A Link to the Past
Banned
Good enough for what? People like whatever cock decided to play detective go well beyond what any person should reasonably worry wrt private information. Rapp likely did all that is reasonable.
Alison Rapp Fired By Nintendo Discussion Thread -- Read Ground Rules in OP
- Thread starter charlequin
- Start date
- Status
Good enough for what? People like whatever cock decided to play detective go well beyond what any person should reasonably worry wrt private information. Rapp likely did all that is reasonable.
DataStream
Member
Regardless of circumstance, Nintendo publishing a game like Bayonetta 2 and also allowing a sex-positive, outspoken feminist employee to fall victim to harassment due to her provocative nature speaks pretty negatively to their "corporate culture".
Working in tech and seeing how hard it is for women in general makes the GG situation feel even worse. My female peers are often underestimated in their abilities and have to work so much harder in order to gain respect outside of the immediate team. Women have it plenty hard already...
Working in tech and seeing how hard it is for women in general makes the GG situation feel even worse. My female peers are often underestimated in their abilities and have to work so much harder in order to gain respect outside of the immediate team. Women have it plenty hard already...
What!
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
I think, without knowing the job and the corresponding circumstances she was fired over and without her denying that this was the reason she was let go, this is very crass and would be unfair towards the many people at Nintendo who do good work. If we find out later down the road that the horrid horrid job she made was actually an obvious strawman (let's say the "accusation" she had some underwear shootings are true and moonlighting does not require registration within Nintendo) then I could somehow understand this, but as it stands, I don't see how such an action could be justified. It certainly is a shit situation we are talking about here and from what I know was brought up against her from Gamergate (her thesis basically) I think firing her wouldn't be justified at all.
Sammy Samusu
Member
I probably don't know the whole story but I think Nintendo is right, they have their own values and image.
Like the tattoo tweet, girl... I have worked at a luxury hotel and I was forced to shave my face everyday, that's their rules, if you are not happy with the way they run their business, go look for another job.
Like the tattoo tweet, girl... I have worked at a luxury hotel and I was forced to shave my face everyday, that's their rules, if you are not happy with the way they run their business, go look for another job.
That's pretty much the big mystery here.
Alison Rapp also didn't reveal it yet. So there is a possibility, that Nintendo really doesn't want to be connected with it and Rapp keeps it a secret to protect herself.
First Nintendo isn't a executive power, so this rule doesn't imply here, second we don't know the source and third i can't believe, somebody did something illegal (like hacking her or breaking into her home).
Captain_Spanky
Member
There's an argument that policies such as this are exclusionary as they make it harder for people with financial, health and other difficulties to remain in work. We cannot on one hand, as a society, say "everyone must work" and then "but only if they look like a middle class, white father from a 1950s sitcom". It's outdated. Tattoos, piercings and facial hair are common these days and the fact that they are an issue to do is more to do with stereotypical depictions of lower class and unintelligent people.
Spring-Loaded
Member
Heavy's Sandvich
Member
I'm really confused.
Sorry for being dumb.
Are there any limits in moonlighting? As long as its legal, its ok?
TheSlySoul
Member
Yeah, wasn't it hacking into personal information?
I think you should throw out any evidence in that case.
Edit: At least one person did hack and spread her personal info.
dragonbane
Member
This goes too far, but otherwise I agree.
Without knowing the ins and outs it's hard to judge, but yeah they should have considered it
But even if they decided that Rapp was not a good representative for the brand, they could have avoided the direct cause and effect situation they created now. GG slings mud and feces and Nintendo fires her. It wouldn't have killed Nintendo to keep her for a few months and let her go then. Plus if you you believe what's cited in this thread as reasons for GG to harass her, it was her job she took the flak for, not her private life.
They way they handled it, it's a straight win for GG and will lead to a lot more harassment in the future and has a chilling effect on every woman in the industry.
If it's a visible choice of a person, companies should allow to not hire or fire you for the reason. Especially if you sign a contact.
Also she had an second job in secret, there is no say, Nintendo wouldn't allow one, if she had asked her boss for permission.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
I think this conclusion is false. If anything, the fact that it is not known to the public now, even though she is under great scrutiny, shows that she most likely did take good measures to keep it a secret. However, since most jobs include colleagues or customers, one can never be 100% certain it doesn't get found out.
From what I've gathered from this story so far, I believe the biggest problem is that in Nintendo's decision to fire this person, for whatever reason, they have effectively shown that GG's means of harassment can work.
