509:(one of the drafting arbitrators) gave their view of the challenges, "if the Committee were in a position to introduce emergency draconian measures (which it isn't), it could only be on the basis of what's happening within the encyclopedia rather what may be going on outside it. There are simply no practical solutions to some of these issues because Knowledge (XXG) is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. It would take major systemic change (end pseudonymous editing, require ID to create an account etc) to make individual editors accountable and, even then, we'd have no reliable means of connecting external anonymous individuals to named internal accounts." It's possible (likely, even!) that arbitrators reviewed the possibility of addressing off-wiki coordination and found the evidence wanting or the action needed to be outside their remit, but little of that came through in the decision.
402:, a former arbitrator, wrote that she "took action using advanced tools the other night only after I had the personal commitment of two of your colleagues to 'have my back' if I did so, because this decision is so broad that even acting entirely within policy I see a realistic risk of being sanctioned for taking entirely policy-accepted actions." Remember the case was kicked off by a complaint about administrative malfeasance, precisely the kind of situation an administrator wading into Gamergate six months from now might face.
222:, even when a draft version of the page was set up to prevent edit warring on the main space. As more attention was drawn to the Knowledge (XXG) article within Gamergate circles, many of these editors themselves became targets from offsite groups due to their opposition towards Gamergate, which appeared to drive them further into their activities of preventing Gamergate supporters from changing the nature of the Knowledge (XXG) article, while forgoing what would be expected behaviour of all Knowledge (XXG) editors.
413:. It is the future of online resentment and so long as Knowledge (XXG) is both editable and authoritative we will face the same sort of problems. I had a hope, when this case was first taken, that Knowledge (XXG) would do the right thing in the end. That this community, which I am so passionate about and have been lucky enough to be a (very marginal) part of would land on the right solution after having tried all the bad ones. We're still looking, and the Arbitration Committee appears to be badly lost.
445:"If there are a parade of single purpose accounts acting badly, the page can be semi-protected or protected long-term by any administrator, and disruptive accounts can be warned and then topic banned. Once the bad actors realize that we aren't going to tolerate them, they will go elsewhere." Additionally, many of the single purpose accounts in the topic area were older but until-recently inactive accounts, rendering semi-protection less useful.
379:
remedies were added by other arbitrators and some of the original remedies did not gain consensus, but remarkably little has changed in the overall scope. Ryulong, Tarc, and NorthBySouthBaranof were topic banned; TaraInDC and TheRedPenofDoom will just be "admonished". Despite finding unanimously that "off-wiki feuds" and accusations of "off-wiki canvassing" were central to the dispute, none of the proposed remedies addressed off-wiki actions.
169:, one of our goals is to offer a platform to discuss happenings in the Knowledge (XXG) community through publication of op-eds, editorials, and other material. This week, we have featured two excellent op-eds penned by Knowledge (XXG) administrators that offer differing views on how the arbitration committee handled the GamerGate case. The views expressed are those of the authors alone; responses and critical commentary are invited in the
1028:
1557:"Pro" Gamergate poeple are those that are stating they believe there are ethics issues in current video game journalism. "Anti" Gamergater people are either those that counter these claims, and/or that have been highly critical of the methods that are attributed to the pro-Gamergate side or the hashtag, though as a label this is much less commonly used. At times you'll see "Gamergater" which refers to the pro-Gamergate side. --
120:
110:
262:
406:
about them. They recognized that behavior during the dispute would be a problem, then took no action as the evidence page ballooned. They recognized the importance of off-wiki coordination and then refused to take action on that very subject. They were repeatedly warned about misinterpreting this dispute as garden-variety
Knowledge (XXG) factionalism and went on to "the decks of all the editors" anyway.
36:
130:
1372:
always deleted, and those implicitly calling for action are generally deleted as well. I should now; as a moderator of that subreddit I've often enforced that rule. "Anti-GG" might organize elsewhere (I wouldn't know), but it is not allowed to do so on Ghazi. (Full disclosure: I got to this page via Ghazi, though I've been paying attention to GG on WP independently)
242:
and encyclopedia policy that an open wiki built on consensus requires to maintain stability, no matter how much one might feel their mission is for the right cause. The decision enforces the tenet that
Knowledge (XXG) is meant to be neutral on any topic it covers and should not be used as a battleground to push agendas from any direction, regardless of the cause.
