Support NeoGAF

[Head.spawn]

Not really, the HR rep who covered it up did.

Does a random HR rep have the authority to make someones job redundant 2-3 months before the release of Uncharted 4, get him bounced in less than 24-hrs and then draw up an NDA contract with $20k attached to it? That takes pull from above and likely involves consulting company legal department I would think.

It seems like the statement from Naughty Dog isn't really saying much since Ballard already stated that they hung up on him when he mentioned the harassment and then had him booted the next day... if they hung up on him, if this is true then that was so they could try to avoid documenting it and then got him bounced see he would never have a chance to do so.

 

[texhnolyze]

Yeah, I don't trust either of them. But this looks like a tough situation for Ballard.

How can he possibly find the evidence from a couple of years ago?

 

[Lady Gaia]

So basically, "hush money"

More like opportunistic insurance. While I’m not a fan of the practice, there are plenty of employers across a range of industries where it’s standard practice to tie severance pay to a contract that prevents anyone from discussing the terms of their severance or saying anything bad about the company or anyone who represents the company. It’s not something they do because they’re covering something up, but I’m sure it comes in handy just in case a former employee is considering suing or otherwise inconveniencing their prior employer regardless of the merit of their claims.

 

[TheFatMan]

..

 

[BoxManLocke]

I know right?

My first thoughts were, hm lets see what develops, both claim their side, so some evidence needs to come in to play for this to move forward.

He said, she said is never a good starting point to take sides, especially with something like this. Also very unfortunate for the company that this is in the public - stuff like this should be handled through proper channels internally.

When we'll live in a world where we can trust companies to handle this the right way, sure.

This is not the world we live in right now. There's a reason so many people are coming forward through "improper channels".

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

Yea, but you seem confused about the innocent until proven guilty thing. You’ve already decided the allegation is true, knowing absolutely nothing beyond some tweets and a corporate denial.

I believe that a person wouldn't make a bold claim to just lie and deceive. I believe something happened and I believe someone did it. I don't know WHO this person is, this specific lead that was mentioned, but I would like to know. I'm in the camp that is supporting the accusers accusation but also am not directly blaming Sony or ND for their response if they truly have no evidence on paper of this incident. And that's how these cases always end up, with their being no paper trail. If someone else was brave enough to speak up to back his story , we would be at least getting somewhere and I hope his bravery allows others who were either wronged by the same HR department or who were also assaulted by this same lead, comes forward.

 

[TheModestGun]

All they had to say is they take harassment seriously and will be looking into the claims. Instead they basically dismissed it by saying they have no record of a complaint and gave no indication they’re going to properly look into it. Their statement is weird because it’s both more than they needed to say and not nearly enough.

Except they literally said that they take sexual assault and harassment allegations very seriously, but there is no way to take action if a report was never filed. So in other words what you really mean is that they didn't give you the outcome you wanted emotionally.

 

[Duderino]

When we'll live in a world where we can trust companies to handle this the right way, sure.

This is not the world we live in right now. There's a reason so many people are coming forward through "improper channels".

That's kinda like saying with the world we live in, there's a reason people have to turn to People's Court. Well... actually junk daytime television has more of a filter than Twitter.

 

[Head.spawn]

Except they literally said that they take sexual assault and harassment allegations very seriously, but there is no way to take action if a report was never filed. So in other words what you really mean is that they didn't give you the outcome you wanted emotionally.

They can say they take it seriously but what value is there in their statement when there was never a claim that a report was filed and that when he brought it up they hung up on him and fired (made his job redundant) him the next day. That much was understood simply by reading Ballards tweets. If they actually took it seriously they'd maybe reach out and ask, then investigate from there... not toss up a dismissive statement that addresses something that we already knew there wasn't a filed report. There would obviously have to be something on file as to why he was abruptly let go though, they haven't addressed that either.

