Support NeoGAF

[diaspora]

She did say that it increased scrutiny. And that's what a lot of people have been saying, too - that the coordinated smear campaign contributed to whatever else was going on. That's what's so frustrating to me. You suffer harassment and shitbaggery and eventually it contributes to fucking up your professional life. Awesome.

I won't speculate on her other job, except to say that she said it wasn't against policy (which could mean it was a loophole excuse) or it could have been a bigger deal. No one knows. Doesn't even really matter. None of this had to happen.

She didn't say the job wasn't against policy, but that Nintendo allows a second job in a more general sense.

 

[Eolz]

I doubt that it was good will. I can almost guarantee that policy change went something like this

EMPLOYEES: Let us be more casual on social media!

MANAGERS: Nope. That is a terrible idea.

EMPLOYEES: Social media is an important part of our lives, and a tool we need to utilize!

MANAGERS (to each other): Just give them what they want. Somebody is bound to screw it up within six months, and when they do we will be completely justified to put a gag on everyone again.

MANAGERS (to employees): Congratulations everyone.....you can now speak freely on Twitter!

Yeah, used "goodwill" as a term that I thought explicit enough. Sorry, couldn't find anything else close in my vocabulary
I don't think you're far from the truth, already seen a lot worse than that before, from both sides.

All this has made me wonder if Treehouse Live was a good idea. I loved it at the time, but it turned previously anonymous employees into celebrities and harassment targets. GAF is better than most sites, but even here, we had a really creepy obsession with the private photographs of Erik on vacation ("the hot one").

Last year, Nintendo's E3 underwhelmed. Treehouse was the face of that disappointing E3. Guess who angry gamers decided to take out their frustrations on? I'd be amazed if it returned this year.

I think Treehouse Live was and still is a really good idea. I don't think them trying to push Treehouse even further after that was a good one.
But yeah, I agree on what you said.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

She did say that it increased scrutiny. And that's what a lot of people have been saying, too - that the coordinated smear campaign contributed to whatever else was going on. That's what's so frustrating to me. You suffer harassment and shitbaggery and eventually it contributes to fucking up your professional life. Awesome.

I won't speculate on her other job, except to say that she said it wasn't against policy (which could mean it was a loophole excuse) or it could have been a bigger deal. No one knows. Doesn't even really matter. None of this had to happen.

If a policy as broken and that was grounds for termination, then it really shouldn't matter how it came to light.

It's shitty as hell that these guys focused on her and harassed her, and I totally sympathize with that situation, but I just don't see why that context should give her some kind of immunity from following corporate policy (assuming whatever she did was against Nintendo's policy).

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

I still see so many people carrying the exact narrative in this thread that GG does. Whether those people are GG themselves doesn't even matter when it is the exact same bullshit.

So either they are playing dumb or are just idiots doing GG work for them in this thread. Congrats on being part of the problem.

You and others keep saying this but a big part of this story is the irresponsible actions of an employee that ultimately led to her dismissal.

One that was warned and one that even knew she was crossing the line or close to it.

She's not the only one at fault obviously but it can't be continuously swept under the rug as if she didn't do anything wrong to be terminated.

You have to look at both sides.

That "group" will never have a leg to stand on because of their malicious reprehensible behavior.

Someone(maybe them) led to the discovery of what cost her her job but she would have be fine if she didn't break company policy or do something detrimental to their values.

 

[@MUWANdo]

If a policy as broken and that was grounds for termination, then it really shouldn't matter how it came to light.

It's shitty as hell that these guys focused on her and harassed her, and I totally sympathize with that situation, but I just don't see why that context should give her some kind of immunity from following corporate policy (assuming whatever she did was against Nintendo's policy).

The argument is that having a job 'in conflict with corporate culture" is open enough that they could have used it to terminate her for something benign that they'd otherwise let slide if not for the existing pressure brought on by GG. You can't divorce her actions and their response from the context of chronic harassment and targeted muckraking.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

The argument is that having a job 'in conflict with corporate culture" is open enough that they could have used it to terminate her for something benign that they'd otherwise let slide if not for the existing pressure brought on by GG. You can't divorce her actions and their response from the context of chronic harassment and targeted muckraking.

The problem is we'll never know.

