# D&D Celebrity Satine Phoenix & Husband Jamison Stone Accused Of Abuse Towards Freelancers



## Chromie (Jun 11, 2022)

I decided to make this a post so more can be aware.

Just wanted to spread this for those interested. The latest update on Battle of the Bard’s kickstarter page was about Jamison resigning as CEO of the company (even though he owns it so it’s a naughty word move) and I’m requesting a refund from them for their naughty word treatment of their writers. Who knows if I’ll get it but whatever. I found an extensive reddit post with links to a lot of people speaking of the abuse and naughty word behavior from both Jamison and Satine. I’ve linked the reddit post and RPG.net thread.

Here’s a video summarizing the situation pretty well.


Reddit thread has a lot of the links centralized in one post. Seems to be updated still.


Much more discussion and summary at RPG.net





__





						🚦 A-Game - Satine Phoenix & Jamison Stone Abuse and Misconduct Allegations
					

This is an A-Game Thread, and as such A-Game rules apply.  So, earlier this week Chad Rowe stepped forward to share an experience he had with Satine Phoenix and Jamison Stone, highlighting their abuse towards him when he did tattoo work for them:    This has caused several other people to also...




					forum.rpg.net
				




EDIT: Great Twitter thread with summary of each person and how their experience with the couple.



Jamison Stone solicits sex during a business meeting.

Satine used a connect at WotC to prevent the hire of someone who wanted to be credited for their work.


Satine to comment sometime soon. At the limit of media inserts for this post.



			https://twitter.com/laura_hirsb/status/1536173805948833793?s=20&t=Dqz_jHHYg-FlZhbnZ0izFg
		




			https://twitter.com/LilahHan/status/1536356305681584129?s=20&t=CRBTyWbwinKgcGVtm2vI1w


----------



## darjr (Jun 11, 2022)

Many of their Origins events have been cancelled as well.


----------



## darjr (Jun 11, 2022)

More and more keeps showing up.


----------



## Chromie (Jun 11, 2022)

darjr said:


> More and more keeps showing up.



Damn, there's a lot to unpack there. Thanks


----------



## Thomas Rainsborough (Jun 11, 2022)

You are a little late to the party. This started much much earlier, and has been all over social media for a week. Just like in any industry, you will find good people and awful people. Here is an example of the latter. Frankly, I watched her DM. She was disinterested, disorganized, and arrogant (I can live with the last if the first two are the opposite). And as a player in the cringe-worthy WOTC sponsored one on one's, she clearly does not even know basic rules, or chooses to ignore them.

Those alone are reasons to trash her and her husband (who is also a terrible player).


----------



## darjr (Jun 11, 2022)

Please don’t chastise someone posting an important thread.

Edit: yes I have in the past or at least come close to it. Note however in the past I was concerned about privacy issues, wrongly in at least one case.

Edit to add a note, this was about the thread before it became an article.


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Jun 11, 2022)

darjr said:


> Please don’t chastise someone posting a thread, especially one that is important.




Yep, especially since for a lot of people, it being "all over social media" is fairly meaning less.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 11, 2022)

Thomas Rainsborough said:


> You are a little late to the party. This started much much earlier, and has been all over social media for a week. Just like in any industry, you will find good people and awful people. Here is an example of the latter. Frankly, I watched her DM. She was disinterested, disorganized, and arrogant (I can live with the last if the first two are the opposite). And as a player in the cringe-worthy WOTC sponsored one on one's, she clearly does not even know basic rules, or chooses to ignore them.
> 
> Those alone are reasons to trash her and her husband (who is also a terrible player).



Um…this whole post is inappropriate, but the last part is kinda funny. You think being “bad players” is reason enough to trash someone? _Really?_


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 11, 2022)

For those of us who were around during the Zak S. debacle and subsequent fallout, Satine Phoenix's behavior here came as absolutely no surprise. That said, I didn't even know who her husband was until they made their marriage into a GaryCon event. This is a hell of an encore performance.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 11, 2022)

My opinion on the matter. I’m staying away from judging them personally because I’m sure I don’t have all info and it’s always best to wait a bit and most importantly, it won’t fix the situation. Rather, I want to stress that we should be supporting our creators and paying freelancers appropriately.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 11, 2022)

That is unfortunate to hear. It's cheap to say now, but I always got an uncomfortable vibe from them and thei associations with Zak et al. I tend to suspend my gut feelings like that until there is evidence of concern.


----------



## darjr (Jun 11, 2022)

NFTs. I am not surprised.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Jun 11, 2022)

I had already pre-judged them for the Bard book.


----------



## Chromie (Jun 11, 2022)

I guess Satine is just keeping shut and full PR mode.


Another person who has a Twitter thread with documenting all the people.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 11, 2022)

I guess LaNasa and Dave Johnson are pretty happy now that the attention has been shifted elsewhere.


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 11, 2022)

Growing old means constantly wondering why these people are "celebrities" in the first place, but also never having to worry about it.


----------



## Chromie (Jun 11, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> Growing old means constantly wondering why these people are "celebrities" in the first place, but also never having to worry about it.



Welp, they have connections in WotC, so Satine has been promoted through that and other large streams.


----------



## J.Quondam (Jun 11, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> I guess LaNasa and Dave Johnson are pretty happy now that the attention has been shifted elsewhere.



Well to be sure, someone like Satine Phoenix gets more attention in a single tweet than LaNasa got votes in his last faceplant run for public office.
So his ego _might_ be feeling a bit conflicted at the moment.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 11, 2022)

Chromie said:


> I guess Satine is just keeping shut and full PR mode.
> 
> View attachment 250786
> 
> Another person who has a Twitter thread with documenting all the people.



Oh, Dia uasal...


----------



## Greggy C (Jun 11, 2022)

Never heard of them, but after watching the first youtube video with them in it, immediate red flags from the two of them.  

Maybe I am just an empath.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 11, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> Growing old means constantly wondering why these people are "celebrities" in the first place, but also never having to worry about it.



Adult film industry stars turned D&D live streamers.


----------



## Obryn (Jun 11, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> That is unfortunate to hear. It's cheap to say now, but I always got an uncomfortable vibe from them and thei associations with Zak et al. I tend to suspend my gut feelings like that until there is evidence of concern.



I don't suspend mine   I think if you've paid close enough attention in the past few years (and no criticism to those who don't - it's pretty depressing), it was pretty clear Phoenix and Stone were not who they publicly presented themselves as. Zak, yup. But also "Grim" Desbrough; she had a twitter fit when people started telling her a close association with that dude isn't exactly compatible with the LGBT ally "Herald of Compassion" she presented herself as. Olivia Hill was ringing the alarm bell way back in 2019.

I can't believe they held on after that, after showing themselves as giant jorp fans, the whole weird nft thing...  But if you have enough connections, an ability to manipulate those in your orbit, and a wide enough and weirdly parasocial fanbase.... Well, turns out people can ignore a lot.

e:


Retreater said:


> Adult film industry stars turned D&D live streamers.



Like, I seriously don't think an adult film background is notable or even worth mentioning; it doesn't make them worse people. Except insofar as "Maybe this is how they learned to treat their employees and 'subordinates' in past careers."  Oh, and a warning not to hunt for certain hashtags on a work pc.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 11, 2022)

Obryn said:


> Like, I seriously don't think an adult film background is notable or even worth mentioning; it doesn't make them worse people. Except insofar as "Maybe this is how they learned to treat their employees and 'subordinates' in past careers." Oh, and a warning not to hunt for certain hashtags on a work pc.



Not trying to shame anybody. I was referring only to how they got famous. I don't think it has anything to do with their character and doesn't make them necessarily bad business people or bad as content creators/gamers. Satine literally got into the hobby industry because of her connections with a podcast based on her previous career, so it's relevant.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 11, 2022)

Well, at least he knows quite clearly who the breadwinner is in that family.  It's weird to me how in so many interactions, he demands "respect".  That's some serious projection going on.


----------



## LadyElect (Jun 11, 2022)

I have no real background on the involved, but the way they write on Twitter/Discord is cartoonish. Just going full “respect” monologue on everyone without including any semblance of it from their own end.


----------



## Greggy C (Jun 11, 2022)

So 2/3 have been cancelled.  There is D&D Hollywood for you, attracts the worst...


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 11, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> So 2/3 have been _cancelled_.



Ugh.  I hate the word.  It's never used in ways that mean what it means.


----------



## J.Quondam (Jun 11, 2022)

Obryn said:


> after showing themselves as giant jorp fans,




jorp?

A quick googling isn't revealing anything obvious to me.


----------



## Maggan (Jun 11, 2022)

J.Quondam said:


> jorp?
> 
> A quick googling isn't revealing anything obvious to me.



Jordan Peterson.


----------



## J.Quondam (Jun 11, 2022)

Maggan said:


> Jordan Peterson.



Ah! I'd never heard him referred to in that way. Thanks.


----------



## Chromie (Jun 11, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> So 2/3 have been cancelled.  There is D&D Hollywood for you, attracts the worst...



Cancelled? They're just dealing with the consequences of their actions.


Here's a disgusting thread from someone else on Jamison basically "cornering" someone in the middle of the woods.


----------



## Greggy C (Jun 11, 2022)

Chromie said:


> Cancelled? They're just dealing with the consequences of their actions.



Well the consequence is any new opportunities in "public entertainment" will be cancelled.  Not like they gonna be on a panel with Matt Mercer.


----------



## Bitbrain (Jun 11, 2022)

Reply to OP.

Didn’t know the two of them were married, but I’ve never liked Jamison Stone and am not surprised in the slightest about him.  There’s always been something about his eyes that screams “do not trust this man” to me.

As for Satine Phoenix, think I’ve only seen a single YouTube video with her in it.  It had something to do with Eberron, if I recall correctly.  Didn’t care for her one way or the other, but it’s still disappointing to learn that she apparently isn’t a nice person.  And I had absolutely no idea until reading this thread that she defended _Zak_.


----------



## Greggy C (Jun 11, 2022)

Plot thickens, actor Ruty Rutenberg implicated in underhand shenanigans


Bit of a cesspool huh.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 11, 2022)

Bitbrain said:


> Didn’t know the two of them were married, but I’ve never liked Jamison Stone and am not surprised in the slightest about him. There’s always been something about his eyes that screams “do not trust this man” to me.



Yeah, they were recently married at GaryCon back in March, presided over by Luke Gygax. I was at the Con when it happened but didn't want to be around the crowd for the public ceremony.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 11, 2022)

Retreater said:


> Yeah, they were recently married at GaryCon back in March, presided over by Luke Gygax. I was at the Con when it happened but didn't want to be around the crowd for the public ceremony.



Same, I was there, but stayed in the distance.  Didn't want to get too close to a thick crowd of people, and I didn't stay for the after party.  One thing that always struck me odd was that they gave each other d20, and Jamison rolled to see how they would be as a couple going forward and rolled a 20, and acted all surprised and shocked he got a 20.  Then Satine mentioned how every side was a 20.  And he didn't notice that when he picked it up and rolled it?  Maybe caught in the moment?


----------



## Retreater (Jun 11, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> Same, I was there, but stayed in the distance.  Didn't want to get too close to a thick crowd of people, and I didn't stay for the after party.  One thing that always struck me odd was that they gave each other d20, and Jamison rolled to see how they would be as a couple going forward and rolled a 20, and acted all surprised and shocked he got a 20.  Then Satine mentioned how every side was a 20.  And he didn't notice that when he picked it up and rolled it?  Maybe caught in the moment?



So I guess they foretold they were going to cheat people?


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 11, 2022)

Chromie said:


> Cancelled? They're just dealing with the consequences of their actions.
> 
> 
> Here's a disgusting thread from someone else on Jamison basically "cornering" someone in the middle of the woods.



Wow, combining sexual and spiritual manipulation with business. Yikes.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 11, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Wow, combining serial and spiritual manipulation with business. Yikes.



Yeah secluding someone who is unlikely to know how to get away, especially when you are probably bigger and stronger than them, especially when you are a man and they are AFAB, and _then_ mixing business, spiritual “guidance”, and sexual propositioning, is…jfc I don’t even have words for how gross that is.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 11, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yeah secluding someone who is unlikely to know how to get away, especially when you are probably bigger and stronger than them, especially when you are a man and they are AFAB, and _then_ mixing business, spiritual “guidance”, and sexual propositioning, is…jfc I don’t even have words for how gross that is.



That's pretty close to the bottom of the barrel.


----------



## Malmuria (Jun 11, 2022)

Chromie said:


> Cancelled? They're just dealing with the consequences of their actions.
> 
> 
> Here's a disgusting thread from someone else on Jamison basically "cornering" someone in the middle of the woods.



wow.  They approach the hobby like it's a cult.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 11, 2022)

I mentioned this on twitter, because I think it's important to call out those good people as well whenever something like this happens


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 11, 2022)

I have only had positive interactions with people that I have done work with in the TTRPG space. Always been paid, zero drama.

I also don’t think that speculating publicly on Satine/Jameson does anything. The people that had a negative interaction said what they felt about it. I have zero idea what happened, what goes on in their private lives and not my place to ponder out loud about it.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 11, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> I have only had positive interactions with people that I have done work with in the TTRPG space. Always been paid, zero drama.



Generally, I have too, although there have been exceptions. I've never had any kind of interaction with the people mentioned in this thread, though.


----------



## darjr (Jun 11, 2022)

Chromie said:


> Cancelled? They're just dealing with the consequences of their actions.
> 
> 
> Here's a disgusting thread from someone else on Jamison basically "cornering" someone in the middle of the woods.



Just to make it clear


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 11, 2022)

darjr said:


> Just to make it clear



So grotesque.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 11, 2022)

darjr said:


> Just to make it clear




Yeah. I read that and JESUS CHRIST. Abusing co-workers and not paying on time (or at all) is really bad, but this is... this is something much, much, worse.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

jdrakeh said:


> Yeah. I read that and JESUS CHRIST. Abusing co-workers and not paying on time (or at all) is really bad, but this is... this is something much, much, worse.



I really can't think of much that is more insidious than entangling another person financially and then applying sexual pressure, except adding an attempt to insert oneself as the center of the victim's religous life at the same time.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

jdrakeh said:


> For those of us who were around during the Zak S. debacle and subsequent fallout, Satine Phoenix's behavior here came as absolutely no surprise. That said, I didn't even know who her husband was until they made their marriage into a GaryCon event. This is a hell of an encore performance.



I can only vaguely recall what she said or did during that. 


Chromie said:


> Welp, they have connections in WotC, so Satine has been promoted through that and other large streams.



Well, no, she got famous through her own efforts, not through friendships at wotc. Far as I know, Stone is well known because of Satine, but that may be just the fact that I’d never heard of him before they started dating.  


LadyElect said:


> I have no real background on the involved, but the way they write on Twitter/Discord is cartoonish. Just going full “respect” monologue on everyone without including any semblance of it from their own end.



Yeah the overwrought “HEAR ME!” nonsense strikes as a bit of a red flag. 


Parmandur said:


> That's pretty close to the bottom of the barrel.



Absolutely.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Well, no, she got famous through her own efforts, not through friendships at wotc.



IIRC she was their social manager for a bit after 5e launch


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I can only vaguely recall what she said or did during that.




She supported Zak S. until the last minute possible and also ran defense for notorious creepers like "Grim" Jim. Many have accused her of actively being involved in Zak's harassment campaign.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I can only vaguely recall what she said or did during that.



Her entrance into the RPG scene was by being a regular on Zak's show, and she went to rhe mat for him until everyone could see the score and then disclaimed having ever seen or heard anything that made her suspect he was an abuser.

I am now extremely suspicious that she may have known about or even facilitated/participated in Zak's behavior, given that this pair seem to be running the same playbook albeit slightly less outwardly aggressively.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 12, 2022)

bedir than said:


> IIRC she was their social manager for a bit after 5e launch




You are correct.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

jdrakeh said:


> She supported Zak S. until the last minute possible and also ran defense for notorious creepers like "Grim" Jim.



As I recall, she did more to publicly defend and legitimize Zak than Mike Mearls did, albeit in a position of less prominence.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 12, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> As I recall, she did more to publicly defend and legitimize Zak than Mike Mearls did, albeit in a position of less prominence.




You recall correctly. She was one of Zak's most ardent defenders until it became untenable for her (until she started to get serious blow back).


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

bedir than said:


> IIRC she was their social manager for a bit after 5e launch



Yes, after she was already a very well known online DM and D&D related personality. 


Parmandur said:


> Her entrance into the RPG scene was by being a regular on Zak's show, and she went to rhe mat for him until everyone could see the score and then disclaimed having ever seen or heard anything that made her suspect he was an abuser.



It’s more accurate to say she was part of the show, having been part of the game that inspired it in the first place, having already been quite well known and well liked in the LA D&D scene (Taliesen Jaffe has commented on this last part). 
And she wouldn’t have gone any farther than D&D With Pornstars without charisma and drive of her own. Like Vivka, she got herself to where she is, insofar as anyone gets anywhere on their own. 


Parmandur said:


> I am now extremely suspicious that she may have known about or even articipated in Zak's, given that this pair seem to be running the same playbook albeit slightly less outwardly aggressively.



Or she’s gotten herself another abusive narcissist for a partner and is noseblind to the stink, but either way her own behavior is hers.  

I do recall people saying she was late to the party when Mandy came forward with her story and finally made people stop turning a blind eye to Zak S’s abusive behavior.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I do recall people saying she was late to the party when Mandy came forward with her story and finally made people stop turning a blind eye to Zak S’s abusive behavior.




She was more than late to the party. She was an ardent defender of Zak (and other horrible people in the industry). Look, it's clear you don't want to acknowledge this, but it is what it is.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yes, after she was already a very well known online DM and D&D related personality.
> 
> It’s more accurate to say she was part of the show, having been part of the game that inspired it in the first place, having already been quite well known and well liked in the LA D&D scene (Taliesen Jaffe has commented on this last part).
> And she wouldn’t have gone any farther than D&D With Pornstars without charisma and drive of her own. Like Vivka, she got herself to where she is, insofar as anyone gets anywhere on their own.
> ...



Enough of the stories are about Satine herself and her independent behavior, unfortunately, that she seems to be an active part of the abusive cycle here.


----------



## Chromie (Jun 12, 2022)

darjr said:


> Just to make it clear



Right, added this specific tweet to the OP. It’s just gross in every way.


----------



## darjr (Jun 12, 2022)




----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yes, after she was already a very well known online DM and D&D related personality.
> 
> It’s more accurate to say she was part of the show, having been part of the game that inspired it in the first place, having already been quite well known and well liked in the LA D&D scene (Taliesen Jaffe has commented on this last part).
> And she wouldn’t have gone any farther than D&D With Pornstars without charisma and drive of her own. Like Vivka, she got herself to where she is, insofar as anyone gets anywhere on their own.
> ...



My mom went from an abusive relationship to an abusive relationship*.  I don't know Satine personally or her situation, or how much culpability she has here if any, but only to comment that it's not unheard of a person going from one abusive partner to another.  I do know she has overcome a dark chapter in her life previously. Is she also guilty?  Possibly.  I don't think it's up to me to make that judgment either way.  I can only go by what they say, and what the people victimized have said.  And I admit my bias from seeing my mother's situation over the years.

*Edit There was a phrase I read a few years ago that really hit me.  Paraphrased, "we turn away good people for us in our relationships because they don't allow us to experience love in how we know it."  I.e., if we grew up in a dysfunctional environment and only saw toxic relationships growing up, that's what we define as "normal" and what we are familiar with.  And subconsciously, that's what "love" feels like to us.

I am NOT saying she has no responsibility here, only that I don't know, and I can see it either way.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

jdrakeh said:


> You recall correctly. She was one of Zak's most ardent defenders until it became untenable for her (until she started to get serious blow back).



At best, she ignored red flags because he was a friend and colleague and former partner that she didn’t want to see that way, which is bad enough. More likely, she cynically calculated the effect on her career and reputation.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> At best, she ignored red flags because he was a friend and colleague and former partner that she didn’t want to see that way, which is bad enough. More likely, she cynically calculated the effect on her career and reputation.



I wanted to give a charitable interpretation at the time, because hey, narcissistic predators actually c have a remarkable ability to pull the wool over the eyes of trusting people.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 12, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> I wanted to give a charitable interpretation at the time, because hey, narcissistic predators actually c have a remarkable ability to pull the wool over the eyes of trusting people.




If she hadn't done the same thing for multiple creepers, multiple times, over the years I, too, may have been charitable. However, she's run defense for some of the industry's most disgusting personalities, multiple times. So, no. She gets no charity from me.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

jdrakeh said:


> If she hadn't done the same thing for multiple creepers, multiple times, over the years I, too, may have been charitable. However, she's run defense for some of the industry's most disgusting personalities, multiple times. So, no. She gets no charity from me.



Yeah, that and the increasing direct accusations about her own misbehavior...


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

jdrakeh said:


> She was more than late to the party. She was an ardent defender of Zak (and other horrible people in the industry). Look, it's clear you don't want to acknowledge this, but it is what it is.



Absolutely nothing I’ve said indicates any such thing. Try keeping your anger directed toward actual bad actors, bud. 


Parmandur said:


> Enough of the stories are about Satine herself and her independent behavior, unfortunately, that she seems to be an active part of the abusive cycle here.



Sure, like I said. Her actions are hers, either way. 


Sacrosanct said:


> My mom went from an abusive relationship to an abusive relationship*.  I don't know Satine personally or her situation, or how much culpability she has here if any, but only to comment that it's not unheard of a person going from one abusive partner to another.  I do know she has overcome a dark chapter in her life previously. Is she also guilty?  Possibly.  I don't think it's up to me to make that judgment either way.  I can only go by what they say, and what the people victimized have said.  And I admit my bias from seeing my mother's situation over the years.
> 
> *Edit There was a phrase I read a few years ago that really hit me.  Paraphrased, "we turn away good people for us in our relationships because they don't allow us to experience love in how we know it."  I.e., if we grew up in a dysfunctional environment and only saw toxic relationships growing up, that's what we define as "normal" and what we are familiar with.  And subconsciously, that's what "love" feels like to us.
> 
> I am NOT saying she has no responsibility here, only that I don't know, and I can see it either way.



Yep, exactly.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Absolutely nothing I’ve said indicates any such thing. Try keeping your anger directed toward actual bad actors, bud.




You do see to be making multiple excuses for her and trying to offload all of this onto her husband, though? I recommend reading all of victim statements on Twitter.


----------



## Shakeshift (Jun 12, 2022)

I feel that Satine is a collaborator, especially considering they are married. It's hard to feign ignorance of the behavior of someone you're married to.

My guess is that Satine is going to eventually break from him, sever all personal and professional ties with him, and give a big story about how she was being gaslighted by Jamison the whole time, and tell everyone how she was being manipulated. Satine'll hope that everyone forgives her, and she'll just try to pretend the whole thing was someone else's machinations. Personally, I do not believe her. Not for one second.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

Shakeshift said:


> I feel that Satine is a collaborator, especially considering they are married. It's hard to feign ignorance of the behavior of someone you're married to.
> 
> My guess is that Satine is going to eventually break from him, sever all personal and professional ties with him, and give a big story about how she was being gaslighted by Jamison the whole time, and tell everyone how she was being manipulated. Satine'll hope that everyone forgives her, and she'll just try to pretend the whole thing was someone else's machinations. Personally, I do not believe her. Not for one second.



I think there is some truthiness to that: I doubt she is or was knowledgeable or party to all of his misbehavior. However, she certainly seems to be part of the toxicity.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 12, 2022)

Shakeshift said:


> I feel that Satine is a collaborator, especially considering they are married. It's hard to feign ignorance of the behavior of someone you're married to.



Married, business partner, and also screenshots of her toxicity. Why are people reluctant to point a finger at her but not Stone?


----------



## pukunui (Jun 12, 2022)

Never mind. I was wrong.


----------



## Mecheon (Jun 12, 2022)

Retreater said:


> Married, business partner, and also screenshots of her toxicity. Why are people reluctant to point a finger at her but not Stone?



Discord screenshots have popped up to basically say their defense on this one is to try to make Stone the fallguy and to shield Satine as much as possible, to boot.

Don't fall for it, folks. The're both calpable in this one.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> I think it’s worth mentioning given that Satine has been using her porn star name and persona to promote a game that is marketed at children.
> 
> Maybe I’m just a prude, but I’ve never been comfortable with the idea that some kid could watch official WotC-produced videos with Satine in them then Google her name to see what else is there and accidentally stumble across her adult film work. That doesn’t seem appropriate to me, and I’ve always been more than a little disappointed with WotC for being OK with it.
> 
> It just seems to me like nothing good has ever come out of D&D’s association with the adult entertainment industry.



Sort of a toxic and manipulative environment by definition.


----------



## thirdkingdom (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> I think it’s worth mentioning given that Satine has been using her porn star name and persona to promote a game that is marketed at children.
> 
> Maybe I’m just a prude, but I’ve never been comfortable with the idea that some kid could watch official WotC-produced videos with Satine in them then Google her name to see what else is there and accidentally stumble across her adult film work. That doesn’t seem appropriate to me, and I’ve always been more than a little disappointed with WotC for being OK with it.
> 
> It just seems to me like nothing good has ever come out of D&D’s association with the adult entertainment industry.



Regardless of what actual bad things Satine has done, sex work is not one of them, and she should not be judged for it.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

jdrakeh said:


> You do see to be making multiple excuses for her and trying to offload all of this onto her husband, though? I recommend reading all of victim statements on Twitter.



I recommend not letting your suspiciousness cause you to make foolishly unprovoked accusations, take a breath, and maybe stop interacting with me if you _can’t_ do so without making such accusations for no reason.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> I think it’s worth mentioning given that Satine has been using her porn star name and persona to promote a game that is marketed at children.
> 
> Maybe I’m just a prude, but I’ve never been comfortable with the idea that some kid could watch official WotC-produced videos with Satine in them then Google her name to see what else is there and accidentally stumble across her adult film work. That doesn’t seem appropriate to me, and I’ve always been more than a little disappointed with WotC for being OK with it.
> 
> It just seems to me like nothing good has ever come out of D&D’s association with the adult entertainment industry.



This goes well beyond prudishness. 

There is no reason for someone involved with D&D to hide having done sex work. 

Using accusations against someone to challenge the presence of anyone in the space whose ever done porn or other sex work is wildly inappropriate.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Enough of the stories are about Satine herself and her independent behavior, unfortunately, that she seems to be an active part of the abusive cycle here.



Which I have explicitly acknowledged previously.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> I think it’s worth mentioning given that Satine has been using her porn star name and persona to promote a game that is marketed at children.
> 
> Maybe I’m just a prude, but I’ve never been comfortable with the idea that some kid could watch official WotC-produced videos with Satine in them then Google her name to see what else is there and accidentally stumble across her adult film work. That doesn’t seem appropriate to me, and I’ve always been more than a little disappointed with WotC for being OK with it.
> 
> It just seems to me like nothing good has ever come out of D&D’s association with the adult entertainment industry.



Satine Phoenix is her stage name, she used it when she did porn, and continues to use it today. It is her chosen name. Shaming her for her past in the adult industry is uncool. Heck, if she were still involved in the adult industry, shaming for that would be uncool also.

Kids don't need to google Satine Phoenix's name to stumble across porn. In fact, finding porn via a google search isn't much of a thing anymore, google's search engine is much more "family friendly" than it used to be.

Phoenix deserves to be called out on her toxic behavior in the TTRPG community, both her own choices and her enabling of Stone. But to clutch your pearls over her past in the adult film industry is . . . well, it's awful.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 12, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Sort of a toxic and manipulative environment by definition.



The porn industry certainly has it problems, and there are plenty of toxic individuals within it. As does the mainstream Hollywood film industry, and the music industry, and sadly, the TTRPG industry . . . .

But the idea that the entire adult film industry is toxic and manipulative is false, a misconception based on sex-shaming.

Can we stick to the very real behavior problems exhibited by Phoenix and Stone without devolving into prudish sex-shaming?


----------



## MGibster (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> I think it’s worth mentioning given that Satine has been using her porn star name and persona to promote a game that is marketed at children.



I watched a few videos from a series Satine hosted about running games and I thought it was pretty good.  When I found out she had made adult movies, I didn't care in the least because there was nothing inappropriate in her GM advice videos.  From what I understand, she first gained attention from gamers for her participation in an online video series where the premise was adult entertainers playing a D&D campaign.  From there, she's pivoted.  A lot of people who make adult films have a very difficult time transitioning to other lines of work, I'm not going to fault Satine for her transition to new material even if she kept the same name.  If it was okay for Satine Phoenix to star in _I Hit It with My Axe _then I think it's okay for her to use that same persona.  



pukunui said:


> Maybe I’m just a prude, but I’ve never been comfortable with the idea that some kid could watch official WotC-produced videos with Satine in them then Google her name to see what else is there and accidentally stumble across her adult film work. That doesn’t seem appropriate to me, and I’ve always been more than a little disappointed with WotC for being OK with it.



I imagine those same kids look at stuff on the internet all the time.  Nobody's going to "stumble" across Satine's adult work.  You're going to have to go out there and look for it.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Shakeshift said:


> I feel that Satine is a collaborator,



Absolutely. Not only that, but a direct bad actor in her own right. 


Shakeshift said:


> especially considering they are married. It's hard to feign ignorance of the behavior of someone you're married to.



This part, though. Nah man. For every Marion Zimmer Bradley there are a hundred people, mostly women, who live in a state of fearful delusion about their spouse, and won’t ever see the truth until/unless they escape from them.  

That doesn’t seem to be the case here, but regardless let’s not spread harmful nonsense like this, that is used to lump abuse survivors in with their abusers all the time.  

She’s an abuser. Their marriage isn’t evidence of that.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> The porn industry certainly has it problems, and there are plenty of toxic individuals within it. As does the mainstream Hollywood film industry, and the music industry, and sadly, the TTRPG industry . . . .
> 
> But the idea that the entire adult film industry is toxic and manipulative is false, a misconception based on sex-shaming.
> 
> Can we stick to the very real behavior problems exhibited by Phoenix and Stone without devolving into prudish sex-shaming?



By all means, let's leave that aside as irrelevant to the behavior in question.


----------



## Synthil (Jun 12, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> Can we stick to the very real behavior problems exhibited by Phoenix and Stone without devolving into prudish sex-shaming?




Indeed. Judge them for being assholes not for using theirs to earn money.
It should be okay for kids to learn of the existence of the adult film industry and sex work in general. It doesn't mean they have to look at it. If an actor played in a 18+ horror movie, kids can also know about it, without having to watch the inappropriate movie.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jun 12, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> Satine Phoenix is her stage name, she used it when she did porn, and continues to use it today. It is her chosen name. Shaming her for her past in the adult industry is uncool. Heck, if she were still involved in the adult industry, shaming for that would be uncool also.




An alternate POV is that Satine Phoenix is a brand. It's standard practice for media companies to use different brands for their adult and child products so both kids and parents can better identify what is appropriate material.

On her web page, Satine refers to herself as "the queen of D&D". D&D is a generally a kid friendly brand. Suggesting Satine use a different stage name for her RPG presence isn't sex shaming, it's just pointing out bad marketing. She should either align herself with the D&D brand better, separate herself from the D&D name more, or understand that she's going to end up with a certain number of annoyed customers. There are a lot of actors and musicians that perform under different stage names for exactly that reason, even when "adult entertainment" isn't part of the equation.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 12, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> An alternate POV is that Satine Phoenix is a brand. It's standard practice for media companies to use different brands for their adult and child products so both kids and parents can better identify what is appropriate material.
> 
> On her web page, Satine refers to herself as "the queen of D&D". D&D is a generally a kid friendly brand. Suggesting Satine use a different stage name for her RPG presence isn't sex shaming, it's just pointing out bad marketing. She should either align herself with the D&D brand better, separate herself from the D&D name more, or understand that she's going to end up with a certain number of annoyed customers. There are a lot of actors and musicians that perform under different stage names for exactly that reason, even when "adult entertainment" isn't part of the equation.



It's her name. Yes, it's also a brand, but it's her name. And yes, suggesting she use a name other than her chosen name, because of it's association with her past adult work, is sex-shaming.

And for "bad marketing" . . . it's worked out just fine for her. If you put her toxic behaviors aside for a moment, she's a talented artist and fan-favorite within the D&D celeb sphere. Or, at least she was until her toxic behaviors came to light recently.


----------



## Malmuria (Jun 12, 2022)




----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> It's her name. Yes, it's also a brand, but it's her name. And yes, suggesting she use a name other than her chosen name, because of it's association with her past adult work, is sex-shaming.
> 
> And for "bad marketing" . . . it's worked out just fine for her. If you put her toxic behaviors aside for a moment, she's a talented artist and fan-favorite within the D&D celeb sphere. Or, at least she was until her toxic behaviors came to light recently.



Hell her talent and charisma are _why_ this took as long as it did. 

I always figured the try-hard vibe from her was just a wounded person not being able to fully relax in the spotlight and just be, rather than trying to be cool and sexy and whatever. Seems like it was, instead, the fact that her kindness and empathy and “bring light and healing” brand was utter BS.


----------



## Synthil (Jun 12, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> Suggesting Satine use a different stage name for her RPG presence isn't sex shaming, it's just pointing out bad marketing.




That's like asking Arnold Schwarzenegger to use different names for Kindergarten Cop and Predator. You _can _do that. But it's not a must. And certainly not a moral failing.


----------



## This Effin’ GM (Jun 12, 2022)

Yeah naw miss me with the shaming for adult film work. 

But also miss me with any defenses of her. I wonder if she’s going to pull the “throw stone to the wolves so she can continue her brand” card. 

Fully expect her to start claiming she’s being bullied even though she’s clearly part of many of these stories. she’s pulled that at least before.


----------



## Synthil (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> who live in a state of fearful delusion about their spouse, and won’t ever see the truth until/unless they escape from them.



But also: being abused doesn't mean one cannot also be also an abuser in their own right. Those aren't mutually exclusive.


----------



## darjr (Jun 12, 2022)

It's entirely possible that she's a bad actor (no doubt in my mind) and a victim of her husbands. I think it's also possible to recognize that and have some sympathy while holding her accountable for her actions and not wanting to have anything to do with her ever again.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Synthil said:


> But also: being abused doesn't mean one cannot also be also an abuser in their own right. Those aren't mutually exclusive.



I literally already explicitly said that was the case.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jun 12, 2022)

Synthil said:


> That's like asking Arnold Schwarzenegger to use different names for Kindergarten Cop and Predator. You _can _do that. But it's not a must. And certainly not a moral failing.




I agree completely.  It's just a business decision.  Nothing more, nothing less.

You may be interested to know, though, that Arnold did use a different name earlier in his career (Arnold Strong), and that others in the industry recommended that he change his name.  It wasn't a moral question in those cases, either, nor was he insulted by the suggestion.  It was a branding decision, just as much as Arnold choosing to do Kindergarten Cop and Jingle All The Way was a branding decision for his career path.

In any case, Satine Phoenix is certainly going to face some extremely difficult branding decisions in the very near future.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 12, 2022)

Never mind. I was wrong.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> tobacco, alcohol or gambling industry people to promote their game.



former employees in the "alcohol industry" have worked for WotC and on their partners. It's rather frequent that people who work in bars and restaurants want to get involved in performance.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> How does one oppose the evil that is pornography without coming across as sex shaming? I would genuinely like to know.
> 
> I don’t really care what Satine does with her body. I do care that WotC openly and knowingly associates with people using their adult film star personas to promote a game marketed for children.
> 
> ...




Whoa, there.  I was agreeing with you from a branding and business perspective.  I definitely don't think that pornography is evil.  There are reasons I don't let my kids watch it, but there's a lot of space between healthy sex education and moral absolutes.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 12, 2022)

Never mind. My anger was misdirected and the discussion was deemed irrelevant. Deleting to stop people from quoting me after the mods have asked us to stop talking about it.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> Are they known for working in that industry, though?



If you search their names you'd probably find out they were bartenders, waiters, etc.  60% of all Americans have worked in restaurants at some point.


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Jun 12, 2022)

I have been puzzled about why WOTC would want association with adult film stars…do what you want personally but if you are wanting to attract a large crowd including kids, it’s a ponderous choice.

I enjoy music and sports.  And a lot of times don’t exactly share values with those that provide me entertainment.

But in this industry I find that folks are held to really high standards.  Like out of proportion high—-such that a lot of people shaking their heads and gasping about Phoenix think nothing of rocking to the music of deadbeats or buying products from big corporations that don’t care about much.

I am guilty of this too.  I just find it an interesting phenomenon.  If you are in the gaming industry and an asshat, your fans can turn really fast.  

Often well deserved but unevenly applied…weird times…


----------



## pukunui (Jun 12, 2022)

Never mind.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 12, 2022)

I grew up in a nice Catholic family and have been on the internet (and what was before) via slow dial-up modems. You used to be about to download sexy pictures in the form of text and use a program to turn it into the picture. I am not concerned that somehow Satine will cause kids to find porn, it is too easy to find otherwise.

I also think that speculating about what being in the industry may or may not have been like is speculating into the wind. Since she has not tried to hide her past career, and has not been hard to find and talk to in the past (may be laying low now), I recommend asking her if you are that curious.

Otherwise, the stories of her actual action or lack of action in the TTRPG industry is more relevant.


----------



## Smackpixi (Jun 12, 2022)

This feels like a reminder D&D is best done by you and your friends by yourselves in whatever way you like it.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 12, 2022)

I mentioned upthread that Satine has said before that that point of her life was dark and she never wants to revisit it. I happen to think that telling someone they are prohibited from following their dream career because of what happened to them when they were young (sometimes not even their fault) is grossly unfair. I'm reminded of the attacks upon Sasha Grey and her new career. 

If WotC needs to cut ties with her, it should be based on her actions and behavior towards people. Not based on a previous career.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 12, 2022)

Smackpixi said:


> This feels like a reminder D&D is best done by you and your friends by yourselves in whatever way you like it.



These were producers/managers/directors harming talent. The managerial level are, accusedly, so corrupt they prevented you from playing stories at the table because creators left the industry due to abuse and lack of payment.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 12, 2022)

never mind


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> Why did she keep her porn industry stage name and persona then? Why not go for a completely fresh start? She never had a complete break, since she went from the porn industry to D&D via Zak S’s “Playing D&D with Porn Stars” thing.
> 
> 
> I am arguing that they shouldn’t use people involved in an industry that is known to be harmful to children to promote a game they market as being suitable to children. This is only an issue for me with Satine specifically because she _didn’t_ ditch her association with the porn industry before she started working with/for WotC to promote D&D.



She was playing D&D before that show. 

In my personal groups over the years I have had players from all walks of life. The fact that porn actors or actresses play D&D is not surprising to me.

Is the next attack going to be against Joe Manganiello because of Magic Mike being about male strippers?


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> How does one oppose the evil that is pornography without coming across as sex shaming? I would genuinely like to know.
> 
> I don’t really care what Satine does with her body. I do care that WotC openly and knowingly associates with people using their adult film star personas to promote a game marketed for children.
> 
> ...



You can't, you are engaging in pure sex-shaming here. But, hard to continue this thread without debating the so-called "evils" of pornography and those who are a part of the industry.


----------



## Zardnaar (Jun 12, 2022)

I have a low opinion of the porn industry and spent a couple of hours in March talking a younger online friend out of not doing it. The money isn't even that good.

 It's predatory imho even if legal.  

 Anyway no idea who these two are I don't watch online D&D streamers or use Twitter at all. Sit back and watch the poo show.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> And now we have multiple cases of toxic people transitioning from the porn industry to the D&D/gaming industry.



We have two. Zak S. and Satine Phoenix. And their toxicity isn't due to their association with the adult industry. 

And there are plenty of other toxic folks in the TTRPG industry that have never worked in the adult film industry. Jamison Stone is one, The RPG Pundit is another, the entire nu-TSR crew, the LotFP guy, and more . . .


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 12, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> We have two. Zak S. and Satine Phoenix. And their toxicity isn't due to their association with the adult industry.
> 
> And there are plenty of other toxic folks in the TTRPG industry that have never worked in the adult film industry. Jamison Stone is one, The RPG Pundit is another, the entire nu-TSR crew, the LotFP guy, and more . . .



That is a pretty broad brush you are painting there.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 12, 2022)

never mind


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 12, 2022)

This Effin’ GM said:


> Yeah naw miss me with the shaming for adult film work.
> 
> But also miss me with any defenses of her. I wonder if she’s going to pull the “throw stone to the wolves so she can continue her brand” card.
> 
> Fully expect her to start claiming she’s being bullied even though she’s clearly part of many of these stories. she’s pulled that at least before.



I don’t… really see anyone here defending her?


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> She was playing D&D before that show.




Yes, but she wasn't _known_ for playing D&D until that show and her association with Zak.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> How does one oppose the evil that is pornography without coming across as sex shaming? I would genuinely like to know.



One doesn’t. Sex work is work. If you believe otherwise, that is sex shaming. Maybe you are otherwise very sex-positive, and if so, that’s great. But the position that pornography is evil is a sex-negative one.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 12, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> One doesn’t. Sex work is work. If you believe otherwise, that is sex shaming. Maybe you are otherwise very sex-positive, and if so, that’s great. But the position that pornography is evil is a sex-negative one.



Pornography is causing great harm to young people. Consider what Billie Eilish has had to say about it, for instance. I don’t really understand how people can defend pornography knowing that it is causing harm. There are better ways to be sex-positive than to be in favor of an industry that harms both those involved in its production as well as those who consume its products.

EDIT: I'll leave this one here, but I understand now that my ire has been misdirected. It's the immoral/amoral bigwigs in the porn industry who should be held to account not the jobbing sex workers just trying to make a living in an exploitative industry. By shaming them, I am making it harder for them to break out of that industry.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> Pornography is causing great harm to young people. Look at what Billie Eilish has had to say about it, for instance. I don’t really understand how people can defend pornography knowing that it is causing harm. There are better ways to be sex-positive than to be in favor of an industry that harms both those involved in its production as well as those who consume its products.



One can oppose unethical practices in an industry without opposing the industry as a whole. The use of neonicotinoid pesticides in commercial farming has done and continues to do incredible harm to the environment and is widely recognized as being a major contributor to the endangerment of bees. But I don’t think the farming industry is evil.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> We have two. Zak S. and Satine Phoenix. And their toxicity isn't due to their association with the adult industry.
> 
> And there are plenty of other toxic folks in the TTRPG industry that have never worked in the adult film industry. Jamison Stone is one, The RPG Pundit is another, the entire nu-TSR crew, the LotFP guy, and more . . .



And sex workers in the D&D sphere who _aren’t _toxic, like Vivka, who is still actively doing sex work.  

Pretty sure Adam Keobel never did porn. Pretty sure being a narcissistic abuser isn’t a result of working in porn.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

jdrakeh said:


> Yes, but she wasn't _known_ for playing D&D until that show and her association with Zak.



So, you’re joining the sex shaming chorus, now? _shocking_


----------



## billd91 (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> And now we have multiple cases of toxic people transitioning from the porn industry to the D&D/gaming industry.
> 
> As a father of (pre-)teen daughters who are interested in D&D, I don’t like this trend, and I have said as much to WotC.



Trend? What trend? That people have left porn for another job? 
If you’re so concerned that sex work is evil, shouldn’t you be celebrating them getting out of that business?


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

billd91 said:


> Trend? What trend? That people have left porn for another job?
> If you’re so concerned that sex work is evil, shouldn’t you be celebrating them getting out of that business?



That wouldn’t allow the _shaming, _though.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 12, 2022)

Can we maybe leave the subject of porn out of this? It really isn’t relevant to the topic at all, and is only likely to lead the conversation in a negative direction.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 12, 2022)

I wonder is wandering off into the weeds and the lectures about sex shaming really have that firm a place here. Immediately going to sex shaming whenever the topic comes up is just a canned response without nuance or context.

I can be ok with the porn industry and understand that society as a whole has age restrictions on who can view it. I can be relaxed about it and understand that there are downward age restrictions of people used in the illegal parts of the industry and it is not sex shaming there.

To wonder why Hasbro wants a public spokes person that is openly from that industry is not a forbidden topic to be shut down with cries of sex shaming. In the case of D&D it is not aimed at super young children so I don’t think it is that big a deal but in the spectrum of views on the topic it is not evil to wonder or not like it. You can acknowledge that it is legal and have an intellectual view that working in it does not taint a person for life and still have emotional or moral reservations about the effect on children.

In the case that this thread is addressing, I don’t think it is relevant.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> To wonder why Hasbro wants a public spokes person that is openly from that industry is not a forbidden topic to be shut down with cries of sex shaming.



Yes, it is. 

Because it is sex shaming.


----------



## ECMO3 (Jun 12, 2022)

Anyone who thinks businesses are universally paid on invoices within 30 days are not living in the real world.  If you want more security and payments on a fixed schedule you should take a low-paying job as an employee with an actual wage, instead of holding out for more money as an independent contractor.


----------



## MGibster (Jun 12, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> An alternate POV is that Satine Phoenix is a brand. It's standard practice for media companies to use different brands for their adult and child products so both kids and parents can better identify what is appropriate material.



More importantly, Satine Phoenix is an actual living breathing human being.  There's an interview with poet Shel Silverstein


Deset Gled said:


> On her web page, Satine refers to herself as "the queen of D&D". D&D is a generally a kid friendly brand.



Since when?  In recent years, WotC published a campaign where the big bad evil guy has several sex slaves, is attempting to take another woman against her will as his bride, features child murder, drug addiction, human trafficking, cannibalism, and all sorts of other things that makes it inappropriate for children.  And that's just _Curse of Strahd_!  The very first edition of AD&D had the infamous random harlot table (Trollops of the Greyhawk unite).

We're not talking about eight year olds here, we're talking teenagers on the low end of the age spectrum for the most part.  If they can handle Strahd then can handle Satine Phoenix.  And even if they can't, well, there are plenty of adult D&D players who can.


pukunui said:


> I don’t really care what Satine does with her body. I do care that WotC openly and knowingly associates with people using their adult film star personas to promote a game marketed for children.



I never would have known Satine had made adult movies if other people hadn't told me.  It never came up in any of the videos I saw her in, but then I never watched _I Hit It with My Axe_.


Sacrosanct said:


> I mentioned upthread that Satine has said before that that point of her life was dark and she never wants to revisit it. I happen to think that telling someone they are prohibited from following their dream career because of what happened to them when they were young (sometimes not even their fault) is grossly unfair. I'm reminded of the attacks upon Sasha Grey and her new career.



Yeah, for the men and women who want to transition from adult filmmaking to another career it can be difficult because there are several obstacles.  You're branded forever and a lot of people don't want to associate with you.  Phoenix didn't do anything inappropriate in any of the videos I've seen her in, and I think it's unfair to hold her former occupation against her.  It's not unfair to hold her bad behavior against her though.  I'm fine with that. 



Charlaquin said:


> he use of *neonicotinoid* pesticides in commercial farming has done and continues to do incredible harm to the environment and is widely recognized as being a major contributor to the endangerment of bees.



Look, if you're just going to start making up words we can't have a serious....oh.....that is a word.  Carry on.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yes, it is.
> 
> Because it is sex shaming.



It is not.

I don’t invest in tobacco companies and would have an issue with someone being prominent in promoting that product being a spokes person for a hobby I enjoyed.

In this particular case I both do not think it is relevant and I personally have no problem with her former profession. I also don’t mind the discussion on it except for the immediate chorus of “sex shaming”.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 12, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> Anyone who thinks businesses are universally paid on invoices within 30 days are not living in the real world.  If you want more security and payments on a fixed schedule you should take a low-paying job as an employee with an actual wage, instead of being greedy and holding out for more money as an independent contractor.



There is a difference between people not reading their contracts and having unrealistic views on how contractors get paid and the allegations that people were not paid at all.

One I have a small amount of sympathy with the business owner. The other is a huge issue. And the examples that people cited of how the contracted (expected by the business) payment terms and the outside talents feelings were handled was not the way I would run a business.


----------



## billd91 (Jun 12, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> Anyone who thinks businesses are universally paid on invoices within 30 days are not living in the real world.  If you want more security and payments on a fixed schedule you should take a low-paying job as an employee with an actual wage, instead of being greedy and holding out for more money as an independent contractor.



Kind of naughty word to blame the freelancer who isn’t getting paid in a reasonable time for their employer’s poor management.
It may be true that lots of invoices get paid late in this economy, but it’s also true that in many of those cases, late invoices start to accrue interest after 30 days. You ought to see some of the massive interest payments made to health care providers if the insurance payer doesn’t pony up the payments in time...


----------



## bedir than (Jun 12, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> Anyone who thinks businesses are universally paid on invoices within 30 days are not living in the real world.  If you want more security and payments on a fixed schedule you should take a low-paying job as an employee with an actual wage, instead of being greedy and holding out for more money as an independent contractor.



The reported responses to requests of getting paid on contract were not mild explanations of cause, but beratement and threats of never working in the industry again.

That's highly unusual. I say this as someone who has invoiced hundreds of times, and yes orgs have missed deadline. We talked about it like mature adults. I worked with them again.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 12, 2022)

MGibster said:


> Look, if you're just going to start making up words we can't have a serious....oh.....that is a word.  Carry on.



Oh, yeah, neonicotinoids are no joke. It’s a silly-looking word and easy to misread if you haven’t heard it pronounced correctly. But, they’re literally “new” (which is to say, synthetic) nicotine-like chemicals, and they’ve been known to be one of the major contributors to the rapid decline of the bee population (the other of course being climate change) for a long time now - I was learning about them in high school in 08. But still nothing has been done about them, because lobbying. It’s not unlike the DDT situation in the 60s, except for the part where we’re basically dependent on bees for our survival, which is less true of birds.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> It is not.
> 
> I don’t invest in tobacco companies and would have an issue with someone being prominent in promoting that product being a spokes person for a hobby I enjoyed.
> 
> In this particular case I both do not think it is relevant and I personally have no problem with her former profession. I also don’t mind the discussion on it except for the immediate chorus of “sex shaming”.



Satine wasn’t a promoter of a product that kills large numbers of people every year. It’s a terrible comparison. She was an actor in an industry that can be toxic, but is far from inherently evil. 

To view her as socially and morally tainted because she used to have sex on camera for a living _is_ sex shaming, and it is inherently what is happening when one says things like, “Why do wotc want a former porn star promoting their game?” or suggest that she should have changed her public identity completely and worked to hide having done porn before entering into the public D&D space. 

The fact that any time a woman with a sexually noteworthy past does soemthing wrong, the discussion immediately becomes about her past, is significant.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 12, 2022)

I’m sorry for belaboring a point that was tangential to the topic at hand. It was a learning experience for me. I have realized that my ire was misplaced, and that I shouldn't shame sex workers for merely be sex workers. Exploitation and such happens in every industry, it seems.

Since the mods have asked us not to discuss pornography in this thread, I have edited this and my other posts in an effort to stop latecomers from quoting me before they reach the red text.


----------



## OakenHart (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> I also don’t mind the discussion on it except for the immediate chorus of “sex shaming”.



I don't think anyone is claiming that simply discussing it is "sex shaming".  Someone specifically said that it is "evil", though, which is pretty much sex shaming.

In any case, this topic isn't really ultimately about that.

This "Gilding Light" thing these two were doing comes off as incredibly creepy and borderline "cultish" to me.  When you start trying to bring in struggling creators, and throw in housing (and attaching those creators' work as an "expense" towards that housing) and adding "spirituality" and presenting yourself as a leader to that spirituality, it paints a pretty disturbing picture.  I hope that gets looked into more, it's the sort of situation a person can easily get trapped in when you are struggling to make money.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Satine wasn’t a promoter of a product that kills large numbers of people every year. It’s a terrible comparison. She was an actor in an industry that can be toxic, but is far from inherently evil.
> 
> To view her as socially and morally tainted because she used to have sex on camera for a living _is_ sex shaming, and it is inherently what is happening when one says things like, “Why do wotc want a former porn star promoting their game?” or suggest that she should have changed her public identity completely and worked to hide having done porn before entering into the public D&D space.
> 
> The fact that any time a woman with a sexually noteworthy past does soemthing wrong, the discussion immediately becomes about her past, is significant.



It is not sex shaming to question the porn industry.

Again, right to that canned response.

Porn is restricted to 18+ in the USA. Child porn is a serious criminal offense. There are documented and peer reviewed studies that show it can be harmful (and others that show it is not and all sorts of ones in between).

Outside the USA, there are quite a few countries with even stronger rules against it. It also crosses over into religious beliefs. 

No one is questioning the sex that happened.


----------



## DarkCrisis (Jun 12, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> An alternate POV is that Satine Phoenix is a brand. It's standard practice for media companies to use different brands for their adult and child products so both kids and parents can better identify what is appropriate material.
> 
> On her web page, Satine refers to herself as "the queen of D&D". D&D is a generally a kid friendly brand. Suggesting Satine use a different stage name for her RPG presence isn't sex shaming, it's just pointing out bad marketing. She should either align herself with the D&D brand better, separate herself from the D&D name more, or understand that she's going to end up with a certain number of annoyed customers. There are a lot of actors and musicians that perform under different stage names for exactly that reason, even when "adult entertainment" isn't part of the equation.



Queen of D&D?  

Bwahahahahaha!  _gasp_. Ahahahahahaha!!


----------



## billd91 (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> It is not sex shaming to question the porn industry.
> 
> Again, right to that canned response.
> .



But this isn’t about debating the merits of the porn industry. This is about using a history of sex work (porn, stripping) as a black mark against a woman now working in the TTRP business. THAT is sex shaming.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> It is not sex shaming to question the porn industry.
> 
> Again, right to that canned response.
> 
> ...



Again, one can “question” unethical practices within an industry without demonizing the industry as a whole, let alone creating barriers to future employment outside the industry for people who have worked in it. Are there problems with the porn industry? Of course there are, it’s an industry. Calling the industry itself evil, or creating a standard where one must take pains to hide the fact that they have worked in that industry in order to get work outside of it will not help fix those problems, and in fact, make them worse. It stigmatizes working in the industry, which insures people avoid going into it unless they are desperate, and isolates them once they have gone into it, making it harder for them to get back out. These factors combine to make sex workers incredibly vulnerable to exploitation by their employers within the industry, creating exactly the same cult-like conditions we critique Jamison and Satine for creating with this “guiding light” thing.

By all means, be critical of unethical practices in the porn industry (and any industry for that matter). Just do it in a way that doesn’t actively make it easier for bad actors in the industry to exploit their laborers.


----------



## Chromie (Jun 12, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> Anyone who thinks businesses are universally paid on invoices within 30 days are not living in the real world.  If you want more security and payments on a fixed schedule you should take a low-paying job as an employee with an actual wage, instead of being greedy and holding out for more money as an independent contractor.



A lot of these freelancer writers have full time job. It’s not greedy wanting to be paid for your work though.

I fail to see how porn has anything to do with who Satine is as an abuser and how that matters at all to this problem. It’s just a brand name and honestly, it detracts from the very current issue of how she and Jamison Stone have used their image to take advantage of others. Satine used her connections inside of WotC to dangle a job in front of a contact and then take it away. Jamison sexually assaulted someone and pressured them into nearly sleeping with him.

it’s definitely a “missing the forest for the trees” argument.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 12, 2022)

never mind


----------



## Malmuria (Jun 12, 2022)

It’s ironic because there are currently threads on this very site where people are advocating including sexual slavery in dnd settings. But no one jumps in on those threads to talk about how dnd is a child friendly game, unless to mock it on that account

Satins Phoenix seems to be a manipulative, abusive person who has enabled other manipulative, abusive people in the hobby.  The fact that she used to be a sex worker is irrelevant.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> It’s ironic because there are currently threads on this very site where people are advocating including sexual slavery in dnd settings. But no one jumps in on those threads to talk about how dnd is a child friendly game, unless to mock it on that account
> 
> Satins Phoenix seems to be a manipulative, abusive person who has enabled other manipulative, abusive people in the hobby.  The fact that she used to be a sex worker is irrelevant.



I don't see those posts, personally.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 12, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> It’s ironic because there are currently threads on this very site where people are advocating including sexual slavery in dnd settings. But no one jumps in on those threads to talk about how dnd is a child friendly game, unless to mock it on that account





Parmandur said:


> I don't see those posts, personally.



The most recent one got shut down before anyone _could_ reply. That said, I think I would make a distinction between how the game is officially promoted (and by whom) vs how individuals choose to play/talk about it.


----------



## Maxperson (Jun 12, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> So 2/3 have been cancelled.  There is D&D Hollywood for you, attracts the worst...



The last of the three won't be.  I played D&D with T.J. for 15 years and he's a great guy, and a great DM.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 12, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> Anyone who thinks businesses are universally paid on invoices within 30 days are not living in the real world.  If you want more security and payments on a fixed schedule you should take a low-paying job as an employee with an actual wage, instead of being greedy and holding out for more money as an independent contractor.



*Mod Note:*

Calling independent contractors “greedy” seems unnecessarily provocative and judgmental.  How about dialing it back a notch?


