised by the IGF, media, and indie dev scene."

Pinsof goes on to explain that this notable indie developer is Shawn McGrath, best known for creating Dyad (and writing this wonderful Kotaku article about Doom 3's source code). In the interview -- which, again, has become fuel for hundreds of GamerGaters since it went live yesterday -- Pinsof claims that McGrath told him Fish reneged on an agreement never to release Fez in the first place.

Says Pinsof:

The thing the public never knew -- that McGrath and Degroot held for leverage should the [Indie Game: The Movie] filmmakers & Fish not change the credits -- is that McGrath worked on Fez until the GDC trailer put out in October 2007, according to McGrath. At this point, McGrath had a second falling out and this time it was serious. McGrath told him they were done and Fish agreed to cancel the project. The agreement was that McGrath would take his original design (2D/3D rotating mechanic) and Fish would take his Trixel engine, according to McGrath. When McGrath saw the game appear at IGF 2008, he was furious and felt backstabbed. There's been bad blood between them ever since.

But McGrath disputes many of the details in Pinsof's account, like the claim that he was holding information as "leverage." ("I didn't hold anything for leverage," McGrath told me. "I didn't mention this to the [Indie Game movie] people at all ever, and wouldn't 'hold it for leverage'... that's pretty silly.")

In fact, when I spoke to McGrath on Skype yesterday, he said that he had only talked to Pinsof once, back in 2012, and that he wasn't sure where these allegations came from.

"I don't think that's entirely true," McGrath said when I read him that section of Pinsof's interview. "From the way that reads, it seems like I had talked to Phil after the trailer was released. That's not true."

"So you guys never agreed that Fish would not work on [Fez] anymore?" I asked.

"No, no, that was never even talked about," McGrath said. "I don't know where that came from. Maybe I said that in the original interview I did with Allistair? I highly doubt I would do that though… No, that never happened. What happened was what I said: we were working on something, it wasn't called Fez, there was no concept of Gomez, what he even looked like, any of the hat stuff, there was none of that. None of that existed; there was no Fez. It didn't even have a name... we didn't even have a name for it."

In fact, McGrath sent me a video of this early prototype that the two worked on together:

"That's the state of it I think when Phil was still working on it," McGrath told me. "So it was really early when he was working on it; it's not like he stole a complete game or something. Like I think people are overreacting.... I'm not cool with what happened, but let's be realistic about it."

The actual story, according to McGrath's recollection: Back in 2004 or 2005, he saw a rough prototype at a University of Toronto game jam with a 2D/3D swapping mechanic that allowed players to flip the screen's dimensions in interesting ways. McGrath thought it was a great idea, so he went home and started iterating on it.

"I started expanding on it and doing a bunch of crazy shit with it," McGrath said.

McGrath says he met Fish in 2006, and the two of them hit it off -- Fish loved McGrath's design ideas; McGrath was impressed by Fish's artistic skills. The two decided to work together, but Fish's infamously surly personality struck a nerve with McGrath, and after a few months they split up. Both McGrath and Fish went their separate ways and continued working on their own games, until Fish released a trailer for Fez in 2007. McGrath, frustrated that Fish had taken the idea, immediately decided to give up on his own project. "I had spent a long time on the game, and I liked what I was doing with it," said McGrath. "And then the Fez trailer came out and I was like, well, I guess I just wasted a year of my life, so I just stopped working on it."

While McGrath does believe that Fish stole his dimension-swapping concept, he disagrees with Pinsof's assertion that Fish took all the credit.

"I don't know if I would say -- he's said in interviews, whenever he was asked about it, he said in interviews that it was my idea. But he's never been like, 'Oh it was my [Fish's] idea,' he's never done that,'" McGrath told me. "To say that he flat out took the credit I would disagree with. But to say that perhaps he was less forthcoming than he could have been maybe would have been a truthful statement, but I don't think it's true to say he stole the idea and then claimed it to be his own. I would agree that he stole the idea."

