Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Thu Mar 28 15:17:15 2024

Utopia Talk / Politics / Gender wars 2
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Fri Jul 13 18:28:59
So one interesting observation is that not a single time in 100 posts, did anyone question the the white knight game dev that defended her, get fired. I think we all agree, he deserves much worse.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Fri Jul 13 18:33:45
she was cunt.
did she deserve to get fired? don't know
but she was a cunt.
the white knight was an idiot.
did he deserve to get fired? don't know
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Fri Jul 13 18:34:15
she was a cunt
Delude
Member
Fri Jul 13 18:34:17
Actually, I didnt like that part. And in fact if anything. Maybe a reprimand or suspension. Even JP deserved a suspension.

But of course. Pf stays and JP goes. Clearly a bias would be declared.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Jul 15 05:24:25
”because fuck the guy”
-seb

I think we peered a little bit into the soul of the man when he said that. Just a little.
McKobb
Member
Sun Jul 15 06:03:50
Cunny she was.
Rugian
Member
Mon Jul 16 02:28:19
In a nutshell...

http://i.k...s/newsfeed/000/960/143/d7a.jpg
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Jul 16 02:34:05
An interesting development in light of seb using Elon Musk as the pinnacle of "male privilege" compared to what happened to this game dev.

Elon Musk calls hero diver in Thailand pedophile. Crosses the shitline of retarded things to say at the wrong moment.

http://www...m_term=.ylpOGz78mQ#.pw6gQKmbj5

LOL :)
The Sentinal
Member
Mon Jul 16 05:03:52
"Come on, let's be honest, when elon musk blows off some criticism on Twitter the way this dev does, many people think it's awesome." -Seb's selectivity

[…]

"It's not *that* he commented, it's how and what he posted. " -Seb's selectivity

[…]

"Nor does it make him [his] equal on the subject." -Seb's selectivity



Seb is right; Elon Musk has enough money to know enough about the knowledge of diving in a cave with it's intricate passages. First hand experiences from these divers are inconsequential to Elon Musk. Seb is also right, this diver must be a pedophile because he knows nothing about being a billionaire and having a mini-submarine.
Seb
Member
Mon Jul 16 06:26:52
Nim:

”because fuck the guy”
-seb

I think we peered a little bit into the soul of the man when he said that. Just a little."

I think we peer a little into yours - after all are you not the one that consistently argues that people need to be less of a snowflakes, and free speech is not a right not to be offended?

I said "fuck the idiot" in the context of why I would not sack her (something you yourself agree) simply because he was offended she dismissed his rude comment, rudely.

RE Musk, this is a fantastic example that, perhaps, lets us see, just a little, into your soul.

Firstly, Male privelege is your characterisation. I think it is perfectly reasonable for an expert to tell a non-expert sarcastically to bog off. What is sadly depressing is when men do it, it passes largely without comment.

Secondly, I think it is more telling in this instance. The issue here is Elon dismissing experts where HE has no knowledge and then throwing a major wobbly when he is dismissed by a cave diver involved in the rescue. (I.e. the reverse situation to the situation we are talking about). In this instance, he's Deroir, not JP. It's diametrically opposite

Funny you missed that point no?

And in this instance, he's calling someone a pedo which is somewhat more extreme than a rando don't you think?

And until he called them a pedo, he had quite a lot of support (and still does) from his fans.

The Sentinel:
Wow. I mean... wow.

I don't think the diving thing had even happened at the time I made my post. And if you had cared to ask me before making some half arsed comments, I could have demonstrated how this is *not* a case of Elon Musk dismissing rando's on areas of his expertise, but Elon Musk being a rando to someone who is an expert.

And yet, still getting lots of support from his fanboys.
The Sentinel
Member
Mon Jul 16 06:38:25
Seb is right. Mob mentality matters when turned into popularity contests. That shows that the person is infallible.
The Sentinel
Member
Mon Jul 16 07:06:06
Seb is also right. Calling a diver to save teenage boys a pedophile is not the same as calling a rando a sexist and introducing gender inequality because the had an opinion on a game.
Seb
Member
Mon Jul 16 07:21:56
The Sentinel:

Your point on mob mentality is neither here nor there and I've made my point on that very clear to anyone with two brain cells to rub together.

Yes, I am right. For a start, directly calling someone a Paedophile in print is libel, whereas calling someone a rando (which he was: a random person in respect of her and game design) is not.

And he didn't actually call *him* sexist.

