The original article is about trolls making up lies and victims having little recourse.
The lie in this case is "Zoe traded sex for press coverage". Kain explains how there is no basis for this claim whatsoever ("the initial concerns were quickly proven to be all smoke and no fire") and then goes on to explain how, despite being based on nothing, this managed to blow up anyhow by everyone making allegations that are nearly impossible to make fact, yet are taken as fact by many others.
This kind of thing is exactly what the original article is talking about, only that in the GamerGate case it's happening in both directions.
As for the DMCA thing: The video was down. While i haven't even watched it, as it's probably full of bullshit, you can go to the video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5CXOafuTXM ), click "... More > Statistics > Daily" and see the view count drop to zero in august for a few days. This outage may have had several reasons, but due to the original uploader linking to what seems to be a DMCA takedown notice on his tumblr ( http://archive.today/UqAwg ) it appears that she did send that. And that is all Kain said.
Given these two facts, and how they do belong into the greater discussion, i am curious how you'd expect him to express that differently.
Well, Kain's article is a description of the exact kind of harassment campaign described in the original article. So the first sense I meant is that the contents of the article are the exact thing talked about.
For the DMCA: "unverifiable" is probably a better description than "unsourced", but the part I wanted to highlight was how this whole thing followed the exact playbook described in Kathy Sierra's essay.
Second, while Kain is trying to take a balanced approach, he unfortunately only looks at the surface of the issues, reporting the accusations in great detail. This is a dynamic that's also pointed out in the original article: uncritically accepting a new martyr while glossing over the original harassment. Lots about "gamers are over" and TFYC, virtually nothing about the mob harassment for anyone other than Phil Fish. And absolutely nothing about the organized astroturfing in the IRC channels, which has been documented extensively.
The accusations are repeated without much introspection, in a way that it can be used as an apologetic hammer against either side. It may not be actively harmful in itself, but it doesn't do much to actually inform the reader of all of the issues.
You believe that an article that describes both sides' claims without judging either is "harassment" and that instead of something that "can be used [...] against either side" we should be looking at articles and authors that are directly and openly associated with Kotaku/Gawker or Polygon/Vox for a more "even-handed" look?
No, I didn't say that article itself is harassment. Just that it isn't as even-handed as it tries to appear.
I just grabbed to Vox link because it was one of the more even-handed summaries from the more general news sites, regardless of association. Read both and come to your own conclusion if that makes you feel better.
I suppose I can dig up something by someone with absolutely no association with any of this, but those people generally aren't writing about this at all. That's part of the problem with that particular mess: everyone who can talk about it already knows each other and have probably already been attacked by one side or the other.
The original article is about trolls making up lies and victims having little recourse.
The lie in this case is "Zoe traded sex for press coverage". Kain explains how there is no basis for this claim whatsoever ("the initial concerns were quickly proven to be all smoke and no fire") and then goes on to explain how, despite being based on nothing, this managed to blow up anyhow by everyone making allegations that are nearly impossible to make fact, yet are taken as fact by many others.
This kind of thing is exactly what the original article is talking about, only that in the GamerGate case it's happening in both directions.
As for the DMCA thing: The video was down. While i haven't even watched it, as it's probably full of bullshit, you can go to the video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5CXOafuTXM ), click "... More > Statistics > Daily" and see the view count drop to zero in august for a few days. This outage may have had several reasons, but due to the original uploader linking to what seems to be a DMCA takedown notice on his tumblr ( http://archive.today/UqAwg ) it appears that she did send that. And that is all Kain said.
Given these two facts, and how they do belong into the greater discussion, i am curious how you'd expect him to express that differently.