>>320155
The initial "sex for reviews" thing was nothing more than the initial rumour that people were trying to find evidence for. It was a "maybe", a possibility that the diggers were investigating. It doesn't matter that it turned out false AFTER investigating, Gamergate started because attempting to investigate at all resulted in bans across the board. And, through that same investigation, all sorts of other egregious conflicts of interest were discovered. But, somehow, because the very first rumour turned out false (or, rather, unprovable, the only thing to go on is their word), somehow every uncovered conflict of interest that followed has no merit. So anyone who thinks that's an actual argument against Gamergate can go fuck themselves.