Alison Rapp Fired By Nintendo Discussion Thread -- Read Ground Rules in OP
- Thread starter charlequin
- Start date
- Status
I have a question and this is for my own curiosity. But I keep reading people saying Free speech this and slippery slope that. Are you using the literal first amendment or the personalized idealized version of the first amendment?
Because obviously absolute free-speech doesn't exist.
Obviously Nintendo thought she deserved a job at Nintendo. So get the fuck out with your "what about the children" bullshit. Do you even understand what a thesis is?
High moral ground indeed, you are celebrating someone who is being harassed losing their job.
When does your "karma" come?
She did nothing as her job was Marketing not localization or translations. She is simply a well known Feminist who has spoken openly about the abuse other women and herself have endured online which led to even more abuse thrown at her.
Hell when they first started attacking her I defended her and within hours people were trying to hack my personal accounts and change passwords etc. Twitter was a shit show for 3+ days til I locked out everyone not already approved. I got it easy because I was just a "white knight"
element
Member
She did nothing. AFAIK she didn't work on anything development related outside of promotion of it. Could be mistaken, but that is what my impression has been. GG pretty much pulled her name out of the hat because she worked in Treehouse and vocal feminist on social media.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
How do you propose this to be done? Employing detectives who background check their users? How about people who have comitted crimes or jounalists they don't like? Or people who have unwelcomed political views?
On the topic: I'm sad she was let go and that this whole controversy led to "hobby detectives" digging into her and surfacing the misdemeanor that led to her job-loss. In principle, Nintendo is in their right to fire people who have a second job behind their back, especially if it is one they do not condone. I know that the same thing (independent of if the job is condoned by my employer) would lead to my dismissal, too. It's particularly sad because she really seemed to enjoy her work at Nintendo. I hope she will find a different workplace she equally likes and does not fail to register her second job there properly.
RomanticHeroX
Member
Because she was specifically targeted for her position in the company, as a scapegoat to take the blame for the perceived censorship of Nintendo games. And rather than refuting their attacks or doing anything to defend their own, Nintendo let her deal with it alone. She was attacked because people were mad about anime titties, and being a woman working at Treehouse surely it must be her fault.
Whimsical Phil
Ninja School will help you
Dude, the first amendment is, like, an entire sentence long. You can't expect people to spend their time wading through all that legal mumbo-jumbo.
SneakersSO
Member
They industry has decried harassment, which extends beyond the scope of GG, surely you can agree with that. Its not like all online harassers are solely the GG type - there are more perpetrators of disgusting online behavior out there than just GG. They've decried these terrible interactions & behaviors. But guess what - theres nothing a corporation can do to actually stop them.
"Hey, you GG assholes, we hate you guys, we don't want your support!"
How exactly would that statement stop GG from throwing money at them? Nintendo now has to target individual members to ensure they aren't receiving money from them? And it won't stop there, cause if we've learned anything since the gaming landscape became politicized, these efforts have only progressively gotten more sophisticated and worse. By decrying the harassment, and limiting their engagement with them, Nintendo wants the controversial eye to look away from them. You think Nintendo wants to willfully antagonize a group that can make the lives of their individual employees a nightmare? Thats a legal liability.
The most Nintendo can do in a case like this is ask the employee to open up a police report against individuals who are looking to do harm to their employees, and hand over any findings they have to the police. If anything, this situation goes to highlight just how powerless corporations are in being able to defend their public facing employees from the scrutiny of The Internet. Its not like Allison Rapp is the first either. Jade Raymond got some of the most disgusting & vile attacks i've ever seen a person endure on the internet, and Ubisoft, much to their credit, decided to make her a behind-the-scenes asset in order to mitigate this sort of treatment going forward. Notice Nintendo attempted to do something similar with Allison in this instance, before her moonlighting activities were brought to light to her employer.
What does this lazy metaphor even mean in this context? Is this another way of saying that women getting harassed should shut up and take it and not speak out about it? Cuz that's certainly what it reads like
Blizzard did this about 2 years ago. Sad that things haven't change since
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znzH9u3DK2o
A Link to the Past
Banned
If a person openly identifies as a GamerGate user, that would probably be adequate to me.
