GW 2 Devs/Playerbase Twitter Discussion

lordhelmos.7623 · July 8, 2018

@"Greyraven.4258" said:Final takeaways.......
My entire political spectrum has changed a bit, it is very very hard to support a movement that has shown itself to so obviously go to the dirty tricks/social engineering playbook....it's actually almost Orwellian. I mean what I have witnessed is no different than INSOC trying to change the narrative that Oceania is no longer at war with Eurasia.
It makes me question the larger picture......though it seems to even question is to be labeled alt right at worst paranoid at best, still....what if what we are being told isn't actually true about who is suffering and why?What if "The good people" are actually diametric from any perceived modern notion of good?What if we are being narrated into a certain mindset by those who wish to keep or take power over everything and everyone?
So much so that I went back and reread the book and this quote.....which I barely remembered in High School gave me chills.
"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right." George Orwell 1984
When people, and Journalism go beyond having an opinion to actively trying to change a narrative we end up with something terrifying .
And if that can happen in gaming it can happen in other corporations.....which means it is happening in government, and actual true freedom is an illusion and we are cattle being herded towards something sinister.
We have lost introspection as a species....we just want our position now and anyone that disagrees is evil and must be destroyed, and that my friends is rational straight from Pol Pot. I hope folks who are raging right now takes a step back to look at the bigger picture.

I think this is the limit of human beings in general. The idea of tribal warfare is hard coded into all of us and what creates tribes is a set of socio-philisophical beliefs that overlap. When misdirected or untempered, the power of belief is a very devastating factor. People form mobs and are easily swayed into passing judgement or taking action without processing all of the facts because they are tribally united under a common banner. Whether this is religion, gender, ethnicity, political belief... the outcome is the same. It because "us" vs "them."

Human beings have not yet learned to prioritize fact-finding, research, and determination of what is closest to the "truth" prior to joining a tribe and taking action. In this case, it became an "us" vs "them" mentality when the issue of gender vs. gamergate came into play (which should have never happened and yet was invoked by the very last person that should have invoked it, the dev themselves). If JP would have applied even the smallest bit of logic prior to her response, she would have seen that Deroir was not attacking her at all and was in fact, very cordial. If Mr. Fries were to have logically assessed the situation he would have seen that JP's predicament was of her own making and the proper response was to contact Anet PR and let the HR professionals handle the situation instead of becoming personally involved. Unfortunately humans are not logical creatures.

This is just ugliness of the human mentality and one thing we have never been able to overcome. We have never been able to priotize logic over belief or question the reason before picking up a sword and thrusting it into our neighbor. To be honest, philosophically I think that humans are just stepping stones in the grand scheme of evolution.

We like to believe that the universe centers around us and the belief system that we created, that we are somehow important to some grand and supreme omnipotent being that somehow craves our attention. No one has taken into account that maybe greater things come out of what is small. The simple cell colonies became more complex jellyfish colonies out of or survival, or that lowly monkeys with basic tool using skills evolved into people.

Perhaps our greatest achievement will be the creation of a machine intelligence that can process logic before emotion or understand tribalism and emotion from a perspective in which all of the factual data about a situation can be analyzed prior to making a sweeping decision that has real impacts. People right now, are mentally incapable of doing that. Some are more intelligent than others, but at some point, we are all prone to an emotional failure.

The distant worlds were never meant for humans to travel, with our inability to survive solar radiation and the coldness of space. Complex problems of probability and string theory were never meant for us to resolve with out limited mental processing capability. Emotional issues were never meant to be overcome by us, due to our emotional urges and spontaneous choices that put us into illogical risk with no benefit other than a driving flawed belief or tribal association.

Some day we will make something better than ourselves, that will replace us, be better than us, and understand far more than we ever could. Until then, it is somewhat entertaining and sad to watch the chaotic tribes form and clash, stuck in a neverending cycle of loss and regression.

To ascend and become a better human you need to understand the system and where the failure us, once you understand it and only until you do, you can ascend it. And sometimes ascending the flaws of being a human means being more humble, something that JP didn't understand at the time of her outburst.

TL;DR - If you want to be smarter watch more star trek, be more Vulcan. Live long and prosper.

