Support NeoGAF

[Kinsei]

If moonlighting is actually allowed at Nintendo (with a few reservations) and she was still fired for that reason, what does that indicated about the nature of her second job? Are you saying Nintendo is lying about why they fired her?



The nature of a PR position is that you are a face of the company both in person and on social media. Are you saying that it was professional for her to post those photos and solicit people for new dresses and other goodies?

I think what she posted is perfectly fine. I guess it's not "professional" but the corporate worlds view of what "professional" means is horse shit.

 

[NinjaCoachZ]

I feel like you should probably sort your priorities out. Teach your daughter not to say dumb shit on social media, and I'm sure she'll be fine. Even if someone does say something nasty, that's life. She'll survive. An encounter with ISIS, though? I'd be more worried about her limbs than her feelings.

Her getting fired, yeah that can be tied to some of the child porn stuff, sure. That's the kind of thing you don't ever talk about and some of the opinions she expressed were yeah, debateable. At best.

But the only reason she became targeted and that came to light is because she had the audacity of... being a feminist. Nobody should have to fear advocating for feminism online.

Also are you really saying that because Gamergate isn't "as bad as ISIS" (as ridiculous as it is to play this relative-badness-value game with two bad things) that it's not a problem??

Moot did more to quash gamergate on 4chan than the moderation teams on twitter and facebook. Funny in retrospect.

When you put it that way... damn.

 

[Bright]

Once again, those statements aren't why she was fired.

Ah, yes, because Nintendo said so. Aha.

 

[RichiRamjag]

Again, anybody blaming her is part of the problem. This is exactly what Gamergate wants.

I don't think immediately calling people a danger to young children is helping either if we're being honest.

You cannot be serious. No, she'll not. Are you even close to understanding what the actual issue is here?

Besides, I say dumb shit on Twitter all the time. Nobody's trying to ruin my life because of it.


We're talking about harassment in the video game industry, "bro". Stop with the strawmen.

Responded to a comment YOU made referencing that. You keep it about harassment in the games industry yourself, otherwise people will respond.

 

[EatinOlives]

If moonlighting is actually allowed at Nintendo (with a few reservations) and she was still fired for that reason, what does that indicated about the nature of her second job?

Something that is apparently inconsistent with Nintendo's internal policies. Which is fine, but only if you take it at face value without factoring in the fact that Nintendo wouldn't have even found out about said moonlighting had it not been for GGers. That's the actual point of contention here, not whether Nintendo's policies allowed them to fire her.

The nature of a PR position is that you are a face of the company both in person and on social media. Are you saying that it was professional for her to post those photos and solicit people for new dresses and other goodies?

Obviously not unprofessional enough for Nintendo since that isn't why she was fired.

 

[Lord Error]

This is why I really dislike commenting on things of this kind before a whole picture is more or less known. I can definitely see Nintendo's side in this now. Of course, I personally don't think what she's done is a big deal or anything, but corporations are much more stringent.

 

[Afrikan]

Again, anybody blaming her is part of the problem. This is exactly what Gamergate wants.

anybody blaming her?

who is blaming her for what?

I'm so confused in this thread.

 

[Bright]

Her getting fired, yeah that can be tied to some of the child porn stuff, sure whatever. But the only reason she became targeted and that came to light is because she had the audacity of... being a feminist.

Also are you really saying that because Gamergate isn't "as bad as ISIS" (as ridiculous as it is to play this relative-badness-value game with two bad things) that it's not a problem??



When you put it that way... damn.

Sure, it's a problem. My issue with the original post is the comparison to ISIS. They're both problems, but in no way the same magnitude. It's dishonest, and frankly GROSS to compare the two.

 

[Diffense]

Again, anybody blaming her is part of the problem. This is exactly what Gamergate wants.

If she was fired for violation of company policy she bears part of the blame regardless of who brought it to light. Issues don't have to be black or white.

 

[Spyder_Monkey]

anybody blaming her?

who is blaming her for what?

I'm so confused in this thread.

This is victim blaming.

