I think that people who are naive or biased are exactly the groups most likely to think that you can take a cursory glance at ANY situation where one person is accusing another of wrongdoing and decide that it's bullshit or not. Some people took a cursory glance at Gamergate and thought it was obvious that Zoe was a huge narcissist and overall ridiculous person who wouldn't be above doing unethical things or disingenuously playing the victim to get attention or get ahead professionally, so they believed any and every accusation against her, whereas other people took a cursory look at the same situation and thought it was obvious that the people banging the Gamergate drum were motivated by misogyny/reactionary politics and wanted an excuse to attack a female game dev and liberal journalists, so they decided any accusation coming from those people must be all bullshit. IMO both characterizations of Zoe and Gamergaters are pretty much true, but that doesn't mean either one was right to make their assumptions about which side was right about the facts of what happened.