191:
including egregious claims against living persons, particularly women. Some evidence of potential outside coordination to influence the
Knowledge (XXG) article exists. How to handle the single purpose and sleeper accounts and anonymous edits of this nature has been a struggle. To stem the influence of these types of editors, the community decided on instituting
199:
difficult to find any sourcing from the media that doesn't paint the
Gamergate supporters in a negative light. This has created a divide between these editors on how our sourcing and neutrality policies need to apply. Issues have arisen around how to present the media's highly negative take on the Gamergate situation within the neutrality policy, while the "
90:
298:'s ex-boyfriend accused her of sleeping around and metastasized into harassment and death threats against anyone (usually female) who criticized either the pretext of the controversy - "actually...it's about ethics in game journalism" - or gaming culture itself. Normally, these situations die out as forum trolls get bored. Gamergaters did not get bored.
140:
100:
349:", where hordes of people motivated by external political agendas were given free rein to drown the procedure in their drivel for weeks, until clerks and arbs started randomly and erraticly hitting out with blocks against established participants who had cracked under the constant provocation and lost their temper."
405:
That an arbitration decision divides the community and foments uncertainty is not news, nor is it a sign by itself that the
Committee cannot tackle vexed problems. What truly staggers here is the extent to which active arbitrators saw the major issues in the case coming and then did literally nothing
1606:
has been one of the major debates surrounding this article. Not to get too meta but I've seen it described as a consumer revolt, an effort to change ethics policies in videogame journalism, an effort to target perceived "enemies" with harassment AND a fight as a bulwark against left-wing progressive
1347:
Hah, /r/gamerghazi is 1/5 of the size/activity of /r/kotakuinaction alone, much less the various 8chan boards dedicated to gamergate. If you're going to make up facts, at least make up ones that aren't easily verifiable. The gamergate article has many flaws, but when the preponderance of sources are
186:
has drawn a lot of people and organizations into the controversy, and
Knowledge (XXG) has been one of the more visible. The Gamergate supporters have identified that the English language Knowledge (XXG) article is one of the first results when one searches for "Gamergate", and desire to see that the
1134:
The earlier GGTF case is also apposite: target banned, her stalker warned. Efforts to fix the gender gap will flounder with a ruling requiring the targets of stalkers to negotiate with said stalkers or leave
Knowledge (XXG) (principle 4). Speaking as a media volunteer, I'm flat-out amazed we didn't
241:
The ArbCom decision does not have the bias that some blogs and news sources are reporting, but instead is applying an equivalent standard to every editor, new or experienced, who comes to edit in a given topic area with a mission: editors are still expected to follow civility, standards of decorum,
225:
The case was presented as a clash of the behaviour and attitudes of these experienced editors against an ongoing tide of single purpose accounts that, intentionally or not, wanted to push the
Gamergate supporter side of the controversy onto Knowledge (XXG) and correct the lack of coverage the press
198:
At the same time, there has been a large disconnect between groups of established editors in how they approach the article. The
Gamergate topic is clearly emotionally-driven, as the harassment of anyone (women or otherwise) via pseudo-anonymous groups already has a toxic connotation, and it is very
187:
article expresses their side of the issue properly. This has resulted in many of these supporters working with the open wiki nature of
Knowledge (XXG) to try to discuss changes and introduce their side into the article. Some of these have been reasonable, starting civil discussions on the content.
1501:
As Beeblebrox noted, it should be clear from reading the proposed decision page history that opinions on many points were divided; the final result, necessarily, was a majority decision. I think most or all of us on the committee are "reasonably" satisfied by the decision; I doubt anyone is fully
385:
summed up the problem directly: "by sanctioning long-time editors who have had to deal with deplorable, egregious off-site (and many times on-site) harassment, while letting one of the main coordinators of that harassment go unmentioned, tells regular editors(volunteers themselves) and admins that
1505:
The committee is under pressure in two directions: "to consider extenuating circumstances" and to deal decisively with long term problem users. These two are often incompatible. I think that was the case here, and this incompatibility was one important cause of the different views by those on the
1482:
Can't say the same about the "other GG" decision, the gendergap case. I feel like we screwed that one up pretty badly. Part of the reason I am glad to be done with the committee was that I was tired of seeing some arbs bend over backwards to try and avoid banning users who we all agreed had been
1460:
for later being bold and not letting themselves be browbeaten by those who insist that infractions of AE are not infractions and who insist that PA and incivility are not PA or incivility, and are perfectly acceptable behaviour for prolific content providers. We will see how the new
390:
added, "in trying to appear fair, you've really only given the outside harassers exactly what they want. I sincerely hope your "robust protections" are as advertised, because from where I sit, I see no incentive at all to try and enforce Knowledge (XXG)'s policies on this set of articles. Looks
1574:
