Support NeoGAF

[charlequin]

First, the background:

http://kotaku.com/the-ugly-new-front-in-the-neverending-video-game-cultur-1762942381

The initial statement:

Nintendo's statement:

Alison's clarification:

That's pretty much the story so far.

~~~THE GROUND RULES~~~

• Don't drive by. Don't post one-line emotional reactions that contribute nothing to a discussion. If you're not here to engage and discuss, take it to Twitter.
• Keep things on topic. Obviously this story touches on a lot of issues but try to keep on the sidewalk.
• Do not under any circumstances get into detective shit. If it isn't already cited from Alison directly or from a reputable media site, if you have to dig around to find it, do not post.

 

[MasterHoodie]

Read this post for the best analysis anyone can raise about the FACTS about this whole thing: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=199708152&postcount=2941

 

[Krejlooc]

It's pretty shitty when people online try to muck up someone's IRL career. Like, trolling on the internet in and of itself sucks, but when it bleeds over into affecting careers it feels like something that should be illegal. More than that, it just feels petty. How jealous are you of someone else that you'll go out of your way to fuck up their career? More than likely, your actions affect more than just the person in question. It's outright cruel.

I see people try do it to Jason Schreier on here as well, and it's just as lame.

 

[PopeReal]

(reposted from very end of last thread)

People keep saying that the story changed throughout the thread, but the main narrative is the same....

....online harassment of women in the gaming community continues unabated.

If that makes you uncomfortable, sorry I guess? But whatever rabbit hole you jump into or corporate rule you follow it remains the same. In this case a Nintendo employee was targeted, and whether you agree that it led to her firing or not, nothing was done to help her. Did Nintendo come out publicly and make a statement about harassment in the game industry? No. Did Nintendo give her resources behind the scenes? Maybe, we don't know. But in no way did Nintendo show any support for their own employee while it continued.

So go ahead and play the "wait and see" or "both sides are bad" or "she is at fault as well" cards. But we have right in front of us another example of how the game industry reacts when women are targeted with harassment.

 

[SodiumBenzoate]

This was one of the main posts that was being discussed at the moment the previous thread was closed and I think it deserves a re-quote:

From her latest string of posts, I think this case is closed.

She was anonymously working a second job (okay) that conflicted with corporate culture for reasons that she heavily implies were an expression of her sex-positive feminism (whatever it was, in Nintendo's eyes not okay), and the reason this was dug up at all was probably because harassers were doing the digging.

Makes sense to me, and I expected as much.

I'm also sure that she is remaining coy about what kind of work she was doing on the side (modelling seems tame enough and in line enough with her existing real-name persona that she probably would have said so openly), but I don't see the point in pressing her for further disclosure when she is already walking on coals by posting a follow-up at all.

The harassment was despicable, particularly when (social justice affiliations aside) her views aligned with those of the median KotakuInAction sympathizer with respect to bowdlerization and cultural difference, and no doubt HR/management took this into account when she was, by her own admission, a risky hire from the start. I think we can agree on this much. But notice that none of this put her employment in jeopardy by itself even if she was shunted into another role (sketchy, yes). Like I've said all along, she has been controversial for ages, harassed for ages, complained about for ages, and retained by Nintendo all along (if under conditions that to her seemed precarious).

Did Nintendo do enough to stand by an employee under siege? No, from our limited information and perspective, I'd say not. But that Nintendo was ultimately too conservative for however it was that she turned her very open libertinism into a second job is not really all that outrageous. (It may reek of slut-shaming, as it were, but they already granted their employee a fair degree of latitude to diverge from corporate norms.) Neither party is willing to say what exactly it was, and I don't think any light will be shed by finding the particulars anyway. The rubbernecking is strictly prurient at this point. I'm not curious, and there is no point in digging.

I say we drop all this and leave her alone to the task of finding a better cultural fit. Plenty of outfits will want her.

 

[devilhawk]

Nintendo failing to properly address issues with harassment does not insulate her from consequences of intentionally breaching parameters of her contract.

Her being terminated for breach of contract doesn't justify Nintendo's silence on the harassment of its employees.

It's simple, really.

