TR Member Perks!

Lo it was discovered journalistic malpractice was the way of The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, The LA Times, MSNBC, CNN, Salon, and The Mary Sue when WAM published the Harassment On Twitter report and their narrative was torn asunder.

-The Gospel According to GamerGate 13:37

Women, Action, & the Media published a report about Twitter harassment.  Data was collected during a three week period in November 2014, when WAM was granted authorized reporter status by Twitter.  According to the report, WAM accepted reports of harassment over Twitter, assessed them, and escalated specific reports for special attention by Twitter. Here’s what we learned from the report.

The Media Narrative About GG Was a Lie

Active members of GamerGate already knew this, but it bears saying out loud.  The New York Times, The Washington Post, The LA Times, MSNBC, CNN, among others couldn’t be bothered to do any research whatsoever about GamerGate when they wrote their SocJus propaganda.  Here is a fact:

Only 12% of 512 alleged harassing accounts were GamerGate related, which is 65 accounts total.

Let’s go a step further.  There are nearly 10,000 accounts in the ggautoblocker blacklist that’s been used by nearly everyone to “identify” GamerGate supporters.  Of those 10,000, only 65 accounts were flagged as harassing.  Written as a percentage, .65% of GamerGate supporting accounts are harassing accounts.  The media narrative was a lie, which we’ve known since most of us got here after the 2 Minutes Hate on Labor Day Weekend 2014, and the narrative should be well and truly dead.

I’m not suggesting the media outlets mentioned above do the same kind of research WAM did in order to write this report.  I’m suggesting they spend some time where the majority of GamerGate supporters hangout, Twitter and the Kotaku in Action subreddit, ask questions, and decide for themselves.  Not a single person, beyond my wife, has ever asked me why I support GamerGate.  Until someone in the media finds to courage to ask those questions, I expect the media narrative will continue to be opposite what the data shows.

The question going forward is two fold: 1) will the media outlets that miscast GamerGate as a harassment movement or hate movement recant and attack the individuals who are harassing? 2) Will the media narrative going forward change in the least?

I’ll believe it when I see it.

GGautoblocker is .65% Effective and 99.35% Industry Blacklist

Randi Harper’s ggautoblocker is one of the worst designed and implemented pieces of software ever written.  All it takes to determine autoblocker’s profound lack of quality is to look at the code.  Autoblocker is designed to be a guilt-by-association Scarlet Letter as a means of passive-aggressively bullying consumer advocates out of the GamerGate movement. It was so badly designed, one of IGDA’s own chapter presidents was flagged by it.  It was greenlit by IGDA thanks to the first 2 Rules of SocJus, and because Kate Edwards well and truly knows nothing about software design or development, yet somehow continues in her role as Executive Director of IGDA.

Going back to the WAM data for a moment, my personal opinion is someone screwed up by using ggautoblocker as a source for GamerGate supporting accounts. Who’s to say the ggautoblocker list is an accurate representation of GamerGate supporters?  I’m a GG supporter, yet I’m not on the blocker, as far as I know. The Kotaku in Action subreddit has over 30,000 subscribers, for example.

But even the 30,000 number is troubling.  Some of the KiA subscribers are vacuum brained Ghazi-ites.  Others are members of the vastly more reasonable AgainstGamerGate subreddit as well, which inflates the number of accounts.  Given that GamerGate isn’t a harassment movement, I don’t see a need to overpopulate the number of Twitter accounts supporting the hashtag, especially if we apply the 1% Rule to reddit subscription numbers.

I suppose you could start with ggautoblocker’s 10,000 accounts, use the 1% Rule applied to social media, and take some sort of “fudge factor” to account for anti-GamerGate people who are, by WAM’s definition, false flagging, report trolling, and spewing to make GamerGate look like something it’s not.

If one were to do all this, one would end up with a “number of GamerGate supporters” at around 70,000.  The next problem is to know who those accounts’ Twitter handles, so WAM could determine whether or not the accounts are harassing.  That’s the rub, so while I’m skeptical of the methodology used by WAM to collect their data, I also concede their way was the best way to collect data given the time allowed.  My point in all this is simply the percentage of GamerGate supporting Twitter accounts that are also harassing accounts is artificially high because of the source data picked due to time constraints.