Manasa Devi.7958 · July 8, 2018

@"dusanyu.4057" said:While I hate Drama, I thought i would chime in on someone who works with the law. (note I am not an attorney ) but, my job of the past 20 years does require a understanding of the law. lets break down the parties in the initial incident
Party A: two persons who on there private twitter accounts were speaking as employees of arena net.Party B: We had one person who is a Streaming Partner of Arena Net (Basically a business partner)
Party B asks party A a question it was not rudely worded and attempts to have a conversation about said contents of said question.
Party A gets upset and resorts to using a gender based Pejorative against a business partner. ((I am making this bold this for a reason))
I am not a Arena net employee so i do not have access to there employee handbook but its a modern company so it is safe to guess that it would have a Zero Tolerance policy for Racism and Sexism.
This would put Anet in a situation that the persons involved, broke that policy and had to be disciplined in a way outlined in the manual.
Stupidity on Antisocial media claims yet another casualty Someday people will learn that Twitter and Facebook are a place to share photos of your dinner.Agreed with all of that, just 1 nitpick: Party A weren't on private twitter accounts. They were public. I think the word you meant to use was "personal" instead of "private".

lilypop.7819 · July 8, 2018

JP undermined the creditability of her employer in PUBLIC with regard to trust between Anet/GW2 and the player base, and thus put ALL Anet's employees at risk of job loss. By so acting JP undermined her employer trust in her. PF in supporting JP lent more creditability to JP statements rather than safe guarding his employer reputation - which should have come first if he had care for ALL the employees giving his seniority.

We need to think what COULD have happened if the CO had not fired both of them.

The SJW/Sexism stuff is essentially a red herring (albeit this is what JP was attacking - whether real or not), imo, although no doubt this will be what will run and run., as it is far easier to comment on than wading though all the tweets and posts and working out the sequences of who said what and when and how and second-guessing why.

~~Politics matter little compared to the trust between buyers and seller if you intend earning a living with the seller.~~

JP (and PF by doubling down), risked the jobs of their fellow employees, therefore lost theirs. Imagine you work for a company and at any time another employee could diminish your future prospects without putting themselves at risk by citing personal freedoms; would you find such employment safe and secure or would you start looking elsewhere before someone went tweeter postal?

In retrospect, JP behaved as if she wanted to get sacked - after all why off-load on someone you must have known didn't qualify for such an attack giving that - in her words - 10% of the community would have been a far better target (and probably have been far less harmful to herself and her employer). Pure speculation of course, but I would certainly feel a bit more restless and edgy with her as a new team member.

And still no apology to the one person/victim who most definitely merits one.

Edit: deleted last para and added a three new ones, following the media 'interviews'.

Merrick.8604 · July 8, 2018

Someone displays an appalling lack of humanity by verbally spitting on the grave of a life lost to cancer then goes on to artlessly rain down a world of pent-up hatered, abuse, and breathtaking condescension at the GW2 community. Didn't we defeat this thing in Living World Season 1?

Soa Cirri.6012 · July 8, 2018

Are we so insecure in our moral identifies that we look to our video game companies to arbitrate for and validate our personal opinions?

Being an awful person and being a competent employee are not mutually exclusive, and the health of the game depends far more upon the latter than the former. It's unreasonable to expect that everyone who's good at their job and contributes meaningfully to a project also be a "good person" on their own time.

What entitles us to dictate or direct what other people are allowed to say under any circumstance? What justifies the expectation that we need corporate protection from people merely for saying something we don't like or agree with? How is it reasonable to expect a sprawling bureaucracy like Anet to cater to the whims of a diverse customer base with violently divided positions, and how is it a victory for the community when only one party within that base gets what they want?

JP flames you on social media? Flame her back. Explain how she's being an asshole. Use the platform for how it was intended, and share with everyone you know how erroneous she is and how odious her positions are, if they are so self-evident.

But demanding that someone be fired from a video game company for a stupid tweet and threatening to boycott over the issue? Save the righteous indignation for things that actually matter.

As for firing her and her white knight? The height of corporate cowardice. But MO throwing people under the bus isn't anything to be surprised by.