 

[Feorax]

They can say they take it seriously but what value is there in their statement when there was never a claim that a report was filed and that when he brought it up they hung up on him and fired (made his job redundant) him the next day. That much was understood simply by reading Ballards tweets. If they actually took it seriousliy they'd maybe reach out and ask, then investigate from there... not toss up a dismissive statement that addresses something that we already knew there wasn't a filed report. There would obviously have to be something on file as to why he was abruptly let go though, they haven't addressed that either.

It's been explained in this thread several times exactly why they cannot do that, and how much damage doing that could potentially cause. Please read the thread before commenting.

Also, they haven't said they have nothing on file as to why he was let go (he was made redundant, David has said so himself), just that there is no reference on their files to any sexual harassment complaint being made.

 

[Head.spawn]

It's been explained in this thread several times exactly why they cannot do that, and how much damage doing that could potentially cause. Please read the thread before commenting.

Also, they haven't said they have nothing on file as to why he was let go (he was made redundant, David has said so himself), just that there is no reference on their files to any sexual harassment complaint being made.

Yeah, I said exactly that in the two small sentences right before the one you bolded.

 

[DreadfulOmen]

Since we seem to have some new faces in this thread, I feel compelled to write this again.


Many of you in this thread are being absolutely ridiculous and unreasonable.


Here are the only pieces of information we have:
1) David Ballard makes allegation of sexual harassment on his public twitter account

2) ND releases statement that there is no evidence they could find regarding any harassment complaint being made.


Seems a perfect situation for a wait and see approach, to see if more evidence is uncovered.

Instead, this thread is filled with:
-Assumption of guilt for Sony and ND
-Claims of a huge conspiracy and coverup, including documents being destroyed by HR
- Talk about boycotting ND and Sony
- Outrage over ND using David’s name in their statement despite him making the allegation on his public twitter account. Nearly all of us knew who was making the allegation before ND ever released a statement, but suddenly here’s an outrage they used his name?

And of course the completely unfair and unreasonable assumption that since the Weinstein issue is prevalent right now, suddenly every accusation made right now is assumed true.



I’m not saying it didn’t happen. I’m not saying it did. I’m saying no one here has ANY clue what did or didn’t happen, and should probably not be commenting with such strong opinions

100% with you on this. Wasn't there a story recently about a guy that was going to jail for rape charges until the girl admitted that she lied about it?

Just wait until more evidence is found.

 

[BaasRed]

I'm curious, since you have actual content-domain knowledge, would ND put themselves at any additional legal risk by simply saying that they are conducting such an investigation?

Edit: Just asked my wife, who is a lawyer but not in employment law or anything directly related, but her instinct is that having claimed that they have no evidence of an allegation, if they subsequently did an investigation and it did turn up evidence of an allegation, that would be very bad for them in that it would call the validity of all of their HR record-keeping. So it seems like it would be a bad idea to claim right off the bat to have no records of this, in case Ballard does decide to name names and/or others come forward.

So either they(ND HR) know exactly what they're talking about or they are hoping to sweep this under the rug in public at least. Im more prone to the latter.

 

[BTA]

What a shitty response/denial. Why even rush to say something if it’s going to be this?

100% with you on this. Wasn't there a story recently about a guy that was going to jail for rape charges until the girl admitted that she lied about it?

Just wait until more evidence is found.

False accusations do occasionally happen, yes, but they happen so rarely compared to legitimate accusations that disbelieving accusations on principle not only doesn’t make any sense but also hurts the people making legitimate accusations, which is part of why more people don’t speak up to begin with - why risk your career and/or public image if no one’s going to believe you anyway. There’s no reason to wait before forming your personal opinion here.

Particularly when there’s no named person accused and so it’s down to whether you trust an individual over a big company.

 

[Joe White]

Talk about boycotting ND and Sony

Big companies like ND/Sony require proper incentives to care about this type of issues and individuals overall, so talking about not giving them any more money or support before they handle this properly is the right thing to do; it doesn't mean they are guilty, it means that this statement is not enough and they have resources to do better.

 

[KORNdoggy]

Evidence is a requirement when it comes to these sorts of allegations imo, and so far neither party are producing any. ND's statement seems reasonable. i'm not going to assume there is some huge conspiracy cover up going on. or even that the guys allegations are legit. (no evidence to suggest either is true) but it seems the ball is in his court now. hopefully he kept the receipts, assuming there was any to keep?

