-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Alison Rapp Fired By Nintendo Discussion Thread -- Read Ground Rules in OP
- Thread starter charlequin
- Start date
- Status
GatticusFinch
Member
She says there was no rule, Nintendo's PR suggests there is and that she violated it. So there's conflicting evidence.
IIRC, moonlighting is allowed- with restrictions. The problem is that the harassment and social media attacks illuminated moonlighting that violated these restrictions. My problem is that there was no moderation done to quash said harassment either while it was going on or afterwards.
I laughed.
I laughed.
NinjaCoachZ
Member
She says there's no rule against moonlighting, in itself.
Nintendo says there's a rule against moonlighting IF it goes against corporate culture.
There's a difference. What she said does not preclude what Nintendo said.
GatticusFinch
Member
There's a difference, but the bolded part is wrong. She says there is no ban, they say there is a partial ban. Can't have a partial ban if there is no ban at all, so what she says is directly confronting what Nintendo says. One of them is wrong.
NinjaCoachZ
Member
You said there's conflicting evidence. Alison Rapp's statement does not conflict with Nintendo's. What Nintendo said is basically just an additional detail to what she said. There is no conflict because her statement does not preclude Nintendo's "corporate culture" tidbit. The two statements match up pretty well.
There is no conspiracy here.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Uhhhh she clearly states in her tweets that her second job was held anonymously, and she posted those photos on Twitter using her real name so it clearly cannot be that? Which is why we had all moved on from these idiotic assumptions about her thesis, tweets, and photos in the first thread that got locked because it turned out to be unsubstantiated speculation.
Whatever that second job really was, it's none of our fucking business.
blankempathy
Member
Strange that Jim says that nintendo is full of cold smiles and lacks genuine heart when their presidents and some other staff members are some of the most recognizable faces in gaming known to be full of enthusiasm and genuine. I mean look at the love Iwata got when he passed. I know he's saying that they want to manufacture nintendrones but having someone who adheres to their image doesn't mean they are not full of passion either. And it's not like they prohibit those things you mentioned above but when you are being paid to represent them you don't get much say. Or quit and find a job that adheres to what you want to wear.
It isn't, but we really can't comment on the validity of her firing by Nintendo as long as we don't know what the job in question was.
SneakersSO
Member
LOL. Your last line got a chuckle out of me, thanks.
I mean, the harassment is deplorable. There isn't much to discuss. Its abhorrent and absolutely unfortunate. Like I said earlier, its reprehensible that one of the public facing women in the game's industry got dragged down like this, again. That Ubisoft had to hide Jade Raymond while working on a franchise the industry loves & holds dear for nearly a decade, while she didn't get to enjoy the spotlight out of fear for what happened the first time she stepped in it. Nintendo moved Allison laterally & out of a public-facing position before they fired her, and you can bet part of that move was to create a safer work environment for her, as well to try to quell some of the nonsense that was flaring up.
This is the internet now. Over the course of 9 years,social media went from a place where we expressed ourselves & found link-minded individuals, to a place where anything can & will be used against us if discovered by our enemies. We didn't intend to do it. Many of these tactics, weaponizing social media outrage to oust unsavory characters from various positions, were things that were done for seemingly the right reasons. But the cats out of the bag - it's now an unbelievably effective weapon. And now that more & more groups will learn to use it, charting social media is going to become increasingly avoided. This is likely why we've seen a drop in users on Twitter in the last year or so, and why that trend doesn't seem to be slowing down.
Really? It should be clear that the photoshoot is irrelevant at this point. You're the one that's turning a blind eye here. You can either move past that or continue having no legitimate argument.
Agreed. Whatever the second job was is between HR/legal and Rapp. My key concern personally is how harassment can be done so brazenly online with no repercussions or moderation.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Other than Iwata, Miyamoto and maybe Reggie, who are at the very top of the chain, I think Jim really nailed it. If Nintendo doesn't want those nintendrones they shouldn't foster that kind of soulless "corporate culture".
NinjaCoachZ
Member
I do think it's interesting that it feels like Nintendo has become very different in the past while. It seems like they've just become colder and more distant.
Considering not even that long ago it felt like there was a Direct every month or so, following them for the past year or so has been pretty grim at times. I hope E3 can shake things up but... Yeah. With all the crazy stuff going on, I just have something telling me there's a pretty dark tone going on, at least at NOA.
Iwata's passing, Alison Rapp and Chris Pranger's firing, and Erik Peterson leaving all within less than a year, the leaks, plus all the external drama, it can't be creating an easy atmosphere.