The real reasons she was let go, even if they are completely separate, are irrelevant. The people behind this shitty little "movement" now believe they won, and the next time someone in a position of power gets caught up in their bullshit, or the next person with an opinion they don't like and something to lose? They wont think twice about doing the same thing. Not that they wouldn't have tried anyway, but this?
This gives confidence in their actions. That leads to people becoming bold. Boldness is the last thing I would like to see these people have.
The real reasons she was let go, even if they are completely separate, are irrelevant. The people behind this shitty little "movement" now believe they won, and the next time someone in a position of power gets caught up in their bullshit, or the next person with an opinion they don't like and something to lose? They wont think twice about doing the same thing. Not that they wouldn't have tried anyway, but this?
This gives confidence in their actions. That leads to people becoming bold. Boldness is the last thing I would like to see these people have.
Nintendo will have policies stating that if their employees do anything outside of work that can bring their company in to disrepute, then they can be disciplined for it, and it would likely be much worse for someone who acts as a public face (prior to a "lateral" move)
While I don't necessarily agree with the firing based on the story about how it went down and her outspokenness about controversial issues on twitter and the fact she maintained a second job that apparently conflicts with Nintendo's stated corporate values.
I would have to say I completely understand why she was fired. That would have happened pretty much anywhere. Nintendo even attempted to move her to a place in the company where her outspoken behavior would be a conflict of interest and it didn't seem to fix the issue.
It's sad to say but this would have probably happened in any company.
I would have to say I completely understand why she was fired. That would have happened pretty much anywhere. Nintendo even attempted to move her to a place in the company where her outspoken behavior would be a conflict of interest and it didn't seem to fix the issue.
It's sad to say but this would have probably happened in any company.
Can't believe how Nintendo and GG fucked over this woman, and now we're diving into her past and litigating the merits of her second employment.
You're crazy if you think this is standard or would happen to a dude. This industry is so toxic for women and the male privilege is palpable.
You're crazy if you think this is standard or would happen to a dude. This industry is so toxic for women and the male privilege is palpable.
Nikodemos
Member
It's a bit of a grey area, but obsessive-compulsive trawling of the internet for minuscule bits that can be forensically pieced together is not technically illegal, regardless of how disturbingly photos-on-the-wall-stalkerish it may appear. And therein lies the problem, and that's why the Union's imposure of The Right To Be Forgotten upon search engines is such an important step towards implementing net privacy.
Well, it sure as shit didn't fix the isue of her continuing to be bombarded by smears and harassment.
Bioshocker
Member
Gosh. Telling a long story on Twitter... Why not get a blog. Hope she's OK, though.
A lot of PR people I work with maintain very strict separation between work related posts and anything personal. They maintain separate accounts.
TheSlySoul
Member
Good point, I guess it isn't technically illegal but a bit morally wrong.
It sounds like the whole second job did come up because of the hate group. It looks bad because of it.
As Charlequin and others have pointed out, the usual good company behavior when one of their employees are facing harassment from its consumers, they get out in front of the controversy from the start and try to do damage control in order to preserve the well-being of their employees. This is what a healthy, good company culture would do.
What Nintendo (of America) has done with its silence and later throwing Rapp under the bus is not a sign of good management that looks out for the well-being of its workers. Instead, it tells us that Nintendo prioritizes the irrational hate caused by wishes for anime boobs/ass/panties over the protection of their employees.
Fact of the matter:
1. While their employee was being irrationally harassed and suffering from false accussations and a witch hunt, Nintendo was silent
2. While their employee was still being harassed and undergoing a witch hunt, they decided to fire her without much comment until media reached out.
Nintendo just isn't acting well in this bullshit
crazepharmacist
Member
So she had a second conflicting job that she intentionally tried to hide from Nintendo because she knew it was against the rules and then Nintendo found out and fired her? Now she's publicly shaming her company and complaining about their decision? Not only has she lost a job but she may have irreparably damaged her potential to land another job in the gaming industry.
Yup. It's gross.
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
Would she have been fired if she wasn't a public face?
I'm curious because companies see a vast difference between who represents them and the side of the corporation that people don't see.
I'm still befuddled by all of this. Moonlighting seems fine for Joanna Schmo who doesn't highlight their career at Nintendo and risky for a public face known to be associated with them.
I'm curious because companies see a vast difference between who represents them and the side of the corporation that people don't see.
I'm still befuddled by all of this. Moonlighting seems fine for Joanna Schmo who doesn't highlight their career at Nintendo and risky for a public face known to be associated with them.
Where are you getting this from?
This is disgusting.