----------



## Synthil (Jun 12, 2022)

Children aren't allowed to drive cars. Cars kill a lot of people, children included. Cars destroy the environment. Therefore, everyone who worked in the automobile industry needs to hide that from children.

And you better not have served in the military and be open about that! Child soldiers are bad, so therefore kids should be held ignorant of soldiers existence as a whole.
...
To hide the mere existence of sex work from children is, in fact, sex shaming.


----------



## Steampunkette (Jun 12, 2022)

I think I lucked right the heck out by -starting- my writing career with ENPublishing.

The company is openly, aggressively, and appropriately inclusive and directly opposes the worst elements of the writing community, like Dave Johnson, and is very heavily focused on functioning as a business by paying all writers once a month for all the work that they have done.

Even if that work later requires significant revisions by an Editor who -also- gets paid the same day the following month for all the work they've done.

I have never felt so embraced by a group of coworkers, or so supported by management, as I do freelancing for ENPublishing.

And reading horror stories like this makes me feel even more grateful.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> It is not sex shaming to question the porn industry.



You aren’t “questioning the porn industry”, though. You’re questioning the validity of someone’s place in TTRPGs _because they used to be a sex worker. _


Myrdin Potter said:


> Again, right to that canned response.



A response you don’t like isn’t a canned response, my dude. 


Myrdin Potter said:


> Porn is restricted to 18+ in the USA. Child porn is a serious criminal offense. There are documented and peer reviewed studies that show it can be harmful (and others that show it is not and all sorts of ones in between).



None of this is in any way relevant. Child porn does not relate to the idea of children knowing porn exists. 


Myrdin Potter said:


> Outside the USA, there are quite a few countries with even stronger rules against it. It also crosses over into religious beliefs.
> 
> No one is questioning the sex that happened.



This is a blatant misrepresentation of the argument.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> You aren’t “questioning the porn industry”, though. You’re questioning the validity of someone’s place in TTRPGs _because they used to be a sex worker. _
> 
> A response you don’t like isn’t a canned response, my dude.
> 
> ...



First of all, I am not questioning someone that worked/works in the sex industry being in the TTRPG space. That would hit pretty close to home for me and I have said several times in this thread that in my opinion it ok and I think it is a valid topic for discussion.

You are thinking too much in absolutes - is there no age limit that children should have access to porn and knowledge of the industry? No parental consent? Should be publicly broadcast in any school?

Want a simple test, post a screen cap in this thread of a TTRPG person in their prior sex work job with any real explicit details. Post deleted and probably a ban.

Isn’t that sex shaming because any sex is fine?


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> I don't see those posts, personally.



Well the complaints and mockery that D&D is “For kids now” are pretty frequent, I’m sure you’ve seen those, if not the slavery posts.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 12, 2022)

pukunui said:


> How does one oppose the evil that is pornography without coming across as sex shaming? I would genuinely like to know.




*Mod Note:*
EN World is not an appropriate venue for your opposition to pornography in the first place.  If someone puts pornographic art in a gaming product, and you feel moved to voice opposition to that, it might be relevant, but the issue in the larger sphere is beyond our bailiwick.  

Please take your efforts elsewhere, and you will not have to worry about how people react to who you shame.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> First of all, I am not questioning someone that worked/works in the sex industry being in the TTRPG space.



Dude if you don’t have a problem with porn stars becoming D&D celebrities without hiding thier past then I do not care about any of the rest of this. You claimed that what other people were doing was “valid”, and not sex shaming. It is sex shaming, and is not remotely valid. 

All this nonsense garbage acting like anyone is advocating showing porn to kids is insanely out of line, though. Take a breath, regain some perspective. Please. 

Edited to keep on topic and in line with moderation.


----------



## DarkCrisis (Jun 12, 2022)

If Satine is trying to leave her porn star life in the past (which she says was a dark time for her), why continue to use the name/brand?


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Dude if you don’t have a problem with porn stars becoming D&D celebrities without hiding thier past then I do not care about any of the rest of this. Have whatever hang ups you want about porn, I guess. Personally I think prudish ideas about porn contributes to the toxicity in the industry, but whatever.
> 
> All this nonsense garbage acting like anyone is advocating showing porn to kids is insanely out of line, though. Take a breath, regain some perspective.



Dude, read what you are writing. Does not matter to what degree it is discussed, it is all sex shaming.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 12, 2022)

*Mod Note:*
Folks,

It is time for you all to leave her pornography work out of the discussion.  It is not relevant to how she treats her employees in the gaming industry.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> Dude, read what you are writing. Does not matter to what degree it is discussed, it is all sex shaming.



I do read what I write, thanks, and nothing I’ve said suggests what you claim it does. 

Questioning the validity of someone’s place here because, or suggesting that a bad actor is a bad actor as a result of, thier past as a porn star, is sex shaming. These are things other posters have been doing. I’ve no idea why you’re defending it if you don’t agree with them, but it doesn’t matter. Mods have already told someone to stop doing it, in red text, so we need to drop it and either discuss the _actual situation at hand, _or just let the thread move on. 

Edit: ninja’d by @Umbran i won’t comment on this debate any further.


----------



## This Effin’ GM (Jun 12, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> I don’t… really see anyone here defending her?



Naw not here at all which is nice. There’s already a few defenders popping up elsewhere stating that it’s all Jamison (even Jamison himself tried to state as much in his apology, shielding her) and her actions are purely from being abused.

I imagine some of those people will try to find areas to go and argue that case and I was just stating my thoughts for those readers or others on the fence. But no I did not mean to imply anyone talking here is excusing her


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 12, 2022)

DarkCrisis said:


> If Satine is trying to leave her porn star life in the past (which she says was a dark time for her), why continue to use the name/brand?



Maybe because it’s her name. It might have a lot of meaning to her - as a trans woman, I understand well the importance a name, especially a chosen name, can have to someone.

Honestly though, it’s probably mostly because she broke into the RPG industry through her connection to Zak S. She was on his show about playing D&D with porn stars, and between that breakthrough and her own charisma, was able to make a name for herself in the RPG industry. That wouldn’t have really been an option had she changed her name.

EDIT: Posted before seeing the mod text. That’s the last I’ll say on the matter here.


----------



## Lyandelill (Jun 12, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Maybe because it’s her name. It might have a lot of meaning to her - as a trans woman, I understand well the importance a name, especially a chosen name, can have to someone.



I kinda thought the same since, well... [pointing at flag in profile pic]


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Maybe because it’s her name. It might have a lot of meaning to her - as a trans woman, I understand well the importance a name, especially a chosen name, can have to someone.
> 
> Honestly though, it’s probably mostly because she broke into the RPG industry through her connection to Zak S. She was on his show about playing D&D with porn stars, and between that breakthrough and her own charisma, was able to make a name for herself in the RPG industry. That wouldn’t have really been an option had she changed her name.
> 
> EDIT: Posted before seeing the mod text. That’s the last I’ll say on the matter here.






Lyandelill said:


> I kinda thought the same since, well... [pointing at flag in profile pic]



Gotta love when these arguments crop up during Pride, eh?  

One thing that sucks about this that hasn’t been mentioned is that, to me at least (and maybe I’m alone in this who knows) Satine has been part of making D&D more queer. Obviously Jeremy Crawford has played a huge role from the game side, but people like Satine, Erika Ishii, Persephone Valentine, Ally Beardsley, Critical Bard, Taleisin Jaffe, Xander Jeanneret, Gabe Hicks, and various others, have played a large role I think in making Queer folk feel welcome, seen, and represented, in our community. 

I always figured her public presence was at least partly a mask, I just figured she was just _masking_ like the rest of us, not hiding this kind of ugliness.  

And now I am working to not be overly suspicious of people who have been close to her/both of them, like Erika Ishii, Becca Scott, and Taleisen Jaffe…


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Gotta love when these arguments crop up during Pride, eh?
> 
> One thing that sucks about this that hasn’t been mentioned is that, to me at least (and maybe I’m alone in this who knows) Satine has been part of making D&D more queer. Obviously Jeremy Crawford has played a huge role from the game side, but people like Satine, Erika Ishii, Persephone Valentine, Ally Beardsley, Critical Bard, Taleisin Jaffe, Xander Jeanneret, Gabe Hicks, and various others, have played a large role I think in making Queer folk feel welcome, seen, and represented, in our community.
> 
> ...



I would be so sad if something like this were to come out about Taleisen Jaffe. I don’t get the vibe from him, but I’m also not immune to forming parasocical relationships with celebrities.


----------



## Aldarc (Jun 12, 2022)

Both Stone and Phoenix worked in the porn industry yet Phoenix is getting a disproportionate amount of flack and shame for it in the thread. The underlying sexism behind this is hardly subtle. Nor is any of it pertinent to the abusive behaviors of either Stone or Phoenix.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> I would be so sad if something like this were to come out about Taleisen Jaffe. I don’t get the vibe from him, but I’m also not immune to forming parasocical relationships with celebrities.



Yeah, definitely. Like I’d be sad if Becca Scott and her husband were terrible, because I like her content and IIRC he is in an important role at dropout/college humor (I think?), and I’ll be honest also because they’re very cute lol, but Taleisen would be…heartbreaking. Him and Erika, more than anyone else in that circle. 


Aldarc said:


> Both Stone and Phoenix worked in the porn industry yet Phoenix is getting a disproportionate amount of flack and shame for it in the thread. The underlying sexism behind this is hardly subtle. Nor is any of it pertinent to the abusive behaviors of either Stone or Phoenix.



I don’t think her ethnicity exactly has nothing to do with it, either, unfortunately.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 12, 2022)

Everybody, let's follow the moderators' statements and stop discussing what Phoenix did before D&D before this whole thread gets shut down. 
What's going on in this issue is important enough to discuss without getting locked due to a tangent.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 12, 2022)

One of the more disappointing things in this is that Satine leverages her time with Wizards as a way to punish people for having the audacity of asking for pay and credit for work they do.

Some individuals with WotC are going to need to make statements about this.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 12, 2022)

bedir than said:


> Some individuals with WotC are going to need to make statements about this.



Does she still work for them? Has Stone ever worked for them?
If Monte Cook or Rob Heinsoo got caught in a scandal, I wouldn't expect a statement from Wizards.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 12, 2022)

Retreater said:


> Does she still work for them? Has Stone ever worked for them?
> If Monte Cook or Rob Heinsoo got caught in a scandal, I wouldn't expect a statement from Wizards.



Read through Liisa's account and then note several people back it.

Satine, prior to working with Jamison, used her network developed while working at WotC to get Liisa's job offer from WotC removed. All because Liisa asked to be credited and paid for work she did but that Ruty and Satine claimed as theirs


----------



## Shakeshift (Jun 12, 2022)

DarkCrisis said:


> Queen of D&D?
> 
> Bwahahahahaha!  _gasp_. Ahahahahahaha!!



I agree. If it's a title of royalty and prestige that you grant YOURSELF, it's hardly a title at all.

Besides that, Satine is not that great of a DM, to be honest. I've watched two of her streams. She doesn't know the technical side of things very well, she doesn't do a lot of prep ahead of time so she gets bogged down, and she plays 'favorites' at the gaming table by giving her favorite players added 'rules of cool' and added attention, and leaving the people at the other end of the people being dismissed out of hand whenever they ask a legitimate question, as if she's annoyed by them pestering her with questions. 

It's all.... not very professional.

HARDLY the "Queen of D&D."


----------



## TheSword (Jun 12, 2022)

Beware of who you kick on the way up, because they’ll kick twice as hard on the way down. Phoenix and Stone spent three days on the most expensive tattoo in history… it will cost them their careers. Fair play to the tattooist for sticking up for the freelancers and for making it clear that it was both Stone and Phoenix.

Its interesting when you look at this kind of case just how damaging the wrong kind of apology can be. Like worse than not apologizing at all.

The other lesson… never put it in writing! It’s always the messages be it discord, WhatsApp, Twitter etc that brings people down in the end.

I won’t be sorry to see them go. I never liked WotC courting the kind of edgy/sexualised element to attempt to seem cool. Luckily they have moved far past that.


----------



## Eltab (Jun 12, 2022)

Invoices:
In manufacturing, you may get 30 days, 60 days, or 90 days to pay, the clock starts when the Invoice is sent to you.  If you are making legit efforts to keep up, you can get a grace period with your supplier - for instance if the check really is delayed in the mail on the day it was due.

 "Greedy"?:
Independent contractors have to pay twice as much Social Security and Medicare taxes as wage-based employees.  Because the contractors are both employer and employee to themselves.  They really need the money for work done, before the due date for payment - not "eventually".


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Jun 12, 2022)

TheSword said:


> Beware of who you kick on the way up, because they’ll kick twice as hard on the way down. Phoenix and Stone spent three days on the most expensive tattoo in history… it will cost them their careers. Fair play to the tattooist for sticking up for the freelancers and for making it clear that it was both Stone and Phoenix.
> 
> Its interesting when you look at this kind of case just how damaging the wrong kind of apology can be. Like worse than not apologizing at all.
> 
> ...



This marketing was ponderous to me and kind of embarrassing.  Trying too hard…


----------



## darjr (Jun 12, 2022)

bedir than said:


> One of the more disappointing things in this is that Satine leverages her time with Wizards as a way to punish people for having the audacity of asking for pay and credit for work they do.
> 
> Some individuals with WotC are going to need to make statements about this.



There is a post out there about how employees or an employee at WotC tried to stop her from badmouthing people and campaigning grudges against people. I’d have to dig for it to find it.


----------



## Shakeshift (Jun 12, 2022)

I don't like it when people refer to independent contractors as 'greedy.' In addition to being a core component of the RPG industry, I'd like to see most companies survive without independent contractors. If you want to see real gouging, look at the ways that most of the big companies try to manipulate, control, or intimidate independent contractors, trying to get them to work for a fraction of the usual price in exchange for the "honor" of working for one of the big corporations while the big companies are still making wads of money in the process. 

THAT is serious gouging.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> The last of the three won't be.  I played D&D with T.J. for 15 years and he's a great guy, and a great DM.



Thank you do much for sharing that: when a big Scandal like this hits, it is easy to get cynical and forget all of the decent people out there.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Well the complaints and mockery that D&D is “For kids now” are pretty frequent, I’m sure you’ve seen those, if not the slavery posts.



The forum provides tools to avoid both of those things entirely.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 12, 2022)

Shakeshift said:


> HARDLY the "Queen of D&D."



Can I nominate Jennell Jaquays for this title?


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

bedir than said:


> Read through Liisa's account and then note several people back it.
> 
> Satine, prior to working with Jamison, used her network developed while working at WotC to get Liisa's job offer from WotC removed. All because Liisa asked to be credited and paid for work she did but that Ruty and Satine claimed as theirs



At least one of the people she blanks the name of has to be Greg Tito.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> At least one of the people she blanks the name of has to be Greg Tito.



Which is disappointing, as he and Shelly both seem like fairly solid people. 



Parmandur said:


> The forum provides tools to avoid both of those things entirely.



Sure. I don't anyone is complaining about having to see them, though, just noting the dichotomy.


----------



## Steampunkette (Jun 12, 2022)

Retreater said:


> Can I nominate Jennell Jaquays for this title?



I second the nomination.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Which is disappointing, as he and Shelly both seem like fairly solid people.



Decent people make mistakes, especially when charismatic Narcisists are involved.


doctorbadwolf said:


> Sure. I don't anyone is complaining about having to see them, though, just noting the dichotomy.



Right, I just don't tend to see those posts, so I literally can't see the dichotomy.


----------



## Maggan (Jun 12, 2022)

Eltab said:


> Independent contractors have to pay twice as much Social Security and Medicare taxes as wage-based employees.  Because the contractors are both employer and employee to themselves.  They really need the money for work done, before the due date for payment - not "eventually".




Yeah, when I do writing gigs I make about one third of my normal salary. If I'm lucky and crank out the stuff quickly.

I hardly think that people chosing to write as freelancers for RPGs could by any stretch be called "greedy".


----------



## ersatzphil (Jun 12, 2022)

Steampunkette said:


> I second the nomination.



Do we need further discussion, or should we move on to voting?

_edit:_ Do we need a quorum or is a simple majority vote enough to carry a motion? I forget the rules.


----------



## Staffan (Jun 12, 2022)

DarkCrisis said:


> Queen of D&D?
> 
> Bwahahahahaha!  _gasp_. Ahahahahahaha!!



If I was gonna give that title to anyone, it'd probably be Marisha Ray.

Edit: Though Jennell Jaquays is also a perfectly cromulent choice.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Staffan said:


> If I was gonna give that title to anyone, it'd probably be Marisha Ray.
> 
> Edit: Though Jennell Jaquays is also a perfectly cromulent choice.



Yeah I _think_ the title was given to Satine by the LA dnd scene when she was younger, possibly by Taliesen Jaffe, or at least he was the first person I ever heard refer to the title. It's not necessarily something she gave herself, though learning more about what she's like privately, who knows.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

I mean, Jeremy Crawford is the Pope of D&D, so I think the responsibility got anointing royalty is his job?


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 12, 2022)

Wonder why people get away with bad behavior for quite a while? This thread has a good clue. One person says anything and they are just sex shaming, sexist racist people. 

That is why many people, especially ones new to the scene or feeling unsure are scared to come forward.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> Wonder why people get away with bad behavior for quite a while? This thread has a good clue. One person says anything and they are just sex shaming, sexist racist people.
> 
> That is why many people, especially ones new to the scene or feeling unsure are scared to come forward.



Pretty sure it has nothing to do with this.   Especially since no one who came forward after keeping it to themselves cited this reason. 

It has more to to with their current power, and nothing to do with their previous careers. There is zero reason to even bring up their previous careers because it has nothing to do with their current behavior.


----------



## darjr (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> Wonder why people get away with bad behavior for quite a while? This thread has a good clue. One person says anything and they are just sex shaming, sexist racist people.
> 
> That is why many people, especially ones new to the scene or feeling unsure are scared to come forward.



Several people have mentioned her former career. Every time she comes up in conversation someone points at it with derision. I dint think the word fear means what you think it means.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> Wonder why people get away with bad behavior for quite a while? This thread has a good clue. One person says anything and they are just sex shaming, sexist racist people.
> 
> That is why many people, especially ones new to the scene or feeling unsure are scared to come forward.



Let's drop that part of the discussion, please.

It is true that clever Narcissists will take advantage of people making charitable interpretations of events, amd are good at creating plausible scenarios and selling people on them.

It is still an ethical mandate to try and read events charitably until good evidence is forthcoming.


----------



## billd91 (Jun 12, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> Wonder why people get away with bad behavior for quite a while? This thread has a good clue. One person says anything and they are just sex shaming, sexist racist people.
> 
> That is why many people, especially ones new to the scene or feeling unsure are scared to come forward.



Wow. *THAT*'s your takeaway from this? Nobody said anything about sex shaming until someone else did that very thing despite all the criticism leveled at her in this thread for her behavior within the TTRPG industry - which should be the only thing that matters in this discussion, and had been, before someone cast aspersions on her because of her prior sex work.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 12, 2022)

I agree that I see no evidence in this thread of sexism or racism (and the mods here don’t let that stand if it is happening).

However, it is in the thread. The insinuation that she is getting attention because of her gender and an insinuation that it is racism as well.

Couple that with the people being told that they are mistaken, they do not understand the way things work. No one would believe them. Etc.

Then for years except for whispers in the back it keeps happening.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 12, 2022)

billd91 said:


> But this isn’t about debating the merits of the porn industry. This is about using a history of sex work (porn, stripping) as a black mark against a woman now working in the TTRP business. THAT is sex shaming.



Agreed. Folks, if you feel you need to do that, you can find somewhere else to do it. Shaming people for sex work, which is real legitimate work, is not acceptable. Stick to the topic at hand, please.


----------



## Staffan (Jun 12, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yeah, definitely. Like I’d be sad if Becca Scott and her husband were terrible, because I like her content and IIRC he is in an important role at dropout/college humor (I think?), and I’ll be honest also because they’re very cute lol, but Taleisen would be…heartbreaking. Him and Erika, more than anyone else in that circle.



I'd be really surprised if Erika Ishii turned out to be an abuser. I mean, sure, it could be an act but they appear to be far too much of a chaos gremlin for that. Satine by comparison always presented a very composed image of herself.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 12, 2022)

Staffan said:


> I'd be really surprised if Erika Ishii turned out to be an abuser. I mean, sure, it could be an act but they appear to be far too much of a chaos gremlin for that. Satine by comparison always presented a very composed image of herself.



Yeah, I definitely don't think it's likely.


----------



## Faolyn (Jun 13, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> Pretty sure it has nothing to do with this.   Especially since no one who came forward after keeping it to themselves cited this reason.
> 
> It has more to to with their current power, and nothing to do with their previous careers. There is zero reason to even bring up their previous careers because it has nothing to do with their current behavior.



Satine was also a comic book illustrator. That _also _has nothing to do with her current behavior.


----------



## darjr (Jun 13, 2022)

Origins released a statement.








						Update: Safety Update
					






					tabletop.events


----------



## MGibster (Jun 13, 2022)

Is it better to be a happy pig or a dissatisfied person?  I grew up knowing next to nothing about the likes of the Hickmans, Pondsmith, Gygax, and others.  In fact, I learned Tracy Hickman was a man and Mike Pondsmith black several years after I had already played the games/modules they created.  I'll have to admit that I was a happy little piglet wallowing in my ignorance back then.  I enjoyed some of Satine Phoenix's videos from a few years back, and I'd be happy having never heard of this.  But it's better to be a dissatisfied person that knows the truth so I can decide for myself whether or not I want to support people who engage in bad behavior.

Edit:  Thanks to @Dire Bare for the correction to Mr. Hickman's gender.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 13, 2022)

darjr said:


> Origins released a statement



Glad they're still getting the honorary treatment from Origins. :/


----------



## ECMO3 (Jun 13, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> There is a difference between people not reading their contracts and having unrealistic views on how contractors get paid and the allegations that people were not paid at all.
> 
> One I have a small amount of sympathy with the business owner. The other is a huge issue. And the examples that people cited of how the contracted (expected by the business) payment terms and the outside talents feelings were handled was not the way I would run a business.




Not being paid at all is a regular part of owning a business, particularly when you are supplying a good or service to another retail business.

Not paying suppliers until you sell a product is common, regardless of what is written in the contract or agreement.  The courts exist as a way to remedy this although that can be both costly and limited.

Treating individuals poorly is uncalled for and I am not defending the tone in the tweets, but there is fundamental difference between not paying someone (i.e. an employee) and not paying someone you contracted with and are filing a 1099 for.  It is not the "person" that is not being paid, it is the business that person owns.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 13, 2022)

This event has led to several other people coming forward about other industry folks a well. Not nearly as big named as Satine, but I’ve been seeing more posts about other people in the industry taking advantage of others. Not gonna name drop here, but I think tearing off the band aid is important. We really need to respect each other in this industry when creating business partnerships. It’s called a “ Professional” for a reason.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 13, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> It is not the "person" that is not being paid, it is the business that person owns.



In a part time industry like this most people don't have businesses. They file on Schedule C. 
Not paying them is not paying them.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 13, 2022)

MGibster said:


> Is it better to be a happy pig or a dissatisfied person?  I grew up knowing next to nothing about the likes of the Hickmans, Pondsmith, Gygax, and others.  In fact, I learned Tracy Hickman was a woman and Mike Pondsmith black several years after I had already played the games/modules they created.  I'll have to admit that I was a happy little piglet wallowing in my ignorance back then.  I enjoyed some of Satine Phoenix's videos from a few years back, and I'd be happy having never heard of this.  But it's better to be a dissatisfied person that knows the truth so I can decide for myself whether or not I want to support people who engage in bad behavior.



You probably meant this, but Tracy Hickman is a man, not a woman. You also seem to be lumping Hickman, Pondsmith, and Gygax in with Phoenix and Stone . . . . Gygax had some regressive views, but is there something we should know about the others?


----------



## MGibster (Jun 13, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> You probably meant this, but Tracy Hickman is a man, not a woman. You also seem to be lumping Hickman, Pondsmith, and Gygax in with Phoenix and Stone . . . . Gygax had some regressive views, but is there something we should know about the others?



Thanks!  What I meant to say was that I thought Tracy Hickman was a woman.  Only because I had never known a guy named Tracy.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 13, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> This event has led to several other people coming forward about other industry folks a well. Not nearly as big named as Satine, but I’ve been seeing more posts about other people in the industry taking advantage of others. Not gonna name drop here, but I think tearing off the band aid is important. We really need to respect each other in this industry when creating business partnerships. It’s called a “ Professional” for a reason.



As tends to happen. Unfortunate, but better to find out now than later.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 13, 2022)

MGibster said:


> Thanks!  What I meant to say was that I thought Tracy Hickman was a woman.  Only because I had never known a guy named Tracy.



Yeah, it was pretty common back in the day to think that Tracy Hickman and Margaret Weis were a team of female writers. Not that it matters of course, some folks still make the mistake today.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 13, 2022)

Retreater said:


> Does she still work for them? Has Stone ever worked for them?
> If Monte Cook or Rob Heinsoo got caught in a scandal, I wouldn't expect a statement from Wizards.



If the behavior in question stretched back to their time at wotc and allegedly involved people still at the company, it would be weird not to.


----------



## Sabathius42 (Jun 13, 2022)

Edit:  Nevermind.  It sucks to want to reply to something from page 6 and what you wrote has become verboten by the time you finish reading the rest of the thread.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 13, 2022)

Retreater said:


> Glad they're still getting the honorary treatment from Origins. :/



Origins is having leadership issues of their own and these two are sadly not the worst people who presented this year according to friends who are more in the know about things than I.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 13, 2022)

Vaalingrade said:


> Origins is having leadership issues of their own and these two are sadly not the worst people who presented this year according to friends who are more in the know about things than I.



Well that gets at least 1 yike....


----------



## Eric V (Jun 13, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yeah, definitely. Like I’d be sad if Becca Scott and her husband were terrible, because I like her content and IIRC he is in an important role at dropout/college humor (I think?), and I’ll be honest also because they’re very cute lol, but Taleisen would be…heartbreaking. Him and Erika, more than anyone else in that circle.



Weird confluence of events:  I just read this post right after I saw a post from Becca Scott describing SP and SJ as "two of the kindest, most open, loving, and integrated people I have ever met. I am so grateful to call them friends!!!"

Universe is weird.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 13, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> Not being paid at all is a regular part of owning a business, particularly when you are supplying a good or service to another retail business.
> 
> Not paying suppliers until you sell a product is common, regardless of what is written in the contract or agreement.  The courts exist as a way to remedy this although that can be both costly and limited.
> 
> Treating individuals poorly is uncalled for and I am not defending the tone in the tweets, but there is fundamental difference between not paying someone (i.e. an employee) and not paying someone you contracted with and are filing a 1099 for.  It is not the "person" that is not being paid, it is the business that person owns.



Most such businesses are actually individuals.

Now RPG work generally pays poorly and maybe this experience has a social good by chasing people away from the space into more productive endeavors. I actually (tongue in cheek) scolded a friend who bends over backwards to make sure his freelancers are paid, including taking a Covid loan out at the beginning of the pandemic to make sure he could pay in advance to give them a cushion for encouraging people to stick it out …

Europe actually got pretty annoyed at exploiting the power dynamic of larger companies bullying smaller companies and passed a law that includes mandatory interest for late payment for smaller companies.


----------



## teitan (Jun 13, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> Growing old means constantly wondering why these people are "celebrities" in the first place, but also never having to worry about it.



Right? How do we have “celebrity players”? I get someone like Vin Diesel, a celebrity who plays D&D but someone who is a celebrity because they play D&D and peacock up for YouTube? Cool story bro. I want to support Indy creators and all but treating gamers like rock stars? 

My thoughts: people are jerks. People are in communities. Jerks are therefore in communities. Beware lest one day you become the jerk. Basically, don’t judge too harshly because someone will find something you said or did and drag it out until it’s a dead horse. But some people… drag it out, beat the horse and bang the gong because sexual predators, not paying the staff and abusive garbage has got to go. It’s one thing to think man, that’s my friend, I believe him and another to be that jerk that did the bad things.


----------



## DarkCrisis (Jun 13, 2022)

Staffan said:


> If I was gonna give that title to anyone, it'd probably be Marisha Ray.
> 
> Edit: Though Jennell Jaquays is also a perfectly cromulent choice.




Popular online streamers aside, I’d give it to like Gygaxs daughter who helped him create the game or perhaps the author Margaret Weis who helped create Dragonlance which helped evolve D&D during that period and wrote some of the most popular d&d fiction to date.

Edit:  having my looked Up  Jennell Jaquays, yes totally.


----------



## AnotherGuy (Jun 13, 2022)

I'm not sure what Jordan Peterson has anything to do with anything. That was just a stupid inclusion.

Anyways that aside - the kickstarter states that Deborah Ann Wohl was a celeb guest writer in the Sirens project. I wonder what her experience with the duo was like.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 13, 2022)

AnotherGuy said:


> I'm not sure what Jordan Peterson has anything to do with anything. That was just a stupid inclusion.




Well, he's a pretty horrible person, so them being fans of a really horrible person when they do horrible things is relevant. 


AnotherGuy said:


> Anyways that aside - the kickstarter states that Deborah Ann Wohl was a celeb guest writer in the Sirens project. I wonder what her experience with the duo was like.



She's more famous than them, so I imagine pretty good.  Narcissists are extremely polite and charming to those who they think they can gain something from. The minute a person's usefulness is done, however, it's like night and day.


----------



## AnotherGuy (Jun 13, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> Satins Phoenix seems to be a manipulative, abusive person who has enabled other manipulative, abusive people in the hobby.  The fact that she used to be a sex worker is irrelevant.




I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you on this perception of Satine and I have not read the entire thread, but from the first page - I get the idea she certainly is an enabler of abusive and manipulative people, but from the little I have seen its mostly that Jamison dude who is the monster. She is certainly complicit in that she should have reined him in, and that could be seen as manipulative, in that she sets her attack dog on the innocents, but one could also see it that she didn't want to engage or confront Jamison on his handling of the issues. Could she be afraid or intimidated by him?

Am I far out in this? Is there something that I'm possibly missing?

EDIT: Yup I was missing the Liisa story. Ignore the above.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 13, 2022)

AnotherGuy said:


> I'm not picking on necessarily disagreeing with you on this perception of Satine and I have not read the entire thread, but from the first page - I get the idea she certainly is an enabler of abusive and manipulative people, but from the little I have seen its mostly that Jamison dude who is the monster. She is certainly complicit in that she should have reined him in, and that could be seen as manipulative, in that she sets her attack dog on the innocents, but one could also see it that she didn't want to engage or confront Jamison on his handling of the issues. Could she be afraid or intimidated by him.
> 
> Am I far out in this? Is there something that I'm possibly missing?



You missed her abuse of Liisa, which predates Satine's relationship with Jamison.

That was something deeper in the thread.


----------



## AnotherGuy (Jun 13, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> Well, he's a pretty horrible person, so them being fans of a really horrible person when they do horrible things is relevant.



Hmm, that is an opinion I don't share.



Sacrosanct said:


> She's more famous than them, so I imagine pretty good.  Narcissists are extremely polite and charming to those who they think they can gain something from. The minute a person's usefulness is done, however, it's like night and day.



That is what I suspect as well.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 13, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Well that gets at least 1 yike....



To be clear, it's just the one guy I know about, not like a legion of scumbags.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 13, 2022)

I don't think being a fan of Jordan Peterson makes someone a bad person. I've read his book and watched listened to some of his podcasts - just to see what the deal with him is. But if one takes his message to heart and then has the persona of accepting everyone across society, being welcoming to a diverse population, accepting "cultural relativism," etc., the person is being duplicitous.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 13, 2022)

AnotherGuy said:


> Hmm, that is an opinion I don't share.



He's a misogynist who thinks men should be in charge and have all the workplace leadership jobs, women should be home in the kitchen, and thinks only skinny women can be attractive.  I happen to think that's a horrible person.  Obviously, your opinion may vary...


----------



## AnotherGuy (Jun 13, 2022)

bedir than said:


> By not reading the thread you missed her abuse of Liisa, which predates Satine's relationship with Jamison



Found it thanks. A long twitter thread by Liisa.
I'm getting the distinct feel she aligns herself with manipulators and abusers (Zak, Ruty and Jamison)


----------



## AnotherGuy (Jun 13, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> He's a misogynist who thinks men should be in charge and have all the workplace leadership jobs, women should be home in the kitchen, and thinks only skinny women can be attractive.  I happen to think that's a horrible person.  Obviously, your opinion may vary...



I'm not going to get into it here as we'd likely derail the thread and receive unwelcoming visitations from the mods.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 13, 2022)

AnotherGuy said:


> Found it thanks. A long twitter thread by Liisa.
> I'm getting the distinct feel she aligns herself with manipulators and abusers.



Also, I adjusted my language a bit from what you quoted. On a reread I thought it a bit harsh


----------



## Mort (Jun 13, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> She's more famous than them, so I imagine pretty good.  Narcissists are extremely polite and charming to those who they think they can gain something from. The minute a person's usefulness is done, however, it's like night and day.




RIght.

You don't judge someone by how they treat peers, bosses/superiors and those able to advance their interests. You judge someone by how they treat employees, contractors service people etc. Much more likely to give a true view of who they actually are.


----------



## NotAYakk (Jun 13, 2022)

teitan said:


> Right? How do we have “celebrity players”? I get someone like Vin Diesel, a celebrity who plays D&D but someone who is a celebrity because they play D&D and peacock up for YouTube? Cool story bro. I want to support Indy creators and all but treating gamers like rock stars?



Vin Diesel is a celebrity for being well known to many people and the huge parasocial relationship effects.

People playing games and sharing it can get the same parasocial effects.  Hence become celebrities, if only in a niche.

Parasocial connections -- when you feel you know someone via one-way social interactions, like movies or videos or music or gossip magazines or political talk shows -- creates most of the celebrities of the modern era.

People get attached to the presented character (be it a formal character or a type of character, or whatever the person presents) and that attachment from many people has value in promoting other works.

LMM is a celebrity, in that when I hear he's done music for something, it makes me more likely to want to experience it.  And the persona he's sharing (real or not) amuses me to watch.  I get that that isn't him, and the connection I feel isn't reciprocal.

There are small-time podcasters I listen to.  Not a huge audience.  But if I ran into them, I'd love to buy them a drink.  Heck, if I ran into one of them and they asked me to spot them a 20, I'd do it and write it off as a loss if I never got it back.  They don't know me from adam.  Take that benefit, and multiply it by millions, and that is social and economic power.

And some of them just play D&D on some obscure podcast you have never heard of.  They don't have millions of followers, so their celebrity power is limited.  As the audience grows, the amount of parasocial connections they have scales linearly.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 13, 2022)

Mort said:


> RIght.
> 
> You don't judge someone by how they treat peers, bosses/superiors and those able to advance their interests. You judge someone by how they treat employees, contractors service people etc. Much more likely to give a true view of who they actually are.



As the saying goes, "Someone who treats you well but the waitstaff bad, is a bad person."


----------



## SteveC (Jun 13, 2022)

I wish I could say any of this is surprising, but ... it's just not. I'm an old fart, and I've also been lucky enough to be around a lot of people in the industry from the past few decades. It's also present in every part of fandom. Talk to me about the scene at science fiction fandom conventions sometimes ... ugh. This isn't something new. 

I think the most important thing is to be very selective as far as who is your brand ambassador.


----------



## Chromie (Jun 13, 2022)

AnotherGuy said:


> I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you on this perception of Satine and I have not read the entire thread, but from the first page - I get the idea she certainly is an enabler of abusive and manipulative people, but from the little I have seen its mostly that Jamison dude who is the monster. She is certainly complicit in that she should have reined him in, and that could be seen as manipulative, in that she sets her attack dog on the innocents, but one could also see it that she didn't want to engage or confront Jamison on his handling of the issues. Could she be afraid or intimidated by him?
> 
> Am I far out in this? Is there something that I'm possibly missing?
> 
> EDIT: Yup I was missing the Liisa story. Ignore the above.



I will post it in the OP so people don’t miss it. I should probably add Jamison‘s PR response where it came out that he’s going to try and take the brunt of the backlash and try to protect Satine’s image.


----------



## darjr (Jun 13, 2022)

Satine is planning to make a statement.


From the video
“We are still scared to answer Colorado phone calls.”


----------



## JediSoth (Jun 13, 2022)

Can't wait to hear: victim-blaming, throwing her partner under the bus, "can't we all just get along," gas-lighting, "We screwed up, but it won't ever happen again _pinky swear_," or some combination thereof.

In the Kickstarter comment, some backers are avocating for the project to be canceled altogether and to have any remaining funds disbursed to the freelancers they took advantage of. I don't think that will happen (and I don't think they'll refund anyone or remove their names from the list of backers or anything resembling integrity), but we'll see. I'm really curious to know what will happen to the stretch goals that will not be fulfilled now because the partners have withdrawn from the project over this (LevelUp Dice pulled out, IIRC and they were making the dice some folks pledged for). 

Part of me has a morbid fascination to watch this slow-motion train wreck, but I have to remind myself I invested almost $120 in this project (I really need to be more discerning and do better due diligence--having one of the creators as the cover art should have been a HUGE red flag to me).


----------



## darjr (Jun 13, 2022)

I hate this situation. I wish it were all different. It could have been? So easily.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 13, 2022)

SteveC said:


> I wish I could say any of this is surprising, but ... it's just not. I'm an old fart, and I've also been lucky enough to be around a lot of people in the industry from the past few decades. It's also present in every part of fandom. Talk to me about the scene at science fiction fandom conventions sometimes ... ugh. This isn't something new.



Truth. And every genre of writers appears to suffer from cliques of catty writers who think being a jackass and taking every opportunity to be scummy if it will advance their personal brand as long as their audience never see it is an integral part of the job.

Basically anyone with the potential for a fan base and no accountability to highly susceptible to this.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 13, 2022)

darjr said:


> I hate this situation. I wish it were all different. It could have been? So easily.



It's horrible to learn, of course, that someone many of us admired has turned out to be toxic and an abuser. You can't help but wonder . . . "Is anybody else in the community I admire also a terrible person?"

But this situation also has some beauty to it. Social media is the blessing and curse of our age, but it allows for folks to share their stories and shine sunlight on toxic behaviors. We have a real _#metoo_ thing going on here with Stone and Phoenix specifically, and possibly other toxic personalities in our community as well.

Learning about the toxic behaviors of those we once admired . . . sad. Watching the community come together to shine sunlight on those behaviors, condemn them, and support their victims . . . beautiful.


----------



## Mannahnin (Jun 13, 2022)

If not beautiful, than certainly necessary.  

Light disinfects.  

Far better for misbehavior to have light shed on it than for corruption to keep rotting away unseen and harming more people.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 13, 2022)

JediSoth said:


> having one of the creators as the cover art should have been a HUGE red flag to me



Yeah. A literal vanity project.

I noted in the KS comments that there are numerous calls to scrub all images of J and S from the book. While that’s a nice idea, I would think it pretty impractical at this stage as it would require the commissioning of new cover art and the like.

I see that Heinz is determined to get the book published so that the freelancers’ work doesn’t go to waste … but given that J claims he spent many sleepless nights rewriting the freelancers’ work because it wasn’t up to his standards, I wonder how much of their work even survives in the finished product!

I reckon it would be better to cancel the whole thing, pay everyone who needs paying (the correct amount they are owed) and move on. Even without images of J and S in the book, I imagine looking at it and reading it would remind everyone of this debacle.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 13, 2022)

It's best to not deify anyone, and not to put celebs on a pedestal.  Not Gary Gygax, and not Satine or Jasmison.  Respect is earned, and on an individual basis.  There's a lot of great people in this hobby, some are well known, some aren't.  That's who I'm focusing on and supporting, however.


----------



## CleverNickName (Jun 13, 2022)

This is the most disappointing news I've gotten on ENWorld since the now-infamous Ernie video.  Damn.  I've always suspected Stone might be a bit of a tool, but I expected better out of Satine.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 13, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> It's best to not deify anyone, and not to put celebs on a pedestal.  Not Gary Gygax, and not Satine or Jasmison.  Respect is earned, and on an individual basis.  There's a lot of great people in this hobby, some are well known, some aren't.  That's who I'm focusing on and supporting, however.



Well yeah, but . . . it's a very human thing to do, and we all do it at times in our lives.

Deifying (or demonizing) someone is a form of stereotyping, which serves a cognitive purpose. It makes it easier to deal with the deluge of complicated information we are barraged with daily. It makes it easier to deal with people . . . but of course comes with the danger of forming an opinion without having all of the facts. But we rarely get all the facts . . . .


----------



## Chromie (Jun 13, 2022)

darjr said:


> Satine is planning to make a statement.
> 
> 
> From the video
> “We are still scared to answer Colorado phone calls.”



Thanks, added to OP.

This one just really infuriates me as someone who has Muslim family.


----------



## darjr (Jun 13, 2022)

JS posted a review of Satines comic book in 2020 with no mention of their personal  or business relationship.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 13, 2022)

darjr said:


> View attachment 250952



I don't understand the reference?


----------



## Chromie (Jun 13, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> I don't understand the reference?



Jamison Stone is reviewing the comic in the tweet i linked, a comic Satine wrote? I'm not sure, I never read or heard about it.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 13, 2022)

Chromie said:


> Jamison Stone is reviewing the comic in the tweet i linked, a comic Satine wrote? I'm not sure, I never read or heard about it.



Yeah, I got that much, was curious about the relevance of the comic.


----------



## darjr (Jun 13, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Yeah, I got that much, was curious about the relevance of the comic.



I updated the post. Satine wrote the comic. Well, co-wrote.


----------



## darjr (Jun 13, 2022)

It’s just… so petty.

I  Know it’s a small thing. But cheese and crackers it’s almost comical.


----------



## Waller (Jun 13, 2022)

darjr said:


> I updated the post. Satine wrote the comic. Well, co-wrote.



Eh, who hasn’t left a good review for a friend or relative’s thing? There’s lots of things to criticize them for, but this ain’t it.


----------



## darjr (Jun 13, 2022)

Bunker said:


> Eh, who hasn’t left a good review for a friend or relative’s thing? There’s lots of things to criticize them for, but this ain’t it.



I’d absolutely point out my relationship to the author. But OK.

Should I delete it?


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 13, 2022)

darjr said:


> I’d absolutely point out my relationship to the author. But OK.
> 
> Should I delete it?



Nah, I think you have a point. Though what is the timeline of their relationship? I know own they just got married, but we're they an item in November 2020?


----------



## Malmuria (Jun 13, 2022)

Amazon's policy:



> *Conflicts of interest*
> It's not allowed to create, edit, or post content about your own products or services. The same goes for services offered by:
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Weiley31 (Jun 13, 2022)

MGibster said:


> Thanks!  What I meant to say was that I thought Tracy Hickman was a woman.  Only because I had never known a guy named Tracy.



Now Dick would take offense to that. But the watches were hella cool.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 13, 2022)

Weiley31 said:


> Now Dick would take offense to that. But the watches were hella cool.



Most kids in the 80's wouldn't have known who that was. Bow, us 90's kids got thst revival, which certainly was a....thing.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 13, 2022)

Weiley31 said:


> Now Dick would take offense to that. But the watches were hella cool.



There's also the famous actor Spencer Tracy.
And the country music artist, Tracy Adkins.
There originator of my art style, Tracy Pad.
And we can't forget the actor from Shameless, William H. Tracy.


----------



## Emrico (Jun 13, 2022)

Retreater said:


> There's also the famous actor Spencer Tracy.
> And the country music artist, Tracy Adkins.
> There originator of my art style, Tracy Pad.
> And we can't forget the actor from Shameless, William H. Tracy.



I think Tracy Morgan is still fairly famous as well.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 13, 2022)

Retreater said:


> There's also the famous actor Spencer Tracy.
> And the country music artist, Tracy Adkins.
> There originator of my art style, Tracy Pad.
> And we can't forget the actor from Shameless, William H. Tracy.



William H. Macy.

Sorry . . . could not resist my impulse to correct a minor error . . .

Also, I think "Tracy" as a last name isn't necessarily seen as feminine, but "Tracy" as a first name certainly is, despite lots of dudes with that name over time. How we feminize or masculinize words is funny sometimes.


----------



## MGibster (Jun 13, 2022)

Retreater said:


> And the country music artist, Tracy Adkins.



His stage name is Trace and pronounce Tr-ace not Tracy.  (Though he was born with the name Tracy.)  



Dire Bare said:


> Also, I think "Tracy" as a last name isn't necessarily seen as feminine, but "Tracy" as a first name certainly is, despite lots of dudes with that name over time. How we feminize or masculinize words is funny sometimes.



I have dead male relatives named Aubrey.  I have yet to meet someone under 80 named Aubrey who wasn't a girl.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 13, 2022)

And today's irony award goes to..


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 13, 2022)

Re: names being male/female, it feels like in the 70s/80s/90s, people got way more insistent about names having just one gender associated with them. Before that it seems like there were a lot more names that were "either". My RL name is one of the few that is still either (more likely to be male but not to the point people would assume).

Re: Jamison/Satine, welp, my fairly reliable creepdar always kept me away from their stuff, even though some of it looked kind of appealing, so I can't say I'm entirely surprised, but I am impressed/horrified that Jamison particularly could manage to sustain such incredibly unpleasant behaviour for so long towards so many people, especially when they're being really nice to him. Jordan Peterson thing is 100% unsurprising, as this "talking like a really bad-natured robot" thing seems to be extremely common with Peterson fans.


----------



## JediSoth (Jun 14, 2022)

Satine has offered an apology on Twitter, throwing Jamison under the bus, as so many predicted. I'm not aware of her having been involved any kind of "leader" as far back as 2008, though.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 14, 2022)

Ooof you can hear the thump-thump of the bus' wheels going over him from here!

I mean, not that he doesn't deserve it but I think they both need to be under that bus.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 14, 2022)

Yeesh, that is one of the coldest and east genuine apologies I think I have ever seen.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 14, 2022)

What about the people she treated badly and screwed before Jamison was even in the picture?  Is he to blame for that too, like a Narcissistic Time Traveler?  (I used capital letters because it sounds like a show).


----------



## CleverNickName (Jun 14, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> And today's irony award goes to..
> 
> View attachment 250956



facepalm.gif


----------



## CleverNickName (Jun 14, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Yeesh, that is one of the coldest and east genuine apologies I think I have ever seen.



Not even close.  Remember the non-apology that we got just a few months ago, regarding a certain transphobic rant from the self-avowed founders of the game? and the subsequent doubling-down?

This is bad, but it's not the least-genuine we've ever seen.  Far from it.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 14, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> William H. Macy.
> 
> Sorry . . . could not resist my impulse to correct a minor error . . .
> 
> Also, I think "Tracy" as a last name isn't necessarily seen as feminine, but "Tracy" as a first name certainly is, despite lots of dudes with that name over time. How we feminize or masculinize words is funny sometimes.



Sorry. Was just my attempt of humor in playing off the previous post about Dick Tracy.
Same as my reference to Trace Adkins.


----------



## billd91 (Jun 14, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> And today's irony award goes to..
> 
> View attachment 250956



Yeah, there's a certain type of person who will revel in pointing out other people's failings without ever interrogating their own. In fact, it's usually to deflect attention from themselves. And Lasagna seems like just that type.


----------



## ECMO3 (Jun 14, 2022)

bedir than said:


> In a part time industry like this most people don't have businesses. They file on Schedule C.
> Not paying them is not paying them.



By definition if they are filing a schedule C they are running a business.  When they are "paid" it is not wages they are reporting, it is business revenue, receipts and sales.

Like I said, if you are in the business of supplying goods or services to a retail business it is common to get paid late or even to not get paid at all if the retailer's business is failing.  It is so common that I would argue the practice is standard and getting paid on time is less common than not getting paid on time.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 14, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> By definition if they are filing a schedule C they are running a business.  When they are "paid" it is not wages they are reporting, it is business revenue, receipts and sales.
> 
> Like I said, if you are in the business of supplying goods or services to a retail business it is common to get paid late or even to not get paid at all if the retailer's business is failing.  It is so common that I would argue the practice is standard and getting paid on time is less common than not getting paid on time.



I'm just a humble publisher, but your suggestion that not paying your freelancers on time is OK does not represent the industry I work in. It certainly doesn't reflect my business values or ethics, and _if_ it's the norm (I don't think it is), it should not be, and certainly shouldn't be normalized, nor should it be implied that it's OK.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 14, 2022)

CleverNickName said:


> Not even close.  Remember the non-apology that we got just a few months ago, regarding a certain transphobic rant from the self-avowed founders of the game? and the subsequent doubling-down?



you see, that didn't rise to the level of a bad apology, more of a complete non-apology. this is a much more conscious "oh, no, I'm in danger" attempt to save one's own bacon: way more calculated.


----------



## Waller (Jun 14, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> you see, that didn't rise to the level of a bad apology, more of a complete non-apology. this is a much more conscious "oh, no, I'm in danger" attempt to save one's own bacon: way more calculated.



Though is it possible to make an apology to social media which works? Somebody may have successfully done it in the last 10 years, but if so, I missed it and I feel like that would be big news. I would challenge anybody to write an apology which was accepted by onlookers. I'm fairly convinced it's not actually possible.


----------



## CleverNickName (Jun 14, 2022)

Sure it is, @Waller.
The best apology is changed behavior.

It's just that words are fast and cheap, so they are usually everyone's first choice.  I hope Satine tries again, and with something a little more tangible.


----------



## TheSword (Jun 14, 2022)

MGibster said:


> His stage name is Trace and pronounce Tr-ace not Tracy.  (Though he was born with the name Tracy.)
> 
> 
> I have dead male relatives named Aubrey.  I have yet to meet someone under 80 named Aubrey who wasn't a girl.



I know a guy in his fifties called Aubrey. I think in the UK it’s more common as a man’s name. Which is to say, not very common.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 14, 2022)

darjr said:


> I’d absolutely point out my relationship to the author. But OK.
> 
> Should I delete it?



Nah it's kinda funny. I definitely wouldn't have a second thought about promoting my friend's work without disclosing my relationship to them. We live in a dystopia, people are out here trying to survive.


Malmuria said:


> Amazon's policy:



Eh, Amazon is one of the most deleteriously impactful organizations on the planet. They can eat their policy. 



JediSoth said:


> Satine has offered an apology on Twitter, throwing Jamison under the bus, as so many predicted. I'm not aware of her having been involved any kind of "leader" as far back as 2008, though.
> 
> View attachment 250960



Seems like she is taking responsibility and also apologizing for her enabling of Stone, but anything short of directly apologizing to people for hurting them is gonna fall short, tbh. If she follows up with specific apologies when she (if she) addresses specific posts, that's better, but she did the things. She caused the harm. I mean people are not working in this industry because of her. 
Good or bad apology is really only significant in the context of judging future action, and judging who remains publicly friends with her, AFAIC.


Parmandur said:


> Yeesh, that is one of the coldest and east genuine apologies I think I have ever seen.



Seems pretty normal, tbh. Like I have followed her on IG for a long time, and it just reads like her speaking somewhat formally, like when talking about new ventures or things like that. She dropped into business voice. That part, fair enough. 

I'm not at all on her side in this, I just don't like seeing people get the "if they get mad they're deflecting! If they don't get upset they're insincere!" treatment.


----------



## Waller (Jun 14, 2022)

CleverNickName said:


> Sure it is, @Waller.
> The best apology is changed behavior.



I agree that people can (hopefully) change their behavior. I disagree that people can successfully write an accepted written public apology.

[Edit -- you edited in extra context to your post after I'd replied.]


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 14, 2022)

Waller said:


> Though is it possible to make an apology to social media which works? Somebody may have successfully done it in the last 10 years, but if so, I missed it and I feel like that would be big news. I would challenge anybody to write an apology which was accepted by onlookers. I'm fairly convinced it's not actually possible.



Sure, if it's followed up on. The combination is required for either to be accepted. 

But I get what you mean, and don't really disagree. I got accused of stealing a couple hundred bucks from a couple that hosted a party, almost 20 years ago, and the way absolutely everything I did just drove the people who believed I had done to believe that even more, even though I certainly hadn't, still bothers me.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 14, 2022)

Waller said:


> Though is it possible to make an apology to social media which works? Somebody may have successfully done it in the last 10 years, but if so, I missed it and I feel like that would be big news. I would challenge anybody to write an apology which was accepted by onlookers. I'm fairly convinced it's not actually possible.



Yes, it’s entirely possible, and it has absolutely been done before. What it takes is:

1. Specifically acknowledging what it was that you did wrong.
2. Demonstrating that you understand why it was wrong.
3. Taking ownership for the harm caused.
4. Explaining what you plan to do to make amends.
5. Actually doing what you say you plan to do.

And, of course, it’s important to recognize that some people still won’t forgive you, and that’s their right.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 14, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Seems pretty normal, tbh. Like I have followed her on IG for a long time, and it just reads like her speaking somewhat formally, like when talking about new ventures or things like that. She dropped into business voice. That part, fair enough.
> 
> I'm not at all on her side in this, I just don't like seeing people get the "if they get mad they're deflecting! If they don't get upset they're insincere!" treatment.



It feels very professional, sure, and cynically so. It is true she is in a no-win situation, but...she set it up herself.


----------



## Waller (Jun 14, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Yes, it’s entirely possible, and it has absolutely been done before. What it takes is:
> 
> 1. Specifically acknowledging what it was that you did wrong.
> 2. Demonstrating that you understand why it was wrong.
> ...



So, ok, so if that is indeed the successful formula (and I reiterate that I do not believe there is one, and there is no combination of words which would be accepted) do you feel you could have written an apology which the internet would have accepted? I suggest no. And neither could anybody else.

(Also, you say it has been done before -- can you giev a few examples? I'm not satying it hasn't happened, but if it did I defintely missed it!)

(and make no mistake, this is 'to the internet' -- none of us are involved in this)

Don't get me wrong. I have no intention of defending these people. I think what they did sucks. I guess I am derailing this with a purely intellectual point about public apologies and my memories of an episode of Black Mirror. Public apolgies are simply crafted performative acts, and literally can't not be. But also they similarly cannot ever work, never have, and never will. That's just not how the internet works. So if I'm distracting from the real conversation at hand, my apologies.*


*oh man that's ironic.


----------



## Faolyn (Jun 14, 2022)

Waller said:


> So, ok, so if that is indeed the successful formula (and I reiterate that I do not believe there is one, and there is no combination of words which would be accepted) do you feel you could have written an apology which the internet would have accepted? I suggest no. And neither could anybody else.



Maybe instead of just saying "I did terrible things," actually listing the things you did? I dunno, but that's a thought.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 14, 2022)

Waller said:


> So, ok, so if that is indeed the successful formula (and I reiterate that I do not believe there is one, and there is no combination of words which would be accepted) do you feel you could have written an apology which the internet would have accepted? I suggest no. And neither could anybody else.
> 
> (Also, you say it has been done before -- can you giev a few examples? I'm not satying it hasn't happened, but if it did I defintely missed it!)
> 
> ...



I suppose it depends what you mean by “the internet.” Is it possible to make a public apology that will be accepted by every single person who reads it? No, of course not. That’s why I included “keep in mind that some people still won’t forgive you and that’s their right.” That’s not unique to the internet, that’s just part of any public address - individual people will take it different ways. But it is possible to make an apology that will be _broadly_ accepted, provided you demonstrate clear understanding of what you need to apologize for, intent to take positive action in response, and follow through on that intent.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jun 14, 2022)

For me, a big part of the failure here is lack of specificity.  She says she feels regret and sorrow, and that she "never meant to hurt anyone," but never actually acknowledges what she did wrong.  But she makes sure to apologize for "enabl[ing] Jamison's terrible behavior".  Naming him but not her own misdeeds makes this feels more like a build up to playing a victim that it does a real apology.

Imagine this same Twitter post being written by someone making complaints against Jamison Stone; it is completely believable that any number of his victims could have written this exact thing, word for word.  All of the people hurt by this pair also feel regret and sorrow, and never meant to hurt anyone, either.


----------



## dragoner (Jun 14, 2022)

I first met Phoenix when she was hanging out, as a goth girl, didn't pay much attention, think someone said she was molested by her dad. Not surprised when she went into porn, as the industry preys on the street kids. Then she resurfaced years later and I followed her on G+ with a bunch of the other usual suspects, which I then stopped following as they did weird and bad stuff. Later I followed her on twitter, then just muted her, and finally unfollowed her, saw some stuff she and Jamison posted.

I think abusing, treating people badly is wrong, and they should not do it. Though I have to admit, none of this has had a direct effect on me, as I didn't know of, or plan to buy any of their stuff. I didn't even know they had a company, and thought they were just doing D&D cruises or something. So if I said I was not going to buy their stuff because of it, it would be hypocrisy.


----------



## Mistwell (Jun 14, 2022)

The only apology I've ever seen which was actually fully accepted by a large portion of the audience was the Dan Harmon apology to Megan Ganz.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 14, 2022)

Hr.  So, it turns out I've played in live-action games with someone on the project, and they also verify the poor treatment the contract hands were getting.  

