Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

There`s a lot of disingenuous argumentative technique going on in your post. The way you've painted her supporters is hardly any nicer than "hate campaign", for example.

But I'm happy you are responding the way you are.

 Da Boss wrote:
There`s a lot of disingenuous argumentative technique going on in your post. The way you've painted her supporters is hardly any nicer than "hate campaign", for example.

If saying "this woman is a swindler, I don't care what you believe, just have better standards for who you follow before you get swindled" is something a 'hate group' would do, then I guess I need to start figuring out what fascist symbol I want to wear.

Instead of using circular logic and vague complaints, you can freely engage me and I'll be absolutely polite and engage your points.

 Pumpkin wrote:
I cannot believe that, this long after the shockingly vile Gamergate saga, people still view Sarkeesian as the villain.

That's just embarrassing.

I can't believe Gamergate has been dead for what seems like 3 or 4 years now, but it's still a boogeyman.

Also, I can't believe people don't realize the whole Gamergate thing was a thing at all for one reason- scummy journalists in a dying profession got called scummy, and a circus ensured. All because one of them promised a mentally ill woman a review if she would do sex things to his peepee. Anyone shocked at the idea that gaming journalists might be scumbags has obviously never had any experience with them. Absolutely none of that shocked me at all.

There are extremes of this on both ends, and both deserve ridicule.

Liking sexy women in games is not an evil thing. Not every form of escapism needs to be transformed into a social commentary for the loons no one else wants to listen to.

There is no 'SJW' agenda in every thing that shows a brown person or a woman. Everyone is free to create and free to critique. There are bigots in every hobby, and they need to be dealt with lickety-split.

Sorry, can someone point out for me what she did to swindle people?

I mean, I'm assuming she must have literally stolen or defrauded (in the criminal sense) people to get this sort of response. Like, she must have forged credit card numbers, or taken money for goods not delivered, or signed people up to badly explained payment plans or something. And if she did these things, have the courts been informed? The police? These are criminal offences after all.

 Ketara wrote:
Sorry, can someone point out for me what she did to swindle people?

I mean, I'm assuming she must have literally stolen or defrauded (in the criminal sense) people to get this sort of response. Like, she must have forged credit card numbers, or taken money for goods not delivered, or signed people up to badly explained payment plans or something. And if she did these things, have the courts been informed? The police? These are criminal offences after all.

Underlined is there.

But you're right, no arrests have been made. Same for those 'rape and death threats' she received. Maybe the law sees things that should be ignored when some people see a problem.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
Sorry, can someone point out for me what she did to swindle people?

I mean, I'm assuming she must have literally stolen or defrauded (in the criminal sense) people to get this sort of response. Like, she must have forged credit card numbers, or taken money for goods not delivered, or signed people up to badly explained payment plans or something. And if she did these things, have the courts been informed? The police? These are criminal offences after all.

Underlined is there.

But you're right, no arrests have been made. Same for those 'rape and death threats' she received. Maybe the law sees things that should be ignored when some people see a problem.

So what, did she commit postal fraud? Why hasn't she been taken to court? I mean, she's clearly visible, and lawyers don't care about the internet. Surely the wronged parties have a legal claim or recourse? I know nothing about this. Could you give me a short summary of what she did to defraud people and why nothing has been done?

 Da Boss wrote:
It does sort of make you a bit ... odd though doesn't it? Being "opposed" to someone who just makes what are essentially youtube videos about video games? I mean hhbomberguy made a video where he said Fallout 3 was gak, but I'm not "opposed" to him.

If all she did was make YouTube videos, nobody would have a problem with her, personally. I find it irritating that she won't defend her views against actual living humans who disagree with her (even Peregrine will stick around and defend his shitposts, Anita will not), and I find it terrifying that she testified in front of the UN arguing in favor of censoring the internet and is a major part of Twitter's Trust and Safety Council, which was the beginning of the end for Twitter's neutrality.

I think in this example, she hasn't done anything against tabletop gaming personally, but she is more the canary in the coalmine. The very fact that GenCon decided to invite this huckster as a guest of honor means that the balance has tipped far enough that the witch hunts are about to start.

And it is a fact that Gamergate was intentionally hijacked by rightwingers as a way to attack feminists and recruit young men. There are plenty of people on record admitting to this. For god's sake, the whole thing started with a who slept with who argument involving an indie developer, which was apparently the biggest crisis to ever hit ethics in games journalism.