rdfaye.4368 · July 8, 2018

@"Evon Skyfyre.9673" said:I wonder, can/do companies actually write policy to govern an employees personal social media? I ask because I have seen way worse offences on LinkedIn from supposed VP's etc of various companies using language that shows they have little respect for anyone, especially public perception of themselves. So the question is, what (if any) is spelled out in Anet's code of conduct, regarding Social Media? Can they prohibit any reference, label or use of the company name or employment status on "Personal" social media accounts? Would a proviso of "Thoughts and musings voiced here are my own and do not reflect those of...".
Note: I have worked on creating and designing commercial message board software since the late 90's. And to be honest I always wondered why companies use them. Their answer is "It's a community driven FAQ". Yeah that rarely happens. I am not blaming the users, they see it as a conduit to the companies, or individuals that they want to reach. All this upset could have been avoided if Devs here used personas, and kept work and private separate. I get they are proud of their work and love gaming, so why not interact? I wish we lived in that world. God I wish we did. My wish now is this thread dies. And those released are working soon and loving their new positions. After 15 years of online gaming, my view has been influenced, but hopefully not biased. I know some game devs, and I made the mistakes of thinking I had a new way for things to work. Thankfully they were patient, but showing me the door would have been completely understandable. FWIW, I'm almost 60 cringe and "I learn more and more about less and less, until one day I will know absolutely everything about nothing". A employer of mine taught me that phrase, he was a nuclear phys. And his creds were ominous. But a more humble man I never met. Excuse the ramblings, hazard of age. :)

In answer to your first paragraph, yes they can and do. My company is not a tech company, but the social media policy is in the employee handbook, which we all have to sign our agreement to. It is just formally extending basic customer service rules into the online arena.

Rules such as always be polite to a customer, do not discuss internal company affairs with outsiders, if you have a problem customer report it to management. And NEVER be rude to a customer or start an argument with one, especially in public. Does not matter how rude or out of line they are, you keep your cool.

If you are discussing your work, wearing a company badge or uniform, have the company name in your profile, or are otherwise identifiable as an employee, all company policies apply even when you are not on the clock. It is basic common sense. So we all need to read our contracts and employee manuals.

Some companies may be more strict than others, so I can't answer for Anet or any other company on LinkedIn or elsewhere. But publicly insulting a customer while openly showing your employer's name, and the escalating it to the point it draws media attention, that is a firing offense.

dusanyu.4057 · July 8, 2018

@"Manasa Devi.7958" said:
Agreed with all of that, just 1 nitpick: Party A weren't on private twitter accounts. They were public. I think the word you meant to use was "personal" instead of "private".

Legally I used the right term as in "privately held" I am assuming you are looking at "private" as in confidential? if someone were to try to argue that a twitter account was confidential in court it would be thrown out as it does not pass the "Expectation of privacy" legal test. see Katz v. United States (No. 35)

ponytheguardian.7439 · July 8, 2018

@"Harper.4173" said:
It was not a lynching - I don't think you know what those are. People didn't hurt her, nobody did anything to her. The community got outraged at the situation and decided to threaten to vote with their wallet. The company had to make a choice. The outraged paying customers or the misbehaving developers. The choice was obvious.
"In my opinion, the reaction of the community and corporate response was more damaging to their corporate image than anything said on twitter." - and in mine anything short of firing the two would have ended up with me no longer supporting Anet financially no matter what.
"At worst, JP should have been called into discuss what happened and why she was so deeply frustrated. Perhaps counselling needed to be offered and a direct apology to the person involved -- but she does not owe the community an apology for being herself in her off hours." - nor does the community need to keep paying for GW2 if Anet decided to keep such an employee on board. She can do her counselling and discuss her frustration while the community took their money elsewhere. Again- Anet is not a psych hospital where people get their frustrations fixed - it's a FOR PROFIT COMPANY.
"The community made this happen. I have seen a lot of outrageous behaviour in the gaming community over the last 10 years, but I have never been so utterly dismayed as I have been this week. Sure it shows the power of multiple voices, but it most certainly didn't show the power of those voices for good. " This is not about good and evil/ right or wrong. This is about a single person's decision to upset a large group of people that had a lot of leverage. It was the worst call she could make and she deserves what she got. I don't care if she was frustrated or not - you make mistakes this big you deserve to get burned. If she had been smart she'd have controlled herself. The world doesn't owe her anything - she made a mistake and she got what she wanted. You don't fight paying customers.
"this wasn't the community's business to get involved in, and it was best left alone." - what I choose to spend my money on most certainly IS my business. I can speak my mind - if the company cares they care. If they don't they don't. It's not the first time the community has been outspoken.

I like how people who already have spent their money on a product don't know that "I'm not supporting them in financial way" card is already obsolete. GW2 is a game that you buy once, buy expansion 1, buy expansion 2. You can buy gems for real money to support, but why would I pay for gems if I can craft gear to sell in BLTC to gain in-game money which I then trade into gems and use the gems.

They already have our money. There is no "I am not financially supporting them" anymore, unless you really want to spend your money on those gems.

@"Harper.4173" said:
Why did she make those posts? Doesn't she realize that such opinions can harm her at work or in any other circumstance? If you're going to hold or have controversial views do it anonymously unless you are prepared to face the possible consequences of those views. But don't act all surprised when those things come around and bite you.

