Sorry, Cris. Didn't mean to offend. You are right, we have met before, and I certainly don't take you as that type of person. I think it says more about the way that certain trolls do their business than it does about you or me or Tom.

Basically, sometimes trolls will phrase a question online in such a way as to sound innocent, but which they know will provoke a polarized response. It's hard to tell the difference between that, and honest curiosity. I believe you when you say it's honest curiosity about a topic you didn't undertstand.

It is an interesting point that you make, that the USU site claims there was no danger on the day Anita canceled her appearance. I remember that announcement on that day, and I see why the two reports might seem to differ, to you, when you are reading them after the fact.

But let me clarify the perceived discrepancy. I don't think there is a discrepancy here, I think that what Anita (and that BBC news article) reported on that day, and what USU is saying, are actually the same thing.

Anita clearly said that she canceled because USU wouldn't (or perhaps couldn't?) beef up their security after receiving the threat. The threat was made, and there is no muddiness about that point. The USU article itself even states, clearly:
Quote:
"A number of people at USU received an email regarding the scheduled presentation by Sarkeesian Wednesday at USU's Taggart Student Center. The email contained threats to Sarkeesian and those who attended her presentation."


This isn't muddy at all to me. It's a clear admission by USU that they received threats and chose to do nothing about them. And I think Anita made the right call by canceling the appearance when USU wouldn't beef up the security. This is pretty clear to me, and I don't see any muddiness in the reporting of the incident here.

There have been too many cases in our country about situations where someone carried out on precisely those kinds of threats. This happens regularly in this country, and it's very sad that it does. The news is currently plastered here with another highly public mass shooting which occurred this week. That's why the gamergate people know that they can make the threats and cause distress by making them. The problem is that there is no way to tell whether the threat will be carried out. USU decided to make a gamble that the threat would not be carried out, and Anita rightfully chose not to make that same gamble.
_________________________
Tony Fabris