Sucks to lose a job you like but it doesn't seem as if Nintendo did anything wrong here. If a "questionable" group (say anonymous for example) discovered that I was embezzling funds at my job and disclosed it I doubt my employer would turn a blind eye and "support me" just because it was wrong for them to hack my computer. If Rapp was doing something she shouldn't have been doing and that came to light as part of a smear campaign she has to take some responsibility. It seems that she has done so even though some posters here are behaving as if Nintendo acted improperly.

I believe the reasons over why Nintendo fired her however the action of Gamergate put her under a microscope. They are just as much to blame for someone losing their job and Gamergate are going to claim this as a victory.

 

[SturokBGD]

So we're back to comparing a global threat that kills hundreds of people a day to a bunch of people on Twitter that got a woman fired?.

The irony you're missing is it's not me that made that comparison.

 

[Bright]

That's not why she was harassed.

How would you know why she was harassed? Were you there when it was arranged? If not, you can't say this with any sort of truth behind it, just feeding the narrative you prescribe to.

 

[SneakersSO]

Moot did more to quash gamergate on 4chan than the moderation teams on twitter and facebook. Funny in retrospect.

Isn't he at Facebook or Google now? Could be a great get, in that regard.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

Publicly calling for laxer punishments for the consumers of child porn while you work for a company whose prime audience are parents and children?

Weren't those comments made before she started working there and only dug up out of context to try to get her fired?

 

[groshkar]

The corporation does not want that attention. So when they say dont tweet it,then dont tweet it. They can terminate depending on the language in her contract. Truthfully if you are a professional and don't have to use social media, then dont. If you do have to use social media, keep it strictly professional.

I don't know if she worked at Nintendo of America's Corporate HQ in Redmond, WA, but if she did the state of Washington is an at-will state, and she very likely didn't have a contact. The employment relationship is entirely voluntary from both sides and any party is free to break it for any reason or none at any time.

The justification of violating such and such policy would only serve a purpose of constructing a defense against any legal actions taken against them.

 

[Bright]

The irony you're missing is it's not me that made that comparison.

Where did I say it was you?

I feel like this is turning into a dog pile.

 

[Nephrahim]

She was attacked by Gamergate, Ergo, she can't be blamed for any punishments that are the results of her own actions? That's exactly the kind of one sided thinking that causes people to retreat into their little groups where everyone agrees with them and not engage in real conversation.

 

[diaspora]

GG bears the blame for harassing her, doxxing her, and illuminating actions that resulted in her termination since they apparently violate company guidelines. Nintendo is at fault for not issuing a statement in solidarity with harassed employees. Twitter is at fault for not fucking moderating their platform- I've already mentioned it but even 4chan is stricter about this.

 

[marrec]

Where did I say it was you?

I feel like this is turning into a dog pile.

*avatarquote.jpg*

Sorry, I'm too lazy to rehost the image.

Damnit.

 

[Bright]

Weren't those comments made before she started working there and only dug up out of context to try to get her fired?

Whether they were made while she was employed is irrelevant. Those comments existed with her and Nintendo's name attached for anyone to see while she was.

 

[SturokBGD]

Responded to a comment YOU made referencing that.

Actually, I was responding to someone else who brought it up - I was saying to him that neither ISIS or the KKK were relevant in this discussion (and it turns out that guy is banned now anyway). I guess you missed that.

This isn't productive.

 

[EatinOlives]

Ah, yes, because Nintendo said so. Aha.

You're losing the plot here.

If Nintendo didn't like that about Alison they would've found that out way before GG, since she's in PR and that thesis is not exactly hidden away from the universe. What we actually can go off of is what Nintendo has said, and what Alison has said in response to that. "Oh that's not REALLY why she was fired, Nintendo's just being coy!" may sound like a fair stance to take at a superficial level, but it invites a nasty sub-discussion in which people scour the internet and pick apart her tweets and her off-the-clock behavior and engage in disgusting character assassination about her as a person to try to justify her being fired.

