#Gamergate

Sure you are. You're just no longer a credible source that can be trusted in the public eye to give an unbiased review.
If your review is biased or not doesn't matter, you're no longer a source of information that can be trusted in this regard because the possibility of personal bias influencing what you say being too high.
Sorry, but that's how it works.

...And therefore I'm the scum of the earth who is undeserving of most common decencies? The entire internet must now band together to subject me to the entirety of their wrath because I may have written a review about a single video game with some amount of bias.

When I say:

If people are so worried about the negative backlash this could have on the gaming industry, why would people bring this much attention to it? There's a rather large logical inconsistency there that I seem to be missing.

I'm not saying things like this should be completely swept under the rug. I'm saying none of this is necessary. What is the point of an internet-wide witch hunt to say that a few people's credibility might be a bit disagreeable.

Social justicers on tumblr going on a witch hunt like this would be mocked for their immaturity/irrationality.

If Zoe Quinn is shedding a negative light on games journalism, what do you think crap like this does to gamers or the internet as a whole? It must take a very large number of very respectable people to try and systematically destroy peoples' entire beings.