 

[nelsonroyale]

I am not sure if twitter is the best format to make a public accusation like this...but I can also see why someone who has experienced an issue which hasn't been taken sufficiently seriously might make a statement on a public forum to draw more attention to their situation. Either way, I don't think I can say anything on this other than it is more than poor conduct if it is true. But there is literally no evidence either way at the moment, so I don't think anything can be inferred...

 

[Bits N Pieces]

Evidence is a requirement when it comes to these sorts of allegations imo, and so far neither party are producing any. ND's statement seems reasonable. i'm not going to assume there is some huge conspiracy cover up going on. or even that the guys allegations are legit. (no evidence to suggest either is true) but it seems the ball is in his court now. hopefully he kept the receipts, assuming there was any to keep?

Most people who are sexually harassed at work have video footage, eye witness accounts or signed confessions of said incidents, dont see why David would be any different?

Spoiler

/s

 

[Sephiroth503]

Most people who are sexually harassed at work have video footage, eye witness accounts or signed confessions of said incidents, dont see why David would be any different?

Spoiler

/s

What would be an acceptable outcome for you in the absence of evidence?

 

[MosquitoSmasher]

So yesterday I saw that a old thread got kicked back up by someone about Ballard leaving ND back and then, returning to ND and then leaving again?

 

[Necro900]

Most people who are sexually harassed at work have video footage, eye witness accounts or signed confessions of said incidents, dont see why David would be any different?

Spoiler

/s

I think he meant the report he sent the HR team. Or any message/text if any harassment occurred via electronic devices.

Can't really understand why users on NeoGAF are so averse to the concept of evidence. A claim on twitter would be laughed off in court without any kind of supporting evidence, and in general tweeting is a pretty weird way to make such claims.

The burden of proof is on the guy, not on ND or Sony, and until proven differently there's nothing to blame both companies for. All these outraged posts as if this was a closed case based on tweets are frankly ridiculous and the byproduct of the worst internet outrage culture, imo.

Let's keep an eye on the case and see if actual evidence comes up before resorting to the pillory.

 

[KORNdoggy]

Most people who are sexually harassed at work have video footage, eye witness accounts or signed confessions of said incidents, dont see why David would be any different?

Spoiler

/s

then he needs corroborating stories. but if he is refusing to name the person responsible, how can anyone even do that? people are saying he could be sued for slander by naming the person, but surely if what he is saying is true there would be no grounds for that.

 

[Thorrgal]

Most people who are sexually harassed at work have video footage, eye witness accounts or signed confessions of said incidents, dont see why David would be any different?

Spoiler

/s

Or mb just a copy of the email to HR?

 

[StayDead]

didnt he say that sony fired him the day after he went to hr to file a complaint? so, if the complaint was never filed...there are no records.

How did he not take them to court then and there for unfair dismissal? Wow, that seems awful if that's true.

 

[Chronospherics]

There are a number of ways to discredit a former employer than making up a sexual abuse allegation. You know there is still a stigma that exists with victims
of abuse that that's not a very pleasant thing to want to make up about yourself

Immediately dismissing someone for coming forward about their experience with sexual abuse because it didn't come with a neatly put together press packet is gross as hell

I'm not immediately dismissing anyone. I hope he has the support to pursue it through the proper channels. I'm just not willing to immediately jump to the conclusion that the accused, is guilty.

I think doing that, is as you put it, gross. Just imagine if Ballard had named someone. Would you retain your belief that whoever Ballard named, was automatically guilty? That could very easily, ruin an innocent persons life.

then he needs corroborating stories. but if he is refusing to name the person responsible, how can anyone even do that? people are saying he could be sued for slander by naming the person, but surely if what he is saying is true there would be no grounds for that.

Contrary to seemingly popular belief, sexual harassment doesn't always take place in a public office, and it can also occur in relatively isolated incidents. If it did happen, there simply may not be anyone else to corroborate the story.

