Running For Congress, Brianna Wu Criticizes The FBI's GamerGate Report (venturebeat.com) 760
An anonymous reader shares this update about programmer/game developer Brianna Wu as well as the FBI's recently-released report on their GamerGate investigation:Wu has officially unveiled the web site for her campaign for a seat in the U.S. Congress, and says if elected she'll confront the FBI over their "appalling failure" when investigating members of the controversial GamerGate coalition. "Wu catalogued more than 180 death threats that she said she received because she spoke out against sexism in the game industry and #GamerGate misogyny," according to VentureBeat, which quotes Wu as saying "only a fraction of a fraction of the information we gave them was ever looked into."
The article says the FBI did investigate -- even asking Google to "preserve records" for several email addresses and YouTube accounts, and making a similar request to Microsoft. And the FBI also interviewed one minor who admitted to making at least 40 threatening phone calls, but after turning over that information learned that the state of Massachusetts had declined to prosecute. In the end the FBI's 173-page report ultimately concluded that there were no actionable leads.
Wu's response? "All this report does for me is show how little the FBI cared about the investigation."
The article says the FBI did investigate -- even asking Google to "preserve records" for several email addresses and YouTube accounts, and making a similar request to Microsoft. And the FBI also interviewed one minor who admitted to making at least 40 threatening phone calls, but after turning over that information learned that the state of Massachusetts had declined to prosecute. In the end the FBI's 173-page report ultimately concluded that there were no actionable leads.
Wu's response? "All this report does for me is show how little the FBI cared about the investigation."
Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Insightful)
No, you unimportant half-melted snowflake, the world does not revolve around you and yours.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Interesting)
I think the FBI should investigate the times where Wu was caught red handed creating fake accounts to harass himself.
Besides, even if 10% of the shit claimed by Wu wasn't made up, trolling is hardly worth spending actual money to investigate.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"Brianna" is nothing more than a professional victim. Seriously, "she" has actually made a living off of Patreon by whining and crying about how much the world doesn't like "her".
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the FBI should investigate the times where Wu was caught red handed creating fake accounts to harass himself.
Besides, even if 10% of the shit claimed by Wu wasn't made up, trolling is hardly worth spending actual money to investigate.
Don't worry. AmiMoJo, PopeRatzo and/or Serviscope_minor will be along soon to "explain" and "interpret" the FBI report to fit with their delusions about gamergate. Serviscope_minor might throw his usual moral panic fit because people are thinking the wrong thoughts instead of going with "listen and believe".
Look for the phrase "this doesn't mean that she wasn't in danger"... or similar god-of-the-gaps arguments.
Re: (Score:3)
There isn't really any need to interpret the FBI report, it's pretty straight forward. They spoke to some of the people dong the harassing and ask them nicely to stop, Most of them were kids who never thought that there would be any consequences, quickly apologised and promised not to do it again.
The issue is that they didn't make much effort to get to the organisers of the harassment campaign, merely the useful idiots who joined in and failed to even create proper anonymous accounts.
Regardless of what you think of Wu, it seems that law enforcement in general is unequipped to deal with this sort of crime. For example, the person who posted a death threat along with her home address has never been brought to justice. Again, regardless of your opinion of Wu, such things are clearly illegal. I'm sure someone else can cite the exact law.
Your interpretation of "they found nothing actionable" is "they are unequipped to deal with this", rather than "they found nothing actionable".
The straight forward takeaway from "they found nothing actionable" is indeed "they found nothing actionable".
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Interesting)
If you look at the evidence, they went after the low hanging fruit and the people who used old technology that they were familiar with. For example, phone records, or asking Twitter for user data.
The IRC logs captured by Quinn show things that are actionable. People speaking about the harassment campaign, apparently logged in from residential internet connections in the US. They failed to even investigate that channel. Didn't even create a GUI in Visual BASIC like on CSI.
Just because they didn't consider the IRC logs to be credible you assume that they didn't even look at them? Maybe they discarded "evidence" that was not credible. Looking at the list of around 20 LEO agencies that were involved in the investigation (posted elsethread), I'm more likely to believe that they found those logs suspect than that they ignored them altogether.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the point. They failed to gather the evidence themselves, which would have made it most robust.
TBH, those IRC logs would not have changed much. Assume that they did have those logs, it still wouldn't turn Wu's lies about being chased from her home (and further lies about reporting it) into truths.
And once again, those logs may have not been credible anyway, hence they were ignored. You are making the assumption that those logs were credible.
