I don't think it's fair to say she's made ALL the threats against herself, but she has been proven to be a liar and has on a few occasions been caught trying to drum-up harassment.

Like the time she forgot to log out of her dev account on Steam before starting a thread saying bad things about herself. She was called on it by a Steam mod and ended up removing the thread shortly after. (https://archive.is/t1Oxl)

Or the time she was talking private chatting with a group of anons that ended up mysteriously being involved in harassing her (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1WSLdFCAAEicWf.png:large)

Or the time she claimed GamerGate was threating a PAX conference, except the threats were from one of her followers directed at GamerGate supporters (https://i.imgur.com/nAxgNCD.png)

Or the time she created the brololz account to harass & mock people on twitter (http://imgur.com/y1OK1By)

I don't agree with anyone receiving death threats and it's dumb that I have to state that whenever Zoe Quinn, Brianna Wu or Anita Sarkeesian come up, but I'm all out of empathy for these women. Who seem to continually kick beehives, get stung by wasps then parade it around as evidence that bees need to be eradicated. They're definitely creating they're own "misery" which gets them big bucks and lots of attention while breaking the #1 rule of the internet (don't feed the trolls)

You're not really one to talk about twisting everything to fit a narrative. Every single story on GamerGate has you adamantly arguing against all facts and berating/belittling anyone that doesn't agree with you.Maybe we're all guilty of this, but don't pretend you're immune and not as equally as bad as everyone else here.

She won game of the year because she's friends with the editor and chief of iMore Rene Ritchie (https://archive.is/oexmd) who happens to be the guy that judges games and hands out the game of the year for iMore. She's been on his podcast (http://www.imore.com/debug-34-sexism-tech) and pretty frequently talked to him on twitter. Just another case of journalists supporting their friend's crap games over much better stuff. Oh, but yeah GamerGate was totally just a hate movement to drive women out of the industry and not because journalists were ruining the indi scene by giving more favorable coverage to people they were friends with without disclosing it.

What are your feelings on creating memes to mock people you disagree with?

Do you think someone running with a meme you might have created is harassment?

Do you feel it's ok to make fun of autistic children to score political points?

Good luck with the rest of the questions.

You've failed at stats and logic.

I only discussed it because you said GamerGate hates Anita and Zoe for the same reasons, which clearly isn't the case. And no amount of you saying it's true will make it true. Her cheating on her BF, or her cheating at all, doesn't matter. What does matter is she is abusive, manipulative and a liar. What also matters is who she cheated on him with, but whenever someone tries to talk about Nathan Grayson or Joshua Boggs it gets dragged down to accusations of slut shaming and being concerned with her sex life. Move past it, no one cares about her sex life except you. It's not about her, it's about a society of double standards that's being used to prevent discussion of a series of events around a horrible human.

And here in lies the problem, you don't game, so you know very little about it and CAN'T possibly know what she's talking about, but you're assuming she has a high degree of knowledge of gaming. I guess this is why you think you're such and expert in discrete math, statistics and logic.

Are you aware she doesn't write her own material?
Are you aware that she's consistently factually wrong about the games she "critiques"?
Are you aware that she doesn't actually play the games she "critiques"?
Are you aware that her footage is "borrowed" from Let's Play? too bad she doesn't credit her source material otherwise you might be

I can only assume you're not aware of any of this, but you believe her anyway. THIS is harmful to the gaming industry, games and gamers. It's someone saying art is misogynistic and makes people misogynistic and people who don't consumer that form of art are agreeing blindly because she's an "expert".

You're conflating what she's received in the past and her getting harassment anyway to her getting harassed and saying it's coming from a group without proving that group is doing anything of the kind to her.

Why is she getting attention for her involvement in GamerGate from the media?
Have you watched ABC Nightline that was just last week?
Have you read ANY article in the last 5 months on GamerGate?
Because just about everything is saying GamerGate is harassment campaign and has her face slapped on it, but nothing's actually providing proof there's ANY harassment coming from GamerGate.

This is literally what the argument against GamerGate is.

"Kotaku investigated Kotaku and found Kotaku is innocent of all wrong doings. Anyone holding Kotaku responsible for Kotaku's lack of ethics and requesting Kotaku be held to better ethical standards is harassing women and misogynistic." - Kotaku

"Misogynist are harassing women in the gaming industry according to Kotaku, let's talk to someone unrelated to the controversy. Why are misogynist harassing you in relation to the controversy?" - Mainstream Media

"ZOMFG!!111!11 I don't play games, but why is this person that doesn't play games being harassed by misogynist?!?!??!! Well I better get on the intertubes and give those misogynist a piece of my mind!!" - Public that doesn't know what the hell is going on

"Um... We're not harassing anyone... We just write e-mails to advertisers for shitty click bait gaming websites and chat with other gamers on twitter about shitty click bait journalist and gaming related stuff... person unrelated to the controversy is entitled to their opinion, but they're not an expert on gaming, they're full of shit and I don't personally like them." - #GamerGate

"MISOGYNIST!!!!11!1!!11!!" - Kotaku, Mainstream media, Public that doesn't know what the hell is going on

"LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!! - Trolls"

WTF DID I JUST READ?!!!!