 

[Gleethor]

Nintendo failing to properly address issues with harassment does not insulate her from consequences of intentionally breaching parameters of her contract.

Her being terminated for breach of contract doesn't justify Nintendo's silence on the harassment of its employees.

It's simple, really.

Short and sweet. Perfect.

 

[Dennis]

So if I understand correctly Nintendo let her go because the second job she worked might potentially conflict with the profile Nintendo wants to maintain?

That while Nintendo is usually OK with second jobs in this case they were not?

 

[QaaQer]

It's just reality and it really isn't going to change. An employer will protect themselves or their interests first and foremost. If firing someone proves to be an easier path to do that, that is what they will do.
.

Companies are made up of individual people. Some are shitty, some are brave, some have a conscience, some are sociopaths. An individual made a descion to fire her, that doesn't mean everyone else on the planet doing that job would have made the same descion.

N is a very Japanese company. It is not surprising that free thinkers and out-side-of-the-box people wouldn't be welcome.

 

[Ridley327]

So if I understand correctly Nintendo let her go because the second job she worked might potentially conflict with the profile Nintendo wants to maintain?

That while Nintendo is usually OK with second jobs in this case they were not?

Correct.

 

[Dicer]

Originally Posted by QuixoticNeutral
I say we drop all this and leave her alone to the task of finding a better cultural fit. Plenty of outfits will want her.

And yet here we are...

 

[Hero]

It's really a shame that GG's involvement lead to her firing and that it took for Nintendo firing her for them to make a statement about it.

Can't blame Nintendo for firing her if something she did could harm the company image. This is pretty standard for whenever you work at a big company, for better or for worse.

 

[PopeReal]

So if I understand correctly Nintendo let her go because the second job she worked might potentially conflict with the profile Nintendo wants to maintain?

In my opinion, suddenly they cared when gamergaters started digging. Either way the stuff Nintendo found was enough for them to let her go.

 

[Kevtones]

Nintendo failing to properly address issues with harassment does not insulate her from consequences of intentionally breaching parameters of her contract.

Her being terminated for breach of contract doesn't justify Nintendo's silence on the harassment of its employees.

It's simple, really.

There it is.

 

[Mithos]

So if I understand correctly Nintendo let her go because the second job she worked might potentially conflict with the profile Nintendo wants to maintain?

That while Nintendo is usually OK with second jobs in this case they were not?

Correct, it was the nature of the second job that rubbed Nintendo the wrong way when they found out what it was, not that she had a second job.

 

[Lime]

I think there are two lines of discussions carried from the other thread:

1. Nintendo and how their actions are symptomatic of a toxic and misogynist industry.
2. Allison Rapp and whatever she did that she did.

I don't personally care that much about 2 (as QuixoticNeutral laid out really well), since 1 is the biggest issue, but nevertheless it's important keep the two lines in mind when participating in the conversation.

And my take-away points based on my impression of the issue still stand, I think, in regards to 1 and the broader topic of bigotry in the games industry/culture:

• Women aren't allowed freedom of speech apparently (Rapp can't say what she thinks without fear of punishment)
• Nintendo caves into a hate movement (implicitly at least)
• Worker rights are absolute bullshit in the games industry (correction: The US)
• Big game companies continue to remain silent in the face of bigotry and terrorism
• Major games media continue to white-wash a hate movement and actual threats (See IGN's coverage of it)
• Slut-shaming and sex-negativity are still alive and well (see the photos or whatever used as an excuse for why it's okay for Nintendo to fire her)
• The same old "both sides" rhetoric is trotted out and the usual suspects who coincidentally are always hyper-critical of outspoken women in games culture/industry are just "asking questions" (see the previous thread)
• We're in month 19 and shit is still not getting fixed. People aren't doing enough to fix it.

(reposted from very end of last thread)

People keep saying that the story changed throughout the thread, but the main narrative is the same....

....online harassment of women in the gaming community continues unabated.

If that makes you uncomfortable, sorry I guess? But whatever rabbit hole you jump into or corporate rule you follow it remains the same. In this case a Nintendo employee was targeted, and whether you agree that it led to her firing or not, nothing was done to help her. Did Nintendo come out publicly and make a statement about harassment in the game industry? No. Did Nintendo give her resources behind the scenes? Maybe, we don't know. But in no way did Nintendo show any support for their own employee while it continued.

