
No prosecution over 'Gamergate' death threats despite confession - anigbrowl
http://www.businessinsider.com/gamergate-fbi-file-2017-2
======
brighteyes
> The man "understood that it was a federal crime to send a threatening
> communication to anyone and will never do it again," the FBI wrote.

Was his understanding correct? Is it in fact a federal crime to be mean and
threatening to someone online? I'm not sure where the line is drawn with
respect to protected speech, and the article takes more of a moral than a
legal or objective point of view.

> During those months, much of the video game world — which is massive —
> became obsessed with the idea that women might ruin the future of games by
> persuading game studios to abandon sexy female characters or tone down the
> default machismo of male characters.

This is simply false. Yes, the video game world is massive, but the part that
discussed gamergate and women in games is very, very small. Most people that
play video games have never heard of gamergate, most of the rest have no
problem with women in games (in fact, many of those players are women
themselves).

The author of the article is living in a bubble. But to its credit, the
article does admit

> It is difficult to estimate just how big the Gamergate movement really was
> [..] 10,000 users discussed Gamergate on Reddit.

That's probably the best estimate. So 10,000 out of many, many millions.

The article dismisses the alternative narrative of "the authorities
investigated and concluded no crimes were committed, thus showing that the
concern about gamergate was largely unwarranted," but that seems more
accurate.

~~~
anigbrowl
Complaining about an article and then observing that the same article
addresses your original complaint kinda moots it. I feel like it would me
productive to address the article as a whole rather than to liveblog your
reading experience.

~~~
brighteyes
Sorry, I don't understand. How did it address my complaint?

I did try to address the article as a whole, hence the long comment ;)

~~~
anigbrowl
You complained that the article's assertion of scope was simply false, then
later wrote:

 _The author of the article is living in a bubble. But to its credit, the
article does admit > It is difficult to estimate just how big the Gamergate
movement really was [..] 10,000 users discussed Gamergate on Reddit._

The claim you dismiss as false only seems so when taken out of context. Since
additional relevant content was supplied in the article, it's inappropriate to
consider it in isolation.

Sorry for being terse and replying so late, I've had a busy day.

