Support NeoGAF

[Scientist Supreme!]

So we've gone back to the victim blaming part of this equation, have we?

Of course.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

What we know:

1) She was fired for moonlighting

She wasnt fired for moonlighting :/

The actual issue with the whole situation is that companies have far too much dominion over their workers. As long as your future is in the hand of companies who can dismiss you for any reason it really doesnt matter what we think is right or wrong. You do as they say or you walk.

Gamergate is a piece of shit and there needs to be better laws that prosecute this type of mob mentality. But more so, companies shouldnt be able to fire you unless you second job displays a conflict of interest. Whatever she was doing, as long as it is not localizing other games r promiting competitors who gives a shit if your company likes it?

 

[marrec]

She wasnt fired for moonlighting :/

The actual issue with the whole situation is that companies have far too much dominion over their workers. As long as your future is in the hand of companies who can dismiss you for any reason it really doesnt matter what we think is right or wrong. You do as they say or you walk.

Gamergate is a piece of shit and there needs to be better laws that prosecute this type of mob mentality. But more so, companies shouldnt be able to fire you unless you second job displays a conflict of interest. Whatever she was doing, as long as it is not localizing other games r promiting competitors who gives a shit if your company likes it?

The response I got from Nintendo was:

"Hello,

Thank you for reaching out to us.

Alison Rapp was terminated due to violation of an internal company policy involving holding a second job in conflict with Nintendo’s corporate culture."

She was officially fired for moonlighting. Let's not get more facts twisted.

Unless I missed somthing (Which is entirely possible, it's not like I've been living this story) she didn't even say she was sure of that, she just speculated on twitter that they never would have found out without the Gamergate involvement.

And that said, it was about a week AFTER she was fired that the rumors for what her second job really was started hitting, so I think it's very likely Nintendo learned on their own.

I took that to mean that it was the harassment campaign that stirred it up. Also, the rumors of her second job were swirling well before then.

 

[GeordieMark]

Which is the crux of the problem. Rapp wasn't any other employee, she was very publicly having her privacy violated and being emotionally harassed by an organized hate group BECAUSE of her public position at Nintendo.

But like I said, Nintendo would be treating the harassment and second job as two totally separate issues.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

The response I got from Nintendo was:

"Hello,

Thank you for reaching out to us.

Alison Rapp was terminated due to violation of an internal company policy involving holding a second job in con"flict with Nintendo’s corporate culture."

She was officially fired for moonlighting. Let's not get more facts twisted.
.

You should read the email.
"In conflict with Nintendo's corporate culture".

Thy dont give a shit she had a second job. Most companies don't. They care about the actual job itself in relation to corporate image they want to project.

This is important, specifically to my point so I suggest you actually recognize what this is about.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

She wasnt fired for moonlighting :/

The actual issue with the whole situation is that companies have far too much dominion over their workers. As long as your future is in the hand of companies who can dismiss you for any reason it really doesnt matter what we think is right or wrong. You do as they say or you walk.

Come on. She was fired for things she knew were against company policy that's why her second job, whatever it was (and it really isn't relevant), she kept a secret. This wasn't some out of the blue rule she didn't know she was breaking.

The response I got from Nintendo was:

"Hello,

Thank you for reaching out to us.

Alison Rapp was terminated due to violation of an internal company policy involving holding a second job in conflict with Nintendo’s corporate culture."

She was officially fired for moonlighting. Let's not get more facts twisted.

Maybe you should reread it. She was fired because of the nature of the the job, not because she had a second job

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Come on. She was fired for things she knew were against company policy that's why her second job, whatever it was (and it really isn't relevant), she kept a secret. This wasn't some out of the blue rule she didn't know she was breaking.

What is come on about my point? The issue is companies shouldnt have that kind of dominion over the people that work for them. If company policy says you cant paint pictures and post them on fb and you do that its reasomable grounds in their eyes. But who the fuck thinks that's actually valid?

People wanna disuade gamer gate but their whole tirade shows no effectiveness if companies werent allowed to fire people specifically over "you did thing I dont like".

 

[Alex_Mexico]

Damn if I was Rapp I'd be upset at the WaPo publishing those rumors. I, for one, certainly would never have heard of them otherwise.

As for this 'new tactic', liberals have been using the exact same tactics to bully people with views they don't like online forever. The point is they typically choose worthy targets for normal, political causes, rather than these guys who act out of hate for women and a massive sense of insecurity.