We have her word.

Their word doesn't count for shit.

And Nintendo will never give their side of the story.

 

[PtM]

I don't think Alison is wrong in that Nintendo allows for a second job. I think the way her tweet was written (calling it moonlighting, which usually has a negative tinge to it) as well as perhaps not understanding the policy thoroughly may have magnified her feelings on the reasoning behind the termination.

Why? NoA themselves said they fired her because of this particular job.

I guess NoA may have had no choice on the matter. If they hadn't fired Rapp, the anonymous tipster could have gone public/to the media with it.

 

[razoftblend]

Why? NoA themselves said they fired her because of this particular job.

I guess NoA may have had no choice on the matter. If they hadn't fired Rapp, the anonymous tipster could have gone public/to the media with it.

They allow a second job with limitations. In this case, the limitation was not conflicting with their cultural image. These are standard limitation in a lot of companies. Where I work, I am allow to have a second job as long as it doesn't conflict with my primary job or within the same industry; usually second job with the competition is not allowed.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

The argument is that having a job 'in conflict with corporate culture" is open enough that they could have used it to terminate her for something benign that they'd otherwise let slide if not for the existing pressure brought on by GG. You can't divorce her actions and their response from the context of chronic harassment and targeted muckraking.

I can only go by what I know about Nintendo and the information we have. I find it hard to believe that they were looking for an excuse to can her, especially considering that they (admitted by her) had given warnings about various things in the past rather than just outright terminating her employment.

That's just me, though. Unless the details of Nintendo's policy, and the details of the side job come out (neither of which are likely) we can only speculate.

You choose to think that Nintendo caved into pressure from GG, but I find that to be patently ridiculous.

 

[Sandfox]

I can only go by what I know about Nintendo and the information we have. I find it hard to believe that they were looking for an excuse to can her, especially considering that they (admitted by her) had given warnings about various things in the past rather than just outright terminating her employment.

That's just me, though. Unless the details of Nintendo's policy, and the details of the side job come out (neither of which are likely) we can only speculate.

You choose to think that Nintendo caved into pressure from GG, but I find that to be patently ridiculous.

Pretty much.

 

[PopeReal]

You and others keep saying this but a big part of this story is the irresponsible actions of an employee that ultimately led to her dismissal.

One that was warned and one that even knew she was crossing the line or close to it.

She's not the only one at fault obviously but it can't be continuously swept under the rug as if she didn't do anything wrong to be terminated.

You have to look at both sides.

That "group" will never have a leg to stand on because of their malicious reprehensible behavior.

Someone(maybe them) led to the discovery of what cost her her job but she would have be fine if she didn't break company policy or do something detrimental to their values.

Again a group of people are allowed to harass and intimidate. In this case it was a Nintendo employee. And Nintendo did jack shit.

There is no "both sides" to these facts. But people still want to push the narrative to what they think she did wrong and why she got fired. All this narrative push does is help GG continue to attack and lets Nintendo off the hook. The focus should be on GG and Nintendo, not examining the character and actions of someone who was the target.

 

[HarryKS]

Was the name of the thread changed? I thought it was about a Nintendo character.

 

[TheWorst]

Was the name of the thread changed? I thought it was about a Nintendo character.

...no.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Again a group of people are allowed to harass and intimidate. In this case it was a Nintendo employee. And Nintendo did jack shit.

There is no "both sides" to these facts. But people still want to push the narrative to what they think she did wrong and why she got fired. All this narrative push does is help GG continue to attack and lets Nintendo off the hook. The focus should be on GG and Nintendo, not examining the character and actions of someone who was the target.

Once again, you're excusing an employee.

No one with a heart or mind is saying she deserved to be harassed and you don't know what Nintendo did behind the scenes.

It's really not in their power to do anything except possibly contact the FBI(who would probably not do much).

You're not looking at all the facts so I don't know why you're saying that.

 

[PopeReal]

Once again, you're excusing an employee.

No one with a heart or mind is saying she deserved to be harassed and you don't know what Nintendo did behind the scenes.

It's really not in their power to do anything except possibly contact the FBI(who would probably not do much).

You're not looking at all the facts so I don't know why you're saying that.