 

[gaming_noob]

Or mb just a copy of the email to HR?

Do you have access to your email address from your ex employer?

 

[semiconscious]

I think he meant the report he sent the HR team. Or any message/text if any harassment occurred via electronic devices.

Can't really understand why users on NeoGAF are so averse to the concept of evidence. A claim on twitter would be laughed off in court without any kind of supporting evidence, and in general tweeting is a pretty weird way to make such claims.

The burden of proof is on the guy, not on ND or Sony, and until proven differently there's nothing to blame both companies for. All these outraged posts as if this was a closed case based on tweets are frankly ridiculous and the byproduct of the worst internet outrage culture, imo.

Let's keep an eye on the case and see if actual evidence comes up before resorting to the pillory.

again, thanks! it's been extremely strange witnessing this, in the absence of any corroboration whatsoever...

 

[Thorrgal]

Do you have access to your email address from your ex employer?

You don't need to have access now, just have a copy of the email, which you should've made at the time taking into account what were talking about here.

But at this point it seems very clear that he doesn't have this kind of proof because he never made a formal complaint through the proper channels, or any kind of informal complain in writing :/

 

[dracula_x]

Do you have access to your email address from your ex employer?

It's not necessary when you use standalone email app. All messages will be archived by default, until you deleted them.

 

[gaming_noob]

You don't need to have access now, just have a copy of the email, which you should've made at the time taking into account what were talking about here.

But at this point it seems very clear that he doesn't have this kind of proof because he never made a formal complaint through the proper channels, or any kind of informal complain in writing :/

ND should sift through their Exchange backups.

 

[Trup1aya]

Except they literally said that they take sexual assault and harassment allegations very seriously, but there is no way to take action if a report was never filed. So in other words what you really mean is that they didn't give you the outcome you wanted emotionally.

But a report can't be filed if hr refuses to hear the claim, then fires him the next day.

This is what the victim is alleging. So to respond to the allegations with "we can't find a report is the exact kind of handwashing that would lead to this sort of thing happening I the first place.

then he needs corroborating stories. but if he is refusing to name the person responsible, how can anyone even do that? people are saying he could be sued for slander by naming the person, but surely if what he is saying is true there would be no grounds for that.

So you think allegations must be untrue in order for someone to get railroaded?

One of the main reasons people don't report these things is for fear of not being believed and/or shame of being victimized. Assailants use this as leverage to continue to exert power over their victim.

True or not, he could be successfully sued for slander because he lacks the legal/financial means to defend himself on court. Witnesses, if there were any, could also be intimidated angainst forward against a giant corporation.

People are so naive to think that the court system always plays out as it should.

 

[mrk8885]

I believe that a person wouldn't make a bold claim to just lie and deceive. I believe something happened and I believe someone did it. I don't know WHO this person is, this specific lead that was mentioned, but I would like to know. I'm in the camp that is supporting the accusers accusation but also am not directly blaming Sony or ND for their response if they truly have no evidence on paper of this incident. And that's how these cases always end up, with their being no paper trail. If someone else was brave enough to speak up to back his story , we would be at least getting somewhere and I hope his bravery allows others who were either wronged by the same HR department or who were also assaulted by this same lead, comes forward.

And like I said, the way you think makes you a TERRIBLE person for a jury. There are stories about fabricated allegations all the time. But you’ve already decided—like so many people here—that one person putting out allegations on Twitter must be true. You don’t know him personally, and don’t know any more about the story than any one of us. But since it’s 2017 and everyone always has pitchforks at the ready, you’ve convinced yourself he’s telling the truth.

It may be true. It may not be true. no one here knows enough to actually claim either way without looking ridiculous. Of course that isn’t stopping many of you from, you know, looking ridiculous.

 

[Dunkley]

How did he not take them to court then and there for unfair dismissal? Wow, that seems awful if that's true.

Because taking a multi-billion company like SIE/Naughty Dog to court for unfair dismissal and having any remote chance of actually winning isn't something any developer can just afford.

