User talk:FuzzyCatPotato/Gamergate

No offense, but this is simultaneously verbose and misses utterly critical portions of the Gamergate...thing.

• If you want to discuss harassment of women in technology, Kathy Sierra's harassment by weev is far more relevant than Dina Karam, especially since weev has turned out to be pro-gg and her harassment is much more like Quinn's, including false claims of DMCA abuse.

• The Zoe Post can be cut down significantly. It really needs only to include the salient points that: Quinn has testified under oath that EG physically abused her and has a restraining order against him. He intentionally made it salacious and included the implications of corruption if "shit went south" He posted his slut-shaming tirade to several forums, where it was removed before he finally put it on /v/ and other imageboards. GG has its origins under the slut-shaming name of #burgersandfries and the Quinnspiracy.

• You've omitted #notyourshield and its origins as a shield against criticism and ties to /pol/. You've totally omitted the email campaigns that completely backfired. You omitted the term Literally Who and its sexist application only to women. You've totally omitted the Gamers are Dead articles, the backlash to which were arguably the gasoline on the fire.

• Meanwhile, you've included irrelevant things that fall under the category of, as many critics of the article have called, Gators "wiping thier ass" and "picking their nose" Such as the New Yorker article, ESEA's statement, Techraptor, which is only relevant as a gator created media outlet, and focused on TotalBiscuit's "neutrality" when the thread on his twitlonger(where he repeated the false allegations of DMCA abuse) was moderated, which was one of the flashpoints for creating the Quinnspiracy, Baldwin being unaware that Gamergate was the term for the type of ant, etc.

In short, you've missed important stuff to include unimportant stuff. I won't edit it just yet, however.Cykosys (talk) 00:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

... All of these are probably true, not least because this was an incomplete reorganization draft, not a rewrite. I suggest editing the Gamergate article itself to reflect your points. Cømrade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 01:32, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Wait, are you talking about this article or the more detailed article this is intended to summarize?Cykosys (talk) 03:37, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

This article. Instead of doing any reformatting (not summarizing, said idea was discarded) here, I've been chatting with Ryulong about reformatting the main GG article. FuzzyCatTomato (talk/stalk) 03:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Um, I'm still slightly confused. I'll edit this article to address my criticisms in the meantime but I was under the impression this would eventually serve as the main article, whether it's a summary or reformatting. Cykosys (talk) 03:51, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Just as an aside

I always thought this was a great read. ^^ Reverend Black Percy (talk) 11:39, 21 January 2017 (UTC)