Whether or not the firing was deserved aside - the fact that someone can confidently make a statement like this is truly disturbing.
“We can probably fire anyone on the GW2 dev team as long we make a big enough stink,” wrote GW2 subreddit member 5NightsAtUndert413 in a now-deleted post. “Nobody at Arenanet is safe from the hand of Reddit... The moment a dev steps out of line or try to talk back to a player, guess what, they’ll know we got their hands on their throat and we can squeeze any time we like.”
Whether or not the firing was deserved aside - the fact that someone can confidently make a statement like this is truly disturbing.
That seems like a pretty lackadaisical apology to me. Sure, it's an acknowledgement and it's better than nothing (or worse, more of the same). But I'm pretty sure it would take on a different tone...
That seems like a pretty lackadaisical apology to me. Sure, it's an acknowledgement and it's better than nothing (or worse, more of the same). But I'm pretty sure it would take on a different tone if that dude lost their job over that comment.
I'm glad he acknowledged it was an awful thing to post. Still, this isn't an isolated incident so the fact that he (and presumably others) believe Reddit is a tool to be used for a...
I'm glad he acknowledged it was an awful thing to post. Still, this isn't an isolated incident so the fact that he (and presumably others) believe Reddit is a tool to be used for a vendetta/revenge makes me deeply uncomfortable.
What did you expect? Most of the "gamers" you see on Reddit and the like are the worst sort of nerd. They're possessed of grotesquely out-sized senses of entitlement because they grew up in a...
What did you expect? Most of the "gamers" you see on Reddit and the like are the worst sort of nerd. They're possessed of grotesquely out-sized senses of entitlement because they grew up in a culture where "the customer is always right" even when they're acting like utter fools. They know damn well that corporations treat workers as disposable objects, and are happy to use this to accomplish their own petty ends.
It was downvoted to -6 and deleted. The author was desperate to find a negative comment for their narrative. Speaking of, please link to better sources than Kotaku. They have a horrible record. If...
It was downvoted to -6 and deleted. The author was desperate to find a negative comment for their narrative.
Speaking of, please link to better sources than Kotaku. They have a horrible record. If you do see a story on the site, it's worth Googling a bit for a more reliable breakdown.
Yep. The guy they quoted was trying to make the community look bad, and deleted it when he realised people were downvoting him. It looks like he sent it to Kotaku (either Jason Schrier or Nathan Grayson), unless the account actually belongs to one of them. He finally posted about it on a notorious troll/hate subreddit.
Kotaku is fine; if you have a specific issue with the article, I think it's more useful to talk about specifics. The comment that got deleted was certainly extreme. On the other hand, this guy got...
Kotaku is fine; if you have a specific issue with the article, I think it's more useful to talk about specifics.
The comment that got deleted was certainly extreme. On the other hand, this guy got 43 upvotes for saying he's celebrating someone losing their job. He is far from alone. It's not incorrect to characterize the subreddit as happy that she was fired.
Kotaku is miles from fine. They give the sheen of legitimacy to the swamp that is gaters, because their content is hyped up clickbait trash that deserves to be ridiculed. There's a reason that...
Kotaku is miles from fine. They give the sheen of legitimacy to the swamp that is gaters, because their content is hyped up clickbait trash that deserves to be ridiculed. There's a reason that group uses /r/kotakuinaction as a recruiting ground so successfully.
No, that's just an excuse. Nobody ever points to specific reasons about why they hate Kotaku, they just point to a reputational viewpoint that they already hold. How come nobody who disparages...
No, that's just an excuse. Nobody ever points to specific reasons about why they hate Kotaku, they just point to a reputational viewpoint that they already hold. How come nobody who disparages Kotaku ever acknowledges the actual good pieces of real journalism they put out?
And, what group? Gamergate? KIA is one of the homes of that movement, not a recruiting ground. The actual Kotaku part of KIA didn't apply past the first month of that sub's creation, and Polygon has been a bigger target for them for the majority of that subreddit's lifespan now.
And I say this as someone who has actually flat-out banned Kotaku content before.
Most people are happy that she's fired, no question. The industry is making progress that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago. The suspect comment was talking as though the community...
Most people are happy that she's fired, no question. The industry is making progress that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago. The suspect comment was talking as though the community got her fired, rather than her actions, which is the narrative the article is pushing.
It's also worth noting that the article was written by Nathan Grayson, who has a history of bullying worse than Jessica Price's own.
