On Ethics and Political Leanings I'm hoping to get a better idea of what frames this divide(*) within gamergate conversations.  What I see, with my obvious limited individual vision, is a spilt in; focus, approach, and goals. In reverse, this by no means comprehensive or absolute.  Examples to consider, refute, and add to: Goals: (Abstract) Improve the video game industry so that it is more consumer friendly and on a path to maintain and continually improve.  (Tangible) Talk to another person, off-line, about gamergate that does not know about gamergate.   Approach:  (Abstract) Adding our narrative, supported with facts, in a transparent fashion with full knowledge that we will repeatedly be ignored by most.  (Tangible)  Emails requesting corrections and/or retractions to articles purposed to smear gamergate. Focus: (Abstract)  Ethics as an umbrella for a host of grievaces.  (Tangible)  Sites disclosing political leanings or an attempt at the site being non-partisan/ non-ideological, Polygon disclosing their progressive stance as an example of this. *The divide, as I see it: 1) Public relations entwined with adversity to relative e-celebrity.  2) Ethics seen as an issue to blanket other individuals' concerns. 3) Tone and ideology policing  My take: 1)  Part jealousy, part nature of this beast.  The pseudonyms do not make for anonymity and sometimes this issue comes off as a twisted popularity contest or test of achievements to determine who can desk-press more internet.  It is fair to wonder if PR would do any good, at best it is a steep uphill climb.  Thinking an offical GG-PR would materialize, and be successful, is a little delusional.  PR seems to me everyone's responsiblity, everyone that could agree on an abstract goal.  To me, those that wouldn't agree are likely either unreasonable or an agent provocateur ([in]dependant shit-stirrer and as a useful destabilizing tool).  For the all the forgotten lulz, I imagine that more beneficial outcomes could have resulted from the energies and creativity expended.   2)  I'm an ethics cuck that might as well be considered a SJW-lite for the sake of this discussion.  I have trouble understanding how ethics being at the forefront is a limiting factor for gamergate compared to delving into the political aspects.  This is based off of the idea ethical concerns can encompass many, if not all, of the political issues raised.  There is a "right kind of diversity" being peddled and promoted that I take issue with.  This can easily be framed as an ethical issue, is it promoting a discriminatory practice under the guise of constructing safe spaces that can be controlled by those pushing "the right kind of diversity?"  There are individuals that are deserving of special protections but what happens when "the victim cries wolf" too many times?  Individuals subjected to; physical, psychological, and emotional abuse can end up worse off.  Rape is a problem.  "Rape culture" might be used to highlight this but it also, unintentionally, normalizes while saying it's a problem.   3)  Be nice and respectful.  It's the "PR is everyone's responsiblity" and just being decent.  We're going to keep getting shit on by; the press, people that accept the harassment narrative, and anyone that just want to shit on something for a little attention.  Infighting is counter-productive and selfish. Does your perspective differ on the divide as described, regardless of how wide the gap appears to be? Is anything missing or too unrealistic? Are there any more points on; focus, approach, or goals that come to mind, abstract or tangible?