The whole thing was very confusing. When reviewing some of the offsite evidence I had to do some digging to find out why "fag" "neckbeard" and "sea lion" were all apparently being used in ways I was not familiar with. These folks, on all sides of the gamer insider world, might find people had a
1371:
Furthermore, organizing essentially anything is against that subreddit's rules (admittedly, not properly codified as such, though the line "We reject the label "Anti-GG," as we are not a movement in the same sense GG is." does imply it). Posts/comments explicitly calling for action are virtually
374:
deadlines slip after 11th hour pleas for more space and time from parties to the case, some of whom had been warned about misuse of the evidence page or accusations made with irrelevant or insufficient evidence. No temporary injunctions were proposed or enacted. No sanctions were made during the
1328:
Don't pretend that those nasty right wing Gamergaters are the only ones coordinating action offsite. The anti-Gamergate Gamerghazi is actually a more active (and arguably more vitriolic) Reddit forum. I've said my piece on this case on Wikipediocracy, it is there if you look for it. Short take:
378:
The initial proposed decision was released, after two delays, on the 19th of January. Every member of Gamergate's "five horsemen" faced sanctions. Only one editor supporting Gamergate who was not already banned or topic banned faced sanctions. Proposed decisions change over time, of course; new
233:
The decision continues to uphold how we should handle new and single purpose accounts that are only here to try to influence the context of one topic, and re-emphasizes the community-based general sanctions within the context of the decision. At the same time, the rulings, particularly towards
229:
While this is difficult situation for any editor to deal with, ArbCom's decision correctly focused solely on behaviour, only issuing findings of fact and no decisions or remedies on content policies, supporting the uninvolved admins who have tried to maintain order in this mess, and urging the
190:
However, the majority of these interested editors have been those that have not taken the time to learn about Knowledge (XXG)'s policies on content, sourcing, and living persons. Several have tried to introduce some of the tenacious Gamergate theories into the article without proper sourcing,
1438:
I am known for being sometimes critical of Arbcom for often taking too long and being too lenient in concluding its cases; that's why I never actually participate on Arbcom cases although I read and follow them all. They have done a grand job with gamergate and it restores my confdence in the
305:, brought a heavily active community interested in seeing their version of events displayed here. Rather than just coordinating to tag-team articles, they also focused on editors. Five Knowledge (XXG) editors, dubbed the "Five Horsemen", were identified as "biased" against Gamergate:
1607:
perspective (the dreaded and mythic "Social Justice Warriors") that proclaims itself no less than a culture war in determining the future of America. As in many articles, defining what something is (and what it is not), is often half the battle. Call it the "War over the Lede".
328:
As a result of the attention (and, admittedly, the intransigence of some long term editors), in the span of three months the article has been protected nine times and the talk page has accumulated millions of bytes of discussion. Three arbitration requests were made in 30 days,
247:
Masem is a Knowledge (XXG) administrator and works frequently on the areas of contemporary works, video games, and popular and Internet culture, science, and current events. He is also a major contributor in the areas of Knowledge (XXG)'s non-free content policy and notability
203:" paradox of reliable sourcing has made the task of presenting objective material about Gamergate supporters from quality sources nearly impossible. There are plenty of pages of heated discussion of these matters, which can be expected from a situation like this.
988:"Turns out that in a culture where social justice warriors don't exist, like the Spanish speaking world, you actually get a neutral and actually informative Knowledge (XXG) article made. Translation of the Spanish Wiki lede : KotakuInAction"
1219:, & my onwiki time is extremely limited -- for example, I'm monitoring my daughter's play date while I type this -- I'm forced to stay out of it. However, I greatly admire the efforts of those with the courage to deal with it. --
1483:
causing disruption for a long time and who would inevitably act disruptively in the future. It's an attitude that I simly cannot understand. We saw a little of this in the gamergate case but it was much worse in the gendergap case.
670:"Logan_Mac comments on Ryulong is working with the gamerghazi mods to promote his gofundme. How would Knowledge (XXG) feel about an editor accepting money from those involved in a conflict that the editor is working on?"
340:
left an prescient note, reminding the Committee that "learing the decks of all the editors who have already contributed to the Gamergate colleciton of articles is only going to provide more incentive for...." with, as
1477:
I think anyone looking at the case pages can see this was not an easy case and opinions on how to proceed differed widely within the committee itself. In the end I am reasonably satisfied with the decision.
1087:
1506:
committee. Unless we were to completely ignore one of these factors, all such decisions are matters of judgment, and for any possible result, some people will be understandably dissatisfied.
1077:
1052:
336:
Arbitrators recognized early on that off-wiki "co-ordination" and "controversy" were central to the case. Editors with experience in similar enforcement areas warned against potential problems.
166:
544:
One principle noting the importance of conduct during arbitration cases has unanimous support from 14 arbitrators. One can only assume the committee feels they've done a good job in this regard.