Huh. Can you unpack that a bit more for us? Like: I read the article carefully; as far as I can tell, the events happened in the order Kotaku says they happened. And, well... isn’t the whole...
Huh. Can you unpack that a bit more for us? Like: I read the article carefully; as far as I can tell, the events happened in the order Kotaku says they happened.
And, well... isn’t the whole argument here that what one person says in a moment of anger reflects on the group they’re part of?
Her response was so mild. That they could create a stink about this so hard that it gets people fired really annoys and worries me. She didn't deserve to be fired at all.
Her response was so mild. That they could create a stink about this so hard that it gets people fired really annoys and worries me.
So mild? Employees of companies who visibly represent their company on social media while spruiking company content are NOT allowed to go picking fights and assuming bad faith when talking to...
So mild? Employees of companies who visibly represent their company on social media while spruiking company content are NOT allowed to go picking fights and assuming bad faith when talking to customers. I can't think of a job where that could ever be ok.
Ignoring the fact that Price has a well documented history of being completely unprofessional on social media and probably shouldn't have been hired in the first place (which you shouldn't, as it's likely the reason for firing as opposed to censure), when you have a customer who in the business world might be called a 'key user' or some other buzzword getting publicly shut down by an employee literally without provocation, that employee is going to have a bad day.
The lesson here isn't "be a demure little girl and listen when the men are talking", no matter how loudly certain people want to claim it, it's "when you're out in public in uniform, don't act like an idiot". Or in specific terms "when talking to customers, assume good faith unless proven otherwise, don't argue with them in public, and DON'T bring personal hangups or political baggage into company affairs".
She has a twitter that announces her company. She was talking on that twitter that announces her company about work she was doing... at her company. She started shit (and it was absolutely her...
She has a twitter that announces her company. She was talking on that twitter that announces her company about work she was doing... at her company. She started shit (and it was absolutely her that started it, completely unprovoked) while talking on that twitter that announces her company about work she was doing at her company with a customer... of her company.
The only way this could be more intrinsically linked to the company image and the idea that employee actions reflect on their companies is if she dressed up as a company mascot and went door to door shooting people in the face saying "this is a message from <company>.
The only options I see here is capitalism has not been kind to you and you are bitter and mouthing off about a situation related to your personal narrative based on zero knowledge, or you are willfully and maliciously misrepresenting the situation, again based on your personal narrative.
No. The lesson here is to compartmentalize. Never identify your employer on the internet. Not directly. Not indirectly. (And nuke your LinkedIn profile stat.) Don't ever talk about your day job on...
No. The lesson here is to compartmentalize.
Never identify your employer on the internet. Not directly. Not indirectly. (And nuke your LinkedIn profile stat.)
Don't ever talk about your day job on the internet.
Don't ever reply to randos who reply when you make the mistake of talking about your day job on the internet.
Leave work at work. Don't talk shop unless you're in the office, on the job, and getting paid.
As it should be. If you behave like a child when you are associated with a company, you will be treated like a child. Which is to say, not allowed to have a job anymore. She lashed out at a valued...
As it should be. If you behave like a child when you are associated with a company, you will be treated like a child. Which is to say, not allowed to have a job anymore. She lashed out at a valued community member who tried to give input, and tried to force her political narrative. It was never about a male thinking he could do a female's job better, it was about somebody who cared for the end product for a long time having concerns about the series he cared about. He was offering criticism, not saying he could do better, and Price reacted very toxic-like. That kind of blind, accusatory behavior can reduce the quality of a product greatly as it almost tyrannical silences any criticism for fear of having a marker placed on your head.
That "thoughts are my own" bit in a bio doesn't mean that you can just be a jerk on your Twitter and not face repercussions. It also doesn't mean that the things you say don't reflect on your...
That "thoughts are my own" bit in a bio doesn't mean that you can just be a jerk on your Twitter and not face repercussions. It also doesn't mean that the things you say don't reflect on your employer.
We don't have the right to say things without consequences, so everyone has to learn to not say regrettable things. The Internet isn't a magical place where you can be a massive douchebag and it's just okay. It's not okay.
So, a developer loses their job, but the people who demanded that the developer be fired merely get banned from Twitter for however long it takes for them to create new accounts? Is that your idea...
So, a developer loses their job, but the people who demanded that the developer be fired merely get banned from Twitter for however long it takes for them to create new accounts? Is that your idea of justice?
The list of things that are okay in a private conversation but not okay in a public one is incredible. A lot of people seem to lose sight of this fact. These developers were representing their...