Not that I doubted the stories, but when someone you know says, "Yeah, we were treated like crap," it becomes rather less distant.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 14, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Hr.  So, it turns out I've played in live-action games with someone on the project, and they also verify the poor treatment the contract hands were getting.
> 
> Not that I doubted the stories, but when someone you know says, "Yeah, we were treated like crap," it becomes rather less distant.



Part of what makes it so self-destructive: their hobby celebrity relied on those connections. Sawing off the branch they were building their treehouse on.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 14, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> For me, a big part of the failure here is lack of specificity.  She says she feels regret and sorrow, and that she "never meant to hurt anyone," but never actually acknowledges what she did wrong.  But she makes sure to apologize for "enabl[ing] Jamison's terrible behavior".  Naming him but not her own misdeeds makes this feels more like a build up to playing a victim that it does a real apology.
> 
> Imagine this same Twitter post being written by someone making complaints against Jamison Stone; it is completely believable that any number of his victims could have written this exact thing, word for word.  All of the people hurt by this pair also feel regret and sorrow, and never meant to hurt anyone, either.



To be fair, it seems like there are a lot of stories coming out, which makes specificity a little more difficult. But, yeah, not only is this broad, but it only expresses contrition without demonstrating understanding of wrongdoing, acceptance of responsibility, or intent to take any corrective action. In fact, it deflects responsibility.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 14, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> To be fair, it seems like there are a lot of stories coming out, which makes specificity a little more difficult. But, yeah, not only is this broad, but it only expresses contrition without demonstrating understanding of wrongdoing, acceptance of responsibility, or intent to take any corrective action. In fact, it deflects responsibility.



"I'm sorry for letting my husband do this."


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Jun 14, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> For me, a big part of the failure here is lack of specificity.



That's really, really common for internet "apologies". If you're vague enough about what you're apologizing for and say a few specific keywords like "I never meant to hurt anyone", and "I should have been better", and deflect blame to something/someone else, a lot of people will eat that up.


----------



## Tales and Chronicles (Jun 14, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> To be fair, it seems like there are a lot of stories coming out, which makes specificity a little more difficult. But, yeah, not only is this broad, but it only expresses contrition without demonstrating understanding of wrongdoing, acceptance of responsibility, or intent to take any corrective action. In fact, it deflects responsibility.



It reminds me of my son's (4 y.o) apologies when I get mad at him for whatever reason. He makes a sad face, and says '' daddy, I'm sorry'' when he sees I'm mad, and if I ask him ''do you know what you're apologize for?'', he looks at me and says '' because I made you grumpy '', with absolutely no specific remorse or understanding of what he actually did wrong, other than seeing I was not happy so he felt the need to make a generic mea culpa so I could fill in the blank, I guess 

Satine's apologies in her statement reads like a mix of ''Wasnt me!'' + '' I'm sorry YOU feel this way''  + '' I'm sorry I got caught''.


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)




----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Jun 14, 2022)

vincegetorix said:


> Satine's apologies in her statement reads like a mix of ''Wasnt me!'' + '' I'm sorry YOU feel this way'' + '' I'm sorry I got caught''.



I know that this apology wasn't in video format, but this video is still relevant:


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)

Rick H the actual creative force behind The Red Opera is going to move in and persist or something, without those two.


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)




----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Jun 14, 2022)

I started seeing Satine Phoenix a bit here and there but still am not sure what her claim to D&D fame is/was.  Podcast or something?  

Was she like a megafan?  If she cooked her own goose out of the club what is the impact going to be?

I am probably just out of touch…if she is just a podcaster I am thinking…”next”


----------



## Chromie (Jun 14, 2022)

EDIT: This appears to be a bug, disreguard.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 14, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> To be fair, it seems like there are a lot of stories coming out, which makes specificity a little more difficult. But, yeah, not only is this broad, but it only expresses contrition without demonstrating understanding of wrongdoing, acceptance of responsibility, or intent to take any corrective action. In fact, it deflects responsibility.




We should start teaching the three-part apology in job training and schools.

1) Express sincere regret for the harm you've done.
2) Express what, exactly, you did that was harmful, and why.
3) If possible, say how you will make it better, or avoid it in the future.

Like, "Oh, geeze!  I'm sorry!  Stepping on your toes must have hurt!  I'll try my best to stay farther away from people on the dance floor next time.  Do you need some ice or something?"


----------



## LordEntrails (Jun 14, 2022)

MGibster said:


> I have dead male relatives named Aubrey. I have yet to meet someone under 80 named Aubrey who wasn't a girl.



Aubrey Hodges. Fairly significant in the CRPG community and from the little interactions I've had with a nice guy.


----------



## LordEntrails (Jun 14, 2022)

Umbran said:


> We should start teaching the three-part apology in job training and schools.



No, let's not. Once it becomes taught and formulaic, it will be too difficult to sort the sincere apologies from the insincere.

Right now it is pretty easy for people to understand which apologies are sincere (even those that do not follow a formula) and which are not.


----------



## mcmillan (Jun 14, 2022)

Chromie said:


> This kind of feels at odds to me too, apologize and distance yourself. Par for the course.
> 
> View attachment 250964



FWIW she has now corrected this and said it looks like a twitter bug and Phoenix is still following her - but no follow up to "address the specific posts". And I have seen at least one of the people affected say he's not interested in having any direct contact which I wouldn't be surprised if others feel this way.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 14, 2022)

LordEntrails said:


> No, let's not. Once it becomes taught and formulaic, it will be too difficult to sort the sincere apologies from the insincere.




Doesn't matter.  It puts you on record admitting what you've done.  Your sincerity is secondary to the public admission.

The non-apologies persist because they avoid actually taking responsibility.  The three-part apology forces you to take it.


----------



## Chromie (Jun 14, 2022)

Brian Foster (of Critical Role formerly) streaming right now, oh man.


Discussing this tweet/video.


----------



## LordEntrails (Jun 14, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Doesn't matter.  It puts you on record admitting what you've done.  Your sincerity is secondary to the public admission.
> 
> The non-apologies persist because they avoid actually taking responsibility.  The three-part apology forces you to take it.



Public admission is important. But I still would rather those that actually want to be sincere need to take a few minutes to think about (or Google) how to do it.

Maybe though it matters little, for those that are not sincere won't spend the time to "do it right" anyway.

But let's stick with discussing that Satine is obviously not sincere. She is saying what she thinks she has to say to minimize damage. It's a PR damage control reaction, not an apology.


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)

Eh deleted cause…


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)

Not sure what this means, if they are out if GaryCon or not? But it isn’t good for them. Also see the post further up that thread from the McElroys.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 14, 2022)

She did not say she would immediately contact everyone that wrote a specific post, she said she would get to them.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 14, 2022)

Umbran said:


> We should start teaching the three-part apology in job training and schools.
> 
> 1) Express sincere regret for the harm you've done.
> 2) Express what, exactly, you did that was harmful, and why.
> ...



We'd have to change all the text books from the current process:

1) Deny until irrefutable proof emerges
2) Apologize while mitigating any responsibility or the severity of what you did.
2b) (Optional) Do something worse during your apology, goto 1).
3) Blame the victim and say you're being canceled using your massive platform
4) Accuse your victims of actually doing the thing you did.
5) Normalize accusing anyone who opposes you of doing the thing you did.


----------



## Ondath (Jun 14, 2022)

Waller said:


> Though is it possible to make an apology to social media which works? Somebody may have successfully done it in the last 10 years, but if so, I missed it and I feel like that would be big news. I would challenge anybody to write an apology which was accepted by onlookers. I'm fairly convinced it's not actually possible.



I'm a bit late to this party, but one example that comes to my mind is Dan Harmon (TW sexual harrasment): He harassed Community writer Megan Gantz while she was writing in the show, and the story came out during #MeToo. Harmon issued what felt like a heartfelt apology, owned up to his mistake and seems to have taken steps to be better. As a result, Gantz has said she forgave him and his reputation seems pretty unscathed.

Edit: It seems @Mistwell beat me to the punch by a long shot! This is what I get for writing a comment without getting up to date on the thread..


----------



## teitan (Jun 14, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> Amazon's policy:



Yep they removed my review of a book when they found out I was friends with the author even though I became friends with him months AFTER I wrote and published the review. A “rival” author reported it. Lots of politics go on in those review spaces. The author and I had interacted before hand but it was in relation to a different matter dealing with online harassment we both were dealing with from the same group of people… the same people who later, most likely, reported the review when we actually became friends through mutual work in a non-profit.


----------



## Yora (Jun 14, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> It feels very professional, sure, and cynically so. It is true she is in a no-win situation, but...she set it up herself.



Sometimes the best you can do is to lose with grace.


----------



## Ghal Maraz (Jun 14, 2022)

Is there a reason this story hasn't already reached the News status? Seems quite relevant and has some potentially huge impact.


----------



## TheSword (Jun 14, 2022)

There is cynicism here, but it isn’t just on Satine’s part. It’s the people on twitter (and to a lesser extent here) who think that for some reason the public/fanbase are the ones that should decide if the apology is appropriate. Or that they are entitled to comment/criticise and generally mock it.

Or the entire fanbase’s assumption that the apologies - of which there should no doubt be many, are anything to do with them at all. The cynicism that maybe if she crafts just the right public statement then at least a portion of the fanbase might ‘forgive’ her. Or maybe not… and let’s all debate whether she has apologized ‘well enough’.

It won’t happen in this modern world of fandom. But I would much prefer Satine and her partner contact the actual aggrieved parties with their apologies privately. Then the freelancers, tatooist and various business partners get to decide if *they* feel the apologies were sufficient.

*Satine Phoenix:* I have taken onboard all the criticism shared online in the last three days and have contacted those people with a direct
apology. It is my attention to make this right. If anyone that raised a concern has not received a response, please contact me and I will respond directly.

Of course, this won’t work because watching the fanbase eat their own young is far more entertaining, I’m not a fan of either of them, which will probably come as no surprise but as always the grotesque mockery and schadenfreude indulging tweets of ‘fans’ is far more disturbing than most of the things Satine is accused of as the twitter responses and memes to her apology demonstrate. 

Why on earth would someone want to be a celebrity. It should come with a warning label like cigarettes.


----------



## Yora (Jun 14, 2022)

Browsing through this thread, the thing that surprises me the most is that I never heard of any of these people.
Makes me wonder how many other worlds of popular D&D are out there of whose existence I've never been aware.


----------



## AnotherGuy (Jun 14, 2022)

TheSword said:


> There is cynicism here, but it isn’t just on Satine’s part. It’s the people on twitter (and to a lesser extent here) who think that for some reason the public/fanbase are the ones that should decide if the apology is appropriate. Or that they are entitled to comment/criticise and generally mock it.



It's a public forum, people are entitled to speak about it, they therefore are free to comment on it and express their opinion. Such is the medium that exists now. I'm not following this judgement on the fan-base.

And to be clear, it is the fan-base that assists in making and buiding you (the celebrity you) up and also the one that can strip away the faith and love that they showered on you. So yeah they should have a right to deem whether the apology is appropriate.


----------



## Imaculata (Jun 14, 2022)

I have watched a few of Satine's D&D streams before. This came as a surprise to me, since I know nothing about her apart from those few videos I've seen. It is a shame too. We need more lady DM's representing our hobby.


----------



## TheSword (Jun 14, 2022)

AnotherGuy said:


> And to be clear, it is the fan-base that assists in making and buiding you (the celebrity you) up and also the one that can strip away the faith and love that they showered on you. So yeah they should have a right to deem whether the apology is appropriate.



Yeah, that’s a really good summary of the approach that concerns me.

We made you, so we decide when you’re broken. You’ll get your apologies vetted by us - and not the people you actually need to apologize too - because ultimately we are the ones that matter.

The problem is by making the apology public the aggrieved party now will never know if the apology was sincere or not. Whereas if it was just to them, then they can have confidence it isn’t part of a media strategy.


----------



## Davies (Jun 14, 2022)

TheSword said:


> The problem is by making the apology public the aggrieved party now will never know if the apology was sincere or not. Whereas if it was just to them, then they can have confidence it isn’t part of a media strategy.




No, they really can't. We are discussing performers -- by definition there will always be a question, under any and all circumstances, whether what they say or do is _performative_. That is true if the audience is vast, or minute.


----------



## TheSword (Jun 14, 2022)

Davies said:


> No, they really can't. We are discussing performers -- by definition there will always be a question, under any and all circumstances, whether what they say or do is _performative_. That is true if the audience is vast, or minute.



Fair point. They could be telling the person what they hear. But then again that’s between them. It’s also where the redress comes in.

What they will know is that it’s not part of mass media strategy.


----------



## JediSoth (Jun 14, 2022)

Keep in mind, Satine and Jamison CHOSE to live and work in the public light. They chose to first issue "apologies" on public forums rather than reaching out privately to the aggrieved parties. No one forced her to put that statement on Twitter before addressing the freelancers who haven't been paid, or their Kickstarter backers who have only heard that Jamison resigned as CEO of a company he owns and that they're investigating the best way to move forward.

So yeah, I think it's appropriate for her critics to judge that apology that throws Jamison under the bus, especially when there's a leaked Discord transcript of Jamison saying he's going to be thrown under the bus to shield Satine from as many of the consequences of of this as possible (see post #24).


----------



## Greggy C (Jun 14, 2022)

Yora said:


> Browsing through this thread, the thing that surprises me the most is that I never heard of any of these people.
> Makes me wonder how many other worlds of popular D&D are out there of whose existence I've never been aware.



You have to be something of a niche fan.  Here is nice video of her with Matt Mercer.  How close she gets into his space is a red flag to me.


----------



## Yora (Jun 14, 2022)

I have heard of him and that many people like him.


----------



## Greggy C (Jun 14, 2022)

Chromie said:


> Discussing this tweet/video.



Such a nice couple, shame that WOTC and CR promote these predator types.


----------



## Yora (Jun 14, 2022)

Yeah, WotC's history with social awareness is not a glamorous one.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 14, 2022)

TheSword said:


> Or the entire fanbase’s assumption that the apologies - of which there should no doubt be many, are anything to do with them at all.



Since Satine and Jamison's behavior kept us from getting stories to tell, probably directly as their projects spiral down, and certainly indirectly when people left the industry we are involved. Just as Hollywood abusers tangentially harm fans so did Satine and Jamison.

Is that as significant as the harm they did directly to people who were supposed to be their colleagues, coworkers, and employers? No.


----------



## FrozenNorth (Jun 14, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> I don’t invest in tobacco companies and would have an issue with someone being prominent in promoting that product being a spokes person for a hobby I enjoyed.



Both Tommy Lee Jones and Pierce Brosnan have  acted as spokesmen for cigarettes in Japan.  Do you boycott their movies?  Aaron Eckhart played the lead role in “Thank you for smoking”.  Did you go see “The Dark Knight Returns”?

Edit.  Having seen the mod text, these is now off topic.  Please ignore.


----------



## Mort (Jun 14, 2022)

TheSword said:


> Yeah, that’s a really good summary of the approach that concerns me.
> 
> We made you, so we decide when you’re broken. You’ll get your apologies vetted by us - and not the people you actually need to apologize too - because ultimately we are the ones that matter.
> 
> The problem is by making the apology public the aggrieved party now will never know if the apology was sincere or not. Whereas if it was just to them, then they can have confidence it isn’t part of a media strategy.




For me, the public apology IS mostly performative. Though I suppose it's important (to them) because they are selling a product.

What's TRULY important is for them to address the individual wrongs. Which in this case has a simple (though maybe not easy depending on their current money flow) solution:  pay the aggreived people what they are owed, preferably with a decent bonus for the fact that you held out.

That will go a LONG way to addressing these particular issues. And will likely be better for these two going forward than any apology, if they wish to continue in the business.


----------



## AnotherGuy (Jun 14, 2022)

FrozenNorth said:


> Aaron Eckhart played the lead role in “Thank you for smoking”.  Did you go see “The Dark Knight Returns”?



I saw the _The Dark Knight Returns _and was disappointed and not because Aaron Eckhart didn't play a role in it.


----------



## AnotherGuy (Jun 14, 2022)

TheSword said:


> Yeah, that’s a really good summary of the approach that concerns me.
> 
> We made you, so we decide when you’re broken. You’ll get your apologies vetted by us - and not the people you actually need to apologize too - because ultimately we are the ones that matter.
> 
> The problem is by making the apology public the aggrieved party now will never know if the apology was sincere or not. Whereas if it was just to them, then they can have confidence it isn’t part of a media strategy.



The aggrieved parties voiced their grievances out into the public. To heal the noise a public apology is required.
That is not to say that a personal apology and making amends is not important. It is a two-pronged approach.

The real problem is - they botched their first attempt (and everyone called them out on it). I'm sure there will be more.


----------



## Malmuria (Jun 14, 2022)

TheSword said:


> Yeah, that’s a really good summary of the approach that concerns me.
> 
> We made you, so we decide when you’re broken. You’ll get your apologies vetted by us - and not the people you actually need to apologize too - because ultimately we are the ones that matter.
> 
> The problem is by making the apology public the aggrieved party now will never know if the apology was sincere or not. Whereas if it was just to them, then they can have confidence it isn’t part of a media strategy.



These were people who were about to lead an event on inclusivity in the hobby at a con when this story blew up.  If that’s their brand and what they get paid to do, I think people generally are allowed to hold them accountable.


----------



## Yora (Jun 14, 2022)

What does accountability even mean? Pay for damages?


----------



## Umbran (Jun 14, 2022)

TheSword said:


> We made you, so we decide when you’re broken.




You remember the Spider-Man quote, right?  With great power comes great responsibility.

Now, remember this - _fame is power_.  It is power above and beyond what a person with otherwise equivalent skills has.  Generally, a famous game designer will make more from a product than a designer you've never heard of with the exact same product.  That is using the power of fame to advantage.

That power comes with responsibilities.  Fail in those responsibilities, and that power can be taken away from you.  



TheSword said:


> You’ll get your apologies vetted by us - and not the people you actually need to apologize too - because ultimately we are the ones that matter.




They need to apologize to the workers, sure.  But, since they abused power the gaming community gave them, the scope of responsibility is somewhat larger.



TheSword said:


> The problem is by making the apology public the aggrieved party now will never know if the apology was sincere or not.  Whereas if it was just to them, then they can have confidence it isn’t part of a media strategy.




Private does not equal sincere.   People will sometimes lie in apologies, and it being public or not doesn't really change that.

The actual sincerity of the apology does not come from the venue, but from time.  This is why a proper apology includes steps taken to make it better - the apology is sincere (or sincere enough, at least) if there's follow-through on those steps.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 14, 2022)

Yora said:


> What does accountability even mean? Pay for damages?




Given that there's outstanding wages as part of the issue, paying those would be a great first step.


----------



## SteveC (Jun 14, 2022)

Umbran said:


> We should start teaching the three-part apology in job training and schools.
> 
> 1) Express sincere regret for the harm you've done.
> 2) Express what, exactly, you did that was harmful, and why.
> ...



As a parent, teaching this has been such an important part of my kiddo's development. I can't say enough how important it is for everyone to learn this.


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 14, 2022)

TheSword said:


> We made you, so we decide when you’re broken.



That's celebrity. Don't get me wrong: People who haven't been made by the social media monster can also be unmade by it, but that isn't what's happening here. Anyway, social shaming is nothing new; it's production and consumption as "media" is.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 14, 2022)

FrozenNorth said:


> Aaron Eckhart played the lead role in “Thank you for smoking”. Did you go see “The Dark Knight Returns”?



Have you seen "Thank You for Smoking?" I have (and read the novel that inspired the movie). It's a very relevant satire about celebrity endorsements and brand promoting of harmful substances. It is anti-smoking if anything.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 14, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> Anyway, social shaming is nothing new; it's production and consumption as "media" is.




Heck, monkeys and apes use shaming.  Social shaming is a basic primate behavioral control mechanism.


----------



## LordEntrails (Jun 14, 2022)

TheSword said:


> Why on earth would someone want to be a celebrity. It should come with a warning label like cigarettes.



My first assumption, until I know otherwise, is ego. They want to be famous, they want the adoration and power that goes with it, all to stroke their ego.

There are of course exceptions, but until proven otherwise, that is my assumption.


TheSword said:


> We made you, so we decide when you’re broken. You’ll get your apologies vetted by us - and not the people you actually need to apologize too - because ultimately we are the ones that matter.



Yes. The community des get a say in the apologies and if they are acceptable. The impact on the fans is not as important as those directly wronged, but it is still important.


----------



## FrozenNorth (Jun 14, 2022)

Retreater said:


> Have you seen "Thank You for Smoking?" I have (and read the novel that inspired the movie). It's a very relevant satire about celebrity endorsements and brand promoting of harmful substances. It is anti-smoking if anything.



I have.  Excellent movie.  And it is a satire.  That being said, Aaron Eckhart absolutely defends smoking to the best of his ability in that movie, because it is what his character would do.


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 14, 2022)

The Emperor of Blood, following the formula and doing it right.


----------



## FrozenNorth (Jun 14, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> The Emperor of Blood, following the formula and doing it right.



It kind of feels like dark elf Sally Stoutaxe is appropriating dwarf culture…


----------



## Imaculata (Jun 14, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> You have to be something of a niche fan.  Here is nice video of her with Matt Mercer.  How close she gets into his space is a red flag to me.




All I see is two DM's sitting at the same distance as they would be when playing at a table, discussing D&D.

I don't see anything in that video that raises a red flag. She seems like she usually is in her videos. Excited about a hobby, with a bit of a sexy attitude about her, that seems part of her online persona.

Not to excuse any of her behavior off-camera. But lets be fair here. Also, she did apologize. Is it sincere? Who can say for sure. But I don't think we should automatically jump to the conclusion that it is insincere.

However, paying the unpaid wages and talking to the victims in private to make amends, would help show her intentions.


----------



## LordEntrails (Jun 14, 2022)

Until they both pay the debts that they are obligated to pay, words really don't matter.


----------



## Zarithar (Jun 14, 2022)

I'm just disappointed more than anything. I've run into Satine at a couple of cons and had nothing but positive interactions with her. It's too bad this has happened and is sad to see that much of her persona was just an act.


----------



## Zarithar (Jun 14, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> You have to be something of a niche fan.  Here is nice video of her with Matt Mercer.  How close she gets into his space is a red flag to me.



I think you are reaching here.


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)

Dungeons & Dragons Personalities Satine Phoenix and Jamison Stone Accused of Bullying, Mistreatment
					

A pair of well-known faces within the Dungeons & Dragons streaming community are facing a number [...]




					comicbook.com


----------



## Imaculata (Jun 14, 2022)

Oof, $40,000?! That's a lot of money.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 14, 2022)

This whole thing is heartbreaking for so many reasons. Satine was an ambassador bringing so many different groups to D&D that might have otherwise not felt welcomed by the hobby, and D&D is objectively better for the infusion of newer, younger players, including women and queer players. To learn that she was abusive and enabling of abusers is not at all surprising, unfortunately. I think it was easy to think of her as one of Zak's victims rather than enablers, but fool me once, etc. etc. She's been accused of enough bad behavior on her own, apart from the male abusers in her life. Her personal treatment of others is, frankly, more damning than her financial malfeasance.

There is a way back from this, there is always a way back, but it requires a great deal of self-reflection, humility, and above all, time. Unfortunately I can't say I've ever met a J*rd*n P*t*rs*n fan with an abundance of either of the first two qualities.


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)




----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)




----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 14, 2022)

Gradine said:


> There is a way back from this, there is always a way back, but it requires a great deal of self-reflection, humility, and above all, time. Unfortunately I can't say I've ever met a J*rd*n P*t*rs*n fan with an abundance of either of the first two qualities.



I like to think there is always a way back, but I get less and less convinced.  We saw it with Ernie Gygax, right?  I gave him some leeway and hoped there would be a way back but now that doesn't seem likely.  Based on more than a decade of recorded abuse (much longer than Ernie's displayed toxic behavior), it seems unlikely there's a way back for them either.  If there is, it's gotta be a big and sustained effort.

When someone shows you who they are, believe them.  And Jamison and Satine have apparently been showing people behind closed doors who they are for years.  This isn't a slip up, or mistake.  This isn't "back in my younger days I was an idiot".  This is a sustained and current trend of behavior going back more than a decade.  It's....very disappointing for reasons you gave.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Jun 14, 2022)

"Parasocial relationship" was a term I just learned about this weekend, talking to my brother (who is a psychologist) about this whole situation. 



NotAYakk said:


> Vin Diesel is a celebrity for being well known to many people and the huge parasocial relationship effects.
> 
> People playing games and sharing it can get the same parasocial effects.  Hence become celebrities, if only in a niche.
> 
> Parasocial connections -- when you feel you know someone via one-way social interactions, like movies or videos or music or gossip magazines or political talk shows -- creates most of the celebrities of the modern era.




The apology is a start, though it needs to be followed up by action. Admitting harm and responsibility is a good first step, but it is still just the first step.



darjr said:


> Not sure what this means, if they are out if GaryCon or not? But it isn’t good for them. Also see the post further up that thread from the McElroys.




As we've seen so often, a simple, unqualified "I am sorry for the harm I caused. I am going to do better. The steps I am taking are as follows..." seems to be so hard for people to say.

Also, what is it about Jorp that seems to attract toxic RPG elements (see also James Raggi)?



Gradine said:


> This whole thing is heartbreaking for so many reasons. Satine was an ambassador bringing so many different groups to D&D that might have otherwise not felt welcomed by the hobby, and D&D is objectively better for the infusion of newer, younger players, including women and queer players. To learn that she was abusive and enabling of abusers is not at all surprising, unfortunately. I think it was easy to think of her as one of Zak's victims rather than enablers, but fool me once, etc. etc. She's been accused of enough bad behavior on her own, apart from the male abusers in her life. Her personal treatment of others is, frankly, more damning than her financial malfeasance.
> 
> There is a way back from this, there is always a way back, but it requires a great deal of self-reflection, humility, and above all, time. Unfortunately I can't say I've ever met a J*rd*n P*t*rs*n fan with an abundance of either of the first two qualities.




I was at Origins this weekend, so I saw it unfold in real time. Went to a seminar presented by Satine Phoenix early on (not one of the $200 ones, I should specify). Watched as references to Jamison Stone as a guest of honor got scrubbed from the website. My last event at the con was the livestream Battle of the Bards and that got cancelled an hour before start time. Whether that was because of everything coming to light, the event only selling seven out of three hundred tickets, or a combination of both, who can say?


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)

She’s done. He’s done. Ruty might see work again. Maybe. But I dint think he’s interested in this industry anymore.

What I am curious about now is who is credited in the Eberron books? Stilly Ruty? Should it be?


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)

I am boggled how this all was kept a secret for so long!


----------



## Jer (Jun 14, 2022)

Ralif Redhammer said:


> As we've seen so often, a simple, unqualified "I am sorry for the harm I caused. I am going to do better. The steps I am taking are as follows..." seems to be so hard for people to say.



I think part of it is that in the US at least admitting that you've done harm basically means you're going to lose any lawsuit filed against you over the matter.  So corporations give non-pologies so as to present a public relations face that gives listeners the impression that they're saying "we hear you and we'll do better" while not giving an actual apology which would require them to actually admit that they've done something wrong and then commit to actually making things right to those they've wronged.

Given how every individual celebrity is now basically an independent corporation at this point, they're doing the same thing. Actually admitting fault and making it right is too expensive, but a non-pology to manage the PR while not admitting specific fault or committing to make the folks you wronged whole is cheap so they do it.

(And it infests our whole culture at this point - the non-pology gets used even when there's no threat of a lawsuit these days.)


----------



## theliel (Jun 14, 2022)

darjr said:


> I am boggled how this all was kept a secret for so long!



Jennifer Kretcher had a few notes on that, now that she's coming forward.

Basically Satine was a Big Deal on the backend (Think producer or directer in Hollywood speak) and has successfully blown up a number of people's careers if she didn't like them.


This supports Liisa Lee's statements.


----------



## Maggan (Jun 14, 2022)

Sigh.

When it rains, it pours.


----------



## Jer (Jun 14, 2022)

darjr said:


> I am boggled how this all was kept a secret for so long!



I've seen it play out so many times in various ways and the story is always the same.  They screw over and/or abuse person after person, each one thinking they're the only one and they think it will be their word against the abuser and nobody will believe them.  Then a whisper network starts where folks who are "in the know" know that someone is an abuser but still nobody is willing to come forth and be public about it because the abuser is too popular or powerful and they're sure they won't be believed.  Finally someone comes forth publicly and the dam breaks - the whisper network starts talking out loud and it seems like a flood of accusations are coming "out of nowhere" - when actually it's just the group of victims finally believing that folks will actually listen to them and also feeling a need to stand in solidarity with the folks who came out first.

It isn't just the highly publicized celebrity cases that work like this either - even in corporate or academic settings you can see the same thing play out.  The folks not in the whisper network think it comes out of nowhere and are surprised that it could be kept quiet that long, but the folks in the know know exactly why they didn't feel like they could say anything until suddenly it became "okay" to speak up.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 14, 2022)

Gradine said:


> There is a way back from this, there is always a way back, but it requires a great deal of self-reflection, humility, and above all, time. Unfortunately I can't say I've ever met a J*rd*n P*t*rs*n fan with an abundance of either of the first two qualities.



There's only a way back if one genuinely understands and regrets what they did wrong besides being caught.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 14, 2022)

Jer said:


> I've seen it play out so many times in various ways and the story is always the same.  They screw over and/or abuse person after person, each one thinking they're the only one and they think it will be their word against the abuser and nobody will believe them.  Then a whisper network starts where folks who are "in the know" know that someone is an abuser but still nobody is willing to come forth and be public about it because the abuser is too popular or powerful and they're sure they won't be believed.  Finally someone comes forth publicly and the dam breaks - the whisper network starts talking out loud and it seems like a flood of accusations are coming "out of nowhere" - when actually it's just the group of victims finally believing that folks will actually listen to them and also feeling a need to stand in solidarity with the folks who came out first.
> 
> It isn't just the highly publicized celebrity cases that work like this either - even in corporate or academic settings you can see the same thing play out.  The folks not in the whisper network think it comes out of nowhere and are surprised that it could be kept quiet that long, but the folks in the know know exactly why they didn't feel like they could say anything until suddenly it became "okay" to speak up.



It's pretty much true of every abusive power dynamic, right?  Workplaces, sports, relationships...


----------



## Malmuria (Jun 14, 2022)

theliel said:


> Jennifer Kretcher had a few notes on that, now that she's coming forward.
> 
> Basically Satine was a Big Deal on the backend (Think producer or directer in Hollywood speak) and has successfully blown up a number of people's careers if she didn't like them.
> 
> ...




I wonder if this dynamic is specific to dnd as a hobby/business.  It seems so many people were afraid to speak out because there are literal gatekeepers--influential people who have access to connections and can blacklist people they don't like.  Perhaps because it is so hard to make a living doing freelance dnd stuff, and so many people want to, it increases the chance of exploitation.  Then again, you see exploitation across many different industries, so maybe not.

I can't help but wonder if the way wotc operates contributes, even if unwittingly, to this dynamic.  It seems that once someone is an 'insider' to some degree, they have a lot of potential power to determine who gets access to opportunities and who does not.


----------



## Malmuria (Jun 14, 2022)

darjr said:


>



If they were stealing money, that seems like a crime?  More than an apology is needed...


----------



## Gradine (Jun 14, 2022)

darjr said:


> I am boggled how this all was kept a secret for so long!



There's a term referred to as a "missing stair". They're a person that's well-known as toxic/abusive/etc. within a community but simply isn't talked about/addressed. The kind of "open secret" that uses their insider status and clout to avoid accountability for as long as possible. #MeToo has been all about rooting out missing stairs.



Maggan said:


> Sigh.
> 
> When it rains, it pours.



The thing about abusers, especially within a professional context, is that they rarely have only a single victim. There's almost always multiple people with a story to tell, and once one story gets traction, it all snowballs from there.


----------



## Greggy C (Jun 14, 2022)

Zarithar said:


> I think you are reaching here.



No, I'm just an empath, I quickly can spot abusers.  Apparently most people can't, so I guess its my super power.

I assume WOTC, Geek & Sundry/CR who enabled her in the first place are all quiet on this.


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)

A large ruined Kickstarter ruins peoples carriers, these two may achieve that as just a footnote.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 14, 2022)

Jer said:


> I've seen it play out so many times in various ways and the story is always the same.  They screw over and/or abuse person after person, each one thinking they're the only one and they think it will be their word against the abuser and nobody will believe them.  Then a whisper network starts where folks who are "in the know" know that someone is an abuser but still nobody is willing to come forth and be public about it because the abuser is too popular or powerful and they're sure they won't be believed.  Finally someone comes forth publicly and the dam breaks - the whisper network starts talking out loud and it seems like a flood of accusations are coming "out of nowhere" - when actually it's just the group of victims finally believing that folks will actually listen to them and also feeling a need to stand in solidarity with the folks who came out first.
> 
> It isn't just the highly publicized celebrity cases that work like this either - even in corporate or academic settings you can see the same thing play out.  The folks not in the whisper network think it comes out of nowhere and are surprised that it could be kept quiet that long, but the folks in the know know exactly why they didn't feel like they could say anything until suddenly it became "okay" to speak up.



Yup, abusers basically "hack" social norms to navigate and appear normal until the facade cracks.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Jun 14, 2022)

_Will be the company acquired by Disney to use the IPs for an animated musical production? _


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 14, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> I wonder if this dynamic is specific to dnd as a hobby/business.  It seems so many people were afraid to speak out because there are literal gatekeepers--influential people who have access to connections and can blacklist people they don't like.  Perhaps because it is so hard to make a living doing freelance dnd stuff, and so many people want to, it increases the chance of exploitation.  Then again, you see exploitation across many different industries, so maybe not.
> 
> I can't help but wonder if the way wotc operates contributes, even if unwittingly, to this dynamic.  It seems that once someone is an 'insider' to some degree, they have a lot of potential power to determine who gets access to opportunities and who does not.



Speaking from experience; abusing freelancers is universal.


----------



## Yora (Jun 14, 2022)

Ralif Redhammer said:


> Also, what is it about Jorp that seems to attract toxic RPG elements (see also James Raggi)?



No idea. (And I doubt it's statistically significant.)
But Raggi actually has a reputation for paying writers really well, offering great contract conditions, and fullfilling his part properly.

Publicly sharing his appreciation for Peterson on twitter is the only offense I've seen brought up against him. Which is somewhat unpleasant, but not a crime. And he seems to have had the wisdom to keep his thoughts to himself since then.


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)

Yora said:


> No idea. (And I doubt it's statistically significant.)
> But Raggi actually has a reputation for paying writers really well, offering great contract conditions, and fullfilling his part properly.
> 
> Publicly sharing his appreciation for Peterson on twitter is the only offense I've seen brought up against him. Which is somewhat unpleasant, but not a crime. And he seems to have had the wisdom to keep his thoughts to himself since then.



Raggi publicly defended Zak and tried to sneak him back into Drivethru and pay him on the sly.

No thanks. Never again.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 14, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> I wonder if this dynamic is specific to dnd as a hobby/business.  It seems so many people were afraid to speak out because there are literal gatekeepers--influential people who have access to connections and can blacklist people they don't like.  Perhaps because it is so hard to make a living doing freelance dnd stuff, and so many people want to, it increases the chance of exploitation.  Then again, you see exploitation across many different industries, so maybe not.
> 
> I can't help but wonder if the way wotc operates contributes, even if unwittingly, to this dynamic.  It seems that once someone is an 'insider' to some degree, they have a lot of potential power to determine who gets access to opportunities and who does not.



Nope, this is a pretty normal human cycle of behavior, both from the abusers and everyone else involved.


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)

And just to point out I went a looong way to try and forgive Raggi and carry on. Watched hours of video with him taking about it.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Jun 14, 2022)

This is, unfortunately the case, and why all these "apologies" seem to follow the same template (vaguely present the events, say you're sorry, place partial blame on something or someone else).



Jer said:


> I think part of it is that in the US at least admitting that you've done harm basically means you're going to lose any lawsuit filed against you over the matter.  So corporations give non-pologies so as to present a public relations face that gives listeners the impression that they're saying "we hear you and we'll do better" while not giving an actual apology which would require them to actually admit that they've done something wrong and then commit to actually making things right to those they've wronged.
> 
> Given how every individual celebrity is now basically an independent corporation at this point, they're doing the same thing. Actually admitting fault and making it right is too expensive, but a non-pology to manage the PR while not admitting specific fault or committing to make the folks you wronged whole is cheap so they do it.
> 
> (And it infests our whole culture at this point - the non-pology gets used even when there's no threat of a lawsuit these days.)


----------



## Zarithar (Jun 14, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> No, I'm just an empath, I quickly can spot abusers.  Apparently most people can't, so I guess its my super power.
> 
> I assume WOTC, Geek & Sundry/CR who enabled her in the first place are all quiet on this.



Being humble also seems to be a super power of yours I see. Keep it up!


----------



## Greggy C (Jun 14, 2022)

Zarithar said:


> Being humble also seems to be a super power of yours I see. Keep it up!



If you have grown up and seen abusers first hand, its pretty easy to spot those types.  
If you are self absorbed though, you probably won't spot it.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Jun 14, 2022)

Ironic that people who have traditionally been disenfranchised by those in power find a community that is welcoming, and once they themselves get a little bit of power they turn around and become the oppressors.

But maybe perfectly predictable?


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 14, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Ironic that people who have traditionally been disenfranchised by those in power find a community that is welcoming, and once they themselves get a little bit of power they turn around and become the oppressors.
> 
> But maybe perfectly predictable?



Anyone can go bad with the right combination of experience. An echo chamber telling you you're awesome and throwing money at you dulls the empathy. The pressure to keep that situation going causes one to seek out less and less ethical means to doing so, etc, etc.

If you don't have people around you to Gibbs slap you every once in a while, it compounds.


----------



## cavetroll (Jun 14, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Ironic that people who have traditionally been disenfranchised by those in power find a community that is welcoming, and once they themselves get a little bit of power they turn around and become the oppressors.
> 
> But maybe perfectly predictable?



Probably reading a little too much into their demographics.  Serial killers come in all shapes and sizes from all walks of life.  
The most common thing is some sort of childhood trauma, along with a particular gene that brings the worst out in people.


----------



## Yora (Jun 14, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Ironic that people who have traditionally been disenfranchised by those in power find a community that is welcoming, and once they themselves get a little bit of power they turn around and become the oppressors.
> 
> But maybe perfectly predictable?



There are plenty of people in the world who complain that the world is unfair, not because they want to be treated as equals, but because they want to be at the top and stomp down on others.


----------



## mythago (Jun 14, 2022)

Since the tweets/article about the lawsuit end of things was pretty scant on details, and I'm home with a sick family member today, I looked it up. Below is what I was able to determine without shelling out $20-$30 for copies of the pleadings. You can look at the first page of them for free via the Preview function.

ROUTINE ANOMALY LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS BURNING QUILL ENTERPRISES, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL. was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court last July. The case number is 21STCV25863. It's a complaint for fraud.

It looks like there may have been a default (i.e., Satine and her company didn't respond when served with the lawsuit filing). Without buying more documents I can't tell whether the plaintiff screwed up and didn't serve her correctly, or whether the court "set aside" the default to let her respond, which is a pretty common thing. She has filed a demurrer and motion to strike. This is also pretty common; it's a response to the complaint claiming there is something wrong with it, and that some or all of the things alleged in it should be stricken.

The next hearing is on the demurrer and motion to strike, and a case management conference (basically a 'what's going on in this case, everyone' meeting) on November 22. The LA court system is the largest in the world and there's a huge backlog when they aren't dealing with COVID, so the delay isn't surprising.

One interesting thing is that a "notice of related case" was filed. That is something one does to inform the court that there's a separate lawsuit pending that's related enough to this one that everyone needs to know about it. That related case is SATINE PHOENIX VS DAVID RUTENBERG, also filed in LA (on February 16 of this year), case number 22STCV05974.  (It was recently amended to add Full Mithril Jacket LLC as a defendant.) The first page of the complaint describes it as a "breach of oral contract" and "breach of fiduciary duty" claim.

A secondary interesting thing about that "related case" is that the Court just issued an order to show cause (that's judge for "you have some explaining to do") for failure to file a proof of service, i.e. to show that in fact the complaint was served on the people one is suing. There is a declaration of diligence in process serving, which implies that they're claiming they tried to serve Rutenberg and/or his company without success.

ETA: Here's the entrance to the labyrinth of trying to access LA court case documents online: Online Services - LA Court


----------



## Christian Hoffer (Jun 14, 2022)

Here are the initial filings for Rutenberg and the demurrer from Phoenix. (I’m in a power outage, so I can’t do more at the moment.)


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 14, 2022)

darjr said:


> She’s done. He’s done. Ruty might see work again. Maybe. But I dint think he’s interested in this industry anymore.
> 
> What I am curious about now is who is credited in the Eberron books? Stilly Ruty? Should it be?



Ruty, I never trusted or liked, nor Stone (or Adam Keobel for that matter). Phoenix i saw as a positive influence and maybe a bit of a try hard. Apparently I’m better at judging other men than I am with women…


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 14, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> Such a nice couple, shame that WOTC and CR promote these predator types.



Uncool, unfair and reaching.

Phoenix and Stone's toxic behaviors have only recently come to light, and neither have been directly involved with WotC, and I think CR, in recent times. I'm sure some individuals within both organizations knew of their behaviors to some degree . . . but to tar either company or any individuals within those companies without any evidence of wrongdoing . . . well, that's pretty toxic also.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 14, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Ruty, I never trusted or liked, nor Stone (or Adam Keobel for that matter). Phoenix i saw as a positive influence and maybe a bit of a try hard. Apparently I’m better at judging other men than I am with women…



Maybe we just expect the behavior more from men? I'm certainly that way - to the point I didn't recognize my wife's abuse in my first marriage until the end.
After all, a guy should be able to take being bullied and hit by a woman, right?


----------



## ersatzphil (Jun 14, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Ruty, I never trusted or liked, nor Stone (or Adam Keobel for that matter). Phoenix i saw as a positive influence and maybe a bit of a try hard. Apparently I’m better at judging other men than I am with women…



In fairness, I had the exact same impression of them.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 14, 2022)

TheSword said:


> Why on earth would someone want to be a celebrity. It should come with a warning label like cigarettes.



I'm not a celebrity, but I used to do a lot of community and university theatre acting when I was younger. Being on stage, in front of a live crowd, in the moment when the crowd is with your performance . . . . WOW, it's a rush! Having folks recognize you in the community and tell you how much they enjoyed your performances . . . . feels pretty awesome.

Celebrity obviously has its downsides, but it feels pretty damn good most of the time. And if you come from a background where you didn't get recognition and love from family and friends . . . celebrity is an even better drug.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jun 14, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> I like to think there is always a way back, but I get less and less convinced.  We saw it with Ernie Gygax, right?  I gave him some leeway and hoped there would be a way back but now that doesn't seem likely.  Based on more than a decade of recorded abuse (much longer than Ernie's displayed toxic behavior), it seems unlikely there's a way back for them either.  If there is, it's gotta be a big and sustained effort.
> 
> When someone shows you who they are, believe them.  And Jamison and Satine have apparently been showing people behind closed doors who they are for years.  This isn't a slip up, or mistake.  This isn't "back in my younger days I was an idiot".  This is a sustained and current trend of behavior going back more than a decade.  It's....very disappointing for reasons you gave.



Ernie did, and still does, have a way back. He just chose not to take it. Phoenix and Stone can also come back from this, but . . . I'm not holding my breath on that.


----------



## Ondath (Jun 14, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Ruty, I never trusted or liked, nor Stone (or Adam Keobel for that matter). Phoenix i saw as a positive influence and maybe a bit of a try hard. Apparently I’m better at judging other men than I am with women…



I first saw Koebel in a DM roundtable he did with Mercer, Colville and Mearls, and I had thought that he had an attitude of "holier-than-thou" towards the rest of the panel when it came to doing representation well in RPGs. Like, he was making reasonable points, but the way he presented them was aggressive and off-putting. He was the co-creator of Dungeon World who could do no wrong, after all. In hindsight I think he was projecting overconfidence to compensate for the abusive behaviour he had in private.


----------



## Yora (Jun 14, 2022)

I think it's generally weird to turn RPGs into a performance.

Or to go even broader artists making a public performance outside of their work. Of course a musician on a stage or actor in a film is a performance. But when people are turning public appearances into a performance, that's just really weird to me.

The corner of the RPG world that I usually roam are usually "I got this idea/discovery that might interest you" or "I have made this product that you might like". With the creators themselves not being part of the discussion of the work, or making the presentation of their new work about themselves.
The two notable exceptions in the past having been Zak and Raggi. They were courting personal attention and that didn't turn out well for anyone involved.
It could well be that these two bad impressions have colored the whole perception of creators marketing themselves, but my instinct is more towards the practice being most appealing to unpleasant individuals.


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)

I know a LOT of creators making some profit from their creations and almost all of them are decent good people. In fact the only bad apples I personally have met I can count on two hands, and that includes Ruty and Satine. Met both of them at conventions, very briefly.

Edit: had to make that two hands. Still a small number, but now I’m sad.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 14, 2022)

Boy, the intro to this video didn't age well, considering what we know now


----------



## mythago (Jun 14, 2022)

Christian Hoffer said:


> Here are the initial filings for Rutenberg and the initial filing for the countersuit from Phoenix.




Thanks Christian! The second attachment isn't the countersuit, though, it's the demurrer and motion to strike to the original lawsuit. 

I'm guessing the two suits may be consolidated at some point.


----------



## darjr (Jun 14, 2022)




----------



## LordEntrails (Jun 15, 2022)

Jer said:


> Given how every individual celebrity is now basically an independent corporation at this point, they're doing the same thing. Actually admitting fault and making it right is too expensive, but a non-pology to manage the PR while not admitting specific fault or committing to make the folks you wronged whole is cheap so they do it.




That is good short term thinking, and maybe even long term thinking for a well backed corporation. But for a sole proprietor probably not. It depends on how much in assets they have stashed away.

Instead of duck and cover / avoid, they could chose to admit fault, pay what they owe, do some proper apologies and then wen they lose the lawsuits just declare bankruptcy. Then they would be able to rebuild their "brand" and start bringing in money again. Sure it would set them back years, but at least they would have a career.

Now with duck and cover they might get to keep some of their money, but they will not have their careers anymore. Short-term, and selfish, thinking.


----------



## theliel (Jun 15, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> Uncool, unfair and reaching.
> 
> Phoenix and Stone's toxic behaviors have only recently come to light, and neither have been directly involved with WotC, and I think CR, in recent times. I'm sure some individuals within both organizations knew of their behaviors to some degree . . . but to tar either company or any individuals within those companies without any evidence of wrongdoing . . . well, that's pretty toxic also.




Nah, Satine's _most recent_ toxic behaviors have just come to light, but she has a long and storied history of 'falling in with the wrong people' from James Desborugh to Zak S, and it's not like WotC doesn't continually have bad actors showing up all the time because they are Nerd Notable (not even famous) when deciding to court specific audiences.

There was the whole thing with Merls & handling reports of Zak S's back actions, to hiring RPG Pundit & Zak S in the first place to try to pander to the OSR crowd during the developmetn of D&D 5th,

So WotC, an arm of a multinational conglomerate Hasbro, has been hiring Influencers since before that was a job, and doing absolute terribly at due diligence, and then getting used for it.  You can see in Liisa's story about Satine & WotC dangling a WotC staff position in front of her to get her to do work, then torpedoing it when Satine decided she didn't like Liisa.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 15, 2022)

theliel said:


> So WotC, an arm of a multinational conglomerate Hasbro, has been hiring Influencers since before that was a job, and doing absolute terribly at due diligence, and then getting used for it.  You can see in Liisa's story about Satine & WotC dangling a WotC staff position in front of her to get her to do work, then torpedoing it when Satine decided she didn't like Liisa.



Yes, and there was some question of who "Z" is in Liisa's story. Somebody upthread said they were sure it must be Greg Tito. I have no idea myself, but whoever it was - were they complicit in Satine's blacklisting of Liisa or were they taken in by her as well?


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 15, 2022)

darjr said:


>



He's certainly had to deal with some pretty bad stuff, so he should know. The more positive news is, Anthony Rapp is an RPGer too now! Hooray! He's been consistently one of the best things about Discovery.


----------



## darjr (Jun 15, 2022)

Venger Satanis steps on his own ego yet again.





Your browser is not able to display this video.


----------



## theliel (Jun 15, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> He's certainly had to deal with some pretty bad stuff, so he should know. The more positive news is, Anthony Rapp is an RPGer too now! Hooray! He's been consistently one of the best things about Discovery.



If you'd like to see him play, he's done Honey Heist with Loading Ready Run on their Dice Friends series.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

pukunui said:


> Yes, and there was some question of who "Z" is in Liisa's story. Somebody upthread said they were sure it must be Greg Tito. I have no idea myself, but whoever it was - were they complicit in Satine's blacklisting of Liisa or were they taken in by her as well?



Literally nobody else at WotC fits the bill: organizing D&D Live was part of the story with Z...and at the time, thst would have been 100% Greg Tito.

I'd like to think Greg listened to the wrong side in a "she said, she said" scenario and was misled.


----------



## darjr (Jun 15, 2022)




----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Jun 15, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> Uncool, unfair and reaching.
> 
> Phoenix and Stone's toxic behaviors have only recently come to light, and neither have been directly involved with WotC, and I think CR, in recent times. I'm sure some individuals within both organizations knew of their behaviors to some degree . . . but to tar either company or any individuals within those companies without any evidence of wrongdoing . . . well, that's pretty toxic also.



That is always how it works.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Literally nobody else at WotC fits the bill: organizing D&D Live was part of the story with Z...and at the time, thst would have been 100% Greg Tito.
> 
> I'd like to think Greg listened to the wrong side in a "she said, she said" scenario and was misled.



I'd like to think so too, since Greg seems like a pretty decent human being.


----------



## Greggy C (Jun 15, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> Uncool, unfair and reaching.
> 
> Phoenix and Stone's toxic behaviors have only recently come to light, and neither have been directly involved with WotC, and I think CR, in recent times. I'm sure some individuals within both organizations knew of their behaviors to some degree . . . but to tar either company or any individuals within those companies without any evidence of wrongdoing . . . well, that's pretty toxic also.



WotC, in the form of Mike Mearls, went to great lengths to protect the abuser Zak Smith, and out accusers.  Mike who was at SP's wedding.  So yeah there is plenty of stuff going on.  I know that much, even when I don't even follow any of this stuff.  So I'm sure even more will keep coming out.  WOTC keeping their head down hoping they don't have to make a statement no doubt.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 15, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> WotC, in the form of Mike Mearls, went to great lengths to protect the abuser Zak Smith, and out accusers.  Mike who was at SP's wedding.  So yeah there is plenty of stuff going on.  I know that much, even when I don't even follow any of this stuff.  So I'm sure even more will keep coming out.  WOTC keeping their head down hoping they don't have to make a statement no doubt.



Mike Mearls, who attended Gary Con like he had plenty of times before, stopped by a former co-workers wedding which was the feature event Thursday night and which took over the bar  which is the main social space in the hotel.

Or, you can read it like this was intended and he flew to the site just for the wedding and got back together with another evil Zak S. associate to plot more dastardly deeds as part of WoTC's ongoing evil.

Please, stay to the topic and try and leave the Mearls trolling out of this thread.

I was at GaryCon and I walked by the wedding party on the way to a game that was scheduled, so I obviously am tainted by association, right?


----------



## billd91 (Jun 15, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> Mike who was at SP's wedding.



*Lots* of people were at the wedding. It was held publicly at Gary Con.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 15, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> I was at GaryCon and I walked by the wedding party on the way to a game that was scheduled, so I obviously am tainted by association, right?



Me too. Honestly, it was hard to avoid there.


----------



## Greggy C (Jun 15, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> Mike Mearls flew to the site just for the wedding and got back together with another evil Zak S. associate to plot more dastardly deeds as part of WoTC's ongoing evil.



I mean I know nothing about Mike Mearls, I wasn't around in those days.  However you can't miss 10,000 tweets calling for him fired due to the Zak Smith debacle.


----------



## Greggy C (Jun 15, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> so I obviously am tainted by association, right?



no idea, certainly there is an impression is strong that D&D is heavily tainted by a lot of bad actors.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 15, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> I mean I know nothing about Mike Mearls, I wasn't around in those days.  However you can't miss 10,000 tweets calling for him fired due to the Zak Smith debacle.



if you know nothing, maybe not slurring someone is the decent thing to do?


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Jun 15, 2022)

If we used '10,000 tweets' as the reason to do anything, our society would fall apart.  LOL.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 15, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> no idea, certainly there is an impression is strong that D&D is heavily tainted by a lot of bad actors.



So you do think that walking by the wedding party taints me. And, I must admit, Thursday was my AL day so I was walking to a 5e D&D game. One that Mearls worked on, Satine was the community manager for in 2016 (that is a guess from memory) and that two other evil OSR personalities consulted on and were given credit in the rulebook.

I would be careful, though. Your wide net accusations may sweep you up as well as you are posting in the same thread that I am.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 15, 2022)




----------



## mythago (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> I'd like to think Greg listened to the wrong side in a "she said, she said" scenario and was misled.




This is how it keeps happening, you know? 

Abusers and creeps _bank _on this. They slither in between the gaps in "everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt" and "never presume malice instead of ignorance". They know that most people dislike confrontation, and would rather make excuses and hope for the best than take the effort to make difficult choices.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 15, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> If you have grown up and seen abusers first hand, its pretty easy to spot those types.
> If you are self absorbed though, you probably won't spot it.



*Mod Note:*
1) If you cannot make your point without being personally insulting, your point is pretty weak, and you probably shouldn't make it.  If you can make it without being insulting, next time do it that way instead.  

2) You are spreading misinformation - abusers are generally very good at covering their nature in public.  Otherwise, we could deal with them early, and nobody would get hurt.  

The combination here is highly detrimental to the discussion.  Do not continue in this vein, please and thanks.


----------



## Greggy C (Jun 15, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> So you do think that walking by the wedding party taints me. And, I must admit, Thursday was my AL day so I was walking to a 5e D&D game. One that Mearls worked on, Satine was the community manager for in 2016 (that is a guess from memory) and that two other evil OSR personalities consulted on and were given credit in the rulebook.
> 
> I would be careful, though. Your wide net accusations may sweep you up as well as you are posting in the same thread that I am.



I'm way too old "to be careful".  I have no stake in this less than professional "industry".  If you want to vigorously defend Mike Mearls and WOTC behaviour, knock yourself out.  I do not care. 


Goodbye.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 15, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> I mean I know nothing about Mike Mearls, I wasn't around in those days.  However you can't miss 10,000 tweets calling for him fired due to the Zak Smith debacle.




Folks, 

This thread is not about Mearls, or Zak S.  Please do not try to make it about them.  We are not going to re-litigate that issue here at this time.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

mythago said:


> This is how it keeps happening, you know?
> 
> Abusers and creeps _bank _on this. They slither in between the gaps in "everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt" and "never presume malice instead of ignorance". They know that most people dislike confrontation, and would rather make excuses and hope for the best than take the effort to make difficult choices.



I mean, the trouble is thst if you do the opposite, things are even worse and more toxic. Making the world safe for people to come forward is the way to enact paoitive change, not assuming that everyone who associates with abusers at any level is morally complicit.

I mean, Tito may be morally complicit, but we can't assume that sight unseen.


----------



## Imaculata (Jun 15, 2022)

What baffles me, is that they would risk their own career and reputation by not paying the people they hire. Sure, it will get one product out quick and cheap by not paying your artist... but then they'll never work for you again. Surely you want to keep producing products?

Apart from just common decency, why would you burn your bridges like that? If you find yourself a good artist, surely you'd like to keep them around for your next project? But instead they just keep burning through new artists, screwing all of them over, and burning that bridge. Eventually word starts getting around.

Even if you are the most unpleasant, selfish influencer, and a rotten person behind the scenes... that just seems rather short sighted.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 15, 2022)

Imaculata said:


> What baffles me, is that they would risk their own career and reputation by not paying the people they hire. Sure, it will get one product out quick and cheap by not paying your artist... but then they'll never work for you again. Surely you want to keep producing products?
> 
> Apart from just common decency, why would you burn your bridges like that? If you find yourself a good artist, surely you'd like to keep them around for your next project? But instead they just keep burning through new artists, screwing all of them over, and burning that bridge. Eventually word starts getting around.
> 
> Even if you are the most unpleasant, selfish influencer, and a rotten person behind the scenes... that just seems rather short sighted.




As a friend of mine likes to say, I think they were "huffing their own farts" (i.e. they believed their own myth about how influential and powerful they were in the industry; that they were essentially untouchable and could destroy anybody who spoke out against them).