This can work in two ways as well, you know. Just like her, it's possibility that you might probably face some consequences when your anonymous identity is suddenly cracked (and todays internet doesn't always need even that if the need arises). Same applies to anyone.

@"Harper.4173" said:
"The community caused 2 people to lose their livelihoods -- the community took it upon themselves to call for the firing of JP without realising the ramifications for their actions. Because of this, two people lost benefits, they will lose savings and they will struggle financially moving forward. " - Their struggle is on them alone. They decided to make an enemy out of something you shouldn't make an enemy of. You don't get to make these kinds of mistakes and get a free pass.

Enemy - in this case, being internet people who take lots of thing to their heart and think they're the "police" in the industry, then possibly some heart burned players.

@"Harper.4173" said:
"you understand, it's all business and someone has to take the fall." - perhaps next times devs will be less keen on making enemies of the community. I mean - if you don't like the community that's fine. Not everyone likes their job or the people they work for ( the people that buy their product) - but it's generally good business that if that is the case you keep it to yourself - or you quit and then talk as much as you want when those people can no longer touch you.

If community get so heart burned for some indecency, do they know why that happens? People today are sensitive and even words can be fatal to some, so no wonder why people tends to get angry. Bad words were not that big of an issue before GG happened and evolved, or before Reddit/Poorchan became the internet enforcers.

@"Harper.4173" said:
"Consider that there is a human at the other side of the computer and the impact of your reactions is real and will be felt for years." - Why should I do that when the human in question didn't even bother to do half of it?

Why should anyone think of this little thing, then? I don't have to consider your feelings when you don't consider that destroying someones career is "not a big deal". It's a two-way street.

@"Harper.4173" said:
"Consider that privacy should be respected and a lot of issues and arguments would be mitigated if someone simply asked "are you just sharing your own thoughts or are you looking for feedback/discussion." - this was not an issue of privacy. A breach of privacy would have been in effect if someone had hacked her PRIVATE data. She posted this on a public platform.

It may not have been about privacy, but some human decency would be in order on both sides. I express my thoughts on a platform and someone comes to disagree with me and give me countering opinion how this and that could be done is not really helpful (especially if target is professional in their own job).

It's my writing, my point of view, I don't need to take your opinion about it into consideration, but I can throw some dirt on you for "playing professional writer" to me. Why? Being all goody-shoes is not healthy. It only gives an image of easily exploitative mindset and gets you more trouble than good.

@"Harper.4173" said:
"The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts.

But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract.

Mysty Meadows.1425 · July 8, 2018

@rdfaye.4368 said:
@"Evon Skyfyre.9673" said:I wonder, can/do companies actually write policy to govern an employees personal social media? I ask because I have seen way worse offences on LinkedIn from supposed VP's etc of various companies using language that shows they have little respect for anyone, especially public perception of themselves. So the question is, what (if any) is spelled out in Anet's code of conduct, regarding Social Media? Can they prohibit any reference, label or use of the company name or employment status on "Personal" social media accounts? Would a proviso of "Thoughts and musings voiced here are my own and do not reflect those of...".
Note: I have worked on creating and designing commercial message board software since the late 90's. And to be honest I always wondered why companies use them. Their answer is "It's a community driven FAQ". Yeah that rarely happens. I am not blaming the users, they see it as a conduit to the companies, or individuals that they want to reach. All this upset could have been avoided if Devs here used personas, and kept work and private separate. I get they are proud of their work and love gaming, so why not interact? I wish we lived in that world. God I wish we did. My wish now is this thread dies. And those released are working soon and loving their new positions. After 15 years of online gaming, my view has been influenced, but hopefully not biased. I know some game devs, and I made the mistakes of thinking I had a new way for things to work. Thankfully they were patient, but showing me the door would have been completely understandable. FWIW, I'm almost 60
cringe
and "I learn more and more about less and less, until one day I will know absolutely everything about nothing". A employer of mine taught me that phrase, he was a nuclear phys. And his creds were ominous. But a more humble man I never met. Excuse the ramblings, hazard of age. :)

In answer to your first paragraph, yes they can and do. My company is not a tech company, but the social media policy is in the employee handbook, which we all have to sign our agreement to. It is just formally extending basic customer service rules into the online arena.

Rules such as always be polite to a customer, do not discuss internal company affairs with outsiders, if you have a problem customer report it to management. And NEVER be rude to a customer or start an argument with one, especially in public. Does not matter how rude or out of line they are, you keep your cool.

