Sorry, my wording was clumsy, which was rather inexcusable as I am actually English. But that doesn't seem to impede my ability to create rather tangled and impenetrable grammar at times.
Anyway, my comment was directed at Pinsof basically ruining a vulnerable person's life: yes, she did the wrong thing, but publicly outing her was irresponsible and dangerous and I don't consider someone to be fair game as a result of their wrongdoing. Sure, address that issue, but the response has to be appropriate and somewhat cautious, neither of which could be used to describe Pinsof's approach which could be seen as dangerously vindictive. I guess living in the UK where our press has a habit of ruining people's lives with a self-righteous disregard for the consequences, I take a dim view of that sort of thing.
I do have a particular interest in this particular case (though no connection with any of the people or organisations involved) which may colour my opinion somewhat, but what I'm seeing is a person who committed a serious misdeed by attempting to fraudulently obtain money; then a journalist who countered that by what I would consider a potentially even more serious misdeed that recklessly endangered her life; and to top it all off, his employer then continued the sequence of misdeeds by some apparent backroom shenanigans when deciding what to do with him.
But this refers to a very specific example; my main ambivalence to the GamerGate situation is that it seems it's now better known for being misappropriated by everyone with a soapbox to shout from and whatever it was originally about has been variously hijacked and misrepresented into oblivion.