----------



## Umbran (Jun 15, 2022)

Imaculata said:


> What baffles me, is that they would risk their own career and reputation by not paying the people they hire. Sure, it will get one product out quick and cheap by not paying your artist... but then they'll never work for you again. Surely you want to keep producing products?




The simplest reason would be that they _couldn't_ pay, for some reason.  Like, the project was poorly managed, the money mis-spent, or similar.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 15, 2022)

Umbran said:


> The simplest reason would be that they _couldn't_ pay, for some reason.  Like, the project was poorly managed, the money mis-spent, or similar.




This is purely supposition, but based on some of the first-hand stories coming out and the lawsuit, I think it possible that they co-mingled project funds with personal funds.


----------



## mythago (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> I mean, the trouble is thst if you do the opposite, things are even worse and more toxic. Making the world safe for people to come forward is the way to enact paoitive change, not assuming that everyone who associates with abusers at any level is morally complicit.
> 
> I mean, Tito may be morally complicit, but we can't assume that sight unseen.




What's "do the opposite"? Are you really arguing that the _only possible alternative_ to the Missing Stair Cinematic Universe is to presume evil motive as the default?

You're right, we can't assume things sight unseen. That includes assuming 'he meant well' and 'he was confused' and 'he was misled' or whatever other fanfic allows us not to have to perform the uncomfortable task of thinking ill of a fellow gamer.

Liisa explained at length what Z did. It wasn't "associating with Satine".


----------



## Umbran (Jun 15, 2022)

jdrakeh said:


> This is purely supposition, but based on some of the first-hand stories coming out and the lawsuit, I think it possible that they co-mingled project funds with personal funds.




Possible, but it may not even be that squirrely.  There are all sorts of ways a project can run over-budget that aren't outright financial malfeasance.  But when you run over budget on a fixed price, someone doesn't get paid.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 15, 2022)

I suppose if Liisa had believed the WotC staffer to be complicit, she wouldn’t have protected their identity.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 15, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Possible, but it may not even be that squirrely.  There are all sorts of ways a project can run over-budget that aren't outright financial malfeasance.  But when you run over budget on a fixed price, someone doesn't get paid.




Sure, but when it happens on almost _every_ project? I'm a little skeptical about the answer being an "honest" mistake.


----------



## darjr (Jun 15, 2022)




----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

mythago said:


> What's "do the opposite"? Are you really arguing that the _only possible alternative_ to the Missing Stair Cinematic Universe is to presume evil motive as the default?
> 
> You're right, we can't assume things sight unseen. That includes assuming 'he meant well' and 'he was confused' and 'he was misled' or whatever other fanfic allows us not to have to perform the uncomfortable task of thinking ill of a fellow gamer.
> 
> Liisa explained at length what Z did. It wasn't "associating with Satine".



It was "believe Satine's side of the story." Which was wrong. But it's not always easy for people to see clearly when someone they like is positioning someone else they barely know as a villain.

Maybe Tito is a psycho abuser, for all I know, but I see no reason to assume that for certain just because he believed a manipulative narcissist.


----------



## Ghal Maraz (Jun 15, 2022)

I guess they are so full of their ego that they literally thought no one would ever stand up against them, so they started doing more and more missteps, leaving their flanks exposed. 

I mean, she proudly used that "Queen of D&D" title like it was something real. They even managed to organise a sort of royal wedding, getting married at a convention named after the founding father of the hobby in a ceremony administered by that founding father's natural son. 

And I'm glad all of this finally surfaced, but that's again another one of those situations that exploded too late: people are still coming out with their stories and many of them had their dreams destroyed by those two. 

I really, really hope that both get the flak they absolutely deserve and that that pathetic excuse from her, pointing to Jamison as the only culprit,  doesn't actually shield her. But it seems more and more evident she's already 'out of the game' (in many senses).


----------



## pukunui (Jun 15, 2022)

Ghal Maraz said:


> I mean, she proudly used that "Queen of D&D" title like it was something real. They even managed to organise a sort of royal wedding, getting married at a convention named after the founding father of the hobby in a ceremony administered by that founding father's natural son.



Has Luke said anything about the matter yet?


----------



## Ghal Maraz (Jun 15, 2022)

pukunui said:


> Has Luke said anything about the matter yet?



Not definitely. He said the Guests of GaryCon will be announced shortly.


----------



## SAVeira (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> It was "believe Satine's side of the story." Which was wrong. But it's not always easy for people to see clearly when someone they like is positioning someone else they barely know as a villain.
> 
> Maybe Tito is a psycho abuser, for all I know, but I see no reason to assume that for certain just because he believed a manipulative narcissist.



A factor that should be kept in mind is that several years ago Satine was in a terrible car accident by her own account left her with severe brain damage.  Would not be surprised that a lot of people, especially individuals at WotC, would give her the benefit of the doubt due that.  Not saying that is right, but it would understand that some behaviour would put down to the injury she received in that accident.

Used to work with a guy that after a stoke started swearing like a sailor.  Everyone just put it down to the stoke.  Not the same, I know, but an example how people can make allowance for behaviour if they think there is a medical justification.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 15, 2022)

pukunui said:


> Has Luke said anything about the matter yet?



What is he supposed to say? I have not seen any bad behavior to have been alleged to have happened at GaryCon. If they are not guests at next year’s GaryCon, that about sums it up.


----------



## theliel (Jun 15, 2022)

Starting to see why WotC eventually parted ways - People reported abuse & failure to pay. 
Satine offered advice to 'talk it out', told no one else in WotC, then *kept working with the person she had reports about*. 

This one I can't put on WotC, this sounds like flat out dereliction of duty.


----------



## AnotherGuy (Jun 15, 2022)

Gradine said:


> There is a way back from this, there is always a way back, but it requires a great deal of self-reflection, humility, and above all, time. Unfortunately I can't say I've ever met a J*rd*n P*t*rs*n fan with an abundance of either of the first two qualities.



Wow, that is quite an aspersion casting on quite a large number of people.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 15, 2022)

jdrakeh said:


> Sure, but when it happens on almost _every_ project?




Sorry, I haven't taken a count of how many projects had actually had payment issues.

Business management is a whole set of skills.  Being in the RPG sphere does not automatically give it to you.


----------



## MGibster (Jun 15, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Business management is a whole set of skills. Being in the RPG sphere does not automatically give it to you.



This is just a flaw with point buy character generation.  You spend all your points on the fun skills and forget to spend it on the boring skills you actually need.


----------



## WarDriveWorley (Jun 15, 2022)

MGibster said:


> This is just a flaw with point buy character generation.  You spend all your points on the fun skills and forget to spend it on the boring skills you actually need.



No one understands how important those clerical skills actually are.


----------



## Mannahnin (Jun 15, 2022)

WarDriveWorley said:


> No one understands how important those clerical skills actually are.



No one ever wants to play the clerk.


----------



## WarDriveWorley (Jun 15, 2022)

Mannahnin said:


> No one ever wants to play the clerk.



Ironically if they made that character my friend Eric would be all over it like slime on an aboleth


----------



## Mannahnin (Jun 15, 2022)

WarDriveWorley said:


> Ironically if they made that character my friend Eric would be all over it like slime on an aboleth



No doubt he could do so in Hârn!  But then you'd be missing Aboleths.


----------



## WarDriveWorley (Jun 15, 2022)

Mannahnin said:


> No doubt he could do so in Hârn!  But then you'd be missing Aboleths.



And one can't truly live without Aboleths


----------



## Aldarc (Jun 15, 2022)

Ralif Redhammer said:


> Also, what is it about Jorp that seems to attract toxic RPG elements (see also James Raggi)?



Pseudo-intellectual validation for their toxicity.


----------



## mythago (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> It was "believe Satine's side of the story." Which was wrong. But it's not always easy for people to see clearly when someone they like is positioning someone else they barely know as a villain.
> 
> Maybe Tito is a psycho abuser, for all I know, but I see no reason to assume that for certain just because he believed a manipulative narcissist.




Who said anything about Z being a “psycho abuser”? You keep painting this in weird extremes: either the assumptions you are making about Z being a truly good dude unwittingly led astray are true, or he’s an evil abuser who is being tarred simply by “associating” with Satine.

Perhaps it would be better to focus on Z’s behavior rather than on making assumptions about what a good guy he “seems” to be?


----------



## Maxperson (Jun 15, 2022)

Mannahnin said:


> No one ever wants to play the clerk.



That's because clerks never get paid on time.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 15, 2022)

There's a phrase I read a few years ago that I really liked, "We unintentionally turn away those who are good for us or show healthy relationship traits because they do not allow us to experience love in the way in which we are familiar."

That is very true.  If we grow up in a toxic or neglectful atmosphere that was called "love", that's what we know; that's how we define it.  So subconsciously that's what we seek, because humans in general seek familiarity.  This isn't must my laymen opinion.  I grew up in an abusive household, and the relationship between my dad and mom was one of high disfunction and certainty not a healthy relationship.  Most of that stuff I realized as I grew to adulthood was not healthy or the way to have a relationship (having seen some of my friends who did have healthy relationships to see firsthand certainly helped).  However, I knew there were a lot of subconscious behaviors I had (like being a huge conflict avoider and shutting down rather whenever confronted), so I swallowed  my pride and went to see a therapist.  Not because I was doing anything abusive or I was having major relationship issues, but because I wanted to be the best partner and parent I can because my family deserves that.  Having a 3rd party professional expert who saw things I didn't and could give great advice was a great help*.  It's pretty well accepted among professionals that my first statement up there is true.  I highly recommend therapists for everyone, and wish they could be part of a standard preventative maintenance healthcare plan so everyone could have access.  Communicating effectively is a skill, and must be practiced and coached.  Recognizing preconceptions and subconscious traits is hard, and we generally need help addressing them.

Why do I bring this up?  Because it shows that comments like "everyone in an abusive relationship should be able to identify abuse easily."  That's wholly untrue, and is actually more the opposite, according to the specialists I've actually spoken to.  There is a reasons why folks who have been in abusive relationships (like my mom) keep getting in them.  Same type of partner over and over.

So it makes complete sense to see how many people who were abused by them continued to take that abuse and didn't say anything, especially in the power dynamic that existed.  No one mistreated by them asked for it or deserved it, and none of them should be victim blamed by not recognizing it.


*I came up with a saying years ago, "Relationships are like a boardgame.  When you're watching it from the side, you know all the right moves, but when it's you playing it, suddenly things get much more clouded."


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 15, 2022)

Let's see is she can live up to her namesake and rise from the ashes.

Based on her response so far, it doesn't seem that way.  Perhaps she should change her name to Satine Vulture instead...


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 15, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> I wonder if this dynamic is specific to dnd as a hobby/business.  It seems so many people were afraid to speak out because there are literal gatekeepers--influential people who have access to connections and can blacklist people they don't like.  Perhaps because it is so hard to make a living doing freelance dnd stuff, and so many people want to, it increases the chance of exploitation.  Then again, you see exploitation across many different industries, so maybe not.
> 
> I can't help but wonder if the way wotc operates contributes, even if unwittingly, to this dynamic.  It seems that once someone is an 'insider' to some degree, they have a lot of potential power to determine who gets access to opportunities and who does not.



It’s not just D&D, it’s every branch of the entertainment industry.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Jun 15, 2022)

I think that the danger of celebrity, no matter how relatively minor, is when you start trying to use it as currency in and of itself. When you start believing your own hype machine and being more concerned with how people treat you than how you treat people. Back in the day, I knew so many musicians that were absolutely full of themselves, when all they were drawing was a crowd of 100-200 people. Big fish in a small pond and all that.*

*Not that I didn't once ask for a bag of marshmallows in a rider as a lark; those remain the best-tasting marshmallows I've ever had... 



Imaculata said:


> What baffles me, is that they would risk their own career and reputation by not paying the people they hire. Sure, it will get one product out quick and cheap by not paying your artist... but then they'll never work for you again. Surely you want to keep producing products?
> 
> Apart from just common decency, why would you burn your bridges like that? If you find yourself a good artist, surely you'd like to keep them around for your next project? But instead they just keep burning through new artists, screwing all of them over, and burning that bridge. Eventually word starts getting around.
> 
> Even if you are the most unpleasant, selfish influencer, and a rotten person behind the scenes... that just seems rather short sighted.




In all honesty, yeah. Just because a person is good at playing D&D, or has good ideas, that doesn't mean that they have the skills to run a business or manage a project. It's one of the reasons the history of TSR is littered with bad/shady business decisions.



MGibster said:


> This is just a flaw with point buy character generation.  You spend all your points on the fun skills and forget to spend it on the boring skills you actually need.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 15, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> It’s not just D&D, it’s every branch of the entertainment industry.



Not just entertainment. It's practically a cornerstone of our entire economic system.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 15, 2022)

Imaculata said:


> What baffles me, is that they would risk their own career and reputation by not paying the people they hire. Sure, it will get one product out quick and cheap by not paying your artist... but then they'll never work for you again. Surely you want to keep producing products?
> 
> Apart from just common decency, why would you burn your bridges like that? If you find yourself a good artist, surely you'd like to keep them around for your next project? But instead they just keep burning through new artists, screwing all of them over, and burning that bridge. Eventually word starts getting around.
> 
> Even if you are the most unpleasant, selfish influencer, and a rotten person behind the scenes... that just seems rather short sighted.



When you control a lot of bridges, burning one between yourself and a newcomer also cuts that newcomer off from the rest of the industry. That’s a big part of how people are able to get away with stuff like this, no one wants to upset them because they’re a bottleneck to get into the big-leagues. There’s also no shortage of talented young artists hoping to break into the RPG space, so they could afford to be pretty flippant with who they cut out.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 15, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> It’s not just D&D, it’s every branch of the entertainment industry.




It isn't just the entertainment industry.  The phrase, "It isn't what you know, it is who you know," applies in lots of places.


----------



## JediSoth (Jun 15, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> Let's see is she can live up to her namesake and rise from the ashes.
> 
> Based on her response so far, it doesn't seem that way.  Perhaps she should change her name to Satine Vulture instead...



How many times do you let someone like that rise, though, before you break out the fire extinguisher and say "No more!"?


----------



## MGibster (Jun 15, 2022)

JediSoth said:


> How many times do you let someone like that rise, though, before you break out the fire extinguisher and say "No more!"?



She's a Phoenix.....so as many times as she wants I guess.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 15, 2022)

AnotherGuy said:


> Wow, that is quite an aspersion casting on quite a large number of people.



And yet, entirely justifiable


----------



## Von Ether (Jun 15, 2022)

Ralif Redhammer said:


> In all honesty, yeah. Just because a person is good at playing D&D, or has good ideas, that doesn't mean that they have the skills to run a business or manage a project. It's one of the reasons the history of TSR is littered with bad/shady business decisions.




It's why over the years the whole "For gamers, by gamers" tag line has become more a red flag than a sign of quality for me.

Like many other small businesses run by people with a good job skill set, their leadership, communication, and project management skills are learned on the job - which may be the worst place to learn them. Especially when a mistake might cost you your livelihood. And few people are great at all three.

It's also known as the Peter Principle for creatives who work in a corporate environment. A person who is a great writer or artists may not have great people skills. Yet to keep getting raises to stay ahead of inflation or get promoted, they have to transition out of the "grunt" work and into management positions - which are not their skill set or the or their focus.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 15, 2022)

Von Ether said:


> It's also known as the Peter Principle for creatives who work in a corporate environment. A person who is a great writer or artists may not have great people skills. Yet to keep getting raises to stay ahead of inflation or get promoted, they have to transition out of the "grunt" work and into management positions - which are not their skill set or the or their focus.



Critically, the second aspect of the Peter Principle is that because they are so inept at middle management, they never get promoted _out _of those positions, and their past excellence keeps them from being fired or demoted. They just stay stuck in positions they are bad at.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 15, 2022)

Gradine said:


> Critically, the second aspect of the Peter Principle is that because they are so inept at middle management, they never get promoted _out _of those positions, and their past excellence keeps them from being fired or demoted. They just stay stuck in positions they are bad at.



Yep, the system seems built specifically to funnel people into their position of least competence.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 15, 2022)

Retreater said:


> Maybe we just expect the behavior more from men? I'm certainly that way - to the point I didn't recognize my wife's abuse in my first marriage until the end.



Yes. Absolutely true. For good reason, too. I mean, for every Satine, there is a Stone and a Zac S, as it were.


Retreater said:


> After all, a guy should be able to take being bullied and hit by a woman, right?



Oof. I'm sorry man. No one should have to live like that. I'm glad you got out.


ersatzphil said:


> In fairness, I had the exact same impression of them.



Yeah, I'm seeing a lot of it. I think Satine projects both inviting warmth _and_ nerdy try-hard energy, on top of being more circumspect with who and how she does this stuff, whereas Zac and Stone lash out much more freely.


Ondath said:


> I first saw Koebel in a DM roundtable he did with Mercer, Colville and Mearls, and I had thought that he had an attitude of "holier-than-thou" towards the rest of the panel when it came to doing representation well in RPGs. Like, he was making reasonable points, but the way he presented them was aggressive and off-putting. He was the co-creator of Dungeon World who could do no wrong, after all. In hindsight I think he was projecting overconfidence to compensate for the abusive behaviour he had in private.



Yeah, even his whole look screamed performative progressiveness to me. 
Listening to him talk...I couldn't watch more than 10 minutes of that panel you're talking about, because of him.


Yora said:


> I think it's generally weird to turn RPGs into a performance.
> 
> Or to go even broader artists making a public performance outside of their work. Of course a musician on a stage or actor in a film is a performance. But when people are turning public appearances into a performance, that's just really weird to me.
> 
> ...



Nah. The Vast majority of people in the TTRPG spotlight are good people. This take is reductive and vastly overbroad.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 15, 2022)

[Deleted: misunderstood another user due to phone glitch.]


----------



## ersatzphil (Jun 15, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yeah, I'm seeing a lot of it. I think Satine projects both inviting warmth _and_ nerdy try-hard energy, on top of being more circumspect with who and how she does this stuff, whereas Zac and Stone lash out much more freely.



In fairness, there's a number of people in the 'D&D Famous' space who feel kind of try-hard to me: I've never payed it much mind; I just assumed they were excited about what they were doing and trying extra hard not to jinx it, which I completely understand. I haven't followed Satine terribly closely - I mainly remember her for appearing on Wil Wheaton's Tabletop and playing a setite in LA by Night - but I hadn't noticed any indication of negative behavior, while the others you mentioned felt like they might be jerks off the bat.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 15, 2022)

Ralif Redhammer said:


> *Not that I didn't once ask for a bag of marshmallows in a rider as a lark; those remain the best-tasting marshmallows I've ever had...



I ran some library mini-comic-con DnD, using an adventure I wrote to take 1 hour to run, just for that event, alongside two other DMs also running my adventure (three times with new players each time), and I can't even tell ya how intoxicating it was to be the king of that moment, for it all to go perfectly, (1-hour adventure with a satisfying arc! I still dunno how I managed it!), and when someone helped my wife get me an energy drink and some nachos between games, i felt like a rock star, just for a moment. 

It's pretty easy to see how people can get caught up. My focus, as always, was on serving others and seeing other people have a good time and be happier leaving the room than entering it, but I can't say I wouldn't lose that eventually if i were truly famous, not just in the world's smallest spotlight for a day.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

mythago said:


> Who said anything about Z being a “psycho abuser”? You keep painting this in weird extremes: either the assumptions you are making about Z being a truly good dude unwittingly led astray are true, or he’s an evil abuser who is being tarred simply by “associating” with Satine.
> 
> Perhaps it would be better to focus on Z’s behavior rather than on making assumptions about what a good guy he “seems” to be?



I assume that he is muddling along somewhere in the middle, like the vast majority of humanity. You seem to be the one painting in extremes here.


----------



## BRayne (Jun 15, 2022)

Retreater said:


> My ex-wife isn't in the TTRPG spotlight. My comment was in regards to people being surprised that women can be abusive.
> I'm not suggesting abuse is more common among game designers or celebrities. What I am saying is that sometimes women can be at fault too.
> Any abuser - regardless of their status or the shape the abuse takes - should be made responsible for their actions.




That section was in response to someone else's point as far as I can tell


----------



## Retreater (Jun 15, 2022)

BRayne said:


> That section was in response to someone else's point as far as I can tell



It was confusing because I think there were three of us quoted, with the poster replying the same to all of us. Maybe it was some kind of error?
In any case, I'm not offended. Just wanted to clear up any miscommunication.
[Edit: was a glitch on my part. Deleted my previous response. Hope this clears up any confusion. Thank you for clarifying.]


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 15, 2022)

Retreater said:


> My ex-wife isn't in the TTRPG spotlight. My comment was in regards to people being surprised that women can be abusive.
> I'm not suggesting abuse is more common among game designers or celebrities. What I am saying is that sometimes women can be at fault too.
> Any abuser - regardless of their status or the shape the abuse takes - should be made responsible for their actions.



I humbly request you look at my post again. What you are quoting here was in reply to an entirely separate person from you, speaking on _their_ implication that the TTRPG spotlight attracts unpleasant people, nor did I say anything that can reasonably be taken as a suggestion of anything in contradiction with what you are saying here.


ersatzphil said:


> In fairness, there's a number of people in the 'D&D Famous' space who feel kind of try-hard to me: I've never payed it much mind; I just assumed they were excited about what they were doing and trying extra hard not to jinx it, which I completely understand. I haven't followed Satine terribly closely - I mainly remember her for appearing on Wil Wheaton's Tabletop and playing a setite in LA by Night - but I hadn't noticed any indication of negative behavior, while the others you mentioned felt like they might be jerks off the bat.



Exactly. that's what I'm saying. Satine never stood out beyond being exceptionally attractive and being maybe a bit more try-hard than some of the people around her. Mearls, Ruty, Jamison, all made me suspicious off the bat. Zak S I honestly had no perception of at all until I found out he was an abuser, he just...didn't stand out to me in any way, even though I was aware of DnD with Pornstars way before Satine became a celeb DM. But Satine just reminded me of nerds I've known all my life. "Hot nerd who is maybe working harder than they need to in order to feel like they fit in and belong and establish their place here" hardly stands out, to me.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 15, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I humbly request you look at my post again. What you are quoting here was in reply to an entirely separate person from you, speaking on _their_ implication that the TTRPG spotlight attracts unpleasant people, nor did I say anything that can reasonably be taken as a suggestion of anything in contradiction with what you are saying here.



So sorry. There must've been a glitch on my phone. I saw only your comment on the last quote (from another user). I assumed it applied to my quote because it didn't display the rest of your post.
I'm so sorry. I will go back and delete the posts I made in reference to your post to remove any further confusion in this thread.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Jun 15, 2022)

I've seen this so many times, and been this. In my previous career, I was good at my job and ended up in management. I was ill-suited for it and miserable. In my current career I've avoided that path and am quite content and happy.



Von Ether said:


> It's also known as the Peter Principle for creatives who work in a corporate environment. A person who is a great writer or artists may not have great people skills. Yet to keep getting raises to stay ahead of inflation or get promoted, they have to transition out of the "grunt" work and into management positions - which are not their skill set or the or their focus.




Yeah, that attention and adulation, even on the smallest scale, can be a heady thing. It's all too easy to go from being thankful for the support to thinking that it is what you are owed.



doctorbadwolf said:


> I ran some library mini-comic-con DnD, using an adventure I wrote to take 1 hour to run, just for that event, alongside two other DMs also running my adventure (three times with new players each time), and I can't even tell ya how intoxicating it was to be the king of that moment, for it all to go perfectly, (1-hour adventure with a satisfying arc! I still dunno how I managed it!), and when someone helped my wife get me an energy drink and some nachos between games, i felt like a rock star, just for a moment.
> 
> It's pretty easy to see how people can get caught up. My focus, as always, was on serving others and seeing other people have a good time and be happier leaving the room than entering it, but I can't say I wouldn't lose that eventually if i were truly famous, not just in the world's smallest spotlight for a day.


----------



## ersatzphil (Jun 15, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Mearls, Ruty, Jamison, all made me suspicious off the bat.



You were suspicious of Mearls off the bat? The others gave me a bad vibe, but Mearls felt like he almost came from Central Casting as "generic D&D nerd".


----------



## ChaosOS (Jun 15, 2022)

darjr said:


> She’s done. He’s done. Ruty might see work again. Maybe. But I dint think he’s interested in this industry anymore.
> 
> What I am curious about now is who is credited in the Eberron books? Stilly Ruty? Should it be?



The stuff Liisa wrote without credit or pay was for the Maze Arcana patreon; Keith did the bulk of the lore writing for Wayfinders, while Ruty was responsible for the first draft of the mechanics.


----------



## billd91 (Jun 15, 2022)

Retreater said:


> So sorry. There must've been a glitch on my phone. I saw only your comment on the last quote (from another user). I assumed it applied to my quote because it didn't display the rest of your post.
> I'm so sorry. I will go back and delete the posts I made in reference to your post to remove any further confusion in this thread.



I'm not sure it was a glitch on your phone. When I first saw the post you responded to, it was mainly a few separate quoted sections with a comment by doctorbadwolf only at the very bottom. And I'm viewing this via Safari on an iMac.
So if there was a glitch, it was more widespread than your phone.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 15, 2022)

Gradine said:


> And yet, entirely justifiable





But perhaps unwise, regardless. 

If you want to broadly sling mud at people, do it on some other board, please and thanks.


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 15, 2022)

ersatzphil said:


> You were suspicious of Mearls off the bat? The others gave me a bad vibe, but Mearls felt like he almost came from Central Casting as "generic D&D nerd".



Since we're also taking this opportunity to call out people with whom we've had good experiences: Since I first hired him as a freelancer at FFG back in ~2002, I found Mike to be one of the most talented, hardest-working, dedicated, professional, authentic, and kind people I encountered during my decade in the industry.


----------



## mythago (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> I assume that he is muddling along somewhere in the middle, like the vast majority of humanity. You seem to be the one painting in extremes here.




I truly don't understand what you mean by "painting in extremes" - it's "extreme" to do anything other than create exculpatory stories for strangers who 'seem' nice?


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

mythago said:


> I truly don't understand what you mean by "painting in extremes" - it's "extreme" to do anything other than create exculpatory stories for strangers who 'seem' nice?



Yes, actually. Charitable interpretations of the actions of others is a moral imperative, until evidence comes to light. Even when one does not like them (particularly if one doesn't like them, really).

Now some actions, like writing Nazi literature or sexually propositioning business partners after taking them out alone in the woods, the most charitable reading is still really, really bad. What Liisa describes of her relationship with Z and Z's actions are disappointing, but not themselves abusive _in se_.


----------



## G R (grizzyGR) (Jun 15, 2022)

I'm glad people are starting to speak out and make this issue public


----------



## BigZebra (Jun 15, 2022)

ersatzphil said:


> You were suspicious of Mearls off the bat? The others gave me a bad vibe, but Mearls felt like he almost came from Central Casting as "generic D&D nerd".



Same. Only got good vibes from Mearls when I have seen him on shows, interviews and whatnot. I will admit to missing him in D&D. I find him talented.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

BigZebra said:


> Same. Only got good vibes from Mearls when I have seen him on shows, interviews and whatnot. I will admit to missing him in D&D. I find him talented.



Mearls formally and proximately cooperated with Zak S. in his abusive activity, but that does seem more like a severe error in judgement than being cut from the same cloth. Still hurt people in the end.


----------



## Von Ether (Jun 15, 2022)

ersatzphil said:


> In fairness, there's a number of people in the 'D&D Famous' space who feel kind of try-hard to me: I've never payed it much mind; I just assumed they were excited about what they were doing and trying extra hard not to jinx it, which I completely understand. I haven't followed Satine terribly closely - I mainly remember her for appearing on Wil Wheaton's Tabletop and playing a setite in LA by Night - but I hadn't noticed any indication of negative behavior, while the others you mentioned felt like they might be jerks off the bat.




I know a lot of game makers who are awkward or shy at heart so just going to a convention and pretending to be an extrovert  is performance for them and they put out that try-hard energy. I imagine by extension some D&D Famous people are the same way.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 15, 2022)

Von Ether said:


> I know a lot of game makers who are awkward or shy at heart so just going to a convention and pretending to be an extrovert  is performance for them and they put out that try-hard energy. I imagine by extension some D&D Famous people are the same way.



I’m not famous or anything, but that’s my experience. If I go to a convention I have to be “on” for several days while I man a booth, and that’s just not me. I imagine for somebody with fans that’s a thousand times harder work.


----------



## mythago (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Yes, actually. Charitable interpretations of the actions of others is a moral imperative, until evidence comes to light. Even when one does not like them (particularly if one doesn't like them, really).




Their actions are not "evidence", then. Thanks for clarifying that the priority here is protecting missing stairs.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 15, 2022)

Morrus said:


> I’m not famous or anything, but that’s my experience. If I go to a convention I have to be “on” for several days while I man a booth, and that’s just not me. I imagine for somebody with fans that’s a thousand times harder work.



Yep, same here.  Just running a booth for 3 days straight and talking to hundreds of people non-stop while being friendly and extroverted is exhausting, not just physically.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

mythago said:


> Their actions are not "evidence", then. Thanks for clarifying that the priority here is protecting missing stairs.



The priority is treating everyone justly. Assuming the worst of everyone is unjust.

What we know is that Greg Tito listened to Satine Phoenix and believed her, which in this case is material mediate cooperation with evil, which is grave matter. But we don't know what exactly he knew and when, and what his mother for believing Satine were, so so no, it is not appropriate to assume the worst. I would recommend that he repent and come clean, but I ain't his Priest nor his manager.

It is noticeable that the victim, Lissa, in thise case doesn't seem to blame Tito, despite his actions being the failure point that let Satine cut her off from further opportunities.


----------



## ersatzphil (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Mearls formally and proximately cooperated with Zak S. in his abusive activity, but that does seem more like a severe error in judgement than being cut from the same cloth. Still hurt people in the end.



Agreed. Not that any of us know the complete timeline of events, but that situation left me with the overall impression of, "Don't let your game designers handle HR issues. They are in no way trained for it and probably won't handle it well. Corporations have HR departments for a reason."


----------



## bedir than (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> What we know is that Greg Tito



We don't know it's Greg Tito. This is an assumption, but not the only valid one. Nathan Stewart would be another reasonable guess at the time.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

ersatzphil said:


> Agreed. Not that any of us know the complete timeline of events, but that situation left me with the overall impression of, "Don't let your game designers handle HR issues. They are in no way trained for it and probably won't handle it well. Corporations have HR departments for a reason."



Yeah, he went way out of his way to prove that. Looking more at the Liisa Lee story, Tito seems to have massively mishandled the D&D Live 2019 situation, and trusted Satine over and against others.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 15, 2022)




----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

bedir than said:


> We don't know it's Greg Tito. This is an assumption, but not the only valid one. Nathan Stewart would be another reasonable guess at the time.



Tito organized D&D Live, though. It was his baby. The whole situation also reads like Tito, for thst matter, warts and all. We don't have absolute knowledge thst she means Tito...but in terms of moral certitude, he was the one doing the work she describes, by himself at WotC. I remember Stewart praising Tito for thst very work on air.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 15, 2022)

bedir than said:


> We don't know it's Greg Tito. This is an assumption, but not the only valid one. Nathan Stewart would be another reasonable guess at the time.



We don’t know who it is, but WotC has informal blacklists (and encourages other companies they know, plus their partners and licensees to follow them). I’m sure WotC doesn’t view them as blacklists, though.


----------



## Nikosandros (Jun 15, 2022)

Morrus said:


> We don’t know who it is, but WotC has informal blacklists (and encourages other companies they know, plus their partners and licensees to follow them). I’m sure WotC doesn’t view them as blacklists, though.



I didn't know that. No surprise, I'm extremely ignorant of the industry. Has this been discussed somewhere or is it simply "common knowledge"?


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> I didn't know that. No surprise, I'm extremely ignorant of the industry. Has this been discussed somewhere or is it simply "common knowledge"?



When was the last time you saw WotC work with ENWorld in any capacity? Like invite a rep to a press conference, or give advance notice?

It is this Blacklist system that both Zak Smith and Satine Phoenix seem to have successfully hacked, at least for a time: cast their perceived enemies as the kind of person with whomWotC would refuse to do business. So, yeah, toxic corporate practice is open to toxic manipulation.


----------



## thom_likes_gaming (Jun 15, 2022)

After reading this gem of a Twitter thread
I can't help but wonder: why in the nine hells are people putting up with this sort of behavior?
I can only imagine that Katie and Tristan are thoroughly nice and trusting folk, and must have clearly wondered if they accidentally joined a recording of Candid Camera...


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

thom_likes_gaming said:


> After reading this gem of a Twitter thread
> I can't help but wonder: why in the nine hells are people putting up with this sort of behavior?
> I can only imagine that Katie and Tristan are thoroughly nice and trusting folk, and must have clearly wondered if they accidentally joined a recording of Candid Camera...



A lot of that crap is pretty standard grooming behavior. Notice that they changed their behavior around certain other people so thst the objects of the grooming could be gaslight. Good for these two for walking away.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 15, 2022)

thom_likes_gaming said:


> After reading this gem of a Twitter thread
> I can't help but wonder: why in the nine hells are people putting up with this sort of behavior?
> I can only imagine that Katie and Tristan are thoroughly nice and trusting folk, and must have clearly wondered if they accidentally joined a recording of Candid Camera...



Katie's boyfriend has a thread of his own in the replies with a much more candid re-telling, and whoo boy


----------



## Gradine (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> A lot of that crap is pretty standard grooming behavior. Notice that they changed their behavior around certain other people so thst the objects of the grooming could be gaslight. Good for these two for walking away.



I literally just watched a YouTube video yesterday about how JK Simmons' character in _Whiplash _uses exactly that technique to abuse poor, innocent Miles Teller, congrats on being literally Hollywood villains y'all


----------



## darjr (Jun 15, 2022)

I dunno. ENWorld did get a direct mention as a news source in several polls, including the last two “player” ones.


----------



## Nikosandros (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> When was the last time you saw WotC work with ENWorld in any capacity? Like invite a rep to a press conference, or give advance notice?
> 
> It is this Blacklist system that both Zak Smith and Satine Phoenix seem to have successfully hacked, at least for a time: cast their perceived enemies as the kind of person with whomWotC would refuse to do business. So, yeah, toxic corporate practice is open to toxic manipulation.



I'm not sure what you are referring to here. Are you saying that Zak Smith and/or Satine Phoenix convinced WotC to blacklist EN World?


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 15, 2022)

Eric V said:


> Weird confluence of events:  I just read this post right after I saw a post from Becca Scott describing SP and SJ as "two of the kindest, most open, loving, and integrated people I have ever met. I am so grateful to call them friends!!!"
> 
> Universe is weird.



Yeah. My wife and I were commenting the other day on thier friendship and how secretly poly thier entire social circle seems, and laughing about it as two poly queer nerds ourselves. 


Greggy C said:


> Such a nice couple, shame that WOTC and CR promote these predator types.



This is a bad take. 


Retreater said:


> So sorry. There must've been a glitch on my phone. I saw only your comment on the last quote (from another user). I assumed it applied to my quote because it didn't display the rest of your post.
> I'm so sorry. I will go back and delete the posts I made in reference to your post to remove any further confusion in this thread.



Probably actually my fault. I had to edit the post, because it was on my phone and I fumble-fingered it to send before I was done. sorry for the confusion. 


Ralif Redhammer said:


> Yeah, that attention and adulation, even on the smallest scale, can be a heady thing. It's all too easy to go from being thankful for the support to thinking that it is what you are owed.



Absolutely. 


ersatzphil said:


> You were suspicious of Mearls off the bat? The others gave me a bad vibe, but Mearls felt like he almost came from Central Casting as "generic D&D nerd".



Yes, though not in the same way. He struck me as a bit of a weasel. Exactly the sort of guy who is very nice and good, until being good requires confronting or challenging a friend. 


Parmandur said:


> Mearls formally and proximately cooperated with Zak S. in his abusive activity, but that does seem more like a severe error in judgement than being cut from the same cloth. Still hurt people in the end.



And handled being called out for that hurt in a way that makes it hard to believe that he has any particular regret for the hurt itself.


----------



## Ondath (Jun 15, 2022)

BigZebra said:


> Same. Only got good vibes from Mearls when I have seen him on shows, interviews and whatnot. I will admit to missing him in D&D. I find him talented.



It's a difficult position to be in as consumers who do not want to condone unethical behaviour, but I kinda feel the same. To me, it looks like the pivot in 5E's design happened largely at the same time as Mearls's "promotion" to a role out of the spotlight, and while Crawford was always a co-lead designer, it seemed to me like Mearls was in charge of the conceptualisation (designing the barebones mechanics and flavour of abilities etc.) and Crawford was in charge of balancing things (making sure stuff that Mearls designed was not mathematically OP) and writing them in a strict language. I don't know if Crawford took the conceptualisation portfolio or someone else took that job, but the push for replacing short rests with PB/day, ignoring earlier restrictions such as no DC increasing magic items for spellcasters and an overall shift in class design seems tied to Mearls's departure. Zak is clearly a terrible person and the way Mearls handled that situation was _yikes_, but damn it I miss books like Xanathar's and Volo's.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 15, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> I'm not sure what you are referring to here. Are you saying that Zak Smith and/or Satine Phoenix convinced WotC to blacklist EN World?



I can assure you that neither of those people were ever in a position to do that thing. But no, I (and ENW) have no relationship with WotC and have not had for several years.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 15, 2022)

Ondath said:


> It's a difficult position to be in as consumers who do not want to condone unethical behaviour, but I kinda feel the same. To me, it looks like the pivot in 5E's design happened largely at the same time as Mearls's "promotion" to a role out of the spotlight, and while Crawford was always a co-lead designer, it seemed to me like Mearls was in charge of the conceptualisation (designing the barebones mechanics and flavour of abilities etc.) and Crawford was in charge of balancing things (making sure stuff that Mearls designed was not mathematically OP) and writing them in a strict language. I don't know if Crawford took the conceptualisation portfolio or someone else took that job, but the push for replacing short rests with PB/day, ignoring earlier restrictions such as no DC increasing magic items for spellcasters and an overall shift in class design seems tied to Mearls's departure. Zak is clearly a terrible person and the way Mearls handled that situation was _yikes_, but damn it I miss books like Xanathar's and Volo's.



I thought Mearls was experimenting with things like getting rid of bonus actions and short rests and stuff before he departed. I'm not sure the game would not have gone in the direction it has had he stayed.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 15, 2022)

pukunui said:


> I view this as being the same as if WotC was using known tobacco, alcohol or gambling industry people to promote their game.



My good friend Greg, from How to Drink, was on the official podcast a while back (possibly years back now, as the whole COVID era has shattered my ability to understand time).  I don't think there's anything contraversial about people who promote responsible alcohol consumption also being tapped to promote D&D.

The problem with Satine isn't that she's a porn star, it's that she's a toxic and abusive human being.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> As I recall, she did more to publicly defend and legitimize Zak than Mike Mearls did, albeit in a position of less prominence.



One of the twitter accusers has her, during her time working for WotC, ignoring a complaint about a male abuser associated with the company, and continuing to publicly associate with alleged abuser after the complaint.  The abuser's name isn't given in the twitter thread that I could see.  I wonder whether this is is referring to Zak, or yet another abuser.

This is a really bad look for Hasbro/WotC if it turns out that for a few years, Mike Mearls was inviting all his creepy rapey friends to work on D&D with him.  Is there another abuser other than Zak that Satine was sheltering?  Are there other people like Satine, Zak and Mearls who are still lurking in WotC or at adjacent third party publishers?


----------



## Ondath (Jun 15, 2022)

pukunui said:


> I thought Mearls was experimenting with things like getting rid of bonus actions and short rests and stuff before he departed. I'm not sure the game would not have gone in the direction it has had he stayed.



That's true! But I think the _direction_ the changes took could have been different. To me, the post-Tasha design team doesn't seem like a team that finally grokked the capabilities of their engine and is now pushing it to its limit, it rather looks like a situation where the old guard that designed the original engine departed, and the new guard started tinkering with a lot of stuff and made some changes without realising why some things were designed the way they were. Take the shift from ability modifier/day to PB/day uses, for instance. I'd argue one reason proficiency bonus was never used in things like use limits was because it stealthily buffs multiclassing, which can already lead to a lot of cheese. By tying the use count of an ability to the class's prime ability score, you're making sure that a multiclassing character gets slightly less uses for their secondary class abilities. By tying use count to proficiency bonus, we've made use scale entirely off of character level, and that allows multiclassing to have access to more uses of an ability.

Of course, we can never know what the design team thought at a given moment, but I'd bet my money that the designers wanted to streamline class ability use counts and picked proficiency bonus as a nice metric that scales without much issue without thinking about the ramifications it would have on multiclassing.


----------



## ECMO3 (Jun 15, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> Uncool, unfair and reaching.
> 
> Phoenix and Stone's toxic behaviors have only recently come to light, and neither have been directly involved with WotC, and I think CR, in recent times. I'm sure some individuals within both organizations knew of their behaviors to some degree . . . but to tar either company or any individuals within those companies without any evidence of wrongdoing . . . well, that's pretty toxic also.



WOTC has faced its own criticisms and scandals ... although they were largely ignored by the fans.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 15, 2022)

For those of you who were saying upthread that you didn't think that public apologies work, does this change your mind at all?









						Lizzo's Apology Is a Masterclass In Taking Ownership and Making Things Right - RELEVANT
					

There's this idea out there that "cancel culture" is some sort of unstoppable force of nature — not so much a group of people as a plague of locusts just




					relevantmagazine.com


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 15, 2022)

Ondath said:


> That's true! But I think the _direction_ the changes took could have been different. To me, the post-Tasha design team doesn't seem like a team that finally grokked the capabilities of their engine and is now pushing it to its limit, it rather looks like a situation where the old guard that designed the original engine departed, and the new guard started tinkering with a lot of stuff and made some changes without realising why some things were designed the way they were. Take the shift from ability modifier/day to PB/day uses, for instance. I'd argue one reason proficiency bonus was never used in things like use limits was because it stealthily buffs multiclassing, which can already lead to a lot of cheese. By tying the use count of an ability to the class's prime ability score, you're making sure that a multiclassing character gets slightly less uses for their secondary class abilities. By tying use count to proficiency bonus, we've made use scale entirely off of character level, and that allows multiclassing to have access to more uses of an ability.
> 
> Of course, we can never know what the design team thought at a given moment, but I'd bet my money that the designers wanted to streamline class ability use counts and picked proficiency bonus as a nice metric that scales without much issue without thinking about the ramifications it would have on multiclassing.



JC was the lead mechanics designer throughout 5e.

Your specific example is definitely not a result of him not understanding why the phb he wrote did things differently. 

Edit: as for your bet, I find it needlessly insulting to the designers. Further, it’s extremely unlikely. It’s more likely that it just simplifies the game and makes multiclassing less painful and annoying, which they view as a _good thing, _while also making it easier to design stuff that doesn’t pull MAD characters further toward MADness. 

It’s very good design.


----------



## billd91 (Jun 15, 2022)

pukunui said:


> For those of you who were saying upthread that you didn't think that public apologies work, does this change your mind at all?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Why would it? What Lizzo did wasn't just an apology. She rerecorded the song with the offending lyric removed. That's not just an apology - that's remediation.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

Gradine said:


> I literally just watched a YouTube video yesterday about how JK Simmons' character in _Whiplash _uses exactly that technique to abuse poor, innocent Miles Teller, congrats on being literally Hollywood villains y'all



Yeah, just mentioning that movie makes some people I know want to vomit, it's sadly not even an exaggerated depiction.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 15, 2022)

billd91 said:


> Why would it? What Lizzo did wasn't just an apology. She rerecorded the song with the offending lyric removed. That's not just an apology - that's remediation.



Because it's an example of what everyone has been talking about - apologizing and then changing your behavior. As you say, she rerecorded her song. She could have chosen to apologize but not change the lyric. She could have said, "Sorry, I'll remember not to use that word in the future" and maybe not sung it in live performances. But no, she actually went through the expense and effort of rerecording the song to delete one word. She listened and made a change.

It would be like if Satine had actually owned up to her behavior and then immediately made sure all her outstanding debts were paid.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> I'm not sure what you are referring to here. Are you saying that Zak Smith and/or Satine Phoenix convinced WotC to blacklist EN World?



No, two thoughts joined by analogy: I don't know what Morrus & Co. did to get on WotC naughty list, but apparently they are.

Separately, both Zak's and Satine's activity included convincing WotC that their enemies were problematic and needed to be on the blacklist...successfully, at least for a time.


----------



## Erdric Dragin (Jun 15, 2022)

This is what happens when you commericialize games far too much. Wish it was the TSR days, minus the mismanagement and lack of social progression.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 15, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> Uncool, unfair and reaching.
> 
> Phoenix and Stone's toxic behaviors have only recently come to light, and neither have been directly involved with WotC, and I think CR, in recent times. I'm sure some individuals within both organizations knew of their behaviors to some degree . . . but to tar either company or any individuals within those companies without any evidence of wrongdoing . . . well, that's pretty toxic also.





One of the accusations specifically mentions actions by Satine during her employment with WotC.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> And handled being called out for that hurt in a way that makes it hard to believe that he has any particular regret for the hurt itself.



He makes the common mistake of confusing motivations with moral complicity. Just because he "meant well" doesn't mean he didn't contribute materially to an abusive situation.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

Ondath said:


> It's a difficult position to be in as consumers who do not want to condone unethical behaviour, but I kinda feel the same. To me, it looks like the pivot in 5E's design happened largely at the same time as Mearls's "promotion" to a role out of the spotlight, and while Crawford was always a co-lead designer, it seemed to me like Mearls was in charge of the conceptualisation (designing the barebones mechanics and flavour of abilities etc.) and Crawford was in charge of balancing things (making sure stuff that Mearls designed was not mathematically OP) and writing them in a strict language. I don't know if Crawford took the conceptualisation portfolio or someone else took that job, but the push for replacing short rests with PB/day, ignoring earlier restrictions such as no DC increasing magic items for spellcasters and an overall shift in class design seems tied to Mearls's departure. Zak is clearly a terrible person and the way Mearls handled that situation was _yikes_, but damn it I miss books like Xanathar's and Volo's.



That's sort of an awful takeaway, and probably not even accurate a out the game.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> One of the twitter accusers has her, during her time working for WotC, ignoring a complaint about a male abuser associated with the company, and continuing to publicly associate with alleged abuser after the complaint.  The abuser's name isn't given in the twitter thread that I could see.  I wonder whether this is is referring to Zak, or yet another abuser.
> 
> This is a really bad look for Hasbro/WotC if it turns out that for a few years, Mike Mearls was inviting all his creepy rapey friends to work on D&D with him.  Is there another abuser other than Zak that Satine was sheltering?  Are there other people like Satine, Zak and Mearls who are still lurking in WotC or at adjacent third party publishers?



Satine's "contract ended" with wotC at coincidentally the same time that the Zak situation really blew up in Mearls face.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> He makes the common mistake of confusing motivations with moral complicity. Just because he "meant well" doesn't mean he didn't contribute materially to an abusive situation.



Exactly. While I was upset when the Zac thing happened and Mike couldn’t even make a public statement of condemnation and apology for helping this person rise in the TTRPG space, I wasn’t surprised. 

It’s easy to tell bigots and gatekeepers to gtfo when your game community is steadily trending more progressive, queer, female, and culturally diverse. Not as easy to stand up and say, “This guy was a friend, and I wish I’d seen how bad he was, and I’m sorry that I helped him build a prominent place in our community”.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

Ondath said:


> That's true! But I think the _direction_ the changes took could have been different. To me, the post-Tasha design team doesn't seem like a team that finally grokked the capabilities of their engine and is now pushing it to its limit, it rather looks like a situation where the old guard that designed the original engine departed, and the new guard started tinkering with a lot of stuff and made some changes without realising why some things were designed the way they were. Take the shift from ability modifier/day to PB/day uses, for instance. I'd argue one reason proficiency bonus was never used in things like use limits was because it stealthily buffs multiclassing, which can already lead to a lot of cheese. By tying the use count of an ability to the class's prime ability score, you're making sure that a multiclassing character gets slightly less uses for their secondary class abilities. By tying use count to proficiency bonus, we've made use scale entirely off of character level, and that allows multiclassing to have access to more uses of an ability.
> 
> Of course, we can never know what the design team thought at a given moment, but I'd bet my money that the designers wanted to streamline class ability use counts and picked proficiency bonus as a nice metric that scales without much issue without thinking about the ramifications it would have on multiclassing.



Maybe they plan to get rid of multi-tasking in 2024. It would meanjust cutting a few pages of variant rules. They never take multiclassing into account for balance, as it stands.

Crawford was the Sage the entire time: he knows the intent behind the rules, and heads up the team working on the rules.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 15, 2022)

billd91 said:


> Why would it? What Lizzo did wasn't just an apology. She rerecorded the song with the offending lyric removed. That's not just an apology - that's remediation.



A necessary part of any sincre apology.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 15, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Satine's "contract ended" with wotC at coincidentally the same time that the Zak situation really blew up in Mearls face.



They were definitely using contractors rather than FT employees in both Satine and Lysa's era.
Now it's FT employees.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 16, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Exactly. While I was upset when the Zac thing happened and Mike couldn’t even make a public statement of condemnation and apology for helping this person rise in the TTRPG space, I wasn’t surprised.
> 
> It’s easy to tell bigots and gatekeepers to gtfo when your game community is steadily trending more progressive, queer, female, and culturally diverse. Not as easy to stand up and say, “This guy was a friend, and I wish I’d seen how bad he was, and I’m sorry that I helped him build a prominent place in our community”.



Part of what was so weird about the situation is that they really weren't friends: Mearls was just confident of his own righteousness and ability to suss out the truth...a misplaced confidence, as it happened.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 16, 2022)

bedir than said:


> They were definitely using contractors rather than FT employees in both Satine and Lysa's era.
> Now it's FT employees.



Yeah...but of the 2018 situation Lusa is describing was Zak, and Satine covered for him, that would make sense that she would take the fall with WotC when it caused them trouble.


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Jun 16, 2022)

Morrus said:


> We don’t know who it is, but WotC is big on blacklists (and even tries to ensure other companies they know, plus their partners and licensees—which is a lot of people—follow them). I’m sure WotC doesn’t view them as blacklists, though.



This is kind of gross actually.

This person is using a power position to bully others.  I know how we can teach them!  Let’s use our power position to make sure they have a hard time finding work.  Sure we could fire them and make sure we don’t do business with them again; but it’s really better to pass judgment on their value and make sure they have hardship.  Because we care.


----------



## Von Ether (Jun 16, 2022)

Morrus said:


> I’m not famous or anything, but that’s my experience. If I go to a convention I have to be “on” for several days while I man a booth, and that’s just not me. I imagine for somebody with fans that’s a thousand times harder work.



Exactly!


----------



## Malmuria (Jun 16, 2022)

Morrus said:


> We don’t know who it is, but WotC has informal blacklists (and encourages other companies they know, plus their partners and licensees to follow them). I’m sure WotC doesn’t view them as blacklists, though.



Could you explain a bit more how this works and why they do this?  It seems like the by-far largest company having blacklists and enforcing them with their partners is a great way to enable abusers.


----------



## beancounter (Jun 16, 2022)

So, has WoTC released a statement regarding those two?


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 16, 2022)

beancounter said:


> So, has WoTC released a statement regarding those two?



Would they?  IIRC, neither currently works for WotC.


----------



## beancounter (Jun 16, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> Would they?  IIRC, neither currently works for WotC.




The OP states that they have worked with WoTC, so I thought that they might want to publicly distance themselves from them, and maybe state that they will not work with them again.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 16, 2022)

beancounter said:


> The OP states that they have worked with WoTC, so I thought that they might want to publicly distance themselves from them, and maybe state that they will not work with them again.



History suggests that they will ignore the situation entirely.


----------



## antiwesley (Jun 16, 2022)

"People who worship heroes must be prepared for disillusionment."

I'm going to sound grognardy here, but this is what happens when your hobby becomes popular. Attention whores (not directly referring to anyone specific with that word) become celebrities, and they act like it. No matter what hobby you have, you'll have people that will do this. We need, as a society, to stop giving these people the power. But like sheeples, we follow them happily into the yawning abyss. This is why, personally, I don't watch anything with talking heads or "influencers". I don't need people to tell me what I should like or not like. I just wish the rest of the world would have enough of a spine to do so as well. If you don't mind a bit of a technical and math reading, this is very interesting: Celebrity worship and cognitive skills revisited


----------



## mythago (Jun 16, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> The priority is treating everyone justly. Assuming the worst of everyone is unjust.




Since nobody has suggested "assuming the worst of everyone", and since that is not the only possible alternative to "assume the best about this particular person", we needn't worry about injustice! That's a relief and I hope we can move on from false dilemmas now.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 16, 2022)

Even with mod text earlier warning people to stay on the subject of the two people in the OP, WoTC employees are still being named and speculated about in very negative ways. I try and be silent if I cannot be kind and not speculate in very negative ways.

Also, if there is a real black list and behavior targeting individuals and this site, maybe some naming discussing in the form of an article could help. In the newest D&D survey I listed here as one of my main sources for D&D news. Why stay silent?


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 16, 2022)

mythago said:


> Since nobody has suggested "assuming the worst of everyone", and since that is not the only possible alternative to "assume the best about this particular person", we needn't worry about injustice! That's a relief and I hope we can move on from false dilemmas now.



I honestly have no idea why you keep picking at this: Greg Tito is probably Z, what he probably did is bad, but it's about what I would expect from him or frankly a lot of people I'm that situation.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 16, 2022)

Satine was a contractor years ago. WoTC almost always ran contracts for one year. She was not an employee and other than some allegations from one side, there is no proof that anyone at WoTC did anything.

Everyone is assuming that she had some real power, who knows and what the actual situation was. Social media managers tend not to be involved in upper managment decisions.


----------



## Juomari Veren (Jun 16, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> Is there another abuser other than Zak that Satine was sheltering?



Funny you should mention that, I believe the week before Origins she was going up to bat for someone in the sphere that was under fire, though I don't remember what for. I'm sure one of the comments on these many, many threads documenting her behavior mentions it offhandedly because it was fairly recent and probably honestly a catalyst for someone to start speaking out about her and Stone on a larger scale.

Frankly, Satine and Jamison have always rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe it's the fact that Jamison doesn't know how to wear eyeliner and (according to one of these threads) doesn't wear sleeves. Ever. Those flags are so red Orks think they go faster than normal. But looking back on it, Satine 100% has that "community management" personality, where she's super good at deflecting blame or diffusing tensions with hollow statements and buzzwords. I've never really paid them much attention, but after seeing their Origins lineup had multiple private events that required $100 tickets to get into it's painfully obvious that, abusive or not, they're clearly not in the right headspace to be a part of the TTRPG community at large.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 16, 2022)

Juomari Veren said:


> Satine 100% has that "community management" personality, where she's super good at deflecting blame or diffusing tensions with hollow statements and buzzwords.



This isn't what community managers do. This is what crisis communicators do. A community manager builds.


----------



## teitan (Jun 16, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> Such a nice couple, shame that WOTC and CR promote these predator types.



That was the point of my previous comments. There are jerks in communities and sometimes they turn up and you’re utterly surprised. It happens. We move on. We shouldn’t be acting like everyone needs to pass purity tests but realize everyone can have moments of tomfoolery and mistakes. Some go over a line. What we really need to stop doing is making celebrities out of these peacocks.


----------



## teitan (Jun 16, 2022)

Zarithar said:


> I'm just disappointed more than anything. I've run into Satine at a couple of cons and had nothing but positive interactions with her. It's too bad this has happened and is sad to see that much of her persona was just an act.



Of course it’s an act, she is playing a role to sell an image. It’s the gentleman’s club analogy. Just because she’s nice then doesn’t mean… she’s nice.


----------



## teitan (Jun 16, 2022)

Gradine said:


> There's a term referred to as a "missing stair". They're a person that's well-known as toxic/abusive/etc. within a community but simply isn't talked about/addressed. The kind of "open secret" that uses their insider status and clout to avoid accountability for as long as possible. #MeToo has been all about rooting out missing stairs.
> 
> 
> The thing about abusers, especially within a professional context, is that they rarely have only a single victim. There's almost always multiple people with a story to tell, and once one story gets traction, it all snowballs from there.



And the sad part is many times they can get their other victims to back them based on whether the perceptions of promised resources is worth it.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 16, 2022)

billd91 said:


> Why would it? What Lizzo did wasn't just an apology. She rerecorded the song with the offending lyric removed. That's not just an apology - that's remediation.



A specific plan of action for how to make amends is part of a good apology, and following through on those plans is how you prove the sincerity of the apology. Otherwise it’s just words.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 16, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Maybe they plan to get rid of multi-tasking in 2024. It would meanjust cutting a few pages of variant rules. They never take multiclassing into account for balance, as it stands.
> 
> Crawford was the Sage the entire time: he knows the intent behind the rules, and heads up the team working on the rules.