She says she was moonlighting under an alias which is most likely true but said there were no real identifiers, but she is lying about that.Second tweet:
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
In what way?
GatticusFinch
Member
Can't discuss whether Nintendo was in the wrong unless we know why they did what they did.
If she's willing to discuss publicly selling the photos and asking for people to gift her things, and the second job she is not willing to publicly discuss and even said she did it anonymously, reason dictates that the second job was even more sensitive to her than the sex pics.
I don't think it's much a stretch to think the two are related.
How do you know that she's lying?
RichiRamjag
Member
Oh I'm with you for sure. Only have a son, but currently working (if you can call it work) on a daughter too. I would want her to grow up in a world where she feels empowered to do whatever she wants without fear just the same.
I see many of the these issues with gaming and women as similar to gaming and people of color just the same, so I definitely understand. It's a very inclusive industry sadly.
It has been posted else where on other sites that are discussing the issue and a few news sites I think. But due to the rules I can't post sources or anything really. Oh and I follow her on twitter.
NinjaCoachZ
Member
We're not going to know what the job is. It's a private matter. So what if it was sensitive? Trying to wade through her dirty laundry to figure out what it is, so that we as random game fans can "more accurately judge" the situation for ourselves... I'm just not comfortable with that. What we have is what we have. Digging for more in this situation, involving a real person's private business, is just unwarranted.
ForsakenLotus
Member
Nintendo hired a progressive, outspoken woman knowing she would be a beacon for inclusion for the company. It may be true that her second job with which she used a pseudonym for was against company policies or scandalous enough to be terminated, there is one thing we should overlook or downplay is...
A hategroup targeted a smear campaign at a Nintendo employee and that employee was fired. Again, maybe it was justified, but the timing is alarming.
A hategroup targeted a smear campaign at a Nintendo employee and that employee was fired. Again, maybe it was justified, but the timing is alarming.
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
I very much doubt they're true but ok.
GatticusFinch
Member
Then we can't be attacking Nintendo either. Can't have it both ways. What if the second job is just so patently offensive to Nintendo that it explains why they did not jump to her defense?
People want to witch hunt Nintendo, and then claim the things that she put out in public are "off limits."
No they are. She still has them up, from when I originally saw them.
What has she posted on Twitter that supports this? Please don't tell me that you're referring to the photoshoot.
Why is that?
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
Ok.
GoldenEye 007
Member
A company can have a policy of allowing second jobs while also having one stating with their approval. If a company objects to a type of job or activity, they certainly can and do take action.
Because that's not the "second job" she got fired for. I'll just assume that you haven't been following this thread very closely, because it's very obvious at this point.
Uncredible
Neo Member
I feel like some people in the thread might be missing the point. I don't think anyone who matters thinks that Gamer Gate did the right thing, or is good for the industry. I also don't think anyone would deny that being a woman in this industry, unfortunately, is very difficult because of the immaturity of a hostile group of gamers.
I think that some people also don't understand that people with antiquated views of how business is handled still exist. In my opinion, it is very dumb that tattoos or any body augmentations that you chose to get, could affect your employment. I feel like alot of good people are working to dispell that way of thinking, which I think is great. However, in my opinion, a company should always be able to hire and fire who they want, especially if that person represents them publicly.
Unless I'm missing a huge chunk of information, I don't think we can necessarily call out Nintendo as the villain because they have their public image to worry about, which is bigger than a single employee. If they thought that this situation could have a negative impact on their business then I feel like the decision to fire her was a good business decision. I'm assuming that I, like many of you, don't care how many tattoos or piercings a Nintendo employee has. But the fact remains that some people do find it to be a problem and Nintendo clearly thinks that their opinion matters.
Edit: I'm a bad spellur.
I think that some people also don't understand that people with antiquated views of how business is handled still exist. In my opinion, it is very dumb that tattoos or any body augmentations that you chose to get, could affect your employment. I feel like alot of good people are working to dispell that way of thinking, which I think is great. However, in my opinion, a company should always be able to hire and fire who they want, especially if that person represents them publicly.
Unless I'm missing a huge chunk of information, I don't think we can necessarily call out Nintendo as the villain because they have their public image to worry about, which is bigger than a single employee. If they thought that this situation could have a negative impact on their business then I feel like the decision to fire her was a good business decision. I'm assuming that I, like many of you, don't care how many tattoos or piercings a Nintendo employee has. But the fact remains that some people do find it to be a problem and Nintendo clearly thinks that their opinion matters.