Especially when, as Chronospherics puts it well:

Contrary to seemingly popular belief, sexual harassment doesn't always take place in a public office, and it can also occur in relatively isolated incidents. If it did happen, there simply may not be anyone else to corroborate the story.

The situation in regards to evidence might just be that. The victim might have experienced it but there's no evidence they can provide beyond their own testimony and there is no one to corroborate that could support their claim of unfair dismissal, let alone sexual harassment.

Realistically they'd have no chances winning this, but in my opinion this is something Dave Ballard knew from the start.

@thread: If you ask me, it seems just like something they wanted to get off their chest, even in the face of jeopardizing their chances with future employers by raising these allegations against a huge company like that, even in the face of an emotional fanbase where you just know all them bad apples are busy writing him insults and death threats on twitter, even in the face of knowing nothing will probably come out of it, they just said the stuff.

Now I am not saying you should believe what they are saying because you are entitled to your interpretation as everyone else is entitled to theirs, it's just why I think they made these tweets in the first place because otherwise I'd have a hard time figuring out an incentive to raise such serious allegations that are going to be investigated by journos with a 100% certainty if it wasn't just for the fact that they wanted to have these things said rather than remaining silent.

If they are true or not however is something we might not find out for a while, if at all. I know I sound like I believe in what Dave Ballard is saying, and yeah, I won't decline my subjectivity so you got me there, but I am aware that this is just my interpretation from an outside view based on a barebones amount of information, just like everyone else's, and proving who is right with their interpretation and who isn't is a matter that can only be resolved once we learn more about the situation at hand.

All we're literally doing at this point is personally weighing equal statements against eachother, and until more information appears it will be difficult to draw any definite conclusions from this situation beyond that it might've happened. We simply don't know enough.

 

[KORNdoggy]

So you think allegations must be untrue in order for someone to get railroaded?

i'm saying a person can't cry slander when the thing they're crying about is true. if i'm being accused of groping someone, and then it's proven that i was groping someone, i can't sue for slander. slander is a false statement that damages the reputation of the alleged. the moment it's proven to be true there are no grounds for someone to sue anyone making those claims.

so...if the guy is telling the truth and has evidence, or there are corroborating stories or people who went through the same ordeal, then he needs to say who it was for people to come forward.

you know, like if he said it was "Jeff". people who work there can go "oh yeah, Jeff, that guy was such a sleazeball, i can attest to what you're saying, he inappropriately touched me too"

 

[Hyunashi]

Until one side can show me some sort of evidence, I mean literally any evidence at all....I just don't see how I can make any judgement calls against Naughty Dog as a company.

It's all just story against story at this point.

Pretty much this.

 

[CannonFodder52]

And like I said, the way you think makes you a TERRIBLE person for a jury. There are stories about fabricated allegations all the time. But you've already decided—like so many people here—that one person putting out allegations on Twitter must be true. You don't know him personally, and don't know any more about the story than any one of us. But since it's 2017 and everyone always has pitchforks at the ready, you've convinced yourself he's telling the truth.

It may be true. It may not be true. no one here knows enough to actually claim either way without looking ridiculous. Of course that isn't stopping many of you from, you know, looking ridiculous.

I don't get why you are so on tilt about people in this thread.

That poster is not on a jury, there is no criminal case, they simply choose to believe victims of sexual assault who come out. I don't think it's outrage culture or pitchfork 2017 as you seem to be implying. Just that some people choose to listen and support those who come out in scenarios like this.

 

[RenditMan]

Big companies like ND/Sony require proper incentives to care about this type of issues and individuals overall, so talking about not giving them any more money or support before they handle this properly is the right thing to do; it doesn't mean they are guilty, it means that this statement is not enough and they have resources to do better.

Maybe they should hire private investigators to spy on their workforce?

You know, instead of having the usual grievance procedures as required by law.