GamerGate isn't right wing. There was a time there, in the early days, when they had an "enemy of my enemy is my friend" relationship with Brietbart and Milo. They were all anti-progressive, and thus cheered each other when they were anti-progressive, but were so for different reasons and had fundamentally different views outside of that. Brietbart tried to take more credit than they deserve after the election and it is in no way representative of the views and opinions of GamerGate. Just because people think progressives have become social authoritarians doesn't make them right wing. It just makes them not progressives.

Also, the thing didn't start with who slept with who. Most people agree that it started with a whole slew of articles within the span of a single day that all said the same thing. "Gamers are dead. Gamers don't need to be your audience anymore." (Sound familiar Star Wars fans?). People were convinced that the gaming journalists were all members of the same clique and using their platform as gaming journalists to push a particular agenda (one which was at odds with the majority of gamers' wishes). When the Five Guys memo came out, it was salacious and targeted a person who was already largely reviled in the game industry (she had purposefully sabotaged a to be televised game jam and made a lot of enemies with her behavior well before GG became a thing - seriously, I had read articles about her terrible behavior on the cancelled game jam years earlier. She is a terrible human being), but it also seemed to prove that game journalists were a clique and were using their position and power (what little they had) for personal gain rather than being objective voices for gaming.

This was exacerbated by the fact the GG was fundamentally an anti-game journalist movement, and yet they let the game journalists define their public persona for people not involved. GG just didn't have the public platform to make their viewpoints clear and known at the time, and the fact that all the gaming journals flat out lied about them and any time they tried to defend themselves, they were blocked or banned and made unable to do so. It was, to me, one of the first really clear examples of how the progressives want to control the message more than they want to have one.

I believe she took crowdfunding money to produce videos and then did not produce all the videos she promised?

 Ketara wrote:
So what, did she commit postal fraud? Why hasn't she been taken to court? I mean, she's clearly visible, and lawyers don't care about the internet. Surely the wronged parties have a legal claim or recourse? I know nothing about this. Could you give me a short summary of what she did to defraud people and why nothing has been done?

Well, if we're going to play 'It's not a problem because no one went to court", then I'll assume you see that as a reasonable argument for why no arrests were made for all of those 'death and rape threats'. You know, assuming 'day old account posting vile things before being banned' is evidence for their existence at all.

So she hosted a Kickstarter, where she claimed she was going to do research because video games are sexist (because that's how research works, you choose what you want to believe and cherry pick things to support it- rather than doing research first and then reaching your conclusion). She didn't deliver on the videos, and she got $400,000+ to make about half the number she promised her Kickstarter investors, and what she did produce were low-tier garbage that any teenager can make in his basement in the afternoon. Not only that, but she used "Let's Play" footage without permission from the owners (something which is quick to get Youtube videos shut down otherwise).

Face it, dude- I get it. You wanna be a feminist. Fine, that's a debate for another day. You believe you're doing good things and want things to be better, and I respect that, at least. But select a better person to listen to.

 Ketara wrote:
Sorry, can someone point out for me what she did to swindle people?

I mean, I'm assuming she must have literally stolen or defrauded (in the criminal sense) people to get this sort of response. Like, she must have forged credit card numbers, or taken money for goods not delivered, or signed people up to badly explained payment plans or something. And if she did these things, have the courts been informed? The police? These are criminal offences after all.

She took in a LOT of money to produce a series of videos (Tropes vs Women), which she never finished, and which she was repeatedly shown to use other people's work without their permission. There was also some funniness with the financial statements her non-profit put out. I don't remember exactly what, but it had something to do with the cost breakdown being grossly over inflated.

Also, if you search YouTube, you can find old videos of her shilling for a telemarketer pyramid scheme.

 Sqorgar wrote:
Also, the thing didn't start with who slept with who. Most people agree that it started with a whole slew of articles within the span of a single day that all said the same thing. "Gamers are dead. Gamers don't need to be your audience anymore." (Sound familiar Star Wars fans?). People were convinced that the gaming journalists were all members of the same clique and using their platform as gaming journalists to push a particular agenda (one which was at odds with the majority of gamers' wishes). When the Five Guys memo came out, it was salacious and targeted a person who was already largely reviled in the game industry (she had purposefully sabotaged a to be televised game jam and made a lot of enemies with her behavior well before GG became a thing - seriously, I had read articles about her terrible behavior on the cancelled game jam years earlier. She is a terrible human being), but it also seemed to prove that game journalists were a clique and were using their position and power (what little they had) for personal gain rather than being objective voices for gaming.