Why are we examining her past unlike any other industry figure? This is brutal.
Sammy Samusu
Member
It's definitely exclusionary but there are also hotels that want pierced and tattooed, cool looking people, working for them.
It's a lot easier (and pleasant) for you to find a company with the same values as yours, than trying to change the policies of a corporation you randomly landed on.
gingerbeardman
Member
If I posted my wishlist that would be gross misconduct and I'd be fired from my employer. I work for the largest hardware/software/services company.
Same company has inclusionary policy and will employee any types of looks as long as the skills and ability are there.
Sounds like there were enough warning signs that this might happen, and she carried on pushing.
Shame but not exactly surprising.
This probably isn't the best way to react to it by Nintendo or Repp.
My 2c
Same company has inclusionary policy and will employee any types of looks as long as the skills and ability are there.
Sounds like there were enough warning signs that this might happen, and she carried on pushing.
Shame but not exactly surprising.
This probably isn't the best way to react to it by Nintendo or Repp.
My 2c
QuantumZebra
Member
Well she had a lot of factors going against her:
1. She was a woman
2. She was the target of GamerGate, and for Nintendo to protect her they would have had to stand up for their employee to a hate mob (which we now know they won't).
3. She was "edgy" in her views/beliefs/off the job activities (this was what gave them the loophole to fire her it looks like).
This entire thing is just a fucking disappointment.
Nintendo has pulled a lot of dumb things in the past but in my heart I always defended them because I viewed them as "one of the good ones" .... not anymore.
I'm going to assume your post here is serious and thoughtful and not tied to ethics, but this is wrong at best and a flat-out lie at worst.
No "information" came from the "public"
A hate group dredged up things from her past, twisted them terribly, and then paraded the corpse around in front of Nintendo's noses. Nintendo in turn dug around and deemed her to not be a "fit" for their corporate culture (the moonlighting thing is a clear excuse on their part... as they DO allow moonlighting, but hers was controversial enough for them to give her the axe).
Disaster Nebraska
Banned
It is standard corporate procedure to watch out for employees trying to leverage their position in order to gain money or popularity outside of the company. It's a prett common problem. Either the employee steals employees and starts a new company ("these were just friends that I made"), violating s non-compete. Or, they use the company's famous name to earn themselves and their beliefs attention, which they might not otherwise have been able to do. According to Alison's own timeline and accounting of the events, she was outspoken about certain hot-button items and Nintendo was gradually moving her out of the spotlight because of that.
I hate to be the old man on the porch, but people getting mad at Nintendo for this need to take a breath and understand how actual corporations work. This isn't Nintendo doing something out of the ordinary at all. If anything, Alison is deliberately trying to rile people up and paint herself as a martyr because she violated a pretty basic corporate policy.
I hate to be the old man on the porch, but people getting mad at Nintendo for this need to take a breath and understand how actual corporations work. This isn't Nintendo doing something out of the ordinary at all. If anything, Alison is deliberately trying to rile people up and paint herself as a martyr because she violated a pretty basic corporate policy.
Companies ignore policy violations all the damn time. Only when it's convenient to them they will use such a thing to fire their employees when they no longer need them/are too much of a hot potato.
Oh yes, having a second job under a pseudonym under no identifiers is totally "leveraging her position to gain money and popularity"
The problem is her job. How can you protect or shield an employee from such attacks, if the persons job is to protect and shield the company. It's like hiring a bodyguard for your bodyguard.
Can we at least stop with the "She's trying to be a martyr!!" stuff?
She's had a thought enough few months without this extra shit, and it doesn't help anyone.
I agree
I agree
I strongly disagree she didn't even want to talk about it in the first place and was initially saying she wishes all of her coworkers the best it's only because it blew up on places like here that she was forced to give her side of the story at all
crazepharmacist
Member
In her case she was a public figure representing the company. They likely could care less if a developer for example has a second conflicting hob.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
Regarding (1) I agree, but regarding (2): What would you expect Nintendo to do? Publicly announcing her dismissal and going into great details regarding the reason? I would not want an emplyer to do that.
Based on what she is saying it seems like it was an odd decision from Nintendo to ever hire her, then when GG happened they read her twitter, saw a bunch of stuff they didn't like and let her go. Sucks for her, but seems like it was a culture clash from the start even before the GG garbage happened. Posting your wishlist as a spokesperson of a company is crazy. That would be reason enough to let her go IMHO, profiteering off your position is a huge don't ever do this.
Disaster Nebraska
Banned
Can we not resort to cries of "leave Brittany alone?"