If you are discussing your work, wearing a company badge or uniform, have the company name in your profile, or are otherwise identifiable as an employee, all company policies apply even when you are not on the clock. It is basic common sense. So we all need to read our contracts and employee manuals.

Some companies may be more strict than others, so I can't answer for Anet or any other company on LinkedIn or elsewhere. But publicly insulting a customer while openly showing your employer's name, and the escalating it to the point it draws media attention, that is a firing offense.

So basically if you are in uniform as it were, by displaying credentials, act accordingly. Makes sense from a business standpoint. Tks.

Malediktus.9250 · July 8, 2018

@"ponytheguardian.7439" said:
"this wasn't the community's business to get involved in, and it was best left alone." - what I choose to spend my money on most certainly IS my business. I can speak my mind - if the company cares they care. If they don't they don't. It's not the first time the community has been outspoken.

I like how people who already have spent their money on a product don't know that "I'm not supporting them in financial way" card is already obsolete. GW2 is a game that you buy once, buy expansion 1, buy expansion 2. You can buy gems for real money to support, but why would I pay for gems if I can craft gear to sell in BLTC to gain in-game money which I then trade into gems and use the gems.

This is where you are wrong. Even if you buy gems with gold you support Anet. Someone else bought the gems for you (except the tiny fraction coming from giveaways and 5k AP chests)

White Dragon.5429 · July 8, 2018

@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@"Harper.4173" said:
"The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts.

But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract.While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly.

That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses.

ponytheguardian.7439 · July 8, 2018

@Malediktus.9250 said:
@"ponytheguardian.7439" said:
"this wasn't the community's business to get involved in, and it was best left alone." - what I choose to spend my money on most certainly IS my business. I can speak my mind - if the company cares they care. If they don't they don't. It's not the first time the community has been outspoken.

I like how people who already have spent their money on a product don't know that "I'm not supporting them in financial way" card is already obsolete. GW2 is a game that you buy once, buy expansion 1, buy expansion 2. You can buy gems for real money to support, but why would I pay for gems if I can craft gear to sell in BLTC to gain in-game money which I then trade into gems and use the gems.

This is where you are wrong. Even if you buy gems with gold you support Anet. Someone else bought the gems for you (except the tiny fraction coming from giveaways and 5k AP chests)

And here I thought that gems were in infinite stock and used as alternative currency provided to us by ANet. It's almost like there was a pile of digital gems that work like real life money, as in they're printed, made available to public and then gems can rotate around like real life money does from consumer to consumer.

I have a feeling that I missed something.

ponytheguardian.7439 · July 8, 2018

@White Dragon.5429 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@"Harper.4173" said:
"The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts.

But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract.While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly.

That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses.

True. But if I go to JP's case, why didn't her previous "infractions" result in this outcome? Probably because internet didn't make a fuzz about those (as far as I know).

EDIT: But to be honest, I think it was only because target was somewhat respected and "looked up to" content creator who is in ANets partnership(?) program and internet didn't like him being talked in such manner. I guess if JP would've said that what she did to someone else, like some common rabble in community, this wouldn't have happened.

Sethorus.9231 · July 8, 2018

So, after checking the whole situation several times.

I do agree with letting Ms. Price go, but Peter? No, that I don't agree, I don't think he was rude toward the community, he provided his input and defended his friend, even though he might have choose poorly in this situation.

I don't think they should have been weighted the same in this situation though

I hope Peter returns to Arena Net some day in the future as he is a decent man and a very polite person.

Blocki.4931 · July 8, 2018

@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@White Dragon.5429 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@"Harper.4173" said:
"The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts.

But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract.While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly.

That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses.

True. But if I go to JP's case, why didn't her previous "infractions" result in this outcome? Probably because internet didn't make a fuzz about those (as far as I know).

Because nobody knew it happened. Why is that an argument? It's like you make a mistake, your employer doesn't know it so he doesn't punish you. Later it gets out and you get your ass handed to you. Difficult concept?