Yeah, but in her defense- she is mentally ill (by her own admission). Sounds like she was exploited, regardless of her scummy behavior. Though after that one incident with the company that catalogued trolls and harassment behavior online- I've always been suspicious of her a little more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sqorgar wrote:
Also, if you search YouTube, you can find old videos of her shilling for a telemarketer pyramid scheme.

It should be noted that the person at the head of this scheme, one that she has praised- has faced criminal charges for this scheme.

And those are gakky things that she did. But what I do not understand is the depth of vitriol toward her. The world is full of people delivering disappointingly on KS. This is one of the very rare times when people who did not back the KS were furious enough about it to go on about it for years, and in some cases make entire series of videos themselves about how terrible she was, some of whom also sought crowdfunding and then didn't deliver.

I can accept that she was not a very good critic and that she should have delivered on her promises or refunded - absolutely. But I see a rancid double standard in how she is treated and the level of obsession some have shown toward her. And I have to conclude it's because she is a woman commenting on what some perceive to be a "male" hobby. Look at how sexualized some of the posts here are - why is there a need to bring sex and genitalia into this at all?

Edit to add: Again, I can accept happily that Games Journalists are pretty scummy with low integrity and no moral standards in many cases. I can easily imagine one of them using their "power" to hit on someone. What I find really weird and troubling is how the straw that broke the camels back had to be a woman having sex and using it to get ahead, a common misogynist trope, when there are so many other examples of worse behaviour on the part of games journalists going back decades.

 Da Boss wrote:
And those are gakky things that she did. But what I do not understand is the depth of vitriol toward her. The world is full of people delivering disappointingly on KS. This is one of the very rare times when people who did not back the KS were furious enough about it to go on about it for years, and in some cases make entire series of videos themselves about how terrible she was, some of whom also sought crowdfunding and then didn't deliver.

Yes, but hear me out- if you fail on a Kickstarter promise with 400 grand in your pocket, and all you've got to do is make some low-quality Youtube videos? That's just something I can laugh at. When you make it a point to also insult people and accuse everyone of being some closet bigot, you tend to get more ire on top of it.

 Da Boss wrote:
I can accept that she was not a very good critic and that she should have delivered on her promises or refunded - absolutely. But I see a rancid double standard in how she is treated and the level of obsession some have shown toward her. And I have to conclude it's because she is a woman commenting on what some perceive to be a "male" hobby. Look at how sexualized some of the posts here are - why is there a need to bring sex and genitalia into this at all?

We didn't bring it into the discussion, man. We just want escapism. We want to enjoy things and be left the hell alone. We don't want right wing or left wing. We just want to sit and enjoy a game, and we were fine for years despite our differences.

It's not because she's a woman- people loathe her former partner even more (Jonathan McIntosh) and he gets called much worse.

Face it, dude- people get a bit aggressive when something they love, and have loved for years suddenly attracts a random loon with an axe to grind (or a buck to make) and that random loon says, "Okay this is all wrong and if you disagree it's harassment and you're a bigot." What kind of reaction do you expect?

 Da Boss wrote:
So she got all the hate she got for being a huckster? I find it strange - the world is full of hucksters, but just this one inspires a gigantic online hate campaign that has lasted for years.

Because the basis of her con is portraying a large group of pretty normal people as being entirely populated by right-wing lunatic hatemongers. She, and a fair few white knights above, are literally the liberal equivalent of the alt-righters who scream buzzwords like communism or social marxism at the slightest hint of something like widely accessible schooling and healthcare, or gay marriage. And being called a literal nazi for playing video games is a pretty big deal to most decent people, so we react a bit more strongly to that than to nigerian prince spam mail.

Well, I just shrug and walk away, because I just saw another youtube pundit that I didn't agree with. Like I say, gaming youtube is full of people saying x or y is objectively wrong and terrible. It's not worth getting bent out of shape over.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
So she got all the hate she got for being a huckster? I find it strange - the world is full of hucksters, but just this one inspires a gigantic online hate campaign that has lasted for years.