Re: (Score:3)
They did action those threats. They tried to investigate, they requested information from Twitter, Google and Microsoft. The issue is that because those requests didn't result in a name and address, they didn't take it further or link it up with the parallel activity on 8chan and IRC properly.
Did you even read the linked PDF? Those requests *did* result in names (and addresses), many of whom were actually interviewed! After interviewing them, they were determined to not be credible.
Re: (Score:3)
"Not prosecuted" is not the same as "exonerated",
It is when "innocent until proven guilty" is in force, which it is. This whole "guilty until proven innocent" is (like I said in another story) repugnant to the middle majority of the population. Only the extremists on both sides think that an accused must prove themselves innocent.
Re: (Score:3)
Nice strawman there. Notice how you ignored the very next sentence which indicated that the REASON why it isn't in this case is because the accusation is not a crime. Nobody will EVER be prosecuted for misogyny - because it isn't a crime.
So NOTHING in the FBI report has anything TO DO with the accusation of misogyny, they didn't investigate misogyny - it's not a crime.
My point was that the two things are utterly unrelated, and you had to go and quote a sentence out of the context of the very next one to try
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Interesting)
The insinuation is that this was done in a clandestine fashion with intent to deceive and overstate the threat. The rebuttal I linked above says that intent is clearly sarcasm/exasperation. Nothing was hidden. The original argument that this was done with intent to deceive is weak as piss.
On a side note, spent 15 mins flipping through the FBI file linked to the original slashdot story. Some seriously juvenile and purille rubbish there. Allthough the death threats, the ones I read at least, where too over the top to be credible, what is definitely present is a visceral hatred and anger and a quite possibly genuine wish for harm. Apalling: I challenge anyone who thinks that can endure that sort of abuse and remain unaffected by it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
We're all at the center of our own world. If you don't realize that, it means you're so egocentric you think your vantage point is special.
That said, attracting death threats for expressing your opinion is pretty objective evidence that other people find you notable. In fact you may not realize it, but your need to express your hatred of her lends her stature.
If you want someone to feel insignificant you should ignore them.
Re: (Score:2)
If you think that my post rises anywhere near the level of hatred you perhaps need to take a remedial English class. Dislike certainly, derision definitely, and I sure as fuck despise the woman's actions. Hatred however is a level of emotional investment I reserve for the truly evil or personal, and she is neither.
Attracting death threats on the internet merely shows that you are expressing an opinion others dislike and are of a high enough profile or 'lucky' enough to attract them. Given the internet histo
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Insightful)
the reason the FBI didn't go further was because they are not in the business of sucking Social Justice Warrior's dicks.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
This.
I actually had to look it up. And I would indeed consider myself an avid gamer. Actually, currently it's likely I spend more time playing games than working (if that's possible). And I haven't heard about it until recently, and I looked it up ... and I don't get it. No, honestly, I don't get it. What the fuck is this about? Someone left someone and now someone wrote an article about a game but didn't report about the game but let his (or her, I don't care) hurt feelings get in the way.
That's it? For real? That's what people get worked up about?
Don't get me wrong, of course, losing someone and being hurt matters to the person who it happens to, but why the FUCK should I give half a shit about it? "But journalism and integrity..." BULLSHIT! Does anyone still read "journalist" articles about games? Half of them are paid ads anyway, the other half is worded in a way that reeks worse of copy/paste than the average answer from a tech supporter. If you care for other people's opinions on games, read reviews from other players on Steam.
Aside of that, PLEASE educate me why this is even a thing? If anything, it reminds me that adding "-gate" to any topic only means "we want to blow this out of proportion or else nobody gives a shit because it's not worth giving one".
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Informative)
Does anyone still read "journalist" articles about games? Half of them are paid ads anyway, the other half is worded in a way that reeks worse of copy/paste than the average answer from a tech supporter. If you care for other people's opinions on games, read reviews from other players on Steam.
That's why it happened in the first place. Because people had enough, and it exploded when the media decided to double down and pull out the "gamers are dead" articles. Then rounded that out with mass censorship on any discussion of it. The comment graveyards on reddit are still around, some are huge 25k+ deleted comments? 5k+ here or there on it? Yep. The gamejournopros leaks. [deepfreeze.it] The "writers" shilling for their friends/buddies shit and not disclosing it? Those same writers being in a gigantic circle jerk of undisclosed payments from various people in the indie industry as well. Keep in mind that this wasn't the start, this had been building since the days of Kane and Lynch and the Dorito Pope.
