#GamerGate Isn’t A Harassment Campaign, States WAM! Report


If you needed any kind of legitimate, peer reviewed proof that #GamerGate wasn’t a harassment campaign based on the claims centered around the blocklists, the Women Action Media! organization has released a detailed report proving just that: #GamerGate is not a social media movement to harass women out of the tech industry.

Over on the Women Action Media! website – designed to work closely in connection with Twitter to get immediate action taken against reported harassers on Twitter – a PDF report was released, which you can view right here, indicating that most of the reports on harassment were on behalf of others. In fact, only 43% of the people who received harassment actually reported it. 57% of the bystanders and delegates were the ones who reported the harassment. Even more than that, few of the reports about harassment had anything to do with #GamerGate at all.

In section 1.2 of the WAM! harassment report on page 24, it’s stated that “Most Alleged Harassers Were Unconnected With GamerGate.”

Only 12% of the people reported as harassers to WAM! had any connection to the ggautoblocker list . Most of the times, according to the data, only one account was reported an inordinate amount of times, where as two or more accounts were infrequently reported. This means that it was mostly one person at a time exercising a lot of the so-called harassment in the Twitter space.

As mentioned in the report….

“The GamerGate controversy, notable for its connection with harassment on Twitter, was ongoing at the time of data collection. To check the influence of GamerGate on these findings, the authors investigated the proportion of WAM! reports that could be linked to GamerGate. Reports to WAM! constitute a much wider range of harassment than the GamerGate controversy alone: 88% of allegedly harassing accounts [n=538] were not linked with GamerGate.”

In other words, majority of the reports about harassment that WAM! received — even in relation to the GG Autoblocker — were not associated with #GamerGate.

Furthermore, the report states…

“Among the 317 genuine harassments reports submitted to WAM!, hate speech and doxxing [releasing private information] were the most common, with 19% of cases representing reports that didn’t fall neatly into any of the categories offered.”

27% of the harassment was hate speech consisting of sexist, racist or homophobic content, while 22% of the harassment was doxxing related.

In relation to #GamerGate, the WAM! report examined Randi Harper’s ggautoblocker, which consists of 9844 accounts. And despite #GamerGate being one of the most 100 used words in many of the 172 stories printed in the media about WAM! – making the word “GamerGate” the seventh most used word in many of the reports about online harassment and WAM! – the reality is that the stats don’t match up with the media narrative. That’s not to mention that #GamerGate had an ongoing harassment patrol to weed out and dwindle down any attempts at harassment that occurred with the hashtag.

If #GamerGate was such a disruptive force of harassment against women why was 88% of the harassment reports unconnected with #GamerGate even when measuring the data from Randi Harper’s autoblocker?

Another visual breakdown of the data was also compiled in an image here, courtesy of Jasperge107:

So the stats seem to verify that maybe, just maybe, people are using the GamerGate hashtag in a fight for ethics? Does this mean the media will finally stop printing blatant defamation against anyone using the hashtag? It was already proven a while back that #GamerGate failed as a harassment campaign, but that hasn’t changed the media’s narrative all that much.

Also, if #GamerGate is the harassment campaign that sites like Wikipedia are claiming it to be, either Wikipedia editors have access to data that WAM! doesn’t, or they’re purposefully misleading people with misinformation in an attempt to defame #GamerGate. Take your pick.

[Update:] For clarity purposes, the report from WAM! was peer reviewed using the following process…

“This report was reviewed by five academic reviewers in a double-blind, revise-and-resubmit peer review process chaired by Zeynep Tufekci, Assistant Professor at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.”

Share The Anger


Profile photo of Billy D

About

Billy has been rustling Jimmies for years. The GJP cried and their tears became his milkshake. Contact.

  • John Cobalt

    Fantastic work!

  • ReLiC71

    ‘Only 12% of the people from the ggautoblocker list were reported as harassers.’

    This is round the wrong way. Only 12% of the reported harassers were people on GGAB; 65 people. FAR less than 12% of the people on the GGAB.

    • Yep, you’re right. Had to re-read that.

      *Fixed.

  • Dr. Evil’s Brother’s Evil Twin

    The games media won’t care. They will continue to push up the LWs and lie while pushing their extremist agenda into games.

    • You’re right, but think – The more evidence there is, the less credibility the GJPs and their affiliated sites will have. Those not supporting them because of GamerGate will start to see that it’s bullshit they’re spewing and go off somewhere else since they continue to spew false information that outright ignores the plain existance of the truth.

    • omgitsbees

      What agenda are you referring to? I don’t want to put words into your mouth, but one of the things I see a lot of people say is that they don’t want “the games media” the get their way with regards to having politics and social issues in games. The thing with that argument is that its always been there in games. “The games media” didn’t get their agenda put in there, game devs have been doing this from the start.