1169:
article and/or talk page and one was involved in the Arbitration case. While they both provide insight, it would be interesting to see an opinion piece by an editor or admin who is uninvolved.
1082:
1072:
76:
1062:
234:
editors who are being topic-banned or admonished, affirm that decorum and civility is expected of editors even when dealing violations of BLP or neutrality. Actions like edit warring and
1045:
1113:
844:"this may be a situation where a temporary injunction at the start of the case may be in order, and I fully agree that a firm hand and an accelerated timeline would also be helpful."
1057:
1039:
496:
This has proven embarrassing enough to the Committee that in their press release they attempt to obscure the issue by lumping in community action with the outcome of the decision.
55:
44:
1014:
454:
In terms of concurrent users, a popular thread on KotakuInAction could bring thousands of interested, motivated eyes on a Knowledge (XXG) article, user or project page.
346:
526:
is reminded that the boundaries of 'involved' are frequently blurred and that the exercise of administrative discretion often requires the exercise of circumspection."
214:
violations and keeping the predominant view of the press as demanded by our neutrality policy to the point of edit warring. They have failed to accept new editors in
418:
Protonk is a Knowledge (XXG) administrator who has had an account for over six years, totaling over 23,000 edits in that time (many of which have yet to be reverted!)
280:
1685:
284:
386:
protecting the project from BLP violations coordinated from off-site will not only get you sanctioned, but the perpetrators will be rewarded with no sanction."
1448:
Arbcom now needs to take its own lead and learn to be faster and sharper with new cases and admins need to be less afraid of excercising their duties under
21:
1660:
1632:
1329:
Arbcom got it mostly right. I'll give 'em a B+. The anti-Gamergaters still control an unbalanced, POV article however, let there be no mistake about that.
1655:
1650:
30:
Evaluating the Arbitration Committee's handling of GamerGate: Does the committee facilitate stability... or is it a circus. Two users, two perspectives.
1530:
I don't understand some terminology: What does it mean to be "for" Gamergate? Or "against"? That's like being for or against Watergate, and what would
705:
467:
436:
By way of introduction and disclaimer, I'm peripherally involved in the Gamergate issue but am neither a party to the case nor a major contributor.
287:(an ArbCom first, perhaps?), has been an utter, avoidable failure that shakes any confidence I have the Committee will be effective in the future.
192:
1645:
669:
173:, but please let your discussion be a positive representation of two of Knowledge (XXG)'s core values—consensus-building and civility. Thank you.
1388:"The (...Arbcom case...) has been an utter, avoidable failure that shakes any confidence I have the Committee will be effective in the future."
1150:
Or: an unproductive disruptionist shown the door, a productive disruptionist put on a short leash... You spin, I spin, we all spin together...
987:
200:
206:
What is core to the Gamergate Arbitration Committee case is that a subset of these established editors have seen themselves as a type of "
1368:
GamerGhazi is indeed opposed to gamergate. It is not more active. In January so far, KiA got 8.77m pageviews, while Ghazi only got 2.66m.
856:
687:
651:
265:
255:
219:
1640:
1027:
652:"One KiA thread on the subject - Operation 5 Horsemen: The corrupt/biased wiki writers OP (Participation Optional) : KotakuInAction"
49:
35:
17:
586:
688:"Involved Knowledge (XXG) editor Tarc complicit in off-wiki cooperation with subjects of Gamergate controversy. : KotakuInAction"
553:
A problem which still exists on the article, with editors importing translations of the Spanish language version of the article.
1414:
1284:
342:
518:
While these allegations were never substantiated, one of the remedies in the proposed decision can only be described as a
195:
on the Gamergate topic space, which has been generally sufficient to quickly quell external pushes to affect the article.
1575:
better understanding of their concerns if they spoke in ways what could be easily understood by those "not in the club".
471:
238:, regardless of how "right" that position might be, is not appropriate within the consensus-driven editing process.
1395:
235:
1666:
857:"Knowledge (XXG) Arbcom Evidence page: Anti-gamergate tactics in play; Need counter evidence. : KotakuInAction"
333:
lodged by editors pushing a pro-Gamergate POV and all aimed at editors defending the article against the same.
322:
1211:, I can give you my opinion as an uninvolved party in a single sentence: Since I can't tell whether this is a
1186:
Absolutely. Our op-ed pages are open to such an uninvolved party who wants to provide their perspective.