Digit.1823 · July 8, 2018

@Cryoguard.7942 said:
@Digit.1823 said:
@"Tris Apollumenon.6435" said:It's extremely upsetting to see how willing Anet was to throw employees to the mob -- not only was there absolutely no move to speak out against the detailed, sexually explicit abuse that the employees received, but the employees in question were
fired
?
The massive response to this by Gamergaters already underscored the hostility of this environment. The
official statement
from Mike himself, stating that a single unprofessionally snarky Twitter thread expressing frustration at being habitually belittled = "attacking the community", only makes it clear that in Anet's eyes, whatever "the community" means, I don't count. Playtime, enthusiasm, time spent helping new players, money spent on gems and DLCs -- arguments could be made for any of those as factors toward being in a given community, but in this case it seems like the overriding definition is "Community == I want devs to be INSTANTLY FIRED the first time they make a frustrated comment in public or back up their colleagues".
I was willing to Block And Move On for ages and ages, even as a WvW player having to deal with tons of teamchat trolls and having to do another blockathon every time a new world alliance rolls around. MMO online communities are hard to moderate, and I recognize that. But having this edict come from above, as an official ArenaNet statement from the top guy himself, that's damning. That hurts.
I know the kitten troll types are all too happy for people like me to get out of their games, but like... games are supposed to be fun. This was my
hobby
, not some kind of activist crusade. I'm too old and tired to stick it out to Make A Statement or Fight The Good Fight when even the top authority is saying "You are not welcome here. Harassers and misogynists,
you
are welcome." More power to those who are determined or thick-skinned enough to persevere. I don't think I can.

You stop right there you unfair, disingenuous hack that you are. You unbelievable charlatan.

There was NEVER any sort of "detailed, sexually explicit abuse" anywhere in the ENTIRE exchange from Deroir's side which sparked this fiasco. You have CLEARLY not read a single word of the twitter conversation that instigated this. He was AT ALL TIMES friendly, polite and merely looking for discussion with someone whom he GREATLY respected and admired, and even apologized profusely when Jessica Price blew off her handle against him which was totally uncalled for. There have literally been twitch clips posted of him in this thread where he expresses his immense admiration for Jessica Price, her work and her contribution to AMA's.

You are the lowest of the low, spouting the utter bs that you just did. Get out of this thread and do some actual research before you even dare to think twice about coming back here you disingenuous liar. Get out!

I think you missed the part where they didn't say the sexually explicit abuse came from the streamer. While I personally don't agree with how the situation was handled by Price, the disgusting amount of abuse female developers face was already bad before now, but it's easy to tell from a quick glance at Twitter it has escalated dramatically. Deroir was likely commenting in the wrong place at the wrong time as it were, and the mob of toxic trolls who crawled to the surface to take advantage of that are the real villains here. And the messages being sent to Fries and Price only cements this as the key issue.

Granted I don't think your anger-fueled response to someone who was trying to put this into the bigger-picture perspective is... ahem... healthy. In fact, somewhat similar to Price's response to Deroir, though I think there's much more context behind her's than your's.

Except if you took any time to actually read his comment you would instantly notice he is talking about the situation where JP got fired, it is literally the end of his first sentence. Which given the situation can be clearly understood that he's mentioning the recent events that caused JP to be removed from the company (rightly so) because of the twitter exchange. And i thought you were so hot for context?

To call that exchange "detailed, sexually explicit abuse" is the greatest lie i have yet to see in this thread.

But i will humor you, show me where the supposed "detailed, sexually explicit abuse" came from BEFORE Deroir's twitter exchange with JP. I am very curious because, in fact, so far JP herself is the only one who has shown a severe amount of sexism in the form of misandry. Her mistrust in and disdain for the male gender is rampant if you took the time to actually look through her post history. There have been excellent summaries of her exchanges with other Guild Wars partners that come to mind, Jebro's exchange with her over the Infinity War movie is a prime example of her warped way of thinking. It's literally cringe worthy, Infinity War might not be the best movie in existence but to call Thanos a "pseudo-hitler" (edit: don't know if it shows or not, but apperantly we cannot mention a certain german gentlemen who had a big hand in WW2) and the movie itself having "cheap holocaust metaphors" can only come from the mental workings of a lunatic:

https://twitter.com/Delafina777/status/991188809290153984

Let's continue on, also take a look at the following what Tris says shall we?

"The official statement from Mike himself, stating that a single unprofessionally snarky Twitter thread expressing frustration at being habitually belittled = "attacking the community"

So let's start getting this straight here, her single twitter thread (which is another great lie, since there were obviously multiple threads, against more then 1 person where she was unprofessionally rude against pretty much everyone) where she expressed frustration at Deroir's polite attempt at conversation with someone who we have learned he greatly admired. You can literally read that she is not mentioning anything about any sort of previous "habitual belittlement" but she is expressing clear disdain over this single situation. And then yes, sure, other people come in and she also starts being incredibly rude to them.