      • AnotherOutsider

        Of course game devs have always been putting their own agenda into their games. But, I think the point that Dr. Evil and most others have been trying to make is that game makers SHOULD be able to dictate their own agenda and not have games media overcast it a priori. Things like Anita Sarkeesian having a direct impact over the content Bioware puts into their games have been very troubling for some people and considering she’s not a developer nor particularly talented artist (nor honest) so it should be.

      • greenleif .

        You are absolutely correct!(✿◠ヮ◠) Along with there being decades of social, political & all other manner of issues being a part of lore & storylines in games, no gamers have ever boycotted or dumped their beloved games b/c of it.

        Same goes for women & girls in gaming~whether they are playing or they’re in gaming development or any other part of the games industry ~ https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B17s4-OIgAADYUC.jpg:large

        https://i.imgur.com/c1qq3kk.jpg

        https://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/818/539/2a6.jpg

        One of “the games media” ‘s many issues which lie @ the core of #GamerGate are those which have chosen to place personal beliefs, personal relationships & personal ideologies above objectively fair gaming reviews.

        All too often, if a reviewer is personally and/or financially involved with a dev or publisher, the reviewer will lean heavily not only in their favor but will publicly crusade for a certain ideology to be pushed while also vehemently chastising, censuring, admonishing & denouncing any games, games devs, artists, publishers AND GAMES MEDIA who don’t align with or fall in step with the clique’s agenda & ideology. Game devs & games media alike who don’t take up the same tenets/ideals/beliefs are punished, frozen out & given the cold shoulder w/in the gaming industry. That shouldn’t happen.

        For a group who claims to want inclusivity & diversity, their actions show otherwise; they want ppl to have the same beliefs that they do or gtfo.

        So you see, you are right~games have had all sorts of different storylines, lore, personalities, heroes, villians, social & political issues all along. Gamers have accepted, loved & played it ALL, all throughout the history of gaming, no matter the beliefs or ideology within.

        What changed is this latest group, this clique, that are beginning to encompass all sides of the industry~including development & media~who don’t want a rainbow of diversity & stories & characters, You are absolutely correct!(✿◠ヮ◠) Along with there being decades of social, political & all other manner of issues being a part of lore & storylines in games, no gamers have ever boycotted or dumped their beloved games b/c of it.

        Same goes for women & girls in gaming~whether they are playing or they’re in gaming development or any other part of the games industry ~ https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B17s4-OIgAADYUC.jpg:large

        https://i.imgur.com/c1qq3kk.jpg

        https://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/818/539/2a6.jpg

        One of “the games media” ‘s many issues which lie @ the core of #GamerGate are those which have chosen to place personal beliefs, personal relationships & personal ideologies above objectively fair gaming reviews.

        All too often, if a reviewer is personally and/or financially involved with a dev or publisher, the reviewer will lean heavily not only in their favor but will publicly crusade for a certain ideology to be pushed while also vehemently chastising, censuring, admonishing & denouncing any games, games devs, artists, publishers AND GAMES MEDIA who don’t align with or fall in step with the clique’s agenda & ideology. Game devs & games media alike who don’t take up the same tenets/ideals/beliefs are punished, frozen out & given the cold shoulder w/in the gaming industry. That shouldn’t happen.

        For a group who claims to want inclusivity & diversity, their actions show otherwise; they want ppl to have the same beliefs that they do or gtfo you dirty stereotypical neckbearded, cis, het, white, fat, mom’s basement dwelling virgins, who lust after yet hate all women & thus making us all misogynists, who are worse than ISIS, a bunch of nazis, KKK, probably rapists or at least rape apologists, sexist, ugly, un-fuckable, should be set on fire, strangled, drowned in a tub by your parents, poisoned, sent to the old Jewish death camps & burned in the ovens or get gassed to death en masse, dumped into lava pits & volcanoes by the truckload, hanged in public, teeth ripped out with pliers, skin flayed & pulled off, & hopefully get raped, bunch of worthless gamers.

        So you see, you are right~games have already had all sorts of different storylines, lore, personalities, heroes, villians, social & political issues all along. Gamers have accepted, embraced, loved, become lifelong diehard fans & played it ALL, all throughout the history of gaming, no matter the beliefs or ideology or characters within 3+ decades of video games.