 

[Trup1aya]

i'm saying a person can't cry slander when the thing they're crying about is true. if i'm being accused of groping someone, and then it's proven that i was groping someone, i can't sue for slander. slander is a false statement that damages the reputation of the alleged. the moment it's proven to be true there are no grounds for someone to sue anyone making those claims.

so...if the guy is telling the truth and has evidence, or there are corroborating stories or people who went through the same ordeal, then he needs to say who it was for people to come forward.

you know, like if he said it was "Jeff". people who work there can go "oh yeah, Jeff, that guy was such a sleazeball, i can attest to what you're saying, he inappropriately touched me too"

There is a difference between something being true, and something being proven true in court. That's what you don't seem to understand.

Untrue things are 'proven' in court all the time. True things are found to be untrue in court, all the time.

If the guy is telling the truth, but has no concrete evidence, that doesn't mean it didn't happen. It DOES mean he could be sued for slander. This is exactly why a company would hang up instead of properly following the complaint process and preserving evidence- to weaken any case against them and/or to build a case of their own.

The victim may not have been harrased publicly. He may be unsure if the same thing happened to others. He may be unsure if other victims would be willing to speak up- for the exact same reasons he waited to speak up.

Naming someone is a tremendously indimidating decision, and comes with real additional risks.

The notion that as long as he's honest, everything will be ok is incredibly naive.

 

[Feorax]

I don't get why you are so on tilt about people in this thread.

That poster is not on a jury, there is no criminal case, they simply choose to believe victims of sexual assault who come out. I don't think it's outrage culture or pitchfork 2017 as you seem to be implying. Just that some people choose to listen and support those who come out in scenarios like this.

There is nothing wrong with people wanting to support the victim. I think in general that should be the default stance everyone takes in situations like these for very obvious reasons.

At the same time, there are a lot of people in this thread who seem absolutely incensed that others think that David's word alone is not enough to absolutely condemn Sony/ND, and are furious that they've put out a statement that any other company would in a similar situation. Many have even suggested speaking to the victim directly, which is absolutely insane.

There have been some level headed posters in here on both sides, but there have also been some absolute lunatics.

 

[semiconscious]

I don't get why you are so on tilt about people in this thread.

That poster is not on a jury, there is no criminal case, they simply choose to believe victims of sexual assault who come out. I don't think it's outrage culture or pitchfork 2017 as you seem to be implying. Just that some people choose to listen and support those who come out in scenarios like this.

taking the side of one party or another in a dispute like this, absent any evidence whatsoever, is a dangerous thing. because, in doing so, one is also aligning themselves against the other party, also absent any evidence. iow, one is charging someone with having done something, based solely on the word of someone one doesn't even know...

 

[old manatee]

So the lesson I've learned from this is that you should always secretly record your interactions with HR.

 

[mrk8885]

I don't get why you are so on tilt about people in this thread.

That poster is not on a jury, there is no criminal case, they simply choose to believe victims of sexual assault who come out. I don't think it's outrage culture or pitchfork 2017 as you seem to be implying. Just that some people choose to listen and support those who come out in scenarios like this.

I’m “on a tilt” about people in this thread because people in this thread are acting ridiculous.

And I just don’t agree with your post. The internet mob mentality is running rampant these days, always quick to jump on a potential injustice. This thread has been littered with examples of people ready to punish Sony and ND as guilty already. Posts about boycotts, and HR conspiracies and coverups, blasting ND for “too quick” of a response (from the same people who would have blasted them for not responding quick enough) and my [still] personal favorite: blasting ND for using his name despite the allegation being made in his public twitter account. That isn’t about “supporting David. “


And there continues to be a sentiment amongst some here that opinions like mine and trying to downplay the accusation and just support a company because we like their games. That’s absurd. You’ll find nothing in my posts to suggest I think Sony and ND are innocent (unlike the myriad posts who have decided they’re guilty). My point is simply that we don’t know enough, and a twitter accusation isn’t the end all be all for the discussion.

This may well end up being shown to be completely true and at THAT time the backlash will be justified. but that doesn’t mean that people calling for a boycott, etc now are being reasonable.

 

[Vitten]

Did the guy lodge an official complaint to his superiors and was it swept under the rug ? Shouldn't be too hard to prove with e-mail correspondence.