It's funny, everyone wants to call everything terrorism these days. Any attack, any murder, any whatever. But the sustained abuse of women online is, in fact, political, and it's one of the few cases where I would agree the term might reasonably apply.



Incognify's comment there appears to be a decent enough, neutral summary of the story so far.

Holy shit, I agree. Add me to the pile of me not hearing about those rumors until I read them in that WoPo article. They shouldn't have published that part based on rumors and unconfirmed GG diggings. And now I just read on her Twitter that she and family members are being doxxed. Fucking lowlives.

 

[marrec]

You should read the email.
"In conflict with Nintendo's corporate culture".

Thy dont give a shit she had a second job. Most companies don't. They care about the actual job itself in relation to corporate image they want to project.

This is important, specifically to my point so I suggest you actually recognize what this is about.

Maybe you should reread it. She was fired because of the nature of the the job, not because she had a second job

It was an unstated premise of my original point. Moonlight is okay at nintendo unless you're moonlighting in a way they don't like. I believe we're splitting hairs.

 

[kamineko]

I'm very frustrated by situations like this and wish that there was something I could do to help.

 

[partyphone]

it's important to remember that nintendo's actions have validated gamergate's tactics, thrown Alison and her family to the wolves and created a hostile environment for any women still employed there.

yeah but let's blame Alison for all of this.

 

[Lister]

What is come on about my point? The issue is companies shouldnt have that kind of dominion over the people that work for them. If company policy says you cant paint pictures and post them on fb and you do that its reasomable grounds in their eyes. But who the fuck thinks that's actually valid?

People wanna disuade gamer gate but their whole tirade shows no effectiveness if companies werent allowed to fire people specifically over "you did thing I dont like".

Most states in the US are "at will employment" states, where they can fire you for anything that isn't explicitly protected by law (race, gender, religion).

You might have a legal case for a suit, given a breach of contract, but so long as the rules of the contract are layed out before hand, you don't really have a leg to stand on. IF your new job says you cna't post pictures to facebook, you cna always say, ok, no thanks, I won't accept emploment on those terms and leave. But if you do accept, and then post pictures ot facebook, they cna and will fire you.

 

[marrec]

it's important to remember that nintendo's actions have validated gamergate's tactics, thrown Alison and her family to the wolves and created a hostile environment for any women still employed there.

yeah but let's blame Alison for all of this.

I think it's also important to remember that this isn't the first nor will it be last time gamergate has done this.

While we all focus on arguing over unimportant details, they're going to move on to the next woman who they deem unworthy.

 

[NinjaCoachZ]

it's important to remember that nintendo's actions have validated gamergate's tactics, thrown Alison and her family to the wolves and created a hostile environment for any women still employed there.

yeah but let's blame Alison for all of this.

This.

There's no point in debating over whether or not the firing itself was justified. That's not in question. Even the most ardent of defenders agree that ultimately, it's what would have happened.

That said, just because "it is what it is", doesn't mean we like it though. And it shouldn't prevent us from tackling the greater issues, as you say. It's a waste our time to constantly bring the discussion back to "oh, but maybe the firing was justified so let's not talk about the other stuff". I'd say by doing that, it might even be playing exactly into the attackers' hands.

 

[Boke1879]

At this point people need to stop arguing about her being fired and for what. Nintendo had grounds to do so and its something Rapp and Nintendo wanted to keep mum about. The timing for it was shitty I'd agree.

That said it's perfectly fine for anyone to be upset about Nintendo being mum on their support for her. She's been harassed for a while and as a public figure Nintendo should hav said something in defense of her.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

What is come on about my point? The issue is companies shouldnt have that kind of dominion over the people that work for them. If company policy says you cant paint pictures and post them on fb and you do that its reasomable grounds in their eyes. But who the fuck thinks that's actually valid?

People wanna disuade gamer gate but their whole tirade shows no effectiveness if companies werent allowed to fire people specifically over "you did thing I dont like".

We don't know what they consider against policy. You just chose the most ridiculous example you could think of, which is useless because it clearly isn't that strict or she wouldn't have even been hired or would have been fired long ago considering the types of controversial comments she posts on twitter.

Not to mention she is in a PR position so it makes sense that a little more scrutiny, than say a support staff or someone else not as public facing, is applied to her public persona.

Again we don't know what Nintendo deems not acceptable, but given the sort of topics she feels passionately about commenting on, it clearly wasn't something as innocent as drawing a picture

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Most states in the US are "at will employment" states, where they can fire you for anything that isn't explicitly protected by law (race, gender, religion).