Because the basis of her con is portraying a large group of pretty normal people as being entirely populated by right-wing lunatic hatemongers. She, and a fair few white knights above, are literally the liberal equivalent of the alt-righters who scream buzzwords like communism or social marxism at the slightest hint of something like widely accessible schooling and healthcare, or gay marriage. And being called a literal nazi for playing video games is a pretty big deal to most decent people, so we react a bit more strongly to that than to nigerian prince spam mail.

I mean has she actually said this? Has she called people nazis for playing video games? It is a pretty dumb thing to say, but again, the scale of the response is ridiculous. If she says things like that, then she is just an idiot and not worth paying attention to. But there is a little cottage industry of people who make videos commenting on her now, and it is just really weird and uncomfortable.

 Da Boss wrote:
Edit to add: Again, I can accept happily that Games Journalists are pretty scummy with low integrity and no moral standards in many cases. I can easily imagine one of them using their "power" to hit on someone. What I find really weird and troubling is how the straw that broke the camels back had to be a woman having sex and using it to get ahead, a common misogynist trope, when there are so many other examples of worse behaviour on the part of games journalists going back decades.

Now you understand MY grudge with Gamergate. They didn't focus on the whole problem with gaming journalists. It's a field full of scumbags and instead of going after the real disease, we focused on a symptom.

But it broke the Camel's back because once they were called on it, they circled the wagons and pissed on their customers. Before that, complaints were ignored. But when someone pointed out how absolutely low they could go, they attacked the people they were supposed to represent.

I just really do not have the same standards you do for consumer journalism. Games journalism has always, always, always been a wink and a nudge from pure shilling. I don't have any expectations that those people are going to represent my interests or do anything other than regurgitate corporate press releases.

 Da Boss wrote:
Well, I just shrug and walk away, because I just saw another youtube pundit that I didn't agree with. Like I say, gaming youtube is full of people saying x or y is objectively wrong and terrible. It's not worth getting bent out of shape over.

You know what is worth getting bent out of shape over?

There's someone out there that's made great changes in gaming. Someone out there has actually DONE something about sexism and bigotry. Some dude is taking kids and helping them through gaming. Someone may have made a loving, welcoming, open community and made an actual difference.

The only 'changes' Anita Sarkeesian has made?

...uh...

...maybe she...

...well...

Okay I can't really think of anything, mostly just pissed a lot of people off.

So it's really hard to see her as deserving of this position. And don't say she 'started a conversation'. Not a whole lot of 'conversation' when you block comments and your opinions aren't up for debate in any forum.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:
I just really do not have the same standards you do for consumer journalism. Games journalism has always, always, always been a wink and a nudge from pure shilling. I don't have any expectations that those people are going to represent my interests or do anything other than regurgitate corporate press releases.

And that's fair. But the young people that were awakened by that should have done something, and moved on to actual consumer journalism.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Well, if we're going to play 'It's not a problem because no one went to court", then I'll assume you see that as a reasonable argument for why no arrests were made for all of those 'death and rape threats'. You know, assuming 'day old account posting vile things before being banned' is evidence for their existence at all....Face it, dude- I get it. You wanna be a feminist. Fine, that's a debate for another day. You believe you're doing good things and want things to be better, and I respect that, at least. But select a better person to listen to.

What the hell is wrong with you? Do you need a lie down or something? I don't know crap about this beyond some vague recollections of seeing some compilations the abuse she got sent and seeing two minutes of a crap video on Youtube at some point. I point blank said that at least twice now. If you're fantasising all this guff about me based on that, I think it's quite clear that you're the one with a problem.

So she hosted a Kickstarter, where she claimed she was going to do research because video games are sexist (because that's how research works, you choose what you want to believe and cherry pick things to support it- rather than doing research first and then reaching your conclusion). She didn't deliver on the videos, and she got $400,000+ to make about half the number she promised her Kickstarter investors, and what she did produce were low-tier garbage that any teenager can make in his basement in the afternoon. Not only that, but she used "Let's Play" footage without permission from the owners (something which is quick to get Youtube videos shut down otherwise).

So just to get this straight:-

1. She did some minor copyright infringement (which I think we've all been doing since Napster), and
2. She ran a Kickstarter, a platform that very explicitly comes with half a dozen warnings around it being a caveat emptor investment situation, and only produced half the amount of content she said she was originally planning on making?

