re: #7 RadicalModerate

And they are leaders why? Because someone said so? Or because they themselves said so (because of course they would)?

The fact remains that there is no official org called GamerGate Inc., so all so-called leaders are by necessity self-appointed. Some, like Roosh (who, I read, attached himself relatively late by creating a site to make money) and Milo Ywhatever are actually piggybacking on this phenomenon.

I have yet to see anything that would preclude one from being a GG’r while despising the said individuals and their methods, as well as opposing doxxing etc. And that’s my whole point. There are lots of bad folks associated with GG but from this it simply does not follow that any particular individual supports threats, harassment, doxxing etc. (which remains true even if most GG’rs are bad, slimey douches - because there are different kinds of bad; you may be an asshole without being a supporter of criminals). And you accused Kita of these things specifically because he’s a GG’r. That’s a logical fallacy.

Just as well, because OWS was started by the antisemitic org AdBusters, had folks like Norman Finkelstein speak at its protests, had some terrorist or otherwise criminal supporters, does not allow the assumption that an average participant was some kind of an evildoer. (The same applies to a whole range of other phenomena, like Islam etc.)

Just consider this - do you really want to be in the same camp as Charles C Johnson and Alex Jones on this discussion? Because both are well documented as being in the “pro-gamergate” group.

First of all the “you” is misplaced, as I have unequivocally indicated where I stand vis a vis GG.

I’m not on GG’s side, just like during the Occupy times I wasn’t on OWS’ side, which didn’t stop me from taking shots at KT’s BS tactics. Second, do you not understand that this is as much a logical fallacy as “[insert baddie’s name] took this position, do you really want to be on his side”?

This is not about taking sides or tribalism. It’s about the basic intellectual consistency.