So go ahead and play the "wait and see" or "both sides are bad" or "she is at fault as well" cards. But we have right in front of us another example of how the game industry reacts when women are targeted with harassment.

Good post.

 

[El Odio]

So if I understand correctly Nintendo let her go because the second job she worked might potentially conflict with the profile Nintendo wants to maintain?

That while Nintendo is usually OK with second jobs in this case they were not?

Correct, given the facts that we have. Their response regrading her termination and her tweets both state that while having a second job is fine, one that conflicts with their corporate image/culture can be grounds for termination.

 

[shandy706]

I remember being told by the company I work for that I was never to have a tattoo that was visible to clients. I don't have any tattoos, but they did fire a guy that got a large one after he had been there for like 12 years.

Some companies are super strict with employee image. I find it a bit silly, but they have the right to run their business as they see fit.

I hope she finds a job that she loves and that doesn't set restrictions that negatively affect her life.

I don't know jack about GG and all that stuff I see in threads, so I can't comment on it.

 

[Eolz]

I wouldn't be too surprised if we hear another statement from Nintendo this week after her latest tweets. Might have said some stuff she agreed to not say.

Again, best of luck to her, hope some hate groups will leave her alone, and that she'll be smarter in her next job if she wants to keep moonlighting. Hopefully she'll find a company where she feels right.

Edit: post 5 and 6 are really good.

 

[Briarios]

Nintendo failing to properly address issues with harassment does not insulate her from consequences of intentionally breaching parameters of her contract.

Her being terminated for breach of contract doesn't justify Nintendo's silence on the harassment of its employees.

It's simple, really.

She wasn't in breach of contract, they felt she clashed with corporate culture which is what companies say when they want to fire someone without cause. They're allowed to do it, but the events leading up to the termination have to give one pause.

 

[ibyea]

At least I hope that she picks herself back up and find some job that is good fit for her. I wish her the best of luck in her future endeavors.

 

[Htown]

Nintendo failing to properly address issues with harassment does not insulate her from consequences of intentionally breaching parameters of her contract.

Her being terminated for breach of contract doesn't justify Nintendo's silence on the harassment of its employees.

It's simple, really.

I tend to agree, with the simple addition of the following:

Yo, FUCK GamerGate.

So if I understand correctly Nintendo let her go because the second job she worked might potentially conflict with the profile Nintendo wants to maintain?

That while Nintendo is usually OK with second jobs in this case they were not?

Basically.

 

[MassiveNights]

So if I understand correctly Nintendo let her go because the second job she worked might potentially conflict with the profile Nintendo wants to maintain?

That while Nintendo is usually OK with second jobs in this case they were not?

Correct.

Alison Rapp feels this was in part due to the video game industry being afraid of women and sex-positivity.

https://twitter.com/alisonrapp/status/715362765326553088

 

[Hard]

If I wouldn't want my mother or my boss to see it, I don't put it on social media.

 

[LudicrousSpeed]

Quoting from the last thread, especially after that post has already been linked in this one:

But notice that none of this put her employment in jeopardy by itself even if she was shunted into another role (sketchy, yes). Like I've said all along, she has been controversial for ages, harassed for ages, complained about for ages, and retained by Nintendo all along (if under conditions that to her seemed precarious).

This pretty much only works if you're taking Nintendo at their word, and, frankly, I see no reason why I should at this point.

It's not uncommon that, if you want to obsfucate the actual reason that you're firing someone, that you take some lesser disciplinary action for the thing that really bugs you and begin looking for a way to generate some other intervening event that you decide to fire them over. It's entirely possible Nintendo knew they'd have a PR nightmare on their hands if they just directly fired her because of the ongoing Torrential Bullshit Downpour that was happening thanks to Video Games' Foremost Hate Group. So, instead, they demoted her out of the public eye and started looking for any excuse they could find to fire her.