The icing on the cake was simply all the bullshit that sites like polygon, kotaku, rps, and so on have tried to push. Things like "GTAV is sexist" or why your vidya makes you a violent killer. Along with the big "vidya is sexist" so we need to create a safe space for the special snowflakes, and you need to give them special concessions because they're special. Which kinda goes against the entire "git gud" line(aka merit is all that matters) that gaming is built around. If anything it's simply exposed that the above mentioned sites are cancerous identity politics engines. And even media like the BBC or NPR have no problems pushing that same line of reasoning as long as it gets them what they want.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Insightful)
So ... after not caring about what journalists write and them lashing out, I now should care about them lashing out? Or for not writing anything and "censoring"?
Again, nobody so far managed to give me any kind of reason, let alone a good one, why I should give a fuck about this whole mess.
People who know nothing about games write about games to piss off gamers. It's not like this has never happened before, and I somehow wonder why gamers still give a shit. From "Uh, games make people go on killing sprees" to "Uh, games are misogynist".
Does any "gamer" still give a shit what they say?
The media have misrepresented games and people who play them for decades now. And suddenly we're supposed to give a shit about what they write? For real?
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why not? That's what the democrats do. You don't agree with them? You must be a racist, xenophobic, sexist piece of shit.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Well yes, if you want to believe that the white man is superior, that African Americans, Mexicans and Muslims are subhumans, that women should suck it up when men verbally harass them, or, you know, "grab them by the pussy", that does make you a bigot and a misogynist.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you just proved his point. You dont agree with him, so you automatically label him as a bigoted asshole.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
Complaining about these words is just the new "politically correct". An effort to rework the language into a kind of newspeak where criticism of your views is impossible because the words needed to describe them are banned.
A truly hilarious criticism coming from an SJW, considering the fact that SJW's are the most serious threat to free speech in the country right now. I dare say you forfeited any right to cite Orwell the second you started trying to ban conservatives from speaking at college campuses across the country, campaigning to have people fired from their jobs for having opinions that didn't jibe with yours, and passing laws that jail people who refuse to use made-up pronouns. Sorry, no moral high ground there for you, snowflake.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not an SJW, I support free speech and wouldn't want to ban people from speaking on college campuses. I don't know of any laws that jail people for not using made-up pronouns but I doubt I would support them. I much prefer to exercise my own freedom of speech, rather than to use the law to limit others.
Also, if I was a snowflake, do you think I would hang around on Slashdot, putting up with the kind of abuse I get?
Perhaps you should find out what people actually think on this topics before accusing them.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh sorry, I just assumed that since some SJW's are anti-free-speech that all of them are. You know, kind of like how SJW's assume that all conservatives are racists and misogynists because some of them are, huh?
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not an SJW
Good god man you must be joking. You're not just any SJW, you are the SJW. You're easily the most famous SJW on slashdot. I knew even before clinking on the story that half of the comments would be you flame warring with someone. Even on stories that aren't political you're waging a culture war, your old sig was something like "SJW: Someone I disagree with and by the way I'm an idiot" and now your new sig is anti-GamerGate. I don't know if maybe you don't know what a SJW is, or you do and just don't like the label. But you fit the mold to a T. If you honestly don't think you're a SJW I suggest you go back are re-read some of your own comments because the pattern of aggressive social justice advocacy is plain for all to see.
Re: (Score:3)
your old sig was something like "SJW: Someone I disagree with and by the way I'm an idiot"
In the context of almost every discussion where the term "SJW" is flung about, I think that sig was a pretty accurate analogy.
Disclaimer: One time I agreed with something AmiMoJo said.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Informative)
We had this conversation once. I remember digging up about 12 quotes from you that were SJW chapter-and-verse. It's just weird that you deny this.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Insightful)
SJW's are the most serious threat to free speech in the country right now
Have you not noticed who the President is and what he's been up to?
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
The moment you speak to his boss with the intent of causing him harm, is the moment your free opinion transforms to a tool of destructing the livelihood of another human. Same as hate speech inciting someone else to take action against you. Same as doccing people. These actions are beyond free speech. They are not for declaring an opinion, they goal is to cause harm to another human.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
the press to just turn into Pravda and echo the party line.
Oh, you mean like Clinton? You know, handing over debate questions, getting campaign approval on articles written before publishing, having direct financial ties, an obvious bias that affected the quality of journalism from reporting on the issues like the Wikileaks and said behavior, and the collusion that labeled and posted Trump as the Pied Piper i.e. someone that they thought Clinton could beat because she is that bad.