The multiclass-lite feats would make a lot of sense in that context.

For those keeping score, that’s another thing 4e already got right that it’s taken 5e a decade to re-learn.


----------



## Faolyn (Jun 16, 2022)

billd91 said:


> Why would it? What Lizzo did wasn't just an apology. She rerecorded the song with the offending lyric removed. That's not just an apology - that's remediation.



I wish Weird Al had done that as well. I _really _like his song Word Crimes _except _for that bit.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 16, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> The multiclass-lite feats would make a lot of sense in that context.
> 
> For those keeping score, that’s another thing 4e already got right that it’s taken 5e a decade to re-learn.



It's really a variant rule that WotC has paid no explicit attention to or given any support in 8 years.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 16, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> It's really a variant rule that WotC has paid no explicit attention to or given any support in 8 years.



I meant the multiclassing feats part.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 16, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> I meant the multiclassing feats part.



Right, I meant the PHB multiclassing rules. Allowing Feat-style Multiclassing would eliminate most of the balance concerns people have.


----------



## Ondath (Jun 16, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> That's sort of an awful takeaway, and probably not even accurate a out the game.



I mean, the whole point of my comment was that I felt ethically conflicted about that feeling I had. But perhaps I should not and just reject my nostalgia given that people disagree with my observation.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 16, 2022)

Ondath said:


> I mean, the whole point of my comment was that I felt ethically conflicted about that feeling I had. But perhaps I should not and just reject my nostalgia given that people disagree with my observation.



It doesn't really reflect the realities of the design direction, though.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 16, 2022)

thom_likes_gaming said:


> After reading this gem of a Twitter thread
> I can't help but wonder: why in the nine hells are people putting up with this sort of behavior?
> I can only imagine that Katie and Tristan are thoroughly nice and trusting folk, and must have clearly wondered if they accidentally joined a recording of Candid Camera...



Yeah that thread is hard to read. I kept eating for the “and then I told them to get thier own snacks, reminded them that I hired them, not the other way around, and sat down and ate a sandwich in front of them and ignored them for twenty minutes”. Like…how!?



Parmandur said:


> Part of what was so weird about the situation is that they really weren't friends: Mearls was just confident of his own righteousness and ability to suss out the truth...a misplaced confidence, as it happened.



That’s fair. But he was such a jerk about it, I’m not really down to give him the benefit of the doubt. 


antiwesley said:


> we follow them happily into the yawning abyss.



Who is “we”? Who is “following” any celebrities in the TTRPG space?

Like…you know that enjoying watching Dimension20 and watching Brennan talk with other D&D creators and DMs about the game, and life, and art, doesn’t inherently put him on a pedestal, or mean I follow all his advice (Mercer would be a better example there. He does a lot of stuff I wouldn’t do as a DM, but I love watching him and his crew play), or “follow” him into anything, much less any overwrought “abyss”. 

Just a thought: It’s generally best to be skeptical of any impulse or mode of thought you have that leads to you feeling superior to other people to the point where you post long-winded and over-dramatic rants about “sheeples”.


----------



## Mark Craddock (Jun 16, 2022)

I'm constantly amazed how people treat others poorly and don't think it will come out. Just don't be a jerk.
Also, Professional DM just sounds so weird.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 16, 2022)

Mark Craddock said:


> Also, Professional DM just sounds so weird.



Yeah, I do hate how the commodification of attention has pushed people towards monetizing more and more of what previously would have been their leisure time. Capitalism will not be satisfied until 100% of our time is devoted to production.

Eh, who am I kidding, it won’t be satisfied then either.


----------



## teitan (Jun 16, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Yeah, I do hate how the commodification of attention has pushed people towards monetizing more and more of what previously would have been their leisure time. Capitalism will not be satisfied until 100% of our time is devoted to production.
> 
> Eh, who am I kidding, it won’t be satisfied then either.



I intensely dislike “influencer” culture in general myself having watched social media influencer nearly rip an organization I am a member of apart with their behavior and people not being willing to call them out for their abuse until they put people’s lives and jobs (including my own) on the line because of one of them having a debased and overly inflated sense of self importance in regard to their position in the movement.


----------



## Imaculata (Jun 16, 2022)

Who would have thought a porn star would screw people over? 

...I know... I know... low hanging fruit. I'll go sit in the corner now.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 16, 2022)

Imaculata said:


> Who would have thought a porn star would screw people over?
> 
> ...I know... I know... low hanging fruit. I'll go sit in the corner now.




*Mod Note:*
You apparently chose to ignore the memo, so yes, you'll go sit in the corner.  You're done in this discussion.

Next time, don't shame people for work that isn't related to the issue at hand.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 16, 2022)

teitan said:


> I intensely dislike “influencer” culture in general myself having watched social media influencer nearly rip an organization I am a member of apart with their behavior and people not being willing to call them out for their abuse until they put people’s lives and jobs (including my own) on the line because of one of them having a debased and overly inflated sense of self importance in regard to their position in the movement.



I saw something similar with a good friend's job in charity which supported a movement. They got a new person in who fancied themselves an influencer (and certainly this person did have fairly nutso numbers of Insta followers and the like). Said new person proceeded to immediately massively misspend the charity's budget (or such was the view of about 50% of the charity, the other 50% thought the person was "influencing" and going to win new converts and so on - but no converts were forthcoming - they did upset and lose a lot of the older people who donated to the charity though!), then generally try and make the entire charity and to some extent even the entire movement be about themselves (the "influencer"), specifically. The "influencer" really went out of their way to smash up anything the organisation would do which might give publicity to other people in the charity - for example, a world-famous fashion designer wanted to help them out and do a photoshoot with everyone from the charity. The "influencer" wanted the photoshoot to only be them and their two buds. The designer wasn't down with that, and the "influencer" ended up just destroying the entire opportunity and the charity's long relationship with the fashion designer over it. Over time, this really wrecked the charity. More than half the staff quit over a fairly short period, because they didn't want to be support for an egocentric "influencer", they wanted to work on their issue, and the "influencer" behaved worse and worse. Actually they behaved in a way very like that of Satine/Jamison in terms of their utterly contemptuous and sneering language towards people they worked with, in and out of the charity, people in the movement, and just ordinary supporters. Eventually even the "influencer" quit because they didn't think people were being sufficiently nice/servile to them, but demanded that the charity keep paying them as a "freelancer", only now they didn't have to do any work. Which the charity agreed to. Said charity has now been "dead in the water" for years as a result of the damage this person did. Just horrifying.

I had forgotten all about this until you mentioned that, but yeah, it seems like this is an "influencer" way of operating.


----------



## billd91 (Jun 16, 2022)

teitan said:


> I intensely dislike “influencer” culture in general myself having watched social media influencer nearly rip an organization I am a member of apart with their behavior and people not being willing to call them out for their abuse until they put people’s lives and jobs (including my own) on the line because of one of them having a debased and overly inflated sense of self importance in regard to their position in the movement.



There are definitely issues with influencer culture. While some people are influencers because of their already high levels of fame in another field (like Dwayne Johnson, Cristiano Renaldo, or Ariana Grande) and probably have a professional publicist helping them, the set of self-recruited influencers probably overlaps a great deal with the set of raging narcissists. And unless they are also wealthy enough to afford a publicity machine (like the Kardashians), they probably don't have a lot of help keeping their behavior under control. 

Fame and wealth, in general, also have a tendency to feed narcissism and entitlement. I'm reminded of a story when Mick Jagger was visiting Saturday Night Live as the guest. He could hold out his hand and demand a soda and an assistant would scurry to provide it. That's gotta warp you a bit. That said, it was *his* assistant and *he* was the one paying for it/had it already contracted. He wasn't just imposing up on the SNL writers to be at his beck and call in that way. And that's a significant difference between the Mick Jagger story and the Satine/Jamison story from Tristan and Katie.


----------



## CleverNickName (Jun 16, 2022)

I used to work in food service before I became an engineer; should I be treated any differently  because of it?

Sex work is legitimate work.  We need to get that through our thick skulls.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 16, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> Satine was a contractor years ago. WoTC almost always ran contracts for one year. She was not an employee and other than some allegations from one side, there is no proof that anyone at WoTC did anything.
> 
> Everyone is assuming that she had some real power, who knows and what the actual situation was. Social media managers tend not to be involved in upper managment decisions.



It's not about whether someone was involved in upper management decisions (she wasn't), it was about who was in charge of handling someone's concern over being asked to work alongside an abuser (she was in charge of it).


----------



## LordEntrails (Jun 16, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> Could you explain a bit more how this works and why they do this?  It seems like the by-far largest company having blacklists and enforcing them with their partners is a great way to enable abusers.











						WotC - WotC blacklist. Discussion
					

We don’t know who it is, but WotC has informal blacklists (and encourages other companies they know, plus their partners and licensees to follow them). I’m sure WotC doesn’t view them as blacklists, though.  OK, that's a bit of a statement to just lay out there. Sounds like something people need...




					www.enworld.org


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 16, 2022)

teitan said:


> I intensely dislike “influencer” culture in general myself having watched social media influencer nearly rip an organization I am a member of apart with their behavior and people not being willing to call them out for their abuse until they put people’s lives and jobs (including my own) on the line because of one of them having a debased and overly inflated sense of self importance in regard to their position in the movement.



“Influencer culture” isn’t where I direct my ire - celebrity has always been a thing, and celebrity status has always come with great social power; “influencer” is just a dismissive term for celebrities who acquired that status through new media channels. Rather, what I intensely dislike is the way social media has created a market out of leisure activity. In the marketplace of ideas, attention is currency, and that just feels gross.


----------



## CleverNickName (Jun 16, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Rather, what I intensely dislike is the way social media has created a market out of leisure activity. In the marketplace of ideas, attention is currency, and that just feels gross.



I get what you're saying, and I agree that it's repugnant, but this phenomenon isn't new and social media didn't create it.

For as long as there have been stories, there have been stories of the "rich and famous," painting their lifestyles to be more glamorous and enviable than everyone else's.  People have made a living for centuries by getting and keeping peoples' attention.  It's not a social media thing, it's a _society_ thing.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 16, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Rather, what I intensely dislike is the way social media has created a market out of leisure activity.



Social media didn't do that to us.  We've had professional golf, professional football, etc for longer than we've been alive.

Reducing what happens on Twitch, for example, to simply "leisure activity" is unfair.  You might believe it's leisure activity as a viewer, but the profitable streams have a huge time and effort investment in production and preparation.  Streams that truly are just "leisure activity" in front of a camera rarely succeed, unless they are done by an exceptionally charismatic or entertaining presenter, in which case it's not the leisure activity being monetized, but the host themselves.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 16, 2022)

CleverNickName said:


> I get what you're saying, and I agree that it's repugnant, but this phenomenon isn't new and social media didn't create it.
> 
> For as long as there have been stories, there have been stories of the "rich and famous," painting their lifestyles to be more glamorous and enviable than everyone else's.  People have made a living for centuries by getting and keeping peoples' attention.  It's not a social media thing, it's a _society_ thing.



I don’t know if you do get what I’m saying, because I agree that what you describe here is not a new phenomenon at all - it’s essentially the same thing I was expressing in my first sentence. What I’m talking about is not new media celebrity, but the societal drive to turn free time into another form of labor. If you’re just playing a game of D&D, you’re being idle where you could be productive by streaming it. If you’re just eating a meal, you’re being idle where you could be productive by instagramming pictures of it. If you’re just consuming media you’re being idle when you could be productive by publicizing your opinion of it. Society applies constant pressure to produce, produce, produce, which is of course not new at all, but social media has opened the avenue for yet another aspect of our lives that was our own to be commodified and marketed.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 16, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> Social media didn't do that to us.  We've had professional golf, professional football, etc for longer than we've been alive.



Yeah, professional sports are also an example of this phenomenon. But a fairly limited form of it compared to new media “content creation.”


Michael Linke said:


> Reducing what happens on Twitch, for example, to simply "leisure activity" is unfair.  You might believe it's leisure activity as a viewer, but the profitable streams have a huge time and effort investment in production and preparation.  Streams that truly are just "leisure activity" in front of a camera rarely succeed, unless they are done by an exceptionally charismatic or entertaining presenter, in which case it's not the leisure activity being monetized, but the host themselves.



That’s exactly my point though. Streaming isn’t leisure, it’s labor. It’s one more chunk of our lives that’s being turned into labor. I don’t envy the lives of content creators who make their living this way, because they have to constantly be “on.” They don’t really get to have leisure time, because the attention market demands that they capitalize on everything “fun” that they do. It must be absolutely exhausting.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 16, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> That’s exactly my point though. Streaming isn’t leisure, it’s labor. It’s one more chunk of our lives that’s being turned into labor. I don’t envy the lives of content creators who make their living this way, because they have to constantly be “on.” They don’t really get to have leisure time, because the attention market demands that they capitalize on everything “fun” that they do. It must be absolutely exhausting.



And thus, the direct line from Foucault to Ninja is complete


----------



## Von Ether (Jun 16, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> I didn't know that. No surprise, I'm extremely ignorant of the industry. Has this been discussed somewhere or is it simply "common knowledge"?



Many blacklists don't start off as a blacklist but there are many that eventually evolve into becoming a blacklist without a publisher even knowing it.

As has been discussed, there's a huge lack of business training on both sides of the fence. And in a very small business with small profit margins, dealing with a creative who constantly misses deadlines and then turns in shoddy work after the fact can tank a project.

The easiest way to deal with it is to avoid using that creative again. (barring the creative has RL issues impacting their work) If a publisher hasn't developed a sense of due diligence or red flags, they may get a few more such creatives. But if the company grows and new people sign onboard, you want them to avoid using the same subpar people.

So then you hand over  a list. 

It seems like a good idea at the time, but all it takes is one publisher employee who is a bad actor to suddenly turn it  into a blacklist.  And now the list is partially about quality control mixed in with personal grudges and the people who get the list later would have to go name by name to confirm the why. But who has time for that.

And that's how you get a blacklist so secret that publisher using it has no idea what they have.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 16, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> I don’t know if you do get what I’m saying, because I agree that what you describe here is not a new phenomenon at all - it’s essentially the same thing I was expressing in my first sentence. What I’m talking about is not new media celebrity, but the societal drive to turn free time into another form of labor. If you’re just playing a game of D&D, you’re being idle where you could be productive by streaming it. If you’re just eating a meal, you’re being idle where you could be productive by instagramming pictures of it. If you’re just consuming media you’re being idle when you could be productive by publicizing your opinion of it. Society applies constant pressure to produce, produce, produce, which is of course not new at all, but social media has opened the avenue for yet another aspect of our lives that was our own to be commodified and marketed.



I would say that digital info tech has made it worse, regardless of how "new" it is. (i'm also not sure why or how it matters how new it is?)

150 years ago, people sang and made music all the time. It was a social activity, a leisure activity, it was just a constant part of life. The idea of having to be good at it in order for it to be okay to do in public didn't exist. Everyone starts singing, you sing, because you're part of the social group and that's the current activity. Now, music is so commodified that most people aren't comfortable singing along to the radio unless they're alone or inebriated.

And as long as people have to produce in order to eat and avoid homelessness, everything people enjoy will trend along the same path.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 16, 2022)

A lot of conversations going on about how creators all have major egos.  Meanwhile, the rest of us non-famous creators are just over here with our imposter syndromes...


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 16, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I would say that digital info tech has made it worse, regardless of how "new" it is. (i'm also not sure why or how it matters how new it is?)
> 
> 150 years ago, people sang and made music all the time. It was a social activity, a leisure activity, it was just a constant part of life. The idea of having to be good at it in order for it to be okay to do in public didn't exist. Everyone starts singing, you sing, because you're part of the social group and that's the current activity. Now, music is so commodified that most people aren't comfortable singing along to the radio unless they're alone or inebriated.
> 
> And as long as people have to produce in order to eat and avoid homelessness, everything people enjoy will trend along the same path.



You’re right, it’s really irrelevant whether or not it’s new; the important point is it’s gross and it’s accelerating.


----------



## Von Ether (Jun 16, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I would say that digital info tech has made it worse, regardless of how "new" it is. (i'm also not sure why or how it matters how new it is?)
> 
> 150 years ago, people sang and made music all the time. It was a social activity, a leisure activity, it was just a constant part of life. The idea of having to be good at it in order for it to be okay to do in public didn't exist. Everyone starts singing, you sing, because you're part of the social group and that's the current activity. Now, music is so commodified that most people aren't comfortable singing along to the radio unless they're alone or inebriated.
> 
> And as long as people have to produce in order to eat and avoid homelessness, everything people enjoy will trend along the same path.



I'd say your 150 years is a bit off for that equation. 

For while the farmer in the field was happily off-key, We had Brahms, Shakespeare, and even da Vinci and many more before them that had to make great music to earn their bread in front of kings, nobles, and those who wanted to impress their peers. 

I am not saying at some point your example is right. But there has been a professional class of entertainer for several centuries. 

On that note, this is where some of tug of war happens between "proper" entertainment of the Classical and Literature vs Pop Culture. The gatekeepers of proper art often refer to the creatives who where supported and sanctioned by kings and authority while the pop art comes from the pool halls, church choirs and home made chap books.


----------



## Von Ether (Jun 16, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> A lot of conversations going on about how creators all have major egos.  Meanwhile, the rest of us non-famous creators are just over here with our imposter syndromes...



And our luck. 

I had a mentor tell me that I was pretty much ready to be published in fiction, all I needed was luck. My first thought was, "Luck? Well now I'm $##$%." 

My ttrpg work makes literal nickels and dimes over the month, but it is still more than fiction ever did.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Jun 16, 2022)

The new was published in other place, and I found interesting this comment. 


> The TTRPG scene is far more toxic today than it's ever been. Much of the toxicity we see comes from people like this, people who claim to be making the space safer and more inclusive. The opposite is true. I've been playing ttrpg's for 40 years, gatekeeping has never been the problem that it is now. And it's being led by people like this.




I suspect today D&D is most popular than ever, and the community is bigger, lots of people have joined, but also there are some "black sheeps" or "rotten appels", and these could cause a serious damage against the prestige of the brand.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 16, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> You’re right, it’s really irrelevant whether or not it’s new; the important point is it’s gross and it’s accelerating.



Absolutely.


Von Ether said:


> I'd say your 150 years is a bit off for that equation.
> 
> For while the farmer in the field was happily off-key, We had Brahms, Shakespeare, and even da Vinci and many more before them that had to make great music to earn their bread in front of kings, nobles, and those who wanted to impress their peers.
> 
> I am not saying at some point your example is right. But there has been a professional class of entertainer for several centuries.



You've badly misunderstood. I did not claim, imply, or otherwise indicate to any degree whatsoever, that there was no professional class of musicians. Never in recorded history has their been a lack of a such professionals. 

It was not, however, just the farmer in the field that was "happily off-key". It was everyone that wasn't a professional. Well, i'm sure many of them were quite good, but that isn't actually relevant to the point. All social activities involved music, made by the participants more often than by a separate group. All kinds of work tended to involve song. 

Making music simply was not something _reserved_ for professionals, until well into the very recent history of widespread recorded music.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 16, 2022)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> The new was published in other place, and I found interesting this comment.
> 
> 
> I suspect today D&D is most popular than ever, and the community is bigger, lots of people have joined, but also there are some "black sheeps" or "rotten appels", and these could cause a serious damage against the prestige of the brand.



That comment is so off base it's wild to read. 

but yes, the bigger the scene gets, the more opportunists will take advantage of it. 

I rather liked B Dave Walter's comment on Satine. She's very much in the Satine business. Were she not abusive about it, fair enough. Since she is, she can kick rocks.


----------



## Zarithar (Jun 16, 2022)

Faolyn said:


> I wish Weird Al had done that as well. I _really _like his song Word Crimes _except _for that bit.



Lol love that song... just curious what are you referring to?


----------



## Gradine (Jun 16, 2022)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> The new was published in other place, and I found interesting this comment.
> 
> "The TTRPG scene is far more toxic today than it's ever been. Much of the toxicity we see comes from people like this, people who claim to be making the space safer and more inclusive. The opposite is true. I've been playing ttrpg's for 40 years, gatekeeping has never been the problem that it is now. And it's being led by people like this."



This is demonstrably, laughably false, and speaks from a perspective that had never been made to feel unwelcome in ttrpgs for 40 years and never once considered the perspectives of different people who had been excluded for decades from many, many, spaces. I can't see how this is a vaguely justifiable take outside politically motivated schadenfreude.


----------



## Faolyn (Jun 16, 2022)

Zarithar said:


> Lol love that song... just curious what are you referring to?



"I saw your blog post. It was really fantastic. That was sarcastic. Because you write like a spastic."

I absolutely love this entire song and the video... except for that line. (I'd heard that it was a slur on people with epilepsy, not people with cerebral palsy, but either way.)


----------



## Faolyn (Jun 16, 2022)

Mark Craddock said:


> I'm constantly amazed how people treat others poorly and don't think it will come out. Just don't be a jerk.
> Also, Professional DM just sounds so weird.



I had someone on reddit recently scream at me because I said I don't get paid DMs, because it meant that I was greedy and wanted someone's hard labor for free.


----------



## Oofta (Jun 16, 2022)

ECMO3 said:


> WOTC has faced its own criticisms and scandals ... although they were largely ignored by the fans.



Shocking news: big corporations aren't perfect.  They also sometimes employ people who are accused of doing bad things*. Also shocking: sometimes people don't believe their friends are capable of being evil, and can overlook evidence to the contrary because they find it hard to believe that someone they personally know could be that horrible.

_*I'm not weighing in on the validity of the accusations one way or another, although I tend to believe the accuser(s)._


----------



## Gradine (Jun 16, 2022)

Faolyn said:


> "I saw your blog post. It was really fantastic. That was sarcastic. Because you write like a spastic."
> 
> I absolutely love this entire song and the video... except for that line. (I'd heard that it was a slur on people with epilepsy, not people with cerebral palsy, but either way.)



My understanding is that "spaz" is, at least in the UK, roughly equivalent to how we'd use the "r" word in the US.


----------



## DarkCrisis (Jun 16, 2022)

Gradine said:


> My understanding is that "spaz" is, at least in the UK, roughly equivalent to how we'd use the "r" word in the US.



Spaz is very 80s.  "You're such a spaz."  Is/Was used in such a way as "You're a nerd/geek."


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 16, 2022)

Faolyn said:


> I had someone on reddit recently scream at me because I said I don't get paid DMs, because it meant that I was greedy and wanted someone's hard labor for free.



See, this is what I was driving at. DMing didn’t used to be thought of as labor. It was, at best, a hobby. But in the attention economy, it inarguably is labor. Professional DMs, while a weird concept, are doing work and have every right to charge for that work. But it’s a messed up system that pressures people to turn their hobbies into work in order to get paid. Also there’s nothing wrong with preferring not to hire paid DMs, whoever said this to you is completely wrongheaded about it. If you hired someone to DM for pay and then didn’t pay them that would be one thing, but just choosing not to hire anyone to DM for pay is perfectly valid.


----------



## Retreater (Jun 16, 2022)

Just because a slur was more commonly used in the 80s it doesn't mean it was appropriate then or is appropriate now.
We used a lot of derogatory language for homosexuals in the 80s as well. We shouldn't excuse that or this example. We should do better.


----------



## Tutara (Jun 16, 2022)

DarkCrisis said:


> Spaz is very 80s.  "You're such a spaz."  Is/Was used in such a way as "You're a nerd/geek."



No, it was very definitely a slur against people with learning disabilities - at least where I grew up in the UK. And it lasted all the way through the 90s too. Repellent stuff.


----------



## Oofta (Jun 16, 2022)

Tutara said:


> No, it was very definitely a slur against people with learning disabilities - at least where I grew up in the UK. And it lasted all the way through the 90s too. Repellent stuff.



Well y'all also call the trunk of a car something you put on your foot.  

Not saying we shouldn't be sensitive to things, just that as someone growing up in the U.S. "spaz" was not particularly derogatory, nor did I ever think of it in terms of association with a disability.  Times change, words have different meanings depending on what side of the pond you live on.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 16, 2022)

DarkCrisis said:


> Spaz is very 80s.  "You're such a spaz."  Is/Was used in such a way as "You're a nerd/geek."



In my experience as a kid with ADHD and a “lolrandom” sense of humor growing up in the US in the 90s and 00s, I got it a lot. It was generally used to connotate a certain over abundance of energy. But the analogy to the R word is pretty fitting - describing someone who’s kinda chaotic and fidgety as spastic, especially to denigrate them, is a similar misuse of a somewhat outdated medical term as using the R word to denigrate someone for behaving in a way one thinks is stupid. And its use as an insult is similarly hurtful to people with actual conditions that have been medically described that way.


----------



## Tutara (Jun 16, 2022)

Oofta said:


> Well y'all also call the trunk of a car something you put on your foot.
> 
> Not saying we shouldn't be sensitive to things, just that as someone growing up in the U.S. "spaz" was not particularly derogatory, nor did I ever think of it in terms of association with a disability.  Times change, words have different meanings depending on what side of the pond you live on.



Sure, but once you learnt it was something really nasty, and applied to people as a way of mocking disability, you’re not going to use it just to antagonise someone, are you? Costs nowt to be considerate, after all.


----------



## Jer (Jun 16, 2022)

Tutara said:


> No, it was very definitely a slur against people with learning disabilities - at least where I grew up in the UK. And it lasted all the way through the 90s too. Repellent stuff.



This is like the opposite of the discussions about the c-word - where in the US it's a horrible slur that can stop a conversation dead when it's uttered if not get the utterer punched while in the UK people throw it around like it's nothing and wonder what Americans are getting so worked up about.

I understand the UK usage and have removed the word from my vocabulary in general, but in the US as far as I know that particular word still doesn't have that connection in the US (the equivalent term in the US is the r-word, which will also now stop a conversation dead if it's used and possibly get the utterer punched).


----------



## Tutara (Jun 16, 2022)

Jer said:


> This is like the opposite of the discussions about the c-word - where in the US it's a horrible slur that can stop a conversation dead when it's uttered if not get the utterer punched while in the UK people throw it around like it's nothing and wonder what Americans are getting so worked up about.
> I understand the UK usage and have removed the word from my vocabulary in general, but in the US as far as I know that particular word still doesn't have that connection in the US (the equivalent term in the US is the r-word, which will also now stop a conversation dead if it's used and possibly get the utterer punched).



I was thinking this exact thing. Which is why I never use that word around people who hate it, even though it’s used more like a form of punctuation than a real word where I live…


----------



## Oofta (Jun 16, 2022)

Tutara said:


> Sure, but once you learnt it was something really nasty, and applied to people as a way of mocking disability, you’re not going to use it just to antagonise someone, are you? Costs nowt to be considerate, after all.



Not saying otherwise.  But sometimes people can use words that in their experience were innocuous out of ignorance.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 16, 2022)

Jer said:


> This is like the opposite of the discussions about the c-word - where in the US it's a horrible slur that can stop a conversation dead when it's uttered if not get the utterer punched while in the UK people throw it around like it's nothing and wonder what Americans are getting so worked up about.



That one has lost a lot of its bite in recent years, I think due in part to certain HBO shows that made heavy use of it. It’s still one you have to be careful with because there are still enough people who view it this way that you don’t want to use it casually in mixed company. But I think it’s gradually becoming more acceptable.


----------



## Tutara (Jun 16, 2022)

Oofta said:


> Not saying otherwise.  But sometimes people can use words that in their experience were innocuous out of ignorance.



Absolutely, I quite agree. And I hope I didn’t seem to imply that you were saying otherwise!


----------



## Jer (Jun 16, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> That one has lost a lot of its bite in recent years, I think due in part to certain HBO shows that made heavy use of it. It’s still one you have to be careful with because there are still enough people who view it this way that you don’t want to use it casually in mixed company. But I think it’s gradually becoming more acceptable.



I think we're hanging around with very different groups of people


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 16, 2022)

Jer said:


> I think we're hanging around with very different groups of people



At a guess, I’m probably hanging out with younger people.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 16, 2022)

Folks, if this is going to become a discussion of slurs, we can just close the thread now.  Keep it on topic, please and thanks.


----------



## Ondath (Jun 16, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> See, this is what I was driving at. DMing didn’t used to be thought of as labor. It was, at best, a hobby. But in the attention economy, it inarguably is labor. Professional DMs, while a weird concept, are doing work and have every right to charge for that work. But it’s a messed up system that pressures people to turn their hobbies into work in order to get paid. Also there’s nothing wrong with preferring not to hire paid DMs, whoever said this to you is completely wrongheaded about it. If you hired someone to DM for pay and then didn’t pay them that would be one thing, but just choosing not to hire anyone to DM for pay is perfectly valid.



I tried making this exact same point in the other thread about paid DMs, and got told that games always had profit motive and that everything was always commodified since the beginning of history. It really baffles me, how people take today's market ideology hegemony as a universal constant.


----------



## Staffan (Jun 16, 2022)

Oofta said:


> Not saying otherwise.  But sometimes people can use words that in their experience were innocuous out of ignorance.



Which seems to be the case for Al:


----------



## Faolyn (Jun 16, 2022)

Edit: Never mind; didn't see the red text.


----------



## Malmuria (Jun 16, 2022)

Gradine said:


> This is demonstrably, laughably false, and speaks from a perspective that had never been made to feel unwelcome in ttrpgs for 40 years and never once considered the perspectives of different people who had been excluded for decades from many, many, spaces. I can't see how this is a vaguely justifiable take outside politically motivated schadenfreude.



The paragraph that was quoted wasn't in the linked article but is the one comment on the article from a reader.  I.e. random internet dude says he feels left out...


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 17, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> It's not about whether someone was involved in upper management decisions (she wasn't), it was about who was in charge of handling someone's concern over being asked to work alongside an abuser (she was in charge of it).



And one allegation that a complaint was not looked into (who was being complained about not specified so no way to know if any relation to Satine) turns into a torrent of assumptions about why and who knew and that M person is not fired yet?

And the person complaining kind of takes over the contract position that Satine had.

I am fairly sure that from what the person making the complaint knew - it was not acted on - happened. Why is was not acted on is unknown. Why the complaint was made to the community/social media manager I also do not understand.


----------



## This Effin’ GM (Jun 17, 2022)

Anyone catching the “apology” stream?


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> And one allegation that a complaint was not looked into (who was being complained about not specified so no way to know if any relation to Satine) turns into a torrent of assumptions about why and who knew and that M person is not fired yet?
> 
> And the person complaining kind of takes over the contract position that Satine had.
> 
> I am fairly sure that from what the person making the complaint knew - it was not acted on - happened. Why is was not acted on is unknown. Why the complaint was made to the community/social media manager I also do not understand.



Probably seemed appropriate if it was an issue in the social media community and the victims in question felt the community manager would help.them. And yeah, it is significant that Satine was out of that position soon after and the leader of the complaint took it over. Given the timing, this was probably the Zak Smith affair that took down Mearls.


----------



## ersatzphil (Jun 17, 2022)

This Effin’ GM said:


> Anyone catching the “apology” stream?



A bit of it. I don't feel like I can comment on her apology, but the comments have been _brutal_.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 17, 2022)

This Effin’ GM said:


> Anyone catching the “apology” stream?



I just took a peek. Lots of tears and lots of mean-spirited commentary. I don’t think it was a good idea on her part to do this.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

ersatzphil said:


> A bit of it. I don't feel like I can comment on her apology, but the comments have been _brutal_.





pukunui said:


> I just took a peek. Lots of tears and lots of mean-spirited commentary. I don’t think it was a good idea on her part to do this.



I don't even want to see this, it sounds painful.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 17, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> I don't even want to see this, it sounds painful.



It was. As awful as her behavior has been, I am somewhat concerned that she might feel driven to self-harm after that.


----------



## ersatzphil (Jun 17, 2022)

pukunui said:


> I just took a peek. Lots of tears and lots of mean-spirited commentary. I don’t think it was a good idea on her part to do this.



...yeah. While she probably needed to make a statement of some sort, doing it in a way where 900 internet strangers can tell you what a horrible person you are was probably an ill thought out idea.


Parmandur said:


> I don't even want to see this, it sounds painful.



She was explicit about not seeing a way back into the TTRPG community, which for good or ill feels realistic, at least on the WotC part of it. She seems absolutely crushed.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

pukunui said:


> It was. As awful as her behavior has been, I am somewhat concerned that she might feel driven to self-harm after that.



I wouldn't wish thst on the worst person.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 17, 2022)

Someone's done a summary of Satine's livestream on Twitter:



TL;DR: She put a lot of the blame on Jamison as expected, didn't really address the accusations that were leveled solely at her, and claimed she had no idea she was such a jerk. She claims she's going to get help. Didn't say anything about paying anyone.

So I guess it was about what we all expected?

Nevertheless, I don't think she deserved the vitriol she got in the comments.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Jun 17, 2022)

pukunui said:


> It was. As awful as her behavior has been, I am somewhat concerned that she might feel driven to self-harm after that.




Some people will do that, not because they feel horrible, but just to keep getting attention.

*Mod Edit:*  Please see my note below.  ~Umbran


----------



## Sabathius42 (Jun 17, 2022)

Well dang.  That's twice in this thread my comment on page X was verboten on page X+Y but which I did t know until after I had posted it.


----------



## ersatzphil (Jun 17, 2022)

pukunui said:


> TL;DR: She put a lot of the blame on Jamison as expected, didn't really address the accusations that were leveled solely at her, and claimed she had no idea she was such a jerk. She claims she's going to get help. Didn't say anything about paying anyone.



She did point out that she hasn't been a part of Maze Arcana since 2019, and that payment issues are out of her control at this point - doesn't mean she's innocent of the original problem, of course, but she doesn't see a way for her to solve them on her end. 



pukunui said:


> Nevertheless, I don't think she deserved the vitriol she got in the comments.



Yeah, agreed. "Welcome to the internet", I suppose.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 17, 2022)

ersatzphil said:


> She did point out that she hasn't been a part of Maze Arcana since 2019, and that payment issues are out of her control at this point - doesn't mean she's innocent of the original problem, of course, but she doesn't see a way for her to solve them on her end.



That's more to do with the lawsuit alleging she stole funds from Ruty, right? As far as I can tell, she didn't say anything about paying the _Sirens _book freelancers who are still owed money.



ersatzphil said:


> Yeah, agreed. "Welcome to the internet", I suppose.



Indeed.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Some people will do that, not because they feel horrible, but just to keep getting attention.



I mean, a week ago she was the Queen of D&D, she cannot have emotionally processed that her RPG career is over yet.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Jun 17, 2022)

Sabathius42 said:


> In middle America in the 80s spaz was dork/need/geek.  At least where I grew up.  Knowing it's a slur elsewhere im happy to see it discontinued, but the same logic should apply to the common UK term for cigarette that comes across different in the US.




For me in the Southeastern US, it depended on how the word was used. It could be used in a light way for how you were used to, or it could be used in a mean and hurtful way for how a lot of others understand it. There is also probably a high count of it's use in 80's and 90's teen comedies, for both meanings.

And regional slang will always be like that. There is plenty that at least seems innocent here in the US, but use that same word or phrase in certain other countries and the locals will be horrified. There are various lists floating around the Net that detail some of them, but I am not going into any of them here because Umbran wants us to steer away from keeping that discussion going.


----------



## ersatzphil (Jun 17, 2022)

Someone from Twitter posted 46 minutes of her apology to YouTube, if people missed it / chose not to view it on Instagram and want to draw their own conclusions:


----------



## John Lloyd1 (Jun 17, 2022)

DarkCrisis said:


> Spaz is very 80s.  "You're such a spaz."  Is/Was used in such a way as "You're a nerd/geek."



That's not how it was used in Australia in the 80s. Very derogatory and offensive.


----------



## Irlo (Jun 17, 2022)

Deleted.


----------



## DarkCrisis (Jun 17, 2022)

John Lloyd1 said:


> That's not how it was used in Australia in the 80s. Very derogatory and offensive.




Ah.  I'm talking USA. I probably should have mentioned that


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 17, 2022)

Guys, we were told to drop the slur talk.


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Jun 17, 2022)

Times like these remind me of the short story “the lottery.”

Someone has to get stoned but who?  We don’t know, but we all take our turn picking a paper, hoping we don’t draw the black dot.  We know someone is gonna get it…if they choose poorly.

Now we might say they _chose _poorly.  And we would be right.  But what disturbs me is the circling around _jeering.   _

Of course she has problems.  There are lots of indicators she had issues but we make her a D&D “influencer/personality” and then torch her when she proves common sense is right. 

I am not happy she was a jerk to others but somehow it does not bring any satisfaction to see her get torched.

Of course the next step is to critique her sorrow and decide whether or not she is genuine.  

It’s all gross, man.  People disappoint.  I hope she recovers, learns new ways of relating to others and any of us rubbing our hands together think about why that is so.


----------



## ersatzphil (Jun 17, 2022)

Warpiglet-7 said:


> Of course the next step is to critique her sorrow and decide whether or not she is genuine.



Judging by the large number of "you're just sad you got caught" comments on her IG livestream: the internet is, as usual, one step ahead.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 17, 2022)

ersatzphil said:


> Judging by the large number of "you're just sad you got caught" comments on her IG livestream: the internet is, as usual, one step ahead.



That sentiment comes from people recognizing a genuine expression of remorse that doesn’t give an indication of understanding what harm was done. When it’s clear you feel bad, but you don’t seem to understand what you’ve done wrong, what else are people supposed to assume you feel bad _about_? It’s “sorry I made you upset” instead of “sorry for [doing the thing that made you upset].”


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 17, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Probably seemed appropriate if it was an issue in the social media community and the victims in question felt the community manager would help.them. And yeah, it is significant that Satine was out of that position soon after and the leader of the complaint took it over. Given the timing, this was probably the Zak Smith affair that took down Mearls.



I doubt it had anything to do with that. Probably hit the contract end. D&D was not proven then, and had been on tiny staff life support for a while. You need to terminate contract positions before a certain time lapse otherwise they are deemed to be employees. Just about everyone WoTC hires are a contractor has the same thing happen.

Why the improbable scandalous answer is picked instead of the standard happens every other contractor  (including the one that said she made the complaint that was not acted on) at the one year mark says more about the people making the assumptions than the person being targeted.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 17, 2022)

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Some people will do that, not because they feel horrible, but just to keep getting attention.




*Mod Note:*
And you are a licensed mental health professional, that you should be casting judgements on self-harm?

While on these boards, please refrain from blaming people for their illnesses - mental or otherwise.  Whether or not you feel you are correct about a particular case, the harm you may be causing to others could be large.  

On this site, please take the default position of _kindness_, rather than derision.  Thank you.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 17, 2022)

Kickstarter update from today:  

“
We have received many questions about what will happen with this project in light of recent changes at Apotheosis Studios. It is currently our intent to finish the book and fulfill the pledges that we received. We will be working over the next few weeks to assess our options and establish new timelines. We will update everyone as we have more information.


To address some of the concerns and claims about writers not being paid we would like to share with you a breakdown of what has happened. First and foremost ALL writers who have submitted their invoices as instructed to our accountant have been paid. Payments started in March, 2022 and as new invoices are received we process them promptly.

We had the following number of contractors working on this project:


Writers - 22 writers. Paid 10cents per word
Artists - 2. Paid monthly
Graphic Designer - 1. Paid monthly
Layout artist - Paid monthly, even when not working on a project
Musicians - 2. Paid promptly per song
Sculptor - 1. Paid promptly per sculpt
The Sirens writing Deadline was Oct 31. Approval passes started in November. Unfortunately the approval passes took longer than expected which pushed out approval for the contractors to bill by 3-4 months. Billing authorization was issued in March of 2022 and we promptly paid all invoices properly submitted to our accountant. We have recently learned that some writers had sent invoices to the wrong email address, this has been addressed and they have been paid. Additionally there were also some writers who, for reasons unknown, never invoiced us at all. Any writer who reaches out to us will be paid once we receive an invoice per the billing procedures sent to them at the time of approval.


For this project we provided templates for Adventure Chapters with a 8,450 words max budget.

9 of 22 chapters were over word count


4 over by 1000 words
1 over by 3700 words
2 over by 4750 words
1 over by 7000 words
Despite the fact that many chapters were over the word counts outlined the writers were paid for the overages after appropriate approval. Writers whose writing was not used were still authorized to bill us and were paid 10 cents per word.  The majority of the book was written by: Rick Heinz, Pat Edwards, Rob Weiland, Megan Mackie, along with writing and editing by Satine Phoenix, and Jamison Stone.”


----------



## Gradine (Jun 17, 2022)

Please, please, please, for the love of all that is good and decent, if somebody is hurting themselves or threatening to hurt themselves, _*believe them. *_Help them get the help they need, whatever form that takes for them.

The idea that people harm themselves for aattention, spreading or sharing that vile misinformation, does considerably more harm than good. It tells people that you are not a safe person to turn to in need. It tells people that no one will believe them that they're hurting.

Be someone that someone can turn to in need. Be someone that someone can trust.

Please.


----------



## Von Ether (Jun 17, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> You've badly misunderstood. I did not claim, imply, or otherwise indicate to any degree whatsoever, that there was no professional class of musicians. Never in recorded history has their been a lack of a such professionals.
> 
> It was not, however, just the farmer in the field that was "happily off-key". It was everyone that wasn't a professional. Well, i'm sure many of them were quite good, but that isn't actually relevant to the point. All social activities involved music, made by the participants more often than by a separate group. All kinds of work tended to involve song.
> 
> Making music simply was not something _reserved_ for professionals, until well into the very recent history of widespread recorded music.




We'll agree to disagree how "badly" I misunderstood vs how you might have "over simplified" a statement about public performance in the last 150 years. Otherwise, I grant you have good points.


----------



## pukunui (Jun 17, 2022)

Satine has posted a link to her video apology and included more details from her notes on her website's blog here: To those who I’ve caused pain, I’m so sorry. — SatinePhoenix

Make of it what you will.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 17, 2022)

Von Ether said:


> We'll agree to disagree how "badly" I misunderstood vs how you might have "over simplified" a statement about public performance in the last 150 years. Otherwise, I grant you have good points.



I’ve a hard time agreeing to disagree after rereading what I said in my first post in this exchange, but it’s a tangent to begin with, so I’ll leave it.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 17, 2022)

More compassion and empathy, less cruelty (even if, perhaps especially when, it feels justified), all around would be a good thing in this hobby


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 17, 2022)

Faolyn said:


> "I saw your blog post. It was really fantastic. That was sarcastic. Because you write like a spastic."
> 
> I absolutely love this entire song and the video... except for that line. (I'd heard that it was a slur on people with epilepsy, not people with cerebral palsy, but either way.)



It was so jarring for me to learn, today, that it’s a slur for physical disabilities in the UK. Growing up, I only ever heard it used to refer to hyperactivity and the like. 


pukunui said:


> Satine has posted a link to her video apology and included more details from her notes on her website's blog here: To those who I’ve caused pain, I’m so sorry. — SatinePhoenix
> 
> Make of it what you will.



The proof, as always, is in actions not words, but as far as words go these seem fine to me. 

I don’t believe that someone accused of bad behavior has any obligation to just passively agree with every element of accusations, so I’ve no problem with the clarifications and “hey B. Dave why!?” section. 

Overall, it’s a start. It will either support further action in helping her rehabilitate her reputation, or it will mean nothing after not being backed by actions.


----------



## Chromie (Jun 17, 2022)

Some tweets and the stream with the comments.



I think Scott brings up an excellent point.  The damage is too great and I don't see this ever being enough.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Jun 17, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> It was so jarring for me to learn, today, that it’s a slur for physical disabilities in the UK. Growing up, I only ever heard it used to refer to hyperactivity and the like.




Remember that back in the 80's, people had no clue that the hyperactivity in many people was caused by ADD, ADHD and other such debilitating conditions.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Jun 17, 2022)

Chromie said:


> I think Scott brings up an excellent point.  The damage is too great and I don't see this ever being enough.




So every ex-con will always be a bad person and can never reform or do good and gain back any respect?


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> I doubt it had anything to do with that. Probably hit the contract end. D&D was not proven then, and had been on tiny staff life support for a while. You need to terminate contract positions before a certain time lapse otherwise they are deemed to be employees. Just about everyone WoTC hires are a contractor has the same thing happen.
> 
> Why the improbable scandalous answer is picked instead of the standard happens every other contractor  (including the one that said she made the complaint that was not acted on) at the one year mark says more about the people making the assumptions than the person being targeted.



This was 2019, well after the game had exploded and they were hiring up. She left a few weeks after Mearls final social media activity trying to cover his butt over the mishandling of the Zak S. situation. Then, the women accusing Satine of mishandling accusations against an abuser working with WotC takes over rhe position immediately.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 17, 2022)

Ondath said:


> I tried making this exact same point in the other thread about paid DMs, and got told that games always had profit motive and that everything was always commodified since the beginning of history. It really baffles me, how people take today's market ideology hegemony as a universal constant.



If someone wants to do professional quality work, they deserve professional quality pay.  I think most DMs deserve a bit of compensation, even if they don't plan to make careers of it.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

pukunui said:


> Satine has posted a link to her video apology and included more details from her notes on her website's blog here: To those who I’ve caused pain, I’m so sorry. — SatinePhoenix
> 
> Make of it what you will.



A lot of victim blaming, not much actual self-reflection.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 17, 2022)

pukunui said:


> It was. As awful as her behavior has been, I am somewhat concerned that she might feel driven to self-harm after that.



Just as I've said about the Heard/Depp and Baldwin stories, keep in mind we're talking about a professional performer and actor.  Before she started doing D&D for a living, her day job was making you believe she was feeling things she didn't really feel, so nobody (other than Satine herself) can ever really know how sorry or not she is, nor any actor making a show of appearing vulnerable.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 17, 2022)

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Remember that back in the 80's, people had no clue that the hyperactivity in many people was caused by ADD, ADHD and other such debilitating conditions.



Side-note: ADD is longer medically recognized as a distinct disorder from ADHD. What we tend to think of as ADD is a subset of ADHD symptoms, and people (like myself) who exhibit more of those symptoms than the hyperactivity we tend to associate with ADHD are considered to have “primarily inattentive” symptoms.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 17, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> If someone wants to do professional quality work, they deserve professional quality pay.  I think most DMs deserve a bit of compensation, even if they don't plan to make careers of it.



Only if they actually  _seek_ professional quality pay. Some people pursue quality (yes, even professional quality) in their hobbies as its own reward, and there’s nothing wrong with that.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jun 17, 2022)

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Remember that back in the 80's, people had no clue that the hyperactivity in many people was caused by ADD, ADHD and other such debilitating conditions.




The use of the word "debilitating" here seems to push past empathy and merge into degrading.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 17, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Side-note: ADD is longer medically recognized as a distinct disorder from ADHD. What we tend to think of as ADD is a subset of ADHD symptoms, and people (like myself) who exhibit more of those symptoms than the hyperactivity we tend to associate with ADHD are considered to have “primarily inattentive” symptoms.



I think people back in the 80s didn't know what to do with the word "Hyperactive".  I was diagnosed as "ADD with hyperactivity", which today would have just been called _normal_ ADHD.  My mom didn't seem to understand how I was hyperactive, since I seemed mostly kind of lazy.  That's probably because her mind wanted to equate Activity with Productivity, and didn't realize that Hyperactivity could actually involve completely meaningless, unproductive activities.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 17, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Only if they actually  _seek_ professional quality pay. Some people pursue quality (yes, even professional quality) in their hobbies as its own reward, and there’s nothing wrong with that.



Many people who engage in hobbies seek compensation to fund further pursuit of that hobby.  There's even a whole section of tax code for "hobby income".

For example, if I paint miniatures as a hobby, i can sell stuff i painted, and dump the proceeds into buying more miniatures to paint.  There are rules for how much hobby income you can earn, and how/when that hobby income needs to be taxed as business income instead.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Only if they actually  _seek_ professional quality pay. Some people pursue quality (yes, even professional quality) in their hobbies as its own reward, and there’s nothing wrong with that.



Yeah, sharing some beautiful memories with close friends and family is it's own reward. Though we've always had an informal pay by food, snacks, and beverages system.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 17, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> The use of the word "debilitating" here seems to push past empathy and merge into degrading.



I mean, it is a disability. We are literally not able to function in the same way as neurotypical people without certain accommodations. “Debilitating” is maybe slightly more extreme wording, but it’s not wrong, and as someone with ADHD myself, I certainly don’t find it offensive.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 17, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> Many people who engage in hobbies seek compensation to fund further pursuit of that hobby.  There's even a whole section of tax code for "hobby income".
> 
> For example, if I paint miniatures as a hobby, i can sell stuff i painted, and dump the proceeds into buying more miniatures to paint.  There are rules for how much hobby income you can earn, and how/when that hobby income needs to be taxed as business income instead.



Sure, and that’s absolutely your right. It would also be your right to put the same dedication into your miniature painting and not sell them.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 17, 2022)

pukunui said:


> I just took a peek. Lots of tears and lots of mean-spirited commentary. I don’t think it was a good idea on her part to do this.



Yeah someone close to her with her best interest at heart really should have advised her to at least turn comments off, or record and then post, or something.  

A lot of folks love these moments. Here’s a target they can harass and then get mad if anyone calls them on it because she’s “the bad guy”, not them! 

Give some folks an excuse, and the distance of online communication, and they let the absolute worst within themselves run free.


----------



## AdmundfortGeographer (Jun 17, 2022)

That streamed apology was really painful to watch happen.

It is curious to hear she is a contractor at Apotheosis at the moment. Didn’t she just become the CEO with Stone “stepping aside”?


----------



## pukunui (Jun 17, 2022)

never mind


----------



## Faolyn (Jun 17, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> The use of the word "debilitating" here seems to push past empathy and merge into degrading.



I gotta say, ADHD _is _pretty debilitating. I've got the inattentive subtype, but I was diagnosed so late in life (at 38) that it really messed up my ability to perform in school and college, which in turn messed up my work life.


----------



## MNblockhead (Jun 17, 2022)

Ralif Redhammer said:


> I've seen this so many times, and been this. In my previous career, I was good at my job and ended up in management. I was ill-suited for it and miserable. In my current career I've avoided that path and am quite content and happy.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, that attention and adulation, even on the smallest scale, can be a heady thing. It's all too easy to go from being thankful for the support to thinking that it is what you are owed.



This makes me think it is not just about celebrity.  A certain attitude can creep in when you are in certain positions, such as certain management positions where your compensation is partially based on your (and therefore your team's) performance, and especially if you are a business owner (perhaps even more so in small business). The stress of responsibility, the stress of your success depending on other peoples performance, and the feeling that you are having to work harder than everyone else can taint how you see and interact with people who report to you. If you are lucky enough to also achieve some success and recognition for competence, it can be more difficult to avoid a certain dictatorial attitude. Add a dash of celebrity to this and it can lead to some very unhealthy views of other people who report to you--especially vendors and contractors. 

I've been in this situation, minus celebrity, and I've learned how important it is to have competent people who are assertive enough to early on call you out when you when you are making poor decisions or are not treating people right.  I remember one instance where I was working with a team on a project where we had to clean up some bad data we received and I made some assumptions based on similar issues I've experienced in the past. The team started complaining about the amount of manual effort required and I snapped, saying something along the lines of yeah, it sucks, but you just have to do it. And I'm sure my tone was exasperated and probably came off as a dismissive. There was an older lady on my team with a strong personality that didn't let me get away with that, and was very clear about why the process was wasting everyone's time and that there must be a better way. It caused me to step back and say I would try to think of a better solution. That evening I spent some time on it and was able to script something that fixed the issues and saved the team--and my company--a great deal of time on low value work that was making everyone unhappy. 

Now, this was someone I had worked with for a while and with whom I had a good relationship, and who I knew was competent. I think it can be much harder for some people to listen to such feedback from temp staff and contractors. You can work so hard gaining competence in your field and trying to earn the respect of your clients, managers, or business partners that you can forget that you need to balance that out with humility and listening to advice, ideas, and criticisms from your direct reports and people with less experience than you. I've certainly experienced that attitude from clients as a vendor and consultant. 

If you add celebrity to that, where even the big fish in the industry are spoiling you with praise, and where you have a fan base pumping up your ego, it can lead to toxic relationships. Certainly many people remain decent even at the height of their success, but few if anyone are totally immune from this.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Jun 17, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> The use of the word "debilitating" here seems to push past empathy and merge into degrading.




Maybe if you had to deal with it like I do, you would not be so flippant about that.


----------



## MNblockhead (Jun 17, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> See, this is what I was driving at. DMing didn’t used to be thought of as labor. It was, at best, a hobby. But in the attention economy, it inarguably is labor. Professional DMs, while a weird concept, are doing work and have every right to charge for that work. But it’s a messed up system that pressures people to turn their hobbies into work in order to get paid. Also there’s nothing wrong with preferring not to hire paid DMs, whoever said this to you is completely wrongheaded about it. If you hired someone to DM for pay and then didn’t pay them that would be one thing, but just choosing not to hire anyone to DM for pay is perfectly valid.



That's quite a stretch. It is just indicative of the growing popularity of the hobby.  The fact that there are professional golfers, fishers, bowlers, cooks, etc. doesn't decrease the number of people who golf, fish, bowl, cook, etc. for leisure. It just means that you have a large enough mass of people interested in the hobby that they are interested in watching and learning from professionals and--if busy and have some money--paying a professional occasionally to enjoy their work. I fish on my own time, without any desire to stream it or make money from it, but I've also paid for guides.  I like to cook but also like to go to restaurants. I DM 8-16 hours a month, not including prep time, and have no interest in charging for it or streaming it.  But I also enjoy live play pod casts, enjoy watching certain people talk about gaming on You Tube, and have paid DMs for a gaming session. 

I started playing D&D in the early-mid 80s. Even with the supposedly deleterious commodification of this hobby, it has never been easier to find free gaming opportunities. Its a virtuous cycle. How many people has Critical Role alone brought into the hobby? Let's not let a few toxic narcissists who glom on to the hobby cast aspersions on all gamers who try to make a career out running or discussing games.


----------



## teitan (Jun 17, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> I saw something similar with a good friend's job in charity which supported a movement. They got a new person in who fancied themselves an influencer (and certainly this person did have fairly nutso numbers of Insta followers and the like). Said new person proceeded to immediately massively misspend the charity's budget (or such was the view of about 50% of the charity, the other 50% thought the person was "influencing" and going to win new converts and so on - but no converts were forthcoming - they did upset and lose a lot of the older people who donated to the charity though!), then generally try and make the entire charity and to some extent even the entire movement be about themselves (the "influencer"), specifically. The "influencer" really went out of their way to smash up anything the organisation would do which might give publicity to other people in the charity - for example, a world-famous fashion designer wanted to help them out and do a photoshoot with everyone from the charity. The "influencer" wanted the photoshoot to only be them and their two buds. The designer wasn't down with that, and the "influencer" ended up just destroying the entire opportunity and the charity's long relationship with the fashion designer over it. Over time, this really wrecked the charity. More than half the staff quit over a fairly short period, because they didn't want to be support for an egocentric "influencer", they wanted to work on their issue, and the "influencer" behaved worse and worse. Actually they behaved in a way very like that of Satine/Jamison in terms of their utterly contemptuous and sneering language towards people they worked with, in and out of the charity, people in the movement, and just ordinary supporters. Eventually even the "influencer" quit because they didn't think people were being sufficiently nice/servile to them, but demanded that the charity keep paying them as a "freelancer", only now they didn't have to do any work. Which the charity agreed to. Said charity has now been "dead in the water" for years as a result of the damage this person did. Just horrifying.
> 
> I had forgotten all about this until you mentioned that, but yeah, it seems like this is an "influencer" way of operating.



In this case they started becoming one about 2009-2010 with a podcast and having success in their local communities creating some celebrity primarily and secondarily through countering a popular yet controversial writer. This guy published through lulu, while his target was being published through a major publisher, and touted by the head of the charitable organization as important. The influencer helped promote that there were ideas in the more successful author’s books that weren’t using sock puppet accounts. He was also using sock puppets and his buddies to prop himself up as some sort of major new voice. He would have sock puppets that argued with him and then turn and be like oh my gosh you’re so right, thank you Mr. Influencer. A few times he screwed up and got caught doing it but deleted it. Some of us knew what was up.

Fast forward and he had changed his tune and “become a team player”. He was talking about the above mentioned writer positively   Etc and it turned sour when they had a disagreement with a friend of the writer. The influencer went out attacking all the writer’s friends, the writer, calling them Nazis, racists etc. he befriended and used people to push his story. Eventually he was removed and his dishonesty has been exposed reducing his influence in the community at large after he tried to gas light everyone on an event he partook in and tried to say “I didn’t do it, this other guy did it”, one of his sock puppet accounts, but the receipts showed it was his real account. Plus we all knew the “other guy” was him. As in he had openly admitted it was him on various occasions as a pseudonym. 