1618:
1593:
1569:
1551:
1517:
1492:
1470:
1431:
1399:
1381:
1361:
1338:
1322:
1303:
1288:
1259:
1243:
1228:
1201:
1180:
1159:
1144:
1140:
1004:
949:
938:
927:
916:
843:
832:
821:
810:
799:
788:
777:
766:
621:
610:
318:
1584:
On the other hand we do the exact same thing around here all the time with all of our WP:WHATEVER links.
1390:
I would like to celebrate the tenth anniversary of someone declaring this about an Arbcom case decision.
633:
1547:
1406:
1391:
1166:
291:
218:
and have presumed bad faith about existing editors who did not follow their view. They have attempted
183:
1589:
1488:
1255:
1299:
1373:
1428:
1279:
1194:
93:
1466:
1377:
1334:
1271:
1224:
1155:
1136:
1135:
get coverage of that one at the time (just before the fundraiser), we dodged a bullet there -
1109:
506:
123:
1543:
1457:
1410:
357:
1309:
Note that Protonk's block/topic ban was commuted 30 minutes ago after discussion at ANI. --
215:
211:
103:
1585:
1565:
1484:
1355:
1316:
1251:
361:
207:
1449:
375:
case, although enforcing the third deadline required fully protecting the evidence page.
301:
Threads on KotakuInAction (KiA), a popular Gamergate forum, or subreddit, on the website
133:
356:
recommended "an expedited case, and firmly holding to deadlines and word limits.", with
1453:
1295:
535:
Though the current Committee is certainly on a roll with regard to gender-related cases
410:
1502:
satisfied with respect to every point. That's inevitable in majority decision-making.
1679:
1513:
1275:
1240:
1187:
523:
463:
387:
314:
360:
hoping to " in a highly expedited manner to avoid its becoming a complete circus".
230:
community to review Gamergate and related articles within the context of policies.
1462:
1330:
1220:
1151:
572:
519:
337:
306:
210:". They have expressed an overly strong concern about maintaining the page free of
157:
113:
395:
and threatened from the outside, and then topic or site banned from the inside."
143:
1425:, etc. People should think of cutting down the intake of Reddit and 8chan posts.
475:
399:
353:
283:. The case, from the "infamous blunder" of the proposed decision to the bizarre
1348:
all saying similar things, the one flaw it doesn't have is being unbalanced. --
1558:
1422:
1350:
1311:
153:
1418:
1274:. The block is apparently for a (now revision-deleted) talk page statement.
1236:
478:
has not been topic banned but their activity on the topic speaks for itself.
382:
345:
put it, "all the makings for another procedural disaster like the infamous "
310:
295:
1608:
1508:
1212:
1208:
1170:
364:
suggested temporary injunctions may be needed to ensure an orderly case.
1216:
392:
1409:
seem to be very good at keeping out opinions by pundits, just like in
302:
1441:
Editor is restricted from editing any administrative noticeboards
279:
The Arbitration Committee just announced their decision in the
70:
54:
391:
like all you will get for your trouble is harassed, attacked,
487:
All the while the page was watched closely by KotakuInAction.
1026:
71:
Evaluating the Arbitration Committee's handling of GamerGate
34:
367:
On the 25th of November, the Committee accepted the case.
1534:
mean? I am serious here, will somebody explain what the
1125:
1118:
1098:
974:
961:
904:
892:
874:
754:
741:
723:
398:
Lest we imagine this uncertainty is only hypothetical,
1123:If your comment has not appeared here, you can try
1266:One of the authors is now blocked and topic-banned
1235:Wow. I didn't realize people cared so much about
8:
811:Future Perfect at Sunrise, 11 November 2014
1165:Both editors were involved in editing the
1686:Knowledge (XXG) Signpost archives 2015-01
1443:, is one I will remember for future use.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Knowledge (XXG) Signpost
1439:committee. In particular, one outcome:
1126:
1102:
565:
429:
724:"Gamergate controversy protection log"
409:Gamergate is not special. It is not a
179:Masem: Committee facilitates stability
767:The Devil's Advocate 10 November 2014
706:"Many, many threads - KotakuInAction"
29:
7:
742:Issues in Talk:Gamergate controversy
1461:committee handles future cases. --
165:Editors' note: As we mentioned in
56:
28:
1108:These comments are automatically
505:Following the proposed decision,
474:has been topic banned by ArbCom.
575:- Mark Bernstein 15 January 2015
275:Protonk: Actually, it's a circus
260:
138:
128:
118:
108:
98:
88:
1415:Tropes vs. Women in Video Games
634:"Projects:Operation 5 Horsemen"
1294:Well, that escalated quickly.