 

[Zunnyhh]

I will admit to being a little bit ignorant & not very interessted in this specific case, but if you're employed as the face of a company in some way, which sells products aimed mostly at kids - You really shouldnt be promoting/condoning CP in any way, shape or form.

And yes, I do consider anime depicted with children in sexual poses as CP.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Why the fuck are we talking about the tweets/thesis and the photo shoots again? She wasn't fired for those things... they are irrelevant. Stop.

Great article by Jim.

Wow, Jim nails it.

I have ever no qualms about a company terminating an employee for image reasons. Whether it's piercings, tatoos, second jobs, or Twitter postings it's perfectly fine by me and it's how the real world works.

I do have qualms, and it pisses me off when people buy into this corporate bullshit.

Terminating an employee for image reasons is legitimate if your employee has, you know, actually done something wrong. If they tweet racist shit, for example, or answer rudely to customers, or whatnot.

Piercings? Tattoos? Stuff that hurts no one? The whole notion that company should care so much about "image" instead of things that actually matter is honestly sickening, and it pains me that people keep buying into this status quo.

Again, Jim Sterling nailed it:

Nintendo wants to maintain a family friendly facade which it does through scrubbing away any ounce of personality from its employees, a rather self-defeating plan when you think about it. All that’s left behind are the awkward scripted moments, executives with smiles etched like scars on their cold faces, and no amount of genuine heart on display.

Which is how Nintendo likes it. It would rather employ clay dolls in the shape of people, devoid of distinguishing features.

Ultimately, there’s one sad message Nintendo is sending to all prospective future talent in the industry, and especially young women – don’t you dare get noticed.

Don’t ever be outstanding. Don’t speak up. Don’t have beliefs.

To stand out would be to clash with Nintendo’s “corporate culture,” a culture of disinfected conformity propping up a few gurning businessmen who promote an artificial, pre-approved spontaneity.

Frankly, it sounds like a fucking shit culture, mate.

 

[Kinsei]

How would you know why she was harassed? Were you there when it was arranged? If not, you can't say this with any sort of truth behind it, just feeding the narrative you prescribe to.

Because the harassment started before they decided to read her college thesis. She was just the latest target in a string of many.

 

[Scientist Supreme!]

This is just becoming gg deflection tactics the thread.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

Whether they were made while she was employed is irrelevant. Those comments existed with her and Nintendo's name attached for anyone to see while she was.

So according to you, your weird posts in this thread could and should be a valid reason to fire you from any of you future jobs...?

 

[SneakersSO]

Weren't those comments made before she started working there and only dug up out of context to try to get her fired?

The thesis was made before she was hired, yes. Her reinforcement of said statements and those positions have occurred a few times by her on her twitter feed, as recent as 6 months ago. So yes, she has made these comments while she was employed by Nintendo.

 

[RichiRamjag]

Actually, I was responding to someone else who brought it up - I was saying to him that neither ISIS or the KKK were relevant in this discussion (and it turns out that guy is banned now anyway). I guess you missed that.

This isn't productive.

I may have (at the dentist). I agree, best to let this side convo rest anyhow.

We both agree the harassment is wrong I'm sure. I may have merely mistook your original statement.

 

[Diffense]

This is victim blaming.

Victims don't have to be blameless in matters that are peripherally related to the action against them. If someone runs a red light and crashes into me then it's discovered that I was driving without insurance that's still on me.

Rapp did not deserve to be harassed but it turns out that she was doing things, in secret, that she obviously knew could get her fired or else she would't have been doing it under a pseudonym. It came to light, as a result of the smear campaign, and the expected consequences ensued. She is not blameless in that respect.

I see some people desperately trying to construct a narrative that Nintendo is completely wrong here but that doesn't seem consistent with what we know. Of the three parties/groups involved Nintendo seem to be the least at fault for anything.

 

[diaspora]

This is just becoming gg deflection tactics the thread.

I only see one guy defending attacking someone for posting their views online.

 

[RomanticHeroX]

How would you know why she was harassed?

Pattern recognition and the slightest amount of critical thought.

