I'm guessing that most people understood the parent comment's reference to that faux crusade for "ethics in game journalism", hence the (deserved) downvotes.
Edit: When I posted this, the parent comment was only 2 sentences long.
Edit: When I posted this, the parent comment was only 2 sentences long.
1. People who are in fact concerned about the sorry ethical state of game journalism.
2. Trolls and jerks who have jumped in to cause trouble, mostly by attacking women in groups #3 and #4.
3. The game journalists whose ethics are being called into question.
4. Assorted "social justice" activists. They showed up because the original spark that set all this off was a lying, vindictive open letter from an ex-boyfriend of female developer, accusing her and some journalists of unethical practices, and that caused the developer to receive some very inappropriate comments. The letter was fairly quickly discredited, but the incident did get may fired up to do something about long standing unethical game journalists, which had long been something people were annoyed about but never got organized enough to do anything about, which is what led to the formation of group #1.
5. Group #1 includes many female gamers. Many of them have been receiving death threats and rape threats. It's not clear if these are coming from people in group #4, or if there is a distinct group of trolls and jerks similar to #2 but who have decided to attack #1 instead of #3 and #4.
Currently:
• group #1 is concentrating on fighting #3, and trying to keep #2 out.
• group #2 is attacking #3 and #4, and trying to make sure #1 gets blamed.
• group #3 is trying hard to make sure people don't consider the points #1, by making sure to cover all the activities of #2, which they attribute to #1, and ignoring group #5's activities.
• group #4 is fighting group #2's actions, which they often attribute to group #1.
• group #5 is fighting the women in group #1.
There may be other groups. The women in group #1 maybe should be considered a separate group, because in addition to fighting #3, many of them are also fighting #4.
If I've made any mistakes leave a comment.
[2] https://github.com/Noelkd/GamerGateGraphiz/blob/master/Gamer...
[3] https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Noelkd/GamerGateGraphiz/ma...
> Not to mention the complete lack of journalistic ethics on Kotaku. They frequently post articles about games they have financial or personal ties to, without disclosure.
You assert that this is a "valid point", but I believe a better characterization would be that it is an extremely broad, unsourced claim.
Posting sources would have felt like an attempt to hijack the discussion to steer it towards a specific industry's problems, rather than focusing on Gawker and Kotaku's association with the parent article's reported moral failings. Given the amount of discussion following my comment I can see that the topic is important or interesting enough to merit posting the sources, however I am currently away from my personal computer where I have access to the communities and resources to be able to provide those sources.
If you are truly interested in the subject, later this evening I will post another reply to this comment with sources and articles.