        What changed is this latest group, this clique, that are beginning to encompass all sides of the industry~including development & media~who don’t want a rainbow of diversity & stories & characters, spread across the huge spectrum of genres in video games anymore, they want to shoehorn in every gender, race, sexual orientation, gender-based backstory, no females can have any emotional or physical weaknesses, they cannot have breasts larger than about an a-maybe b-cup, they must remain covered up, they may not be sexy or sexual (unless it is a non-binary, non-cis-het male & female relationship) they cannot have certain backstories or experiences (no matter how realistic it might be for their character), they cannot be too pretty but cannot be too …masculine (run the risk of the male w/ boobs tropes & so on). This list isn’t even complete & this is ONLY regarding female or female-gender-oriented characters. The demands to follow the ever changing & ever fluidly meandering expectations are hardly rewarded when a game attempts to please this clique & are mostly called out, demeaned, publicly shamed, personally attacked & guilted into either changing a number of things in the game or suffering the consequences of not being covered by the cliquey games media or allowed/accepted into the circle of what has become a powerful hipster game industry, driven by ideology that either earns nominations, rotating jury & judging seats for the inner clique awards & plenty of cross promotions & favors or earns you a cold fucking seat on the ground outside while the party continues with anyone willing to bend & play ball.

        imo, *THAT* is the agenda that is ruining gaming atm & is why #GamerGate exists. Dirty game industry journos who have become no more than glorified bloggers & PR agents for fair weather/circumstantially profitable & masterfully manipulative friends who are the clique in gaming dev/games industry atm, most of whom are driven by certain ideologies.

        sincerely,
        @moonsugarlily

      • Aaron Alexander Simonoff

        I think the thing that some people find irritating isn’t the fact that social issues appear in games. That’s a good thing, and most people are fine with that. Games should be creative enterprises that explore all facets of life.

        I think where people get irritated is when you have a game like The Witcher 3, and you have that review by Arthur Gies from Polygon, where he basically rails against the game because he thinks it’s sexist. Now I’m totally fine with him having opinions about sexism in the game, but I just think that if you’re trying to write an impartial review of the game based on its gameplay, narrative structure, and design, it isn’t really relevant whether or not Arthur Gies thinks the girls show too much skin. Now, on the other hand, if he wanted to write an introspective essay about sexism in video games, THAT would be a much more appropriate place to talk about those kinds of things.

        It’s not that people are opposed to social justice so much as it seems like it’s being injected into EVERYTHING these days. I think women should be treated fairly too, and there should be expanded roles for them in various forms of media, but sometimes I just want to enjoy Avengers: Age of Ultron, and not have to hear about what a terrible person Joss Whedon is because Black Widow was written into a forced relationship with Bruce Banner. I didn’t like that part of the movie either, but who the fuck cares? It doesn’t offend me as a person, or oppress anyone. It’s an artistic choice, and not everyone is going to love every artist’s creative choices.

  • SIlver666

    I think anita and wu need to find a job soon.

    • Dr. Evil’s Brother’s Evil Twin

      This basically disproves their narrative, but there will still be sheep willing to give them money.

      • Tom

        How many times do you hetro normative white cis male shitlords need to be told evidence (along with facts and reason) is part of the patriarchy!

    • Don Quixote

      I honestly doubt anyone outside of gamergate will listen to this evidence its too different from their beliefs.

      • Grahf

        As a once-badass american metal band might say… Sad but true.

      • moko

        No there are those who are watching, and lets just say that they are tired of shitty people causing more harm in the name of good.

    • waka333

      Not really. The idiots who believe their “victimhood” are too dumb to stop believing it, so they have a constant source of money.

  • Falcus

    0.66% ALLEGED harassers. Still zero confirmed harassers.

    • anon

      Good point. All we know is that they were reported, not thaty they were necessarily guilty.

  • masterninja

    Yet there are no ethical concerns with journalists if you ask anti gamergate…

    LETS STOMP ALL OVER THE NARRATIVE!

  • Sand Ripper

    I can’t wait to see how Sarkeesian and Wu try to discredit this.

  • Grahf

    That’s the funny thing about liars.. They have to keep twisting and turning to maintain their lies, but the truth requires no maintenance.

    That is why gamergate was always going to prevail.

    • Eagleeye595

      We just keep exposing them and as you said eventually those lies will be twisted in such a way, the ones who decided to lie from the start will find themselves hanging by those very lies in the end.

  • Sergio Nacher Fernández

    I heard a rumbling noise. I think it was the narrative crumbling under its own weight.

    But of course, there will be aGGros that continue lying for the sake of getting their victimbux, and drones that will listen and believe them. These people are like roaches. They don’t die even if you kill them.

    • Holythirteen

      Wily Matt is working hard on the double-speak right now. But we can’t seem to find a translator that speaks backpedaling bullshit. Ah well, what can you do.

