Jump to content
  • Sign Up

GW 2 Devs/Playerbase Twitter Discussion


Recommended Posts

@Dragon.4032 said:

@"Harper.4173" said:
  1. "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.

This not only needs to change, it must change and if we have to legislate it then that's the solution. Corporate America needs to be brought to heel and learn that they can not and will not be allowed to control what employees say on their own personal social media accounts.

Public
social media posts are not different than your actions taken out in public places. Public Twitter posts=/=your private and secure home where jokes are kept between friends and families. People have always been judged by how they are presented in public places, there's no reason that needs to be changed. If you want to speak poorly of people and face zero consequences, then keep it in a private setting among your friends and family, no need to take out the megaphone and then complain when the consequences come at you.

There is zero reason for her response, and there is zero reason why any sort of business needs to tolerate sexism either, just because she's a female doesn't mean it's okay to hate on the opposite gender when the guy did nothing wrong, and had even complimented her not long before that.

I don't care if it's public, it's still your PERSONAL social media account and Corporate American has no right to sensor it...and if people are unable to separate a persons personal life from their professional life, then the person with the problem is the one unable to separate the two. Those are two distinct entities, you have a job that is your professional life, you go home after work and that is your personal life...they are not one and the same in the vast majority of cases, and Corporate America needs to be kicked out of our personal lives.

It’s not a private, personal place if you have over 13k strangers following you and it’s open to the world to look in. That’s public. It might be “personal” in that they put their name on a spot on someone else’s property (the people that own the site Twitter in this case) however if they set it to public which allows the whole world to see and answer you and if they brand themselves on that publicly accessible site as an employee of a particular company and if they discuss their work on that site with their settings on public so all can see and comment then no, it’s no longer
only
a personal social media where you are entitled to privacy.

As @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said

You know, back when I worked at a bank, they had a certain way of phrasing it. Of course, it was all surrounded with cooperate newspeak and a bunch generic praise, but ultimately the message was this:

The job doesn't start when you punch the clock. The job starts when you put on the uniform. If you are out in the world, the moment you wear our emblem, you represent us. If somebody sees you and recognizing you as an employee of our company, then you represent us.

She was wearing ANet’s emblem when she tagged her account as an ANet dev and posted a discussion about her work. At that point she was repping ANet and anything she said reflects on them also. Just like anything you say while at work reflects on your employee. She cursed at and insulted customers of her job while repping ANet and she got the same punishment as you would get if you cursed and insulted customers while repping your job.

Edit: spelling

Yea as long as you are sending family mails through that gmail account in public domain, everyone should have the right to probe into your emails whether you like to have your own space or not. Get real.

You have an option to open twitter up to the public, or to just friends. If you open it up to the public, you're making a choice. Presumably family emails aren't posted publicly so the analogy doesn't work.

When I managed a computer store, I met a customer at Typhoon Lagoon in Disney World. Not planned. He just happened to be there at the same time as me, behind me in the same line waiting for food. Weird, weird coincidence. He starts asking me computer questions on my vacation.

Just so happens I liked the guy and chatted with him until we got our food. But the point is, even if I couldn't stand the guy, I'd have been civil because he's a paying customer and there's zero reason to offend him. None. Unless he threatened me or outright insulted me.

Deroir wasn't correct in what he was saying, and JP was very much correct. She probably took what he was saying wrong. She just typed a whole page explaining stuff that's pretty well understood, not the first time I've heard convos like this from professionals, and he's like I disagree "slightly". But his disagreement wasn't actually slight and it probably rubbed her the wrong way.

Doesn't excuse her saying something later like I'm not on the clock and I don't have to pretend to like you. She could have said a lot of things. She could have explained to him why the footprint of an MMO doesn't support branching storylines. She could have even said that this is something the dev community has discussed for years, and I assure you this is the case, even if you don't realize it. Instead, she chose to see his comments as an attack on her because she's a woman. Would he have said the same thing to a male dev? I think so. Not all of us think in terms of gender on twitter or facebook or forums. I know I don't.

If I insulted a customer who did nothing more than express an opinion, then I would be in the wrong and I'd expect some sort of penalty for it.

Sure I understand your views. I'm not here to disagree with you at all. But you need to understand not to take Jessica's point of view for granted and how she should have reacted in her own shoes. How she reacted wasn't very pleasing but there is a reason, but to completely neglect that side of the reason doesn't seem very ethical, at least not in the way Mike had to fire them.

