Wrong. Wrong Wrong. This is what Anita S and her buddies in the gaming journalism industry want people to think with their hack articles though.

Zoe Quinn was pretty much out of the gamergate picture a week after gamergate started. Corrupt people in journalism that think that by telling people that it is about hating on Zoe, Anita and women in general it will deflcet from the actual  problems that gamergate is trying to bring to light. It clearly worked on you.

This

"well if there is no investigation into what is going on or in other words no one is attempting to reveal other cases where corruption has influenced media then what is the point of continuing gamergate?" and "therefore the goal was only ever to talk about a problem and not attempt to change it?":

Like I said, the problem isn't proving people that there is corruption in the gaming media, it is convincing people that it matters. The media doesn't really try to deny that there is some shady stuff going on, they just think it doesn't really matter (even look outside of the gaming media at Colbert laughing at the thought that people care about game media corruption). 

Who is to say that talking never helped anything? Talking is the thing that we are lacking. Talking is the problem. We need a dialogue. We need openness. We need communication between the press and the gamers. We are talking about the problems, trying to show people why they matter and trying to think of ways to help. As I said, numerous sites have already changed their disclosure policies, however there just isn't enough dialogue. So many people are content to just sweep this all under the rug and these discussions keep arising because we don't want this to be forgotten and ignored. We want to keep talking about it until people start realizing we want change. Unfortunately, the media has effectively destroyed the power of GamerGate, protecting themselves from its effects. Even still, I think a lot of people will start asking questions where none were asked before...

"except the lives of zoe quinn and anita sarkesian who are under constant attack because of this movement":

Anita was under attack long before GamerGate, and I don't believe any of the threats they received are connected directly to GamerGate. In fact, GamerGate has long moved on from either of these two, it is the anti-GamerGate folk who seem to love dragging them back in. 

then why am i seeing people who claim to be associated with gamergate still attacking her to this day?

you have to understand that what your personal objectives are for this movement are not necessaily those of the other people who back it

that's why i said that the goal needs to be focused on investigating corruption in journalism

otherwise all gamergate will acheive is the reinforcement of the negative perceptions people have about gamers

Equal rights between men and women eh?

Sorry, but the fact of the matter is men and women are not equal. In many things, men are better. In other things, women are better. Are you going to suddenly tell me that the NBA should integrate men and women in the name of equality? Should we pay female basketball players the same money as male basketball players?

That's just stupid. We live in a world where men and women have different strengths. Equality for sexes is impossible and if you try to do it, you just wind up with a bunch of crap that doesn't make sense.

So yes, feminism is garbage.

If GG was ever actually about gaming or anything related to gaming it might. So far it's just a bunch of pissed off guys harassing woman and trying to keep them out of their gaming community. Then there are feminists attacking back. It's not going to stop the console war the same way invading invading Iraq didn't end the war in Afghanistan. It simply just started a new war. That's all this was, one angry ex boyfriend and a bunch of angry chan/twitter trolls/MRA's starting a different war because games as we knew them changed and are changing and woman are getting a stronger influence/presence in gaming and some people simply think that is not their place.

Here, educate yourself a bit:

Oh I have. there is no doubt what those peoples true intentions were. Sure there is a lot of discussion going around about it but there is no doubt there is shit tons of hate and propaganda comming from those that started it all on the chans/twitter.

It seems most of the discussion or disagreements came when talking about gender politics in gaming. Now, I don't think there is anything wrong with having these discussions (although I certainly don't think reviews are the right place for that), but I think we need to change a few things:

First of all, as TB hinted at, but didn't directly say, the media has a lot of power. That is something that always needs to be kept in mind in these discussions. The games media are immensely powerful when it comes to influencing opinions, with things like giving certain games more publicity or outright denying publicity in addition to the power of review scores and aggregates. The media is powerful enough to destroy a game before it is even released.

Second, I think sensationalism plays a decently large part in many of our gender politics conversations. While freedom should be granted to journalists to express their opinion, we reach a point where we are no longer receiving video game news, so much as tabloids printed to piss people off. There is no real way to quantify this, but it does seem fairly obvious when looking at how GamerGate was handled by the media. Either there was a massive wave of ignorance and a lack of investigations within the media, or sensationalism took hold and they printed stories for hits. How do we condemn this practice while allowing discussion to happen? I think the first step is to change the way you write about these issues. Many times these stories are accusatory and scandalous instead of being open minded and constructive. Unfortunately there is no way to push sensationalism out of the media, but if anyone wants to take steps towards a civil discussion, don't try to do it in a way that is designed to piss people off (just look at all of those anti-gamer pieces that I believe were referenced in the video).

Third, I think the collaboration between the media needs to be severely restricted. While it is natural that many of these people may become friends, it limits the ability to express views counter to the popular belief. This creates a very strong group thinking atmosphere and makes people scared or reluctant to post their honest opinions. This is really dangerous. Having people who speak up about gender issues is quite fine, but this needs to be a discussion, not an assault. We need people on both sides. Many times, GamerGate has been painted as being the attacking side, but people on both sides get a lot of flak for their opinions. When you are in the groupthink atmosphere of journalism, counter opinions are really dangerous. Instead of sitting down and thinking about how you are all going to orchestrate an anti-gamer movement, just let everyone come up with their own opinions...I don't think this particular side of things gets enough discussion.