An good semi-rant by Ken White of popehat on GamerGate. I recommend it as an excellent example of applied rationality and sorting out through the hysterics.
Meh, he seems to be trying to hard to pretend to be wise. One of the more egregious examples:
There’s no excuse for threats to anyone, whatever “side” they are on. Posting someone’s home address or private phone number or financial details will almost never be relevant to a good-faith dispute — it’s clearly intended to terrorize, and it risks empowering disturbed people to do real harm. These things are wrong no matter who does them, no matter the motive, and no mater the target.
That’s like saying “Violence is wrong no matter who does it, therefore if an armed gang invades your neighborhood you should passively comply”.
An good semi-rant by Ken White of popehat on GamerGate. I recommend it as an excellent example of applied rationality and sorting out through the hysterics.
Meh, he seems to be trying to hard to pretend to be wise. One of the more egregious examples:
That’s like saying “Violence is wrong no matter who does it, therefore if an armed gang invades your neighborhood you should passively comply”.
He does a better job of it than most people I know :-) It’s not that I completely agree with him, but he writes well and makes a lot of valid points.
The biggest objection to his position is, essentially, Yvain’s post on weak men.
Sarah Hoyt has a good description of the problems with the post here.
Meh. It’s a rant and not a particularly well-thought-out one.