Actually it is well within Nintendo's power to publically support an employee who is being harassed. Other companies have managed to do so. They need to stand up not stay silent.

And I don't need to excuse her or anybody else involving their performance at work. I am not going to take the time to dig into people's shit and judge them. She got fired and Nintendo was well within their rights to fire her. They know it and she didn't argue it. It has nothing to do with the fact she was targeted and and will continue to be targeted along with other women within the gaming industry.

 

[Laughing Banana]

Again a group of people are allowed to harass and intimidate. In this case it was a Nintendo employee. And Nintendo did jack shit.

There is no "both sides" to these facts. But people still want to push the narrative to what they think she did wrong and why she got fired. All this narrative push does is help GG continue to attack and lets Nintendo off the hook. The focus should be on GG and Nintendo, not examining the character and actions of someone who was the target.

You simply do not want to entertain the possibility that she's fired precisely because of the nature of her second job?--which is, by the way, the main contention of this thread, the main reason of our discussion. That Nintendo appeared to have done nothing during her harassment was true (at least publicly), and yes, that was unfortunate, but that in itself probably has nothing to do with why she's fired.

"Alison Rapp was fired because she has a 2nd job that conflicted with Nintendo's values." You don't want to entertain the possibility that this has nothing to do with her involvement with GG, at least not directly?

We don't even know whether Nintendo gained that information from a GamerGate person or not (a person in here raised a good idea: if it was a GamerGate person that found out what she's been doing, why wouldn't they divulge that information cheerily for all the world to see? It seemed like such a GamerGate thing to do, after all) We just immediately assumed that the information was gained through a GamerGate person--we also just assumed that it was obtained illegally, and in a thread where the OP has stated in strong words that we must only push narratives based on the facts that we now, these assumptions without concrete proof are being pushed front, forward, and center as the fact that we all have to accept?

Again, the fact that Nintendo appeared to have done nothing to help Ms. Alison when she was harassed was really unfortunate--I am sure everyone, well, everyone that is sane anyways--would agree with this. But specifically talking about this termination, it seems strange to me that we would immediately put 100% of the fault towards Nintendo and simply dismiss the possibility that hey, maybe she did something that was in conflict with how Nintendo do things and that something was a sound enough reason for Nintendo to terminate her.

It seemed like so many in this thread are so eager to say "Nintendo buckles down to GamerGate and that's why they fired Alison" as the all-the-end-be that we should just 100% accept no matter what.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Actually it is well within Nintendo's power to publically support an employee who is being harassed. Other companies have managed to do so. They need to stand up not stay silent.

And I don't need to excuse her or anybody else involving their performance at work. I am not going to take the time to dig into people's shit and judge them. She got fired and Nintendo was well within their rights to fire her. They know it and she didn't argue it. It has nothing to do with the fact she was targeted and and will continue to be targeted along with other women within the gaming industry.

Well, there.

I agree with that for the most part.

Something is long overdue with these harassers but they haven't been held accountable so far so I don't have high hopes.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Again a group of people are allowed to harass and intimidate. In this case it was a Nintendo employee. And Nintendo did jack shit.

There is no "both sides" to these facts. But people still want to push the narrative to what they think she did wrong and why she got fired. All this narrative push does is help GG continue to attack and lets Nintendo off the hook. The focus should be on GG and Nintendo, not examining the character and actions of someone who was the target.

This makes no sense.

All I see is that you are saying that Nintendo is either lying (which none of us can know for certain), or that you expected Nintendo to give one employee immunity from repercussions for breaking corporate policy because that employee was being harassed by a hate group.

I agree that the focus should certainly be on GG for their harassment, but that is separate from Nintendo terminating an employee over breaking corporate policy, unless Nintendo is lying and they actually just hate women, too, and caved in to pressure from GG, which is absolutely incomprehensible to me, but I suppose you're free to speculate like the rest of us.

 

[Makki]

Do the people that make all these remarks and claims that Nintendo should have stepped up and is fucking up have more information than anyone else in here or something? Unless it is known what exactly conflicted with NoA's rules everyone is making up a straw man with Nintendo on its head and citing negligence from their part when the only facts around are GG created harassment. Their firing, if illegitimate, would be able to be contested in court, that would be your only indication that their decision was based on a lack of ethics of any sort.