1119:add the page to your watchlist
352:Recognizing these exigencies,
1:
1405:Meanwhile, editors active in
833:Newyorkbrad, 13 November 2014
468:topic banned by the community
170:
1619:00:24, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
1594:21:59, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
1570:16:04, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
1552:08:24, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
1518:17:19, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
1493:22:07, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
1471:04:17, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
1452:. Kudos for admins such as
1432:17:01, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
1400:09:32, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
1382:08:41, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
1362:06:35, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
1339:04:46, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
1323:06:45, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
1304:02:32, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
1289:00:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
1260:21:58, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
1244:12:37, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
1229:22:00, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
1202:23:56, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
1181:23:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
1160:04:49, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
1145:22:59, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
917:Roger Davies 26 January 2015
789:Newyorkbrad 13 November 2014
622:EvergreenFir 29 October 2014
294:erupted when game developer
1633:delivered to your talk page
846:Beeblebrox 15 November 2014
1702:
1272:User_talk:Protonk#Blocked
611:Jehochman 2 November 2014
587:"Gaming's summer of rage"
343:Future Perfect at Sunrise
1602:Defining what GamerGate
939:Resolute 28 January 2015
274:
236:battleground mentalities
201:verifiability, not truth
1005:Hasteur 29 October 2014
822:WormTT 14 November 2014
800:Hasteur 29 October 2014
778:WormTT 14 November 2014
226:has given their side.
1250:Ok that's just weird.
1116:. To follow comments,
1031:
950:Risker 28 January 2015
905:History of the dispute
39:
1526:Confusing terminology
1407:Gamergate controversy
1167:GamerGate controversy
1030:
292:Gamergate controversy
38:
1542:words mean? Thanks,
1112:from this article's
928:DD2K 20 January 2015
472:The Devil's Advocate
875:"GG Protection log"
323:NorthBySouthBaranof
1103:Discuss this story
1032:
370:The Committee let
45:← Back to Contents
40:
1287:
1200:
1127:purging the cache
962:Gamaliel reminded
193:general sanctions
50:View Latest Issue
1693:
1669:
1628:Want the latest
1616:
1562:
1411:Anita Sarkeesian
1358:
1353:
1319:
1314:
1282:
1278:
1197:
1192:
1190:
1178:
1130:
1128:
1122:
1101:
1088:Featured content
1050:
1042:
1035:
1018:
1007:
1002:
996:
995:
984:
978:
977:
971:
965:
964:
958:
952:
947:
941:
936:
930:
925:
919:
914:
908:
907:
901:
895:
894:
889:
883:
882:
871:
865:
864:
853:
847:
841:
835:
830:
824:
819:
813:
808:
802:
797:
791:
786:
780:
775:
769:
764:
758:
757:
751:
745:
744:
738:
732:
731:
720:
714:
713:
702:
696:
695:
684:
678:
677:
666:
660:
659:
648:
642:
641:
630:
624:
619:
613:
608:
602:
601:
599:
597:
591:The Boston Globe
582:
576:
570:
554:
551:
545:
542:
536:
533:
527:
516:
510:
503:
497:
494:
488:
485:
479:
461:
455:
452:
446:
443:
437:
434:
270:
268:
264:
263:
258:
171:comments section
167:our introduction
160:
142:
141:
132:
131:
122:
121:
112:
111:
102:
101:
92:
91:
62:
60:
58:
1701:
1700:
1696:
1695:
1694:
1692:
1691:
1690:
1676:
1675:
1674:
1673:
1672:
1671:
1670:
1665:
1663:
1658:
1653:
1648:
1643:
1636:
1625:
1624:
1609:
1560:
1528:
1463:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง
1356:
1351:
1317:
1312:
1280:
1268:
1195:
1188:
1171:
1132:
1124:
1117:
1106:
1105:
1099:+ Add a comment
1097:
1093:
1092:
1091:
1078:Recent research
1053:From the editor
1043:
1040:28 January 2015
1038:
1036:
1033:
1022:
1021:
1016:
1010:
1003:
999:
986:
985:
981:
973:
972:
968:
960:
959:
955:
948:
944:
937:
933:
926:
922:
915:
911:
903:
902:
898:
891:
890:
886:
873:
872:
868:
855:
854:
850:
842:
838:
831:
827:
820:
816:
809:
805:
798:
794:
787:
783:
776:
772:
765:
761:
753:
752:
748:
740:
739:
735:
722:
721:
717:
704:
703:
699:
686:
685:
681:
668:
667:
663:
650:
649:
645:
632:
631:
627:
620:
616:
609:
605:
595:
593:
585:Singal, Jesse.