You might have a legal case for a suit, given a breach of contract, but so long as the rules of the contract are layed out before hand, you don't really have a leg to stand on. IF your new job says you cna't post pictures to facebook, you cna always say, ok, no thanks, I won't accept emploment on those terms and leave. But if you do accept, and then post pictures ot facebook, they cna and will fire you.

I understand what the laws are now. My point is these are bullshit. The lives people live outside of employment need to be protected to a reasonable stamdard. It is not reasonable for a company to say "only express yourself how we want or your gone" in regards to their employees personal lives.

The way it is now is why internet mobs are able to trash peoples lives and why its impossible to be an individual with a corporation breathing down your neck. Who the fuck thinks these are good things?

 

[aeolist]

maybe the worst part of this whole thing is that anyone googling "allison rapp" for the forseeable future will be greeted by pages of slander, rumors, and openly defamatory bullshit. her career from now on is entirely dependent on potential employers knowing about her situation and supporting her side in spite of the flak hiring her would bring.

the idea of the "content-neutral algorithm" on platforms like google/facebook/twitter has become a sick joke. they're willing to make changes to search results when it affects them financially (ads) or legally (dmca) but otherwise don't give a solitary fuck who they hurt. google should not be pushing "ANITA SARKEESIAN - DESTROYED" garbage at me on youtube and twitter should not be showing made up accusations about pedophilia if i try to find dan olson's account.

 

[Griss]

The thread is hamstrung by the following facts
a) Alison was fired due to the nature of her second job
b) Rumours as to the nature / illegality of that job are flying everywhere on social media, and are in fact the subject of the article in the OP
c) We can't discuss said rumours for fear of victim blaming / libel / spreading what is possibly a system of lies put together by a hate group etc. (Which is, to be clear, perfectly fair, and probably the correct call - I am not criticising the moderation / rules in the slightest.)

But it means that all that is left to be said is that
a) The people doing this harassment are very bad, and we need a method to deal with them. (And again, if you go off-Neogaf it's clear that this isn't exactly Gamergate behind this, at least not anymore), and
b) Nintendo could have / should have spoken out about the harassment.

There's not much more to it than that.

maybe the worst part of this whole thing is that anyone googling "allison rapp" for the forseeable future will be greeted by pages of slander, rumors, and openly defamatory bullshit. her career from now on is entirely dependent on potential employers knowing about her situation and supporting her side in spite of the flak hiring her would bring.

the idea of the "content-neutral algorithm" on platforms like google/facebook/twitter has become a sick joke. they're willing to make changes to search results when it affects them financially (ads) or legally (dmca) but otherwise don't give a solitary fuck who they hurt. google should not be pushing "ANITA SARKEESIAN - DESTROYED" garbage at me on youtube and twitter should not be showing made up accusations about pedophilia if i try to find dan olson's account.

I thought her thesis was a problem for her before, but one that could be explained logically and rationally in an interview. (After all, I agree with plenty of what she said - it's just that many people are terrified of that stuff.) But to add her thesis to this cesspit of rumours bubbling under her name on social media? She's going to need to find a company that specifically welcomes her as a message to the harassers and as a liberal, feminist statement - because to the average company I believe she will be utterly toxic.

 

[partyphone]

I think it's also important to remember that this isn't the first nor will it be last time gamergate has done this.

While we all focus on arguing over unimportant details, they're going to move on to the next woman who they deem unworthy.

yeah. and like I said before it's no coincidence that they waited to dox and harass her family after she was fired. they were actually afraid Nintendo might give her support.

 

[GeordieMark]

It was an unstated premise of my original point. Moonlight is okay at nintendo unless you're moonlighting in a way they don't like. I believe we're splitting hairs.

Most companies allow moonlighting if it is declared and is not a conflict of interests. What constitutes a conflict of interests is usually detailed in the contract of employment of company handbook. The correct course of action for an employee wishing to moonlight is to first discuss it with HR/line management before starting the second job. What you are saying would apply to pretty much any company. Some things are permitted and others aren't, or maybe are, but with conditions attached.

I'm just speaking about how these things generally work, not this particular case, but I would always advise employees to be upfront with their employer when considering moonlighting to avoid any issues down the line.