Edit: I'm a bad spellur.
GatticusFinch
Member
You're missing a huge chunk of information. Had nothing to do with tattoos or piercings.
NinjaCoachZ
Member
What do you mean "can't have it both ways"? It's not a black-and-white thing.
Maybe Alison Rapp's second job is something so scandalous that no employer would want her. Whatever. But that's a "what if" scenario with no way to be proven and we're never going to get any comment from it.
And even so, there's still merit in the discussion of what Nintendo did and what kind of effect it has on women in game companies in the future and sets precedent for organized groups using harassment tactics to their advantage.
So she has more than two jobs?
The whole discussion about whether Nintendo was within their rights is largely inapposite here. They could have fired her for no cause at all at any time, and they are also "well within their rights" to ignore policy violations like they do every day for their various employees browsing the web and answering personal emails. It's not as simple as "she violated a policy, therefore let's stop talking about this, nothing to see here" like some people seem to want it.
Whatever the reasons were for Alison being let go by Nintendo, that facts remain that:
Whether or not those two facts are in any way related, this comes out looking like a victory for GamerGate, and that's just awful.
Alison has my sympathy, and I wish her luck in her future endeavors.
- She was targeted for harassment by GamerGate.
- Her employment was terminated at Nintendo.
Whether or not those two facts are in any way related, this comes out looking like a victory for GamerGate, and that's just awful.
Alison has my sympathy, and I wish her luck in her future endeavors.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Sure we can. We can discuss how wrong Nintendo was for not standing up for their employee while she was being harassed for months, for example.
Or, that second job is just as innocuous but they used it as an excuse to fire her to rid themselves of the "problem". Which is just as likely, considering their silence during the harassment campaign.
Also LOL @ "sex pics". Dat pearl-clutching
Well, I mean, if we're talking about the firing- that's up in the air as you said. If we're talking about nothing being done with regards to harassment I'd place the onus of this on a complete lack of effective moderation on the part of companies that own the platforms that the harassment is occurring on. I think Nintendo owed her a statement expressing solidarity with employees being harassed but in terms of effectively clamping down on the attacks is on Twitter and facebook.
She did a photoshoot, seemingly for her personal enjoyment and use - not really a "job". Whatever the job was that supposedly got her fired remains unknown (and it should stay that way).
n00bsauce87
Member
Read this and the tweets in OP.
I agree with how it was presented in the quote. You are a public figure. Anything and everything you do reflects back (in this case) Nintendo. Nintendo has a right to be upset that she decided to take a job that Nintendo wouldn't have allowed in the first place as an option to moonlight. She shouldn't have been snitched on (better phrasing perhaps) because it's her life, but she knew of the consequences.
She must be good at her position because no one has said that she was bad at it. Someone will hire her in the industry if she still wants to pursue it.
If HR doesn't approve of it, going anon will not make your situation any better.
It's really ... offputting on how there's so much searching for what her second job is; it is kinda critical to the story as that's the reason she was let go, but to have her life publically dissected is just not cool (it's not so much getting dissected here ... but it is in other places).
Yeah, this is a really great article. Would encourage people to read it.
Frankly amazed companies still act like this.
Someday Nintendo will figure out that as a public entity, they have an image and that to maintain it, they have to work with their employees instead of against them. Someday.
Bumbletron
Member
Is that what they are doing? I hate to question that kind of thing, because I don't have the kind of information necessary. But what proof do we have that they are fostering a soulless corporate culture? I'm on the fence on all of this other than the fact that the harassment was complete bullshit.
Uncredible
Neo Member
"I was consistently made to worry that getting another tattoo or piercing would mean they'd pull me from public appearances"
That's from her twitter.
What does the word nothing mean to you?
Get to steppin'.
Mechanized
Member
The root of it all is that she never would have been fired for moonlighting if hateful bastards weren't on a quest to get her fired. They put a spotlight on her. If she needed extra money who gives a shit how she got it? It wasn't illegal or she'd be in jail.
D
Deleted member 126221
Unconfirmed Member
You'll have to try harder than that.
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
You must be in the wrong thread.
This is a pretty restrictive view of "support". If I'm Donald Trump and I'm retweeting white supremacy content, you'd say I'm supporting racists, right? You don't have to actively donate or picket in the street.
I don't think Rapp's thesis can be outright distilled to supporting pedophilia, but it's also disingenuous to say that a thesis and tweets aren't a way of showing support or your worldview.
- Status