Fish, who has been a target of GamerGate since the campaign started last year, declined to comment on this story when reached by Kotaku last night. His issues with other former partner Jason DeGroot have also been documented in various interviews, including the documentary Indie Game: The Movie, whose creators only told Fish's side of this particular story.

But McGrath seems particularly frustrated at the misinformation that's been floating around over the past day thanks to Pinsof's interview. Pinsof claimed multiple times that McGrath would not talk to media because he was afraid of being ostracised by media, but McGrath says that's not true.

"The biggest reason why I didn't ever want to talk about this [is] because no matter what, it's not gonna come out right," McGrath told me last night. "There's nothing that can happen, there's no situation that exists where everybody who gives a shit actually knows what the truth is. That can't happen, the way that the internet works makes that an impossibility. So I was just like, 'Fuck it, who cares?' This isn't actually that important. I don't have anything to do with the game, I've moved on with my life, I've made a game since then, I don't even care about this anymore. I kinda wish this would just never have happened."

The GamerGate narrative, of course, has been entirely different, as evidenced both by the front page of the GG subreddit and by the many tweets from Pinsof that launched this entire controversy.

GamerGate's Latest Conspiracy Theory Doesn't Hold Up

Since last night, Pinsof has walked back many of his earlier claims on Twitter, now saying that it's "unclear"whether there Fish and McGrath made an agreement over whether Fez would not be developed. "[McGrath] afraid to go public during original interview due to unwanted attention, he now says not due to Fish's industry influence," Pinsof wrote this morning. He has also withdrawn his allegation that Fish stole McGrath's code, which was printed in the TechRaptor interview yesterday.

Which gets us to the crux of this story: as usual, this sequence of events is far more convoluted and nuanced than Pinsof and various GamerGaters have suggested. To sum up the story of Fez's development as a tale of good vs. evil -- the type of rudimentary sorting that GamerGaters have been so attracted to over the past few months -- is to ignore what really happened.


Comments

    I'm all for having high standards in journalism, but what is the deal with Gamergate, why are they so crazed about potential small things going on in the game dev/review world when the media generally is such a cesspool on far, far more important issues in the wider world of news and journalism?

      The people under the Gamergate flag are made up in three main parts. There's a bunch of assholes who heard about Gamergate and jumped on board to use it as a platform to vent their stupid anger, then there's a bunch of conspiracy theorists desperate for the inside scoop, and then there was, until it became apparent that Gamergate had become nothing but a front for assholes and nuts, a group of people who legitimately just wanted to see video games journalists held to a higher standard.
      The ones getting excited about this are the conspiracy theorists and explaining why they fixate on one thing rather than something more real comes down to the individual. I knew a guy whose life hit a bit of a rough patch, he got angry, then he kept isolating himself further and further and alienating everyone he knew with wild conspiracy theories because assuring himself that he was the one who could see through the lies and everyone else were just mindless sheep was the only way he felt like he was worth a damn. In a lot of ways he was telling himself over dramatic lies to avoid coping with his life. He didn't have to deal with his loneliness if he chose to believe that beign part of society was bad.

      That last group is pretty understandable given that 'games journalism' has always just had a far too close relationship paid advertising. If you care about games it's easy to give that a high priority and just because it has a high priority doesn't mean you can't also care about the other issues the world face (I only see you commenting on Kotaku, but that doesn't mean it's all you care about). Although personally I find it hard to get stirred up over those sorts of claims. At this point it's like being outraged that wrestling is fake. Everyone knows you can't trust a reviewer to fully state their relationship with the people and products. The big Gamergate headlines were scandalous (well, they would be if they were true) but the industry is pretty open about the general pay to win nature of games journalism.

        There was a fourth group at one point, people who identify as gamers and were insulted by what appeared to be a coordinated media blitz to put a knife in the back of the gamer identity.