Isn't it a good thing the media and government being at odds? Let's be clear, if you w
Re: Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you behave in a misogynist way, then your behaviour can accurately be described as misogynist.
This rings false, because we all know that "disagreeing with a woman" makes you a misogynist. Much like teaching women self-defense against rapists makes you a rape apologist, and suggesting that everyone should ignore race in how they treat others makes you a racist.
Those little games are all played out. When basically everything is racist, misogynist, and xenophobic, the only rational response is to shrug and ignore those words. The language has changed, and those words no longer have useful meaning.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Insightful)
Many people have been blasted for "hate speech" for criticizing the views of progressive women. It's common enough that accusations of actual hate speech are routinely dismissed by many. Just more words over-used to the point of meaninglessness.
Re: (Score:3)
And "bigotry" isn't limited to racism.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
When someone calls you 'bigot' for criticizing a philosophy you know they are _full of shit_.
Philosophies held are exactly the kind of thing you can judge a person or group on. Skip the name calling and defend it or shut up.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
And "bigotry" isn't limited to racism.
Bigotry has nothing to do with racism. Bigotry is intolerance of an opinion. In fact, calling people racist because you don't like their opinions is bigotry.
Re: (Score:3)
Bigotry is the rejection of opinions other than your own simply because they are not your own.
Bigotry has NOTHING to do hate of a particular race, sex, nation, religion, etc. The original use of the word was related to religion, but still it merely meant rejecting other beliefs without consideration because they are not your own.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
I didn't call anyone a racist, and trying to redefine a word to shortcut actually have to deal with what someone said is, apart from anything else, intellectually lazy
You've called lots of people racist in the past, including me, a black man. Assigning unrelated traits into a single collection like you did may not be you calling someone racist, but you're certainly implying it.
At least have the courage to directly call someone out instead of loosely chaining booleans together with a vague conditional.
Re: (Score:3)
You being black is entirely irrelevant information here.
Re: (Score:3)
No, that is a texbook example of xenophobia. In politics, conservatism means that one is content with the current laws and does not advocate reforms.
Re: Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
NOTE: I do not have an opinion on whether the OP is right or not, but Brianna Wu's tactics during the Gamergate situation resembled those of people in other situations who created fake attacks on themselves...that does not mean they are not true, just that she was either behind those tactics, or she provoked them in order to garner publicity for herself rather than seeking to actually address the problem she claimed to be protesting.
Re: (Score:3)
Do you attempt to blatantly misconstrue everything everyone says? Or only on this topic?
Re: (Score:3)
People should be able to subject people who disagree with them to endless harassment and intimidation without any consequences, right?
And that's exactly what she plans to do to the other kids that called bad names once she's been given the congressional power to pursue her feminist witch-hunt with impunity.
That's enough to make me campaign against her just on principle alone.
Re: Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Informative)
Or even your own side for that matter...it was really hard to resist baiting a certain self-styled royalty of a chan with how quickly he lost his spaghetti.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
Death threats on the internet are about as credible as Baghdad Bob was during the invasion of Iraq. The FBI looked into them, and determined their credibility was at said level, reported the one person who repeatedly harassed her and presumably handed over their evidence of such to the appropriate authorities, and then dropped the issue because they did their jobs. But for our special snowflake this isn't good enough. She needs that extra special law enforcement appeasement. It's certainly not the FBI's problem that Massachusetts declined to prosecute.
Re: (Score:3)
Firstly, nothing in the article indicates that death threats were made, secondly during those 6 months how many death threats online do you think were made in France? I'm gonna guess somewhere northward of 50 million. Which makes any individual death threat completely and utterly useless as an indicator of actual danger.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps you should take your own advice. They investigated. The one person who was remotely credible and repeatedly harassed her they reported to the appropriate authorities. She's throwing a bitch fit because they didn't find anyone they were willing to publicly crucify to appease her ego.
Re:Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, TFA reading is a weak point here, but you should have at least read the summary:
Wu catalogued more than 180 death threats that she said she received because she spoke out against sexism in the game industry and #GamerGate misogyny
Nah, nothing special. No need to investigate.
It's in the summary dumbass - they did investigate. What more did you want?
Re: (Score:3)
The report says that they took some of the threats seriously.
No. It says they took *all* of the threats seriously, which is why they subsequently investigated those threats, and said investigation found them to not be credible.