NoA has no business shielding their employee from a shitstorm of anonymous harassment to an employee that was told to not stir up controversy and at some point further removed as a public figure because she "fought" to keep tweeting about rape culture while representing Nintendo as a public figure (which sounds just like what a big corporate-driven business would do within their power to correct the situation).

The cops cant do anything about social media abuse and bullying, yet NoA could have solved that part of this controversy? By making a public statement for GG to read and laugh at?

 

[dr. apocalipsis]

So a company fires a PR employee that goes all against it's own corporate image everytime there is chance and it becomes a news because?

 

[Laughing Banana]

The cops cant do anything about social media abuse and bullying, yet NoA could have solved that part of this controversy? By making a public statement for GG to read and laugh at?

Of course GG would just read and laugh at it, but symbolically speaking it would be a powerful gesture if Nintendo, and Sony, and Microsoft, and anyone else, actually spoke in strong terms about how they do not condone movement like GG.

 

[Scientist Supreme!]

Do the people that make all these remarks and claims that Nintendo should have stepped up and is fucking up have more information than anyone else in here or something? Unless it is known what exactly conflicted with NoA's rules everyone is making up a straw man with Nintendo on its head and citing negligence from their part when the only facts around are GG created harassment. Their firing, if illegitimate, would be able to be contested in court, that would be your only indication that their decision was based on a lack of ethics of any sort.

NoA has no business shielding their employee from a shitstorm of anonymous harassment to an employee that was told to not stir up controversy and at some point further removed as a public figure because she "fought" to keep tweeting about rape culture while representing Nintendo as a public figure (which sounds just like what a big corporate-driven business would do within their power to correct the situation).

The cops cant do anything about social media abuse and bullying, yet NoA could have solved that part of this controversy? By making a public statement for GG to read and laugh at?

Yes, Nintendo could have stood up for their employe instead of staying silent like a coward. Yes, Nintendo could have publicly come out against gg, hopefully prompting others in the industry to do the same. There's no defense for Nintendo actions. They failed Alison and every other woman that is going to be targeted after.

 

[Makki]

Of course GG would just read and laugh at it, but symbolically speaking it would be a powerful gesture if Nintendo, and Sony, and Microsoft, and anyone else, actually spoke in strong terms about how they do not condone movement like GG.

Nintendo has literally nothing to gain but DDOS attacks when it should go without saying that any business, not just Nintendo, would not sponsor the harassment of women (From an ethical, business and a PR standpoint no corporation wanting to keep their value would ever do this, it's logical). GG isn't something they can address as it has nothing to do with their business model, and the actions of an employee independent from their efforts drew the attention of this shit group of people, not Nintendo's.

It is not up to Nintendo to shame GG and fight the fight that a company has no business arguing against. The fight against GG should be from individuals.

 

[FlashFlooder]

So a company fires a PR employee that goes all against it's own corporate image everytime there is chance and it becomes a news because?

Seriously. I don't get what the controversy is here.

 

[Laughing Banana]

Nintendo has literally nothing to gain but DDOS attacks when it should go without saying that any business, not just Nintendo, would not sponsor the harassment of women (From both a business standpoint and a PR image no corporation wanting to keep their value would ever do this, it's logical). GG isn't something they can address as it has nothing to do with their business model, and the actions of an employee independent from their efforts drew the attention of a shit group of people.

"Has nothing to gain" is not really true: not only it would be powerful symbolically, it would make very good press if Nintendo support one of their employees publicly against GG. Just imagine the amount of goodwill that kind of gesture would generate for them.

"The company that stood up against something wrong." No business in the world would refuse to be given that title.

 

[Demise]

Do the people that make all these remarks and claims that Nintendo should have stepped up and is fucking up have more information than anyone else in here or something? Unless it is known what exactly conflicted with NoA's rules everyone is making up a straw man with Nintendo on its head and citing negligence from their part when the only facts around are GG created harassment. Their firing, if illegitimate, would be able to be contested in court.

NoA has no business shielding their employee from a shitstorm of anonymous harassment to an employee that was told to not stir up controversy and at some point further removed as a public figure because she "fought" to keep tweeting about rape culture while representing Nintendo as a public figure (which sounds just like what a big corporate-driven business would do within their power to correct the situation).