Granted I don't think your extreme lack of reading comprehension and failure to actually read into the context of someone who was trying to put this into the "bigger-picture perspective" (basically lie) is... ahem... healthy. In fact, somewhat similar to Price's response to Deroir, though i think you also missed a lot of context in that situation too given that you still somewhat blame Deroir for this. Like really? Being in the wrong place and wrong time has got nothing to do with the instant amount of flak he got from JP, who immediately pulled the gender card, from simply trying to have a meaningful conversation with someone who he thought the world of.

P.s. i will leave Deroir's post-situation thoughts here for you to ponder over. Look at this clip, skip to around 4:40 and listen....listen very carefully, lest you miss any of that juicy context: https://old.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/8wnkw8/deroirs_response_to_the_incident/

P.p.s. Just to give you more of that juicy context you're so hot for, here is what he thought of Jessica before the twitter fiasco: https://clips.twitch.tv/CrypticMistyStingrayDxCat

Malediktus.9250 · July 8, 2018

@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@Malediktus.9250 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
"this wasn't the community's business to get involved in, and it was best left alone." - what I choose to spend my money on most certainly IS my business. I can speak my mind - if the company cares they care. If they don't they don't. It's not the first time the community has been outspoken.

I like how people who already have spent their money on a product don't know that "I'm not supporting them in financial way" card is already obsolete. GW2 is a game that you buy once, buy expansion 1, buy expansion 2. You can buy gems for real money to support, but why would I pay for gems if I can craft gear to sell in BLTC to gain in-game money which I then trade into gems and use the gems.

This is where you are wrong. Even if you buy gems with gold you support Anet. Someone else bought the gems for you (except the tiny fraction coming from giveaways and 5k AP chests)

And here I thought that gems were in infinite stock and used as alternative currency provided to us by ANet. It's almost like there was a pile of digital gems that work like real life money, as in they're printed, made available to public and then gems can rotate around like real life money does from consumer to consumer.

I have a feeling that I missed something.

It is why the price of the gems to gold ratio changes all the time. A lot of gems in pool = less gold per gem and vice versa. So if you buy gems with gold you increase the amount of gold the people get for their gems. Some people sell gems and the gold to gems ratio adjusts again etc.

ponytheguardian.7439 · July 8, 2018

@Blocki.4931 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@White Dragon.5429 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@"Harper.4173" said:
"The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts.

But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract.While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly.

That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses.

True. But if I go to JP's case, why didn't her previous "infractions" result in this outcome? Probably because internet didn't make a fuzz about those (as far as I know).

Because nobody knew it happened. Why is that an argument? It's like you make a mistake, your employer doesn't know it so he doesn't punish you. Later it gets out and you get your kitten handed to you. Difficult concept?

Trust me. These things won't go unnoticed in todays internet. If someone doesn't like you, they will dig up every piece of **** they can and destroy you. That's how internet works. There is a chance that because her target was who he is, was the actual reason for letting her go. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.

Deihnyx.6318 · July 8, 2018

@Belorn.2659 said:
@Zushada.6108 said:
Let me be clear in my thoughts here:
The community made this happen.

No, the community did not make anything happen. Just as bioware game director had to distance the company with someone who celebrated a victim to cancer, so was this the only realistic result when JP public statements was discovered.

I would say that the community at least influenced the final decision.However I fail to see how [in this particular scenario] is that an argument in support of JP's case.It simply shows that indeed damage was done. If you only had the bigots of alt right reacting to this, the community here would not have exploded as well.

The fact is (answering to previous answer I cant find anymore) that sexism is real, is ugly, does happen to people, does happen to women a lot, so when it is used as a wild card to just bash someone who's only crime is providing respectful feedback it doesnt only hurt the image of the company, it hurts people who truly are subjected to sexism, which Im sure she was at some point to be so angry all the time.

But again, I think that not apologizing after realizing she was in the wrong (even 2 days after) is the red line saying it wont be possible to do damage control.

Blocki.4931 · July 8, 2018

@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@Blocki.4931 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@White Dragon.5429 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@"Harper.4173" said:
"The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts.

But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract.While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly.

That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses.

True. But if I go to JP's case, why didn't her previous "infractions" result in this outcome? Probably because internet didn't make a fuzz about those (as far as I know).

Because nobody knew it happened. Why is that an argument? It's like you make a mistake, your employer doesn't know it so he doesn't punish you. Later it gets out and you get your kitten handed to you. Difficult concept?