She says:

"Today, being a female dev" - which describes her experiences.
https://twitter.com/Delafina777/status/1014554296107483136

And the ass hat comment.
https://twitter.com/Delafina777/status/1014555719352213504

So, we are in clear agreement:

I'm completely correct, your initial post characterising my opinion was wildly wrong.

Cheers :)
The Sentinel
Member
Mon Jul 16 07:29:09
Seb is right. No media outlet has attacked him for being sexist or inferred him only stating his opinion because she is a woman. As well as painting the CEO of the game company as sexist either. She has not given any interviews at all eluding it was because she is a woman for being in her present situation.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Jul 16 07:52:25
"What is sadly depressing is when men do it, it passes largely without comment."

Link?
hood
Member
Mon Jul 16 08:15:45
It should be noted that one of the reasons this woman was so worked up was because it was a holiday and "this guy has no rights to her personal time" or some such. And "he wasn't invited to comment on her thread."

Aside from the inconceivable petulance in those statements, it just completely lacks logic. She commented on twitter. Twitter has: block functionality, no online status, no expectation of reply. All she needed to do was... nothing. She didn't have to feel pressured to reply to the YouTuber, she didn't need to reply to him. He made no indication that he was seeking a reply in his first comment, it was only later comments that he indication discussion (which, again, it's fucking Twitter, these can occur over several days at the users convenience). Basically every objection Price had besides "don't tell me how to do my job" was of her own machination.

I find it telling that both Seb and this woman see this guy as encroaching on her expertise while almost everyone else just sees someone offering an opinion to be taken or ignored. Someone who wants to see persecution will find it, similar to that "hot ones" thread.
Seb
Member
Mon Jul 16 09:05:56
The sentinel clearly has failed to understand the difference between JR *not* calling Deroir sexist and media doing so - for which they alone bare responsibility, and Elon Musk calling a specific diver a pedo.

Seb
Member
Mon Jul 16 09:12:03
hood:

"It should be noted that one of the reasons this woman was so worked up was because it was a holiday"

I think you are making some assumptions there. That's is not a given from reading of the posts. It reads much more of "oh my mentions have exploded, seriously guys, I'm going to have a beer"

"and "this guy has no rights to her personal time" or some such."

This looks like more a general comment on a recurring theme (and she has even expounded on this in other media) that fans and others act as though she has an obligation to answer their queries and engage with them.

"And "he wasn't invited to comment on her thread.""

That was the other fellow I think, though she may have said so to, and I think that is a perfectly reasonable response to someone going out of the way to tell someone they are wrong.

It does not lack logic at all. Twitter allows a response, it does not follow that anyone posting on twitter would welcome a comment from anyone.

She was not offended that he replied to her comment. She was offended by his tone.

"almost everyone else"
Your bubble perhaps.

hood
Member
Mon Jul 16 09:38:21
"sebs leaking asshole"

Pretty much everything you said was wrong. As I stated last thread, I am uninterested in you wasting my time with your unfathomable inability to read. Just because you are referenced does not mean you were being talked to.


"it does not follow that anyone posting on twitter would welcome a comment from anyone."

And since you apparently believe that this is more than reason enough to expect that randos STFU, kindly assimilate your opinions on this subject and my now-second-time statement that I am uninterested in your retarded opinion or comment.
hood
Member
Mon Jul 16 09:40:25
"being talked to."

My apologies. "Talked to" implies some sort of equality between the two parties talking. I meant talked at, which more correctly implies a lesser importance of the audience (in this case, seb thinking he was the audience).

I was not talking at you, seb.
Seb
Member
Mon Jul 16 09:53:48
Hood:

"Pretty much everything you said was wrong."

Ironic observation with someone who serially makes factual errors.

"As I stated last thread, I am uninterested in you wasting my time"
Hey, you referenced me in your post.

"nd since you apparently believe that this is more than reason enough to expect that randos STFU"
You are not a rando. You mention me in a post, I have a right of reply. You want me to stop talking to you it is simple: don't comment on my posts, don't address posts to me, and do not mention me in your posts. Deal?

""Talked to" implies some sort of equality between the two parties talking"

I know, I know - I stoop to your level.



Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Jul 16 10:03:52
"I was not talking at you, seb."

+2

I suggest you stfu in threads I create and do not respond to me unless I ask you something directly.
hood
Member
Mon Jul 16 10:10:54
"Ironic observation with someone who serially makes factual errors."

I think you're mistaken in your definition of irony. Ironic would be me gushing about just how brilliant that smashing man of a man, Seb, is! Yes, irony is in the delivery, not the interpretation. I can see how you might have gotten confused, though. Words (and communication) are indeed difficult.