The cops cant do anything about social media abuse and bullying, yet NoA could have solved that part of this controversy? By making a public statement for GG to read and laugh at?

Plus, she was getting harassed online wasn't she ? I can't really understand how you can make it so important when all you have to do is close your social media accounts or just not according importance to social media at all to get rid of it. I'm not judging her or anything but social media harassment is a bullet you can dodge pretty easily, it's not like being harassed by co-worker or a neighboor, those situations are terrible. Being harassed online seems to be way more easy to manage, especially when all you have to do is staying away from social medias or staying away from internet. But I'll be glad to be convinced otherwise.

Just a point that had probably be brought up already : why is everyone assuming (including Alison) that NOA get the information from GG ? Is this a fact or just some speculation ? I'm not a L from Death Note but if they knew what was the nature of the job, they'd be relieved to shout what it was to everyone on the net.

 

[Trojan]

I just wanted to say that this thread has some of the most insightful conversation I've ever read on a complex topic like this. Really cool to read some of these well-written posts, and more so, to see that the conversation hasn't devolved into absolutes and culture-baiting.

The best of GAF.

 

[fernoca]

You simply do not want to entertain the possibility that she's fired precisely because of the nature of her second job?--which is, by the way, the main contention of this thread, the main reason of our discussion. That Nintendo appeared to have done nothing during her harassment was true (at least publicly), and yes, that was unfortunate, but that in itself probably has nothing to do with why she's fired.

"Alison Rapp was fired because she has a 2nd job that conflicted with Nintendo's values." You don't want to entertain the possibility that this has nothing to do with her involvement with GG, at least not directly?

We don't even know whether Nintendo gained that information from a GamerGate person or not (a person in here raised a good idea: if it was a GamerGate person that found out what she's been doing, why wouldn't they divulge that information cheerily for all the world to see? It seemed like such a GamerGate thing to do, after all) We just immediately assumed that the information was gained through a GamerGate person--we also just assumed that it was obtained illegally, and in a thread where the OP has stated in strong words that we must only push narratives based on the facts that we now, these assumptions without concrete proof are being pushed front, forward, and center as the fact that we all have to accept?

Again, the fact that Nintendo appeared to have done nothing to help Ms. Alison was really unfortunate--I am sure everyone, well, everyone that is sane anyways--would agree with this. But specifically talking about this termination, it seems strange to me that we would immediately put 100% of the fault towards Nintendo and simply dismiss the possibility that hey, maybe she did something that was in conflict with how Nintendo do things and that something was a sound enough reason for Nintendo to terminate her.

It seemed like so many in this thread are so eager to say "Nintendo buckles down to GamerGate and that's why they fired Alison" as the all-the-end-be that we should just 100% accept no matter what.

Pretty much.
And even they as companies are not mandated or forced to openly "defend" employees in situations like this. Would be nice but won't do much.

I've received death threats at a few jobs. Even explained the last one in either this or the last thread, which was openly posted on the Facebook of my employer.

They said nothing regarding that online. Yet they advised us, offered counseling and even their lawyers in case we wanted to press things further. My mom was in the hospital during that time (and passed away a few weeks later) so I decided to not do anything.

The problem is that we know nothing about that or the second job. So people end around the Dyack syndrome of "for or against". The parts not want that information exposed.

That Nintendo should've openly said something about it, maybe. People were asking for Iwata's firing and some wishing him ill for ruining Nintendo...and they still said nothing. People all sent rage messages on his Twitter that last E3 weeks before he paased away and outside responding about improving things for later... nothing else.

We sadly live in an era that everything is posted online. People want the information out. People want everyone taking sides. And that's part of the reason Alison was inthis mess even before working at Nintendo. Some things ate not as simple as "for or against".

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Plus, she was getting harassed online wasn't she ? I can't really understand how you can make it so important when all you have to do is close your social media accounts or just not according importance to social media at all to get rid of it. I'm not judging her or anything but social media harassment is a bullet you can dodge pretty easily, it's not like being harassed by co-worker or a neighboor, those situations are terrible. Being harassed online seems to be way more easy to manage, especially when all you have to do is staying away from social medias or staying away from internet. But I'll be glad to be convinced otherwise.