 

[Bright]

So according to you, your weird posts in this thread could and should be a valid reason to fire you from any of you future jobs...?

Is my company or real name attached to these posts?

 

[Nephrahim]

So according to you, your weird posts in this thread could and should be a valid reason to fire you from any of you future jobs...?

Although this site might be a little too obscure to bother with, people have gotten worse for less.

It's pretty common to just delete your social media accounts once you start looking for a new job because everyone has stupid shit they want to hide.

 

[Bright]

Pattern recognition and the slightest amount of critical thought.

So everyone else is allowed to use "pattern recognition" and "critical thought" to determine the start of the harassment, yet I'm not allowed to employ them to determine the actual reason for her being fired?

Intellectually dishonest.

 

[GatticusFinch]

Why the fuck are we talking about the tweets/thesis and the photo shoots again? She wasn't fired for those things... they are irrelevant. Stop.

What was she fired for, then?

You can't say she was fired for some secret, anonymous, second job that Nintendo says is against their "corporate culture" and then ask everyone to ignore the fact that she has tweets out there discussing selling sexy photo shoots (the tweets only have the "teasers," so I assume the rest are nudes based on her tweets) and links and discussion about her fans buying her stuff.

I mean, you want us to believe she had some totally innocuous second job that Nintendo shitcanned her over, but neither she nor Nintendo will say what this second job is? We're not flushing common sense down the drain here. If the second job was innocuous, she would have come out and said what it was. The fact that she did it anonymously is pretty good evidence that it wasn't.

 

[benicillin]

What was she fired for, then?

You can't say she was fired for some secret, anonymous, second job that Nintendo says is against their "corporate culture" and then ask everyone to ignore the fact that she has tweets out there discussing selling sexy photo shoots (the tweets only have the "teasers," so I assume the rest are nudes based on her tweets) and links and discussion about her fans buying her stuff.

I mean, you want us to believe she had some totally innocuous second job that Nintendo shitcanned her over, but neither she nor Nintendo will say what this second job is? We're not flushing common sense down the drain here. If the second job was innocuous, she would have come out and said what it was. The fact that she did it anonymously is pretty good evidence that it wasn't.

Just move on dude. Why she got fired is between her and Nintendo. If she wants to elaborate further she's welcome to, but until then don't be a weirdo playing Internet detective and making assumptions.

 

[NinjaCoachZ]

Is my company or real name attached to these posts?

Neither of those were attached to Alison Rapp's moonlighting gig.

 

[marrec]

What was she fired for, then?

You can't say she was fired for some secret, anonymous, second job that Nintendo says is against their "corporate culture" and then ask everyone to ignore the fact that she has tweets out there discussing selling sexy photo shoots (the tweets only have the "teasers," so I assume the rest are nudes based on her tweets) and links and discussion about her fans buying her stuff.

I mean, you want us to believe she had some totally innocuous second job that Nintendo shitcanned her over, but neither she nor Nintendo will say what this second job is? We're not flushing common sense down the drain here. If the second job was innocuous, she would have come out and said what it was. The fact that she did it anonymously is pretty good evidence that it wasn't.

Normally I would agree but I think in this case we could also assume that the second job hasn't been made public because she doesn't want the harassment she's received to follow her to it.

That is a perfectly logical conclusion and one that doesn't assume some type of shady purpose for no reason.

 

[EatinOlives]

So everyone else is allowed to use "pattern recognition" and "critical thought" to determine the start of the harassment, yet I'm not allowed to employ them to determine the actual reason for her being fired?

Intellectually dishonest.

Because you're engaging in a pointless quest to arbitrarily determine what you personally deem what the "REAL" reason she was fired for. And of course once your investigation starts you naturally start picking apart her as a person and she wrote without making any real connections since we don't have any means (the know-how or the know-what) to actually make any real conclusions.

You're engaging in rubbernecking at best, character assassination at worst.

 

[Sianos]

How would you know why she was harassed? Were you there when it was arranged? If not, you can't say this with any sort of truth behind it, just feeding the narrative you prescribe to.