"I have a right of reply."

Says who? Please explain what gives you a right of reply.


"Deal?"

Oh dear. I don't think you got it. I was making fun of your ideals, not legitimately asking you to not talk to me. It should be pretty clear by now that I'm completely fine with people being able to make replies in open communication channels, and that this idea that one can say whatever they want to the world and then find a stick up their ass when someone replies to said comment is laughable. If you do not want a reply, you have options: block annoying people, restrict access, don't say it in public, find a different medium for communication. By saying something on Twitter, you open yourself to whoever you allow to see it (which is often: everybody). Twitter provides tools to change this; if you do not use those tools, you are passively allowing comments.


"I know, I know - I stoop to your level."

Yes, it is most delicious when you stoop to insults. Every good torturer savors the moment when their subject breaks. One should not confuse personality with intelligence, however.




Anyway, this is distracting from Price et al, so I'll sideline sebs many defects.
hood
Member
Mon Jul 16 11:38:37
I think I had a marginal brain fart and subsituted a bit of sarcasm for irony.
The Sentinel
Member
Mon Jul 16 11:52:22
Seb is right. She never inferred at any point during her exchange and continuation that she was female and that he somehow only made the comment because she was one. It is perfectly normal to identify as a gender when respond. While also give interviews stating the very reason she said what she said.
Delude
Member
Mon Jul 16 11:56:53
Well this picked up lol
Seb
Member
Mon Jul 16 13:40:00
Nim:

I suggest you do as you advise JP and just not post in public.

Hood:

Another American who doesn't understand irony.

Right of repmy is established custom of good faith debate. It's not surprising to see you reject it!

You don't seriously think that was a serious deal you moron. I was pointing put the absurdity of complaining that I'm responding to a post in which you mention me.

The Sentinel:

Do you mean implied or infered? I think she may not have had to infer she herself was female. If you are going to play the intelectual...

There is a difference between identifying a latter of experience and attribution you know.

Mansplaining is a thing. It happens.





Forwyn
Member
Mon Jul 16 13:42:11
"Mansplaining is a thing. It happens."

rofl
Seb
Member
Mon Jul 16 13:43:17
"By saying something on Twitter, you open yourself to whoever you allow to see it (which is often: everybody)."

Does that also not apply for Deroir?

If he wants to post cobdescendingly, is she not free then to dismiss it as a foolish, univited comment from someone not qualified or experiences to comment?
Seb
Member
Mon Jul 16 13:50:58
I love that good can't even dismiss the fact he makes repeated factual errors without making another unforced factual error. About the definition of a word no less. Because. he. knows. words. bro.
hood
Member
Mon Jul 16 14:04:56
"Another American who doesn't understand irony."

Already addressed, illiterate tard.


"Right of repmy is established custom of good faith debate. It's not surprising to see you reject it!

You don't seriously think that was a serious deal you moron. I was pointing put the absurdity of complaining that I'm responding to a post in which you mention me."

1. Repmy?
2. Who rejected anything? I asked you to explain. "It's just a thing" isn't a good explanation. I'm sure you can do better than that.
3. Yes, I got that you were not actually offering a deal. Your point was pretty obvious.
4. You clearly did not get my point. I asked you to not respond to me not as a literal request but to point out how dumb it is to take the stance that nobody can/should talk to you without express permission. Mentioning someone doesn't actually include or invite them to participate in a convo (neither Price or Deroir are really being invited to this convo, yet both are mentioned many times). Yet you seem to understand that subject based interest brings about the want to participate. You wanted to reply to me because you saw Seb mentioned. Deroir wanted to reply because he thought Price's thread was interesting.


"Does that also not apply for Deroir?"

Uh. "Does that not also" you mean?

Yes, it does. Deroir, to my knowledge, never acted the cunt and pulled a "I wasn't talking to you so don't butt in" card. He never told price she couldn't or shouldn't respond. He just said she could have been more polite.


"If he wants to post cobdescendingly"

Post what? Also, it is an extreme minority of people who think Deroir was condescending.
The Sentinel
Member
Mon Jul 16 14:24:57
Seb is right. Being intellectual is about the words you use and not making a mistake using them. While continuously and grossly misspelling simple words at the same time saying you're a superior intellectual.

Seb is also right. It is okay to fully misinterpret a person's comment as long as you twist it to your own version of the message. That isn't mansplaining but is fact.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Jul 16 14:30:40
"I suggest you do as you advise JP and just not post in public."