          But they realised that in the end, that was something that's been happening for 30 years or so now and wasn't unique to their cause. So they ended up petering out.

          I generally lump them in as the conspiracy theorists, but yeah you could count them as a fourth group since there was supposedly evidence proving it was more than paranoia.

            So... Just a bunch of BS in the end?

            Yeah, considering there were actual articles running along the lines of "Gamers are dead"... Bit hard to throw conspiracy theory label on that.

            Everyone but the hateful mongoloids and the conspiracy nuts left long, long ago.

        My understanding was after the Quinn issue, Gamergate was meant to be constructed of that last group and was an attempt to separate from the mass hysteria and have an actual look to see if there are some real concern/issues. But we all know that that’s not how the internet works and the former groups flocked to it.

        Last edited 06/02/15 1:16 pm

          The allegations against Quinn were wholly fabricated by a vindictive ex and then spread by those with an anti-women/anti-diversity agenda. That's the very origins of the movement. The assholes @DogMan speaks of didn't jump on board later, they were the ones who started the whole thing.

            The allegations against Quinn were wholly fabricated by a vindictive ex

            It's been a long time since I've read the actual essay of the ex (so correct me if I'm wrong) but I believe his only allegation was that she cheated on him with those 5 people. Conclusions about journalism ethics etc., were drawn by others. Are you saying that didn't happen? He did post his proof, did anyone manage to dispute this? Quinn simply refused to comment as far as I know.

            then spread by those with an anti-women/anti-diversity agenda.
            And others

            That's the very origins of the movement.
            I think that was more the origin of "Quinnspiracy". But they were both just twitter hashtags to begin with, so it's pretty hard to discern exactly why people at the time were using either.

            The assholes @dogman speaks of didn't jump on board later, they were the ones who started the whole thing.
            I'm going to ask you for a source on this. I acknowledge that could be difficult to provide but you seem very definite on the exact timeline.

              I'm going to ask you for a source on this. I acknowledge that could be difficult to provide but you seem very definite on the exact timeline.

              The only timeline I've ever seen has a few incidents predating everything. That said it's really hard to tell because even though it's tied closely to an easy to trace hashtag the 'games media' is so shifty that most months we have a big reveal that someone is doing something dodgy. Would it be fair to say that it goes back to one of the early examples of someone getting their review squashed because their website was running an ad campaign for the game? A lot of people who are anti-Gamergate would say that the whole Jade Raymond thing is part of it. Some members of the group would say it starting with Anita pushing an anti-male agenda into gaming (not something I agree with).
              Personally I think there was something there that predates those people. I think a lot of major gaming websites embraced flame baiting and telling gamers they're terrible people as a way to generate traffic so it was bound to blow up into something like this eventually (I firmly believe that half the reason anyone knows Anita's name is because several authors used it as a chance to whip a bunch of assholes into a frenzy). But how to you trace back a riot? Is it the thousand people who show up just to loot? Is it the guy who threw the first brick? Is it the police for responding? Or is it the event that caused ten thousand people to feel the need to group together and be heard? With such a multi-headed multi-agenda beast it's hard to point to any one event that spawned it all.

                It's not hard to trace what happened at all.

                Anti-feminists had disliked Quinn for some time (primarily because she's a feminist and they hate that, also because they seemingly hold her responsible for the GAME_JAM clusterfuck) seize on the blog put up by the vindictive ex and spread unsubstantiated rumours that Quinn traded sexual favours with Nathan Grayson for a positive review of Depression Quest. Not only did both deny any relationship, but neither Grayson nor anyone else at Kotaku has ever reviewed Depression Quest (which was and remains a free game). They then start doxxing Quinn, making harassing phone calls etc.

                The gamergate hashtag is first used at this point, to share articles and YouTube videos promoting these allegations against Quinn (the 'Quinnspiracy' is not a separate thing - it's the genesis of the gamergate identity).