Picking the source data they did actually makes ggautoblocker look more effective than it actually is as an anti-harassment tool.

Of course, Harper created the tool to be used as an industry blacklist, which is why no one at IGDA looked at it before it was given the green light as an anti-harassment tool.  If anyone following Milo is automatically out of the running for gaming industry jobs, then there would have to be positions available for the fundamentally unemployable, dishonest, and incompetent, right?

WAM Should Be Celebrated For Letting the Data Tell the Story

Let me be the first to say how happy I am that WAM collected the data and reported on the data they collected.  They’d have every reason to not report on the data, specifically the GamerGate data, in favor of making a series of alarmist claims about online harassment relative to GamerGate. 

The “cry wolf GamerGate” strategy has worked for every member of SocJus that’s tried it so far; thus, I posit the following: What would Dan Golding, Katherine Cross, Jill Pantozzi, or the SocJus holy trinity (Wu, Sarkeesian, and Quinn) have done had they possessed this data and reported on it?

You’re fooling yourself if you think you’d have seen inlays stating that only 12% of total reports over  the reporting period were related to GamerGate.  You’re fooling yourself if you think they would have reported the starting point for “what is GamerGate” was Harper’s blacklist.  You’re fooling yourself if you think the entire report would have been anything other than Chicken Little shrieking “Twitter is falling! Twitter is falling!”  The WAM report is calm, cool, and collected; it makes reasonable criticisms of the current systems in place for handling harassment, and the report would be a good jumping off point for any downstream discussions on how to make Twitter better relative to online harassment.

A second point, and far less important, is a fundamental problem with harassment reporting on Twitter in general.  It’s not the idea of “authorized reporter status”.  I actually kind of like that, assuming if WAM is going to be a authorized reporter, then men’s equivalent would also be an authorized reporter. Ideally, I’d much prefer ideology stay out of harassment reporting altogether, but I’m asking for way too much from the “criticism is harassment” SocJus crowd for my preference to be reality.

What I think needs to be done away with totally is being able to report a harassing Twitter account on a stranger’s behalf.  The WAM data actually brings this weakness in reporting to light, as 53% of all reports were made by other parties, and of those reports, bystanders were a 3:1 majority over official delegates.  It’s clear, based on this sample, there are far too many busybodies with nothing better to do than report a troll for other people who may or may not consider an individual tweet to be harassment.  When we’re (well, not me, because I’m a white, heterosexual, well-adjusted, career-oriented male, but I mean the Royal we, when I say we’re) working on the fix for Twitter harassment, the short comings in the reporting process, specifically proxy reporting by strangers, should be addressed at the same time other reporting solutions are presented.

So, nice work, WAM.  You’ve proven to have more courage than most of the main stream press and online gaming press combined when it comes to treating GamerGate fairly and treating consumers like adults.  As both a GamerGate supporter and adult consumer, I appreciate that.

Todd Wohling

A long time ago on an Intellivision far, far away my gaming journey started with Lock n' Chase, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons The Cloudy Mountain, and Night Stalker. I earned both a BS-Physics and a BS-Mathematics from the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire. Today I spend most of my time on PC. I left a career of 14 years in aerospace in Colorado, so I could immigrate to Norway.

  • plasmacutter

    I am simply floored that the same organization which served as a tool for censorship of prominent critics of feminism for months has actually released such an illuminating document.

    Good luck getting the fundamentally arrogant narcissists in the media to acknowledge it or, god forbid, offer retractions, apologies, or clear the air.

    These are the same people who brought us “WMDs in Iraq”, mocked and belittled occupy, and doctored footage to make the tea party protests look much larger than they were.

  • MRAlias

    I wonder if Gamergate should try to get the MSM to retract or update their articles seeing as they’ve been proven false.

  • TheScienceEnthusiast1130

    Here is another video clip that exposes the evil feminists:

  • Dulius

    Either they learned a lesson (not likely) or the numbers were just too overwhelemingly against their ideologies.