Before all that though he almost cost several people their jobs include law firm partners, politicians, journalists etc. exposed some others to stalkers (it’s a niche community but some of the people attracted to it are unhinged and think they are vastly more important than they really are or have connections they don’t have, think Illuminati stuff) such as me and my family. We had to call the police because someone living close to us saw our names on a website in connection with someone he had crafted a false relationship with and was also stalking. It was just insane.


----------



## MNblockhead (Jun 17, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> If someone wants to do professional quality work, they deserve professional quality pay.  I think most DMs deserve a bit of compensation, even if they don't plan to make careers of it.



Deserve?  That's for the market to decide. If there is no demand for it, doesn't matter how good you are, you are not going to get "professional pay", whatever that means. 

I've paid professional DMs because I wanted what they were offering — a good experience, scheduled at a time convenient for me. 

It has never crossed my mind, however, that I deserve to have my friends compensate me for my time running running my D&D campaigns. I'm just enjoying time with friends. Doing it for pay would ruin it for me because of the expectations that come with being paid. I have a job. Gaming is my hobby.


----------



## MNblockhead (Jun 17, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> I mean, it is a disability. We are literally not able to function in the same way as neurotypical people without certain accommodations. “Debilitating” is maybe slightly more extreme wording, but it’s not wrong, and as someone with ADHD myself, I certainly don’t find it offensive.



Yeah, refusing to recognize that it can be debilitating can be the greater offensive. I was diagnosed as in the early 80s and put on Ritalin when the field was new and Ritalin was over prescribed. A lot of drugging up of difficult kids in over-crowded schools and all that.  Even though I have mild ADHD, the experience in 6th and 7th grade was very negative. I felt rather zombified by Ritalin, though my teachers were happy with the result. For me, mild ADHD is a bit of a super-power in that the same impulse that can distract me from paying attention to what I'm supposed to, also allows me to focus intensely on one thing for long periods of time to the point of forgoing sleep. Computerized calendars, task, and project-management systems help make up for my weaknesses. 

But my experience in middle school put a big chip on my shoulder when it came to talk about ADHD, especially medicines to treat it. My armchair theorizing based on some reading I did was that what we call a debility in our industrialized and post-industrial society was, in fact, and evolutionary advantage for most of human history. The same thing that makes someone with ADHD perform poorly in our modern school system, makes them a good hunter (really, go hiking with someone with ADHD, they always seem to notice things that most people don't).  I was strongly against medicating people with something I didn't think should be treated as an illness.

It took me a while to accept that some people really do need medicine to treat severe ADHD and it be a life-changing improvement to many people's well being. The science has come a long way since the 80s and dismissing the fact that for some people it can be really debilitating can be quite harmful to people who whose lives would be greatly improved by proper medical care.


----------



## Jahydin (Jun 17, 2022)

I didn't think ADHD could be so bad.

Reading articles like this has downplayed the severity for me :
"Of the 6.4 million kids who have been given diagnoses of A.D.H.D., a large percentage are unlikely to have any kind of physiological difference that would make them more distractible than the average non-A.D.H.D. kid. It’s also doubtful that biological or environmental changes are making physiological differences more prevalent. Instead, the rapid increase in people with A.D.H.D. probably has more to do with sociological factors — changes in the way we school our children, in the way we interact with doctors and in what we expect from our kids."


----------



## Azuresun (Jun 17, 2022)

Warpiglet-7 said:


> Times like these remind me of the short story “the lottery.”
> 
> Someone has to get stoned but who?  We don’t know, but we all take our turn picking a paper, hoping we don’t draw the black dot.  We know someone is gonna get it…if they choose poorly.
> 
> ...




Yeah. People who whine about "cancel culture" are obnoxious and wrong, but there's still something deeply disturbing about the dogpiles that social media encourages, no matter how virtuous their cassus belli might have started out as. It's almost literally an Orwellian Five Minutes Hate.


----------



## TheSword (Jun 17, 2022)

It’s nice to see we’ve moved on.


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Jun 17, 2022)

deleted


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Jun 17, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yeah someone close to her with her best interest at heart really should have advised her to at least turn comments off, or record and then post, or something.
> 
> A lot of folks love these moments. Here’s a target they can harass and then get mad if anyone calls them on it because she’s “the bad guy”, not them!
> 
> Give some folks an excuse, and the distance of online communication, and they let the absolute worst within themselves run free.



And this is exactly why I personally think making "public apologies" to the general populace on stuff like this is more or less a waste of time.  You are apologizing to a lot of people who have nothing to do with the actual situation and who are just looking to get a self-congratulatory pat on the back after acting the jerk to the person by demanding restitution for something they had nothing to do with.

Apologize to the actual people who your hurt?  Absolutely.  Apologize to the mass of humanity out in social media-land who are demanding a pound of flesh because they need their public-facing online presence to seem holier-than-thou?  No thanks.


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Jun 17, 2022)

Azuresun said:


> Yeah. People who whine about "cancel culture" are obnoxious and wrong, but there's still something deeply disturbing about the dogpiles that social media encourages, no matter how virtuous their cassus belli might have started out as. It's almost literally an Orwellian Five Minutes Hate.



The thing I just shrug about "cancel culture" is that it really seems to me to highlight the difference between those of us who didn't grow up with social media, and the ones that do.  Because when you think about it... what is "cancelling"?  It is people telling someone "We aren't going to let you be famous anymore."

That's it.  That's the punishment.  They don't want to see or hear about you online.  There's no other forfeiture-- the person doesn't lose any of their money, the person doesn't go to prison, the person doesn't suffer anything physically... nothing like any of that.  All it is is "you can't be famous".

And I think that says a lot that that's the worst punishment our younger generations can think of to dish out to someone-- wish them to be anonymous.  It makes me think that people like JK Rowling and Louie CK are just crying all the way to the bank.


----------



## JediSoth (Jun 17, 2022)

I suppose everyone will have to decide for themselves whether S&J are sufficiently remorseful and deserve yet another chance. This would be Satine's third chance, by my count, and Jamison's second (for me, he sort of came out of nowhere last year, but I well-remember how she supported Zak S. right up until the last minute and I even have a friend with receipts for the harassment mob she sent toward him).

For me, I want nothing to do with any future projects she's involved in (or him, for that matter... not that anything he's said or done on his own really appeals to me). The bridge has been burnt. I'm too old and grumpy to give people multiple chance to not be jerks. There's plenty of other creators out there I can give my money to.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 17, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> The thing I just shrug about "cancel culture" is that it really seems to me to highlight the difference between those of us who didn't grow up with social media, and the ones that do.  Because when you think about it... what is "cancelling"?  It is people telling someone "We aren't going to let you be famous anymore."
> 
> That's it.  That's the punishment.  They don't want to see or hear about you online.  There's no other forfeiture-- the person doesn't lose any of their money, the person doesn't go to prison, the person doesn't suffer anything physically... nothing like any of that.  All it is is "you can't be famous".




I think for famous people this may be the case. Most famous people can probably weather a cancelation financially because they will still find an audience even if they are deprived of a larger one. But canceling for people who aren't famous, are just internet famous, or simply using social media to market business or a service that is career ending to people, and can impact future employment, family life, personal life with friends, etc. Social media is a powerful tool and businesses use it when they are hiring. A public canceling of someone  who is not famous or who has some minor internet celebrity in a niche area, can easily result in that person not finding employment or having tremendous difficulty finding employment. It certainly can impact their ability to find work in that field, but it can extend to totally unrelated fields because companies don't want to hire someone who has a stain like that on social media (and people have been known to contact employers of regular working folks when a  person has a political or cultural opinion they don't like for example). So it can literally mean loss of ability to food and house oneself. I live in the US, where the safety net isn't going to protect you from that kind of loss of employment. So I am not a fan anytime things move in the direction of going after peoples' livelihoods (which cancelation campaigns frequently have the effect of)


----------



## Retreater (Jun 17, 2022)

I never followed her to begin with. I hope only that this fiasco helps the freelancers get paid and treated better (since I'm a freelancer I do have a stake in the industry as a whole.) I also hope this gets the project fulfilled for all the backers (since I also back a lot of things on Kickstarter).
I hope this has a ripple effect on the industry. If two big names can get called out, maybe other designers who aren't as well known will see this as a wake-up call (assuming they need one). 
But I agree with others here. Both of these people need to back away and get the help they need. I think some degree of public accountability can be helpful, but let's not go overboard as a community.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 17, 2022)

Jahydin said:


> I didn't think ADHD could be so bad.
> 
> Reading articles like this has downplayed the severity for me :
> "Of the 6.4 million kids who have been given diagnoses of A.D.H.D., a large percentage are unlikely to have any kind of physiological difference that would make them more distractible than the average non-A.D.H.D. kid. It’s also doubtful that biological or environmental changes are making physiological differences more prevalent. Instead, the rapid increase in people with A.D.H.D. probably has more to do with sociological factors — changes in the way we school our children, in the way we interact with doctors and in what we expect from our kids."



It was super over-diagnosed in kids and medication for it was over-prescribed in the 80s and 90s, but it is very much a real thing, which can be very debilitating for some people.


----------



## Maggan (Jun 17, 2022)

This whole mess made me wonder, is there somewhere there is a description for freelancers in the RPG industry to read about what they should expect sort of generally when being employed? I'm not thinking of pay rates or such, just basics about what treatment are you to expect as a mimimun, what are the most common things to look out for and things like that.

That could help people being abused recognise it early on, instead of chalking it up to business practice.


----------



## Grendel_Khan (Jun 17, 2022)

Jahydin said:


> I didn't think ADHD could be so bad.
> 
> Reading articles like this has downplayed the severity for me :
> "Of the 6.4 million kids who have been given diagnoses of A.D.H.D., a large percentage are unlikely to have any kind of physiological difference that would make them more distractible than the average non-A.D.H.D. kid. It’s also doubtful that biological or environmental changes are making physiological differences more prevalent. Instead, the rapid increase in people with A.D.H.D. probably has more to do with sociological factors — changes in the way we school our children, in the way we interact with doctors and in what we expect from our kids."




That article is from _8 years ago_. Do you know how much has changed about our understanding of mental health in general, and ADHD specifically, since then?


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 17, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> Because when you think about it... what is "cancelling"? It is people telling someone "We aren't going to let you be famous anymore."



It's also "The book I haven't actually read shouldn't be published" and "You should be fired" and "You should not be allowed to speak on campus" ad nauseum. That's not to say the government should step in and "do something about this" (freedom of association is a thing, too), but internet culture evolved into this and it would be nice if it evolved out of it someday.


----------



## Jer (Jun 17, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> It's also "The book I haven't actually read shouldn't be published" and "You should be fired" and "You should not be allowed to speak on campus" ad nauseum. That's not to say the government should step in and "do something about this" (freedom of association is a thing, too), but internet culture evolved into this and it would be nice if it evolved out of it someday.



That isn't internet culture.  That is all stuff that has been going on my entire life. Trying to get people fired for their politics or to protest a public speaker - especially at universities - has been going on in this country for decades - at least back into the 80s if not earlier.  And those of us old enough to remember the Satanic Panic around D&D might actually remember some book burnings protesting books that the burners thought "shouldn't be published" - and those were going on before D&D and continued going on after.

What's changed is that it's all very much more public now.  And much more "democratized".  For example, 35 years ago if there was a student protest over a speaker at some small liberal arts college in Ohio you wouldn't have heard about it even if you lived up the road from them unless it was literally the president of the US that they were protesting.  It might have merited a blurb on page 6 of a newspaper on a slow news day. Now it's the number 1 story on a hundred different websites trying to fill a 24 hour news cycle even if it's just some nobody and "everyone" is supposed to have an opinion on it and it all feeds into some ongoing narrative about how the world is going to heck.  Instead of protesting just being a thing that college students do because they don't have any power to do anything else.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 17, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> This was 2019, well after the game had exploded and they were hiring up. She left a few weeks after Mearls final social media activity trying to cover his butt over the mishandling of the Zak S. situation. Then, the women accusing Satine of mishandling accusations against an abuser working with WotC takes over rhe position immediately.











						Want A Job As WotC's Community Manager?
					

For those who want to work at Wizards of the Coast, there's a new job opportunity opening up. Current Community Manager Satine Phoenix's contract expires this month, and the spot has opened up for applications.      Here's what Satine Phoenix said on Twitter:  "SUCH an amazing year with my...




					www.enworld.org
				




Was a one year contract.

Started in 2018 and the company was commonly using 1 year term contracts then. 

Contract term ended. 

I do not see anything other than the contract ending in the timing of when she left. Next community manager was a one year contract as well.


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 17, 2022)

Jer said:


> That isn't internet culture. That is all stuff that has been going on my entire life.



No one is saying social shaming is new -- I've said that explicitly. But if you haven't noticed the way it's manifested in internet culture, I don't really know what to tell you. I guess we can agree to disagree.


----------



## Jer (Jun 17, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> No one is saying social shaming is new -- I've said that explicitly. But if you haven't noticed the way it's manifested in internet culture, I don't really know what to tell you. I guess we can agree to disagree.





Jer said:


> *What's changed is that it's all very much more public now.  And much more "democratized". * F



I've noticed that it's changed, as I mention in the message you're replaying to.  It's changed in that it's now global instead of local and much more democratized.  It isn't just a group of rich alumni trying to get a professor fired for their politics - it's "regular" folks with social media accounts trying to do it.   Students can't just protest an offensive speaker coming to talk at their university without it becoming national news and everyone having to have an opinion on it.  And so on.

Social media takes the local and makes it global.  That can be good, but it can also be ugly.  Because turning a local mob into a global mob will necessarily make it more visible and harder to ignore.  But this stuff was always going on - it's just harder to pretend that it isn't happening than it was 40 years ago.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 17, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> And I think that says a lot that that's the worst punishment our younger generations can think of to dish out to someone-- wish them to be anonymous.




I think you're pretty wrong there.  It isn't the worst they can think of.  It is the one and only punishment that they actually can _implement_.

The world at large cannot take your money, or send you to prison - those are for the courts.  And making you suffer physically would in most forms be highly illegal.  The world at large has been handed one tool to work with, so that's what they work with.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 17, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> I mean, it is a disability. We are literally not able to function in the same way as neurotypical people without certain accommodations. “Debilitating” is maybe slightly more extreme wording, but it’s not wrong, and as someone with ADHD myself, I certainly don’t find it offensive.



As someone with fairly severe ADHD (thank god for ritalin!) I'd definitely say ADHD can be debilitating. It's an interesting disability in that the impact on your life is not necessarily purely negative (I suspect people with a lot of disabilities actually feel this way though), but if I didn't have ritalin, I don't think I could hold a job long-term, and my relationships with others would be negatively impacted to (I have enough impulsive stuff that I sometimes say stuff that comes into my mind but that I didn't actually want to, y'know, say, and certainly don't mean - one thing I value about the internet and forums especially is that you can review and edit posts).


MNblockhead said:


> For me, mild ADHD is a bit of a super-power in that the same impulse that can distract me from paying attention to what I'm supposed to, also allows me to focus intensely on one thing for long periods of time to the point of forgoing sleep. Computerized calendars, task, and project-management systems help make up for my weaknesses.



Yeah this exactly. I also got a minor benefit before my ADHD was treated in that, unless I was really focused on what someone was saying, I was basically nearly immune to back-handed compliments, cutting remarks, and any put-downs which weren't so direct they were embarrassing to the person saying them, so a lot of high-school nastiness just rolled off me. I remember realizing someone was trying to insult me literally a year after they'd done it, and we'd since become friends, I think in part because they had so dismally failed to put me down lol.


Greg Benage said:


> No one is saying social shaming is new -- I've said that explicitly. But if you haven't noticed the way it's manifested in internet culture, I don't really know what to tell you. I guess we can agree to disagree.



Just looking at the internet here is really unhelpful, though.

That's the problem, and that's what people do. They focus entirely on the internet, and they completely ignore the much bigger, much more real stuff going on, which is news media, particularly talk news, opinion columns and the like, which have a much bigger real/long-term impact on both society and the success of individuals than spats on the internet do.

Also, those sources tell you to only think about the internet, and never to think about them, they tell you they're normal and okay, and the internet stuff is wrong. To the point where a talking head on a TV channel (not even Fox, btw) is disparaging a literal _child_, essentially doxxing them, trying to come up with anything negative at all they can find about them, and essentially sic'ing people on them, and reaching millions or tens of millions of people, but when confronted on the issue, insists that's not "cancel culture". Whereas a post with 80k likes on it, that was probably only seen by a few hundred k people, that is "cancel culture".

My point is that to focus on the internet here is delusional nonsense, that's entirely self-serving and a bit of a generational problem.

Yes would it be nice to see less pile-ons and so on - sure, but we already have - they have already declined. They're way less fashionable than they were. But no-one reports on that. That's not a story. Instead someone millionaire or even billionaire in a couple of hilarious cases, whines that they've been "cancelled" because people decided they sucked, and said so, even though it has had no material impact on them. A month later the same millionaire can be seen telling their viewers/readers/followers how dastardly some individual is, and saying that those viewers/readers/followers might want to contact the employer of the individual, and demand they be fired. Worrying about hypocrisy is for poor people.

The issue started to become an actual problem with the 24-hour news cycle, and the rise of opinion-based shows to fill airtime, and later the realization by newspapers that opinion columns, no matter how dumb and vile, got more clicks than well-written, well-researched, well-considered articles.

That's your real problem. "Cancel culture" stuff is an attempt by those people - the ones perpetrating this issue - to distract from their own behaviour. Ignore how I, Opinion Show Host, told 12.5m people that this 15-year-old kid is a bad person who needs to be_ dealt with_, and be really worried that about a minor internet celeb who said rape was funny and then got upset when people told him it wasn't and un-followed him. That latter, they tell you, is the "real problem". Sheesh.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 17, 2022)

This thread seems to have a lot of difficulty staying near its nominal topic.   First sex shaming, then slurs, now ADHD.  The latter, at least, is a worthy enough topic overall, but not for this thread.

That suggests to me that the nominal topic has largely played out. 

Bring it back around to relevance, please.


----------



## Chromie (Jun 17, 2022)

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> So every ex-con will always be a bad person and can never reform or do good and gain back any respect?



You're clearly being sensationalist, don't try to put words in my mouth. I don't know what's going on in your day but don't jump down my throat.


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 17, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> My point is that to focus on the internet here is delusional nonsense, that's entirely self-serving and a bit of a generational problem.




I think this is still relevant to the topic, but I apologize if that's a misjudgment on my part.

But anyway, not a big fan of whataboutism. Yes, our televised media is rotten, too, and yes, I'm thinking of the same outlets you are when I say that, but that does nothing to freshen up the culture of mobbing and dogpiling on social media. And to circle back to the point, the outcome of that rottenness is _not_ just "you can't be famous anymore." Just as the rottenness of televised media isn't just "grandma has something new to be mad about" -- it's "the school board has a new pretense to pull books out of the library or select history textbooks that don't teach history."

In short, both suck.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 17, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> I think this is still relevant to the topic, but I apologize if that's a misjudgment on my part.
> 
> But anyway, not a big fan of whataboutism. Yes, our televised media is rotten, too, and yes, I'm thinking of the same outlets you are when I say that, but that does nothing to freshen up the culture of mobbing and dogpiling on social media. And to circle back to the point, the outcome of that rottenness is _not_ just "you can't be famous anymore." Just as the rottenness of televised media isn't just "grandma has something new to be mad about" -- it's "the school board has a new pretense to pull books out of the library or select history textbooks that don't teach history."
> 
> In short, both suck.



I'm not sure if you understand where the "whataboutism" is, here. The televised media is _engaging in whataboutism_ to distract from their own behaviour, which is far more egregious and reaches many times more people. To talk about "cancel culture" as a product of the internet is to _engage in_ whataboutism. You're being vague enough that I'm unsure if you get this or not though.

And equating mobbing and dogpiling to "cancel culture" is confusing, at best. We have a number of different phenomenons here, and slapping them all together feels intentionally muddying the waters - something televised media is extremely keen to do, because of the "Look over there!!!" factor. When we look at the real impact of internet arguments on the kind of people who talk about being "cancelled", who have enough of a platform to even use that term, it's usually very little.

We were talking about Jorp, who Satine and Jamison are fans of, earlier. He recently cancelled _himself_ (quitting Twitter entirely of his own volition) because he made a take so bad, his own followers were like "What the heck dude?!" (he suggested an er, moderately full-figured woman was ugly and her being on a magazine cover was the end of society, not apparently realizing/considering that the vast majority of his fans have SOs who are more in the full-figured range than the "athletic" range, and that it also doesn't mesh well with his general "reject modernity, embrace tradition" vibe).

As I've said, this behaviour has already become less fashionable on the internet (in part because people have realized that the internet is no longer Something Awful writ large, and horrible opinions expressed without circumspection might not get the laughs they once did). But various talking heads on TV are apparently only becoming more popular, as are opinion channels in general, and opinion columnists, in the US at least.

And on-topic, how would you describe what is happening to Satine/Jamison? According to TV opinion types, they're definitely getting "cancelled", aren't they? Victims of "cancel culture" for sure, because, 30 years ago, no-one would ever have heard about this. Maybe a specialist magazine would have published an article critical of them, and a few hundred people would have read it. Is that a bad thing? It seems like it's maybe not a bad thing that they're getting "cancelled" to me. And don't give me some double-standards - you can't only call it cancellation when it's "not justified".


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 17, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> As I've said, this behaviour has already become less fashionable on the internet.



Given the topic of this thread and particularly the spectacle of this live-stream, it seems to have some legs.

Other than that, I have no comment on your "Whatabout _their _whataboutism?" bit.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 17, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> Given the topic of this thread and particularly the spectacle of this live-stream, it seems to have some legs.
> 
> Other than that, I have no comment on your "Whatabout _their _whataboutism?" bit.



So let's be really clear on this, you're saying that's happening to Satine/Jamison is bad and unfair "cancel culture"?

Not that it's the consequences of their own actions naturally coming back to bite them?

This is another point I just made, but after you started responding, I think - either it's "cancel culture" when you like and when you don't like it, and you need to accept "cancel culture" isn't a dirty word, or there's no such thing as "cancel culture" and that "consequences culture" is a valid term, or I guess the third alternative is, you think people should escape the consequences for their actions (this isn't an unheard-of view - several celebs complaining about being "cancelled" have expressed the idea that it's deeply unfair that the bad behaviour they engaged in should say, impact their book sales). As I said, thirty years ago, people behaving like Satine/Jamison would have faced no consequences beyond maybe an oblique and mildly critical article in a specialist publication. They might slowly and eventually have acquired a "bad rep" with freelancers and the like, but would have taken a very long time and never exploded.

Do you think that they'd have gotten away with it is a good thing? You seem to be suggesting that.

EDIT - Just to expand on the "no-one should face any consequences for non-criminal behaviour, no matter how bad" point, we're now starting to get politicians and their surrogates suggesting that politicians who do bad but not technically criminal things shouldn't be penalized by the public for those things. I.e. politician is a bully, unpleasant to people, runs business that could be regarded as scams, is incompetent, is a known repeated liar in their personal and business life, should not suffer consequences for that. And that people who don't vote for them, or campaign against them on those grounds are being "unfair".

I'd say that is pretty novel.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Jun 17, 2022)

As an aside, I absolutely love How to Drink! I've made a bunch of the drinks he's created.



Michael Linke said:


> My good friend Greg, from How to Drink, was on the official podcast a while back (possibly years back now, as the whole COVID era has shattered my ability to understand time).  I don't think there's anything contraversial about people who promote responsible alcohol consumption also being tapped to promote D&D.
> 
> The problem with Satine isn't that she's a porn star, it's that she's a toxic and abusive human being.




Definitely. It's probably that celebrity acts as an exponential modifier, especially when people don't have the skills, training, or disposition for management. Managing people well is a skill. I did not have it when I was in that position, not at all. 

As you said, it's also important to be able to listen to people, to be able to recognize when they're telling you that you're in the wrong.



MNblockhead said:


> This makes me think it is not just about celebrity.  A certain attitude can creep in when you are in certain positions, such as certain management positions where your compensation is partially based on your (and therefore your team's) performance, and especially if you are a business owner (perhaps even more so in small business). The stress of responsibility, the stress of your success depending on other peoples performance, and the feeling that you are having to work harder than everyone else can taint how you see and interact with people who report to you. If you are lucky enough to also achieve some success and recognition for competence, it can be more difficult to avoid a certain dictatorial attitude. Add a dash of celebrity to this and it can lead to some very unhealthy views of other people who report to you--especially vendors and contractors.
> 
> I've been in this situation, minus celebrity, and I've learned how important it is to have competent people who are assertive enough to early on call you out when you when you are making poor decisions or are not treating people right.  I remember one instance where I was working with a team on a project where we had to clean up some bad data we received and I made some assumptions based on similar issues I've experienced in the past. The team started complaining about the amount of manual effort required and I snapped, saying something along the lines of yeah, it sucks, but you just have to do it. And I'm sure my tone was exasperated and probably came off as a dismissive. There was an older lady on my team with a strong personality that didn't let me get away with that, and was very clear about why the process was wasting everyone's time and that there must be a better way. It caused me to step back and say I would try to think of a better solution. That evening I spent some time on it and was able to script something that fixed the issues and saved the team--and my company--a great deal of time on low value work that was making everyone unhappy.
> 
> ...




I caught a bit of Satine Phoenix's livestream. She seemed to feel real regret and pain, but like I said before, whether this is accompanied by action will be the telling factor. Or whether it ends up just being blamed on Jamison Stone. 

However, yeesh, the comments were pretty ugly. I don't get behaving that way online, and for that I suppose I should be thankful.



doctorbadwolf said:


> Yeah someone close to her with her best interest at heart really should have advised her to at least turn comments off, or record and then post, or something.
> 
> A lot of folks love these moments. Here’s a target they can harass and then get mad if anyone calls them on it because she’s “the bad guy”, not them!
> 
> Give some folks an excuse, and the distance of online communication, and they let the absolute worst within themselves run free.


----------



## darjr (Jun 17, 2022)

I feel really terrible for her and also realizing she might not have realized what she was doing without a moment like this. I just wish it wasn’t so terrible. I also don’t think she fully understands what she’s done, her confusion seemed real. This sucks all the way around.

Also I think it’s important that their behavior isn’t tolerated.

Edit to add: also if current bad actors see this and change their ways then good.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 17, 2022)

darjr said:


> I feel really terrible for her and also realizing she might not have realized what she was doing without a moment like this. I just wish it wasn’t so terrible. I also don’t think she fully understands what she’s done, her confusion seemed real. This sucks all the way around.
> 
> Also I think it’s important that their behavior isn’t tolerated.



I think ironically going by whether people's apologies "seem genuine" or not is kind of worse than just going by their actual actions.

If we look at justice systems which actually attempt to be fair (rather than the court of public opinion, which Jack Sparrow recently showed is much easier to manipulate than, say, a judge actually following the law), genuine remorse can be a mitigating factor in sentencing, but it doesn't mean you didn't do it.


----------



## darjr (Jun 17, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> I think ironically going by whether people's apologies "seem genuine" or not is kind of worse than just going by their actual actions.
> 
> If we look at justice systems which actually attempt to be fair (rather than the court of public opinion, which Jack Sparrow recently showed is much easier to manipulate than, say, a judge actually following the law), genuine remorse can be a mitigating factor in sentencing, but it doesn't mean you didn't do it.



Yes. I dint let her off the hook. But yea that needs saying.


----------



## mythago (Jun 17, 2022)

Gradine said:


> This is demonstrably, laughably false, and speaks from a perspective that had never been made to feel unwelcome in ttrpgs for 40 years and never once considered the perspectives of different people who had been excluded for decades from many, many, spaces. I can't see how this is a vaguely justifiable take outside politically motivated schadenfreude.




Let's just be blunt: it's the perspective of someone who either used to be a gatekeeper, or was oblivious to all of the gatekeeping that was actively being done to people who didn't look or present like him.


----------



## mythago (Jun 17, 2022)

darjr said:


> I feel really terrible for her and also realizing she might not have realized what she was doing without a moment like this. I just wish it wasn’t so terrible. I also don’t think she fully understands what she’s done, her confusion seemed real. This sucks all the way around.




I'm going to gently suggest here that this "sucks" much worse for the people Satine and Jamison and their enablers stepped on, and your maybe-she-didn't-know-any-better, everything-is-terrible casting is misplaced?



Ruin Explorer said:


> I think ironically going by whether people's apologies "seem genuine" or not is kind of worse than just going by their actual actions.




What you're missing is that your focus here is on bad actors and the consequences for their bad action. For others, the focus is on "ostracism is bad" and "but what if someone comes after _me _for something crummy _I've _done?" (which been explicitly bandied about in this very thread). People who focus on the subject differently are inevitably going to talk past one another.


----------



## darjr (Jun 17, 2022)

mythago said:


> I'm going to gently suggest here that this "sucks" much worse for the people Satine and Jamison and their enablers stepped on, and your maybe-she-didn't-know-any-better, everything-is-terrible casting is misplaced?



Yea. What she did absolutely sucks.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 17, 2022)

mythago said:


> What you're missing is that your focus here is on bad actors and the consequences for their bad action. For others, the focus is on "ostracism is bad" and "but what if someone comes after _me _for something crummy _I've _done?" (which been explicitly bandied about in this very thread). People who focus on the subject differently are inevitably going to talk past one another.



I'm not "missing" that, I just don't think it's a really valid consideration, because like, if you've done bad things, either get cracking on cleaning them off the internet, or get ahead of the problem and talk about them on your terms. Ideally both. Now. Before they catch up with you. People have done that, and it's worked for them, because when someone was suddenly "OMG THIS PERSON SAID A BAD THING IN 2003!", loads of people were like "Yeah, we know...".


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 17, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> So let's be really clear on this, you're saying that's happening to Satine/Jamison is bad and unfair "cancel culture"?



I don't know her or a single one of the people she allegedly abused/mistreated/disrespected/was mean to. I'll repeat what I said from the jump: I don't really understand why anyone ever put her in a position to be a "diva" in the first place, but if I'm honest, I care even less.

I think the whole spectacle of aggrieved randos who _also _don't know her or any of the people she allegedly abused/mistreated/disrespected/was mean to chasing that dopamine hit of "likes" on social media by publicly dogpiling her is "bad." I don't like it and think randos ought not to do it -- "bad" like that.


----------



## Bolares (Jun 17, 2022)

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> So every ex-con will always be a bad person and can never reform or do good and gain back any respect?



I don’t like this comparison. It’s equating having space in a hobbie where youa ctivelly done damage (and in the message didn’t repair fully) to the troubles ex-cons have reintegrating to society. I think ot’s disengenuous and makes light of the troubles people trying to reintegrate suffer.
Nobody is asking the abuser to be excluded from society as a whole, but to face the consequences and make ammends to the people they hurt. Also, if you want to maie comparisons to criminal activity, I’d say it’s fair to stop someone that used their job to commit a crime from ever coming back to that preffession again.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 17, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> I don't know her or a single one of the people she allegedly abused/mistreated/disrespected/was mean to. I'll repeat what I said from the jump: I don't really understand why anyone ever put her in a position to be a "diva" in the first place, but if I'm honest, I care even less.
> 
> I think the whole spectacle of aggrieved randos who _also _don't know her or any of the people she allegedly abused/mistreated/disrespected/was mean to chasing that dopamine hit of "likes" on social media by publicly dogpiling her is "bad." I don't like it and think randos ought not to do it -- "bad" like that.



So you don't understand that being verbally abusive to a contractor, and then not paying said contractor is bad?

And that you think it's wrong for other people to agree that it was bad?

Like, if you employed a guy to paint your house, talked him down and insulted and demeaned him the whole time, then either didn't pay him, or didn't pay him the whole amount, all the time continuing to abuse him, you would be unable to see how that was "bad"?

And if you neighbours discussed how awful you were for this behaviour when the painter told them, when he was painting their house, they would be the bad people, not you?

That's pretty wild.

EDIT - Also this constant use of "randos" just indicates some incredibly funny inability/unwillingness to understand others. No-one is a "rando" in their own mind. Something I'd expect a messageboard user, of all people, to understand.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 17, 2022)

mythago said:


> I'm going to gently suggest here that this "sucks" much worse for the people Satine and Jamison and their enablers stepped on, and your maybe-she-didn't-know-any-better, everything-is-terrible casting is misplaced?



Look, facing the consequences for your actions is way worse then having your livelihood and self-worth trashed by someone who doesn't expect to face the consequences of their actions. They might be scared right out of abusing people further, and is that really a world we want to live in where people think twice before doing awful things?

It's the modern internet prosperity doctrine: We don't want famous and powerful people to face consequences because we have the dream of being in their place and also never facing consequences.


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 17, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> So you don't understand that being verbally abusive to a contractor, and then not paying said contractor is bad?



No, what I said is, I don't know her or a single one of the people who claim those things. Don't know 'em, never heard of 'em, and certainly never witnessed any of the alleged verbal abuse or contractual malfeasance. None of which is to say they didn't happen -- just that _I_ am not in a position to publicly dogpile her for it, and the vast majority of the hundreds (thousands?) of randos who have been doing it aren't either. And when randos who aren't involved dogpile anyway because they love those "likes," I think that's bad. That's what I said.


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Jun 17, 2022)

Umbran said:


> I think you're pretty wrong there.  It isn't the worst they can think of.  It is the one and only punishment that they actually can _implement_.
> 
> The world at large cannot take your money, or send you to prison - those are for the courts.  And making you suffer physically would in most forms be highly illegal.  The world at large has been handed one tool to work with, so that's what they work with.



Can't it be both?  With so much of people's lives now lived online and so much of a person's personal stance, and stake, and livelihood, and self-worth is about their place online... shaming someone or trying to kick someone off is a person's way of having and using their personal power and raise their own standing.  Because as we both agree... none of this stuff is illegal, so there's no recourse in that regard to put someone in their place that they feel has done something wrong.  Cancelling them is the only _and_ best way to punish them.  And is in fact the most punishing punishment from a lot of people's perspectives, because their online presence and standing-- with all the Likes and Upvotes and Followers and Friends that come with it-- is what is most important.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 17, 2022)

Ralif Redhammer said:


> As an aside, I absolutely love How to Drink! I've made a bunch of the drinks he's created.



His D&D-themed Tavern Punch is delicious! However, don’t try to barrel age it Iike he suggests. It contains fruit juice and will absolutely ruin your barrel. Learned this the hard way.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 17, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> No, what I said is, I don't know her or a single one of the people who claim those things. Don't know 'em, never heard of 'em, and certainly never witnessed any of the alleged verbal abuse or contractual malfeasance. None of which is to say they didn't happen -- just that _I_ am not in a position to publicly dogpile her for it, and the vast majority of the hundreds (thousands?) of randos who have been doing it aren't either. And when randos who aren't involved dogpile anyway because they love those "likes," I think that's bad. That's what I said.



What do you even think "dogpiling" is?

Is it an expressing an opinion? Because it really looks like you're saying people shouldn't be allowed to

A) Express opinions that are "too similar" to the opinions of others.

And/or

B) that people shouldn't be allowed to express opinions about people they don't _personally_ know.

So by your "aren't involved" logic, if say, a politician bullies and abuses a bunch of her subordinates (who aren't politicians, but civil servants), abuses her position, nearly commits treason, and so on, but doesn't actually break the law, and I'm not _directly_ impacted by any of those things, I shouldn't be allowed to say "This politician really absolutely sucks and no-one should vote for her or buy anything that gives her money!" (this is a non-theoretical example btw and _not_ a US politician).

Because that according to you, I'm "not involved" and therefore should not be allowed to express my opinion, and if I do express it, I'm being a bad person by "dogpiling" (at least if anyone agrees with me). I'm not in her constituency. I'm not in her party. Her role in politics means her actions don't directly impact me much if at all, and she failed her attempt at quasi-treason, and we don't give Nobel prizes for attempted chemistry.

I don't think you have any kind of coherent or reasonable definition of "dogpiling", and I don't think you have any coherent or reasonable ideas on what's okay/not okay here. Everything you've said seems to break down the moment it's exposed to real-world scenarios, or stuff you might care about but not be directly impacted by.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 17, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> Can't it be both?  With so much of people's lives now lived online and so much of a person's personal stance, and stake, and livelihood, and self-worth is about their place online... shaming someone or trying to kick someone off is a person's way of having and using their personal power and raise their own standing.  Because as we both agree... none of this stuff is illegal, so there's no recourse in that regard to put someone in their place that they feel has done something wrong.  Cancelling them is the only _and_ best way to punish them.  And is in fact the most punishing punishment from a lot of people's perspectives, because their online presence and standing-- with all the Likes and Upvotes and Followers and Friends that come with it-- is what is most important.



I mean it's not actually a punishment in anything but their minds because rarely are canceled people deplatformed and rarely are people universally deplatformed. That's why we get to still hear them screaming after they apparently lost all their ability to reach people.

Basically, our best punishment is sending a kid to their room where all their toys are.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 17, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> No, what I said is, I don't know her or a single one of the people who claim those things. Don't know 'em, never heard of 'em, and certainly never witnessed any of the alleged verbal abuse or contractual malfeasance. None of which is to say they didn't happen -- just that _I_ am not in a position to publicly dogpile her for it, and the vast majority of the hundreds (thousands?) of randos who have been doing it aren't either. And when randos who aren't involved dogpile anyway because they love those "likes," I think that's bad. That's what I said.







Social consequences are nothing without social pressure, and behavior doesn't change without consequences.


----------



## mythago (Jun 17, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> I'm not "missing" that, I just don't think it's a really valid consideration, because like, if you've done bad things, either get cracking on cleaning them off the internet, or get ahead of the problem and talk about them on your terms. Ideally both. Now. Before they catch up with you. People have done that, and it's worked for them, because when someone was suddenly "OMG THIS PERSON SAID A BAD THING IN 2003!", loads of people were like "Yeah, we know...".




Sure. I'm just observing some of the back and forth and it's one of those things where there isn't going to be a consensus, because Geek Social Fallacy #1.


----------



## JDragon (Jun 17, 2022)

So out of curiosity, did either of them have any kind of a home game that they ran or regularly participated in?

I'm aware that she has been involved in a number of streamed / YT games, just have never seen any mention of a home game.


----------



## mythago (Jun 17, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> No, what I said is, I don't know her or a single one of the people who claim those things. Don't know 'em, never heard of 'em, and certainly never witnessed any of the alleged verbal abuse or contractual malfeasance. None of which is to say they didn't happen -- just that _I_ am not in a position to publicly dogpile her for it, and the vast majority of the hundreds (thousands?) of randos who have been doing it aren't either. And when randos who aren't involved dogpile anyway because they love those "likes," I think that's bad. That's what I said.




Live by the sword, etc.

Though it's a bit concerning that your criteria for dogpiling = bad is that you, personally, don't know these people and never saw 'em do a bad. If everyone posting mean tweets about S&J had personally witnessed their bad behavior, would it no longer be "dogpiling"?


----------



## CleverNickName (Jun 17, 2022)

Satine's video was incredibly painful to watch.  I don't know her well enough to question her sincerity or motives, and all I can truthfully say is that I would never, ever, in a million years, open myself up to that kind of treatment by the public.

As others have said, her actions over the next few months will be the true test of sincerity.  I'm not close enough to the topic to know what needs to be done, or what needs to be done first, but she'll have to figure all that out. 

I expect she will spend the next few weeks doing damage control: hire a PR manager, make phone calls, write letters (and paychecks), go back through that video feed and block/report the people who threatened her and her husband with bodily harm, that sort of thing.  Then she will probably go into reconstruction mode for a year or two: drop out of the public eye, meet with other people in the industry, repair some relationships and end some others, attend a few business workshops, focus on self-care, all while working behind the cameras and using a pen name to grow her resume.  I don't know if she will ever be able to return to her original celebrity status...or if she even wants to.

Again, I'm not close enough to this person, her business, or the wronged parties to know any of this for sure.  This is all just conjecture.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 17, 2022)

Vaalingrade said:


> I mean it's not actually a punishment in anything but their minds because rarely are canceled people deplatformed and rarely are people universally deplatformed. That's why we get to still hear them screaming after they apparently lost all their ability to reach people.
> 
> Basically, our best punishment is sending a kid to their room where all their toys are.



Perfectly put.

The only people who get universally deplatformed are those whose actions have been so egregious that they've pissed off everyone, on all parts of the political spectrum. And even they usually eventually come limping back into the public sphere. Jorp realized he'd basically done this so pre-emptively cancelled himself before anyone could do it for him, thus shortening the time he has to spend in his room (and he can spend that time writing books for when he comes out of said room).

Oh I guess there's also people who cannot stop breaking the rules of platforms and making threats or committing libel (a writer who supports JK Rowling eventually managed to make so many "actionable threats" which he thought were just "funny" that he basically got perma-banned everywhere - maybe don't make "actionable threats")?

The people who really get "cancelled" are those just no-one cares about anymore. This is part of why a lot of opinion-mongers get more and more extreme. They know that the moment no-one cares is when they truly lose their power.


mythago said:


> Sure. I'm just observing some of the back and forth and it's one of those things where there isn't going to be a consensus, because Geek Social Fallacy #1.



Does anyone still believe that?

I hear a lot of silly arguments defending people who (largely falsely) claim to have been "cancelled", but it's been... more than a decade since I heard that one. That was the one used to defend Cat-pee Man and other classic figures of the early internet. "Noooo you can't not invite that guy because he stinks and refuses to do anything about it!" but then extending to "Noooooo you can't not invite that guy just because he makes women extremely uncomfortable with his behaviour and is probably a danger to them! That's uncool!". I'd literally forgotten it even existed. It's really not very different from typical Frat Boy stuff honestly.

The "Something Awful generation", which I guess technically I am one of, definitely _used to_ believe a lot of that. Blizzard's "Old Guard" of high-level management and lead devs all believed most of that, but they're gone now, in large part because those beliefs lead directly to them enabling actual rapists and serial sex abusers and harassers and so on.

There's always the spectacular idiocy of Blizzard's original Real ID design to show how they believed all this, particularly GSF4 and GSF5.


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 17, 2022)

Gradine said:


> Social consequences are nothing without social pressure, and behavior doesn't change without consequences.



I agree with this. If someone abuses you, or mistreats you, or doesn't pay you for contracted work, you should speak up. If you witness someone else being abused, you should speak up. If you speak up, maybe others who have been wronged will find the courage to speak up as well. That's social pressure and it's good and important.

If you were _not_ wronged, if you are an anonymous person on the internet who does _not _know the accused or the accuser and has no knowledge whatsoever about any of it, _you do not have to insert yourself _into this good and important process. If you do feel the need to insert yourself, a kind word of support for the accuser might be welcome and appreciated and provide social support for their speaking up.

Now go read those Twitter threads and live-stream comments. You'll find some of those kind words there. You'll also find a _lot _of people who literally have no actual knowledge about any of it jumping on the pile and ripping to shreds, usually anonymously, a person who they do not even know.

And I think that's bad.


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 17, 2022)

mythago said:


> If everyone posting mean tweets about S&J had personally witnessed their bad behavior, would it no longer be "dogpiling"?



Correct.

ETA: Even better to speak up at the time when you see someone being mistreated, and not just later when they make a Twitter thread about it, even if there's no one around to see you speak up.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 17, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> Now go read those Twitter threads and live-stream comments. You'll find some of those kind words there. You'll also find a _lot _of people who literally have no actual knowledge about any of it jumping on the pile and ripping to shreds, usually anonymously, a person who they do not even know.



That you can't see the miles-deep irony/hypocrisy here is pretty funny.

You're taking a huge dump on literally every single person who has ever expressed an opinion about something that doesn't directly impact them, and to you, that's fine, but if they say something you don't like, that's not okay.

Are you going to answer about my example with the politician? Because by your logic in your earlier post AND in this post, I am not allowed to criticise the politician and/or a bad person for criticising the politician.

I think a society where we're not allowed to criticise politicians for bad actions unless we were directly impacted by them is a society that is not going to run well. And how do you even define "witnessed"? Like, does it have to be first-hand as in we were literally present? Or does a screenshot or video count? By your logic, it seems like if I saw a politician hitting their kids on a TV news station's reporting, I would not have "witnessed" it sufficiently. But if I was in the park where they were doing it, and saw them, I would have? This is pretty incoherent stuff dude.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 17, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> And this is exactly why I personally think making "public apologies" to the general populace on stuff like this is more or less a waste of time.  You are apologizing to a lot of people who have nothing to do with the actual situation and who are just looking to get a self-congratulatory pat on the back after acting the jerk to the person by demanding restitution for something they had nothing to do with.
> 
> Apologize to the actual people who your hurt?  Absolutely.  Apologize to the mass of humanity out in social media-land who are demanding a pound of flesh because they need their public-facing online presence to seem holier-than-thou?  No thanks.



Public figure, public apology. 


DEFCON 1 said:


> The thing I just shrug about "cancel culture" is that it really seems to me to highlight the difference between those of us who didn't grow up with social media, and the ones that do.  Because when you think about it... what is "cancelling"?  It is people telling someone "We aren't going to let you be famous anymore."



 Well, no. Cancelling is a warning to other people in a community. Deplatforming is a bonus, when it can be accomplished. 


Umbran said:


> I think you're pretty wrong there.  It isn't the worst they can think of.  It is the one and only punishment that they actually can _implement_.
> 
> The world at large cannot take your money, or send you to prison - those are for the courts.  And making you suffer physically would in most forms be highly illegal.  The world at large has been handed one tool to work with, so that's what they work with.



And it’s not so ephemeral as they suggest, anyway. Social reputation death is literally painful for most people. That’s why it’s been an effective “punishment” (insofar as punishment is even the point) for thousands of years. 


Chromie said:


> You're clearly being sensationalist, don't try to put words in my mouth. I don't know what's going on in your day but don't jump down my throat.



It’s not sensationalist, it’s a valid point. 


Vaalingrade said:


> I mean it's not actually a punishment in anything but their minds because rarely are canceled people deplatformed and rarely are people universally deplatformed. That's why we get to still hear them screaming after they apparently lost all their ability to reach people.
> 
> Basically, our best punishment is sending a kid to their room where all their toys are.



Hardly. Joss Whedon had several projects cancelled and is barely working now, Satine and Jamison had basically their whole current careers pulled out from under them, and you seem to be ignoring the fact that it is extremely painful for the vast majority of people to have the people around them turn against them. 

Besides which, so what? What’s your point?


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 17, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> If you were _not_ wronged, if you are an anonymous person on the internet who does _not _know the accused or the accuser and has no knowledge whatsoever about any of it, _you do not have to insert yourself _into this good and important process. If you do feel the need to insert yourself, a kind word of support for the accuser might be welcome and appreciated and provide social support for their speaking up.



How are us sad nobodies, who are essentially the plankton of all industries (basically the food from which everything grows off, but never respected or cared about) supposed to actually stand up to the abusers without others having our backs?

If everyone just minded their business, the abusers just plain win and get to keep doing what they're doing.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 17, 2022)

Vaalingrade said:


> If everyone just minded their business, the abusers just plain win and get to keep doing what they're doing.



And if Greg or anyone doubts this, just look at history. Especially as regards racism, homophobia and sexism, but also stuff like being paid fairly for your work.


----------



## Greg Benage (Jun 17, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> That you can't see the miles-deep irony/hypocrisy here is pretty funny.



Honestly, while I'm not going to block you or anything like that, I'm not going to engage with you any further, either. Judging by several of these little comments in multiple posts, now, you seem to find in me a considerable deficit of either intellectual capacity or intellectual honesty. I feel I've made my position very clear, so I'll no longer trouble you with it.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 17, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> and you seem to be ignoring the fact that it is extremely painful for the vast majority of people to have the people around them turn against them.



What exactly do you expect when someone shows the people around them what they are in the dark and it's terrible?

No, they f'd around and found out. Now they have a crossroads where they can choose to stop f'ing around or get an education.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 17, 2022)

Vaalingrade said:


> What exactly do you expect when someone shows the people around them what they are in the dark and it's terrible?
> 
> No, they f'd around and found out. Now they have a crossroads where they can choose to stop f'ing around or get an education.



What in the unholy hell are you even talking about? Did you skim the discussion and hit reply without reading what you replied to?


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 17, 2022)

Greg Benage said:


> Honestly, while I'm not going to block you or anything like that, I'm not going to engage with you any further, either. Judging by several of these little comments in multiple posts, now, you seem to find in me a considerable deficit of either intellectual capacity or intellectual honesty. I feel I've made my position very clear, so I'll no longer trouble you with it.



No, I've been very clear about my concern:

Your _argument_ is incoherent.

You don't have to be stupid or intentionally dishonest to have an incoherent argument. You just need _ill-considered opinions_. The internet adequately demonstrates that, no matter how smart you are, you probably have a whole bunch of ill-considered, incoherent opinions. You be a tenured professor of philosophy and have bunch of them! The Jorp incident I've referenced a couple of times was exactly an example of that, and the dude realized it, but only after he'd broadcast it to millions of people.

I know I've had incoherent opinions which people have taken apart before. I actually kind of value that, as annoying as it might be at the time. I've changed my thinking before because people have shown me my opinions are incoherent. Incoherent is different from inconsistent, of course. Inconsistent can usually be explained, and there can be reasons for it. Incoherent just means they don't actually make sense/hold together.

You don't have to engage with me, that's fine, and I appreciate you telling me (and not "cancelling" me lol) but I am also going to be honest and point that I'm not going to stop noting where opinions/arguments are incoherent, where appropriate.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 17, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> What in the unholy hell are you even talking about? Did you skim the discussion and hit reply without reading what you replied to?



I read exactly what you wrote.

Just because I don't agree to feel bad for people who got a slap on the wrist from the internet doesn't mean I didn't read it.


----------



## Maxperson (Jun 17, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> It was super over-diagnosed in kids and medication for it was over-prescribed in the 80s and 90s, but it is very much a real thing, which can be very debilitating for some people.



I have A.D.H.D. as well.  I have therapists and psychologists in the family(makes family functions interesting) and more than one diagnosed me as an adult, but oddly none actually recommended I get any kind of medication.  As a kid my energy levels were through the roof.  As I have gotten older(52 now) the H.D. has gone almost completely away, only popping out as pacing while I'm thinking about things or the twitching of my foot as I sit.  The A.D. is the harder part for me.  I can't focus for long periods of time. At work if I have to focus for an hour or two, I have to then "go to the bathroom" for a while to decompress and just not think about things for a bit.

My son is a mini-me, so we got him diagnosed early.  He's on Adderall and we watched him closely to make sure it wasn't changing who he was.  It doesn't and it helps, so he's still on it, though we are giving him a break during the summer.  After watching it help him, I went to a psychiatrist and we are currently experimenting with dosages and types(slow release or not) of Adderall to try and get it right.

Edit: Sorry @Umbran.  I just saw your post and won't comment further.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 17, 2022)

Vaalingrade said:


> I read exactly what you wrote.
> 
> Just because I don't agree to feel bad for people who got a slap on the wrist from the internet doesn't mean I didn't read it.



The fact you think that I am saying that anyone needs to feel bad for anyone in the post you quoted proves unequivocally that you _didn’t _read the post.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Jun 17, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> The fact you think that I am saying that anyone needs to feel bad for anyone in the post you quoted proves unequivocally that you _didn’t _read the post.



Is there a point to this?

Regardless of if I got your intended message, I pretty clearly read the post. Either clarify or let it go. Stop alleging I didn't read the thing I obviously read.


----------



## Ghal Maraz (Jun 17, 2022)

I'm probably going to be at the upper limit of me-as-mean, but, while I completely distance myself from those comments on the livestream and I do think that threats should be persecuted, I also do think that this kind of overreaction had to be expected: she went down the same rabbit hole she's been digging all these years.

Moreover, I see that she also acted as expected: blaming Jamison, ignoring her own personal accusations, victim-blaming and victim-calling, excusing herself by saying that people should have told her how much mean she was while one of the main accusations against the 'royal couple' is that they actively threatened to destroy other people's careers.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

darjr said:


> I feel really terrible for her and also realizing she might not have realized what she was doing without a moment like this. I just wish it wasn’t so terrible. I also don’t think she fully understands what she’s done, her confusion seemed real. This sucks all the way around.
> 
> Also I think it’s important that their behavior isn’t tolerated.
> 
> Edit to add: also if current bad actors see this and change their ways then good.



I really hope she does seek help, because she is stuck in some vicious cycles here. Trading her celebrity for  path towards some personal healing would be the best case scenario, I think.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

Ruin Explorer said:


> I think ironically going by whether people's apologies "seem genuine" or not is kind of worse than just going by their actual actions.
> 
> If we look at justice systems which actually attempt to be fair (rather than the court of public opinion, which Jack Sparrow recently showed is much easier to manipulate than, say, a judge actually following the law), genuine remorse can be a mitigating factor in sentencing, but it doesn't mean you didn't do it.



Genuine remorse shouldn't take any from the consequences of her actions, but might offer hope for her as a person.


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Jun 17, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Public figure, public apology.



Yeah, but you don't _have_ to apologize to the unaggrieved.  People oftentimes do if getting back into the public's good graces is important... but quite often the public (or at least the portions of the public who are demanding an apology) aren't anyone you really care to placate anyway.  In other words... unless someone _needs_ to be famous and well-liked again... they can just make amends privately with those they hurt and essentially give a middle finger to the general public demanding their head.  I know I certainly wouldn't want to give a lot of those people much satisfaction.



doctorbadwolf said:


> Well, no. Cancelling is a warning to other people in a community. Deplatforming is a bonus, when it can be accomplished.



That seems rather stupidly harsh then.  Having everybody kick the crap out of someone not to punish them, but to _warn others_ "Don't be like this person!"?  What a lovely way to keep yourself guilt-free.  You never have to feel bad about anything to do to this person you're repeatedly crapping on and kicking while they're down, because it isn't about _them_... it's about _everyone else_ you're just sending warnings to.

If that's really the whole point, then my god all these people are truly a-holes as well.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

Bolares said:


> I don’t like this comparison. It’s equating having space in a hobbie where youa ctivelly done damage (and in the message didn’t repair fully) to the troubles ex-cons have reintegrating to society. I think ot’s disengenuous and makes light of the troubles people trying to reintegrate suffer.
> Nobody is asking the abuser to be excluded from society as a whole, but to face the consequences and make ammends to the people they hurt. Also, if you want to maie comparisons to criminal activity, I’d say it’s fair to stop someone that used their job to commit a crime from ever coming back to that preffession again.



Yeah,I totally think convicts should be reintegration better, but I wouldn't hire a guy who went to prison for embezzlement to be my personal financial advisor.


----------



## Jer (Jun 17, 2022)

Ghal Maraz said:


> I'm probably going to be at the upper limit of me-as-mean, but, while I completely distance myself from those comments on the livestream and I do think that threats should be persecuted, I also do think that this kind of overreaction had to be expected: she went down the same rabbit hole she's been digging all these years.



The thing is that there is absolutely no way that any kind of public apology was going to go any other way even if she gave the gold standard  apology of clearly admitting fault, demonstrating that she was going to make the folks she harmed monetarily whole, and giving some kind of indication of how she planned to change going forward.  That's not how this kind of celebrity narrative works - we seem to love our celebrities on the way up, put them on a pedestal, and then savage them mercilessly once their flaws are discovered.  As long as there have been celebrities it seems like once you screw up you're going to fall into that narrative arc unless you just leave the public eye and wait for people to forget about you for a while.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 17, 2022)

Okay, here's a recap of the specific discussion in question.


DEFCON 1 said:


> And I think that says a lot that that's the worst punishment our younger generations can think of to dish out to someone-- wish them to be anonymous. It makes me think that people like JK Rowling and Louie CK are just crying all the way to the bank.



This began the exchange.


Vaalingrade said:


> I mean it's not actually a punishment in anything but their minds because rarely are canceled people deplatformed and rarely are people universally deplatformed. That's why we get to still hear them screaming after they apparently lost all their ability to reach people.
> 
> Basically, our best punishment is sending a kid to their room where all their toys are.



This was your response to the exchange, a couple replies in.  


doctorbadwolf said:


> Hardly. Joss Whedon had several projects cancelled and is barely working now, Satine and Jamison had basically their whole current careers pulled out from under them, and you seem to be ignoring the fact that it is extremely painful for the vast majority of people to have the people around them turn against them.
> 
> Besides which, so what? What’s your point?



I replied pointing out that there are actual tangible consequences quite often, and that the intangible consequences you're being so dismissive of as to act like they aren't really consequences are in fact significant. Literally not a single word eliciting any sympathy for anyone, in the whole post. Just pointing out that people lose work, and that social/reputational consequences _are_ real consequences.

And you never answered my question. What on earth even is your point?


Vaalingrade said:


> Is there a point to this?
> 
> Regardless of if I got your intended message, I pretty clearly read the post. Either clarify or let it go. Stop alleging I didn't read the thing I obviously read.



So, having summed up the exchange that you replied to my post in, do you get it? 

If not, feel free to just drop it, because I'm not going to try to spell it out any more than this.


----------



## CleverNickName (Jun 17, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> Yeah,I totally think convicts should be reintegration better, but I wouldn't hire a guy who went to prison for embezzlement to be my personal financial advisor.