I suggest we have one set of rules, make up your mind.
Delude
Member
Mon Jul 16 15:07:51
Anyone feel that this thread is an excellent depiction of seb's hypocrisy versus other threads?
Seb
Member
Mon Jul 16 15:26:10
hood:

"Already addressed, illiterate tard."

Hah, too late.

"2. Who rejected anything? I asked you to explain."
No, that would be "what is right of reply?"
What you said was:

"Says who? Please explain what gives you a right of reply."

I.e. you are asking about *why* I should have such a right, not *what* such a right would entail. As you are unfamiliar with the concept, right of reply is the culturally accepted right for someone to respond to public criticism. In media, most editorial policies will either seek comment or allow a letter or response to be published. In some countries it is a legal requirement.

"the stance that nobody can/should talk to you without express permission."

Oh dear, if that was the case again, another error: her stance isn't that nobody should talk to her without express permission, rather that his response was rude and unwarranted. Which of course, according to you, she should be absolutely free to say without repercussion on an open platform without getting sacked. It is a strange world where Deroir is allowed to say what he likes without repercussion and JP is not.

"Deroir wanted to reply because he thought Price's thread was interesting."
Unfortunately, contextually, the post wasn't aimed at him - the fact that it was an open forum doesn't necessarily mean he was being invited to give feedback on the author; and the net result of his condescending tone was basically "Hello, I'm here to mark your homework" - condescending and patronizing. Which of course he is *free* to do, and which she should be free to respond to without reddit getting a burn the witch brigade out in force.


"Uh. "Does that not also" you mean?"

Sentinel:
I'm not claiming to be a superior intellectual, but I'm not the one who insists on posting entirely in the form of statements making judgements on others from a viewpoint intended to portray themselves as objective.

It seems to me if one is going to make a stylistic point of presenting themselves as an objective viewpoint, one should not then make schoolboy errors as it undermines the veneer and makes the whole effect look a bit shonky. A sort of card-board cut out version of credibility.

Nim:
"I suggest we have one set of rules, make up your mind."

How about this: everyone is allowed to post what they like on social media short of harassment and hate speech.

If someone is rude or condescending to them, they should be allowed to say so without an angry mob getting them fired for precisely the same reason that first person is allowed to say something rude or condescending (even if there intent was not to be so and they are too tone deaf to see why they are being so).
Seb
Member
Mon Jul 16 15:27:26
Bottom line Nim, I think my position has the benefit of being logically consistent, where as yours is weird.

It either implies there is some omniscient universal position as to what is rude or not; or that one person is allowed to be rude and immune from criticism, whereas the other person is not.
hood
Member
Mon Jul 16 15:52:23
"Hah, too late."

Preemptively is "too late." This is Seb logic.


""2. Who rejected anything? I asked you to explain."
No, that would be "what is right of reply?"
What you said was:"

Tard, asking for an explanation of reasoning does not equate to dismissing the idea. One could agree with the idea yet still ask for a reason. In this case, it's called acquiring perspective.


"I.e. you are asking about *why* I should have such a right, not *what* such a right would entail."

So you understood the words I said, but then interpreted them to mean something completely different? You are admitting this?

To be clear: yes, I was undoubtedly asking you why you believe you have a right of reply (both in general and in the context of my original, casual reference to you in this thread); no, posing this question was not a rejection of the idea - that was your assumption.


"her stance isn't that nobody should talk to her without express permission, rather that his response was rude and unwarranted"

I'm not sure if you realize you're mansplaining for her or if it's just delicious hypocrisy.


"It is a strange world where Deroir is allowed to say what he likes without repercussion and JP is not."

Price was bound to an employee agreement. Deroir was not. I don't think anyone on the boards really thinks that Price should have been fired, but pretty much any objective person can recognize that Price both escalated and went fully aggressive. Pretty much any objective person also seems to agree that Deriors first post was not condescending or offensive in any way.
Seb
Member
Mon Jul 16 16:22:11
hood:

You don't get to go on and on about you "don't know words" and then make a car crash like that and brush it off.

"Tard, asking for an explanation of reasoning"

Either you know what it is, but questioning whether it applies, or you don't know what it is, in which case ask, rather than ask why I think it applied. Given you challenged whether it applies, it is reasonable to think you understood the concept.

"One could agree with the idea yet still ask for a reason"
So, if you agree with the idea, but are asking for a reason, that tends to indicate my response was the correct, because if you understand the concept then you don't need a reason. But in your post before this, you were asking me to explain the concept. So which is it?

