News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Meta executives ‘inadvertently’ identified in OnlyFans br... by jslaD on Thursday October 13, 2022 @11:05AM (#33192036)
Isn’t this what gamergate was about?
Re:Meta executives ‘inadvertently’ identified in OnlyFans br... by nullish_signal on Thursday October 13, 2022 @12:26PM (#33193202)
Yea basically, Yellow Journalists in bed with Terrible Game Devs
Re:Meta executives ‘inadvertently’ identified in OnlyFans br... by RajT88 on Thursday October 13, 2022 @01:36PM (#33194128)
If you believe GamerGate was about what it purported to be about.

(It wasn't, and you shouldn't)

But anyways - you got at least the pretext correct.

Re:Meta executives ‘inadvertently’ identified in OnlyFans br... by nullish_signal on Sunday October 23, 2022 @12:37PM (#33308215)
So what pretext do you purport about Gamer Gate?

Your post does not include any clear opinions, just negations of who-knows-what

Re:Meta executives ‘inadvertently’ identified in OnlyFans br... by consumer451 on Thursday October 13, 2022 @11:31AM (#33192391)
Re:Meta executives ‘inadvertently’ identified in OnlyFans br... by jslaD on Thursday October 13, 2022 @12:26PM (#33193193)
Yes, it’s well explained there - a woman had sex with a reporter to get publicity for a videogame that she had developed.
Re:Meta executives ‘inadvertently’ identified in OnlyFans br... by UncleMeat on Thursday October 13, 2022 @12:46PM (#33193490)
A woman had sex with a reporter. That reporter also blurbed a game she made. That is not the same as "she had sex with a reporter to get publicity."

Gamergate was trash from the beginning and only got more distasteful over time.

Re:Meta executives ‘inadvertently’ identified in OnlyFans br... by LordDragonfang on Thursday October 13, 2022 @04:32PM (#33196132)
And to be clear, said blurb on her game was a passing mention, not a review, and was published before they began their relationship.