TLDR; the FBI took the threats seriously. They investigated. The concluded that the threats were not credible.
Re: Malignant narcissist upset, news at 11. (Score:3)
Mainly because I was appalled, firstly at her treatment, and secondly because she felt she had to apologise to her abusers. That's so wrong and yet I don't see any outcry or demonstrations on her behalf. This is why I find it so hard to be part of the left even though my politics will always lean that way.
The way she was treated was disgraceful and yet there's no demands for redress or criminal proceedings because it's not racism or misogyny when "our side" does it.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
So.... (Score:3, Funny)
Nothing actionable? What a shock, I tell you! What a shock!
An Inanimate Carbon Rod 2018! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Aww, I was hoping rod would run for president in 2020.
Self sacrifice? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Same chair and same pockmarks and dirty spots on the walls in his "escaped safehouse" and his original "I had to run away from here because death threats" home as well.
Not sure if it was on steam or twitter though, for your question. But he DID misappropriate a good chunk of his kickstarter money.
Re: (Score:3)
"She fought the alt-right and won" (Score:2)
Re:"She fought the alt-right and won" (Score:5, Informative)
Tricky to say. A lot of GG members seem pretty broadly left wing. They dislike the extremists who focus on identity politics though, and are more likely to see Republicans as people with political opinions they strongly disagree with, rather than evil.
As such it seemed like a reasonable alliance from the point of view of right wingers (including the alt-right) who are staunchly opposed to the identity politics extremists; and they can broadly get on board with a message of "journalistic ethics".
Also hard to say. A lot of gamergaters say that all they wanted was disclosure of personal interest in articles. In this case GG won, but Wu wasn't opposed to that. I'm not sure what her view of GG's goal was. Presumably to prevent the number of female programmers going up to 8%... Not sure she's won here.
Re: (Score:3)
A key note would been how there was a point in the autumn where it seemed GG won and journos had new policies up: those in it for 'the right to not be vilified/left alone and get honest reviews' were sated, while another faction went on to now try to crusade in other fiel
The last thing we need right now ... (Score:3)
... is another goddam non-politician with an axe to grind.
Her personal shit is not on my to do list.
Sign of the times (Score:5, Funny)
I wonder where Brianna Wu got the strange notion that an internet troll could run for office and possibly win.
So Mr. John Flynt wants to double down on failure. (Score:3)
It didn't work the first time around for her, it's only going to be worse to think he's any more important by being a Congresscritter.
No credible threats (Score:3)
It is nice to see a nod given to SA in the report (though it does not go into much detail) - goons, true to their name, were the ones often pitting reddit/chans vs wu/sarkeesian against each other (by false flagging both camps) just for the sake of spectacular flamewars such internet cockfights tend to generate.
GamerGate's discussion about this. (Score:5, Informative)
Some Gamergate threads about it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak... [reddit.com]
The new narrative from the Regressive Left is "Waah, the FBI didn't do enough work to find the harassment we KNOW simply MUST be there."
The reality is the FBI investigated GamerGate and exonerated us. The harassment was either kids being stupid, obvious 4chan memes, or strangely enough True Blood fans getting pissed.
Turns out it actually is about ethics in games journalism. (But really is about a Culture War in Gaming that the Left has soundly lost.)
Meanwhile... (Score:5, Insightful)
One day of typical work of Roberta Williams was more important for gaming than the whole life of this prick.
Re:Meanwhile... (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny thing on that. You know that the usual social justice clique likes to scrub her out of history because she likes to make things that cater to her audience. Much like how they like to scrub Mari Shimazaki who was the artist and character designer for so many AAA games, and how she not only likes "sexy female characters" but has no problems designing male ones to pander or give fan service. Or they like to complain about manga's which have a very high level of female storyboard writers or lead-artists/illustrators.
"She fought the alt-right and won" (Score:4, Insightful)
"She fought the alt-right and won" - that is apparently her campaign slogan. That would also be news to the alt-right, that (a) didn't exist when GamerGate happened and (b) barely even knows she exists.
It's like saying: "she beat her fists against a brick wall - left blood flecks everywhere - she must've won".
If Jack Thompson and the Devil had a Child... (Score:4, Insightful)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
He lost his law license over his stupidity.
Wu doesn't have anything of value to revoke she's so worthless.
The FBI probably looked at what was sent to Jack Thompson and what was sent to Wu, had a good laugh and then went home to play Call of Duty.
Oh PLEASE let her get elected (Score:4, Interesting)
Just in case you thought Trump wasn't enough of a show, but THIS should be awesome entertainment.