  • David

    What’s also interesting is 42% of the reports made to Twitter by WAM were declined. Meaning that WAM was reporting a significant amount of accounts that weren’t actually breaking Twitter’s rules but was still trying to get them suspended anyway. That’s pretty jarring when you think about it.

    • dsadsada

      I just skimmed the PDF report but I think I saw that the 42% that were declined all occurred on the same day and were identified to be from a bot or something.

  • srhbutts

    You’re still harassers by reasoning of fuck you.

    • I wish this was the real srhbutts… that would be kind of funny.

  • Red

    lmao get rekt

  • Red

    THIS JUST IN: BEING 12% OF REPORTS IS A GOOD THING you fools

  • Mr0303

    WAM in itself is a bigoted organisation. They are used to mass report “harassers” to Twitter. Of course harassers in this case means anyone who disagrees with a woman (accidently this is the Women part in their name).

    I suspect that they are facing some legal action regarding GG and this small correction is purely for damage control.

    • dsadsada

      Dunno about any of that but for those too lazy to read the PDF, here’s their breakdown for what counted as harassment.

      • Mr0303

        If you have time take a look at this. It is a great breakdown for their purpose and shady tactics.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3Dfrm55x14

        I’m pretty sure they acted against GG members and something might have scared them off.

      • C G Saturation

        Other, ie. “having a penis”. Probably.

  • C G Saturation

    It baffles (and depresses) me that there are people out there living in such a miniscule bubble that they seriously believe GG is a “harassment campaign”.

    Well, they are probably the same people who accuse every minor displeasing thing around them of being “harassment”. When it’s more than one thing, it becomes a “campaign”.

  • ElliotRyan

    This interpretation of the study is completely misleading. This was never meant to show what Gamergate is or isn’t about, it was meant to show that only a small amount of the harassers they managed to gather intersected with known Gamergate supporters.

    Even if it were 100% instead of 12%, those accounts would still only make up about 5% of the total amount of accounts on the autoblocker list. So even if you decided to pretend that this stat said anything at all about Gamergate, it’s completely unfalsifiable for that purpose, and therefore scientifically useless for what you’d want to use it to prove.

    • This was never meant to show what Gamergate is or isn’t about, it was meant to show that only a small amount of the harassers they managed to gather intersected with known Gamergate supporters.

      So what you’re saying is that even though this data shows that the people blocked on by the GG Autoblocker aren’t harassers that that information isn’t relevant to the people who state that they aren’t harassers?

      It almost sounds as bad as the people who say that because they’ve encountered sock puppets that the people using Not Your Shield must not be minorities (and if you feel that way, I can put you in touch with a few of them and you can explain to them how they aren’t women/black/trans/etc.,)

      Even if it were 100% instead of 12%, those accounts would still only make up about 5% of the total amount of accounts on the autoblocker list.

      Not sure where you’re getting that 100% from. There’s not even a mention in the article whether or not the 12% were fully identified as the ones causing the harassment to people outside of #GamerGate or if the 12% on the blocklist were actually the ones harassing the people in #Gamergate.

      So even if you decided to pretend that this stat said anything at all
      about Gamergate, it’s completely unfalsifiable for that purpose, and
      therefore scientifically useless for what you’d want to use it to prove.

      I never set out to prove anything, only documented that the stats show that according to WAM!’s own report, it isn’t a harassment campaign.

      You really beat the mess out of that strawman, though. He looks like he’s about had it. Man, you don’t really hold back, bro.

      https://i.imgur.com/tz2V58s.png

      • ElliotRyan

        So what you’re saying is that even though this data shows that the
        people blocked by the GG Autoblocker aren’t harassers that the
        information isn’t relevant to the people who state that they aren’t
        harassers?

        What I’m saying is that according to your interpretation, this statistic could never have shown that Gamergate IS full of harassers, NO MATTER WHAT the outcome was. This is because the amount of accounts in this study is dwarfed by the amount of accounts in the autoblocker list. Again, IF (and I’ll say it again here in case you missed it.. IF …) the statistic here were 100% instead of 12%, that would still only be a total of around 500 harassing accounts that WAM found. Stacked up against the 9800 accounts that are in the autoblocker, this would only come up to about 5% of known Gamergate accounts being harassers according to WAM. This is why trying to use this stat to say it’s in any way descriptive of Gamergate itself is ridiculous.

        Not sure where you’re getting that 100% from.

        I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you didn’t know what a hypothetical argument was. Considering how confused you got by that, it’s no wonder the whole falsifiability thing flew over your head.

        I’m so sorry, I didn’t know.

      • What I’m saying is that according to your interpretation, this statistic could never have shown that Gamergate IS full of harassers, NO MATTER WHAT the outcome was.