    Even Shaw has managed (once) to produce something that said “I thought X but got Y as the answer”

  • ArsCortica

    The MSM will never admit that their coverage was bs unless directly forced to simply because they thrive on the same form of outrage culture which the corrupt gaming journalism sites like Craptaku and Co. make their money from. It thus should not come as a big surprise that they will do everything in their power to suppress or undermine evidence that goes against their little narrative.

  • Eralun

    Good on WAM for putting facts before ideology.

  • Robert Grosso

    The numbers are pretty solid, and only re-affirm how most of the allegations are bunk.

    What do we do with them now is the better question.

  • It looks like the bill is coming due and the media is trying to hide from the collectors.

  • Kain Yusanagi

    Then promptly used that paper as a source to cite for a paper that instead comes to the conclusion she desired. >_>

  • crydiego

    Wow, you need to read the list again. New York Time, MSMBC, CNN, …I don’t have a political side here I just know they do. I don’ t think gg has a political element anyway.

  • Of 70K total #GG supporters, 65 were found to be tweeting abuse? I must be one of them, and the “abuse” I tweeted was to quote a feminist’s own words back to her. I suspect the number is even lower than 65

  • crydiego

    Never start a ground war in Asia and don’t spit on Gammers!

  • Parrikle

    Analysing statistics is always tricky, and with these sorts of numbers it is hard to reach any solid conclusions. But it is worth keeping a few points in mind:

    * The 512 accounts alleged to have been involved in harassment are from the entire of Twitter, with the massive number of people who use it. This seems small, and I’d expect there to be a lot more harassment, but if we assume that it is representative …
    * … 12% of all accounts on Twitter that were alleged to have been involved in harassment during the survey period were connected to GamerGate.

    This isn’t something that speaks favourably of GG. If 12% of all harassment came from one group, that group would appear to be disproportionately represented in those figures.

    * Identification of GamerGate accounts was only through being listed on the blacklist.
    * Accordingly, it is possible that more than 12% came from Twitter accounts connected to GG, on the grounds that not all GG accounts were on the blacklist.

    I would expect more of the accused accounts to be from GG, but as mentioned in the article, there is no way to tell given the parameters of the study.

    * Accounts had to be reported as being possibly involved in harassment in order to make the list.
    * Given that we can assume that not all harassment was reported (and traditionally only a very small percentage of harassment is), it is possible that the percentage of GG accounts that may have been involved in harassment was significantly higher.

    On the other hand:

    * The WAM project was closely connected to GamerGate. Thus GamerGate may have been more likely to be reported than other groups involved in harassment, and may therefore be disportionally represented in the figures.
    * Not all accounts on the blacklist were necessarily GG accounts. So the 12% may be misleading.
    * The percentage of accounts actively opposed to GamerGate that were involved in harassment wasn’t able to be calcuated.

    The thing is, the only definite claim that can be made from those figures is that GamerGate supporters were alledged to have been involved on harassment over Twitter. Which does not speak well of GamerGate, as it shows that harassment was occuring under the GG banner. And if the figures are accurate, to say that GamerGate is responsible for 12% of all reported accounts involved in harassment on Twitter is not something that speaks well of the movement.

  • moose

    provided there isn’t some form of time limit I would be tempted to do that, and if they don’t then report them to regulatory bodies. I know one particular news site I would like to see issue an apology *cough guardian cough*

  • webkilla

    A beautiful article. And like Plasmacutter said: That WAM isn’t also appologizing or at least retracting their statements on GG, in the face of these facts, is pure stubborn lunacy at this point

  • peori

    Did they have much choice other than to be honest about it now? Given that it’s clear Gamergate isn’t going away any time soon, has been effective in its goals and is still watching, plus the journalism committee thing on the horizon – it seems like it would be corporate suicide for WAM to get caught manipulating data now. It’s not like early on when they were clearly using ideological bias with regards to who got suspended on Twatter, where it was easy to show the bias but kinda hard to prove given the excuses they can trot out; such as being overwhelmed by reports and things slipping through the cracks.

    Maybe I’m being overly cynical but I don’t think they deserve much more than a wary acknowledgement that they’re smart enough not to scuttle their own gravy boat.