Just a point that had probably be brought up already : why is everyone assuming (including Alison) that NOA get the information from GG ? Is this a fact or just some speculation ? I'm not a L from Death Note but if they knew what was the nature of the job, they'll be relieved to shout what it was to everyone on the net.

I may be wrong, but I don't think Alison said that GG members found out and told Nintendo. She's just pointing out (probably correctly), that their harassment of her and the hubbub on the Internet that it caused almost certainly led to folks at Nintendo more carefully monitoring and investigating her activity online.

 

[Kimawolf]

Yes, Nintendo could have stood up for their employe instead of staying silent like a coward. Yes, Nintendo could have publicly come out against gg, hopefully prompting others in the industry to do the same. There's no defense for Nintendo actions. They failed Alison and every other woman that is going to be targeted after.

Nintendo aren't to blame. They don't own the platform of harassment, they can't patrol the platforms, they have said before they are against harassment.

Her being fired, you either believe her and Nintendo or you make up your own conspiracy theory. Either way trying to pin this on Nintendo when they have no control over any of the platforms, when no one knows WHAT exactly they've done for her and her family in private (she certainly seems very cordial and nice to a company which, according to you and the mob watched and encouraged her life being ruined), so to assume they didn't offer her support is just witch hunting on a grand scale.

The only parties here responsible for her harassment is Gamergate, whoever exposed her 2nd job to Nintendo. that's it.

The only parties responsible for her firing is herself, she chose to do a job which conflicts with their policies, just because you're harassed doesn't suddenly absolve you of following rules, rules she's obviously know about since she was warned on day 1.

And lets not forget, while we're talking about boycotting and how horrible Nintendo is, the company responsible is the platform holder, Twitter. THEY give the tools for harassment, they do nothing to combat it on their own platform. THAT'S where you, jim Sterling, the gaming sites need to push you "anger". you want to drag someone to the carpet, drag them for not controlling their platforms and allowing unmitigated harassment with no repercussions.

 

[Scientist Supreme!]

Nintendo aren't to blame. They don't own the platform of harassment, they can't patrol the platforms, they have said before they are against harassment.

Her being fired, you either believe her and Nintendo or you make up your own conspiracy theory. Either way trying to pin this on Nintendo when they have no control over any of the platforms, when no one knows WHAT exactly they've done for her and her family in private (she certainly seems very cordial and nice to a company which, according to you and the mob watched and encouraged her life being ruined), so to assume they didn't offer her support is just witch hunting on a grand scale.

The only parties here responsible for her harassment is Gamergate, whoever exposed her 2nd job to Nintendo. that's it.

The only parties responsible for her firing is herself, she chose to do a job which conflicts with their policies, just because you're harassed doesn't suddenly absolve you of following rules, rules she's obviously know about since she was warned on day 1.

And lets not forget, while we're talking about boycotting and how horrible Nintendo is, the company responsible is the platform holder, Twitter. THEY give the tools for harassment, they do nothing to combat it on their own platform. THAT'S where you, jim Sterling, the gaming sites need to push you "anger". you want to drag someone to the carpet, drag them for not controlling their platforms and allowing unmitigated harassment with no repercussions.

Nope, I'll continue to drag to Nintendo for this. For reasons I have explained again and again. Gamergate may have done the harassment but Nintendo allowed it to happen and now has condoned it.

 

[jstripes]

Honestly, the fact that these things keep happening depresses the shit out of me.

I grew up proud of loving video games. Now the scene is full of complete shits determined to ruin the lives of others over minor things.

As someone who's played video games since the early '80s, fuck modern "gamers".

 

[Laughing Banana]

Nope, I'll continue to drag to Nintendo for this. For reasons I have explained again and again. Gamergate may have done the harassment but Nintendo allowed it to happen and now has condoned it.

By firing Alison?

 

[moondoggerr]

So much arguing past each other in this thread.

Here is what I, and many people who are angry at Nintendo, are NOT angry about:

Alison Rapp being fired'

I don't really know anything about it. Apparently it has something to do with a second job. I dont give a rip, its not my business. Either way, I'm not mad about it. Maybe one day I will be.