The list of things that are okay in a private conversation but not okay in a public one is incredible. A lot of people seem to lose sight of this fact.
These developers were representing their employer. They were doing it in a way that their employer really disapproved of. This is not good.
If the conversation had been private, it would not have been problematic at all, because:
the employer probably wouldn't know
the people involved would all know each other
there's much less of a problem with misunderstandings
These people chose to represent their company, and they chose to interact with people negatively on the internet as representatives of their company. They should not have done that.
Yeah, problem is that these kind of people: Need to realize when someone is worth picking a fight with and when not. My youngest son can't let a single offense slip away. Hell, he's even going...
Yeah, problem is that these kind of people:
Price felt like Deroir overstepped his bounds. “Today in being a female game dev: ‘Allow me—a person who does not work with you—explain to you how you do your job,’” she tweeted, adding that she’d been working in narrative for a decade and didn’t need the concept of branching dialogue explained to her.
Need to realize when someone is worth picking a fight with and when not.
My youngest son can't let a single offense slip away. Hell, he's even going actively around the school yard looking for bullies so he can defend other kids.
While this is cute and all at 6, I'm trying to have him learn that sometimes it's not worth to pick up a fight.
"Hitting all the rocks on the road gives you only broken shoes" said my grampa.
Maybe someone should have taught that to the lots on social warriors that feel so frustrated today.
Whether or not the firing was deserved aside - the fact that someone can confidently make a statement like this is truly disturbing.
That seems like a pretty lackadaisical apology to me. Sure, it's an acknowledgement and it's better than nothing (or worse, more of the same). But I'm pretty sure it would take on a different tone if that dude lost their job over that comment.
I'm glad he acknowledged it was an awful thing to post. Still, this isn't an isolated incident so the fact that he (and presumably others) believe Reddit is a tool to be used for a vendetta/revenge makes me deeply uncomfortable.
Agreed. Irrespective of this event, maliciously acting to getting someone fired is incredibly vindictive.
What did you expect? Most of the "gamers" you see on Reddit and the like are the worst sort of nerd. They're possessed of grotesquely out-sized senses of entitlement because they grew up in a culture where "the customer is always right" even when they're acting like utter fools. They know damn well that corporations treat workers as disposable objects, and are happy to use this to accomplish their own petty ends.
It was downvoted to -6 and deleted. The author was desperate to find a negative comment for their narrative.
Speaking of, please link to better sources than Kotaku. They have a horrible record. If you do see a story on the site, it's worth Googling a bit for a more reliable breakdown.
EDIT: http://archive.is/UIZ5N
Yep. The guy they quoted was trying to make the community look bad, and deleted it when he realised people were downvoting him. It looks like he sent it to Kotaku (either Jason Schrier or Nathan Grayson), unless the account actually belongs to one of them. He finally posted about it on a notorious troll/hate subreddit.
Seriously, don't trust Kotaku.
Kotaku is fine; if you have a specific issue with the article, I think it's more useful to talk about specifics.
The comment that got deleted was certainly extreme. On the other hand, this guy got 43 upvotes for saying he's celebrating someone losing their job. He is far from alone. It's not incorrect to characterize the subreddit as happy that she was fired.
Kotaku is miles from fine. They give the sheen of legitimacy to the swamp that is gaters, because their content is hyped up clickbait trash that deserves to be ridiculed. There's a reason that group uses /r/kotakuinaction as a recruiting ground so successfully.
No, that's just an excuse. Nobody ever points to specific reasons about why they hate Kotaku, they just point to a reputational viewpoint that they already hold. How come nobody who disparages Kotaku ever acknowledges the actual good pieces of real journalism they put out?
And, what group? Gamergate? KIA is one of the homes of that movement, not a recruiting ground. The actual Kotaku part of KIA didn't apply past the first month of that sub's creation, and Polygon has been a bigger target for them for the majority of that subreddit's lifespan now.
And I say this as someone who has actually flat-out banned Kotaku content before.
Most people are happy that she's fired, no question. The industry is making progress that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago. The suspect comment was talking as though the community got her fired, rather than her actions, which is the narrative the article is pushing.
It's also worth noting that the article was written by Nathan Grayson, who has a history of bullying worse than Jessica Price's own.
Huh. Can you unpack that a bit more for us? Like: I read the article carefully; as far as I can tell, the events happened in the order Kotaku says they happened.