I'll stand by with popcorn and coke. I mean, I thought Trump was already gold for satire news shows, but this woman is a platinum encrusted jewel.
Re: (Score:3)
My problem with her is that she's a narcissist loudmouth who takes herself far too serious and considers herself far more important than she possibly could be. How the hell is that a (trans)gender issue?
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It's gotten harder and harder now that even gay or interracial marriage is allowed and women can go vote. Being the oppressed victim is no longer as simple as being Irish.
They're really digging below the bottom of the barrel with "microaggressions" and "I identify as my gender fluids" crap.
Re; ..."he thinks?" (Score:5, Funny)
Pronouns-ment....
"HE" who?
Brianna Wu?
If Wu it be...
then she -not- he.
If he not Wu...
then who?
thanks for your attention
to grammatical convention
so please, would you
say just who (Wu?)
"HE"
might be?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Wu? really, what's needed in Congress right now is an ex-General whose ACTUALLY been under fire and under a death threat.
Well she did experience death threats.
Really when the core defence of America is at stake, you have bigger problem to fix than misogyny. You need cold headed military and hard nosed politicians in Congress and Senate. Trump's men will call you a terrorist, threaten your life with actual police state, and you'll go crying, and that's no help to anyone.
You don't think defending the rights of half of the population is a worthwhile part of the struggle?
And why do you assume she'll be weak and cowardly? She stood up to a vile hate mob, had the opportunity to retire back into obscurity, and now is coming back for more. That's a lot more than I can say for a bunch of congressmen that come from a certain party that starts with R and ends with Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
What "half" of the population you moron? About 7% of the US population supports or agrees with the current feminism movement. The "womans" march after inauguration disallowed and dis invited anyone who was not pro choice, excluding at least half the women in the country. It was propaganda, and 93% of the women in the country that don't agree with feminism want people like you to fuck off and die.
Nope [politicususa.com].
The poll conducted by Public Policy Polling (PPP) shows that more Americans have a favorable opinion of the women who marched during Trump’s inaugural weekend – 50 percent – than they do of the new president, who only 44 percent of respondents support. Trump’s disapproval rating – 50 percent – is also historically high for a new president.
Re: (Score:2)
I gave numbers of women who support the current "Feminists", and my numbers are not contrived by current political pandering propaganda polls. I also gave numbers on pro-life women, who you chose to ignore. Those numbers are also not propaganda motivated polls. Continue living in your bubble, fucking idiot.
I'm sorry, your 7% number was pretty obviously made up or talking about something completely different. I mean 10% of American men consider themselves strong feminists [washingtonpost.com].
You really expect me to believe you found a legitimate poll that suggested only 7% of Americans support the feminist movement?
As for abortion they don't have the exact question to match the direction of the Trump administration, but only 19% of Americans think abortion should be illegal [gallup.com].
I don't know where you think the goalposts are, I'm not
Re:No one gives a fuck (Score:5, Insightful)
Hillary lost, get over it. You have to own your guy's fuck-ups, now.
This is the sorest bunch of winners ever. I've never seen people who's canddates win, and they're angrier than before the election.
It's over, but they didn't win (Score:4, Insightful)
The election *is* over and time to move on. Hillary won't be running again, so it's a bit pointless to be talking about her, agreed. However:
> I've never seen people who's canddates win,
People who dislike scumbags like Hillary didn't see their candidate win. The US elected a different style of bad. Kasich, for example, dropped out in May, so no, "their" candidates didn't win.
Only amongst very uninformed people who treat national policy as like a ball game, where they root for "their team" does acknowledging Hillary's serious faults equate to rooting for Trump.
Now, all Americans live in a country where Trump is in fact President. Those of us who voted against him, such as myself, have Trump as our president - even though I voted against him twice. Those who favored Trump now have him as President. Hillary's speech about this was right on the money. She said all of us will now, if we're smart, will try to support good policies that he proposes and oppose bad ones. The election is over, Hillary has moved on. Now we press for good policy, the best policies we can from our President. A few years from now we'll have a chance to discuss who the next President should be.
Re: (Score:3)
Hillary's speech about this was right on the money. She said all of us will now, if we're smart, will try to support good policies that he proposes and oppose bad ones
Yeah, I really wish we were more focused on the policies. Here is what Trump said about his recent executive order [facebook.com]. Instead of just calling him a big baby, or racist, or narcissistic whatever, I'd like to see some actual analysis of his policies. For example, here are some questions worth discussing:
1) Is there a better to way to keep terrorists from entering the country? Is that a worthy goal? How would you do it?
