• Grey

    I disagree that a singular voice is needed. While the opposition seems to favor speaking with one voice, the same party lines, and following the leader, many of the complaints against the media included collusion and cronyism, and an authoritarian agenda according to some. So it is in the favor of the supporters of the group to not only be diverse, but to show their diversity while still, at the heart of it, singing in the same key.

    • http://jackgraal.com/ Jack Graal

      Thank you for your thoughts. I just don’t see a way to resolve this without extracting the wise ideas and conclusions from the trololo crowd.

    • TITAN

      I have to agree with Grey, The Anti-GamerGate side want us to have leaders so they have people to pick apart and attack, our more well known members have already had knives, syinges of chemicals, SWAT teams and fire trucks sent to their homes. They also tell us we should get a new # because they fear our unity.
      Having no leaders may in the long run make it harder for us to come to the table but it is also our greatest strength and our best line of self defence.

    • http://jackgraal.com/ Jack Graal

      Well, I think that both “sides” should have a more clear voice. And right now the “Anti-GamerGate side”, as you call them, is more anonymous which, in my opinion, is bad for the whole situation and makes it more violent and chaotic.

    • Dustin Geels

      more anonymous bullshit these are named people with their fucking jobs listed saying and doing this shit they aren’t anonymous they simply don’t give a fuck they think they are untouchable

    • Howard

      I would also like to mention a with the leaving of prominent gamergate member king of pol showed that with leaders it is easily had easily corruptible weakness. He had good intentions but he did use falsified information.

  • James

    Hi Jack, thanks for exploring and talking about both aspects of GamerGate in a reasoned manner.

    Just to give some background to my reply, I’ve been following GamerGate since the “Gamers are dead” articles on twitter, 4/8chan, and KotakuInAction, but despite that I do only speak for myself. And I write this comment BECAUSE you seem like a reasonable person who appreciates good discussion. If you have any replies specifically to me, or just future articles in general about GamerGate, I would like to read them.

    First of all (since you brought her up), Anita has been receiving (completely unjustified, let me make that clear) death threats for a while due to her controversial Feminst Frequency videos. The internet being a huge anonymous place, some trolls latched on to the content of her videos and made such terrible threats either because they themselves felt threatened by her content, or they we just being contrarian to get some perverse joy out of it. NO ONE LIKES THIS. A reason why people such as myself do not like her is because even though these videos are funded and she is a public personality, she has never responsed to any criticism of her videos or attempted an open dialogue (and trust me, there’s lots of valid, rational criticism of them out there). But because of these trolls, any attempt to criticise is met with “you’re just another troll, blocked”, and no discussion can take place.

    In the first few weeks of Gamergate, Anita released another one of her videos, and predictably she was unfortunately attacked on twitter again. For some reason, journalists seized on this as Gamergate’s true nature, instead of accusing the same unaffiliated group of trolls that had attacked her every other time she had released a video. This is lazy at best and lying to deflect criticism at worst.

    It’s very important to understand what a consumer revolt means from a practical standpoint. One consumer has very little power, so they need to
    group together by necessity to be heard, and when you have an open group
    that relies on a large number of people to have any traction, that a
    handful are assholes is inevitable. One of things I implied earlier is that Anita’s trolls are not part of Gamergate. They might be! I don’t know for sure because of anonymity. But even if they are, how can we filter them out? We report harassment on twitter, reddit, or 8chan where we see it. This may be a exaggerated comparison (I don’t really have time to find a
    more appropriate analogy) but I think it’s relevant; using the logic that the trolls have tainted Gamergate and it should be ended because of it is like saying the Arab spring demonstrations should have been quelled solely because
    looting was occurring.

    This is getting way too long, but I want to address your point of anonymity. The truth is that not all of us are public personalities like journalists, bloggers, or media critics. For those of us with usual jobs, if someone rings up the office and falsely accuses us of doing things online, the office doesn’t have time to deal with this shit and there’s a good chance you’ll be the casualty. Example: https://twitter.com/j_millerworks/status/513272855505940480

    Even aside from that, is it relevant if you know that my name is James? If a piece of writing is sincere and the floor is open for discussion, does it matter who “owns” the idea?
    Too many arguments and different pieces of writing? Listen to find the majority! Try engaging one or two people who seem to share the opinion of that majority so see if their reasons are rational! Take appropriate action to see if that appeases anyone! There may be more than one issue, so you may need to rinse/repeat.

    Damn, writing this bullshit at midnight with work tomorrow. Apologies if there’s any mistakes or typos.

    • http://jackgraal.com/ Jack Graal

      Hi James,
      thank you for this VERY long, but really solid comment :)

      As you can notice above, I didn’t use any names except Anita’s. I mentioned her not because of her stand on #GamerGate thing, but just as a figure I could make an example of. And to point that everyone has rights, but these rights are a privilege, not a weapon.

      About the anonymity, I believe there doesn’t have to be one personal voice, but rather a more clear message of what is every “side” trying to say. If someone is not responding to valid arguments, then he or she is not worth the discussion. But when they are not responding, and people start attacking each other – that is a problem.

      Also, If a Jack, or a Jill, or a James, just like you, is making good points and knows what he is talking about, then, as you said before, the floor is open for discussion.

      But we have to remember that majority is not always right. That’s why democracy is working only because the majority has someone elected as its voice. Otherwise there would be ostracism and anyone who does not agree with the majority would be expelled.

  • Wavinator

    Thank you for a fairer article than mainstream media deigned to run. Retweeted it.

  • Patrick Cooper

    Notice how this guy goes to great lengths to pain women as victims while completely leaving out stuff like GameJournoPros, the Media blackout… the Wikipedia manipulation… the ungodly amount of evidence of collusion… the outright blacklists…

    None of THAT gets mentioned… Of course not. He knows who butters his bread.

  • Pingback: REPLAYLISTA #4 - Kung Fury i biali nieludzie | JackGraal.com()