I mean, if this were absolutely anyone else, and the company found that they were moonlighting in a way the company didn't appreciate, do you think anyone else would just get summarily fired over it instead of, say, being pulled aside by a manager who says "I know we allow moonlighting, but this is not acceptable and you have to stop"?

 

[Kinsei]

I wouldn't be too surprised if we hear another statement from Nintendo this week after her latest tweets. Might have said some stuff she agreed to not say.

Again, best of luck to her, hope some haye groups will leave her alone, and that she'll be smarter in her next job if she wants to keep moonlighting. Hopefully she'll find a company where she feels right.

They won't. If anything this whole thing will embolden them.

If I wouldn't want my mother or my boss to see it, I don't put it on social media.

She didn't post anything like that on social media so I'm not sure what you are getting at.

 

[PopeReal]

If I wouldn't want my mother or my boss to see it, I don't put it on social media.

Good advice. But to add to that I am not down with people spending time digging through shit for the sole purpose of fucking with peoples lives.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Entirely unsurprising that Nintendo would do this. Seriously, Nintendo would be the company that decides that the best approach is to cause people to harass, threaten, and stalk people in the industry, and now GG knows that Nintendo will fire anyone that they want them to. Saying that you don't condone harassment, Nintendo, is fucking empty, because your actions to the harassers speak only to them as "GamerGate won."

It really makes me kind of apprehensive to support Nintendo given this situation. :/

 

[Iksenpets]

Read this post for the best analysis anyone can raise about the FACTS about this whole thing: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=199708152&postcount=2941

This post still doesn't deal with the fact that they, after years of giving her pretty much free reign, only crack down after the GG harassment campaign. No matter what reasons they may cite for her firing, no matter how well within their legal, contractual rights they may be, it doesn't change the fact that they pretty brazenly capitulated to a GG harassment campaign and looked for a justification after the fact. A company that wants to fire you can always find some justification on the contract, and that seems to be pretty much what they did, given the timing the the amount of freedom they were giving her beforehand.

 

[Maedhros]

So if I understand correctly Nintendo let her go because the second job she worked might potentially conflict with the profile Nintendo wants to maintain?

That while Nintendo is usually OK with second jobs in this case they were not?

And what led them to make this decision was probably GG guys.

This is basically the full. I think there's blame from both sides. Pretty shitty of Nintendo to not defend her while she was being harassed I guess.

 

[10k]

So basically if it wasn't for GG, Nintendo never would have investigated in her thesis and someone who snooped around her anonymous pics sent them to Nintendo.

I can't believe Nintendo is concerned about tattoos and piercings too. Smh. The victim pays the price. That's some good ethics, Nintendo. Nice to know you don't have your employees backs.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

I said this in the last thread but normally moonlighting is only an issue in companies if its related or in conflict of interest with your primary job. As neither Nintendo or Alison is mentioning exactly what the job was obviously it wasn't something purely benign for a PR/spokesperson/company face.

It is however entirely shit that some internet warrior fuckboys went and dug up all this private anonymous shit on her just to tattle and get her fired. What the fuck is people's problems? This girl is entirely undeserving of the kind of hate. She'll land on her feet quick though.

 

[Anteo]

So if I understand correctly Nintendo let her go because the second job she worked might potentially conflict with the profile Nintendo wants to maintain?

That while Nintendo is usually OK with second jobs in this case they were not?

She said the reason she was terminated is that she wasnt a good, safe representative of Nintendo.

She also said that because of the GG attack they looked at her tweets and they stripped her of the spokesperson status, and all that was because they decided she wasnt a good representative of Nintendo (but not fired yet according to her tweets)

Then she gets fired because of the second job (but its unknow if they knew about it since the beggining, or it was just recently)

 

[hey_monkey]

I can't imagine that it was just the second job, whatever it was (there are a lot of unsubstantiated rumors floating around), would have been as much of an issue if:

a) she hadn't been so outspoken (that's not typical at Treehouse, and
b) they weren't getting flooded with GGers and co yelling about how she's a "pedo-apologist" for some undergrad research.

You know? It's just awfully coincidental.

 

[Divvy]

Nintendo failing to properly address issues with harassment does not insulate her from consequences of intentionally breaching parameters of her contract.

Her being terminated for breach of contract doesn't justify Nintendo's silence on the harassment of its employees.

