>>326409
So I finally sat down to read through Nackt's screed. Less angry than I was expecting, but in the end it amounts to a big pile of "Nuh-UH!" and "but ur board lol x500" and "but U" which was predicted.
I think Nackt would benefit from a brief lesson in tactics versus strategy.
First let's take a quick statistic.
>Words typed in that Twitlonger: 6007
>Above-average typing speed of an average person: 50
>Approximate time spent just typing said Twitlonger (not including hunting for links): 120mins
>Average energy expended by someone sitting and typing: ~419 joules/hr
>Average energy expended by someone's brain operating in a state of focus: ~50 joules/hr
>Approximate energy expended by Nackt on her screed: (419+50)*1.3333 = ~625.3 joules.
I can render all that time and energy wasted at the snap of a finger by just declining to respond. Instead, this time lets use this as an easy example of an attrition strategy.
Objectively, the Twitlonger is comprised of four kinds of speech: Insinuations, speculations, concrete points without supporting evidence, and concrete points with supporting evidence, in that approximate order of frequency.
>Insinuations
Being an angry screed by a butthurt person on Twitter, this occupies the bulk of the Twitlonger. Specifically in the form of various allusions and suggestions that the state of GGHQ is relevant to my criticism of Nackt's arrogance, and that by pointing out GGHQ's low rank and history, Nackt parries this into a gotcha or moral victory.
To immediately invalidate approximately 70% of the Twitlonger, it's enough to say that I don't weigh my sense of self worth, or the worth of my arguments, on the activity status of an anonymous image board. I would suggest that anyone who does, such as Nackt, has mental problems.
If I cared about being popular, I wouldn't have signed up for the world's worst "misogynist hate campaign" in the first place.
I will address two specific falsehoods buried in the insinuations, however.
The insinuation that the swatting was never attempted is false. The first of several false reports was made on 10/14/2015 at about 3:30am CST. These reports claimed among other various things that I was stockpiling illegal weapons and threatening to shoot up a nearby school if the police didn't intervene immediately. These reports pre-dated other false reports filed to the ATF and FBI in an attempt to have them raid my place of business. What the police told you is exactly what it says on the tin: The
local PD did not open a case, because the reports were filed anonymously by parties operating over the Internet and not known people in their jurisdiction. That's the FBI's department. More specifically, this was the raid that took place on /baph/ and /b/ that Zan would later claim credit for "running", in his words. At least one accomplice to this is Male_Goddess, another member of Thidran's circle, who claimed credit in conjunction with LadyFuzzTail -
another member of Thidran's circle, and was subsequently signal boosted by Kelly,
yet another member of Thidran's circle.
>Speculation
That the few devs who were willing to publicly support #GG only opposed boycotts to protect their own bottom line is speculation on your part, as is your premise that journos removed from their positions only to be shuffled around or change companies means that our protest was a failure. You speculate that 8chan's UID cookies are used for nefarious purposes as opposed to benign ones.
Concrete points: I have no disagreement with some of these, such as the Gawker Legdrop where you gave a fair assessment. You do not present any evidence at all to show that "ethics only" was ever a major keystone of #GG anywhere but the inside of your head and those of your like-minded burnouts.
>Yeah, I remember hearing this same banter when I told you all Academia was involved. How did that turn out smart guy?
I agree that academia
is involved. But I am not the singular representative of the #GG hivemind. Is that your problem, perhaps? Do you think I represent in a single body the multitudes who call you retarded and relieve your frustrations at me?
>Because you could not acknowledge who your real allies were all along and for that you alienated them.
Many of the people I believe you're referring to don't even play videogames. They just see gaming as one more field in their nonsense culture war. They have no respect for me, and I have even less for them, and their efforts to sabotage parts of #GG they disagree with don't go un-noticed. You have failed to make an argument. #
GamerGate. I'd think who was involved would be self evident.
Ignoring the remaining posturing and blowharding, it's time for that lesson I talked about. "Tactics" are the methods employed when fighting a specific battle or battles, and "strategy" is how you integrate battles and their outcomes to bring about gain in the picture of the overall conflict.
To wit: You have four broad choices.
[Expand Post]
A: You write another Twitlonger or similar in response to this, possibly even larger in size. I will not respond to this one substantially in a deliberate effort to see your energy wasted. This is the option you are going to choose, because its all your limited psychology of confrontation will allow for. I predict it.
B: You do not respond at all or respond in a limited fashion and go on about your business.
C: Incensed, you make a more involved personal attack against me, which will be ignored as in option A so I can watch you waste your energy.
D: You commit or attempt some criminal act, which will be recorded, analysed, and reported to appropriate authorities.
A is advantageous to me because it validates my prediction about you and your psychological nature. B is advantageous to me because the distractions you make cease and both of our works continue. C is advantageous to me because I can waste your energy and see you further discredited by a childish tantrum. And D is advantageous to me because Germany's laws are considerably stricter and better investigated than here in the US, your engagements with me are recorded and documented, and you may inadvertently remove yourself as a problem.
You do not have an option that does not advantage me in some way.
You obsess about tactics, Nackt. The opponent in front of you and what you are going to do to him or prevent being done to you. This person, that person, this organization, that organization, this ideology, that ideology. They're all just battles. You don't need to win the battles to win a war. You only need to win the right ones, in the right way. Sometimes the right way to win, is even to lose, if the battle is the right one at the right place and time. Knowing which is which? That's strategy.
Now when you calm down from the anger at how easily I manipulated you, and the blood quits pounding in your ears - remember to make your choice. How do you want me to win?
Oh, and let's get meta for a second.
>My reply: 1252 words
>% of your energy expended: ~ 21%
I won the attrition battle by default.