 

[partyphone]

maybe the worst part of this whole thing is that anyone googling "allison rapp" for the forseeable future will be greeted by pages of slander, rumors, and openly defamatory bullshit. her career from now on is entirely dependent on potential employers knowing about her situation and supporting her side in spite of the flak hiring her would bring.

the idea of the "content-neutral algorithm" on platforms like google/facebook/twitter has become a sick joke. they're willing to make changes to search results when it affects them financially (ads) or legally (dmca) but otherwise don't give a solitary fuck who they hurt. google should not be pushing "ANITA SARKEESIAN - DESTROYED" garbage at me on youtube and twitter should not be showing made up accusations about pedophilia if i try to find dan olson's account.

yeah this is another awful facet of gamergate. they're super good at SEO and they know large platform holders basically don't give a shit.

 

[marrec]

The thread is hamstrung by the following facts
a) Alison was fired due to the nature of her second job
b) Rumours as to the nature / illegality of that job are flying everywhere, and are in fact the subject of the article in the OP
c) We can't discuss said rumours for fear of victim blaming / libel / spreading what is possibly a system of lies put together by a hate group etc. (Which is, to be clear, perfectly fair, and probably the correct call - I am not criticising the moderation / rules in the slightest.)

While I agree with the above, the article is more about the specific type of harassment rather than the target.

But it means that all that is left to be said is that
a) The people doing this harassment are very bad, and we need a method to deal with them. (And again, if you go off-Neogaf it's clear that this isn't exactly Gamergate behind this, at least not anymore), and
b) Nintendo could have / should have spoken out about the harassment.

There's not much more to it than that.

This has been the most morbidly fascinating part of the entire drama for me. I've been very vocally against GG since it's inception in the fall of 2014 but the rules and tactics for GG have, up to this point, mostly be concentrated within their organizational structure. Yes, they shed many organizers here and there as the group evolved, but you really didn't see the structured and planned harassment go beyond the normal GG hangouts.

With Rapp, there are definitely more disparate and less organized groups of people using the tactics, structure, and plan of GG but outside of the normal confines. It's really scary to think that this type of organized destruction is now being exported to even more remote corners of the internet.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

We don't know what they consider against policy. You just chose the most ridiculous example you could think of, which is useless because it clearly isn't that strict or she wouldn't have even been hired or would have been fired long ago considering the types of controversial comments she posts on twitter.

Not to mention she is in a PR position so it makes sense that a little more scrutiny, than say a support staff or someone else not as public facing, is applied to her public persona.

Again we don't know what Nintendo deems not acceptable, but given the sort of topics she feels passionately about commenting on, it clearly wasn't something as innocent as drawing a picture

I chose drawing pictures because we have been forbidden from talking about or speculating on her job. I also chose it because its entirely valid for a company to do that currently. Its a pie in the sky example that any company could enact. The idea itself is suppose to be absurd because its the reality of the laws.

My point has nothing to do wih nintendo. It has to do with the fact that people shouldmt be allowed to be corporate slaves.

 

[AcademicSaucer]

Here's the thing, and this is something I myself have come to open my eyes to in recent times as things have coalesced in online landscapes. The massively organized digging into peoples lives in the hopes of pulling up dirt to smear them with all over the media, in the hopes that they be fired or removed from power or what have you - this is something that was invented on social media. Perfected even.

Years ago when this stuff first started happening to people, it was typically for the 'right' reason. Maybe it was a celebrity who said some terrible, insensitive shit. Or someone in politics. Maybe a corporate head. It didn't matter who it was - it was justified. The ends justified the means. The internet weaponized social outrage to get the justice it felt was needed or warranted.

Online culture was always going to reach an impasse as it grew to where communities became staunchly opposed to one another. Its human tribalism in full display. We just naively thought it would never happen online. And people in social media started using these same tactics against people who are ideologically opposed to one another. Now, because we are sympathetic to the victims of these efforts, we define this as harassment, and decry it. But when we were perfecting & creating these tactics, no one thought the same. We explained it away as dog-piling or whatever else. Keep this in mind the next time you see the internet dog-piling on a person for the 'right' reasons.



This is something that technology and platform holders themselves will have to figure out. Seeing as how specific online communities are just banning people whose viewpoints they feel are problematic, in an effort to 'stem' harassment that occurs when these groups are within close enough proximity to interact, I imagine one of the things we are going to see going forward is a further segregation of communities on the internet. However, instead of it being websites that house altogether different content, I imagine we will see social media outlets that house different ideological perspectives. You can already see the beginnings of this in the sort of audience & people that are attracted to a website like Voat, as opposed to Reddit, its ideological mirror.

