  Over the past few years, online bullying and aggression have become
increasingly prominent, and manifested in many different forms on social media.
However, there is little work analyzing the characteristics of abusive users
and what distinguishes them from typical social media users. In this paper, we
start addressing this gap by analyzing tweets containing a great large amount
of abusiveness. We focus on a Twitter dataset revolving around the Gamergate
controversy, which led to many incidents of cyberbullying and cyberaggression
on various gaming and social media platforms. We study the properties of the
users tweeting about Gamergate, the content they post, and the differences in
their behavior compared to typical Twitter users.
  We find that while their tweets are often seemingly about aggressive and
hateful subjects, "Gamergaters" do not exhibit common expressions of online
anger, and in fact primarily differ from typical users in that their tweets are
less joyful. They are also more engaged than typical Twitter users, which is an
indication as to how and why this controversy is still ongoing. Surprisingly,
we find that Gamergaters are less likely to be suspended by Twitter, thus we
analyze their properties to identify differences from typical users and what
may have led to their suspension. We perform an unsupervised machine learning
analysis to detect clusters of users who, though currently active, could be
considered for suspension since they exhibit similar behaviors with suspended
users. Finally, we confirm the usefulness of our analyzed features by emulating
the Twitter suspension mechanism with a supervised learning method, achieving
very good precision and recall.