And, well... isn’t the whole argument here that what one person says in a moment of anger reflects on the group they’re part of?
Her response was so mild. That they could create a stink about this so hard that it gets people fired really annoys and worries me.
She didn't deserve to be fired at all.
So mild? Employees of companies who visibly represent their company on social media while spruiking company content are NOT allowed to go picking fights and assuming bad faith when talking to customers. I can't think of a job where that could ever be ok.
Ignoring the fact that Price has a well documented history of being completely unprofessional on social media and probably shouldn't have been hired in the first place (which you shouldn't, as it's likely the reason for firing as opposed to censure), when you have a customer who in the business world might be called a 'key user' or some other buzzword getting publicly shut down by an employee literally without provocation, that employee is going to have a bad day.
The lesson here isn't "be a demure little girl and listen when the men are talking", no matter how loudly certain people want to claim it, it's "when you're out in public in uniform, don't act like an idiot". Or in specific terms "when talking to customers, assume good faith unless proven otherwise, don't argue with them in public, and DON'T bring personal hangups or political baggage into company affairs".
She has a twitter that announces her company. She was talking on that twitter that announces her company about work she was doing... at her company. She started shit (and it was absolutely her that started it, completely unprovoked) while talking on that twitter that announces her company about work she was doing at her company with a customer... of her company.
The only way this could be more intrinsically linked to the company image and the idea that employee actions reflect on their companies is if she dressed up as a company mascot and went door to door shooting people in the face saying "this is a message from <company>.
The only options I see here is capitalism has not been kind to you and you are bitter and mouthing off about a situation related to your personal narrative based on zero knowledge, or you are willfully and maliciously misrepresenting the situation, again based on your personal narrative.
Because shooting people in the face is equivalent to telling people off on twitter.
No. The lesson here is to compartmentalize.
Leave work at work. Don't talk shop unless you're in the office, on the job, and getting paid.
Couldn't agree more.
As it should be. If you behave like a child when you are associated with a company, you will be treated like a child. Which is to say, not allowed to have a job anymore. She lashed out at a valued community member who tried to give input, and tried to force her political narrative. It was never about a male thinking he could do a female's job better, it was about somebody who cared for the end product for a long time having concerns about the series he cared about. He was offering criticism, not saying he could do better, and Price reacted very toxic-like. That kind of blind, accusatory behavior can reduce the quality of a product greatly as it almost tyrannical silences any criticism for fear of having a marker placed on your head.
Official response: https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/586426#Comment_586426
Tweet text: https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/8w3q4n/must_be_a_thrill_to_work_with_this_dev/e1shmum/
Edit: IGN: http://www.ign.com/articles/2018/07/06/guild-wars-2-writers-fired-after-twitter-dispute-with-streamer?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
The best part is all the journalists with similar histories of behaviour freaking out.
That "thoughts are my own" bit in a bio doesn't mean that you can just be a jerk on your Twitter and not face repercussions. It also doesn't mean that the things you say don't reflect on your employer.
We don't have the right to say things without consequences, so everyone has to learn to not say regrettable things. The Internet isn't a magical place where you can be a massive douchebag and it's just okay. It's not okay.
They were talking about their work at the company though, disclaimer or not, it's official.
Fine. Then the people who got Jessica Price fired should be doxxed and fired as well. Fair's fair, right?
I never agree with that sentiment.
I think that it's possible they should have their twitter access removed though.
So, a developer loses their job, but the people who demanded that the developer be fired merely get banned from Twitter for however long it takes for them to create new accounts? Is that your idea of justice?
But who was a massive douchebag here? If she replied like she did in a private conversation, it would be a little brash, but nothing more
The list of things that are okay in a private conversation but not okay in a public one is incredible. A lot of people seem to lose sight of this fact.
These developers were representing their employer. They were doing it in a way that their employer really disapproved of. This is not good.
If the conversation had been private, it would not have been problematic at all, because:
These people chose to represent their company, and they chose to interact with people negatively on the internet as representatives of their company. They should not have done that.
Yeah, problem is that these kind of people:
Need to realize when someone is worth picking a fight with and when not.
My youngest son can't let a single offense slip away. Hell, he's even going actively around the school yard looking for bullies so he can defend other kids.
While this is cute and all at 6, I'm trying to have him learn that sometimes it's not worth to pick up a fight.
"Hitting all the rocks on the road gives you only broken shoes" said my grampa.
Maybe someone should have taught that to the lots on social warriors that feel so frustrated today.