                The following week, Anita Sarkeesian releases the next episode of her Tropes vs Women in Video Games series. Anti-feminists had disliked Sarkeesian for some time (you see a pattern here?) and continue their campaign of harassment against her, including making death threats against her and her family, leading her to leave her house for the sake of safety.

                Two articles, prompted by the attacks made on Quinn and Sarkeesian, are published the following week which pose existential questions about the gamer identity:
                http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/224400/Gamers_dont_have_to_be_your_audience_Gamers_are_over.php
                http://dangolding.tumblr.com/post/95985875943/the-end-of-gamers

                (Note that Alexander, a woman, rapidly becomes the target of harassment and threats herself, while Golding, a man, does not, despite both articles covering essentially the same ground and making substantially the same arguments.)

                Using the reaction these articles generated, and still riding on the false allegations about Quinn and Grayson, the anti-feminists then create a veneer of legitimacy around their continuing campaigns against Quinn, Sarkeesian and others by promoting the idea that an unethical gaming press is trying to destroy gamers.

                  Anti-feminists had disliked Quinn for some time (primarily because she's a feminist and they hate that, also because they seemingly hold her responsible for the GAME_JAM clusterfuck) seize on the blog put up by the vindictive ex and spread unsubstantiated rumours that Quinn traded sexual favours with Nathan Grayson for a positive review of Depression Quest.

                  Yes, some said for a positive review. A lot more people said positive media, which Grayson absolutely has provided as well as others on that list of guys.

                  Not only did both deny any relationship, but neither Grayson nor anyone else at Kotaku has ever reviewed Depression Quest (which was and remains a free game).

                  When did they deny the relationship? I am fairly certain that the relationship was confirmed even by Totillo after speaking to Grayson. Why is the game being free relevant? Are you posing that you get nothing out of releasing a game and it being extremely successful despite not making money out of it?

                  They then start doxxing Quinn, making harassing phone calls etc.
                  How do you know they were gamergaters? Is anyone anti-Quinn a gamergater?

                  The gamergate hashtag is first used at this point, to share articles and YouTube videos promoting these allegations against Quinn (the 'Quinnspiracy' is not a separate thing - it's the genesis of the gamergate identity).

                  The gamergate hashtag was first used to share two youtube videos. Did you watch the videos? The entire thing is focusing on whether or not there are conflicts of interest and the concerns with media reactions. It also screeenshots and references every single point. It honestly flies in the face of your claim that it's just anti-feminist or started by assholes.

                  The following week, Anita Sarkeesian releases the next episode of her Tropes vs Women in Video Games series. Anti-feminists had disliked Sarkeesian for some time (you see a pattern here?) and continue their campaign of harassment against her, including making death threats against her and her family, leading her to leave her house for the sake of safety.

                  Again, are all anti-feminists gamergaters? Is this some sort of focused and planned attack by a collective identifying themselves as gamergaters? Are these the same people discussing conflicts of interest or concerns with games journalism?

                  Two articles, prompted by the attacks made on Quinn and Sarkeesian, are published the following week which pose existential questions about the gamer identity:
                  http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/224400/Gamers_dont_have_to_be_your_audience_Gamers_are_over.php
                  http://dangolding.tumblr.com/post/95985875943/the-end-of-gamers

                  Not a single mention of gamergate in either of those articles and neither seem to try to even allude that they are responsible. Instead, they attack all gamers and fling stereotypes.


                  (Note that Alexander, a woman, rapidly becomes the target of harassment and threats herself, while Golding, a man, does not, despite both articles covering essentially the same ground and making substantially the same arguments.)

                  Gee, I wonder if it had something to do with opening:
                  "I often say I’m a video game culture writer, but lately I don’t know exactly what that means. ‘Game culture’ as we know it is kind of embarrassing -- it’s not even culture. It’s buying things, spackling over memes and in-jokes repeatedly, and it’s getting mad on the internet.