Hand in your nerd badge and GTFO, you've failed all logic and lose the internet -_-

You dislike person X therefore you dislike person Y for the same reason? No, I dislike person X because she's a hypocritical abuser, professional victim and people won't stop talking about her. Plus she's been give a free pass from being criticized for being hypocritical abuser and professional victim because of her gender. <== this is sexism at it's finest. If the genders had been reversed concerning the Zoe post, we'd be praising Zoe for being a strong independent women that called out an abusive ex. I know, I've actually praised women in the past for doing exactly that, but Eron gets shit on by people that NEVER even read his post, which has evidence FROM ZOE that she was an abuser. On top of this she's ACTUALLY used sex to further her career reinforcing the negative stereotype that that's how women in the industry operate.

She's rich brat that comes from a rich family and a horrible human being who's being defended for being a horrible human being at the expense of hardworking women and other indi devs just trying to make ends meet. She's taken advantage of her "privilege", real privilege, not this made up "you're white so you never had to work for anything in your life and the fact that you don't know that means your privileged" privilege, to ATTACK things like the WizzardChans, TFYC and GamerGate. AND SHE'S GETTING AWAY WITH IT!!

I dislike person Y, because she's a liar and a con artist that had NOTHING to do with the current situation, but inserted herself and claimed, without proof, people looking for ethics in journalism were attacking her. Even though THOSE people tracked down one of her harassers to HELP her and she's gotten a shit ton of media attention for slandering them.

Go read the comments on ABC Nightline's Youtube video with her, or their Facebook page, the VAST majority of commenters, including women, see right through it, but she's STILL held up by people like you as an example of how bad "gamers" are because they don't like being talked down to and told they're misogynistic shitlords for playing Mario because Peach is a "damsel in distress", by someone that plays a real life damsel in distress and HATES GAMES. Then when anyone so much as scratches their head in her direction, MISOGYNY!!!!.

Other than the fact that BOTH these women are using GamerGate as a spring board for attention they are completely unrelated. I hate a lot of people, most of whom are men, Jack Thompson, Nathan Grayson, Sam Biddle, Geordie Tait, Barnie the Dinosaur and the Red Power Ranger to name a few and I don't hate them all for the same reason, not even for remotely the same reasons. And God help you if you say no one else on Earth has a common hatred for Sam Biddle and Barnie the Dinosaur -_-

Sex was inconsequential. Nathan was friends with Zoe going back as far as 2012, twitter history proves that. On top of that Nathan was thanked in the games credits, so even if they weren't having a sexual relationship, he was promoting his own game without disclosure and was friends with the dev he was writing about, without disclosure. Even if it was two days after he'd written about her, it's still proof their relationship was close enough he should have recused himself or disclosed the relationship.

Also the whole mess with Nathan Grayson was only the tip of the iceberg. Milo Yiannopoulos released the GameJournoPro mailing list, which was based of the JournoList mailing list that was a huge scandal in the mainstream media and got people fired back in 2010 for blacklisting and collusion, but hey didn't work for them lets start anther one. For the most part the GJP was harmless, but they did discuss blacklisting people, donating to patreons of gamedevs, how to narrate the GamerGate story, what game developers to suppress and what ones to promote, which is all collusion.

Then there's the "Gamers are Dead" articles, which discuss the death of the "Gamer" identity. 10+ nearly identically worded articles all released in 24 hours, sorry but if that doesn't prove collusion I don't know what does. These articles are ACTUALLY what got GamerGate going. I could have cared less about Zoe Quinn and Nathan Grayson, but the gaming media slandering an entire demographic that's supposed to be their customers? To what end? In defense of their poor behaviour and being asked to be more ethical? Yeah that didn't fly with me, and if you look at the Topsy graph you can see August 28th is where GamerGate starts to go in to full swing.

What's really funny though is at the end of the graph where #GamerGate is still getting 20K-25K tweets a day, most of the people I got into #GamerGate with aren't even using the tag anymore. We're all mostly following each other now, so using the tag to talk is pointless, we just read our regular twitter feeds, or spend time on KiA, or 8Chan. I'm pretty much just a twitter user myself, but I'm warming up to KiA. It's really easy to miss info on twitter and 140 characters sucks and encourages people to get into on sentence slap fights. Which is pretty much all you see on the #GamerGate tag now.