Here is what I, and plenty of people who are angry at Nintendo, ARE angry about:

The fact that, while doing her duties while employed at Nintendo, Alison Rapp was subjected to repeated and multiple instances of harassment and abuse, and her employer made NO statement or show of support of any kind. This continued for months.

This. Isn't. Right.

You want to shrug and say, well, that's the way things are? Go ahead. I personally consider that to be against the forward progress of humanity, that brought us from slavery to the weekend and a forty-hour week, but if you want to align that way, have at it. But if that was your daughter? Your wife? Your sister? YOU?

It's Not OK.

And it's not OK for threads like this to turn into giant victim blaming pile ons where sniggering posters hiding behind their own usernames allude to naughty pictures and describe someone in terms specifically deployed to make them hated. Read back through this thread. It's dehumanizing.

We need to find a baseline of human decency or we're in deep trouble.

 

[Demise]

.

We sadly live in an era that everything is posted online. People want the information out. People want everyone taking sides. And that's part of the reason Alison was inthis mess even before working at Nintendo. Some things ate not as simple as "for or against".

It's also up to you to protect yourself and keep some informations or pictures about you out of the internet. I don't know how old she is but I'm sure she's not a minor and she's responsible for what she posts on the net.

We're speaking of twitter as a tool to harassment but it's also up to you to not provide the tools to get harassed online beyond the typical insults we all get. It's up to you to :

- Avoid those platforms.
- Or if you really need them, to avoid posting your life, pictures, opinion on touchy subjects and pretty much everything personal.

Yes, everything posted on the net can backfire violently but unless you get hacked, you're the person in charge of your personal informations.

 

[Vincent Grayson]

It's also up to you to protect yourself and keep some informations or pictures about you out of the internet. I don't know how old she is but I'm sure she's not a minor and she's responsible for what she posts on the net.

We're speaking of twitter as a tool to harassment but it's also up to you to not provide the tools to get harassed online beyond the typical insults we all get. It's up to you to :

- Avoid those platforms.
- Or if you really need them, to avoid posting your life, pictures, opinion on touchy subjects and pretty much everything personal.

Yes, everything posted on the net can backfire violently but unless you get hacked, you're the person in charge of your personal informations.

Whether your doors are locked or unlocked, you still arrest the people who break into your house.

This is no different. The harassers are the problem. Full stop.

 

[Trogdor1123]

Nope, I'll continue to drag to Nintendo for this. For reasons I have explained again and again. Gamergate may have done the harassment but Nintendo allowed it to happen and now has condoned it.

I dont know man... that seems like a bit of an extreme logical jump. You are welcome to think what you want but there could easily be other factors involved. Given that most of us, if not all, dont know the whole story none of us should be jumping to conclusions (on either side).

 

[TheWorst]

So much arguing past each other in this thread.

Here is what I, and many people who are angry at Nintendo, are NOT angry about:

Alison Rapp being fired'

I don't really know anything about it. Apparently it has something to do with a second job. I dont give a rip, its not my business. Either way, I'm not mad about it. Maybe one day I will be.

Here is what I, and plenty of people who are angry at Nintendo, ARE angry about:

The fact that, while doing her duties while employed at Nintendo, Alison Rapp was subjected to repeated and multiple instances of harassment and abuse, and her employer made NO statement or show of support of any kind. This continued for months.

This. Isn't. Right.

You want to shrug and say, well, that's the way things are? Go ahead. I personally consider that to be against the forward progress of humanity, that brought us from slavery to the weekend and a forty-hour week, but if you want to align that way, have at it. But if that was your daughter? Your wife? Your sister? YOU?

It's Not OK.

And it's not OK for threads like this to turn into giant victim blaming pile on where sniggering posters hiding behind their own usernames allude to naughty pictures and describe someone in terms specifically deployed to make them hated. Read back through this thread. It's dehumanizing.

We need to find a baseline of human decency or we're in deep trouble.

+1

 

[Trogdor1123]

+1

forgive my ignorance but is that confirmed?

 

[Huff]

So it is normal for an employer to deal with online harassment?

 

[TheWorst]

forgive my ignorance but is that confirmed?

Alison was most definitely harassed by GG while Nintendo said nothing. What needs to be confirmed?