It sucks to be fired. Apparently this particular person is thread-worthy because of their beliefs. Am I not allowed to comment? If the only acceptable answer here is to hate Nintendo, then enjoy your mob. Pitchforks are next to the torches in the foyer.
partyphone
Banned
this is exactly why i'm mad at nintendo, though. of course this is the correct business decision. but it's still fucking disgusting.
You can comment, but don't place extra blame on her that is unwarranted.
You can be apathetic sure, but that's what keeps this stuff happening. The industry players are so silent on GG.
Spring-Loaded
Member
Getting what? Are you quoting the wrong person?
The end result would have probably be the same, with more information about her being revealed.
The press reaction to Nintendo is weird, I get that they don't want GG to have a win but if the press release is true, then be mad at Nintendo for the policy.
That information was acquired through illegal means. Or are you just invalidating a mob?
UncleSporky
Member
Maybe I don't fully understand what this wishlist posting thing is about. Why would someone be fired for posting one?
The information in this post was acquired through assumptions.
edit- I might be misinterpreting your comment, but basically there is no evidence that the information relating to the second job was found via illegal means.
Disaster Nebraska
Banned
She wasn't forced to do anything. She could've remained silent and let it blow over. Instead, she painted the situation from her side of the story -- knowing full well that a Corp like Nintendo would be unable to disclose their own side of the story -- and made herself out to be the victim. This threw fuel on a fire that never needed to burn.
You're a dupe if you think someone saying "wish my coworkers the best!" somehow justifies their intentions later. Making yourself out to be the well-meaning-but-cruelly-misunderstood ex-employee is a classic move.
Coolio McAwesome
Member
This topic is embarrassing. Once again, we have a case of so-called journalists writing shitty clickbait stories without doing any actual journalism. If you are going to write an article about an employee's termination, the responsible and ethical thing to do is to get the employer's side of the story too.
Nintendo has made a public comment regarding Ms. Rapp's termination. If their side of the story isn't accurate, they would needlessly be opening themselves up to a lawsuit. There is no reason to doubt what they are saying.
The notion that Ms. Rapp was fired for any reason other than the one Nintendo provided is baseless speculation. The speculation isn't even logical. I know everyone hates GamerGate, but do you really think Nintendo cares what they think? Isn't it more likely that Nintendo caved to the anti-pedophile activists? If you're going to speculate, can you at least look at this logically? GamerGate makes a better villain than the Wayne Foundation, but it's completely absurd to suggest GamerGate would have more influence in this instance.
If you owned a company and were contacted by random GamerGaters who were concerned about one one of your employees, why would you give a shit? I know I wouldn't. If I was contacted by a credible organization like the Wayne Foundation that's committed to spreading awareness of CSEC, on the other hand, I'd probably take their concerns a little more seriously.
TL/DR:
- The journalists who initially reported about this should be ashamed.
- There's no reason to doubt Nintendo's official response given the potential penalties that lying would bring.
- The speculation about the "real" reason why Ms. Rapp was fired doesn't even make any sense. It's batshit insane to suggest that GamerGate had more influence over Nintendo than the Wayne Foundation.
Nintendo has made a public comment regarding Ms. Rapp's termination. If their side of the story isn't accurate, they would needlessly be opening themselves up to a lawsuit. There is no reason to doubt what they are saying.
The notion that Ms. Rapp was fired for any reason other than the one Nintendo provided is baseless speculation. The speculation isn't even logical. I know everyone hates GamerGate, but do you really think Nintendo cares what they think? Isn't it more likely that Nintendo caved to the anti-pedophile activists? If you're going to speculate, can you at least look at this logically? GamerGate makes a better villain than the Wayne Foundation, but it's completely absurd to suggest GamerGate would have more influence in this instance.
If you owned a company and were contacted by random GamerGaters who were concerned about one one of your employees, why would you give a shit? I know I wouldn't. If I was contacted by a credible organization like the Wayne Foundation that's committed to spreading awareness of CSEC, on the other hand, I'd probably take their concerns a little more seriously.
TL/DR:
- The journalists who initially reported about this should be ashamed.
- There's no reason to doubt Nintendo's official response given the potential penalties that lying would bring.
- The speculation about the "real" reason why Ms. Rapp was fired doesn't even make any sense. It's batshit insane to suggest that GamerGate had more influence over Nintendo than the Wayne Foundation.
In theory, as the representative of a big company, people might then send you stuff to get in your good books and hope for help later on on projects/work/coverage etc
My post? I don't have any information in any of my post just my view on things.
- Status