The big issue is people are SOOOOOOO hung up on Zoe Quinn, most of us didn't care about her in the first place, but we're forever stuck explaining the origins rather than talking about what's happened since. GamerGate has already been successful:

• It had several sites update their ethical policies, The Escapist, IGN, and PC Gamer.
• Journalist ARE using disclosures now.
• It helped point out blacklisting and collusion in the industry, like the blacklisting of Allistair Pinsof.
• Pushed the FTC along in updating their guidelines and they're investigating sites like Gawker.
• Cost Gawker Media millions in lost ad revenue and forced them to retroactively update articles with associated links
• As a bonus GamerGate's donated over $120K to various projects to get women into the industry (TFYC & BasedGamer), and charities (anti-bullying, suicide prevention, UNICEF, GamerFruit, etc..) http://gamergate.me/charity/

So whatever happens to GamerGate from here on out, it's already a win. People can throw all the crap they want at Gamers. Where people sit around and complain about the media or just accept it's corrupt and there's nothing to be done, we stood up and made an ACTUAL difference, even if people don't want to recognize it.

I would have just gone with, "Sex was inconsequential. Nathan was friends with Zoe going back as far as 2012, twitter history proves that. On top of that Nathan was thanked in the games credits, so even if they weren't having a sexual relationship, he was promoting his own game without disclosure and was friends with the dev he was writing about, without disclosure. Even if it was two days after he'd written about her, it's still proof their relationship was close enough he should have recused himself or disclosed the relationship."

No, no no, no no no. "social justice advocate" is not the same as "social justice warrior" and you don't get to change the phrasing you're arguing about now just to suit your need.

We'll there's your problem, you find it offensive and don't like other people defining it for you. Maybe think about why "Gamers" are so mad they've been labeled cis-white-male shitlord misogynerds?

I wasn't disagreeing with you. Just pointing out SJW has a specific meaning, at least as to how I've come to understand it, it's a specific type of hypocrite.

As to the harassment a lot of it can be found here

I only just read about that last night. Something about her trying to claim Linux == GamerGate == 8Chan therefore Lin... MISOGYNNNNNYYYYY!!!!

I don't know enough about her to bring her up here, but apparently she's pissed at Linus for being a dick? which everyone on /. I'm sure can agree to, but I think most of us would shrug it of as, "so"...

I'm not aware of her profiting off of it just yet though, but I'm sure she's working up to it.

The claim you made was "everyone knows", which is an appeal to popularity. The terms SJW and Social Justice have alternate meanings to lots of people, what you're presenting is, "everyone agrees with me" while MANY people are disagreeing with you, RIGHT IN THIS THREAD. Therefore "everyone" does not believe what you say they believe. The example you provided (http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/202080/origin-of-the-phrase-social-justice-warrior) links to a page using RationalWiki and twitter as sources so it's just as relevant as Googling "Social Justice Warrior" and aggregating the top ten results, which clearly defines it as something other than you're trying to define it as.

I'm not insulting you personally, just pointing out that you're clearly wrong with your argument in saying, "everyone" as a way to BTFO people that clearly are not agreeing with you.

I support the dictionary definition of feminism:

But that doesn't mean I support crack pots that claim to be "feminist" so they can justify attacking a man over his shirt.

How feminism is defined and how it's perceived are two entirely different things. In one case it's dictionary definition is used as, "You support equal rights for women, great you're a feminist then!!", on the back end it's used to justify out right attacking people that are "anti-feminist" as being "anti-women" and the use of positive discrimination, which has NOTHING to do with women's rights and everything to do with forcing people to comply with a minority ideology. I've seen people, women, claim to be egalitarians because they don't like the public perception of feminism and get practically lynched for it. I REALLY want feminism to survive, but if it's going to, people need to separate "I support equal rights for all" feminist from the "Boys are dumb, throw rocks at them" feminist.

TL;DR - How something is defined in a book is not always how it's used in practice.

Do you not know what site you're posting on?

It's a form of adhom, "Look at all the horrible things he's said about WOMEN!!", rest of anything else he has to say is irrelevant. It's usually followed by, "HE'S THE LEADER OF GAMERGATE!! IF YOU SUPPORT ETHICS IN JOURNALISM YOU SUPPORT MISOGYNY!!!", because you can't obviously agree with people on some points, but disagree with them entirely on others.

Six anonymous female developers, at the very beginning of GamerGate. I read them and the articles were highly suspicious, I'm skeptical when someone won't put a name (even a sudo name) on something they've said. Others who commented in favor of GamerGate, like all the devs that also support GamerGate, were quickly threatened and had their games boycotted... Which turned out to be a big mistake on the oppositions part. They called for a boycott, GamerGate had the game green-lit.

Both sides are a minority of gamers overall, GamerGate (pro and anti) is some 150,000 accounts on twitter, Facebook groups, KiA (pro subreddit >25,000), GamerGhazi (anti subreddit ~4,750 subs)... The opposition seems to be primarily made up of non-gamers, or people that hate gaming and gamers at the very least. The pro-GamerGate side is MUCH larger than the opposition. Then there's everyone else that just doesn't care one way or the other and/or points and laughs at both sides for being idiots.

Here's a guy that did a really nice network analysis of the twitter tag, who suffered a lot of abuse for it.
http://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2...
http://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2...
http://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2...
http://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2...
http://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2...