                  It’s young men queuing with plush mushroom hats and backpacks and jutting promo poster rolls. Queuing passionately for hours, at events around the world, to see the things that marketers want them to see. To find out whether they should buy things or not. They don’t know how to dress or behave. Television cameras pan across these listless queues, and often catch the expressions of people who don’t quite know why they themselves are standing there.

                  ‘Games culture’ is a petri dish of people who know so little about how human social interaction and professional life works that they can concoct online ‘wars’ about social justice or ‘game journalism ethics,’ straight-faced, and cause genuine human consequences. Because of video games."

                  Don't act like the two articles are even remotely similar. Both discuss the same subject matter but they clearly take entirely different approaches to the issue.

                  Using the reaction these articles generated, and still riding on the false allegations about Quinn and Grayson, the anti-feminists then create a veneer of legitimacy around their continuing campaigns against Quinn, Sarkeesian and others by promoting the idea that an unethical gaming press is trying to destroy gamers

                  But they've attacked a lot of issues and it has turned out that they have had legitimate concerns. Quite a few sites have agreed to things they have brought up and amended their code of ethics, Kotaku included.

              "I believe his only allegation was that she cheated on him with those 5 people."

              Well that's the whole problem isn't it. He gets dumped and the first thing he does is try to make her look like a slut. And 'gamers' everywhere eat it up.

                The statement posed was that this was fabricated.

      They have to keep pretending "it's about ethics in journalism" as a cover for their attacks on women.

        It is interesting that for a group so concerned about "ethics", they publish anything they can come up with about individuals without any real fact checking or the stuff that would be considered ethics in journalism.

          I'm not sure how that can be a fair criticism. Gamergate are a relatively incohesive group of individuals who post in a subreddit and use a hashtag on twitter. That said, the closest thing I've seen to rules are in their subreddit and it states “7. "Trust, but verify.” A major claim requires major proof. Remember to provide evidence for the claims that you make. If your evidence must remain confidential, message the moderators to privately verify your claims." I also see posters constantly linking to sources and/or screencaps and constantly trying to verify and discuss these sources. At the very least I see them posting as much proof as places such as kotaku.

        Yes because a group of 40,000 misogynists would stick with a hashtag for 6 months, that makes total sense.

    I thought we all agreed that we were "tired" of gamer gate?

      Same as how we are all tired of the conflict in the Middle East. There are a few exceptions to the "all" that just want it to keep going.

      Feels a bit like two kids who just had a schoolyard brawl, now trying to sabotage the other's reputation by badmouthing them, because neither of them can let it go. There are no winners here, we all lose.

      http://kotaku.com/were-all-tired-of-gamergate-1648624281 *yawns*

        It's pretty clear Kotaku are not .... otherwise they would be trying to give the horse CPR.

    As I type this, my head is buried in sand, which is where it goes every time I see mention of Gamergate.

      Just go play games. It sounds crazy since supposedly the entire gaming world is in choas over it, but XBOX Live and the PSN have never even heard of Gamergate.

    I still don't even "get" GamerGate. The whole movement is incoherent and there seems to be a couple of seemingly unrelated issues (journalism quality, sexism, gamer identity) swirling around the same flag. I can barely reconcile this article with what I already thought GamerGate was.

      It's basically the same concept as Anon. Anyone can say they're representing Anon/Gamergate so it quickly turns into a large group of loosely linked causes where nobody realises that by supporting 'Gamergate' they're supporting fifty or so radical views that have nothing to do with their cause. We can jump over to Twitter right now and use the hashtag #Gamergate as the flag to rally under for our movement to kill all babies. Nobody will stop us and a few people will accidentally support us.