        But the article, my interpretation, NEVER stated that Gamergate is full of harassers. You’re attacking a strawman again.

      • ElliotRyan

        I’m sorry, but is this a prank? Are you being obtuse on purpose in an attempt to maybe frustrate me or something?

      • Nope.

      • ElliotRyan

        So you really just cannot grasp that I was making a point about how these stats, under your interpretation, could not have produced any outcome other than “Gamergate isn’t about harassment”, and is therefore a tautology? You actually thought I was simply stating that you made x claim in your article?

        I’m positively stunned. I’m not even sure what to say here.

      • I’m just relaying the info from the report.

        You’re attempting to make this about something I have no control over. I just relayed the facts… only the facts.

        If your issue is that the stats can’t absolve #GamerGate in anyway under any facet of scrutiny (which is not entirely true), then your issue is not with me but with the way the study was conducted. At which point, I would highly suggest contacting Zeynep Tufekci.

        Otherwise you’re simply arguing to see words up there.

      • Aaron Alexander Simonoff

        You’re not making a very good point, and I also don’t think YOU grasp what the report is saying. Of the 9,844 people that the were targeted by the GGautoblockerbot, only 65 accounts were reported for harassment. So in other words, 9,779 accounts did NO HARASSING WHATSOEVER. I can accept a margin of error within 5-10% but a margin of error of 15,000%? I think you might need to go back to formula.

        I would shift the focus back on you and say that YOU are the one being obtuse. I think you might have had a more cogent argument if the numbers weren’t SOOOOO ridiculously out of whack. And let’s keep in mind something, of the 65 accounts that were accused of harassment, how many of them did something that would ACTUALLY constitute harassment? This report makes no mention as to whether or not each individual claim was investigated. I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that it was, but it conceivable that the number might even be smaller. You’re fighting a losing battle here.

    • AnotherOutsider

      Yeah, I have to agree. Billy’s use of the report is misleading. This doesn’t in any way absolve the 9779 other people on the ggautoblocker list. It wasn’t a study of all the content of those users posts after all, it was simply a cross-study of which (of their limited 500 claims) reports of harassment matched the ggautoblocker list. Many people could have harassed and not been reported using WAM’s tool, or on the other hand could have indeed been gamergate oriented but somehow avoided the ggautoblocker list (from my understanding those one the list had to follow certain prominent members of #gg, so it should be easy enough to avoid). I also have to agree that 12% is too high, though obviously what constitutes harassment is certainly up for debate.
      Billy’s been too narrow on his arguments against you, it doesn’t seem you have taken any position to depict #gg in any way, so I think he should re-examine what you’re saying.

      • Billy’s been too narrow on his arguments against you, it doesn’t seem you have taken any position to depict #gg in any way

        This article isn’t about “feels”. It’s based on hard data points and doesn’t veer from what the data says. If those 9779 people were allegedly labeled as harassers or reported then you would have an argument, otherwise it’s baseless conjecture to start trying to add narrative to numbers.

        As far as the data is concerned, those 9779 aren’t harassers. Period.

        If you have any other data or reports to share that say otherwise, share them and I’ll report on it.

        I think he should re-examine what you’re saying.

        No.

      • AnotherOutsider

        Listen, I’m not here to endorse or expound upon anyone’s narrative, yours or otherwise. I don’t believe GamerGate is a harassment campaign and I don’t think the far-too-inclusive-ggautoblocker list was an effective or honorable way of dealing with harassment. So you can stop inferring what I’m trying to say and inserting your won thogut/speech into it. I’m just saying that you can’t use an extremely limited dataset to absolve anyone, especially when it didn’t attempt to analyze the list or its participation as a whole in any way. End of.

        As an aside, maybe you could use your investigative prowess to get someone from the WAM study to comment on this article’s conclusions, eh?

      • I’m just saying that you can’t use an extremely limited dataset to absolve anyone,

        The data shows harassment had little to do with the people on the list. As I said before, if you show me some data that says otherwise I’ll report on it (this seems to be something a lot of people keep missing whenever they make infantile comments. If you want harassment statistics or for me to report on it, show me the data and I’ll do so).

        Otherwise, the data shows that reports of alleged harassment was barely a percentage in relation to the people on the list. That’s what the article says, that’s what the data says. Period.

        especially when it didn’t attempt to analyze the list or its participation as a whole in any way.

        Participation in what exactly? Conduct? Harassment? Dialogue? The same could be said for any of the data in WAM!’s report, some of which Twitter decided not to label as harassment based on reports they forwarded to Twitter’s support. I’m not exactly sure why people are so intent that this data subset requires a fine tooth comb of scrutiny to simply say whether or not enough harassment was attached to people on the autoblocker list to label — based on a numerical majority and NOTHING else — whether or not the people associated on that list are harassers.