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
This is quite an unreasonable thing to do, considering everything related to it: manpower, possible breach of privacy, etc etc etc.
Like it or not, arseholes do get to enjoy certain rights that we shouldn't cross, if only simply because we should be a better person than them.
hey_monkey
Banned
UNFORTUNATE.
You know, I don't usually scope folks' post history, but sometimes it's the only way to know when a particular line of discussion just ain't worth your fucking time.
Does karma work through harassment campaigns now? For a moral concept casting judgement upon people it sure uses some shitty agents to enable it's schemes. No need to sanction such disgusting activity by claiming it as the moral high ground working in the background, when it's pretty obvious which human forces are in play, between Alison, the harassment campaign and Nintendo.
manfestival
Member
Geez another far reaching statement in a sea of them.
OK, great job at attempting to take the high ground here.
A Link to the Past
Banned
It's not simply about sticking it to them. It's also about cultivating a safe space for players who may be subject to threats or harassment. Because at this stage, there are no "innocent GamerGaters" - anyone who was ignorant of the organization is long gone.
That won't happen. And is not like it can be enforced by law.
We have Gamergaters, homophobes, racists in this forum. And outside the account suicides in a few threads, is not as if they parade it around.
Videogames.
OT: Props to Rapp for spilling the beans on Twitter.
Very disappointed that Nintendo gave her the shaft like this, but I wish I could say I was surprised.
If moonlighting is accepted as policy, and Nintendo's statement says they laid her off because she was moonlighting, can't she sue or something?
Although good luck winning that, I guess.
Darth Ghandi
Banned
Very disappointed by Nintendo.
Crap move.
Crap move.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
So what do you mean is adequate? Playing detective to find out if a Nintendo Network / XBL / PSN user openly identified on some other platformer as a GamerGate user (what is a GamerGate user? As far as I know you can be part of the movement, but how do you use GamerGate?)? Or do you just mean "banning people who put "I'm a GamerGater" in their NN/XBL/PSN account?
A Link to the Past
Banned
That won't happen. And is not like it can be enforced by law.
We have Gamergaters, homophobes, racists in this forum. And outside the account suicides in a few threads, is not as if they parade it around.
The thing is, NeoGAF COULD ban people for being a GamerGater, if those people were open about it, if the site so chose. So these companies could surely make a decision that this group isn't tolerated on their services.
I just mean people who identify as such on their respective accounts.
fvng
Member
lol. love the reference. post of the thread. Honestly I feel bad for Allison to some extent, but if she broke them rules, she broke 'em. Does ubering count as Moonlighting
I'd prefer to keep the discussion on the silence on harassment in the industry, but to clarify on that point: Even before Gamergate became a thing, there was a very toxic group of individuals withing gaming that people should have spoke up about but didn't because that's just the status quo. Nintendo may not have intended to contribute to this stagnant situation when they fired Alison, but they also didn't intend "to make any form of social commentary" with Tomodachi Life denying same-sex marriages which, apology issued or not, their actions speak much larger than whatever their PR puts out, to say nothing of the problems surrounding Fire Emblem Fates' handling of its gay characters and same-sex relationships
also Radiant Dawn with Heather, what a strawwoman
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
Yes, cultivating a safe place for anyone to flourish and enjoy is important. But regardless, I don't think what you're proposing is reasonable.
The best thing to hope for is for the companies to actually make a direct statement denouncing GamerGate and all its ilk. For them to actively scour the Internet to spot and detect whether a particular person is a GamerGate supporter or not and then to ban them based on that sleuthing is just unreasonable.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
Twitter could definantely ban people
SneakersSO
Member
Oh GOD!
1. This is an IMPOSSIBILITY. Not only would this run into legal ramifications (a discrimination suit by individual people would be filed so goddamn fast), but there would be no actual way to stop people from accessing their networks. There are TONS of workarounds, and if anything, this would embolden those GG members to make the services of those networks an absolute nightmare. It would encourage hacking & DDOSing the likes of which we've never seen.