I probably would, actually.  Such a person would know the job inside and out, and would be intimately familiar with the laws and regulatory requirements.  And they would also know that they are being watched, like a hawk, by nearly everyone.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 17, 2022)

Jer said:


> The thing is that there is absolutely no way that any kind of public apology was going to go any other way even if she gave the gold standard  apology of clearly admitting fault, demonstrating that she was going to make the folks she harmed monetarily whole, and giving some kind of indication of how she planned to change going forward.  That's not how this kind of celebrity narrative works - we seem to love our celebrities on the way up, put them on a pedestal, and then savage them mercilessly once their flaws are discovered.  As long as there have been celebrities it seems like once you screw up you're going to fall into that narrative arc unless you just leave the public eye and wait for people to forget about you for a while.



This is true, though I'd point out that she has at least enumerated a plan for how she is going to change her behaviors going forward. if she follows up, great. If not, it won't mean anything and she'll just prove herself a liar. 

Either way, IMO the only things wrong with her apology is that the stream was very ill-considered, this was not the time to get nitpicky about details or be defensive, and it's overly long-winded and meandering, rather than getting straight to the point.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

CleverNickName said:


> I probably would, actually.  Such a person would know the job inside and out, and would be intimately familiar with the laws and regulatory requirements.  And they would also know that they are being watched like a hawk.



Well, maybe as an individual taking that risk, but a corporate hire is probably right out.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 17, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> That seems rather stupidly harsh then. Having everybody kick the crap out of someone not to punish them, but to _warn others_ "Don't be like this person!"?



That is pretty plainly not what I said, nor is cancelling someone analogous to "kicking the crap out of someone".


DEFCON 1 said:


> What a lovely way to keep yourself guilt-free. You never have to feel bad about anything to do to this person you're repeatedly crapping on and kicking while they're down, because it isn't about _them_... it's about _everyone else_ you're just sending warnings to.
> 
> If that's really the whole point, then my god all these people are truly a-holes as well.



You seem to be avidly determined to mischaracterize cancellation as a social practice in order to demonize those who engage in it. 

Please don't reply to me any further in this thread.


----------



## Dausuul (Jun 17, 2022)

CleverNickName said:


> I probably would, actually.  Such a person would know the job inside and out, and would be intimately familiar with the laws and regulatory requirements.  And they would also know that they are being watched, like a hawk, by nearly everyone.



If they had that kind of intimate familiarity with the law and awareness of scrutiny, how'd they get caught in the first place? More likely they were sloppy and greedy and shortsighted. They found themselves in a position where they had access to money, and grabbed it after a) convincing themselves it was legal, b) convincing themselves they'd never be caught, or c) not thinking about it at all. Then it turned out it wasn't legal and they did get caught.

Most criminals are not scheming masterminds... or, at least, the ones who get caught aren't.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 17, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> And it’s not so ephemeral as they suggest, anyway. Social reputation death is literally painful for most people. That’s why it’s been an effective “punishment” (insofar as punishment is even the point) for thousands of years.




Millions of years, even.  It is standard primate behavior.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 17, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Millions of years, even.  It is standard primate behavior.



Yeah it's kind of like when i talk about my work history and experience in a resume, ya know? Only 10-15 (thousand) years is actually relevant most of the time, so i don't worry about anything beyond that.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 17, 2022)

Vaalingrade said:


> How are us sad nobodies, who are essentially the plankton of all industries (basically the food from which everything grows off, but never respected or cared about) supposed to actually stand up to the abusers without others having our backs?
> 
> If everyone just minded their business, the abusers just plain win and get to keep doing what they're doing.



This. I don't think it's great to personally spew bile at S&J; meeting toxicity with toxicity isn't good. But we all, as consumers of this industry and community members of this hobby, have a responsibility to each other to keep our community safe, friendly, and open. And that means making it clear that abusers aren't welcome.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jun 17, 2022)

Dausuul said:


> If they had that kind of intimate familiarity with the law and awareness of scrutiny, how'd they get caught in the first place? More likely they were sloppy and greedy and shortsighted. They found themselves in a position where they had access to money, and grabbed it after a) convincing themselves it was legal, b) convincing themselves they'd never be caught, or c) not thinking about it at all. Then it turned out it wasn't legal and they did get caught.
> 
> Most criminals are not scheming masterminds.



Yeah, that's the problem.

There are two likely scenarios here:

1) They were smart, and doing this a clever way, and only got caught because of bad luck.

In which case, they may well do it again, because they'll be smart enough to know it was bad luck, and to work new methods.

2) They were doing some really lazy/incompetent embezzling, which is like 95% of embezzling, like the classic "just use the company credit card to pay for personal stuff for a long time and never tell anyone*".

In which case they have no special skills, probably aren't very smart, and probably won't behave any better in future.

In neither case would it be smart to hire them for a position with any access to company funds.


* = The awful influencer I mentioned earlier did that - just used the company credit card they'd foolishly been issued to pay for loads of personal stuff. They then brazened it out when confronted and said they thought it was fine and no-one had told them it wasn't (this was definitely not true - rather the first two people who told them, the influencer just said they were wrong and she wasn't going to listen to them, and kept on doing it, albeit suddenly it became a bit more plausibly deniable, like it didn't fit what was allowed in company rules at all, but it was stuff that could be lied about, like very expensive meals which could be said to be with supporters/celebs, even though there was zero evidence to support that, like no pictures, despite this person being selfie-obsessed), and because they were this higher-profile person, and quite a bully, a lot of people didn't want to pursue it. In most organisations though that would not have ended well.


----------



## Fandabidozi (Jun 17, 2022)

CleverNickName said:


> I probably would, actually.  Such a person would know the job inside and out, and would be intimately familiar with the laws and regulatory requirements.  And they would also know that they are being watched, like a hawk, by nearly everyone.



They would also know you were a sucker and fleece you for everything you got.


----------



## Lyandelill (Jun 17, 2022)

Gradine said:


> Social consequences are nothing without social pressure, and behavior doesn't change without consequences.



Personally, I'd love to somehow cancel jk rowling so hard she _never tweeted again_. She's done enough damage already for a hundred average terfs.



antiwesley said:


> Attention whores



...that's not a very nice word to use, really


----------



## FrozenNorth (Jun 17, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Millions of years, even.  It is standard primate behavior.



Damn dirty apes!  You blew it up!  Damn you to heeeeeellllll!


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Jun 17, 2022)

Someone tell doctorbadwolf (since they don't want me to respond to them directly) that my comments were made directly off of what they specifically said.  If they misspoke or it turned out I misunderstood what they were trying to imply... then they're free to be more clear if they wish to be.  But when the statement is "Cancelling is a warning to other people in a community.", there's not much ambiguity there and my response was directly off of that.

But if they don't wish to clear it up... that's cool too.  Doesn't matter.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 17, 2022)

antiwesley said:


> Attention w****s







e: sorry, couldn't resist


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 17, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Sure, and that’s absolutely your right. It would also be your right to put the same dedication into your miniature painting and not sell them.



Suppose money IS an object.  You have a set amount of money you can spend per month on models to paint, and a fixed amount of space to store the models you've painted.  Selling models you're willing to part with frees up space to store and display more models, and gives you access to funds to buy additional models to paint above your tight monthly hobby budget.

Making money and showing dedication aren't mutually exclusive.


----------



## mythago (Jun 17, 2022)

Jer said:


> The thing is that there is absolutely no way that any kind of public apology was going to go any other way even if she gave the gold standard  apology of clearly admitting fault, demonstrating that she was going to make the folks she harmed monetarily whole, and giving some kind of indication of how she planned to change going forward.




Sometimes the right thing to do is the right thing to do, regardless of whether it gets the poll numbers back up.



Jer said:


> That's not how this kind of celebrity narrative works - we seem to love our celebrities on the way up, put them on a pedestal, and then savage them mercilessly once their flaws are discovered.  As long as there have been celebrities it seems like once you screw up you're going to fall into that narrative arc unless you just leave the public eye and wait for people to forget about you for a while.




"Flaws are discovered"? "Fall" into a narrative arc? These people cultivated celebrity status for profit and used that status to intentionally cause harm to others who annoyed them or got in their way. They didn't trip and accidentally anger the slavering mob over a minor slight.


----------



## Umbran (Jun 17, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> Someone tell doctorbadwolf....




*Mod Note:*
The next time you are asked to leave someone alone, actually leave them alone, please and thanks.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 17, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> The use of the word "debilitating" here seems to push past empathy and merge into degrading.



So, I hope that your feeling there is out of genuine concern, and not something else.

ADHD IS a learning disability, and it is debilitating.  It doesn't mean i'm incompetent or incapacitated by it, but it definitely does have a strong, often negative, impact on my ability to function in conventional learning and working environments, and is a source of frustration for people who are close to me who don't understand why I think and act the way I do.

There are a lot of people that disguise their dismissal of handicaps as encouragement.  There are a lot of other people that fall into that line of thinking without malice, because they believe the people who say "Don't let your disability define you!" rather than trust the people who actually have those disabilities to know what does and doesn't define them.


----------



## Jer (Jun 17, 2022)

mythago said:


> "Flaws are discovered"? "Fall" into a narrative arc? These people cultivated celebrity status for profit and used that status to intentionally cause harm to others who annoyed them or got in their way. They didn't trip and accidentally anger the slavering mob over a minor slight.



I was speaking more generically and about why a public online apology where everyone can comment on it is going to turn out like hers did regardless of what kind of apology you give, what you try to do to fix it, or what you've done.  That's how it works - the comments on the video are going to be nasty and disgusting regardless of whether the content of the video deserves it or not because that's how celebrity narratives work.  As soon as you're caught doing something wrong you're going to get savaged for it.  It is what it is.

It's a bad idea to expect anything less than vitriol from a public apology like that.  So people should stop doing them and start making actual apologies and restitution to the people actually harmed rather than to the general public who are at best spectators in something that is only their business to the extent that they might want to stop buying what the person apologizing is selling.


----------



## mythago (Jun 17, 2022)

CleverNickName said:


> I probably would, actually.  Such a person would know the job inside and out, and would be intimately familiar with the laws and regulatory requirements.  And they would also know that they are being watched, like a hawk, by nearly everyone.




Or, they learned from their mistakes and are determined not to get caught this time. (Part of being intimately familiar with the laws and regulatory requirements means knowing where the loopholes and lack-of-oversight are, too.) Or, they simply don't have the impulse control to resist grabbing money they have access to. Here's a guy who embezzled from his employer _while he was on parole_ for a previous embezzlement conviction. Being "watched like a hawk" by everyone from the parole office to his new employer didn't stop him from stealing money to spend on truly frivolous things.

And - you also might have a real headache on your hands if happens again, and now someone _else _harmed by that embezzlement - or who is charged with enforcing those regulatory requirements -  wants to know why you deliberately put somebody with a bad past in a position of doing the same harm all over again.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 17, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> So, I hope that your feeling there is out of genuine concern, and not something else.
> 
> ADHD IS a learning disability, and it is debilitating.  It doesn't mean i'm incompetent or incapacitated by it, but it definitely does have a strong, often negative, impact on my ability to function in conventional learning and working environments, and is a source of frustration for people who are close to me who don't understand why I think and act the way I do.
> 
> There are a lot of people that disguise their dismissal of handicaps as encouragement.  There are a lot of other people that fall into that line of thinking without malice, because they believe the people who say "Don't let your disability define you!" rather than trust the people who actually have those disabilities to know what does and doesn't define them.



It sounds like bragging, but I fully believe this is an apt description: My ADHD essentially makes my brain 20% faster, stronger, better than the average bear's brain, but it also leads me to needlessly multi-task along often pointless pursuits.  The net effect of that buff in Int and that debuff in Focus is that I typically end up performing 20% WORSE than the average bear at the one task that matters at the moment.

In certain, very specific instances I'm able to leverage that potential and actually perform with efficiency.  Managing ADHD is a matter of knowing how to take advantage of the features, while minimizing my exposure to situations that make it work against me.  It lends itself well to dev work, where I'm essentially reading/understanding/editing multiple editor windows simultaneously while also monitoring logs and screen output.  But then when I have to read and understand some API documentation, or focus down on a very narrow problem, i'm definitely operating at a handicap.


----------



## CleverNickName (Jun 17, 2022)

Dausuul said:


> If they had that kind of intimate familiarity with the law and awareness of scrutiny, how'd they get caught in the first place?
> . . .
> Most criminals are not scheming masterminds... or, at least, the ones who get caught aren't.





Fandabidozi said:


> They would also know you were a sucker and fleece you for everything you got.





mythago said:


> Or, they learned from their mistakes and are determined not to get caught this time. (Part of being intimately familiar with the laws and regulatory requirements means knowing where the loopholes and lack-of-oversight are, too.) Or, they simply don't have the impulse control to resist grabbing money. . .



I know this is all hypothetical, and I know it is completely not on-topic for the thread, so I'll drop it.  On my way out, I'd like to remind everyone that attitudes and assumptions like this are why people with felony convictions, who have served their time and paid their dues and done everything asked of them by the legal system, are still ostracized and shunned, and have difficulty finding stable work and housing.  We need to do better than this.


----------



## Faolyn (Jun 17, 2022)

Jahydin said:


> I didn't think ADHD could be so bad.
> 
> Reading articles like this has downplayed the severity for me :
> "Of the 6.4 million kids who have been given diagnoses of A.D.H.D., a large percentage are unlikely to have any kind of physiological difference that would make them more distractible than the average non-A.D.H.D. kid. It’s also doubtful that biological or environmental changes are making physiological differences more prevalent. Instead, the rapid increase in people with A.D.H.D. probably has more to do with sociological factors — changes in the way we school our children, in the way we interact with doctors and in what we expect from our kids."



I can't read the article because of the paywall, but this paragraph alone is really badly done. It ignores that _testing _is more accurate and more widely performed, for one. I'm a woman. When I was a kid back in the 80s, ADHD was something that only boys had. It never occurred to anyone that I had an actual problem. I "lacked stick-to-it-iveness" or "needed to apply myself" or was just "lazy" or even "bored in class because she's so smart" because I was a girl (and wasn't bouncing off of walls). Even boys, sometimes, were (and are) misdiagnosed: not enough discipline, too much sugar, etc. 

So this basically ignores that doctors are looking at the disorder in a more in-depth manner these days.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 17, 2022)

MNblockhead said:


> Yeah, refusing to recognize that it can be debilitating can be the greater offensive. I was diagnosed as in the early 80s and put on Ritalin when the field was new and Ritalin was over prescribed. A lot of drugging up of difficult kids in over-crowded schools and all that.  Even though I have mild ADHD, the experience in 6th and 7th grade was very negative. I felt rather zombified by Ritalin, though my teachers were happy with the result. For me, mild ADHD is a bit of a super-power in that the same impulse that can distract me from paying attention to what I'm supposed to, also allows me to focus intensely on one thing for long periods of time to the point of forgoing sleep. Computerized calendars, task, and project-management systems help make up for my weaknesses.
> 
> But my experience in middle school put a big chip on my shoulder when it came to talk about ADHD, especially medicines to treat it. My armchair theorizing based on some reading I did was that what we call a debility in our industrialized and post-industrial society was, in fact, and evolutionary advantage for most of human history. The same thing that makes someone with ADHD perform poorly in our modern school system, makes them a good hunter (really, go hiking with someone with ADHD, they always seem to notice things that most people don't).  I was strongly against medicating people with something I didn't think should be treated as an illness.
> 
> It took me a while to accept that some people really do need medicine to treat severe ADHD and it be a life-changing improvement to many people's well being. The science has come a long way since the 80s and dismissing the fact that for some people it can be really debilitating can be quite harmful to people who whose lives would be greatly improved by proper medical care.



The education system didn't know how to deal with us.  Instead of looking at ways to improve the education system to work for more kids, they put the problem kids on hard drugs.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

CleverNickName said:


> I know this is all hypothetical, and I know it is completely not on-topic for the thread, so I'll drop it.  On my way out, I'd like to remind everyone that attitudes and assumptions like this are why people with felony convictions, who have served their time and paid their dues and done everything asked of them by the legal system, are still ostracized and shunned, and have difficulty finding stable work and housing.  We need to do better than this.



I think that it is on topic: I wouldn't want to work with Satine or Jacaon here, ever, because of how they have treated people in the past. And I don't think that an embezzled, say, can never offer anything to society. Just not in a position of fiduciary responsibility because...theyblack fiduciary responsibility.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 17, 2022)

Faolyn said:


> I can't read the article because of the paywall, but this paragraph alone is really badly done. It ignores that _testing _is more accurate and more widely performed, for one. I'm a woman. When I was a kid back in the 80s, ADHD was something that only boys had. It never occurred to anyone that I had an actual problem. I "lacked stick-to-it-iveness" or "needed to apply myself" or was just "lazy" or even "bored in class because she's so smart" because I was a girl (and wasn't bouncing off of walls). Even boys, sometimes, were (and are) misdiagnosed: not enough discipline, too much sugar, etc.
> 
> So this basically ignores that doctors are looking at the disorder in a more in-depth manner these days.



I was someschooled growing up, and a large number of people in thst scene in the 90's were parents getting their ADHD kids away from an unsupportive negative feedback loop st school, diagnosed or not.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 17, 2022)

Jahydin said:


> Instead, the rapid increase in people with A.D.H.D. probably has more to do with sociological factors




In better words, there were always people with ADHD.  Before the 80s, we just considered them to be degenerate, lazy or stupid.  In the 80s and 90s we recognized there was something different actually going on with a good percentage of the populous, gave the condition a name, and thought long and hard about what was making these people different.  The first solution was to try to treat the individuals.  The more modern, more effective solution, is to create an education and work system that supports more people without making their liver pay the price for their cognitive issues.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 17, 2022)

An eye-opener for me was reading articles about how people in my field were Micro-dosing LSD as a performance enhancer.  I read into what they were getting out of micro-dosing, and realized all these poseurs were clandestinely acquiring and ingesting an illegal substance in the hopes that it will allow their normal brain, for just a few hours, to act like the brain I've had my entire life.


----------



## darjr (Jun 17, 2022)




----------



## Michael Linke (Jun 17, 2022)

Probably shut down the discord after/because the leak of the message about Jamison doing everything possible to make sure none of this harms Satine.  Apparently he can't trust many of the people who were on that server, and he's better off without it.

Stone's a terrible person, but clearly not stupid.  He knows that if he can take all of the heat for this, Satine has a lucrative career ahead of her.  Unfortunately, she's shown to be an abuser herself, and not just an enabler/victim of Jamison's, and her inept attempt at apology the other day hasn't helped her outrun the accusations against her.

You hate to see it, but I don't think she's gonna come back from this.  All things considered, I would prefer that she genuinely learned from her actions and went on to something so good that it made up for the wrong she'd done.  She doesn't appear to be doing well so far on the "genuinely learning" front.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 17, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> Suppose money IS an object.  You have a set amount of money you can spend per month on models to paint, and a fixed amount of space to store the models you've painted.  Selling models you're willing to part with frees up space to store and display more models, and gives you access to funds to buy additional models to paint above your tight monthly hobby budget.
> 
> Making money and showing dedication aren't mutually exclusive.



When did I ever say they were mutually exclusive? By all means, if you want to monetize you hobbies, you are perfectly free and welcome to do so. Not everyone does want to do so, and they are also perfectly free and welcome not to. What I find extremely distasteful is the societal incentive structure that pushes people to monetize their hobbies out of necessity or social pressure, not the people who choose to do so. Money is indeed an object for most people _and that’s the problem._


----------



## mythago (Jun 17, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> I think that it is on topic: I wouldn't want to work with Satine or Jacaon here, ever, because of how they have treated people in the past. And I don't think that an embezzled, say, can never offer anything to society. Just not in a position of fiduciary responsibility because...theyblack fiduciary responsibility.




It is off topic in the sense that "how do we re-integrate people with criminal convictions into society" is an enormously complicated question, made more so by the fact that (in the US at least) issues of racism and disparate treatment factor strongly into what is a crime, who is charged with and convicted of crimes, and who gets the benefit of the doubt afterward.

It's very much on topic in the sense that, those complicated questions get weaponized to excuse bad actors within a community. How very dare you say you would not want to work with these people! Why, you're _exactly like _the carceral system that punishes a guy convicted for pot dealing by depriving him of job opportunities and the right to vote! Isn't is much more harmonious and better for everyone, particularly for those of us not directly harmed by the bad actors, if we just accept their apologies and hand out second, third, and nth chances like they were promotional T-shirts at a con party?


----------



## mythago (Jun 17, 2022)

(sorry, weird double post)


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 17, 2022)

Gradine said:


> This. I don't think it's great to personally spew bile at S&J; meeting toxicity with toxicity isn't good. But we all, as consumers of this industry and community members of this hobby, have a responsibility to each other to keep our community safe, friendly, and open. And that means making it clear that abusers aren't welcome.



This is fair, but I think the sentiment happening here is more than doing so shouldn't cross the line into actual harassment, physical threats, telling someone to unalive themselves, etc. Mass rejection by your community is plenty of negative feedback. The people doing the above are _also abusers_. They just target people being ostracized in order to avoid criticism for their abuse.


Michael Linke said:


> Making money and showing dedication aren't mutually exclusive.



I think her point was that they also aren't inherently tied to eachother, not that they are mutually exclusive. Saying "you don't have to focus your hobby on profit making" doesn't imply that it's bad to do so, it just means it's also fine to not do so.


Michael Linke said:


> It sounds like bragging, but I fully believe this is an apt description: My ADHD essentially makes my brain 20% faster, stronger, better than the average bear's brain, but it also leads me to needlessly multi-task along often pointless pursuits.  The net effect of that buff in Int and that debuff in Focus is that I typically end up performing 20% WORSE than the average bear at the one task that matters at the moment.
> 
> In certain, very specific instances I'm able to leverage that potential and actually perform with efficiency.  Managing ADHD is a matter of knowing how to take advantage of the features, while minimizing my exposure to situations that make it work against me.  It lends itself well to dev work, where I'm essentially reading/understanding/editing multiple editor windows simultaneously while also monitoring logs and screen output.  But then when I have to read and understand some API documentation, or focus down on a very narrow problem, i'm definitely operating at a handicap.



Yeah I have no idea how to operate excel for it's intended purposes, but I spent months of screen time mastering it as a vehicle for creating widgets to copy and paste-as-picture into a word document in order to make a clean-looking character sheet. Meanwhile I can only reliably do about 90% my daily paperwork as a manager, in spite of having the job for 6 months. I'm exceptionally good one on one with people, though. I learned how to mask and mirror like a right bastard.


Faolyn said:


> I can't read the article because of the paywall, but this paragraph alone is really badly done. It ignores that _testing _is more accurate and more widely performed, for one. I'm a woman. When I was a kid back in the 80s, ADHD was something that only boys had. It never occurred to anyone that I had an actual problem. I "lacked stick-to-it-iveness" or "needed to apply myself" or was just "lazy" or even "bored in class because she's so smart" because I was a girl (and wasn't bouncing off of walls). Even boys, sometimes, were (and are) misdiagnosed: not enough discipline, too much sugar, etc.
> 
> So this basically ignores that doctors are looking at the disorder in a more in-depth manner these days.



It's so hard to even express to neurotypical folks why I am so uncomfortable being told how smart i am, even at 37. 
Hell, I've been treated like I wasn't masculine enough by jerks who associate specific behaviors and habits with boys vs girls, and I didn't fit the paradigm. (Fellas, is it gay to participate in class enthusiastically?)


Michael Linke said:


> The education system didn't know how to deal with us.  Instead of looking at ways to improve the education system to work for more kids, they put the problem kids on hard drugs.



Careful with that brush, neighbor. Plenty of people simply cannot function in a way that allows them to live how they want to live, or to do the work they want to do, or to maintain relationships without undue stress, without those "hard drugs". 

The fact that medication wasn't the right choice for _you_ does not indicate a disability-wide prognosis.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 17, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> The people doing the above are _also abusers_. They just target people being ostracized in order to avoid criticism for their abuse.



QFT


----------



## Yora (Jun 17, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> It's so hard to even express to neurotypical folks why I am so uncomfortable being told how smart i am, even at 37.



I thought the whole Mensa organization is ridiculous if someone like me meets the entry requirements. 
That's not genius level. That's not even an exclusive club. Those people aren't anything special, even if they like giving themselves a badge for their own greatness.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 17, 2022)

Yora said:


> I thought the whole Mensa organization is ridiculous if someone like me meets the entry requirements.
> That's not genius level. That's not even an exclusive club. Those people aren't anything special, even if they like giving themselves a badge for their own greatness.



Oof. Yeah. The variation I've seen in my own IQ test results is hilarious to me. I'm anywhere from genius to well below "average", depending on my blood sugar, how well I slept, and the methodology of the test. 

Also the premise of Mensa is, even if not out loud, that getting geniuses to socialize and develop strong bonds will lead to more geniuses and a better society, which is both ablest and a bit eugenics-y.


----------



## Yora (Jun 17, 2022)

I can understand how children with exceptionally fast learning speeds might have trouble socializing with other children of their ages and could benefit from being around other kids they can better relate to. But that's probably really helpful for something like 1 child in a 100. Not one kid in 50.
"Sample size: Me" is of course not representative, but in my year in school there were three other kids way smarter than me and we all were doing fine socially. Smart kids can have social problems in school, but "being too smart" is not the cause of that problem.


----------



## Faolyn (Jun 17, 2022)

Yora said:


> I can understand how children with exceptionally fast learning speeds might have trouble socializing with other children of their ages and could benefit from being around other kids they can better relate to. But that's probably really helpful for something like 1 child in a 100. Not one kid in 50.
> "Sample size: Me" is of course not representative, but in my year in school there were three other kids way smarter than me and we all were doing fine socially. Smart kids can have social problems in school, but "being too smart" is not the cause of that problem.



Being too smart _can _be the problem if the school _makes _that into a problem. I was one of those kids who didn't see anything wrong with correcting adults when they were factually wrong. My 4th-grade teacher got _really _annoyed when I corrected her when she claimed that whales were fish, and she made sure everyone else in the class knew how much she didn't like me. Fortunately, my parents got me out of that class soon after (she was a terrible teacher in many ways, not just this one), but her actions definitely helped in making me into even more of a social pariah than I already was.

On the plus side, it taught me from an early to always have sources in order to back up claims.


----------



## vostygg (Jun 17, 2022)

Accusations fly and lives are destroyed.  Cancel culture denies people anything resembling due process.  We should at least use a ducking stool to ascertain their guilt or innocence like a good civilized mob.

"Moral courage is not a question of standing up to people on the other side. That's actually pretty easy to do. Real moral courage is standing up to your own side on behalf of people from the other side."  --Arthur Brooks


----------



## JediSoth (Jun 18, 2022)

I don't need a court of law to determine whether or not I'm going to continue to support a company/artists that I feel are dishonest or abusive.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Accusations fly and lives are destroyed.  Cancel culture denies people anything resembling due process.  We should at least use a ducking stool to ascertain their guilt or innocence like a good civilized mob.
> 
> "Moral courage is not a question of standing up to people on the other side. That's actually pretty easy to do. Real moral courage is standing up to your own side on behalf of people from the other side."  --Arthur Brooks



Both Jamison and Satine admitted to some amount of harm, and then blamed their victims. Don't really need a court of law for me to figure that they hurt people I know.


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

JediSoth said:


> I don't need a court of law to determine whether or not I'm going to continue to support a company/artists that I feel are dishonest or abusive.






bedir than said:


> Both Jamison and Satine admitted to some amount of harm, and then blamed their victims. Don't really need a court of law for me to figure that they hurt people I know.




Meh! I'll stick to the unpopular stance that everyone can be an a-hole on a bad day and that social media vastly exacerbates the problem by ensuring that we never have to face the people whose lives we so blithely destroy.

I do not know Jamison or Satine, but if they are like anyone else, there are likely any number of people who would testify to their good character if they did not fear being shouted down and canceled themselves.


----------



## seebs (Jun 18, 2022)

There is nothing you can do that will prevent people from testifying to your good character, though. Nothing. As long as you didn't do it to _them_, it won't matter. So the interesting question, to me, is always "did these things happen", and in particular, do I have reason to think that they appear to be _recurring_ things? Because yeah, anyone can be bad on their worst day. But if I can find multiple different people who've encountered someone being bad in similar ways, that starts to look suspiciously like a _pattern_.

An abuser who only abuses a few people is still an abuser, and I'm going to prefer that they not be in positions of power over others, generally.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Cancel culture denies people anything resembling due process.




We can't imprison or fine anybody, or deprive them of life or liberty. A court of law is not required to determine social consequences. The very idea that a court of law should be needed before one decides how to legally and non-violently react to somebody's behaviour is waaaaaaay beyond anything I think anybody would reasonably suggest. So let's not throw around legal terms like 'due process' and the like unless you want a judge to intervene every time you disagree with somebody. We're not _there_ yet in our society, fortunately.


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

seebs said:


> There is nothing you can do that will prevent people from testifying to your good character, though. Nothing. As long as you didn't do it to _them_, it won't matter. So the interesting question, to me, is always "did these things happen", and in particular, do I have reason to think that they appear to be _recurring_ things? Because yeah, anyone can be bad on their worst day. But if I can find multiple different people who've encountered someone being bad in similar ways, that starts to look suspiciously like a _pattern_.
> 
> An abuser who only abuses a few people is still an abuser, and I'm going to prefer that they not be in positions of power over others, generally.



Lacking all the context and facts of these peoples' lives, I choose to err on the side of compassion and forgiveness.


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

L


vostygg said:


> Meh! I'll stick to the unpopular stance that everyone can be an a-hole on their worst day and that social media vastly exacerbates the problem by ensuring that we never have to face the people whose lives we so blithely destroy.
> 
> I do not know Jamison or Satine, but if they are like anyone else, there are likely any number of people who would testify to their good character if they did not fear being shouted down and canceled themselves.




Of course there are people who could/would testify to their good character. But from all available evidence these would be people in positions to benefit this couple.

That's their true issue - they punch down. They abuse and exploit those that can't hit them back. Or at least those that they thought couldn't hit them back. Had they not done that and shown a modicum of respect to their employees/contractors etc. They wouldn't be in this mess.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

Morrus said:


> We can't imprison or fine anybody, or deprive them of life or liberty. A court of law is not required to determine social consequences. The very idea that a court of law should be needed before one decides how to legally and non-violently react to somebody's behaviour is waaaaaaay beyond anything I think anybody would reasonably suggest. So let's not throw around legal terms like 'due process' and the like unless you want a judge to intervene every time you disagree with somebody. We're not _there_ yet in our society, fortunately.




I do think there is a big difference between people expressing opinions and the dogpiling that happens, the ostracism, the exclusion and the resulting loss of work and livelihood people do experience online storms. I definitely can see how it feels like an extrajudicial process is unfolding in many circumstances. People should be free to express their opinions. I think the issue is a lot of social media controversies make institutions, employers and platforms afraid to work with people for fear of guilt by association. Peoples lives do get ruined by this stuff. And I don't think any good comes in taking pleasure in someone losing the ability to put a roof over their head or food on the table. It spans the gamut of course. But I have been pretty uncomfortable with a lot of what I have seen in terms of how cruel people are to one another, even when they feel justified, or have justification for anger, on social media, especially in gaming circles in the past few years. In general I think there is a lot of anger, a lot of people not seeing one another as real human beings. Overall I think the hobby would benefit from more compassion


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Lacking all the context and facts of these people's lives, I choose to err on the side of compassion and forgiveness.




Sure, but would you work for them without taking extra precautions? I wouldn't.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 18, 2022)

Mort said:


> L
> 
> 
> Of course there are people who could/would testify to their good character. But from all available evidence these people would be people in positions to benefit this couple.
> ...



That's the crazy making part: if they didn't abuse and harm and backbite...they wouldn't just still have careers, they would be further advanced than they got!


----------



## Jahydin (Jun 18, 2022)

@Faolyn @Michael Linke @Grendel_Khan @Charlaquin 
Appreciate everyone going off-topic a bit to educate me. I don't want to further derail the thread, but I wanted to at least say thanks and that I would look further into it.

Also, sorry about the paywall. Never could figure out why for some it shows up an others it doesn't.


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

Parmandur said:


> That's the crazy making part: if they didn't abuse and harm and backbite...they wouldn't just still have careers, they would be further advanced than they got!




Some people can't help themselves.

Edit: there's an old courtroom saying "when you're winning... Shut up." It's amazing how many people can't seem to do this.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> I do think there is a big difference between people expressing opinions and the dogpiling that happens, the ostracism, the exclusion and the resulting loss of work and livelihood people do experience online storms. I definitely can see how it feels like an extrajudicial process is unfolding in many circumstances. People should be free to express their opinions. I think the issue is a lot of social media controversies make institutions, employers and platforms afraid to work with people for fear of guilt by association. Peoples lives do get ruined by this stuff. And I don't think any good comes in taking pleasure in someone losing the ability to put a roof over their head or food on the table. It spans the gamut of course. But I have been pretty uncomfortable with a lot of what I have seen in terms of how cruel people are to one another, even when they feel justified, or have justification for anger, on social media, especially in gaming circles in the past few years. In general I think there is a lot of anger, a lot of people not seeing one another as real human beings. Overall I think the hobby would benefit from more compassion



Feeling uncomfortable with it and asking for social interactions to be legislated are very different things, though. That's a heck of a step I don't think any of us want? I mean, do we?


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

Morrus said:


> We can't imprison or fine anybody, or deprive them of life or liberty. A court of law is not required to determine social consequences. The very idea that a court of law should be needed before one decides how to legally and non-violently react to somebody's behaviour is waaaaaaay beyond anything I think anybody would reasonably suggest. So let's not throw around legal terms like 'due process' and the like unless you want a judge to intervene every time you disagree with somebody. We're not _there_ yet in our society, fortunately.



Due process in the sense that I am using it is not about a court of law. It is about applying principles such as a presumption of innocence and a desire to hear all sides of a case before drawing any conclusions.  Let's not pretend that social media is interested in these principles. I read the tweets in question and I don't see enough evidence to warrant the destruction of these peoples' lives or livelihoods.


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Due process in the sense that I am using it is not about a court of law. It is about applying principles such as a presumption of innocence and a desire to hear all sides of a case before drawing any conclusions.  I read the tweets in question and I don't see enough evidence to warrant the destruction of these peoples' lives or livelihoods.




But again, their lives and livelihoods are based, a good deal, on dealing with employees and contractors. 

Again, knowing what you know, would you work for or even with these people? 

Exposing terrible business practices is not "ruining these people's lives" it is ensuring  THEY don't ruin more people's lives.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

Morrus said:


> Feeling uncomfortable with it and asking for social interactions to be legislated are very different things, though. That's a heck of a step I don't think any of us want? I mean, do we?




Maybe we are talking past each other. I am not acting for social interactions to be legislated. I don't know how you would even begin to do that. I just think we should be more compassionate and resist the online rage. Especially when it centers justice on taking away peoples ability to work or to exist. By extrajudicial I just mean that online campaigns of anger directed at individuals (justified and not justified) are yielding consequences that rise to de facto legal outcomes: people losing work, having their lives ruined, being excused from events, from spaces, etc. This is why I think people mention due process. It just feels rather chaotic and cruel sometimes, and like it can easily be directed by bad actors.


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

Mort said:


> Again, knowing what you know, would you work for or even with these people?



I would defer judgment until I got to know them and was able to draw my own firsthand impressions.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> Maybe we are talking past each other. I am not acting for social interactions to be legislated. I don't know how you would even begin to do that. I just think we should be more compassionate and resist the online rage. Especially when it centers justice on taking away peoples ability to work or to exist. By extrajudicial I just mean that online campaigns of anger directed at individuals (justified and not justified) are yielding consequences that rise to de facto legal outcomes: people losing work, having their lives ruined, being excused from events, from spaces, etc. This is why I think people mention due process. It just feels rather chaotic and cruel sometimes, and like it can easily be directed by bad actors.



Due process is a specific legal term. I assume people mean the words they say. If they don’t then what’s the point of even talking? If they don’t mean due process, perhaps they should stop saying due process. If they do mean due process, then see my previous post.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Due process in the sense that I am using it is not about a court of law. It is about applying principles such as a presumption of innocence and a desire to hear all sides of a case before drawing any conclusions.  Let's not pretend that social media is interested in any such principles. I read the tweets in question and I don't see enough evidence to warrant the destruction of these peoples' lives or livelihoods.




I can't really speak to this particular case well, as I found it a  pretty deep and time consuming hole to peer into. But speaking more generally I just find the sophistication with which social media handles these controversies is about the level we used to handle social scandal and controversy in high school (and my emotional reaction to a lot of these cases makes me feel like I am in high school again: in a very bad way). On social media it is often less about the truth, and more about who spins the wittiest narrative in the fewest number of characters. Optics often matter more than what's really going on or what really happened and once the narrative is set, its hard for anyone to overcome it, even if they are misunderstood or being misrepresented. That doesn't mean there people should just be allowed to be horrible, but I think we really need to slow down and not rush to judgment, practice consciously hearing people out more and being compassionate in where these things go. And often these things reach a point where people get attacked not for doing anything wrong but taking the 'wrong position' on someone who is believed to have done wrong or is persona non-grata. It really spirals into some ugliness.


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> I would defer judgment until I got to know them and was able to draw my own firsthand impressions.




But that's the point.

From all evidence, these people make an excellent first impression. They are charismatic.

The whole point of ALL of this is to warn people to be wary of that. To try to limit their ability to punch down as they have been.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

Morrus said:


> Due process is a specific legal term. I assume people mean the words they say. If they don’t then what’s the point of even talking? If they don’t mean due process, perhaps they should stop saying due process. If they do mean due process, then see my previous post.




Again, i think the point is that people feel like they've lost some due process because social media has changed things. You can now experience fallout on social media that is comparable to losing a court case because it has permanent and wide impact (again people losing the ability to work, things like that). No one is suggesting a form of due process be implemented for online interactions. They are saying we should think about how these online storms are impacting peoples lives and if we are obfuscating the truth in any way in our anger or our need for immediate consequences. I think people are just saying: maybe bring it down a notch


----------



## Morrus (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> Again, i think the point is that people feel like they've lost some due process because social media has changed things. You can now experience fallout on social media that is comparable to losing a court case because it has permanent and wide impact (again people losing the ability to work, things like that). No one is suggesting a form of due process be implemented for online interactions. They are saying we should think about how these online storms are impacting peoples lives and if we are obfuscating the truth in any way in our anger or our need for immediate consequences. I think people are just saying: maybe bring it down a notch



If that’s the case (and I understand you’re not speaking as a representative of everybody) then they should stop using that term, as it obfuscates their message. ‘Tone it down a notch’ at least makes sense, though it’s up to the individual to agree.‘Due process’ just makes it sound like they want the courts to intervene in social interactions.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Meh! I'll stick to the unpopular stance that everyone can be an a-hole on their worst day and that social media vastly exacerbates the problem by ensuring that we never have to face the people whose lives we so blithely destroy.
> 
> I do not know Jamison or Satine, but if they are like anyone else, there are likely any number of people who would testify to their good character if they did not fear being shouted down and canceled themselves.






vostygg said:


> Lacking all the context and facts of these people's lives, I choose to err on the side of compassion and forgiveness.



What's compassionate of supporting the people who stole money?


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

Morrus said:


> If that’s the case (and I understand you’re not speaking as a representative of everybody) then they should stop using that term, as it obfuscates their message. ‘Tone it down a notch’ at least makes sense, though it’s up to the individual to agree.‘Due process’ just makes it sound like they want the courts to intervene in social interactions.



Fine.  I amend my original statement to, "Cancel culture does not adhere to any of the principles associated with due process, including a presumption of innocence and a desire to hear all sides of a case before condemning the accused. It is much more closely akin to mob justice."


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

bedir than said:


> What's compassionate of supporting the people who stole money?



I don't know beyond a reasonable doubt that they stole money.


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Fine.  I amend my original statement to, "Cancel culture does not adhere to any of the principles associated with due process, including a presumption of innocence or a desire to hear all sides of a story before condemning the accused. It is much more closely akin to mob justice."




That can certainly be the case. Twitter and the like can often be a plague for people.

Here though, there are receipts. The bullying and wage theft have been documented. It's a good thing the practices were made known or they would continue and the offending parties not only would be undeterred they would be emboldened and enriched.


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> I don't know beyond a reasonable doubt that they stole money.




You might want to stop using legal terms.

But if we're going there:

There has EASILY been a preponderance of evidence presented to make any reasonable person be VERY cautious if/when entering into any sort of transaction with these people.


----------



## Grendel_Khan (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Accusations fly and lives are destroyed.  Cancel culture denies people anything resembling due process.  We should at least use a ducking stool to ascertain their guilt or innocence like a good civilized mob.



Would really be great if you took these boo-hoo-cancel-culture talking points somewhere else. There are plenty of fronts in the bad faith culture war--no need to bring that to a gaming forum.


----------



## darjr (Jun 18, 2022)

I’m sure they could use a financial partner now. Who’s gunna volunteer? After all there hasn’t been “due process”.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Lacking all the context and facts of these people's lives, I choose to err on the side of compassion and forgiveness.



And how do you feel about their victims, and the consequences they've faced?


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

Grendel_Khan said:


> Would really be great if you took these boo-hoo-cancel-culture talking points somewhere else. There are plenty of fronts in the bad faith culture war--no need to bring that to a gaming forum.



Nah! Your opinion of what constitutes valid discussion on these forums is no more valid than mine.  I am not going to be censored by you since you are not a moderator. In fact, you should take your attempts to enforce ideological conformity elsewhere--no need to bring _that_ to a gaming forum.


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

Gradine said:


> And how do you feel about their victims, and the consequences they've face



While I sympathize with anyone who was mistreated, I don't see anything like a balanced presentation of facts here.  It's akin to a court case in which the prosecution gets to present a whole host of witnesses, and the defense is entirely absent. That's the very definition of mob justice.


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> While I sympathize with anyone who was mistreated, I don't see anything like a balanced presentation of facts here.  It's akin to a court case in which the prosecution gets to present a whole host of witnesses, and the defense is entirely absent. That's the very definition of mob justice.




That's not quite right though. Both Phoenix and Stone HAVE presented their side of the story.

But the accusers have brought evidence and receipts and they were NOT contradicted or refuted.

Stone and Phoenix have been reduced to "we're really sorry..." (That we got caught and called out) and "please give us an opportunity to do better."

I will say Stone SAYS all parties finally got compensated. So hopefully the aggreived parties really were made whole.

This isn't a case of poor little celebrities getting piled on. This is a case of a grift(and horrible behavior) getting exposed and consequences being suffered as a result. Huge difference.


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

Mort said:


> That's not quite right though. Both Phoenix and Stone HAVE presented their side of the story.
> 
> But the accusers have brought evidence and receipts and they were NOT contradicted or refuted.
> 
> ...



While I respect your opinions, you and I are not drawing the same conclusions from the body of evidence presented.  Any public figure whose livelihood is being threatened on social media is generally counseled to issue a public apology in order to limit the damage.  I don't give much weight to that at all.  It's just part of the PR playbook.


----------



## mythago (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Maybe we are talking past each other. I am not acting for social interactions to be legislated. I don't know how you would even begin to do that. I just think we should be more compassionate and resist the online rage. Especially when it centers justice on taking away peoples ability to work or to exist. By extrajudicial I just mean that online campaigns of anger directed at individuals (justified and not justified) are yielding consequences that rise to de facto legal outcomes: people losing work, having their lives ruined, being excused from events, from spaces, etc. This is why I think people mention due process. It just feels rather chaotic and cruel sometimes, and like it can easily be directed by bad actors.




Yes, it is literally "extrajudicial" because it is _not in the courts_. Nobody is "taking away" S&J's ability "to exist", or to work, or anything else. People do not want to associate with them because they behaved in a chaotic, cruel manner to many people, sometimes for no reason other than sheer egotism. That's what parents refer to as natural consequences: if you hit other children and grab their toys, the other children won't want to play with you anymore.

The reason people throw out "due process" is because they're anxious about a sotiatopm and they want to drag in some Higher Principle to back them up. Nobody in real life, not even the people complaining about "due process", runs their personal lives by demanding "due process" in social interactions.


----------



## mythago (Jun 18, 2022)

Mort said:


> I will say Stone SAYS all parties finally got compensated. So hopefully the aggreived parties really were made whole.




The lawsuits got settled?


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Meh! I'll stick to the unpopular stance that everyone can be an a-hole on their worst day and that social media vastly exacerbates the problem by ensuring that we never have to face the people whose lives we so blithely destroy.
> 
> I do not know Jamison or Satine, but if they are like anyone else, there are likely any number of people who would testify to their good character if they did not fear being shouted down and canceled themselves.



The mindset described herein enables abusers.


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

mythago said:


> The lawsuits got settled?



Not that I'm aware. In was referring to the Kickstarter project. There was a post by Stone stating (with some detail) that everyone who worked on it got payed got payed (though even there, he got pretty weasely with some if the language). Just saying, hope that is true and ACTION rather than words does mean something


----------



## Umbran (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Meh! I'll stick to the unpopular stance that everyone can be an a-hole on their worst day...




This wasn't one day.  This was a long-term pattern of behavior...


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 18, 2022)

It does not matter if there is due process. “Jack Sparrow” had a jury trial (with a judge) in the USA and someone in this thread is dismissing it as him appealing to the court of public opinion.

I have read some various reactions to Satine’s live stream from the people that had made complaints and they were not impressed and brought up pretty good points in response to what she said.

I am pretty sure that there were some overly delicate people in the freelancers that were used. And that they were stepped on much harder than needed.

*Mod Edit*: let’s not use inflammatory terms when talking about people, please.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Due process in the sense that I am using it is not about a court of law. It is about applying principles such as a presumption of innocence and a desire to hear all sides of a case before drawing any conclusions.  Let's not pretend that social media is interested in these principles. I read the tweets in question and I don't see enough evidence to warrant the destruction of these peoples' lives or livelihoods.



The pushed people out of the industry, verbally and emotionally abused people, threatened people's livelihoods, and Stones literally propositioned somene for sex after leading them into a wilderness he knew but they didn't, after establishing a business relationship with him as patron _and_ trying to establish himself as her mentor. 

If none of that is enough for you to think it's justified to, and lets be real clear about what is actually happening here rather than this hyperbolic nonsense about destroying lives, call them out in public and demand apology and reparations, and warn others of how they deal with people with less power than them in professional enviroments....well, i don't know that you're going to have much common ground with many others in this thread. I'll leave it at that.


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> While I respect your opinions, you and I are not drawing the same conclusions from the body of evidence presented.  Any public figure whose livelihood is being threatened on social media is generally counseled to issue a public apology in order to limit the damage.  I don't give much weight to that at all.  It's just part of the PR playbook.





I put ZERO weight on the public apology, it is, as you say, PR standard.

But hopefully, revealing these actions gets REAL results for the people harmed - that would be a good take away.

I find it highly unlikely that these accusations are somehow inflated or fabricated, there is just too much shown and too many compelling accounts (with clear evidence).

As has been stated, the public shaming is regrettable and unnecessary. But the public forum revealing these acts is a net positive and without it, abusive behavior goes unpunished and, worse, continues.


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> The mindset described herein enables abusers.



Whether you know it or not, our entire legal system is founded on the principle that "it is better that ten guilty people go free than that one innocent suffer."

Alright.  I think I'm done here!  I'll let everyone get back to the business of trashing Satine and Jamison without the odious burden of dissenting viewpoints. 

Cheers!


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Whether you know it or not, our entire legal system is founded on the principle that "it is better that ten guilty people go free than that one innocent suffer."




That refers to criminal penalty, particularly incarceration and loss of otherwise inherent rights.

None of that is remotely at stake for these two, at least not from the public outcry and disgust.

Loss of face is NOT loss of rights and privileges.


----------



## theCourier (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Whether you know it or not, our entire legal system is founded on the principle that "it is better that ten guilty people go free than that one innocent suffer."
> 
> Alright.  I think I'm done here!  I'll let everyone get back to the business of trashing Satine and Jamison without the odious burden of dissenting viewpoints.
> 
> Cheers!



Anything to give the benefit of doubt to people who are potentially abusers, while giving absolutely none and making it nigh impossible for those making accusations to actually be believed, right?


----------



## Umbran (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> Again, i think the point is that people feel like they've lost some due process because social media has changed things. You can now experience fallout on social media that is comparable to losing a court case because it has permanent and wide impact (again people losing the ability to work, things like that).




Abuse victims have been suffering permanent impacts for time immemorial.  Our legal/court systems are ineffective at curbing such abuse.  What you see on social media is the predictable and understandable result of allowing the injustice to persist.

In waggling your finger at social media, you miss the root cause of the issue - the abuse.  Address that, and the social media issue will be resolved.  Meanwhile, telling victims and their friends and allies to shut up and sit down, without doing something material to protect them, is not a good look.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Whether you know it or not, our entire legal system is founded on the principle that "it is better that ten guilty people go free than that one innocent suffer."
> 
> Alright.  I think I'm done here!  I'll let everyone get back to the business of trashing Satine and Jamison without the odious burden of dissenting viewpoints.
> 
> Cheers!



Oof. neighbor, you feel free to point out who is suggesting that Satine Pheonix or Jamison Stone should suffer legal action in the criminal justice system. 

Right. No one has.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Abuse victims have been suffering permanent impacts for time immemorial.  Our legal/court systems are ineffective at curbing such abuse.  What you see on social media is the predictable and understandable result of allowing the injustice to persist.
> 
> In waggling your finger at social media, you miss the root cause of the issue - the abuse.  Address that, and the social media issue will be resolved.  Meanwhile, telling victims and their friends and allies to shut up and sit down, without doing something material to protect them, is not a good look.




You are putting words in my mouth Umbran.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Abuse victims have been suffering permanent impacts for time immemorial.  Our legal/court systems are ineffective at curbing such abuse.  What you see on social media is the predictable and understandable result of allowing the injustice to persist.




I just want to make a point here about this. No one is defending abuse. I am certainly not doing so. I am defending being compassionate, empathetic and deliberative. But our legal court system in the US, is based on taking pains to prevent innocent people from being punished for crimes they didn't commit. And it still happens that innocent people go to prison. There are very good reasons for wanting to make sure our system avoids that. There are plenty of examples throughout our history of the legal system destroying peoples lives when they didn't deserve it. That means you will have people who commit all kinds of crimes not face justice. Not just abuse, but murder, drug trafficking, theft, and more. Because we don't want innocent people going to prison. The standards of evidence are intentionally set high to avoid this. But I don't think the solution is to let twitter mobs decide what happens to people who are accused but not found guilty. I am not saying there shouldn't be conversations, I am just saying we should be very wary of normalizing this kind of extrajudicial justice, when large groups of people acting in haste, are not well equipped to mete out justice in a way that doesn't also harm innocent people. It shouldn't justify that just as it shouldn't justify vigilante justice. I live in a high crime area and I see plenty of criminals go unpunished. That doesn't mean I want people to take to the streets and enact street justice (because I've also seen how sideways that can go and hurt people who are entirely innocent). But wanting to make sure innocent people don't go to prison, doesn't mean I support murder and drug trafficking, or that I want victims of crime to shut up.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> I just want to make a point here about this. No one is defending abuse. I am certainly not doing so. I am defending being compassionate, empathetic and deliberative. But our legal court system in the US, is based on taking pains to prevent innocent people from being punished for crimes they didn't commit. And it still happens that innocent people go to prison. There are very good reasons for wanting to make sure our system avoids that. There are plenty of examples throughout our history of the legal system destroying peoples lives when they didn't deserve it. That means you will have people who commit all kinds of crimes not face justice. Not just abuse, but murder, drug trafficking, theft, and more. Because we don't want innocent people going to prison. The standards of evidence are intentionally set high to avoid this. But I don't think the solution is to let twitter mobs decide what happens to people who are accused but not found guilty. I am not saying there shouldn't be conversations, I am just saying we should be very wary of normalizing this kind of extrajudicial justice, when large groups of people acting in haste, are not well equipped to mete out justice in a way that doesn't also harm innocent people. It shouldn't justify that just as it shouldn't justify vigilante justice. I live in a high crime area and I see plenty of criminals go unpunished. That doesn't mean I want people to take to the streets and enact street justice (because I've also seen how sideways that can go and hurt people who are entirely innocent).



Stop mischaracterising what is happening. Street justice does not refer to _people sharing stories of abuse and others stepping away from the abusers as a result. _

“Street justice” is using violence in place of judicial justice or litigation. 

“Extrajudicial justice” would be the same sort of thing. 

If someone gets kicked out of a few bars for abusing patrons while there to perform, it isn’t either of those things to not allow them to play at your bar.


----------



## bedir than (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> I am defending being compassionate, empathetic and deliberative.



There's no compassion for the abused, no empathy for those that suffer, and no deliberation when it comes to the fact that both Jamison and Satine have admitted they harmed people


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Stop mischaracterising what is happening. Street justice does not refer to _people sharing stories of abuse and others stepping away from the abusers as a result. _
> 
> “Street justice” is using violence in place of judicial justice or litigation.
> 
> ...




I never said street justice equaled that, and I stated several times, I am not saying people need to stop sharing stories. I  said we should not normalize using twitter as an extrajudicial platform for for justice in response to a poster who said was being used that way because the courts were inadequate. People lose their job over blowouts on twitter, people have trouble finding work when they become pariahs on social media. When these things happen, and when they've happened in the gaming community, I find the rush to cruelty and to judgement a little alarming. I think that is a fair reaction. 

I have no problem kicking people out of venues if they misbehave. I do have a problem with the permanence, intensity, and recklessness of cancelation campaigns that happen twitter. 

As far as this particular case is concerned, I haven't weighed in because I found it too time consuming once I started delving into. My only concern in this specific case is that apology video seems concerning to me in terms of what state she is in, as she clearly expresses a lack of hope for future employment. While there may be issues at hand that need to be rectified in some way, I do think cautioning people against dogpiling or being cruel (even if they think she deserves it) is warranted because we should all have some empathy for someone in the state she appears to be in the end of the video (and again that isn't to say she didn't do anything: on that front I don't know).


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

bedir than said:


> There's no compassion for the abused, no empathy for those that suffer, and no deliberation when it comes to the fact that both Jamison and Satine have admitted they harmed people




Everyone deserves empathy and compassion. I think people who were abused (and again in this case I haven't dug deep enough to weigh in intelligently on whether that is the case) they deserve compassion. If people haven't been paid, then they deserve compensation. That I am fine with. What I am not fine with, is people saying you have to join in on hating someone or excluding someone.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> I just want to make a point here about this. No one is defending abuse. I am certainly not doing so. I am defending being compassionate, empathetic and deliberative. But our legal court system in the US, is based on taking pains to prevent innocent people from being punished for crimes they didn't commit. And it still happens that innocent people go to prison. There are very good reasons for wanting to make sure our system avoids that. There are plenty of examples throughout our history of the legal system destroying peoples lives when they didn't deserve it. That means you will have people who commit all kinds of crimes not face justice. Not just abuse, but murder, drug trafficking, theft, and more. Because we don't want innocent people going to prison. The standards of evidence are intentionally set high to avoid this. But I don't think the solution is to let twitter mobs decide what happens to people who are accused but not found guilty. I am not saying there shouldn't be conversations, I am just saying we should be very wary of normalizing this kind of extrajudicial justice, when large groups of people acting in haste, are not well equipped to mete out justice in a way that doesn't also harm innocent people. It shouldn't justify that just as it shouldn't justify vigilante justice. I live in a high crime area and I see plenty of criminals go unpunished. That doesn't mean I want people to take to the streets and enact street justice (because I've also seen how sideways that can go and hurt people who are entirely innocent). But wanting to make sure innocent people don't go to prison, doesn't mean I support murder and drug trafficking, or that I want victims of crime to shut up.



What Justice do you think is being meted out? Some people were abusive jerks and because they were charismatic and had good connections, it didn’t come out for quite a while. Now it has come out, and people are deciding not to associate or do business with them. That’s not Justice being meted out, that’s just completely normal social dynamics.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> “Extrajudicial justice” would be the same sort of thing.




What i mean by extrajudicial is social media achieving court like outcomes through social and cultural pressure. So getting someone fired from their job because of a whisper campaign or something. Or getting someone blacklisted from an industry, or in extreme cases, tarring their reputation so badly they can't even get a job at McDonalds because the controversy comes up anytime they are google searched. The problem with twitter is it is like a game of telephone. In some cases there is merit to claims. But in others it just starts out as a spat, and it grows and things get distorted. So you can have people being accused of doing things that not only they didn't do, but they weren't even originally accused of doing (it just grows into something else over time, or a bad actor or two slip in or distort what is being said about someone). People commit suicide over these kinds of things. It is not minor.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> What Justice do you think is being meted out? Some people were abusive jerks and because they were charismatic and had good connections, it didn’t come out for quite a while. Now it has come out, and people are deciding not to associate or do business with them. That’s not Justice being meted out, that’s just completely normal social dynamics.




