SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Brianna Wu, head of the independent gaming studio Giant Spacekat, was the target of a series of tweets containing death threats on Friday; one published her home address (since redacted). The poster's Twitter account has been disabled.
Wu responded on Friday night with the tweet:
Brianna Wu @Spacekatgal
The police just came by. Husband and I are going somewhere safe.
Remember, #gamergate isn't about attacking women.
GamerGate supporters denounced the threats and "doxxing" against Wu and disavowed the poster. However, several suspected that the tweets were a false flag created by anti-GamerGate forces:
Sun Knight @SunKnightO
@Sen_Armstrong @Spacekatgal @chatterwhiteman It's clearly either a troll or false flag shame that people actually think its legit.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:10PM
> What we do know isn't the whole picture,
How do we "know" that? Sounds like wishful thinking.
> but what we've seen so far doesn't look good.
Yeah, it looks like a bunch of butthurt idiots making up shit.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:12PM
Yeah, it looks like a bunch of butthurt idiots making up shit.
Why should I care what it looks like to you? The conflict of interest is there no matter what it looks like to you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:16PM
> Why should I care what it looks like to you? The conflict of interest is there no matter what it looks like to you.
Why should I care what it looks like to you? The evidence of conflict of interest is not there no matter what it looks like to you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12 2014, @10:34PM
Citation needed.
"A good review exists!" is not proof of anything. A list of other games greenlighted at the same time is not proof of anything. What else is there being touted as "proof of a conflict of interest"?
If "she could've fucked this guy who then bribed other people with money!"-type conspiracy theories are all you've got, then you're only proving that you're working backwards from a conclusion and desperately searching for evidence to support it.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 13 2014, @12:21AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @04:14AM
Pardon the parsing, but that is basically what you're saying.
So she had sex with a journalist, so what? Its nobody's business who she has sex with. "A relationship exists" is not an ethics violation. [wikipedia.org] And how is it "obvious" that the only purpose behind the relationship was to get good press? How can you know anybody's motivations for anything? Are you a mind reader? No? Then you can't know and can only guess.
There are no facts to support your claims. Have some integrity for once in your life and stop trying to destroy innocent people's lives for no reason.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 13 2014, @09:32AM
Its nobody's business who she has sex with.
Because she had sex with a journalist who covers her industry, this matter becomes the business of the journalist's employer and any customers of the developer's game who are concerned that reviews of the game may be compromised by the above conflict of interest. When the relationship affects others in ways that can be very harmful, then it becomes their business.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13 2014, @12:54AM
Well, he may be searching for evidence to back up his wild-eyed conspiracy theory but he is still failing quite miserably at actually finding any.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday October 13 2014, @09:35AM