  • Tlewis2376

    There were WMD’s in Iraq or were those drums of Chemical Weapons I helped dispose of just make believe?

  • King of Bros

    To say 65 people in a 10k group are harassers is great for us actually
    you can try reslicing the bread a thousand ways but it won’t change
    It’s also ignoring this very simple factor:we have very vocal detractors who say reporting us to WAM as their change to rid themselves of us for good
    So that’s focused reporting ON GG rather than policing the entirety of twitter

  • SIlver666

    SJWs: But..but..but Anita said….
    Intelligent People: Anita is not god you moron!

  • Chuck Starduster

    Sadly, the SocJus crowd will still try to ignore these facts, because they FEEL harassed (by facts), and feels always come before facts for them.

  • Ben Kuyt

    They do that a lot, don’t they? They ignore facts instead of looking at the data because it helps their narrative. Look at the rape statistics and stuff. Nothing is good enough.

  • mbits

    Guess what?

    The media narrative about the truth about the media narrative is going to be spun, too — so it is irrelevant.

    Also, it can still be pretty powerful for their side since everyone is so sympathetic toward them when they say “a whopping 12% of *all* harassment is committed by gamergate”. Even if it were one percent, that is a huge statistic for them to throw around. To say that “one percent of ALL online harassment is committed by gamergate” is massive.

    And of course, there is a difference between “by gamergate” and “by someone using the gamergate hashtag”.

  • Audie Bakerson

    Seriously, Sadam used chemical weapons on his own people. How can anyone sane deny Iraq had chemical weapons?

  • Robert Grosso

    I agree on that, which is a problem that needs to be addressed.

    That said, with some sort of statistical analysis we now have some data to actually begin to back up the more positive aspects behind GamerGate. What needs to change, however, is that the people involved in GamerGate need to really get on the same page when it comes to this entire ordeal.

  • Parrikle

    But the data doesn’t say that only 65 people out of 10k are harassers. It says that 65 of out of 512 accounts accused of harassment are GamerGaters. The remaining GG accounts either a) weren’t involved in harassment, b) engaged in harassment by weren’t reported for it, or c) were reported for harassment but weren’t identified as GamerGaters.We don’t know how many people fall into a, b, or c. That’s the limit of the study. It can say what percentage of accounts reported were identified as GamerGaters, but it can’t say what percentage of GamerGaters were involved in harassment.

  • mikey

    … lol….. SO this is where you take the data and run

  • Fenrir007

    To the media, it was never about truth, but perception – and they had a monopoly on that for a damn long time. But we came along to challenge that, and it seems to be working.

  • Ricardo Lima

    They should but either because of their ideology or to save face they wont.

  • Ralin Storm

    Reddit subs started banning anyone discussing or posting anything relating to lies about GG a few months ago.

  • Splattergrunt

    I honestly suspect that the GG “supported” accounts were just accounts that mentioned GG…supported or not

  • David

    There are tens of thousands of people on the #GG hashtag. Not just 500. One data scientist estimated there were between 150-200k people on Twitter on the hashtag. There are over 7 million tweets. There are over 30k people on the KiA subreddit. This isn’t just a few hundred people.

    500 isn’t a big enough sample. Not to mention I see time and time again that people are claiming they are being harassed just for being disagreed with or criticized. These numbers are likely inflated due to that. Trolls and critics can also use the hashtag and have been shown to use the hashtag. More women have been doxxed or threatened on the GG side. This is due to the third party trolls who were on the hashtag trying to stir up chaos and drama.

    This guilt by association, anyone who uses the hashtag is apart of GG, is a fallacy.

  • Parrikle

    I agree entirely about the sample size. Which is why we can’t use that sample to calculate the percentage of GG supporters who were involved in harassment – it doesn;t give up any sort of idea. Similarly, you are right that the 65 may be inflated by trolls, and that there was no count for anti-GG.

    Accordingly, the only thing that those figures tell us is that GG supporters may have been involved in harassment, and that GG supporters may have made up 12% of those accused of harassment in the sample. Any other conclusion regarding GG, (good or bad), isn’t supported by the study.