Great post, let law enforcement do their work, don't go all Internet vigilante on people.

 

[NegativeCero]

I'd like to think this article and just the issue getting mainstream coverage will be a good thing, but that it encouraged these people that they have some amount of power to mess with people's lives is really depressing. Here's hoping for some positive results out of this mess.

 

[GeordieMark]

I chose drawing pictures because we have been forbidden from talking about or speculating on her job. I also chose it because its entirely valid for a company to do that currently. Its a pie in the sky example that any company could enact. The idea itself is suppose to be absurd because its the reality of the laws.

My point has nothing to do wih nintendo. It has to do with the fact that people shouldmt be allowed to be corporate slaves.

I disagree with the corporate slaves comment. I've never worked for a games company that hasn't had a moonlighting policy. It is common and they are used pretty much everywhere, and quite often they are pretty flexible too. Also, slaves don't get to walk away from a job that has t&cs they disagree with.

 

[Takiyah]

To chime - contracts in all facets of the game industry are pretty draconian in what they allow people to do work wise outside of the company 9-5. Contracts often will forbid you having any ideas/do any work anytime other for them. There are pros and cons to it, but, people certainly get fired over it. To be clear - I'm not saying that legitimately happened in this case (in fact, I believe the opposite), but I've seen it legitimately happen in a few instances..

 

[Ivan Amiibo]

A perfect example of how the harassment of Rapp (and others) has been so effective.

Nobody has officially said she was doing anything illegal.

What we know:

1) She was fired for moonlighting

2) She attempted to keep her Nintendo persona separate from her moonlighting persona

3) The campaign of privacy invasion and harassment is how Nintendo found out about her moonlighting job

Your paragraph is based completely on fabricated rumors spread by her harassers, and be saying these as if they have any basis in reality, you are furthering their goals. Namely, ruining her life simply because she's an outspoken woman attached to Video Games.

The whole "quandary" as you stated it really depends on what her moonlighting job was before we can begin to compare it to the Hogan case. According to what you're saying here, your hypothetical was just as valid as mine, though I made sure to add "allegedly" since I don't actually know what her moonlighting job was, in an apparently vain attempt to not get accused of being a secret rogue GG agent.

 

[Mendrox]

The thread is hamstrung by the following facts
a) Alison was fired due to the nature of her second job
b) Rumours as to the nature / illegality of that job are flying everywhere on social media, and are in fact the subject of the article in the OP
c) We can't discuss said rumours for fear of victim blaming / libel / spreading what is possibly a system of lies put together by a hate group etc. (Which is, to be clear, perfectly fair, and probably the correct call - I am not criticising the moderation / rules in the slightest.)

But it means that all that is left to be said is that
a) The people doing this harassment are very bad, and we need a method to deal with them. (And again, if you go off-Neogaf it's clear that this isn't exactly Gamergate behind this, at least not anymore), and
b) Nintendo could have / should have spoken out about the harassment.

There's not much more to it than that.



I thought her thesis was a problem for her before, but one that could be explained logically and rationally in an interview. (After all, I agree with plenty of what she said - it's just that many people are terrified of that stuff.) But to add her thesis to this cesspit of rumours bubbling under her name on social media? She's going to need to find a company that specifically welcomes her as a message to the harassers and as a liberal, feminist statement - because to the average company I believe she will be utterly toxic.

Thank you for real. Also just close This thread and let it sink in so people will forgot her for her sake. Even if people wouldnt have found the things she could have been fucked over for a longer time.

If companies search for your private Information then you should also watch your privacy.

There is also currently no way to punish bad mouthers on the Internet so it fucking sucks for her, but she also had her own part in that case, Nintendo knows that and she too and she doesnt blame shit. Just let it be. I dont know of that whole GG shit but this is totally politics just in area of videogames this time.

At my Job people got fired for online stuff too. People should know better. people should also start giving a shit about.their own life and start protect their privacy on the internet.

 

[aeolist]

it's kind of beside the point but i tend to think that moonlighting provisions in employment contracts should just be illegal unless it's prohibiting working for a direct competitor. maybe california would be willing to take that step since they already cracked down on non-competes.

just because nintendo is currently allowed to force things like that on their employees doesn't make it ok.

 

[ModBot]

This thread has strayed far of the original topic of discussing career ruining online harassment in general, and turned into yet another speculation thread about the private life of Alison Rapp.