        The article nor the data seeks to prove anything else other than that. I’m not sure why some people are having a hard time understanding that.

        maybe you could use your investigative prowess to get someone from the WAM study to comment on this article’s conclusions, eh?

        For what?

      • AnotherOutsider

        The reason people have taken you up on what the report actually says is because of the way you have portrayed the data. If you had taken the space and changed your tone to recognize that WAM!’s dataset was limited and not wholly representative of reports on Twitter

      • As it is, from a list of less than .1% of users on Twitter, it managed to makeup 12% of reported harassment. That’s significant and as a
        source for facts on gamergate, there’s should be no need for you to white-wash it.

        Who said anything about white-washing anything? Based on a represenative of less than 0.66% of alleged individuals reported for harassment in connection with the GG hashtag out of nearly 10,000 how can anyone claim that that’s not enough data to conclude that the people on the list aren’t engaging in a harassment campaign?

        The word campaign:
        noun: a systematic course of aggressive activities for some specific purpose

        Based on the figures, based on the data, based on the people on the list, is there any figurative data pointing to #GamerGate being a harassment campaign even though it’s been used 172 stories indicating it as such?

        No where in the article does it say that #GG wasn’t used at any point for any kind of harassment, but it makes it known that based on the autoblocker data it would be impossible for this to be considered a harassment campaign centered around nearly 10,000 people who have been labeled as harassers.

        It seems like this is a very difficult thing for people to grasp and no matter how many times it’s explained, people have a difficult time understanding that the numbers aren’t correlative to the narrative of the people on the autoblocker being engaged in a harassment campaign. For the last time, if you have numbers that show otherwise, please provide them. Because as it stands, this specific data set DISPROVES what the media has been saying about the majority of the people on the autoblocker.

        There could have been tens of thousands of reports through Twitter for the same period,

        Where in the article does it say that the totality of Twitter’s reports about harassment is what correlates to the people on the GG autoblocker list being harassers? You won’t find it because I never mentioned it.

        we can’t portray what proportion of overall harassment (or the totality
        of harassment done by those on the list) this represents.

        Compared to what? Reported by whom? If there are no reports or data correlated to people on the list being reported for harassment and there is no data linking the two then it’s innocent until proven guilty. Why are you going about this the other way around? Do you assume all Mexicans in America are illegal immigrants until a consensus proves they’re not?

        That’s not how data sampling works.

        The best we can do is a ball park, but your ham-fisted approach didn’t propose that.

        Yes, it did. I mention the GG Autoblocker numerous times in correlation with the data and #GG being a harassment campaign. Anyone who bothered to read the article would gather that much from it.

        I can’t be responsible for the lack of someone else’s reading comprehension.

        if Kate Edwards of the IGDA renounces using it, I think it’s a well enough regarded fact that the ggautoblocker list is too inclusive.

        Kate Edwards is a liar. Kate said NO ONE from GG wanted to come to the table to talk. I explicitly asked numerous times before Kate went public “denouncing” #GamerGate that we should come to the table to talk. In fact, I suggested something along the lines of Airplay, but Kate shot the idea down saying people in #GG would just say she’s an SJW. A few weeks later she goes to numerous outlets saying NO ONE has been willing to have discussions. I even e-mailed Kate BEFORE she went to GI.biz asking if we could do a Q&A and she never responded. Of course Edwards would renounce the data if it doesn’t fit her narrative. I’ll likely post the e-mail exchanges since some people are stupid enough to believe liars.

        Added to this, I don’t take the word of liars for much.

      • AnotherOutsider

        Sorry for the late reply, but I refrained from the topic because I knew you would misrepresent my words. I never said that we shouldn’t presume innocence of those listed on the ggautoblocker. But in the same vein I’m saying that this limited report cannot totally absolve them WERE THEY TO BE FAIRLY INVESTIGATED, NOT THAT I AM CALLING FOR SUCH.

        You say that you didn’t try to correlate it with the total number of harassment reports from Twitter because you didn’t have the data. I’m saying that that’s the point in which your analysis is flawed! The WAM report never intended to catch ALL harassment on Twitter or to find ALL the harassment of those who represent Gamergate or even to qualify what proportion of harassment it believed it received. And yet, you are using this data to somehow abdicate the entire remainder ggautoblocker list from suspicion, when the DATA DOESN’T TRY to represent a number of users even close to that on the ggautoblocker list. If you try to correlate this data directly to the total number of users on the ggautoblocker list you are MISUSING THE DATA. By the way, directly imposing two data sets on top of each other is NOT ball-parking. Ball-parking is making a reasonable estimate. Directly imposing two data-sets that cannot, by reason, be imposed upon each other is HAM-FISTED.