  • David

    Well considering there are tens of thousands of people on a hashtag, it was receiving 40-50k tweets every day on average for the first 3-4 months, and there are only 65 reported cases in a three week period, don’t you think it’s safe to say that there isn’t a significant amount of people on the hashtag harassing or threatening people?

    WAM only gained these special privileges from Twitter due to people complaining to Twitter about all the harassment women were receiving from misogynists in GG due to the media reporting that. Odd that the media who GamerGate criticizes would slander and lie about them in such a way. If I remember right the WAM report also had 40% of their requests to suspend people rejected by Twitter. That also says something about how WAM was reporting people who shouldn’t have been suspended.

  • Parrikle

    No, I think it is only safe to say that only a very small percentage of harassment was reported from all sources. To be honest, I don’t expect to see large amounts of harassment coming out of GG – what I expect to see is a relatively small number of very vocal people posting a lot of harassment, and the bulk not getting involved.

    To make a claim about the percentage of GamerGaters involved in harassment, we would need to specifically sample GG tweets, rather than sample tweets from any source. That’s going to be difficult at best without access to the raw Twitter data, and it would be extremely difficult to identify GG editors. The use of the blockbot got around that in this case, but we know that is not an accurate sample.

  • TheGeneral

    The narrative has been dead for quite some time. They just continue to shield and crab around to avoid the onus of their piss poor attitudes , actions , their racism and their sexism .

  • Tom

    We know Iraq HAD chemical weapons (Donald Rumsfeld still had the receipts) the question was did Iraq HAVE WMD.

  • Tom

    The problem is that for today’s media the general narrative is more important than the truth of a specific case. Its like the recently failed nuisance lawsuit against a venture capatulist firm for gender discrimination it does not matter that she was essentially laughed out of court because while it might not have been true in that case it highlights the wider issue even if that issue exists only in the imagination of the media.

  • Dulius

    I did say she only managed it once :^)

  • chizwoz

    The really shocking thing about how mainstream media all bought into that narrative with almost zero checking of data is that they probably do the exact same thing with most stories. In conclusion: never believe the media about anything.

  • Angus the Deplorable

    Do you have any links you could share?
    I’d like to know more about this…

  • Angus the Deplorable

    Have you been unbanned from Twitter yet?

  • Nope Naw

    I had to stop at the tweet from Ernest Adams. I’m so fucking disappointed in him. I actually looked up to him and his book “On Game Design” was my go to book for such a long time. He was a really nice guy in person too. Sucks that he’s been brainwashed by the SocJus.

  • Dusty Ayres

    A better term to use instead of SJW is Emo Progressive.

  • Nope Naw

    I used SocJus because it’s heavily used here, and, unless I’m completely mistaken, it’s thinly veiled code for SJW. Thus having the same meaning. “Emo Progressive” seems to not mean the same thing.

  • Dusty Ayres

    I use the term in place of SJW because I believe them to be the same thing.

  • Kain Yusanagi

    Unfortunately my HDD crashed a few days ago with an unmountable boot volume error and is currently unrecoverable, so no, I don’t. :< I know Sargon of Akkad did a video on it so you can ask him about it (or just browse his videos), but rather than just watching his video, do the papers justice and read them yourself.

  • Is… is that EVIDENCE?


  • Gamergater #7230

    She was banned 5 months ago 🙁

  • TheScienceEnthusiast1130


  • Father Agnostus

    It’s not 99.35% industry blacklist, not all of those people are part of the industry. So it is an industry & consumer blacklist.

  • ObeliskDR

    That’s right! About time Gamergate was proven to be a woman hate mov— wait, y-you mean it was that narrative that died!?

  • Jonathan Roberts

    Hallelujah, praise the sun y’all!!!

  • Todd Wohling

    Eh, if all you need to be a “game developer” is Baby’s First Write-It-For-You HTML Utility and a dream (the SocJus definition of “Game Developer”), then *ALL* of us are game developers. So, by their definition and Butt’s logic, I’m correct. 😛

  • chizwoz

    Unfortunately quite a few decent but gullible people believed it.