584:
583:
579:
571:
567:
563:
558:
557:
552:
548:
543:
539:
534:
530:
517:
513:
504:
500:
495:
491:
486:
482:
462:
458:
453:
449:
444:
440:
435:
431:
426:
319:TheRedPenOfDoom
277:
272:
266:
261:
256:
254:
181:
161:
151:
150:
149:
148:
139:
129:
119:
109:
99:
89:
83:
80:
69:
65:
63:
57:28 January 2015
53:
52:
47:
41:
31:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
1699:
1697:
1689:
1688:
1678:
1677:
1664:
1659:
1654:
1649:
1644:
1639:
1638:
1637:
1627:
1626:
1623:
1622:
1621:
1599:
1598:
1597:
1596:
1579:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1527:
1524:
1523:
1522:
1521:
1520:
1503:
1496:
1495:
1479:
1478:
1474:
1473:
1445:
1444:
1435:
1434:
1426:
1385:
1384:
1369:
1366:
1365:
1364:
1342:
1341:
1307:
1306:
1267:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1247:
1246:
1232:
1231:
1205:
1204:
1163:
1162:
1107:
1104:
1096:
1095:
1094:
1090:
1085:
1083:Special report
1080:
1075:
1073:Traffic report
1070:
1065:
1060:
1055:
1049:
1037:
1025:
1024:
1023:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1009:
1008:
997:
979:
966:
953:
942:
931:
920:
909:
896:
884:
866:
848:
836:
825:
814:
803:
792:
781:
770:
759:
746:
733:
715:
697:
679:
661:
643:
625:
614:
603:
577:
564:
562:
559:
556:
555:
546:
537:
528:
511:
498:
489:
480:
456:
447:
438:
428:
427:
425:
422:
421:
420:
411:100 year flood
281:Gamergate case
276:
273:
252:
251:
250:
220:page ownership
180:
177:
176:
175:
147:
146:
136:
126:
116:
106:
96:
85:
84:
81:
75:
74:
73:
72:
67:
66:
64:
61:
48:
43:
42:
33:
32:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1698:
1687:
1684:
1683:
1681:
1668:
1662:
1657:
1652:
1647:
1642:
1634:
1631:
1620:
1617:
1614:
1613:
1605:
1601:
1600:
1595:
1591:
1587:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1580:
1573:
1572:
1571:
1567:
1563:
1556:
1555:
1554:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1541:
1537:
1533:
1525:
1519:
1515:
1511:
1510:
1504:
1500:
1499:
1498:
1497:
1494:
1490:
1486:
1481:
1480:
1476:
1475:
1472:
1468:
1464:
1459:
1455:
1451:
1447:
1446:
1442:
1437:
1436:
1433:
1430:
1427:
1424:
1420:
1416:
1412:
1408:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1401:
1397:
1393:
1389:
1383:
1379:
1375:
1370:
1367:
1363:
1360:
1359:
1354:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1343:
1340:
1336:
1332:
1327:
1326:
1325:
1324:
1321:
1320:
1315:
1305:
1301:
1297:
1293:
1292:
1291:
1290:
1286:
1283:
1277:
1273:
1265:
1261:
1257:
1253:
1249:
1248:
1245:
1242:
1238:
1234:
1233:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1207:
1206:
1203:
1198:
1191:
1185:
1184:
1183:
1182:
1179:
1176:
1175:
1168:
1161:
1157:
1153:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1129:
1120:
1115:
1111:
1100:
1089:
1086:
1084:
1081:
1079:
1076:
1074:
1071:
1069:
1066:
1064:
1061:
1059:
1056:
1054:
1051:
1047:
1041:
1034:In this issue
1029:
1020:
1006:
1001:
998:
993:
989:
983:
980:
976:
970:
967:
963:
957:
954:
951:
946:
943:
940:
935:
932:
929:
924:
921:
918:
913:
910:
906:
900:
897:
893:
888:
885:
880:
879:wikipedia.org
876:
870:
867:
862:
858:
852:
849:
845:
840:
837:
834:
829:
826:
823:
818:
815:
812:
807:
804:
801:
796:
793:
790:
785:
782:
779:
774:
771:
768:
763:
760:
756:
750:
747:
743:
737:
734:
729:
728:wikipedia.org
725:
719:
716:
711:
707:
701:
698:
693:
689:
683:
680:
675:
671:
665:
662:
657:
653:
647:
644:
639:
635:
629:
626:
623:
618:
615:
612:
607:
604:
592:
588:
581:
578:
574:
569:
566:
560:
550:
547:
541:
538:
532:
529:
525:
522:admonition: "
521:
515:
512:
508:
502:
499:
493:
490:
484:
481:
477:
473:
469:
465:
460:
457:
451:
448:
442:
439:
433:
430:
423:
419:
416:
415:
414:
412:
407:
403:
401:
396:
394:
389:
384:
380:
376:
373:
368:
365:
363:
359:
355:
350:
348:
344:
339:
334:
332:
326:
324:
320:
316:
312:
308:
304:
299:
297:
293:
288:
286:
285:press release
282:
271:
269:
259:
249:
245:
244:
243:
239:
237:
231:
227:
223:
221:
217:
213:
209:
204:
202:
196:
194:
188:
185:
178:
174:
172:
168:
163:
162:
159:
155:
145:
137:
135:
127:
125:
117:
115:
107:
105:
97:
95:
87:
86:
78:
59:
51:
46:
37:
23:
19:
1629:
1611:
1610:
1603:
1539:
1535:
1531:
1529:
1507:
1440:
1387:
1386:
1349:
1310:
1308:
1269:
1173:
1172:
1164:
1137:David Gerard
1133:
1067:
1063:In the media
1046:all comments
1000:
991:
982:
969:
956:
945:
934:
923:
912:
899:
887:
878:
869:
860:
851:
839:
828:
817:
806:
795:
784:
773:
762:
749:
736:
727:
718:
709:
700:
691:
682:
673:
664:
655:
646:
638:gamergate.me
637:
628:
617:
606:
594:. Retrieved
590:
580:
568:
549:
540:
531:
520:Gilliamesque
514:
507:Roger Davies
501:
492:
483:
459:
450:
441:
432:
417:
408:
404:
397:
381:
377:
371:
369:
366:
351:
335:
330:
327:
300:
289:
278:
253:
246:
240:
232:
228:
224:
208:white knight
205:
197:
189:
182:
164:
1667:Suggestions
1635:each month?
1544:GeorgeLouis
1458:HJ Mitchell
1110:transcluded
358:Newyorkbrad
347:Macedonia 2
257:Arbitration
248:guidelines.
1586:Beeblebrox
1485:Beeblebrox
1423:Brianna Wu
1252:Beeblebrox
710:reddit.com
596:21 January
561:References
362:Beeblebrox
216:good faith
82:Share this
77:Contribute
22:2015-01-28
1661:Subscribe
1454:Sandstein
1419:Zoe Quinn
1296:kencf0618
1114:talk page
755:Gamergate
296:Zoe Quinn
267:Committee
184:Gamergate
1680:Category
1656:Newsroom
1651:Archives
1630:Signpost
1241:LukeSurl
1213:Tar-Baby
1189:Gamaliel
1058:In focus
1017:Previous
573:Infamous
524:Gamaliel
464:ArmyLine
388:Resolute
315:TaraInDC
124:LinkedIn
104:Facebook
20: |
1540:against
1392:Manning
1374:Menethh
1331:Carrite
1276:Andreas
1221:llywrch
1217:Tar pit
1152:Carrite
1019:"Forum"
338:Hasteur
307:Ryulong
158:Protonk
114:Twitter
992:reddit
861:reddit
692:reddit
674:reddit
656:reddit
476:Skrelk
400:Risker
393:doxxed
354:WormTT
303:Reddit
134:Reddit
94:E-mail
1646:About
1514:talk
1450:WP:AE
1429:Peter
1215:or a
1068:Forum
975:3.1.9
424:Notes
154:Masem
68:Forum
16:<
1641:Home
1590:talk
1561:ASEM
1548:talk
1538:and
1532:that
1489:talk
1467:talk
1456:and
1396:talk
1378:talk
1352:Pres
1335:talk
1313:Pres
1300:talk
1270:See
1256:talk
1239:. --
1237:ants
1225:talk
1196:talk
1156:talk
1141:talk
598:2015
470:and
466:was
383:DD2K
321:and
311:Tarc
290:The
156:and
144:Digg
1536:for
1509:DGG
1285:466
1209:Liz
372:two
331:all
313:,,
212:BLP
152:By
79:—
1682::
1615:iz
1604:is
1592:)
1568:)
1550:)
1516:)
1491:)
1469:)
1421:,
1417:,
1413:,
1398:)
1380:)
1337:)
1302:)
1281:JN
1258:)
1227:)
1177:iz
1158:)
1143:)
1015:←
990:.
877:.
859:.
726:.
708:.
690:.
672:.
654:.
636:.
589:.
325:.
317:,
309:,
1612:L
1588:(
1566:t
1564:(
1559:M
1546:(
1512:(
1487:(
1465:(
1394:(
1376:(
1357:N
1333:(
1318:N
1298:(
1254:(
1223:(
1199:)
1193:(
1174:L
1154:(
1139:(
1131:.
1121:.
1048:)
1044:(
994:.
881:.
863:.
730:.
712:.
694:.
676:.
658:.
640:.
600:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