You have very muddled thinking.

"So you understood the words I said,"
I understand the words you wrote, but they, as is often the case, convey a very different meaning than the meaning you intended. Even now, you've gone back and forth in the space of two consecutive posts.

Simple question then Hood: Do you understand what right of reply is, and if so, do you understand why I would have one if you reference me in a post? It's fairly self describing. I would have a right of reply because it is an understood tennet of good faith that when making a public criticism of someone they have the right to address that criticism.

If you are asking *why* that should be the case, then you are kind of rejecting the premise.

"I'm not sure if you realize you're mansplaining for her"

I don't think you know what mansplaining is. Mansplaining would be me explaining to *her* either a concept that she has just explained or would obviously know from the context of our conversation or knowledge about her expertise.

You are not her, so, you know, bad start there. Try again?

"Price was bound to an employee agreement"
Actually, it appears she wasn't explicitly bound by an employee agreement, but that's something to look into.

Secondly, I don't think the mob were upset because she broke an employment contract they had no site of, and I think it is disingenuous to claim so.

My question is why so many think she was morally wrong to respond as she did as she evidently felt offended, but Deroir was not morally wrong to respond as he did when he was offended, and why it was ok for the mob to be offended on Deroir's behalf to the extent they were.

"Price both escalated"
If that is an escalation, you are a snowflake extraordinaire.

"went fully aggressive"
I thought the deal was she played the victim? Clearly not as well as poor, disheartened Deroir.

"Pretty much any objective person"
No True Scotsman fallacy.

Lots of people think it was offensive and condescending, and those that don't tend to be the kind of people that don't see the hypocrisy in Deroir being "allowed" to be offended but JP not.







The Sentinel
Member
Mon Jul 16 16:28:19
Seb is right. Disagreeing and not being a professional dev is offensive and condescending.
hood
Member
Mon Jul 16 17:19:01
"I don't think you know what mansplaining is."

The act of a man interjecting for a woman and explaining what she meant to a 3rd party is apparently not covered in "mansplaining." While it seems like a needlessly limited definition to require the recipient be a woman, fair enough. I stand by the statement nonetheless, with whatever word appropriately covers the pure ego of you thinking you know better what Price meant than she did as a replacement for mansplaining.


@ the entire right of reply thing:

So you don't understand the concept of questioning your beliefs? You never seek to test the ideas you hold to see if they stand up to scrutiny? You don't see any value in acquiring a secondary opinion? While I'm not actually shocked you don't see value in it, I am quite shocked that you would actually say it.


"Even now, you've gone back and forth in the space of two consecutive posts."

This just isn't true. From the beginning, I was asking you for your opinion as to why you have a right of reply. In no way did I say you did not have that right or that I think you shouldn't, I simply asked why you believed that you did. There was no flip flopping, only an inability for you to comprehend and internalize my words.


"I don't think the mob were upset because she broke an employment contract they had no site of, and I think it is disingenuous to claim so."

Who the fuck ever claimed this? Price was an employee of Arenanet. She was bound by Arenanet company standards. She was subject to repercussions (being fired) because she was an employee. Deroir was not an employee. Therefore, he suffered no repercussions. You quite literally referenced her "getting sacked" the previous sentence. Now you're talking about mobs. You are unhinged.


"If that is an escalation, you are a snowflake extraordinaire."

What, her first (direct) snippy reply to Deroir? No, that wasn't escalation; she was just being a shitnugget. Escalation (removing formatting for brevity):

"Today in being a female game dev: How dare you suggest that professional expertise exists without proving nine ways to Sunday that amateurs don't know as much about an industry as people who work in that industry. Freals, gamers' disbelief in expertise continues to be -upsidedown smiley-"

"And also, "I totally insist that male devs prove everything they say as much as I say it to women." Science says that's not true, buddy-o."

"Sure, dude. Now get out of my fucking feed with your assumptions and your entitlement to my time"

"Today in being a female game dev: "Allow me--a person who does not work with you--explain to you how you do your job.""

"like, the next rando asshat who attempts to explain the concept of branching dialogue to me--as if, you know, having worked in game narrative for a fucking DECADE, I have never heard of it--is getting instablocked. PSA."

"Since we've got a lot of hurt manfeels today, lemme make something clear: this is my feed. I'm not on the clock here. I'm not your emotional courtesan just because I'm a dev. Don't expect me to pretend to like you here."