2) Is Trump aware of the problems he's caused to some immigrants stuck in the airport? (I
Re: (Score:2)
dispassionately analyzing goals and policy objectives will be more effective
I used to think that way too. But intelligent people dispassionately analyzed his policy statements during the election, and arrived at two conclusions:
1. The few concrete policy statements he made, would never work. (Ex: Building a wall, tax plans, etc.)
2. He made so few coherent statements that it was hard to figure out what his policy objectives are.
Even now, most of his executive orders are nonsense. Hiring freezes don't work (gee, if only we had a businessman at the helm who knew such things...), an
Re: (Score:3)
I used to think that way too. But intelligent people dispassionately analyzed his policy statements during the election, and arrived at two conclusions: 1. The few concrete policy statements he made, would never work. (Ex: Building a wall, tax plans, etc.)
Here's the thing. You didn't even read what he said. Here it is again [facebook.com]. If you don't want to read it, that's fine, but be aware that if you don't, you're not contributing to the conversation, you're detracting from it.
2. He made so few coherent statements that it was hard to figure out what his policy objectives are.
That might have been an excuse during the election, but actions speak louder than words, and it's pretty clear that he meant some of the words he said during the election. Do you really think he didn't mean it when he said he would block Muslim countries from coming into the US? Or that he woul
Re:It's over, but they didn't win (Score:4, Informative)
The stated reason for choosing those seven countries (the same ones Obama selected for increased scrutiny in 2011) is because they lack functioning governments that can provide meaningful information that can be used for security screening. It's hard to get someone's criminal record from the "government" of Somalia. Saudi Arabia has a functioning government with government records, so their citizens can be screened.
This all appears to be objectively true. If it were about "banning muslims" he would have included, as you say, nations like Saudi Arabia, or Indonesia, etc. I hate Islam and would much prefer an actual muslim ban, but this appears to be security and documentation related, not part of any effective anti-Islamification plan.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The election *is* over and time to move on. Hillary won't be running again, so it's a bit pointless to be talking about her, agreed. However:
> I've never seen people who's canddates win,
People who dislike scumbags like Hillary didn't see their candidate win.
How does any of what you wrote address my statement that the angry Pro-Trump people are getting angrier every day?
Perhaps this will be the administration that restores America to th eposition it held right after World War two, and all will be well.
But political groups that use anger as their core principle don't often work out very well.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You think conservatives won ?
Conservatives value process and playing by the rules, the use of reason to prove our point.
The left kept screaming like children and digging in their heels till they created a reflection of themselves that hates them.
Trump won, he is purely a creation of the insanity of the left and their unwillingness to have a rational political process.
You are welcome to him.
Re:No one gives a fuck (Score:5, Interesting)
You think conservatives won ?
I think that a process that modern day crypto-conservatives used to their advantage since the early 1990's, and went nuts over for the last 8 years got out of their control. Republicans own both the house and senate, and most of the state Governments, they also have a Republican president. Sounds to me like they won really big.
Conservatives value process and playing by the rules, the use of reason to prove our point.
Conservatives, perhaps. Crypto-conservatives, the present day version no, they do not.
I don't want to get in a tit-for -tat battle, but here is one of your leaders, Mitch McConnel, on the previous occupant's nomination for the Supreme court, and the REpublican Congress refuesd to even consider the previous occupat's nomination. Tell me the process, and playing by the rules, and the use of reason that just saying "NO" is. However, rest assured that Mitch is aghast that any opposition to your Republican leader Donald Trump, the duly elected president of teh United States of America, the candidate who set Republican Conservative Records in the number of votes cast for him in the primaries, in addition to teh record set, had almost twice the votes of the nearest competitior Ted Cruz.
sorry fellow, Donald Trump is exactly the representative of the Republican party. He is the man ovrwhemlingly wanted by Republicans.
And here is the issue I have with the present day Republicans. After overwhelmingly supporting this guy, you won't own what he is. You might not like it, but you are part of what got hiim there, congratulations, you must be proud of the ultimte culmination of your hard work
Not that you'll own it. It isn't in the crypto-conservative's psyche. You'll have some excuse.