        Kate Edwards may be a liar. Kate Edwards is clearly in opposition to #GamerGate. Yet Kate Edwards denounced the #ggautoblocker list even though it was made to serve her political interests. That means that the #ggautoblocker list is NOT REPUTABLE. I’m not trying to dispute that. THE #ggautoblocker LIST IS NOT REPUTABLE so lets stop trying to append it to total amounts of GamerGate harassment.

        Finally, by what logic do you have to say that you’re whitewashing something, in order to whitewash it? I’m done.

      • A Real Libertarian

        “Because you haven’t proved yourself innocent, I’m going to treat you as guilty”.

        Oh, sure GamerGate could still be full of harassers who evaded detection, but you could be a serial killer who has evaded detection.

        So why shouldn’t I call you a serial killer?

      • AnotherOutsider

        Did I treat anyone as guilty? No. Do grow up.

      • The WAM report never intended to catch ALL harassment on Twitter or to find ALL the harassment of those who represent Gamergate or even to qualify what proportion of harassment it believed it received. And yet, you are using this data to somehow abdicate the entire remainder
        ggautoblocker list from suspicion, when the DATA DOESN’T TRY to represent a number of users even close to that on the ggautoblocker list.

        You’re assuming everyone is guilty until proven innocent.

        You’re going about this all the wrong way, but thanks for clarifying. Until someone can prove that GG is actually a harassment campaign, the data is sound.

      • AnotherOutsider

        No, no I am not presuming guilt. I’m taking up your analysis as flawed. That is all.

      • If you can’t prove that the people added to the list are guilty of harassment, and they’re only on the list for guilt by association, then it means they’re innocent until proven guilty.

        The WAM data only goes so far as to prove “guilt” for the people reported for alleged harassment.

        You’re going about criticizing the way the data was handle by begging the question.

      • AnotherOutsider

        Wrong. I’m making an argument that doesn’t irrationally ignore the concept of proportionality.

      • If suspicion is seen as undue punishment, your ideal appears to be a bizzare form of reverse thought-police.

        Awesome.

        Provide evidence of suspicion.

        I’ll wait. You can’t. You have no evidence.

        Also, if you can’t provide evidence of suspicion beyond purported conjecture you’ll look like a fool.

      • AnotherOutsider

        Evidence of suspicion?! You are seriously out for a loop. Suspicion is locking your doors at night. Suspicion is thinking any reporter is capable of conflict of interest. Suspicion is being put on a block list (wrongly in some/most cases, I acknowledge). Suspicion is taking a sampling of 500 loosely affiliated reports and being proven right for 67 people on that same blcoklist [Again, out of a population of less than 0.1% (10000 on ggautoblock vs at least 100 million English-speaking) of Twitter users they find a source for 10% of their harassment. That’s a significant aberration. And guess what? None of us should be surprised. Activism tenda to attract people who believe that the ends are justified by the means. We can see in Feminism and we can SURELY see it in some #GamerGate

      • Suspicion is thinking any reporter is capable of conflict of interest.

        Only if there has been signs or evidence prior that indicates corruption or potential conflicts of interest are at play. Just like before Grayson/Quinn there was the Gerstmanngate incident, Doristogate and the review extortion ring in the mobile sector. There is a basis for reasonable suspicion.

        As I said, reasonable suspicion is based on evidence.

        You don’t assume just because a black guy in a hoodie is walking around in your neighborhood at night he’s a criminal, otherwise you look like a paranoid racist. You take that assumption based on likely news reports that black guys walking around in your neighborhood at night have committed crimes. It sets the premise for reasonable suspicion.

        So I ask again: what evidence are you using to base your reasonable suspicion on?

      • AnotherOutsider

        Oh, and I suppose gamers are known for their civil discourse on Xbox Live? Give it a rest.

      • Oh, and I suppose gamers are known for their civil discourse on Xbox Live? Give it a rest.

        Well what’s the statistical crossover rate between Xbox Live and #GamerGate?

        Look, you’re the one making claims without evidence or any basis for your claims. I’m asking you questions because you’re attempting to misrepresent the data from an unfounded position. If you can’t back that position up just say so and I’ll stop asking. But you’re digging yourself in deeper here.

        You have to see the absurdity in the fact that I’m asking you simple questions and you can’t answer them, right?

      • AnotherOutsider

        Tell me which claim I made without evidence or basis.

