I downvote and move on because there's no point in trying to do anything but hate on GamerGate in a subreddit like GirlGamers, you're just not going to get any reasonable discussion there on the topic. Not to mention that the article being posted was beating the deadest horse there is regarding GamerGate: Zoe Quinn.

I don't visit KotakuInAction or GamerGhazi often but I have read more of the former and I fail to see how such people can be labeled as the evil harassers that they're made out to be. By GamerGhazi I am not only referring to the subreddit but the people that type of people that frequent such a subreddit. Honestly, if there were people that were anti-GG (Anita Sarkessian would be ideal) that took some of these people up on their offers to discuss 'GamerGate' related topics (and in the case of Anita, to also discuss her videos in more depth) then there may be others that would be willing to do the same instead of just this pointless hating on the other side. I can't deny that some of those that support GamerGate will do some 'screaming' at the other side too but I also can't discredit them that much when they're not the ones refusing to discuss these things with the other side.

I keep saying 'other side' because there really is two sides in this and because of this 'us vs them' mentality anyone that tries to make some middle ground just can't because they're assumed to be a part of the other side; though this primarily relates to the anti-GG side in my past experience. I don't know enough about GamerGate to say I'm a supporter of it but I can say I'm a supporter of improving ethics in video games 'journalism', which I would think any reasonable person would be in support of.

I feel I'm rambling a bit but your wording suggests that you disagree with my comment and support GamerGhazi. The main thing I have against them is that they'd much rather be against the other side than discuss things with them. Both sides really need to discuss things or they wont get anywhere.