In that exchange with Umbran I was speaking broadly  about twitter being used to mete out justice. Like I said, I can't really weigh in on this case, beyond what I said about being concerned after seeing the apology video, because I just found it too deep to delve into when I tried following the links. 

But I would argue what we are seeing play out in general on social media isn't normal social dynamics. It is stuff that has started to happen in the past 5 years or so. What you are seeing now, and I am not saying that is happening in this particular instance, is people being canceled from events, losing jobs, etc for much more minor transgressions (sometimes just having the wrong opinion on something). And it has broader impact and lasts forever. And you are seeing often get affixed with labels that aren't even true. Or aren't the whole story, and that impacts their ability to live and work. I think this is pretty obvious to anyone who has been paying attention to the hobby space for the past decade that this shift has happened.

I don't see any of what I've seen in the past few years on social media in the hobby as normal

Also in this particular instance. If people were abusive jerks, its fair for folks to be angry about that. But what I can say is, what troubles me is some of the cruelty I am seeing in places. I am not saying anyone is blameless or that there shouldn't' be conquesquences. But we are seeing a person's life be destroyed in real time, and I have trouble not seeing the tragedy in that. It is certainly not something I want to cheer on. 

And even here clearly there is a justice being meted out. You specificity it in your post "people are deciding not to associate or do business". So these people are losing work opportunities, being removed from paid events, etc. I am not saying that should or shouldn't happen, but it is an outcome of twitter being used in this way. If you don't think the person should work int he hobby, fair enough. But for how long? Forever? Do you think they should still even be able work at all in other industries? Should they be barred from creative fields? Should they not be allowed to work in service jobs? Do you think every employer should turn them away? Where should the limit of people deciding not to associate with or do business with them fall? What is the most just outcome? I ask because I feel in these kinds of storms, twitter doesn't do a great job of setting the limits of that outcome and clearly it is an outcome. Something substantive is coming of all this. Which is why I am wary of twitter as an instrument of justice (and against doesn't mean people didn't do things that were bad or that there shouldn't be consequences).


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> In that exchange with Umbran I was speaking broadly  about twitter being used to mete out justice. Like I said, I can't really weigh in on this case, beyond what I said about being concerned after seeing the apology video, because I just found it too deep to delve into when I tried following the links.
> 
> But I would argue what we are seeing play out in general on social media isn't normal social dynamics. It is stuff that has started to happen in the past 5 years or so. What you are seeing now, and I am not saying that is happening in this particular instance, is people being canceled from events, losing jobs, etc for much more minor transgressions (sometimes just having the wrong opinion on something). And it has broader impact and lasts forever. And you are seeing often get affixed with labels that aren't even true. Or aren't the whole story, and that impacts their ability to live and work. I think this is pretty obvious to anyone who has been paying attention to the hobby space for the past decade that this shift has happened.
> 
> I don't see any of what I've seen in the past few years on social media in the hobby as normal



“Cancel culture” is two distinct phenomena: one is people choosing not to associate or do business with people for various reasons, usually related to having been accused of some behavior, or having publicly expressed some view that the party ceasing association… doesn’t want to associate with… and the other is cyber bullying. The latter is definitely a serious problem with social media that needs addressing. The former is definitely just normal social dynamics.


----------



## seebs (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Lacking all the context and facts of these people's lives, I choose to err on the side of compassion and forgiveness.



I see the appeal, but I think you may underestimate the harm to victims of being told that their accounts don't matter and aren't real and there's no reason to do anything about the harm done to them. Context only gets you so far, and the consistent pattern in our society of assuming that successful people must be guiltless and disregarding any and all concerns about them is how you get people spending decades abusing people and getting away with it.

It's good to be aware that an accusation _could_ be false, but you seem to be leaping straight to functionally assuming that all accusations are false, and that seems like a pretty strong stance to be arguing for in the absence of any particular evidence for it.



vostygg said:


> I would defer judgment until I got to know them and was able to draw my own firsthand impressions.



It seems to me that it would make sense to, at the very least, actively investigate allegations like these _before_ "working for or with" people. Because otherwise, if the allegations _are_ true, you're quite possibly going to get screwed over.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> “Cancel culture” is two distinct phenomena: one is people choosing not to associate or do business with people for various reasons, usually related to having been accused of some behavior, or having publicly expressed some view that the party ceasing association… doesn’t want to associate with… and the other is cyber bullying. The latter is definitely a serious problem with social media that needs addressing. The former is definitely just normal social dynamics.




It is more than cyber bullying. Even in the former case, it tends to take on a life of its own and become a game of telephone. In some instances it may have some merit, in others not. But from my point of view, I think the consequences often are far out of proportion to what the person is even accused of. Which again is one of the main reasons I just distrust using social media to cancel someone (because social media and large mobs of people on social media are not good ways to achieve a truly just outcome). I am not saying you have to keep following someone or support someone who says stuff you don't like. I just think we've taken things much too far when it comes to how we ostracize and demonize people on social media. And how that ultimately leads to people having a hard time even existing.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> If someone gets kicked out of a few bars for abusing patrons while there to perform, it isn’t either of those things to not allow them to play at your bar.




I am not arguing against this.


----------



## Charlaquin (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> It is more than cyber bullying. Even in the former case, it tends to take on a life of its own and become a game of telephone. In some instances it may have some merit, in others not. But from my point of view, I think the consequences often are far out of proportion to what the person is even accused of. Which again is one of the main reasons I just distrust using social media to cancel someone (because social media and large mobs of people on social media are not good ways to achieve a truly just outcome). I am not saying you have to keep following someone or support someone who says stuff you don't like. I just think we've taken things much too far when it comes to how we ostracize and demonize people on social media. And how that ultimately leads to people having a hard time even existing.



I don’t know, what you’re describing sounds exactly like cyber bullying to me.


----------



## MNblockhead (Jun 18, 2022)

Jahydin said:


> I didn't think ADHD could be so bad.
> 
> Reading articles like this has downplayed the severity for me :
> "Of the 6.4 million kids who have been given diagnoses of A.D.H.D., a large percentage are unlikely to have any kind of physiological difference that would make them more distractible than the average non-A.D.H.D. kid. It’s also doubtful that biological or environmental changes are making physiological differences more prevalent. Instead, the rapid increase in people with A.D.H.D. probably has more to do with sociological factors — changes in the way we school our children, in the way we interact with doctors and in what we expect from our kids."



Right.  And I was one of those kids who probably didn't need to be on Ritalin.  I still feel that even people with more severe cases of ADHD likely would have been fine in a hunter-gather society or even a pre-industrial agrarian society.  At the nature of schooling and work has changed, and as the numbers of distractions of modern life keep compounding, it is hard for certain people to succeed without medical help. For a long time, I would argue against medication, promoting exercise, diet, removing distractions, using software to help keep you organized and focused, etc. And this is not bad advice.  But at some point it, for some people, it becomes shaming them for getting help they and their doctors have determined is needed.  It is like telling a chronically depressed person that they should just meditate/pray/exercise instead of medicating themselves.  Some people need the medication to thrive.


----------



## MNblockhead (Jun 18, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> The thing I just shrug about "cancel culture" is that it really seems to me to highlight the difference between those of us who didn't grow up with social media, and the ones that do.  Because when you think about it... what is "cancelling"?  It is people telling someone "We aren't going to let you be famous anymore."
> 
> That's it.  That's the punishment.  They don't want to see or hear about you online.  There's no other forfeiture-- the person doesn't lose any of their money, the person doesn't go to prison, the person doesn't suffer anything physically... nothing like any of that.  All it is is "you can't be famous".
> 
> And I think that says a lot that that's the worst punishment our younger generations can think of to dish out to someone-- wish them to be anonymous.  It makes me think that people like JK Rowling and Louie CK are just crying all the way to the bank.



Well...it gets much worse than this.  I try to avoid the term "cancel culture" for the same reason I avoid "sheeple", "CRT", and other loaded terms that people thrown around as a perjorative and as a lazy substitute for thoughtful dialog. But we can agree, I think, that the ability to bully people--from whatever spot in the political spectrum the bullies sit--is exponentially greater in the era of social media.  From elementary school kids to adults at the top of their careers, people have been driven out of careers and to suicide. People are doxed, stalked, harassed, and threatened. Yeah, this terrible behavior has always existed in communities. But the ability to for large groups of people with otherwise weak connections to the targets to pile on is so much greater. And it encourages certain types of people to take it too far--far out of proportion to whatever sin the target is guilty of.


----------



## TheSword (Jun 18, 2022)

Morrus said:


> We can't imprison or fine anybody, or deprive them of life or liberty. A court of law is not required to determine social consequences. The very idea that a court of law should be needed before one decides how to legally and non-violently react to somebody's behaviour is waaaaaaay beyond anything I think anybody would reasonably suggest. So let's not throw around legal terms like 'due process' and the like unless you want a judge to intervene every time you disagree with somebody. We're not _there_ yet in our society, fortunately.



You can’t imprison people so you don’t need due process? There is such a thing as natural justice.

Come on, you live in the UK. You know that an employer has to follow Employment law regulations, even though they can’t fine or imprisonment you.

Every employer in the Uk (and most of Europe) has to give you clear grounds for your misconduct and present you evidence. It has to give you opportunity to reply. It needs to be unbiased. It needs to make a decision after all the facts have been seen and not before. The punishment has to be proportional. Your well-being has to be taken care of throughout the process. It has to be confidential.

Now Satine isn’t in the UK and isn’t an employee. So doesn’t get these protections. But let’s not pretend the only time a person deserves fair treatment is if they’re about to go to prison!

As an aside, contracts and SLA’s are supposed to protect contractors. What went wrong here? Why haven’t the freelancers that have been abused got their contracts to fall back on in disputes over pay?


----------



## MNblockhead (Jun 18, 2022)

TheSword said:


> As an aside, contracts and SLA’s are supposed to protect contractors. What went wrong here? Why haven’t the freelancers that have been abused got their contracts to fall back on in disputes over pay?



Have no idea, but I having been involved in legal disputes over business deals that have gone bad, it is expensive, it is time consuming, and it can be quite stressful. For the amount of money in question, even small claims court is likely not worth the hassle for many people.  If I agree to work for someone on a small project and that person stiffs me or strings me along, I might not bother going to down the path of litigation, but I would certainly let colleagues and perhaps others in my network know. That's pretty much what seems to be going on.  Though, there is litigation as well.  Satine seems lacking in business acumen and that combined with an unchecked ego, led her to treat people poorly. She also seems to have enabled, at a minimum by looking the other way, some quite abusive individuals in her professional and social circle. 

Calling her out on it publicly is just more effective.  As litigious as the US is, etiquette and the social consequences for breaking rule of etiquette, is primarily what governs our behavior.


----------



## TheSword (Jun 18, 2022)

MNblockhead said:


> Have no idea, but I having been involved in legal disputes over business deals that have gone bad, it is expensive, it is time consuming, and it can be quite stressful. For the amount of money in question, even small claims court is likely not worth the hassle for many people.  If I agree to work for someone on a small project and that person stiffs me or strings me along, I might not bother going to down the path of litigation, but I would certainly let colleagues and perhaps others in my network know. That's pretty much what seems to be going on.  Though, there is litigation as well.  Satine seems lacking in business acumen and that combined with an unchecked ego, led her to treat people poorly. She also seems to have enabled, at a minimum by looking the other way, some quite abusive individuals in her professional and social circle.
> 
> Calling her out on it publicly is just more effective.  As litigious as the US is, etiquette and the social consequences for breaking rule of etiquette, is primarily what governs our behavior.



Sure but the social stigma normally comes from breaking a contract - and therefore getting a reputation for duplicitousness.


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Abuse victims have been suffering permanent impacts for time immemorial.  Our legal/court systems are ineffective at curbing such abuse.  What you see on social media is the predictable and understandable result of allowing the injustice to persist.
> 
> In waggling your finger at social media, you miss the root cause of the issue - the abuse.  Address that, and the social media issue will be resolved.  Meanwhile, telling victims and their friends and allies to shut up and sit down, without doing something material to protect them, is not a good look.



Compassion is always a good look.  Calling for moderation and proportionality at a stoning is compassion; it's not the same as siding with abusers.  "If you're not with us, you're against us" is the very definition of a false dichotomy.


----------



## MNblockhead (Jun 18, 2022)

TheSword said:


> Sure but the social stigma normally comes from breaking a contract - and therefore getting a reputation for duplicitousness.



Not in my experience. More common are clients, colleagues, and vendors who are on the up and up legally, but are difficult to work with.  By difficult to work with, that can mean: 

* they are overly abrasive or abusive in how they treat people that at some point, while they may be competent, the damage they do to morale makes it not worth working with them. 

* poor support and poor communication - they may meet deadlines and the letter of their SLAs, but are unresponsive and unhelpful. You couldn't trust them to be there when you need them and rather than having to tighten up contracts and SLAs and constantly defend your contractual rights, you are just going to use and recommend those who have a culture of good customer service.

In the Satine's case, the failure to pay contractors was what caused the dam to break, but more damning is how she treated people generally.  The abuse and prima dona behavior may not have amounted to anything legally actionable but it certainly has damaged her reputation.  

If Satine treated everyone with decency and clearly communicated payment issues, but due to poor business skills was unable to pay people in a timely manner, it wouldn't look good, but it would be a lot easier to address and likely more forgivable. It is not just that people did not get paid, but rather that a pattern of dismissive and abusive behavior got to the point where it seems like she felt she was entitled not to pay people.  Hell, maybe there are justifiable reasons she was unable to make payments, but her other actions have made it difficult to give a charitable view. 

Treat people well as a general rule and they are more likely to forgive a slip up. Treat people poorly and it becomes very difficult to argue that the failure to pay was anything other than another manifestation of your contempt for them.


----------



## Staffan (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> And even here clearly there is a justice being meted out. You specificity it in your post "people are deciding not to associate or do business". So these people are losing work opportunities, being removed from paid events, etc. I am not saying that should or shouldn't happen, but it is an outcome of twitter being used in this way. If you don't think the person should work int he hobby, fair enough. But for how long? Forever? Do you think they should still even be able work at all in other industries? Should they be barred from creative fields? Should they not be allowed to work in service jobs? Do you think every employer should turn them away? Where should the limit of people deciding not to associate with or do business with them fall? What is the most just outcome? I ask because I feel in these kinds of storms, twitter doesn't do a great job of setting the limits of that outcome and clearly it is an outcome. Something substantive is coming of all this. Which is why I am wary of twitter as an instrument of justice (and against doesn't mean people didn't do things that were bad or that there shouldn't be consequences).



At the very least, neither of these people should ever be in a position where they hold power, formal or informal, over anyone else. Ever.

Personally, I would also be far less likely to watch or enjoy anything where they were involved. I don't think I'm alone in that. So they should probably never be in a public-facing position again, simply because they'd be toxic in any such position.

Which probably means they need to get jobs outside of the entertainment industry. I hear Amazon's hiring.


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

MNblockhead said:


> Not in my experience. More common are clients, colleagues, and vendors who are on the up and up legally, but are difficult to work with.  By difficult to work with, that can mean:
> 
> * they are overly abrasive or abusive in how they treat people that at some point, while they may be competent, the damage they do to morale makes it not worth working with them.
> 
> ...



Right, it wasn't just that people weren't getting paid

It was (very clear from the their own writings) that they were bullying and gaslighting people - telling them it was their own fault they weren't getting paid.

That's exactly the kind of behavior that needs to be exposed so it does not continue.


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

Staffan said:


> Which probably means they need to get jobs outside of the entertainment industry. I hear Amazon's hiring.




I know you're being (at least partially) facetious but (sadly), schmoozing and charming those above you while exploiting and belittling those below you Is a proven effective technique on the American corporate ladder.

Assuming he could keep his temper in check, Stone would likely rise to a top Amazon corporate position in no time.


----------



## Staffan (Jun 18, 2022)

Mort said:


> I know you're being (at least partially) facetious but (sadly), schmoozing and charming those above you while exploiting and belittling those below you Is a proven effective technique on the American corporate ladder.
> 
> Assuming he could keep his temper in check, Stone would likely rise to a top Amazon corporate position in no time.



I was thinking more on the warehouse side.


----------



## Ondath (Jun 18, 2022)

Staffan said:


> At the very least, neither of these people should ever be in a position where they hold power, formal or informal, over anyone else. Ever.
> 
> Personally, I would also be far less likely to watch or enjoy anything where they were involved. I don't think I'm alone in that. So they should probably never be in a public-facing position again, simply because they'd be toxic in any such position.
> 
> Which probably means they need to get jobs outside of the entertainment industry. I hear Amazon's hiring.



This seems excessive to me. Living in a society means holding some power over someone else no matter what you do. What you're suggesting is that they should basically be condemned to a life of manual labour, you even imply that with the Amazon comment.

I'm all for people facing the consequences of their actions, but arguing that there should *never *be a way for abusers to reform is pessimistic and counter productive. By your logic, Dan Harmon should have been kicked out of the industry after harassing Megan Gantz. But instead he took responsibility for his actions and Gantz found his apology and effort to do better to be genuine. If you close the door for reform, you can't have reconciliation of this kind.

It's also counterproductive from a pragmatic standpoint. If the only available answer to abuse of power is barring them from any meaningful job for the rest of their lives, abusers are incentivised to just do what they do more discreetly. If you instead show that some form of reconciliation is possible (and will actually be morally better for them), you have some chance that they will be more willing to be held accountable for what they have done.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 18, 2022)

TheSword said:


> You can’t imprison people so you don’t need due process? There is such a thing as natural justice.
> 
> Come on, you live in the UK. You know that an employer has to follow Employment law regulations, even though they can’t fine or imprisonment you.
> 
> ...



I'm not sure what you mean. We aren't employing them. Or are you suggesting that those who have now chosen not to associate with them should be legally forced to? It's a pretty confusing take and I'm honestly not sure where you're going with it.


----------



## Mort (Jun 18, 2022)

TheSword said:


> You can’t imprison people so you don’t need due process? There is such a thing as natural justice.
> 
> Come on, you live in the UK. You know that an employer has to follow Employment law regulations, even though they can’t fine or imprisonment you.
> 
> ...




So are you saying the contractors were wrong to point out bullying and other terrible behavior and should have, instead, kept quiet?



TheSword said:


> As an aside, contracts and SLA’s are supposed to protect contractors. What went wrong here? Why haven’t the freelancers that have been abused got their contracts to fall back on in disputes over pay?




Litigating a contract is EXPENSIVE, like REALLY expensive. The contractors quite likely couldn't afford it easily.

That said, I know they (Stone and Phoenix) ARE being sued in some  capacity ,-; such things take a while to resolve.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jun 18, 2022)

I posted the Kickstarter update where the claim was made that writers have been paid. I cannot check the exact details or the contract but if I take that at face value, the deadline for the writing was last October and the contract said that pay was supposably on acceptance. Plus, some writers turned in way more than they were contracted to.

It does not seem bad that there is an acceptance process. Where the failure seemed to be was the time it took - November to March. And then being asked to turn in an invoice (asking for an invoice is common, you need proof via the payment process).

They appeared to have mixed editing with approval. Approval should be skim reading the submission and insuring that reasonable work was submitted. I honestly do not know what to do about asking a writer for 8K words and getting 12K words. 

Couple the too long delay (30 days would have been reasonable, 4 months is too long) with condescending and harsh language and you go from a freelancer that is fine with the process to annoyed and mad people.


----------



## Steampunkette (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> Everyone deserves empathy and compassion. I think people who were abused* (and again in this case I haven't dug deep enough to weigh in intelligently on whether that is the case) *they deserve compassion. If people haven't been paid, then they deserve compensation. That I am fine with. What I am not fine with, is people saying you have to join in on hating someone or excluding someone.



Then stop posting about a situation you don't understand and instead go digging.

THIS is there the problem is. You're defending complete trash fires from a reasonable tongue-lashing for the awful things they've done, but don't know -what- they've done.

Also the "Weigh intelligently if that is the case" is just horrifying.

"Your abuse doesn't count 'til -I- weigh in on whether it was bad enough to publicly reprimand the people who did it."

The sheer audacity.



vostygg said:


> Compassion is always a good look.  Calling for moderation and proportionality at a stoning is compassion; it's not the same as siding with abusers.  "If you're not with us, you're against us" is the very definition of a false dichotomy.



If someone were being stoned, you'd have a point. This is a social backlash for a pair of people who stole from people, didn't fulfill their contracts, and in one case used their authority and misleading intentions to commit coercive rape.

Also: Your false dichotomy callout is disingenuous. If you have an attacker and a victim and you choose not to intervene you have chosen to side with the attacker by allowing the violence to continue. The attacker may continue to violate his victim's rights without opposition.

You didn't "Choose Neither" in that situation, you chose the aggressor.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

Steampunkette said:


> Then stop posting about a situation you don't understand and instead go digging.
> 
> THIS is there the problem is. You're defending complete trash fires from a reasonable tongue-lashing for the awful things they've done, but don't know -what- they've done.



I haven't defended them. I've gone out of my way to point out I can't really comment specially on the situation because I find the rabbit hole rather deep here. This thread is about more than this one situation, and there are aspects of the situation I am comfortable speaking to (like whether there ought to be a concern about the well being of someone after they post a video like that, whether that ought to moderate peoples reactions to them, etc). But most of my commentary has been in response to more general statements about people being raked through the goals on social media for perceived wrong doings and whether social media itself is a good vessel for justice.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

Steampunkette said:


> Also: Your false dichotomy callout is disingenuous. If you have an attacker and a victim and you choose not to intervene you have chosen to side with the attacker by allowing the violence to continue. The attacker may continue to violate his victim's rights without opposition.




Choosing to intervene and choosing to participate in a public shaming are two very different things though. And choosing to intervene and stop an attacker from hurting another person, which I agree you should do, and continuing to beat the attacker until they are near death are also two different things. The concerns being raised are about proportionality and the ability of twitter to arrive at a proportionally just outcome


----------



## Steampunkette (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> I haven't defended them. I've gone out of my way to point out I can't really comment specially on the situation because I find the rabbit hole rather deep here. This thread is about more than this one situation, and there are aspects of the situation I am comfortable speaking to (like whether there ought to be a concern about the well being of someone after they post a video like that, whether that ought to moderate peoples reactions to them, etc). But most of my commentary has been in response to more general statements about people being raked through the goals on social media for perceived wrong doings and whether social media itself is a good vessel for justice.



"Moderate people's reaction". "Raked through the coals". "Perceived wrongdoings." "Good vessel for Justice."

Moderating people's reaction: Seeking to reduce the backlash against the people who have done wrong. This is defending them from backlash. Not defending their -actions-, which you claim to not know enough about, but defending them as people. The distinction is present, but the result is the same. You're trying to ameliorate apparent harm to abusers and that tells victims to stop fighting back.

Raked through the coals: A statement describing a torture. Because a social media backlash is to be compared to violent torture. While your intention is probably to use a common enough turn of phrase in this case it points to "Overreaction". Which again tells victims to stop fighting back.

Perceived Wrongdoings: Maybe they didn't even do anything wrong, despite all the evidence and personal accounts and stuff that you have repeatedly stated you haven't read or learned about or 'weighed'. So stop complaining about it, victims of abuse. Don't fight back.

Good vessel for justice: Stop fighting back unless you take it through the court system, assuming of course you've got the time and money for that particular course of action, and keep it to yourselves so no other victim sees a way to fight back and no other potential victim gets warned in advance.

Your -intention- may not be to defend these folks. But the -result- of your choices doesn't always line up.


Bedrockgames said:


> Choosing to intervene and choosing to participate in a public shaming are two very different things though. And choosing to intervene and stop an attacker from hurting another person, which I agree you should do, and continuing to beat the attacker until they are near death are also two different things. The concerns being raised are about proportionality and the ability of twitter to arrive at a proportionally just outcome



Jamison Stone raped a woman.

Social Media cannot put the man into prison for his crime.

Ergo there is no point in which Social Media can reach proportionality with the severity of his crimes by our societal norms and laws.

Ipso Facto: Social Media Backlash can never be as just to the victim as the court system, and favors the criminal.

Apply this to all other forms of emotional and economic abuse he and Satine engaged in.


----------



## Staffan (Jun 18, 2022)

Ondath said:


> This seems excessive to me. Living in a society means holding some power over someone else no matter what you do. What you're suggesting is that they should basically be condemned to a life of manual labour, you even imply that with the Amazon comment.



I mean, there are also call center jobs, and all sorts of other jobs where they can make a living without their narcissism hurting anyone else. And there's no shame in such a job. The world needs ditch-diggers, and ditch-diggers should be adequately compensated for their labor.



Ondath said:


> I'm all for people facing the consequences of their actions, but arguing that there should *never *be a way for abusers to reform is pessimistic and counter productive. By your logic, Dan Harmon should have been kicked out of the industry after harassing Megan Gantz. But instead he took responsibility for his actions and Gantz found his apology and effort to do better to be genuine. If you close the door for reform, you can't have reconciliation of this kind.



Thing is that the world does not owe them reformation. That's something they're going to have to figure out on their own. I know I wouldn't touch anything they're involved with with an 11' pole unless there are people I trust (well, as much as you can trust anyone online) saying they're cool. And in the meantime, there are other ways to make a living.

There's a difference between people forced into crime by circumstance and necessity, and people who choose to abuse positions of relative power. The former deserves a chance at redemption, the latter needs a lot of work on restitution to all the people they have wronged (whether in the judicial or personal sense).


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

Steampunkette said:


> Jamison Stone raped a woman.




I haven’t defended him for anything at all. And on this, this is the first I am hearing of a Rape accusation. If that’s true I am in no way saying there shouldn’t be legal or social consequences, nor am I saying victims should bd silence. Again most of what I have been talking about is the ability of social media to serve as a platform for effective justice (and the case of these two people my commentary had been focused on concern after seeing her stats at ghdcrbf of the apology video and whether that should have us seeing you roll back the aggression towards her


----------



## Steampunkette (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> I haven’t defended him for anything at all. And on this, this is the first I am hearing of a Rape accusation. If that’s true I am in no way saying there shouldn’t be legal or social consequences, nor am I saying victims should bd silence. Again most of what I have been talking about is the ability of social media to serve as a platform for effective justice (and the case of these two people my commentary had been focused on concern after seeing her stats at ghdcrbf of the apology video and whether that should have us seeing you roll back the aggression towards her



The fact that this is the first your hearing of it COMPLETELY UNDERMINES the rest of your intentions.

Pontificating over whether social media can be an effective platform for justice requires knowing what has been done and knowing what the social media response to it is and judging the proportionality.

Without knowing what has been done to cause the backlash, you're just talking in circles and wasting time talking about hypotheticals while people are -actually- suffering. You're treating it like it's a thought experiment, something interesting to consider, and in the process saying a lot of stuff like "Perceived Wrongdoing" that flatly tells the people currently suffering that the abuse they received might not even exist.

Go digging. Stop posting. Don't defend yourself against this response, don't dig in your heels, don't reiterate that you're "Just" talking about some thought-construct that isn't really related to the topic at hand.

If you want to weigh things, Bedrock Games, then go find out what you'll be putting on each side of the scale.


----------



## Ondath (Jun 18, 2022)

Staffan said:


> I mean, there are also call center jobs, and all sorts of other jobs where they can make a living without their narcissism hurting anyone else. And there's no shame in such a job. The world needs ditch-diggers, and ditch-diggers should be adequately compensated for their labor.
> 
> 
> Thing is that the world does not owe them reformation. That's something they're going to have to figure out on their own. I know I wouldn't touch anything they're involved with with an 11' pole unless there are people I trust (well, as much as you can trust anyone online) saying they're cool. And in the meantime, there are other ways to make a living.
> ...



I just can't stand by such an unkind view. If you think the world doesn't owe them reform, that's on you, but I thought the whole point of having a moral community is being better than whatever unjust world we are plunged into.

Everyone deserves a chance for reformation, and while this reformation might not be easy or might require extensive efforts to make amends, denying it outright is immoral IMO. It denies the infinite freedom and dignity all of us inherently have.


----------



## mythago (Jun 18, 2022)

Ondath said:


> I just can't stand by such an unkind view. If you think the world doesn't owe them reform, that's on you, but I thought the whole point of having a moral community is being better than whatever unjust world we are plunged into.
> 
> Everyone deserves a chance for reformation, and while this reformation might not be easy or might require extensive efforts to make amends, denying it outright is immoral IMO. It denies the infinite freedom and dignity all of us inherently have.




“owe” then reform? “Deserves” a chance?

Restorative Justice is never centered on the perpetrator and isn’t about putting their redemption narrative first and foremost.

These people are still trying to image-manage their way out of consequences and yet even as they are trying to ooze right back into their positions, here we go with dressing up anxiety about conflict as a moral imperative.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

Steampunkette said:


> The fact that this is the first your hearing of it COMPLETELY UNDERMINES the rest of your intentions.
> 
> Pontificating over whether social media can be an effective platform for justice requires knowing what has been done and knowing what the social media response to it is and judging the proportionality.
> 
> ...




Again I have mostly been responding to general posts about social media backlash that keep coming up in the discussion not this particular case and regularly explained where I can’t comment on issues specifically around this controversy. but I do think it is still fair for me to react when I see someone who looks like they are in serious distress in an apology video and question whether things are getting out of hand. Doesn’t mean if people were abused there shouldn’t be justice of people should be silent. But does mean we should be cautious if we think s person could be driven to harm themselves.


----------



## Ondath (Jun 18, 2022)

mythago said:


> “owe” then reform? “Deserves” a chance?
> 
> Restorative Justice is never centered on the perpetrator and isn’t about putting their redemption narrative first and foremost.
> 
> These people are still trying to image-manage their way out of consequences and yet even as they are trying to ooze right back into their positions, here we go with dressing up anxiety about conflict as a moral imperative.



Surely you agree that there's a major, useful gap between "Restorative justice should be about the perpetrator" (which isn't what I said, but let's pretend it is) and "people who abused power should be condemned to call centre or warehouse jobs"? I don't think finding the latter too harsh is an extreme view.

Also note that "owing them reform" was the terms used by the person I was quoting. I wouldn't put it that way myself, I think it's rather that a justice system that does not hope for reform as much as possible is not one I'd condone.


----------



## Steampunkette (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> Again I have mostly been responding to general posts about social media backlash that keep coming up in the discussion not this particular case and regularly explained where I can’t comment on issues specifically around this controversy. but I do think it is still fair for me to react when I see someone who looks like they are in serious distress in an apology video and question whether things are getting out of hand. Doesn’t mean if people were abused there shouldn’t be justice of people should be silent. But does mean we should be cautious if we think s person could be driven to harm themselves.



So you're not interested in the controversy, you're not interested in actually weighing the results of social media, and you think Satine might do a desperate outrage to herself, and you want to join in with other people pointlessly navel-gazing over whether social media is "Just" without actually, y'know, trying to determine whether the given situation is just.

Like... do you understand what I'm saying here or am I being particularly obtuse?

If you want to weigh whether social media is Just you have to determine the crimes and the punishment and compare the two.

Doesn't matter if it's -this- controversy or some -other- controversy. That's just the baseline minimum level of information required to accomplish the goal. You cannot determine proportionality without knowing both the action and the reaction. Right?

Navel-gazing philosophical hypothetical discussion of imagined actions and reactions probably has it's place somewhere... But in this thread, which is specifically about these people and the things they've done... just ain't it.

Though if you're sincerely worried Satine will hurt herself, feel free to just say that. It would probably be an appropriately weighed concern.


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Jun 18, 2022)

Social media has changed the equation.  

When I hire people, I check references and do some digging.  I look at a resume and look for gaps and odd patterns.  People that burn bridges don’t do well.

Now we have a new game.  Many uninvolved parties participate.  Usually they are misinformed (not always).  But in large numbers many people just go along with the wave.

And the other unsettling thing is a growing tendency to not just disassociate from people but to salt the fields—-go out of our way to make sure others also don’t give the person a chance.   It happened before, but now with the internet you can rally many people and extend consequences that go beyond your own sphere.

Sometimes social capital is used to not just remove the person from one sphere or job but to apply lasting economic punishment.  I am not just getting kicked out of one circle but other circles I have never interacted with.

Some will willingly go along with this assured that they are just upholding some shared ideal.

We say there is no “cancel culture” and maybe that is true but call this what you will.  Sometimes it is probably deserved if it actually protects the public.  Other times?

It is often is mob mentality but we’re the good mob!  So why worry?  Sure the occasional innocent person is on death row but you know, omelettes and broken eggs.

It’s all cool until you get the slip of paper with a black dot yourself for some perceived crime.  It might not be big at first but once someone sounds the alarm your misdeeds or “insufficient apology” will only be evidence of your lack of worth and we can look for dirt that confirms our suspicions.

Its not going to stop; this is our culture now supported by social media and the internet.  It’s here to stay.  It’s just a gross process which brings out the worst in people.

From concerned onlookers to cabal of evil witches around a bubbling cauldron in 5 seconds flat. 

I am not defending these people.  I am not sure how Satine was relevant to D&D in the first place.  I looked at one scenario and had questions.  Then I realized I don’t consume her products so what’s the use?

I don’t think people should be free of consequences or reputations but the quick widespread intentional consequences are a thing that is here to stay—just going to keep drawing a slip and hope to not draw a black dot.   I go out of my way to follow my values and the Golden rule but it’s no guarantee.


----------



## mythago (Jun 18, 2022)

Ondath said:


> Surely you agree that there's a major, useful gap between "Restorative justice should be about the perpetrator" (which isn't what I said, but let's pretend it is) and "people who abused power should be condemned to call centre or warehouse jobs"? I don't think finding the latter too harsh is an extreme view.
> 
> Also note that "owing them reform" was the terms used by the person I was quoting. I wouldn't put it that way myself, I think it's rather that a justice system that does not hope for reform as much as possible is not one I'd condone.




I’m honestly not sure how to address the argument that the only alternative to being a D&D celebrity is a lifetime of working at a call center or warehouse job. Much less the


Ondath said:


> Surely you agree that there's a major, useful gap between "Restorative justice should be about the perpetrator" (which isn't what I said, but let's pretend it is) and "people who abused power should be condemned to call centre or warehouse jobs"? I don't think finding the latter too harsh is an extreme view.
> 
> Also note that "owing them reform" was the terms used by the person I was quoting. I wouldn't put it that way myself, I think it's rather that a justice system that does not hope for reform as much as possible is not one I'd condone.


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

Steampunkette said:


> Also: Your false dichotomy callout is disingenuous. If you have an attacker and a victim and you choose not to intervene you have chosen to side with the attacker by allowing the violence to continue. The attacker may continue to violate his victim's rights without opposition.
> 
> You didn't "Choose Neither" in that situation, you chose the aggressor.



Nonsense!



Steampunkette said:


> Jamison Stone raped a woman.



Really?  What proof do you have of this?  If it's true, then I hope he is tried in a court of law and sent to prison. If it's false, then how dare you promulgate falsehoods that could ruin a person's life without knowing any of the parties involved and with nothing but a set of one-sided social media posts to go by?  Mob justice is all this is, and it sickens me.  I don't even know why I bother.  An insidious aspect of cancel culture is that the voices of moderation and proportionality get shouted down and bullied off the stage by the zealots with the torches and the pitchforks.


----------



## Ondath (Jun 18, 2022)

mythago said:


> I’m honestly not sure how to address the argument that the only alternative to being a D&D celebrity is a lifetime of working at a call center or warehouse job.



Except this is literally what @Staffan said, arguing that they should not be able to hold any public-facing job that might give them any power over others. My comments were literally an answer to that absurd demand.

And I already said that I am absolutely in favour of S&J facing the consequences of their actions. It's likely they will never be able to earn a living as "D&D performers", and given the number of kind and hard working people they have pushed out of the industry, that seems fair. *But* *it's a massive leap to go from that to saying that there should be no way for them to make amends and earn people's trust in the very, very long term and that they should never hold any public-facing job. *

Does that make my stance clearer?

EDIT: Just to pre-emptively cover a counterpoint, I was talking about the mistreatment of freelancers and the gatekeeping they've done. Stone's rape is something way worse than all of this and requires a response of a much different kind, that goes without saying.


----------



## Steampunkette (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Really?  What proof do you have of this?  If it's true, then I hope he is tried in a court of law and sent to prison. If it's false, then how dare you promulgate falsehoods that could ruin a person's life without knowing any of the parties involved and with nothing but a set of one-sided social media posts to go by?  Mob justice is all this is, and it sickens me.  I don't even know why I bother.  An insidious aspect of cancel culture is that the voices of moderation and proportionality get shouted down and bullied off the stage by the zealots with the torches and the pitchforks.



If my eyes rolled -any- harder at your post they would've made it to England, skipping all the way across the Atlantic.

1) The victim came forward, explained it, outlined it, and has no reason to lie.
2) The idea that a rape allegation ruins a man's life is a funny legal fiction with no basis in reality.
3) "Cancel Culture" dog whistles are -actively- against the rules, here.
4) "Mob Justice" would involve dragging the man out of his home and lynching him. Social backlash is not remotely the same.

Troll harder.


----------



## mythago (Jun 18, 2022)

Ondath said:


> Except this is literally what @Staffan said, arguing that they should not be able to hold any public-facing job that might give them any power over others. My comments were literally an answer to that absurd demand.
> 
> And I already said that I am absolutely in favour of S&J facing the consequences of their actions. It's likely they will never be able to earn a living as "D&D performers", and given the number of kind and hard working they might have pushed out of the industry, that seems fair. *But* *it's a massive leap to go from that to saying that there should be no way for them to make amends and earn people's trust in the very, very long term and that they should never hold any public-facing job. *
> 
> Does that make my stance clearer?




(Apologies for my garbled prior post. I don't know what happened on my phone there.)

So first, let's acknowledge that the person arguing that they should never hold any public-facing job is indulging in a ridiculous fantasy. Getting shunned by a hobby community is not going to destroy anyone's lifetime job prospects, much less "condemn" them to ditch-digging or call centers (and wow, we could have a whole nuther post on the whole 'menial jobs' thing). They aren't even 'condemned' to being kicked out of the TTRPG community. There are plenty of bad actors whose place in TTRPGs is just fine, thank you, and even a subset of the community that rallies around unapologetically crappy people.  So no, nobody is going to be sentenced to work in a call center for life or banned from picking up a dice bag. Somebody posting about what "should" happen to them is not describing anything that will happen in real life.

But whether or not they get to make amends and earn "people's" trust is a question that needs to be shorn of entitlement language that centers their well-being. When you use language about them being "owed" another chance, or that they "deserve" to be welcomed back, whether or not you intend to, you're absolutely framing the issue where the bad actors are the protagonists and their redemption arc is a moral imperative.

I mention Restorative Justice because it addresses that exact question - how do we repair harm to a community, and how do we repair the harm that was done to victims while balancing the need to bring perpetrators back into society? It's difficult, complicated, thoughtful work. I have enormous respect for the people who do it even when I don't agree with them on many things. What it _isn't _is a claim that everyone "deserves" another chance, or that victims always owe forgiveness and redemption.



Warpiglet-7 said:


> I don’t think people should be free of consequences or reputations but the quick widespread intentional consequences are a thing that is here to stay—just going to keep drawing a slip and hope to not draw a black dot.   I go out of my way to follow my values and the Golden rule but it’s no guarantee.




The black dot slip only gets drawn by people who had their turn enthusiastically throwing stones at others. Not sure that was quite the analogy you thought you were going for.


----------



## mythago (Jun 18, 2022)

Bedrockgames said:


> I haven't defended them. I've gone out of my way to point out I can't really comment specially on the situation because I find the rabbit hole rather deep here.




There's a post explaining the situation and with multiple links right at the top of this thread. This isn't the Warren Commission Report, it's really not that hard to see what is going on. You're jumping on a whole thread about a specific situation and choosing to ignore that situation because it might get in the way of your Larger Argument about social media and bullying.


----------



## vostygg (Jun 18, 2022)

Steampunkette said:


> If my eyes rolled -any- harder at your post they would've made it to England, skipping all the way across the Atlantic.
> 
> 1) The victim came forward, explained it, outlined it, and has no reason to lie.



Right! That's the same burden of proof they applied at Salem.


Steampunkette said:


> 2) The idea that a rape allegation ruins a man's life is a funny legal fiction with no basis in reality.\



Absolute nonsense!  Modern employers Google job applicants in this century. 


Steampunkette said:


> 3) "Cancel Culture" dog whistles are -actively- against the rules, here.



This is basically code for an unwillingness to entertain alternate viewpoints on what is supposed to be an open forum.  It is exactly what I mean when I say that the torch-and-pitchfork-bearing lot are intolerant of alternate viewpoints.



Steampunkette said:


> 4) "Mob Justice" would involve dragging the man out of his home and lynching him. Social backlash is not remotely the same.



You have no problem hyperbolizing the alleged crimes of the accused, but you strangely like to minimize the impact of social media on its victims.


----------



## Ondath (Jun 18, 2022)

mythago said:


> (Apologies for my garbled prior post. I don't know what happened on my phone there.)
> 
> So first, let's acknowledge that the person arguing that they should never hold any public-facing job is indulging in a ridiculous fantasy. Getting shunned by a hobby community is not going to destroy anyone's lifetime job prospects, much less "condemn" them to ditch-digging or call centers (and wow, we could have a whole nuther post on the whole 'menial jobs' thing). They aren't even 'condemned' to being kicked out of the TTRPG community. There are plenty of bad actors whose place in TTRPGs is just fine, thank you, and even a subset of the community that rallies around unapologetically crappy people.  So no, nobody is going to be sentenced to work in a call center for life or banned from picking up a dice bag. Somebody posting about what "should" happen to them is not describing anything that will happen in real life.
> 
> ...



I think these arguments are absolutely fair! I didn't mean to use a language of entitlement, and I don't have anything against the points you've made here. 

That said, I think I will unwatch this thread. At this point, the discussion seems to be getting rather heated without much to do on our end as the speculating public.


----------



## Grendel_Khan (Jun 18, 2022)

Warpiglet-7 said:


> I am not defending these people.  I am not sure how Satine was relevant to D&D in the first place.  I looked at one scenario and had questions.  Then I realized I don’t consume her products so what’s the use?




Seems like you're only interested in talking about this in the abstract, then, since the OP and subsequent threads have tons of information about Satine's relevance. You have to actually go out of your way to to wade into this discussion with expansive posts while simultaneously washing your hands of the whole sordid affair, by saying you don't really know what it's about anyway.

Online forums are like any discussion space--a bad place to zoom out and speak generally about vague principles, rules-of-thumb, and hypotheticals. If you don't want to engage with the specifics here, what's the point?

I don't mean to single you out, necessarily, since there are others doing the same in this thread. But by floating around in the realm of hypotheticals you're also engaging in the same cancel-culture handwringing that always happens--flying to the defense of some imagined population of canceled victims out there, when the facts nearly always bear out that no one really gets canceled, in the sense that the cancel-culture-obsessed imagine them to be. Rather, people sometimes, very rarely, suffer consequences for their actions, while the very types of folks who rail on about cancel culture actively seek to get their enemies fired...but naturally wouldn't ever call what they're doing cancel culture. That's what someone else does, to all the upstanding job-creators and strivers under constant assault by their lessers.
But here I am, doing the very thing I'm criticizing, speaking in generalities. So I'll be more specific: I propose we stick to the particulars of this and similar situations within the TTRPG community. And if the details are too unsavory or uninteresting to do that, then...why come to the defense of or express concern for someone you can't be bothered to learn about?


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Jun 18, 2022)

mythago said:


> (Apologies for my garbled prior post. I don't know what happened on my phone there.)
> 
> So first, let's acknowledge that the person arguing that they should never hold any public-facing job is indulging in a ridiculous fantasy. Getting shunned by a hobby community is not going to destroy anyone's lifetime job prospects, much less "condemn" them to ditch-digging or call centers (and wow, we could have a whole nuther post on the whole 'menial jobs' thing). They aren't even 'condemned' to being kicked out of the TTRPG community. There are plenty of bad actors whose place in TTRPGs is just fine, thank you, and even a subset of the community that rallies around unapologetically crappy people.  So no, nobody is going to be sentenced to work in a call center for life or banned from picking up a dice bag. Somebody posting about what "should" happen to them is not describing anything that will happen in real life.
> 
> ...



I think it fits for most people who are defending the practice.  So good to know I won’t get a turn!

Except my broader point is just that: with this stuff anyone can get pulled in without knowingly or purposely pulling the paper—-even advocating against it.  That’s where our culture went.

It reminds me of grad school when I was awakened at 3AM before comps by a group of drunk guys singing  ”everybody must get stoned!”   That song fits.


----------



## Grendel_Khan (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Right! That's the same burden of proof they applied at Salem.




Ah, on to the next talking point in the playbook: It's a witch trial!


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Jun 18, 2022)

Grendel_Khan said:


> Seems like you're only interested in talking about this in the abstract, then, since the OP and subsequent threads have tons of information about Satine's relevance. You have to actually go out of your way to to wade into this discussion with expansive posts while simultaneously washing your hands of the whole sordid affair, by saying you don't really know what it's about anyway.
> 
> Online forums are like any discussion space--a bad place to zoom out and speak generally about vague principles, rules-of-thumb, and hypotheticals. If you don't want to engage with the specifics here, what's the point?
> 
> ...



You mean express an opinion about how our community behaves?  Seems relevant to me. And a fair number of others.

To that end, feel free to get to it!  The details!  The nitty gritty and reliability of the evidence…start with the tattoo scenario.


----------



## Sabathius42 (Jun 18, 2022)

Mort said:


> But again, their lives and livelihoods are based, a good deal, on dealing with employees and contractors.
> 
> Again, knowing what you know, would you work for or even with these people?
> 
> Exposing terrible business practices is not "ruining these people's lives" it is ensuring  THEY don't ruin more people's lives.



Amazon does all these bad things....and to a much greater degree than has been leveled in this case...but they still are pretty popular.


----------



## Steampunkette (Jun 18, 2022)

vostygg said:


> Right! That's the same burden of proof they applied at Salem.



If this were the 1600s and a matter of religious fervor I might actually have some kind of empathy for this argument to ridiculousness.


vostygg said:


> Absolute nonsense!  Modern employers Google job applicants in this century.



Absolute nonsense! Modern Employers don't care unless they're small businesses with something to prove.

Brock Turner, who raped a girl in public and was caught IN THE ACT, tried, convicted, and jailed (for a criminally short sentence even BEFORE he got out before serving half of it because the judge 'didn't want to ruin his life') has a factory job in his hometown.

IN HIS HOMETOWN. Where everyone knows exactly what happened.


vostygg said:


> This is basically code for an unwillingness to entertain alternate viewpoints on what is supposed to be an open forum.  It is exactly what I mean when I say that the torch-and-pitchfork-bearing lot are intolerant of alternate viewpoints.



Once more to the 1700s/1800s BS.

The reason it's against the rules is because it's a bad faith argument made almost invariably by toxic elements.


vostygg said:


> You have no problem hyperbolizing the alleged crimes of the accused, but you strangely like to minimize the impact of social media on its victims.



"Hyperbolizing". Stating the man committed an act of rape is not hyperbole.

You can question whether it happened if you wanna be seen as a complete jerk, but that's on you.

Hyperbole would be trying to frame his actions as being more drastic in order to elicit a particular emotional response... Like referring to something as a Witch Trial or "Torches and pitchforks Brigade" to insult and demean others.

Hmmm.


----------



## Sabathius42 (Jun 18, 2022)

Morrus said:


> Due process is a specific legal term. I assume people mean the words they say. If they don’t then what’s the point of even talking? If they don’t mean due process, perhaps they should stop saying due process. If they do mean due process, then see my previous post.




In my lifetime the term due process is a generic one meaning "look at all the data before judging" and not necessarily relating to the legal system specifically.


----------



## Bedrockgames (Jun 18, 2022)

Steampunkette said:


> So you're not interested in the controversy, you're not interested in actually weighing the results of social media, and you think Satine might do a desperate outrage to herself, and you want to join in with other people pointlessly navel-gazing over whether social media is "Just" without actually, y'know, trying to determine whether the given situation is just.
> 
> Like... do you understand what I'm saying here or am I being particularly obtuse?
> 
> ...




I don't think we are going to see eye to eye on this stuff. My position is social media is a horrible venue for figuring these things out (again in general). I think its fair for me to make general remarks when people are making general points in a thread even when that thread starts out about something more specific (because we've been experiencing more and more use of social media in this way and it is something we all have to contend with and deal with on a daily basis). If you feel I am navel gazing, I can't persuade you otherwise (I think I am making relevant points of value but fair enough). I am happy to move on and just agree to disagree 



Steampunkette said:


> Though if you're sincerely worried Satine will hurt herself, feel free to just say that. It would probably be an appropriately weighed concern.




This has been my main concern in this part of the discussion. I did watch the apology video because it came across my social media feed. I was a lot less concerned about the sincerity of the apology (generally I find most public apologies have a degree of the obligatory that makes them suspect), and more concerned about what I saw towards the end, where I could sense a dawning realization on her part that she has very few employment prospects now, and that her ability to work (really in any field or any job, but certainly in a job that she would like to do) might be impacted by this. So I saw suffering there, I felt like there was reason to be concerned. And again I made the point that  a lot of the anger might well be justified, and kept reiterating I wasn't fully informed of the full extent of things (not because I can't be be bothered to read stuff before weighing in but because there are a lot of links in this story and I found many hard to follow or contextualize: and I don't really pay much attention to D&D celebrities and the kind of RPG entertainment they seem to be involved in: didn't know about any of the projects or people involved, etc), but there I was concerned that some of anger being directed towards her could in fact push her further into dangerous space. I think we shouldn't lose our empathy in these kinds of situations, even if (and I am not saying it is or isn' the case) someone did wrong or deserves some kind of punishment. I don't think it should be come an excuse to just form a hate mob on someone (and again that doesn't mean people with grievances should be silenced), to be dismissive of the real world consequences people might face, etc. One of the issues I see in these kinds of conversations is people get so flippant about what loss of employment means. A lot of people minimize the impact of poverty on folks in these discussions. For those of us who live in poverty, and who struggle to put food on the table, I think we react to that because its perceived or treated as an almost non-consequence (where if you are someone who is struggling financially you see it as the ultimate, a potentially life ending, consequence). So I can feel empathy and compassion for someone who looks in the camera and realizes they might no longer be able to support themselves (and perhaps she'll be fine there, I don't know, but it seemed to be a very real concern she was contemplating at the end of the video).


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 18, 2022)

TheSword said:


> You can’t imprison people so you don’t need due process? There is such a thing as natural justice.
> 
> Come on, you live in the UK. You know that an employer has to follow Employment law regulations, even though they can’t fine or imprisonment you.
> 
> ...



They probably stromgarmed people into handshake agreements, no contract. I can't say for sure, but thst wouldn't even be abnormal. Welcome to America.


----------



## Sabathius42 (Jun 18, 2022)

Mort said:


> But that's the point.
> 
> From all evidence, these people make an excellent first impression. They are charismatic.
> 
> The whole point of ALL of this is to warn people to be wary of that. To try to limit their ability to punch down as they have been.



Does this ring true when we have had people in this very thread that have been intermingling comments attacking sex work, not liking their GM style, accusing them of being bad players, etc.. that has NOTHING to do with the actual "bad" things they may be responsible for.

The dogpile is not people coming forward with legitimate complaints and others discussing them, its the massive wave of generic negative and sometimes over-the-line comments from those who can hide behind their anonymitity AND the actual glee some people have at attacking someone else.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 18, 2022)

Ondath said:


> I just can't stand by such an unkind view. If you think the world doesn't owe them reform, that's on you, but I thought the whole point of having a moral community is being better than whatever unjust world we are plunged into.
> 
> Everyone deserves a chance for reformation, and while this reformation might not be easy or might require extensive efforts to make amends, denying it outright is immoral IMO. It denies the infinite freedom and dignity all of us inherently have.



Sure, they can be reformed...but not as thought leaders or onscreen personalities. They are done there, they need to move on to other work.


----------



## Steampunkette (Jun 18, 2022)

Sabathius42 said:


> Does this ring true when we have had people in this very thread that have been intermingling comments attacking sex work, not liking their GM style, accusing them of being bad players, etc.. that has NOTHING to do with the actual "bad" things they may be responsible for.
> 
> The dogpile is not people coming forward with legitimate complaints and others discussing them, its the massive wave of generic negative and sometimes over-the-line comments from those who can hide behind their anonymitity AND the actual glee some people have at attacking someone else.



And those people got kicked from the threads by the Mods because we don't tolerate intolerance, here.

I wish Twitter, Facebook, and other social media would do the same. Activate their "Anti-Nazi" code and autoban tons of complete garbage fires permanently. But they won't. 'Cause the garbage fires are associated with a particular end of the political spectrum, shock of shocks, and too many "Intolerant but not quite Nazi" people would also get kicked.


----------



## Warpiglet-7 (Jun 18, 2022)

I don’t feel a need to debate certain points.  History has been written.  We all know what happens in social media when you are on the poop list.  I just cannot like it no matter how hard I try and geek culture is at he cutting edge of this it seems.

In pointing that out we got “you are talking about something irrelevant” to screw that sort of introspection!  Silence the Nazis!

Holy Moses what a microcosm.  Rage on internet!


----------



## Sabathius42 (Jun 18, 2022)

Steampunkette said:


> So you're not interested in the controversy, you're not interested in actually weighing the results of social media, and you think Satine might do a desperate outrage to herself, and you want to join in with other people pointlessly navel-gazing over whether social media is "Just" without actually, y'know, trying to determine whether the given situation is just.
> 
> Like... do you understand what I'm saying here or am I being particularly obtuse?
> 
> ...



I think they have stated 10+ times their thoughts were about social media woes in general and not about this specific case (even bolded sometimes).  If that line of discussion isnt appropriate to the thread (and I feel it is) then the mods can let them know.


----------



## Sabathius42 (Jun 18, 2022)

Steampunkette said:


> And those people got kicked from the threads by the Mods because we don't tolerate intolerance, here.
> 
> I wish Twitter, Facebook, and other social media would do the same. Activate their "Anti-Nazi" code and autoban tons of complete garbage fires permanently. But they won't. 'Cause the garbage fires are associated with a particular end of the political spectrum, shock of shocks, and too many "Intolerant but not quite Nazi" people would also get kicked.



So...then we agree that dogpiling happens in social media controversies?

I don't understand the resistance to say it does.  It 100% happens and all that useless negative energy both fuels a fire that creates more useless negative energy and more importantly drowns out the legitimate discussion that happens inside of it.

Nobody here is saying that bringing issues to light and holding people accountable is a bad thing, or that you shouldn't listen to those who are trying to voice their grievances, but they are saying that unmoderated social media is an atmosphere that can easily turn into an unproductive mass of anonymous negative comments with no sustenance.


----------



## Steampunkette (Jun 18, 2022)

Warpiglet-7 said:


> I don’t feel a need to debate certain points.  History has been written.  We all know what happens in social media when you are on the poop list.  I just cannot like it no matter how hard I try and geek culture is not he cutting edge of this it seems.
> 
> In pointing that out we got “you are talking about something irrelevant” to screw that sort of introspection!  Silence the Nazis!
> 
> Holy Moses what a microcosm.  Rage on internet!



Apparently we don't know. 'Cause y'all seem to think it is some kind of obnoxious death knell that results in poverty and destruction of life, while the rest of us look over at Dave Chapelle still getting stand up specials and popping in to drop new Transphobic Comedy during a John Mulaney show.

Gina Carano retreated from social media after the backlash against her, and is still an actress with one film just wrapping and two more in post and pre production.

Nathan Silvester, a cop who actually got fired for responding to Lebron James mourning the death of Makhia Bryant with "You're Next" just before the George Floyd verdict came back, got half a million dollars donated to him, a podcast, and his pension kept in place.

So even when there are consequences offline, they're generally ameliorated by... y'know... your life not -actually- being destroyed or otherwise harmed in any meaningful way.

Heck, knowing how police hiring works Nathan probably could've just started working for the next town over, like various cops often do when they're fired for things like Abuse of Authority or Police Brutality.

You wanna question the way backlash in social media works? GREAT. Make a thread about it. Slap a + on it to denote it is meant to be a positive thread. Then wax philosophical about it.

But people generally don't appreciate derailments that by their very nature demean the current events that a given thread is ACTIVELY ABOUT.


Sabathius42 said:


> I think they have stated 10+ times their thoughts were about social media woes in general and not about this specific case (even bolded sometimes).  If that line of discussion isnt appropriate to the thread (and I feel it is) then the mods can let them know.



If you have to keep repeating that you're not interested in the topic of the read you're posting in as people drag the topic back, again and again, maybe it's just time to read the room and make a thread about what you want to talk about instead of posting 10+ times?

But sure. Instead I can just report these posts going forward and let the mods handle it, if that's your preferred method.


----------



## Morrus (Jun 18, 2022)

This thread hasn’t been about the events in the article for some time, and has reached the usual repetitive predictable stage with the same posts that that all these topics do, so I’m closing it.


----------