        Thanks for the reply! It didn't even occur to me that the movement was a moving target that was rallying behind new issues. I thought (like all previous "gates") that it was centralized around one concept and there was just "evidence piling up" that kept resurrecting it. If its basically anon I don't know why anyone still cares. :S

          The group existed to a degree earlier, but there was a scandal that generated the name and brought in a ton of people, mostly assholes jumping in half informed and furious that evil temptress women would dare sulley the sacred integrity of video games journalism, but due to the nature of hashtags it instantly grew beyond that and became a 'movement'.

          Last edited 06/02/15 1:35 pm

      Its about ethics in gaming journalism, everything else was brought up by anti GG.

    Like my mumma always said........Close the "Gate" behind you!

    Stuff like this doesn't surprise me, in that people are using the over-agendarised idiots in GamerGate to grind all their axes for them (see what happened with Brianna Wu & others) but it's getting beyond the joke (has been for a long time).

    If you question their motivations, they throw up all the usual Conspiracy Theorist bullshit by either making it look like you're working for the enemy or they attempt to take down your websites to prove that they aren't the bad guys.

    Here's something on my recent dealings with them (after I intentionally trolled them to see what kind of reaction I'd get, so I'm not an innocent party in any way): https://andthegeekshall.wordpress.com/2015/02/03/rant-all-the-effect-of-pissing-into-the-wind/

    I just want to see this thing die but as a recent Gawker article pointed out, some people are getting a sick thrill egging on the delusional psychopaths in the group.

    People seem to be focusing a lot on the "Gamergate" part of this and eye-rolling at it above all else. I'm more interested in what the deal is with Fez and all that, though. Been interesting reading the techraptor articles, then this, then thanks to the twitter link up there somewhere, Pinsof's response to it.

    So as usual I don't know what to think and will just sit back and put some more popcorn on.

      It's certainly one way to get an audience to agree with you, isn't it?
      "This guy reckons some stuff isn't right" vs "GAMERGATE, INTERNET MONSTERS think something's wrong, BUT THEY'RE ALWAYS WRONG, RIGHT?"

    Can we get a response to Alec Holowka confirming the McGrath story? Then suddenly deleting it and pretending it didn't happen?

    I find Gamergate conspiracies as credible as people who say the moon landings never happened.

    Pinsofs response to this article:

    http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1skget9

    Last edited 06/02/15 2:00 pm

    I personally just wish this whole thing, and both sides to it, would just piss off and disappear...

    Last edited 06/02/15 3:02 pm

    Sheesh, this whole Gamergate thing has to take the cake for the Biggest Waste Of Everybody's Time in the last 10 years. Really, who gives a shit?

    haha yes okay phlaiman beat me to it and I didn't see
    whatever

    Last edited 06/02/15 7:07 pm

    I'm confused on the whole gamer gate stuff
    I thought it was about how journalists get things on the side to post up good things about a game or software/hardware. Like the guy who wrote bad things about a game which was advertised all over the site he worked for and he got fired for it.

    But then i hear its about women in gaming and in the gaming industry.

    now its back to this.

    How about this, shut up about it all already. I don't give a crap what one person says about a game, i'll read up a few articles about something which interests me. Watch a video about it or something.

    With how females are "treated" you think its only females who get targeted in threats and other bullshit? The ones who are voicing it are just louder. So many people get threatened, abused, harassed and treated in different ways its not just one sided. Stop being "oh but they get picked on", STEP BACK and take a look at the bigger picture its more bullying.

    The whole feminist stuff is utter crap and is just a form of bullying done by both sexes to both sexes, not just male to female.

    So what is gamer gate next month? ill set up the timetable
    March its about abuse on goats
    April its about left handers not getting enough mice to use
    May is about how thrall steals another kill from your character
    june is back on corruption in jurnolism
    july is about the aliens not getting enough time on wifi
    the rest of the year will be about some random card games and board games

    Last edited 06/02/15 7:53 pm

    It's good to hear that those supporting Gamergate are going after this so strongly. It's highly important and it's highly important that they do this. They shall be known for the things that they value and the actions that they take or don't take.

Join the discussion!