It's simple, really.

I don't think Nintendo needs to publicly address GG necessarily. It would only serve to legitimize and embolden them, and possibly invite more attacks onto their employees.

THAT BEING SAID, they should certainly have been supporting her through other non-public means, whether that is through law enforcement or through other legal channels. It doesn't really sound like they did which is something they definitely deserve to be criticized for.

 

[Dicer]

If I wouldn't want my mother or my boss to see it, I don't put it on social media.

What about your Bosses Mom tho?

OT: I hope this discussion dies off, and she can regroup and get back on track with whatever in relative peace, pipe dream I know, but it's my wish...

 

[cartographer]

I can't imagine that it was just the second job, whatever it was (there are a lot of unsubstantiated rumors floating around), would have been as much of an issue if:

a) she hadn't been so outspoken (that's not typical at Treehouse, and
b) they weren't getting flooded with GGers and co yelling about how she's a "pedo-apologist" for some undergrad research.

You know? It's just awfully coincidental.

It seems like her explanation of it fits better than speculation.

 

[hey_monkey]

I said this in the last thread but normally moonlighting is only an issue in companies if its related or in conflict of interest with your primary job. As neither Nintendo or Alison is mentioning exactly what the job was obviously it wasn't something purely benign for a PR/spokesperson/company face.

It could also be just not relevant or your business.

 

[Griss]

Nintendo failing to properly address issues with harassment does not insulate her from consequences of intentionally breaching parameters of her contract.

Her being terminated for breach of contract doesn't justify Nintendo's silence on the harassment of its employees.

It's simple, really.

Well said.

 

[Lunar15]

Wow, this feels even worse.

Bit confused on some things in Rapp's side though. If Moonlighting was policy, why does she say they "found out"?

 

[Skux]

Before anyone get up in arms about this (too late), it's clearly stated she was fired for having a second job, a breach of contract.

If she was let go for being "outspoken" it would have happened a long time before this Fire Emblem business.

 

[DecoReturns]

Does this really need a thread?


Just leave her in peace. She'll get back on her feet

 

[stump sock]

• Women aren't allowed freedom of speech apparently (Rapp can't say what she thinks without fear of punishment)

• 
  
  are you talking about w/r/t her employment or w/r/t not being abused by fuckwits on the internet? because the former isn't exclusive to women, or nintendo. Chris Pranger is proof of that. Lots of companies don't allow employees to say whatever they want on the internet, this isn't new or shocking.

 

[PopeReal]

So basically if it wasn't for GG, Nintendo never would have investigated in her thesis and someone who snooped around her anonymous pics sent them to Nintendo.

I can't believe Nintendo is concerned about tattoos and piercings too. Smh. The victim pays the price. That's some good ethics, Nintendo. Nice to know you don't have your employees backs.

GG did the digging for them. It is fucking gross.

Also, we can see online that the narrative was quickly moved to her and what she has done wrong. A tough fucking battle when the anonymous cowards deal with nothing.

 

[Darryl]

I can't find out what the second job was

 

[direct_quote]

I hope she recovers, the whole situation sounds terrible for her, and I'm sure the harassment from GG folks will never end. Truly disgusting people out there.

 

[Raist]

So if I understand correctly Nintendo let her go because the second job she worked might potentially conflict with the profile Nintendo wants to maintain?

That while Nintendo is usually OK with second jobs in this case they were not?

Yes. I don't know why people got confused in the first place. Nintendo's statement was clearly "a second job that was not compatible" or something like that. Not just "she had a second job and we don't allow this".

 

[cartographer]

I can't find out what the second job was

If she's not sharing then don't try to.

 

[hey_monkey]

It seems like her explanation of it fits better than speculation.

...how is it speculation when she said (her explanation that you reference) was that they were looking at her tweets because of this?

She literally said, "This was because the GG mess meant they “looked at my tweets” and decided I wasn’t a good representative of the company."

GG mess = scrutiny

 

[WrenchNinja]

I can't find out what the second job was

That's because no one but Alison, Nintendo and whoever outed her knows.