2. How exactly does a company decrying a group of people prevent said group of people from enjoying their product? If you haven't noticed, these are group of people who are driven by tons of motivation, including spite. Tons of companies have come out against GG, including Blizzard. You think GGers stopped playing Blizzard games? Valve? EA? Don't be so naive.
3. First off, individuals are targeted regardless of their employer's stance on GG, which is meaningless because there has yet to be any major gaming company that has come out in support of GG, nor will there ever be. Most of the people who are ideological opponents to GG, and are prominent members of a major gaming company, have all come under scrutiny by the group. It hasn't stopped GG from going after individuals, ever. At this point, GG is looking for people who are ideologically opposite of them to slip up in a major way so they can run off and tell their employers about it.
No company has given in to GG's campaign of harassment. They've reacted to things GG presented them about individuals or certain parent companies, but that is GG using the same weaponized social media outrage machine they have seen work in various other instances & contexts, including in the gaming industry, to their advantage. Do you think Nintendo should've simply ignored the things they were being presented with, including her moonlighting position they deemed inappropriate? Simply because it was GG that brought it to their attention?
fvng
Member
wait what? you want thought police? are you being sarcastic
Twitter definitely should ban people. Twitter's policies are crap.
King of Custard
Member
I've never posted in one of these threads before and I am open to discussion about it but she has provided reasons for her dismissal as well as not being able to defend against Nintendo's main reason for firing her.
Tattoos and piercings: Not allowed in quite a few jobs so I can understand why she's been warned about them
Political issues: Again something you have to be careful of discussing especially in her line of work. Your obviously allowed an opinion but discussing them on an open twitter account can put you in jeopardy.
Conflict of interest: She hasn't provided a defense for this, Nintendo won't as they have to respect her privacy and while she by no means has to state what her other job is. Without knowing what her job was it turns into a they said, she said fight which you can't argue either way.
With the information we've been given by both parties I can't find any wrongdoing on Nintendo's part. She does seem like a nice person and hopefully she can find a position that plays more to her strengths rather than one which will get her in trouble.
Tattoos and piercings: Not allowed in quite a few jobs so I can understand why she's been warned about them
Political issues: Again something you have to be careful of discussing especially in her line of work. Your obviously allowed an opinion but discussing them on an open twitter account can put you in jeopardy.
Conflict of interest: She hasn't provided a defense for this, Nintendo won't as they have to respect her privacy and while she by no means has to state what her other job is. Without knowing what her job was it turns into a they said, she said fight which you can't argue either way.
With the information we've been given by both parties I can't find any wrongdoing on Nintendo's part. She does seem like a nice person and hopefully she can find a position that plays more to her strengths rather than one which will get her in trouble.
Jelly Rajah
Banned
What's there to see here? She had a second job under a fake name and that directly violated the rules of her position at Nintendo.
Not wanting a website like Twitter to give a platform to people that actively support a harassment group is not the same thing as policing thoughts.
SneakersSO
Member
Yeah, that would never go well. Discrimination lawsuits and all that. The most Twitter can do is make a strict ToS regarding harassment & particularly policies, and strictly enforce it whenever its broken, which is their current solution.
Rats Off To Ya
Banned
His language was vague enough that Gators literally heard it as a statement of support. I'm not making that up.
People in power need to take these people to task in no uncertain terms, and make it clear that they will not be bowing to any pressure. But nobody in that high of a position has the balls to alienate a not-insignificant portion of their audience. And some (like Nintendo) take steps to implicitly embolden their cause.
EA is the only company I've seen take a fairly firm stance on this topic, beyond the empty "we don't condone harassment" platitudes.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
They could do this, but it would be rather useless. On NeoGAF, correct me if I am wrong, people who are identifying as gamergaters or who are foun out as such have consistently been banned, but the obvious solution is not to call yourself a gamergater then. I have never seen anyone writing he's a gamergater on NN/XBL/PSN. This rule would be rather worthless and I would certainly prefer exclusion from the networks not for affiliation, but for actions on the network.