Hint: it's because the people who are harassing her agree with that thesis and supporting the message of her thesis is their modus operandi, you know, the ethics in the video games that they hide behind with the censorship of little girl panties and what not. And yet, they still blamed her for localization changes that she was outspokenly against - and then harassed her under the pretenses of her being against those same localization changes.

How strange, condemning someone for supporting your own goals - I wonder if we start firing our pattern recognition clusters on all cylinders we can figure out what this person has in common with the prototypic image of the usual Gamergate harassment target. No hints for this one, I think you can do it.

 

[diaspora]

Why Rapp was fired is ultimately between her and Nintendo imo. What bears discussion imo, is the harassment and doxxing that led to the illumination of her actions that got her terminated in the first place. To wit, I think the solution is for Twitter and Facebook to hire 4chan mods to stamp out gamergate.

 

[SneakersSO]

Neither of those were attached to Alison Rapp's moonlighting gig.

But she was a public face of a company. Bright isn't. When you're a front facing spokesperson for a company, your activities in your private life cannot reflect back on said company. Thats just the way the world works.

There are important lessons to takeaway from all this for people who are observing, especially when it comes to interacting with social media and associating with your employer on social media.

 

[Bright]

Neither of those were attached to Alison Rapp's moonlighting gig.

We were talking about Twitter. And did it have to be? There was a rule for no moonlighting, and she broke it. The rule wasn't 'no moonlighting with your name and company attached.'

 

[SturokBGD]

I may have (at the dentist). I agree, best to let this side convo rest anyhow.

We both agree the harassment is wrong I'm sure. I may have merely mistook your original statement.

And with that, they world got a little brighter. Sorry I went straight for the throat, I'm super fanatical about video games but I also have two young daughters so I've taken some of the issues here quite personally.

 

[razoftblend]

Uh, I mean, it was her thesis paper, which I'm not sure is in the same ball park of what you are describing. If she was making un-nuanced tweets about the topic during a Treehouse event, that is one thing, but to publish a (presumably) peer-reviewed and well researched item about a topic, even a controversial one, as a part of your studies and then be held to task for it years later is much more troubling.

I think valkyr was refering to her behavior on the job. She was a public figure; professional image comes with the job for those people. She was warned not to post about controversial stuff, and she ignored those warnings. She brought unnesessary attention to herself even without taking her theses into account.

Look at what happened to Manny Pacquiao. He lost his sponsor due to a comment he made about gay people. Social media is a dangerous game, and not manny people can play it right.

Edit: I do find it funny that people expect Nintendo to reveal to us what the second job was. That is private matter that they discussed with Alison. Neither one has an obligation to tell us about it, thought Alison does have the option; Nintendo doesn't. That would be a violation of private information.

 

[Uncredible]

So we're back to comparing a global threat that kills hundreds of people a day to a bunch of people on Twitter that got a woman fired?

The hyperbole is ridiculous.

I haven't been around long but this is one of the best retorts I've seen here. 👏👏👏👏

 

[marrec]

Why Rapp was fired is ultimately between her and Nintendo imo. What bears discussion imo, is the harassment and doxxing that led to the illumination of her actions that got her terminated in the first place. To wit, I think the solution is for Twitter and Facebook to hire 4chan mods to stamp out gamergate.

Absolutely 100% agree.

Well, except for the part where we disagree about responsibility.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

We were talking about Twitter. And did it have to be? There was a rule for no moonlighting, and she broke it. The rule wasn't 'no moonlighting with your name and company attached.'

Hmmmm. Source?

EDIT: lol, nervermind.

 

[NinjaCoachZ]

We were talking about Twitter. And did it have to be? There was a rule for no moonlighting, and she broke it. The rule wasn't 'no moonlighting with your name and company attached.'

I'm just pointing out that whether or not what you do is public knowledge doesn't matter if there are people out there who have a grudge against you and will campaign together to harass you. Like what happened to Alison Rapp.

You are saying "well, my name and company are protected". That didn't help her though. So it wouldn't help you either if you've become a target for whatever reason.

EDIT: I guess this conversation's done.