And before you accuse me of being a liberal - I'm not. I'm a Goldwater conservative, I believe in paying attention to the budget, but once set, paying the bills (present day cons like to "starve the beast". I believe in compromise to do the law (don't even get me started), I believe that th eGovernment needs to stay out of our bedrooms and private life, and I believe in separation of religion and state - and for the same reason my boy Barry did, and I quote from a speech of his in 1981:
"There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of 'conservatism.' "
This is what your party has become. What Barry warned against has become reality to the point that you elected the exact opposite of wht you preach as your vlues because you hate anyone who doesn't toe the party line, and Trump was infinitely preferable to a godammed stinking Democrat. The next several years are going to be interesting. Will the Republicans reform the country into some sort of totalitarian government, accepting every fiat your president signs, or will we have civil war number two, or will you just inherit the wind. Gonna be exciting fer sure!
Re: (Score:3)
This is the sorest bunch of winners ever. I've never seen people who's canddates win, and they're angrier than before the election.
And how long were people harping about Bush after Obama got elected and rainbows and unicorns didn't magically appear across the country?
Re: (Score:2)
Get punched fascist.
The irony is rich.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Get punched fascist.
Keep it up that attitude from the left is what created the Alt-Right
At the rate you all are going you will be begging for conservatives to return to the scene
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Just think, all this insanity from the regressive left was just barely brewing under the surface, only held back because of their delusion that the rest of the world agreed with them.
Re: Why doesn't he have his picture on website? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, yes, Crashmarik, you conservatives have been denying responsibility since your love affair with the anti-communists and segregationists in the 1950s.
But we know you are Spartacus, and Spartacus is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
Tell me whats the difference between segregation and the quotas of affirmative action ?
Re: Why doesn't he have his picture on website? (Score:4, Insightful)
One reduces the degree with which races mix, and the other increases it.
They are literally the exact OPPOSITE of each other.
Re: (Score:3)
Future fascists will call themselves anti-fascists.
Grow up and act like an adult.
Re:"Actionable leads" (Score:5, Informative)
There were plenty of "actionable leads" in the report, but either the FBI or one of the more local DA's all just refused to prosecute. Several people admitted to doing it (death threats), but "promised not to do it again". I don't know anything about this woman, but the report says that the FBI simply failed.
That is the EXACT opposite of what the report says. They weren't actionable leads. That's why they weren't acted upon.
In fact, this report pretty much exonerates GamerGate and proves exactly what we've been saying all along. There may have been "death threats," but they weren't actually threats of harm, and they were mostly sent by idiots from the chans or other young kids. In fact, the only one they had to do any major investigative work on was the false flag targeting MrRepzion. Others, like the one Antia used to steal from that college, were outright hoaxes.
Oh, and mentioned on page 163 is that Brianna got harassed by about 40 phone calls. The only GamerGate chat Brianna has ever been in is GamerGhazi's mod chat. (Before they banned her for being a batshit insane loser.) In other words, that was a Social Justice Warrior harassing Brianna because Brianna is such an insufferable idiot that even the more asinine of the regressive left can't stand her.
Re:"Actionable leads" (Score:5, Interesting)
To be fair, 99.9999% of the SJWs screeching about the FBI not deciding to send in jack booted thugs to arrest anyone with a Twitter account who has ever criticized Saint Anita or BatWu never even opened the PDF once. The narrative is "the FBI didn't do their jobs" and they're relying on confirmation bias to uphold it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:"Actionable leads" (Score:4, Interesting)
I read the PDF, you dumb fuck. Death threats are illegal.
Yes, they are. Non-credible threats, however, have about as much of a chance of being prosecuted and achieving jail time for the person making the non-credible threat as Wu has of winning that seat in 2018.
If I threaten you by telling you some outrageous bullshit, like "I'll rip your head off like Sub-Zero!" the FBI is going to look at that and know it isn't actionable. Now, if I threaten with something much more credible, like having taken pictures of you going in and out of your house, and saying "watch your back, you never know when I'll attack", then the FBI (or local law enforcement) will see that as a much more credible threat, especially since it appears I'm already stalking you, and know where you live.
Those differences are what separate SJW logic from real logic. SJW logic dictates that even the most outrageous thing said to them ("I'll shove a nuclear bomb up your ass and detonate it!") is a real and credible threat to their special snowflake lives; and that they now deserve money from strangers because they're a victim. Real logic says: yeah, that threat is so toooooootally real. Like, fer sure, dude. *laughs and walks away knowing the threat is a fake*.
Re: (Score:3)
I wouldn't blame the comments. I'd blame the fact that this was ever posted as news in the first place. Even if it was for nerds, it certainly doesn't matter.