tyriless said:
Thus you look for a link between the two. You find a link. "OMG, she get's mentioned in the coding!" or something, whatever, (if you have to highlight two words in block of text it's pretty tenuous) and you go "They were in cahoots the whole time."
The_Kodu said:
Next that block of text is actually a thank you message coded into the Depression Quest Website itself, with a few other names a couple of which might be recognizable too such as the head editor of Gamasutra for example.
Again, you are really fishing in deep waters here and reeling in next to nothing. You know in the conspiracy movies where there is a wall filled with photographs and newspaper articles and it's all connected by thin bits of strings? That's what you are presenting here, except a little more ludicrous.
The_Kodu said:
What made people jump on the case wasn't so much what happened but how it was handled. I mean this would have been a fly by night gossip story but instead we had DMCA abuse we had hit pieces we had "I do not negotiate with terrorists" we had mass censorship of the discussion and people went "Hold on, hold on something is not right at all here" Then we had The Fine Young Capitalists show up with the accusation of doxxing and media blackouts because Zoe disliked them.
No it got handled in that manner because a bunch people came to slut shame an Indie Developer based on a jilted ex-lover's hearsay (and private communication he posted, which is a really scumbag thing to do). Seeing how this tenuous link was "exposed" with parading out the sexual liaison of one woman, I can see how the initial reaction was "Nope that's none of mine or your business." Especially when Zoe Quinn's name is being dragged through the mud for no good reason (the reason being this conspiracy of coverage you keep alluding to happening). As far as name being dragged through the mud how about that comic Shredded Moose did where she gave a blowjob for a better rating? Pretty good example of the story that GamerGate was pushing forward and apparently, with you, is still pushing forward. I almost linked it here, but eff that guy. It's not likely safe and would be inconsiderate of me to post a link to here anyways.
However that narrative is what the websites wanted to avoid. Sadly, it resulted in the opposite, as the whole thing blown up in everyone's face, but that is because they underestimated how god-awful the people who started GamerGate could be.
The_Kodu said:
What they discovered was there was next to no evidence for the initial bout of harassment Zoe claimed to have received from Wizardchan and many of the stories were flawed. The more people circled the wagons the more people wondered why and dug in to those so determined to defend this.
It's funny, there is next to no evidence that Zoe slept with Nathan for positive coverage, but you totally jumped on THAT conspiracy band wagon...hmmm.
The_Kodu said:
Sex = not a bad thing
Using Sex to get ahead = yeh kinda a bit of a dick move as it means it's no longer about the quality of the work anymore.
So you assume that she had sex for exposure then rather than for the sheer pleasure of it. Apparently, men and woman can't have sex because they enjoy it. Last time I checked, most people bang because it's fun, there is an emotional connection, or a biological urge, which is far more likely what happened here then for some form of profit or notoriety. Because let's look at this article. It was written before she and Nathan had that interlude that they both admitted too. Sure, you could say that had sex with him beforehand, but you don't know that. Zoe Quinn, Nathan, and Eron Gjon all speak of this one incident and no other, so the likelihood it happened before is slim. But let's say it did happen, just for your argument's sake: what is the end result: a one paragraph blurb where her game get's mentioned (not her name either, just her game), along with two other games. Suddenly your conspiracy looks like this: Zoe Quinn may of, but most likely didn't, sleep with Nathan Grayson before he wrote this blurb that positively mentions her game as "a Twine Darling" along with two other games he also separately brings up getting Green-Lit on Steam (a game by the way which is free on Steam).
So yes, this is pretty tenuous stuff.
tyriless said:
Move on, because every time you bring this up, you are looking more like the side of GamerGate that everyone in GamerGate PRETENDS doesn't exist. I thought you guys weren't supposed be bringing up Zoe Quinn anyway. For a group that's supposed to be moving on, you are doing a really poor job representing it.
The_Kodu said:
People asked about this, I'm answering. why is it someone else brings it up people answer then someone goes "Stop bringing it up" maybe the other side might want to stop asking about it ?
Yeah, you could totally stop responding or go, "I don't care about Zoe Quinn. It turned out she had little or nothing to do with actual journalism ethics," rather than continuing to defend GamerGate's reasoning to attack her and smear her name. Yet you feel compelled to continue to justify what has happened to her, as if you really don't think she is a human being that deserves same respect as everyone else does.
The_Kodu said:
People asked I'm giving answers and while you might not believe it the stuff that came up after the Nathan Grayson stuff is far more damning and far more of an ethical concern with far more impact on multiple people including people trying to silence someone making accusations of sexual assault.
Well we at least you admit this whole thing should be more about Nathan Grayson than Zoe Quinn. However, based on what you deem as acceptable evidence of the two colluding for positive coverage, I'm doubt anyone other than the usual GG brigade is going give your arguments against him any serious thought. So far, out of the half dozen GamerGate people I spoke to the only conspiracy that's held any real weight was IndieCade.