"The attempts of fans to exert ownership over our personal lives and times are something I am hardcore about stopping. You don't own me, and I don't owe you."


attempted to be in chronological order.
Forwyn
Member
Mon Jul 16 17:26:47
"I don't think you know what mansplaining is. Mansplaining would be me explaining to *her*"

i.e. mansplaining is an entirely sexist term that only applies when a man explains something to a female, whether he's trying to be condescending or not.

For males doing the same to females, and females doing the same to females, and anything in-between doing the same to anything in-between, we just use the say they were condescending.

But that's too easy, gotta resort to sexual tribalism.
Forwyn
Member
Mon Jul 16 17:27:05
males doing the same to males*
Aeros
Member
Mon Jul 16 17:30:47
Anyone who uses the term mansplaining as a term that has any validity is an idiot.
The Sentinal
Member
Mon Jul 16 17:51:23
Seb is right. By no means she was a snowflake who quickly responded as she felt she was insulted by a condescending rando who made a slight critique. He was because she pointed his sexist views.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 00:46:50
1.
If someone writes a memo for the company diversity effort criticizing it using research and then someone leaks it to start a twitter mob. Waaaaaa it’s so unfair to women, fuck the guy.

2.
If a person using the company name on twitter is rude to a company partner. Waaaaaa it’s so unfair to woman, fuck the guy.

Consistency.

Seb
Member
Tue Jul 17 03:29:19
Forwyn:

Cute. But no. That's like saying "anti Semitic" is a racist term.

Truth is I rarely see women doing this men or women, or men to men, however I *often* see men doing this to women, fairly egregiously.

Nim:
I actually said it was fine to fire her, but it does turn out they'd actually agreed in hiring her to let her speak out on industry issues inc feminist issues so might revise that slightly if confirmed.

I'm suggesting not that the company was wrong, but that the mobs reaction was extreme.

This does not compare to the Google memo which was unfortunate in that it was shared widely internally, and made it clear that he felt that statistically, his female colleagues were likely to be less capable than his male colleagues. Which is both wrong and far more worthy of condemnation than calling a guy a rando.

So yes, consistency. My position has it, yours doesn't. You think it's wrong to fire Google guy, right to fire JP. Twitter mob wrong for Damore, right for JP.
I think, subject to actually having written assurances re use of private Twitter account, right to fire both but much stronger employment law grounds (hostile working place) for Damore, and twitter mob getting offended by Damores abuse of science and conclusions is a more reasonable thing to square about than someone calling a games journo a rando.



Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 05:10:27
Fakeseb,

This is from the ending paragraph of my OP in the original thread where you first came into contact with the story.

**IMO, she should not have been fired, she should have been reprimanded, but then again, this developer a month ago was tweeting about how happy she was that John Peter Bain (AKA Totalbiscuit) a game commentator had died from cancer (not the feminism type, but actual real cancer), from what I understand because he was on the opposite side of the gamergate thing that took place a couple of years ago, AKA he spread misogyny. So while I have some understanding for ArenaNet, specially since they makes a big thing of engaging with the community, I would still err on the side of forgiveness in most of these cases.**

What does the first sentence read fakeseb?

I forgave this woman for celebrating the death of one of the game commentators I enjoyed. So you owe me an apology fakeseb.


Consistency in the brains ability to store information, mine has it, yours does not. This is actually very bad news for you since my brain also stores a lot of THC.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 05:13:33
"I actually said it was fine to fire her, but it does turn out they'd actually agreed in hiring her to let her speak out on industry issues inc feminist issues so might revise that slightly if confirmed."

Indeed, and one can only imagine what a delight this entitled cunt is to work with :)

Something tells me it likely was not over this recent twitter thing that Anet decided to fire her. The road Anet took was paved with good intentions, did not pan out.
delude
Member
Tue Jul 17 05:15:03
"I actually said it was fine to fire her, but it does turn out they'd actually agreed in hiring her to let her speak out on industry issues inc feminist issues so might revise that slightly if confirmed. "

Except for the fact they didn't say she can attack a member of the community or customers to which she did. But no big deal, you think that Deroir is the big bad evil man that posted an opinion that attacked her because she was a woman.