This is not the type of allegation you go over lightly with your boss over a drink after work, you note everything down to build your case and make sure there's written reports between you and your superiors. Otherwise it's all just a bunch of hearsay.

 

[CannonFodder52]

I’m “on a tilt” about people in this thread because people in this thread are acting ridiculous.

And I just don’t agree with your post. The internet mob mentality is running rampant these days, always quick to jump on a potential injustice. This thread has been littered with examples of people ready to punish Sony and ND as guilty already. Posts about boycotts, and HR conspiracies and coverups, blasting ND for “too quick” of a response (from the same people who would have blasted them for not responding quick enough) and my [still] personal favorite: blasting ND for using his name despite the allegation being made in his public twitter account. That isn’t about “supporting David. “

About the usage of his name. Everyone who's aware of the situation, or was waiting on the statement already knows who he is. But since ND's statement reads as a denial of his allegation and boosts his name to a much much wider audience of gamers, many are likely to hop on over to his twitter and attack him. Maybe it's the accepted standard and their statement essentially had to list his name or something, but I can definitely see why people are weirded out that they did list it.

 

[Thorrgal]

ND should sift through their Exchange backups.

I'm sure they have and they haven't found anything because there isn't anything to find

Otherwise they would not have released such a strong statement

Did the guy lodge an official complaint to his superiors and was it swept under the rug ? Shouldn't be too hard to prove with e-mail correspondence.

This is not the type of allegation you go over lightly with your boss over a drink after work, you note everything down to build your case and make sure there's written reports between you and your superiors. Otherwise it's all just a bunch of hearsay.

He (presumably) didn't lodge any official complaint, that's one of the the issues here...

 

[mrk8885]

About the usage of his name. Everyone who's aware of the situation, or was waiting on the statement already knows who he is. But since ND's statement reads as a denial of his allegation and boosts his name to a much much wider audience of gamers, many are likely to hop on over to his twitter and attack him. Maybe it's the accepted standard and their statement essentially had to list his name or something, but I can definitely see why people are weirded out that they did list it.

Well obviously I don’t support people going to his twitter and harassing him.

But had they not used his name, any jerk who felt compelled to attack him personally could have searched google or twitter for 5 seconds and found his account.

 

[llien]

Until one side can show me some sort of evidence, I mean literally any evidence at all....I just don't see how I can make any judgement calls against Naughty Dog as a company..

Well, there inherently is no way to present "something doesn't exist" kind of evidence.

 

[ScientificPizza]

And like I said, the way you think makes you a TERRIBLE person for a jury. There are stories about fabricated allegations all the time. But you’ve already decided—like so many people here—that one person putting out allegations on Twitter must be true. You don’t know him personally, and don’t know any more about the story than any one of us. But since it’s 2017 and everyone always has pitchforks at the ready, you’ve convinced yourself he’s telling the truth.

It may be true. It may not be true. no one here knows enough to actually claim either way without looking ridiculous. Of course that isn’t stopping many of you from, you know, looking ridiculous.

Fabricated all of the time? Do you have any sources for that?

Also choosing to not immediately dismiss a victim coming forward does not make you a terrible person for a jury. Because that's not how juries work. Anyone in this thread saying that to discredit other people for simply displaying empathy are stupid as hell

 

[Quonny]

I'm sure they have and they haven't found anything because there isn't anything to find

Otherwise they would not have released such a strong statement

This.

This statement is strong because it’s so easy to disprove if they’re lying. One saved email. One downloaded voicemail. One archived text message. That’s all anyone needs to completely destroy this statement. The fact that they released it at all should show that they really don’t have anything, which isn’t to say the abuse didn’t take place.

People saying this is a nothing statement aren’t really paying attention.

 

[mrk8885]

Fabricated all of the time? Do you have any sources for that?

Also choosing to not immediately dismiss a victim coming forward does not make you a terrible person for a jury. Because that's not how juries work. Anyone in this thread saying that to discredit other people for simply displaying empathy are stupid as hell

You seem to be purposely misconstruing my point. I’m not dismissing the victim. I’m just not ready to declare Sony or ND guilty of some huge cover up either.