I'm slightly confused on the second one because you simultaneously say that she 'didn't deliver' and that she 'made about half'. One of those would be the actions of a scammer/swindler, the other is someone who delivered, just not as much as was originally hoped for in a (heavily qualified investment platform based) Kickstarter campaign.

 Ketara wrote:
What the hell is wrong with you? Do you need a lie down or something? I don't know crap about this beyond some vague recollections of seeing some compilations the abuse she got sent and seeing two minutes of a crap video on Youtube at some point. I point blank said that at least twice now. If you're fantasising all this guff about me based on that, I think it's quite clear that you're the one with a problem.

Oh, I must have been mistaken when I assumed you had good intentions. I won't make that error again, if you like.

 Ketara wrote:
1. She did some minor copyright infringement (which I think we've all been doing since Napster), and
2. She ran a Kickstarter, a platform that very explicitly comes with half a dozen warnings around it being a caveat emptor investment situation, and only produced half the amount of content she said she was originally planning on making?

I'm slightly confused on the second one because you simultaneously say that she 'didn't deliver and that she 'made about half'. One of those would be the actions of a scammer/swindler, the other is someone who delivered, just not as much as was originally hoped for in a (heavily qualified investment platform based) Kickstarter campaign.

$400,000. Youtube videos with stolen content. Kind of what anyone would consider a scam.

And I'll clue you in on something- if you don't believe the whole, "We're here to fight harassment!" thing isn't often a prelude for a swindle, see 'Bullyhunters'.

 Da Boss wrote:
I just really do not have the same standards you do for consumer journalism. Games journalism has always, always, always been a wink and a nudge from pure shilling. I don't have any expectations that those people are going to represent my interests or do anything other than regurgitate corporate press releases.

The problem is, they started using their position to influence corporate decisions. They'd go, look, the people want this thing! The developers would go, really? And the journalists would go, absolutely. Look, we even wrote thirty articles about it. Then the developers would start treating their fans like gak.

You can see the exact same thing. When The Last Jedi came out and was universally hated, you'd see articles saying things like "Why Star Wars fans don't have to be your audience - and that's a good thing", which attempt to portray anyone who disliked that movie as someone opposed to the diversity politics. And then there's all these articles talking about how amazing Black Panther is for being the first black super hero, which is revisionist history that has no respect for the multiple black super heroes that came before. Remember Ghostbusters 2016 and how terribly Sony treated Ghostbuster fans? Or how comic book fans are all misogynists because they didn't like it when Iron Man was replaced with a teenage black girl who was supposedly smarter and more talented than him. Go check out the headlines for Thundercats Roar. There's an agenda being pushed that not only seeks to change the things that people love, but to blame and shame them for loving it.

Similarly, Anita Sarkeesian is not a gamer. It's obvious by her videos that she doesn't understand video games on a fundamental level and has very minimal exposure to them. And yet she tells us what we are supposed to think about them, then labels us for disagreeing with her. The truth is, she's not a gamer. She wouldn't be caught dead in the same room as a gamer. Her interaction with Boogie was legendary, and very telling. And she's telling us that games are bad and gamers are worse. Is it a surprise that gamers might be slightly offended by this?

Slightly offended? No, that seems totally appropriate. It is the years long hate campaign I don't understand. (Also, I didn't mind TLJ. About as good as Return of the Jedi for me).

I don't think someone has to be a gamer to comment on games, either, btw. But I thought her commentary was pretty basic surface level stuff, not too interesting.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
IDGAF about her. Unless she goes after Kingdom Death. Then, I might just join Kotaku online in trying to get her banned and censored.

John, you've never had a problem with all the posters here, including me, who often point out KDM's foibles and ridiculous sexualization. What gives Sarkesian such power over you?

KDM has always generated a healthy level of objection from a portion of the market. That KDM takes that and keeps doing its thing anyway is part of the charm.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Oh, I must have been mistaken when I assumed you had good intentions. I won't make that error again, if you like.

$400,000. Youtube videos with stolen content. Kind of what anyone would consider a scam.

And I'll clue you in on something- if you don't believe the whole, "We're here to fight harassment!" thing isn't often a prelude for a swindle, see 'Bullyhunters'.

...Sorry, was that first line an attempt at being condescending? I can't quite tell, because you previously wrote a paragraph loftily admonishing me over needing to pick better role models to listen to, when I know nothing about the woman who I'm supposedly paying attention to, or anything she's said or done.