And spare me the long winded diatribe that you will/would respond with. I already know what you will say because you've said it already. And with that you will still remain a hypocrite.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 05:15:44
It was the straw that broke the camels back.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 05:26:33
(hostile game community)

Fixed.
delude
Member
Tue Jul 17 05:35:46
Nim, I shall see you on WVW....for the toast!
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 06:03:38
Something tells me you are on the US server :/

I am on Gandara (EU).
delude
Member
Tue Jul 17 06:20:54
No worries. Megaservers, I am sure we have ran into each other a few times unknowingly. But as WVW...yeah, I don't think we would ever run into each other.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 06:35:29
Ah right, megaservers, I have some faint memory of the game telling me I can switch to a more populated shard when I have idled in Lions Arch, but yea WvW is pretty much all I play.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 06:59:17
"Hi, everyone. I've got a thing to say and then I'm going back off Twitter for a bit because I've had a vacation planned for a while and I intend to take it to the fullest. You can respond if you want, but I've got any notifications from people I don't follow muted, and I'm not going to check responses. If you're a legit industry/press person and want to get in contact, we have mutual networks through which you can do that.

Here's the thing you should be noting if you're a game dev:

Much of the narrative around this has been around 1) that I was fired; and 2) whether there was warning/discussion. That's missing a big portion of this. So let's talk about not how I was fired, but how it was announced. The announcement was an escalation. The company could have chosen to say 'their remarks don't represent the company, we don't agree with what they said, and they're no longer with the company.'

That's not what they did. They framed an interaction on my personal social media in which I told a few individuals who (I thought) were being assholes that I wasn't on the clock and wasn't going to feign affection for people who are being assholes as 'attacks on the community.'

They knew—or at least had a responsibility to know, in 2018—what would happen to a female game dev who was fired in response to an exchange about sexism. It would have been bad enough if they had just fired me and announced I was fired. But they *escalated.* They pointed to Peter and me as Enemies Of The Community. That wasn't just firing us and, oh well, if they get harassed, them's the breaks. That was active solicitation of harassment. And their silence in condemning the harassment is profoundly telling.

There was a fair amount of criticism directed at major game companies in 2014-2015 for not standing up for their female/marginalized employees, but their failure their was passive. None of them *escalated* the harassment of developers in this way. They were aware that I was going to get deluged with threats, harassment, etc. The firing wasn't the punishment—the use of the mob was. And I'm not sure what they can possibly do to reassure their employees—let alone every other dev in the industry, whose backs they've painted targets on--that they won't use the mob to punish any employee who they feel has gotten too uppity.

Oh, one more thing. Mike O'Brien's most recent statement reduces my contribution to GW2 to one scene from one episode. Given how often women's work is erased or minimized, that's especially egregious. So, for the record: Everything in GW2 is made by a team. There's no content that's made by one person. But in terms of *influence*: the entire season is mine. I led the season story breaking meetings, I led the episode outlining meetings, and every line of dialogue went through me. Everything you've seen of the story so far this season is my work, and you're going to be seeing my work in it for a long time.

A bunch of the content you'll be seeing is also work led by women: female team and game design leads, female writing leads, female cinematics leads. It's the best content GW2 has produced. Women in this industry lead, and aren't going anywhere. (I'm not going to name them because I don't want to direct the mob at them.)

Anyway, if you're a dev in this industry, take a very careful look at what ArenaNet has done, and get a guarantee from your management that they're not going to do it to you."
------------

TL:DR
She thinks Anet could have handled this better [like Anet and everyone with a brain thinks she should have handled twitter better]. She tacitly admits she was wrong about thinking he was trying to be an asshole [It is as if discussing in text lends itself to misunderstanding people, I could have warned them]. Also in ending she was very very important for the game and everything will have her stamp on it for some time to come, bla bla bla waaa waaa women misogyny and etc.

The end
Delude
Member
Tue Jul 17 07:12:19
Yeah I read that the moment she posted it.

The notice she puts highlights either her ignorance or ignoring years of others who have been let go due to their conduct via social media.

Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 07:18:48
Anyway, I think we all predicted fakeseb and where he would land on this.

I claim that my model of fakeseb is better than his model of me. In other words I can summarize his views better than he can summarize mine. Something I challenged him to do several times, he never took the offer. When asked for links to threads he claims contain some damning post one has written, he can't be bothered to provide them, even though it literally takes 15 seconds to google oh I don't know say "hetrodox" site:www.utopiaforums.com. Why? Because fakeseb is an idiot who can't use google or remember things as far back as 5 posts. That Phd is an ever shrinking fig leaf trying to conceal the shame that is your intellect.
Delude
Member
Tue Jul 17 07:27:20
Dishonest Seb?
hood
Member
Tue Jul 17 07:28:37
Google is difficult. I say that non-sarcastically as an extremely impaired searcher. IDK what it is but I (and I'm sure others) just can't Google to save my life.