 

[meltingparappa]

The saddest takeaway from all of this is that people can unwittingly join a mob created by a misogynistic hate group, do some mental gymnastics to believe it's for the sake of ethics in game journalism protecting children, then afterwards spin the circumstances around to make it seem as if it's entirely her fault that she's always had coming, so nobody has to feel bad about doing their part in destroying her life.

I can barely wait for a few weeks from now when it happens to another female developer, and is just as successful.

 

[Makki]

So it is normal for an employer to deal with online harassment?

Especially when it is started by doing extra curricular duties against the employer's will? nope, because the posters above seems to think that it was within her duties to speak her mind on issues not related to her job on twitter, even though Nintendo asked her to stay away from controversy.

 

[Laughing Banana]

So much arguing past each other in this thread.

Here is what I, and many people who are angry at Nintendo, are NOT angry about:

Alison Rapp being fired'

-snip-

If you don't think that there's no "Nintendo buckled over GG and thus fired Alison" sentiment being thrown around in here, the sentiment that's the reason why so many are angry about this, then I don't know how you missed that in this thread and the locked one before this. To say that people are *not* angry about that is just positively bizarre to me as it's so very plain to see.

That Nintendo appeared to do nothing during the wave of harassment directed toward Alison is just cherry on top. Well... not "just" since it's really unfortunate.

 

[Demise]

Whether your doors are locked or unlocked, you still arrest the people who break into your house.

This is no different. The harassers are the problem. Full stop.

Of course they are, but let's be real about this. It's way simplier/smarter to educate people to not share every sensitive informations on the net (it's not like Alison were very careful about it) and not according so much importance to online behavior than fighting every anon that insults people over the net on some wild platforms that even the gov around the world can't control.

If you want to close social medias, fine I'm with you since I will not miss them. But if you to take symbolic posture just for the sake of it and not applying real solutions, nothing will be solved and i'm out.

 

[ugh_the_boot]

Nope, I'll continue to drag to Nintendo for this. For reasons I have explained again and again. Gamergate may have done the harassment but Nintendo allowed it to happen and now has condoned it.

Where were you when all this was going on? I blame you for not sticking up for Alison sooner, this all could've been avoided it you'd just done your part.

Nintendo = 1 person (apparently).

 

[TheWorst]

So it is normal for an employer to deal with online harassment?

Should it matter what's "normal" when it's obvious that things should change? This way of thinking makes no sense at all to me. There have been way too many posters in this thread who seem perfectly content with the status quo continuing, even if the status quo is extremely shitty.

 

[Huff]

Should it matter what's "normal" when it's obvious that things should change? This way of thinking makes no sense at all to me. There have been way too many posters in this thread who seem perfectly content with the status quo continuing, even if the status quo is extremely shitty.

What did Nintendo not do that they should have?

 

[NinjamicWZ]

Nope, I'll continue to drag to Nintendo for this. For reasons I have explained again and again. Gamergate may have done the harassment but Nintendo allowed it to happen and now has condoned it.

Why didn't you stop it?

 

[Trojan]

I think there are a few possible explanations I can think of for why Nintendo didn't comment on Alison's harassment/smear campaign:

1) They were afraid of countering a very loud group that had a message Involving pedophelia, probably the most toxic topic for an employer to deal with.

2) There was a cultural divide (US-Japan) that blinded some to how serious the situation was. I am not an expert on Japanese culture, but I think this type of harassment is a lot more prevalent in American society and might be difficult to understand from a Japanese perspective.

3) They were initially indifferent to the tweets and social media comments Alison was making during her tenure in Nintendo. They found out after the fact and freaked out. This also could be viewed as negligence.

4) They did not support her as an employee and essentially let this happen under their watch because they felt she wasn't worth "standing up for"

No matter which ones of these are true (if any of them), I think it's clear that Nintendo did not have a clear understanding of how to handle harassment on this level.

If they didn't believe in her, they could have come to her aid to support her as a human being who was under severe duress within the context of her job. If they did value her as an employee, the previous statement would be even more true. Because the incident had spilled into the public domain, not saying anything is almost being complicit in what's happening.

I can't say that Nintendo was malicious or callous in their handling of this, but at the least they definitely did not have a full understanding of the situation.