Anon on Gamergate

I dug into the rabbit hole of this one again and I really thought this particularly sequence was interesting. Zoe's [Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zo%C3%AB_Quinn#Harassment_and_Gamergate) says "Quinn was falsely accused of receiving positive coverage from a journalist with whom they were in a relationship". That "falsely" seems like editorializing in my opinion since Quinn *was* accused, but I dug into the source to see what proved these accusation false and if Wikipedia was truthful and unbiased in their editorializing. A citation for the false accusation claim was [this](https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/gamergate-scandal-erupts-video-game-community) article from The New Yorker. >"Baldwin, seeking to point out an example of unethical journalism, linked on Twitter to a video claiming that a video-game writer had promoted work by the independent game-maker Zoe Quinn while the two were in a relationship. (This claim that has since been proved false)." So Wikipedia's source is just another source saying it was proven false. But the New Yorker had hyperlinked "proven false" so it must be [there](https://deadspin.com/the-future-of-the-culture-wars-is-here-and-its-gamerga-1646145844/) that we can find what evidence proves it was false, right? >"Among his many accusations, he claims she slept with a gaming journalist in return for favorable coverage. This clearly isn't true" The article later said that the accusations weren't possible because Nathan Grayson (the journalist she later had a verifiable relationship with) worked for Kotaku at the time and they didn't review Depression Quest, so he couldn't have possibly influenced any reviews there, but Grayson also [wrote for Rock Paper Shotgun](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate#Zo%C3%AB_Quinn_and_Depression_Quest) at the time and over there, he calling it a ["powerful Twine darling"](https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/admission-quest-valve-greenlights-50-more-games). Another writer from that same publication — though the full review seems to have been pulled as it is referenced but not linked to — calls Depression Quest "indescribable" and really puts out this [vibe](https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/mostly-indescribable-depression-quest) that it is so sacred and profound that he didn't feel worthy to play it. So, the argument that "he wrote for this one publication that didn't review so he couldn't have done it" even though his other publication glazed the thing is really disingenuous and deceiving. And that's it! That's what Wikipedia, Deadspin, and The New Yorker editors consider sufficient evidence to outright call the accusation false.