"I claim that my model of fakeseb is better than his model of me. In other words I can summarize his views better than he can summarize mine."

Seb can't even, and indeed finds it strange anyone would want him to, explain the reasoning for his own views. Why would you expect him to understand anyone else's view?
Seb
Member
Tue Jul 17 07:39:06
Nim:

Given the number of times you've mischaracterized my position to be diametrically opposite to what it is, you are building a very narrow case.

You are right in that I elided - my understanding was that like me, you think ArenaNet were entitled to fire her but should have not done so. Is that a fair statement? This contrasts with Damore where you think Google were wrong to fire full stop as I understood it.



Seb
Member
Tue Jul 17 07:40:22
Oh and 're apology you can go fuck yourself as you've never apologised to me in the same circumstances which is literally every thread.
Seb
Member
Tue Jul 17 07:43:37
Nim:

" what a delight this entitled cunt"

Hi, I'm Nim and I'm not at all prejudiced. I just think women speaking out about experience of discrimination and harassment are entitled cunts, see no evidence of discrimination (all accounts are just entitled cunts) but defend men who assert their female colleagues are pity hires and likely to be inferior and think they should be allowed to create a hostile workplace on the corporate intranet.
Seb
Member
Tue Jul 17 07:51:45
"Except for the fact they didn't say she can attack a member of the community"

Delude, if that's an attack you are a snowflake.

He was the one that critiqued her not the other way around.

Nim:
Where does she admit tacitly she handled the tweet wrong?

I provided links to your idiot misquote multiple times and you never responded.

Jergul can attest to that.

Hood:

I explain my reasoning all the time. You are the one that throws a wobbly when your faulty reasoning is questioned - claiming that any line of argument that shows your reasoning is inconsistent amounts to misrepresentation.

Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 07:51:56
Remember that girl who made a joke about AIDS and being white, boarded the plane to Africa and was fired before she had landed? She was even the PR person of that company.

I don't think JP should have been fired, but I have a degree of understanding for firing people who mistreat customers and partners, than I do not have for firing someone like Damore. JP could have handled this in several ways, where by we would never have heard about this. It is difficult for me to imagine how Damore or anyone could have pointed to the psychological research on sex differences without the shitstorm that followed. JP was fired for how she said what she said, Damore was fired not because of the wording of his memo "possible non bias, but for what the studies he cited implied. The question was not so much, is he right as in, should people be allowed to hold and express the different view points and hypothesis that are the subject of much discussion within science? According to fakeseb, no.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 07:54:03
"Hi, I'm Nim and I'm not at all prejudiced."

How am I prejudice when all the chips have fallen? Prejudice would have been if I had called her an entitled cunt before this all had happened. So you do not even understand PRE-judice? Idiot much?
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 07:57:35
fakeseb
"Where does she admit tacitly she handled the tweet wrong?"

"They framed an interaction on my personal social media in which I told a few individuals who (I thought) were being assholes"

I thought, implies she "does no longer think".
Delude
Member
Tue Jul 17 08:05:20
"Delude, if that's an attack you are a snowflake."

Interesting that you keep repeating that. Would you not say that she herself is a snowflake, or that you are a snowflake if you think that deroir submitted a opinion was an attack on her. And then she going as far as to equating it to being her "off time" and touting it was being a gender issue?

Snowflake indeed.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 08:19:42
"Jergul can attest to that."

Take his word when I won't take yours? The only other person, I would dismiss more readily than you. I mean ffs man, Jergul only has an MSc.
hood
Member
Tue Jul 17 08:23:55
Citing Jergul is like citing Putin on Russian hacking.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jul 17 08:25:14
I can forgive JP, as I have done already, for getting angry in the heat of the moment. We all have customers who are fucking retards, not that the guy was, but you know we have standards of behavior. We can be polite even when people are retards. She understand now that he was not being an asshole.

Less forgivable is the keyboard white knight blinded by his prejudice, that goes in head first and balls deep, incorrigible, screeching MUH WOMEN!
jergul
large member
Wed Jul 18 10:47:04
Seb
Far be it for me to insert labour law, but...

From my perspective, an employer is free to fire anyone at any time. This is an inviolate right.

However, if the dismissal is in breach of contract or labour laws, then compensation is due.

In this case. Of course the woman could be fired. If in violation, then she should be compensated.

Her job now is to not become unemployable by virtue of making too much social noise.

Same thing is true of the google miscreant.
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share