This whole "ban GamerGaters" angle is bonkers. Talk about the easiest thing to duck. But why the heck is it a good idea to judge people based on identity rather than their actions? We cannot inspect a person's soul and see that they Are In Their Heart, GamerGater. But we'll catch them if they do shit things. You're on some precrime shit.
A Link to the Past
Banned
I will only say that I legitimately cannot stand every time I see someone act like GamerGate is cleverly turning the tables on the "outrage machine". The progenitors of GamerGate have been using it for its intended purpose all along. They didn't try to flip the table and show SJWs who is boss, GG is constantly outraged about everything. Treating outrage like it's a product of the political left and nothing else is entirely inaccurate.
Wow, so you come into this thread to exclaim how horrible a person Rapp is, and then you come in to say that it's not acceptable to ban people from Twitter for being in GamerGate.
Wow, so you come into this thread to exclaim how horrible a person Rapp is, and then you come in to say that it's not acceptable to ban people from Twitter for being in GamerGate.
You can ban people from your service for harassing people without fear of lawsuits. I think better anti harassment tools and policies are the bare minimum Twitter could do.
SneakersSO
Member
Except this line of reasoning can then be applied to a multitude of 'harmful' groups & ideas. Everything from republicans to people who celebrate particular cultures could be affected by this. Not to mention, you'd have to deal with discrimination lawsuits, which they'd probably lose.
Theres a reason Twitter has yet to ever blanket ban a group of people who identify with any one particular group or political ideology.
Yep. It's annoying they haven't even done the bare minimum.
SneakersSO
Member
You're absolutely right. Thats what they should do & continue to pursue. But there's a difference between banning a group of people who identify with some political label & banning people who break your ToS when the occasion occurs.
I think banning actual harassers is what people are actually asking for.
A Link to the Past
Banned
GamerGate members have a very, very sordid history of using Twitter to communicate death threats, doxxing, and hate speech. Twitter has a very sordid history of ignoring this. So no, they are not going to lose a discrimination lawsuit, no more than Reddit would if they got sued by coontown members.
At this stage, subscribing to GamerGate ideology is implicit support of the pretty horrid shit that happens in it. If you want to be a member of a hate group, fine - but don't get upset when people group you together with the worst of the group. Ignorance is not an excuse anymore, not when the realities of GamerGate are damned rampant.
SneakersSO
Member
Precrime is exactly where this conversation is going, unfortunately. Catching people when they do shitty things is the only reasonable way we have to reacting to situations like these. Ensuring the proper parties are punished for harassing Allison Rapp is what we & the Twitter customer service reps should be focused on.
Fahzgoolin
Banned
I don't mean this as a drive by comment, but it really does seem to be the cool thing to hate on Ninty. Mix even a hint of GamerGate nonsense and you have yourself a NeoGaf lake of fire.
I see a lot of people hungry for some sort of justice regarding GG and this topic is a convenient excuse to tackle that issue.
Spacejaws
Member
To all those talking about freedom of speech, when I signed up to a large corporate entity, some of my contract stipulates what I can share on social media and what can be grounds for dismissial. Nintendo being as big as it is are not going to be any different. Once the corporate guys were are made aware of the tweets then yea they would probably have to act.
Its not even just about the company though, my contract stipulates I'm not allowed to share religious, policital or corporate views that do not agree with the company which effectively means do bot share any of these opinions.
So much for freedom of speech. There you go Inwould get fired just for saying that here.
Its not even just about the company though, my contract stipulates I'm not allowed to share religious, policital or corporate views that do not agree with the company which effectively means do bot share any of these opinions.
So much for freedom of speech. There you go Inwould get fired just for saying that here.
Dicktatorship
Junior Member
She sure is airing a lot of dirty laundry since the termination. That could be really bad for her; if she's got a strict NDA then it could be lawsuit. Also, large companies really tend to avoid people and situations like this so she may end up limited to career options in the indie scene for the next couple of years.
- Status