[Poit]

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD Mainly journalistic integrity, but it's growing into improving several facets of gaming media and culture. End to harassment/bullying, transparency between companies and news sites, greater diversity, more women speaking up for themselves, etc. Every time a new smear embargo is lifted; a new goal is added. GG would not have as positive a message it has if the game journos didn't try so hard to smear the group as a whole. But yeah, the assholes are poisoning the well. Both sides got major harassment.

Where in the goals of Gamergate are tasks such as flooding research surveys with harassing responses?

What is a smear embargo?

If Gamergate supposedly has such a "positive message", why is it associated with so much harassment, threats, and so forth?

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD Stephen Totilo saying "I've looked into it, nothing was wrong" is not something with a truth value. It could be that he truly feels nothing was wrong with his writer having a relationship with his subject. His senior editorial judgment that it's not wrong in itself can't be judged as truth or lie, it's his call. His site. We do think it's wrong, particularly when another writer of his promoted games from her girlfriend and her roommate on Kotaku without disclosing her personal relationships.

Why do you not believe Totilo? What did Quinn do that was wrong?

Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD Off the top of my head, these are the sites most closely related to the unethical actions we wanna root out (it hasn't been confirmed that there's corruption per se but people are looking into financial ties - there's some shit about Fez winning an indy games award that was... educational): Kotaku (Ed: Stephen Totilo) RockPaperShotgun Polygon (Ed: Ben Kuchira, who is certainly on the darker side of things) Gamasutra (where is Leigh Alexander is STILL employed) Ars Technica.

So, wait, I'm confused. There's no confirmation of corruption, but you're going after these sites anyway?