Don't you see how bizare that is?

I'm quite happy to discuss the topic, but I know little about it. Which is why I'm asking you simple questions over what it is that makes her a 'scammer' (something with very clear legal and moral connotations within the realm of law and intent) But I'm all I'm getting out of you is a mangled story and some bizare compulsion to set me up in little strawman chairs to knock down. Which is really quite peculiar and speaks realms as to your degree of personal emotional investment in the story. It is, after all, quite difficult to argue with someone who explicitly states that they don't know the facts (and consequently cannot have an opinion as of yet).

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
John, you've never had a problem with all the posters here, including me, who often point out KDM's foibles and ridiculous sexualization. What gives Sarkesian such power over you?

Which of our posters here have been on headline news? Just curious.

She became headline news because of the response to her videos. If people had just shrugged and moved on, she'd not have gotten any exposure.

 Carnikang wrote:
Honestly, she's just another agenda pusher who may weight in on the industry... it only matters if her agenda is pushed by someone with backing, or like minds are already in place.

Not to add fuel to fire, but the Warhammer Adventures debacle has put the community into a light that I'm not sure I enjoy all that much. People either reacted horribly (nah mah stuffs no kids) or they seemed to revel in the fact that there was more 'all-important-diversity' (among other things that seemed suspect) and that was the only thing good about the inclusion of the books. That could easily be seized upon by someone like her.

Where did anyone who was excited about Warhammer Adventures state that it was because of the diversity? I read the whole thread on Dakka, and the only pro-diversity supporters were straw men invented by the usual "not muh warhams " types.

The actual pro side was interested in books that would appeal to (their) kids.

 Sqorgar wrote:
She took in a LOT of money to produce a series of videos (Tropes vs Women), which she never finished,

So (looking for the details here), she made the series, but it wasn't as long as she'd originally planned?

There was also some funniness with the financial statements her non-profit put out. I don't remember exactly what, but it had something to do with the cost breakdown being grossly over inflated.

I'd be wary of that; purely because even on this website alone I've seen cases where a nerd with a bee in their bonnet has attempted to dig through financial statements and concocted wild stories of impropriety out of nothing.

Ketara, essentially she did not deliver everything she promised and what she did deliver was apparently pretty poor quality. A story we have all seen many times before, but without the absolute torrent of outrage seen in this case.

 Ketara wrote:
I'm quite happy to discuss the topic, but I know little about it. Which is why I'm asking you simple questions over what it is that makes her a 'scammer' (something with very clear legal and moral connotations within the realm of law and morality) But I'm all I'm getting out of you is a mangled story and some bizare compulsion to set me up in little strawman chairs to knock down. Which is really quite peculiar and speaks realms as to your degree of personal emotional investment in the story. It is, after all, quite difficult to argue with someone who explicitly states that they don't know the facts (and consequently cannot have an opinion as of yet).

Oh, well then clearly I misunderstood. Sorry, I tend to assume that people are as familiar with things as I am too often. I didn't mean to do that.

Anyway, yes- she's seen as a 'scammer' because she took $400,000 in Kickstarter funds and produced something my 13 year old nephew can make in a couple of afternoons. She then dropped the project- and she's got ties to an older Pyramid/Ponzi scheme that had actual arrests in the past. Additionally, it's also believed by many that she's essentially holding her hand out and telling insecure and ill-informed persons she can help solve a problem, while her 'proof' that this problem even exists is a bunch of cherry-picked data.

That's why she's seen as a scammer.

Now, combine that "I'm here to fix harassment" with a more recent debacle with "Bullyhunters". People have seen something ripe for exploitation and the jackals have come out to feed.






Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:
She became headline news because of the response to her videos. If people had just shrugged and moved on, she'd not have gotten any exposure.

The Orange Mean Man in the white house putting ketchup on his steak is headline news. Let's not act like it takes a moral outrage.

Adeptus: There are jackals on the other side of it too though - that fella making a documentary about her and shilling for crowdfunding money. I will look him up and post a link.

Jorden Owen and Davis Aurini. They had a patreon for their documentary about Anita Sarkeesian and failed to deliver. Aurini is also a racist white nationalist. I would assume you are just as outraged about them, and disgusted at the lack of a large campaign of people castigating them for their lack of ethics?