      • It wasn’t a study of all the content of those users posts after all,
        it was simply a cross-study of which (of their limited 500 claims)
        reports of harassment matched the ggautoblocker list. Many people could
        have harassed and not been reported using WAM’s tool, or on the other
        hand could have indeed been gamergate oriented but somehow avoided the
        ggautoblocker list (from my understanding those one the list had to
        follow certain prominent members of #gg, so it should be easy enough to
        avoid).

      • A Real Libertarian

        Until you have something besides “there’s a lot of people in GamerGate so some must be harassers” we aren’t going to believe you.

        Evidence or get the fuck out you fanatical moron.

      • AnotherOutsider

        You’re the fanatical one. I followed William Usher’s blog (and was an implicit supporter) up until this obnoxious display of statistical ignorance and misrepresentation. The report IS evidence.

      • A Real Libertarian

        The report is evidence, but it’s not evidence for your claims.

        Is that so hard to understand?

  • Bobby

    Jordan fades back… SWISH! And that’s the ball game

  • TtTreatise

    You do realize they are talking about ALL harassment on Twitter, right? Not just game or GG-Related. Of ALL harassment in the world, the vast majority is unaware of GG’s existence, yet GG was a measurable source of harassment. That’s significant and this article radically misrepresents the studies findings.

    • Aaron Alexander Simonoff

      No, that is NOT what this report is saying. Read it again. This is measured from the GGautoblocker bot. If you think only 9,984 cases of harassment have been reported across the whole of Twitter you are kidding yourself. There are like 10’s of millions of people on Twitter, and guess what? Hate groups have access to Twitter, but this is only targeting harassment that fits a certain criteria.

      • TtTreatise

        No. You are simply wrong.

        From the report.

        > p.38
        1.7A LIMITATIONS: VOLUME, GENDER, LANGUAGE & GENUINENESS The reporting project was a WAM! initiative. People learned about the project—and how to participate—through information spread by news media and social media. Although Twitter established WAM! as an authorized reporter, the project wasn’t integrated into Twitter’s reporting tools. Thus, in order to report abuse or harassment to WAM!, individuals had to go directly to the WAM! web form. This point of entry undoubtedly influenced the data received.

        > p38.
        > This report makes use of full data from the WAM! authorized reporting period of November 6 to December 27, 2014, including 811 submissions via the WAM! Twitter Reporting Tool, 640 tickets within WAM!’s ticketing system for handling incoming reports, and 185 messages received from Twitter in association with cases escalated by WAM! to Twitter

        > p14.
        > Reports to WAM! constitute a much wider range of harassment than the GamerGate controversy alone: 88% of allegedly harassing accounts (n=538) were not linked with GamerGate.

        Takeaways:

        – This data is collected and compared in a set time period
        – The data is not limited to GG specific messages
        – Although they had official support from Twitter, It is limited to people that used the WAM reporting systems, not the default Twitter report.
        – 12% of the total reports from this sample were related to GG in that they were on the ggautoblocker list

        The report makes no claims about whether GG can be considered a harassment campaign and it further can not be inferred from the data.

  • Egon

    Just because you apparently can’t use logic properly: The statistic is “12% of *all* harassment on twitter is GamerGate related”, not “only a small portion of GamerGate related tweets are harassment”. GamerGate can pretty much be 100% harassment and that would still be consistent with this study. Also, saying “we are only 12% of the total problem, therefore we are harmless” is a pretty poor excuse.

    • GamerGate can pretty much be 100% harassment and that would still be consistent with this study.

      Then more than 0.66% of the people labeled as harassers on the GG Autoblocker would have been reported for harassment.

      If you have stats to back up your sophistry, feel free to drop some stats. Otherwise you’re just repeating really silly comments already debunked in this thread.

  • 9844 accounts on the ggautoblocker list. 538 people were reported to WAM! as harrassers, and only 65 of those were on the autoblocker.

    The supposed reason the autoblocker exists is to block harassing accounts. By describing it that way, Randi has essentially labeled everyone on it a harasser. Meaning, that even by SJW standards, she has directly and by name labeled 9779 confirmed innocent people “harassers.”
    Of course, I won’t be holding my breath to see that blocklist go down to the number WAM! found any time soon.

  • Pingback: Gawker suspects “Republican Moles” planted Conde Naste Gay Hatchet Job story in order to get Gawker Media sued out of existence - THE GLOBAL SCOOP()

  • Pingback: Gawker suspects “Republican Moles” planted Conde Naste Gay Hatchet Job story in order to get Gawker Media sued out of existence - TECHNOLOGY POLICY REVIEW()

  • Pingback: Washington Post Publishes Libelous #GamerGate Article | One Angry Gamer()

  • Pingback: Some SJWs Are Furious Real Gamers Can Attend E3 2017 | One Angry Gamer()

20
Skip to toolbar