Trust me. These things won't go unnoticed in todays internet. If someone doesn't like you, they will dig up every piece of **** they can and destroy you. That's how internet works. There is a chance that because her target was who he is, was the actual reason for letting her go. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.

Are you seriously implying he sicced his followers on her? Because this is some conspiracy shit.

I'm not a fan of digging into somebody's past just to get them fired, but that's not a free pass to be an absolute cunt to anybody.

And yes, those things do go unnoticed when out of your 10k followers only 40 care enough to actually engage you and of those 40 at least 39 of them are safely inside the same filter bubble as you

ponytheguardian.7439 · July 8, 2018

@Malediktus.9250 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@Malediktus.9250 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
"this wasn't the community's business to get involved in, and it was best left alone." - what I choose to spend my money on most certainly IS my business. I can speak my mind - if the company cares they care. If they don't they don't. It's not the first time the community has been outspoken.

I like how people who already have spent their money on a product don't know that "I'm not supporting them in financial way" card is already obsolete. GW2 is a game that you buy once, buy expansion 1, buy expansion 2. You can buy gems for real money to support, but why would I pay for gems if I can craft gear to sell in BLTC to gain in-game money which I then trade into gems and use the gems.

This is where you are wrong. Even if you buy gems with gold you support Anet. Someone else bought the gems for you (except the tiny fraction coming from giveaways and 5k AP chests)

And here I thought that gems were in infinite stock and used as alternative currency provided to us by ANet. It's almost like there was a pile of digital gems that work like real life money, as in they're printed, made available to public and then gems can rotate around like real life money does from consumer to consumer.

I have a feeling that I missed something.

It is why the price of the gems to gold ratio changes all the time. A lot of gems in pool = less gold per gem and vice versa. So if you buy gems with gold you increase the amount of gold the people get for their gems. Some people sell gems and the gold to gems ratio adjusts again etc.

Ah that's true. But what I initally meant, was that while buying gems with real money supports ANet, using gold to get those gems doesn't because you're not buying them with real money. Instead you put in the work required to make in-game money so you can get the amount of gems you need without using a real dime.

Gems are always in that pool. They don't go away. As far as I know, the ratio change was based on how much there is actual demand for them and price goes up and down based on how much gold or gems you trade.

ponytheguardian.7439 · July 8, 2018

@Blocki.4931 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@Blocki.4931 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@White Dragon.5429 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@"Harper.4173" said:
"The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts.

But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract.While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly.

That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses.

True. But if I go to JP's case, why didn't her previous "infractions" result in this outcome? Probably because internet didn't make a fuzz about those (as far as I know).

Because nobody knew it happened. Why is that an argument? It's like you make a mistake, your employer doesn't know it so he doesn't punish you. Later it gets out and you get your kitten handed to you. Difficult concept?

Trust me. These things won't go unnoticed in todays internet. If someone doesn't like you, they will dig up every piece of **** they can and destroy you. That's how internet works. There is a chance that because her target was who he is, was the actual reason for letting her go. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.

Are you seriously implying he sicced his followers on her? Because this is some conspiracy kitten.

I'm not a fan of digging into somebody's past just to get them fired, but that's not a free pass to be an absolute kitten to anybody.

And yes, those things do go unnoticed when out of your 10k followers only 40 care enough to actually engage you and of those 40 at least 39 of them are safely inside the same filter bubble as you

Let me translate my first quote:

@ponytheguardian.7439 said:Trust me. These things won't go unnoticed in todays internet. If someone doesn't like you, they will dig up every piece of *
they can and destroy you. That's how internet works.This is what applies to the actual people in the Internet ~community~. Including random
hats in Reddit/Poorchan/Everyone-else who just like to think that the train looks fun. This was not saying that this respected content creator sent his followers after JP. No. I doubt that, greatly.
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:There is a chance that because her target was who he is, was the actual reason for letting her go. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.This means: MO didn't like her saying bad things to this respected content creator. But if there has been other situations like this that were known within the company, why didn't she get booted before? Instead, now that the target was who he is, MO let her go. And because Fries wanted to stand with her, he got a boot as well.

This is not rocket science or some illuminati theory, or is it?

ChronosCosmos.9450 · July 8, 2018

Jessica Price is back...

She is blaming Anet now lol...

CETheLucid.3964 · July 8, 2018

@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@Blocki.4931 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@Blocki.4931 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@White Dragon.5429 said:
@ponytheguardian.7439 said:
@"Harper.4173" said:
"The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts.