News Gamergate guy allegedly commits murder-suicide (ex-girlfriend)

[interchange]

Looks like this was written in November 2016 (update to include reference to the killing): https://retrobitch.wordpress.com/2016/11/30/radical-felines-when-harassment-becomes-a-game/

It appears Rudy was heavily involved with harassing women in the gaming industry around that time. What is "GamerGate" anyway? If it's a hashtag that he never used, OK. But it doesn't appear to be any sort of clearly organized movement.

 

[fskimospy]

Looks like this was written in November 2016 (update to include reference to the killing): https://retrobitch.wordpress.com/2016/11/30/radical-felines-when-harassment-becomes-a-game/

It appears Rudy was heavily involved with harassing women in the gaming industry around that time. What is "GamerGate" anyway? If it's a hashtag that he never used, OK. But it doesn't appear to be any sort of clearly organized movement.

It is a movement based around the online harassment of women, haha.

Gamergate - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

So apparently the argument is that the guy who likes harassing women online listed his interest in a group dedicated to harassing women online but that doesn’t mean he’s a proponent of harassing women online.

 

[shortylickens]

Looks like this was written in November 2016 (update to include reference to the killing): https://retrobitch.wordpress.com/2016/11/30/radical-felines-when-harassment-becomes-a-game/

It appears Rudy was heavily involved with harassing women in the gaming industry around that time. What is "GamerGate" anyway? If it's a hashtag that he never used, OK. But it doesn't appear to be any sort of clearly organized movement.

is google broke?

No, it was not a movement, more of an incident or scandal. Men were sexually harassing women online and it revolved mostly around gaming culture.
I dont do much online gaming so I'm not familiar with the culture but apparently women are harassed and threatened quite regularly. Less so in MMO's because they keep track of accounts and IP's and it doest take much to get your dumb ass permabanned. But in most shooters and RTS's and also on streaming its apparently easy to get away with douchery for a very long time.
Also that woman Anita Sarkeesian got on a soap box about sexism within video games and the internet as a whole ganged up on her. Was not pretty. She took a lot of abuse and threats and I think some psychopaths even tracked her down in real life.

 

[shortylickens]

Anita Sarkeesian - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It was more than just simple shit talking online.

 

[Commodus]

Interest - wanting to know about something

Proponent - advocating that something

Learn the difference between the two first before resorting to drama queen antics.

Really? That's the best you have?

I won't rehash what what fskimospy said, but you either aren't particularly great at linguistics or are purposefully hanging on semantics. The guy liked GG because it lined up with his views; the specifics aren't as clear, but both are big fans of harassing women.

 

[cytg111]

Well when you find yourself in need to that kind of thing ... you are probably a low performing male....

 

[Aikouka]

Methinks you have no idea what gamer gate was about. But please, tell us about how it was about ethics in games journalism.

Please, try and tell us that.

The awkward thing is that it kind of depended upon who you followed. For example, I used to watch a good amount of TotalBiscuit's content, and while he may have discussed the Zoe Quinn story on his podcast, there wasn't really any negativity put toward her. However, he did actively discuss what he perceived to be ethics issues when dealing with game publishers or promotional agencies. Although, I recall that this actually came back to bite him as some people ended up accusing him of being part of GamerGate due to those discussions. He ended up making some good remarks about being wary of "hastag-ivism", because when it comes down to it, no one owns or has control of a hashtag.

 

[mikeymikec]

Interest - wanting to know about something

Proponent - advocating that something

Why are you so desperate to distance yourself from a fellow gamergater? Honestly, I'm finding it a little weird.

IMO it would be like me being insulted that some random Irish / British person (or anything that I consider myself much closer to in terms of identity) did something horrible, as if it casts any kind of ill light on my reputation.

I mean, sure, Gamergate proponents tend to have a rep for being misogynists outside of their little circle, but since you don't believe that has any base in truth to it, why do you care what this guy did? Another gamergater could do something amazingly positive with their life and end up with a procession of thousands at their funeral, but you wouldn't believe that just because you two shared an opinion that it makes you any better, would you?

 

[fskimospy]

The awkward thing is that it kind of depended upon who you followed. For example, I used to watch a good amount of TotalBiscuit's content, and while he may have discussed the Zoe Quinn story on his podcast, there wasn't really any negativity put toward her. However, he did actively discuss what he perceived to be ethics issues when dealing with game publishers or promotional agencies. Although, I recall that this actually came back to bite him as some people ended up accusing him of being part of GamerGate due to those discussions. He ended up making some good remarks about being wary of "hastag-ivism", because when it comes down to it, no one owns or has control of a hashtag.

I am sure some people were genuinely interested in journalistic ethics. I don’t know much of anything about the games journalism industry but considering how close publications were to the industry in my younger years it certainly seems plausible there are issues.

So it sounds like that guy was a decent person with a real complaint and it’s unfair he got swept up in all that but man there were a lot of people associated with that movement being really horrible people.

 

[Commodus]

I am sure some people were genuinely interested in journalistic ethics. I don’t know much of anything about the games journalism industry but considering how close publications were to the industry in my younger years it certainly seems plausible there are issues.

So it sounds like that guy was a decent person with a real complaint and it’s unfair he got swept up in all that but man there were a lot of people associated with that movement being really horrible people.

The kicker is that there are valid concerns about ethics in games journalism, but GG was often hung up on things that weren't really violations at all while ignoring the real ones (say, outlets that take paid trips but don't disclose them).

I still remember how GG shrieked when it learned there was a mailing list where game journalists talked to each other... "omg collusion!" Only this was an entirely innocuous discussion group, and GG members had apparently never heard of the concept of people across an industry talking to each other. Socialization and community? What's that?

 

[ralfy]

Wait, you're seriously arguing that this guy was listing gamergate as an interest, intending to indicate that he was interested in it in an academic sense?

So to be clear if you were a WW2 aficionado and were on a dating website you would put Nazism as an interest and expect people to be like 'surely he means this in an academic sense and not as a proponent!'.

No. It's that he indicated it as a interest but that doesn't make him a proponent.

For example, given your example, I'm also a WW2 aficionado and am interested in Nazism, among others, but I'm not a Nazi, and I'm not a proponent of such.

 

[ralfy]

It is a movement based around the online harassment of women, haha.

Gamergate - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

So apparently the argument is that the guy who likes harassing women online listed his interest in a group dedicated to harassing women online but that doesn’t mean he’s a proponent of harassing women online.

According to the same source, the group involves more than that. In fact, one is not even sure who are members of such a group, or if there are actually several of them.

 

[ralfy]

Really? That's the best you have?

I won't rehash what what fskimospy said, but you either aren't particularly great at linguistics or are purposefully hanging on semantics. The guy liked GG because it lined up with his views; the specifics aren't as clear, but both are big fans of harassing women.

Yes, but the claim is that he's a proponent of GG. There's no proof of that.

 

[fskimospy]

No. It's that he indicated it as a interest but that doesn't make him a proponent.

For example, given your example, I'm also a WW2 aficionado and am interested in Nazism, among others, but I'm not a Nazi, and I'm not a proponent of such.

You didn’t answer the question - if you indicated that as your interest on a dating profile would you expect the average person reading it to understand that to be an academic interest or that you were a proponent?

The guy engaged in similar harassment of women that gamergate is notorious for and said it was an interest of his. There is only one conclusion any reasonable and rational person would make here as to what’s most likely.

 

[ralfy]

Why are you so desperate to distance yourself from a fellow gamergater? Honestly, I'm finding it a little weird.

I'm a Gamergater? That's new to me.

IMO it would be like me being insulted that some random Irish / British person (or anything that I consider myself much closer to in terms of identity) did something horrible, as if it casts any kind of ill light on my reputation.

That makes no sense at all because I didn't know anything about him until now.

I mean, sure, Gamergate proponents tend to have a rep for being misogynists outside of their little circle, but since you don't believe that has any base in truth to it, why do you care what this guy did? Another gamergater could do something amazingly positive with their life and end up with a procession of thousands at their funeral, but you wouldn't believe that just because you two shared an opinion that it makes you any better, would you?

What little circle? Can you give numbers and identities?

 

[ralfy]

You didn’t answer the question - if you indicated that as your interest on a dating profile would you expect the average person reading it to understand that to be an academic interest or that you were a proponent?

The guy engaged in similar harassment of women that gamergate is notorious for and said it was an interest of his. There is only one conclusion any reasonable and rational person would make here as to what’s most likely.

Didn't you just counter your own argument? The person is only interested in Nazism because he's a WW2 aficionado, but when he puts that in a dating profile others assume that he's a Nazi proponent.

 

[fskimospy]

Didn't you just counter your own argument? The person is only interested in Nazism because he's a WW2 aficionado, but when he puts that in a dating profile others assume that he's a Nazi proponent.

No, I didn't. Edit: Sorry, you did answer it - so we agree that the expected interpretation is that when someone lists something as an interest they are a proponent.

1) Would you expect the average person to believe you were indicated in Nazism as an academic pursuit only if you listed it as one of your interests?

2) What does the fact that he engaged in exactly the sort of behavior gamergate is infamous for tell you about his disposition towards it?

 

[mikeymikec]

I'm a Gamergater? That's new to me.

That makes no sense at all because I didn't know anything about him until now.

What little circle? Can you give numbers and identities?

Spare me the bullshit. You've gone from starting a discussion and advocating a position that "there's no evidence" that he was a proponent of gamergate to "there's no proof" and demanding precise numbers and identities of gamergate proponents (as if they're an organisation with any kind of member list, as opposed to consisting of a large number of mostly anonymous cowards who like to harass women online). The only logical reason why you would waste your time arguing such an absurd position, is because you're a proponent of gamergate yourself.

 

[SmCaudata]

This is not something I know much about, so I'm trying to catch up from following a few links. I think this is interesting in a bigger context of evaluating our culture and trying to understand the roles we play, law enforcement plays, etc. in this story. Not simply because someone ended up dead. I don't think his ex-girlfriend is among those whom he harassed from what I am reading. But there is a big problem with the harassment itself.

I am not finding in my links any discussion of actual law enforcement efforts or civil litigation efforts to address this behavior. I see references to reporting of it and concerns. The police, however, can't really do anything if they recognize a person to be dangerous but has not broken the law. I expect a violation of criminal law would require the threats to be credible, which is not a clear distinction at the time they were made / reported. But they ought to be actionable in civil court.

More disturbingly is a community around this which enabled or reinforced the behavior, reports that people linked to him would harass women on his behalf. This does not seem to be so simple as a single deranged individual.

Well, the police have been very busy harrasing people of color in order to satisfy an itchy trigger. Intervening here would have been "protecting" and "serving".

 

[pmv]

Didn't you just counter your own argument? The person is only interested in Nazism because he's a WW2 aficionado, but when he puts that in a dating profile others assume that he's a Nazi proponent.

I think if you put it on your CV when applying for jobs as an academic historian it would be interpreted one way, if you put it on a dating profile it carries a different implication.

That said, in lockdown I started watching videos on youtube about WW2 history, and I find myself wondering sometimes about people who seem to be excessively fascinated with Nazi German military equipment and tactics. It seems to sometimes shade over into admiration as if they've forgotten what the purpose of it all was.

 

[hal2kilo]

I think if you put it on your CV when applying for jobs as an academic historian it would be interpreted one way, if you put it on a dating profile it carries a different implication.

That said, in lockdown I started watching videos on youtube about WW2 history, and I find myself wondering sometimes about people who seem to be excessively fascinated with Nazi German military equipment and tactics. It seems to sometimes shade over into admiration as if they've forgotten what the purpose of it all was.

Half of Discovery Channel History bandwidth is dedicated to Hitler shit. Ever wonder why. I sure do.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Spare me the bullshit. You've gone from starting a discussion and advocating a position that "there's no evidence" that he was a proponent of gamergate to "there's no proof" and demanding precise numbers and identities of gamergate proponents (as if they're an organisation with any kind of member list, as opposed to consisting of a large number of mostly anonymous cowards who like to harass women online). The only logical reason why you would waste your time arguing such an absurd position, is because you're a proponent of gamergate yourself.

I have a strong hunch he's probably one of the idiots on here that trashed their own username in that fiascoe. I recall one moron using a very similar avatar and I think even other Gamgergaters were trashing him constantly by the end because he was acting exactly like barfy in this thread (where he was constantly trying to spin "gotchas" and just be a general dumbass, making them look bad when he'd basically concentrate the essence of their idiotic arguments down into the hateful dimwitted male victimhood shit that Gamergate was with a modern right winger's level of discourse).

 

[darkswordsman17]

The kicker is that there are valid concerns about ethics in games journalism, but GG was often hung up on things that weren't really violations at all while ignoring the real ones (say, outlets that take paid trips but don't disclose them).

I still remember how GG shrieked when it learned there was a mailing list where game journalists talked to each other... "omg collusion!" Only this was an entirely innocuous discussion group, and GG members had apparently never heard of the concept of people across an industry talking to each other. Socialization and community? What's that?

Do you even remember the whiny bitch boy's shit that started it all? Dude lost his mind and created a "cum list" of guys he assumed she was fucking because he found out they had some form of interaction (so of course obviously if a woman does anything with a guy, that means they're fucking, right?) and then obsessing over it and forming it into the grand conspiracy in which she was going to subvert all of the gaming industry to become queen of the gamers, all so she could get a blurb article about her "not even a game!!!!!!!" game on a gaming blog. That's literally what started gamergate.

Hell I remember reading some of the messages between her and him that he used to claim how she was just a lying succubus and a master manipulator. The part I read boiled down to him basically thinking they were somehow in a serious relationship even though she had moved to the other side of the country months before (and I don't know if they were ever that serious to begin with, I seem to recall her being like "well we weren't even really boyfriend/girlfriend, we dated but we never were serious" and then her basically going "sorry dude, I guess I somehow misled you by continuing to talk to you some" and then her trying to explain how it should have been obvious to him while he basically tried to spin everything as though she had been doing it entirely focused around him (i.e. so if she got involved with anyone she was hiding it from him but also somehow simultaneously trying to use it to hurt him like everything she did focused around how it would impact him).

It was just young relationship shit that some (even sadder more pathetic version of Fox News talking heads by just speculating and trashing on gaming and pop culture shit on like some shitty podcast or YouTube channel because they were angstly manchildren) assclowns looking for an ax to grind and oxygen starved forum jackoffs then blew into the pathetic gamer stereotype version of a grand conspiracy. Which, I'm still not sure on the chicken and egg situation there, as a lot of the other conspiracy shit that we now see having rotted the brains of right wingers everywhere already had started, and actually much of that led to Gamergate blowing up, and all of that has since overshadowed Gamergate. But without Gamergate and the flashpoint of impotent sexual rage of pubescent boys triggering the manbabies (that women were pointing out quite clearly while those manbabies cried "I'm not, you're a slutty bitch, I'm gonna rape you to death") that far too many men (and some women) have become, I'm not sure we'd have gotten what we got afterwards. Although at the same time I feel like it was also inevitable it was going to get worse and worse, so if it wasn't that it would've been something else.

I remember trying to tell the Gamergate dipshits that they were being manipulated for all the reasons they were claiming to be psychotically pissed about gaming journalism for, and sometimes for worse reasons. Instead they got mentally cucked almost as bad as the Germans that fell for the Nazis' shit.