We don't know what happened in that office in private. We have no idea. Not a clue. Mike could have asked her to apologize and she could have refused. To me that would be grounds for firing. Frankly I think that sort of bad judgement reflecting on the company probably would have been enough to fire her anyway, but I always like to give people the benefit of the doubt. I wasn't one of the mob calling for her to be fired. Which doesn't mean I didn't feel she was wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

There's no3 strikes and you're out system in WA. It's an "at-will employment state". That means employers can terminate working relationships at will as long as they do not apply to the following: In

snips

Flesh, I usually agree with on most of your posts, but on this point it appears I'm going to be disagreeing with most of the other posters on here. I'm sorry, but nobody is going to be allowed to dictate what I can post on my person social media account(s), other than what is considered against the law or the owner of the social media site. Not my family, not my friends and certainly not my employer...if I was posting on a company provided or owned social media site, then they can guide how and what I say. But on my own personal accounts whether I display their emblem or list them as my place of work...only over my dead body, and we will have to legislate it out of existence, because they won't back off on their own.

So if a work colleague posts on their 'own person social media account', which is wholly open to the public, an item which could result in significant revenue reduction to your employer and thereby puts your prospects at risk, you would be happy as it upholds your personal freedoms?

If so, you better hope any disgruntled media friendly card-carrying colleague doesn't fancy a career/job change! An employer chasing after such a 'tweeter postal' ex-employee would be engaged in a very fruitless task with little consolation to those left behind, as 'intent' would be difficult to determine - at least initially.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Saelenthi.5720" said:

Sorry to chime in on this, but.... there is no "tone" on the internet. Everything is there in the writing, including smileys. So you'd be able to quote the parts that make the tweet for you condescending, and I just dont see it. Ive re-read them quite a few times and theres nothing to indicate a demonstration of superiority.

The wording you use cab definitely imply a tone hence why I said it was probably not meant but due to him not being a native english speaker

Link to post
Share on other sites

I applaud Mo for taking the high road in all this. He has stated his case and left it at that and not one poster here knows the details of what was said to cause the final firings since only one side has openly discussed "some" details. The company has every legal right to protect their image and at the end of the day some actions were taken by those fired and consequences of those actions were brought forth.You all can second guess things until the proverbial cows come home but in the end it is what it is and we as a community need to let it go and move on so all involved can do the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@inubasiri.8745 said:

@inubasiri.8745 said:Congratulations, some of you have just had 2 actual people fired. I hope it was worth being offended on the internet. Sick age we're living in.She was offended too. So was he. Because accountability is a sick age we live in. Amazing right?

Yeah well if everyone was accountable for making others offended on the internet, we'd all be in jail now. But I guess in this case only the devs got the short straw. As I said, congratulations people (you know who you are), your outcry was heard by the mighty Mo, you don't need to be offended anymore.Don't worry, the UK is working on that. lol

Great so now you agree with me?It's not a good idea for law to be punishing people based upon feelings. Because the law should be objective, not subjective. However in this case, we can look at objective and see clearly what was wrong.

But that's precisely the point. Was what they did illegal? If not why are they getting fired for it? Because it hurt someone's feelings which is why they made a reddit thread about it and other people went there and agreed with it. You have to self-censor yourself if you want to keep your job, then?

Illegal? I understand who you are replying to, and what they said, but the situation still had nothing to do with actual law. They were employees acting like kitten. More so Price since from what I saw of the other guy, crap was tame. I don't know if you know how businesses work, but normally you don't want employees attacking your fans/customers unprovoked. Also censor yourself? no. Just don't act like an kitten for no reason in this case. Unless the person is naturally an kitten, then yes, self-censor.

Yeah but they weren't acting as employees. Remember those were their personal accounts. My point isn't that she wasn't acting noxious, my point is that it should have no bearing on her employment. And also if someone didn't put it on reddit, most people wouldn't be offended by it because they wouldn't have known about it. Because what is said between individuals should sometimes just stay between individuals.

No.. sorry your incorrect imo.When someone openly advertises their workplace publicly and then puts out material that is absolutely work related then by their own choice they are putting themselves and the company into the public eye.. by offering out her pro tip AMA she decided, no one else, to put herself on the clock.. what ensued was a lack of professionalism and an abhorrent attack on a respectful community member, a content partner and a person who less than 24hrs previous was calling this person a God, someone he admired for her work.Simple fact is she let both herself down and the company in the way she acted and the things she decided to accuse the poster and similarly ANET of.. and continues to do so reading some of here journo interviews.. which hopefully no one in their right mind would take seriously knowing her history.

As you may have admitted in the end, it's more about her than what she said, isn't it? No really, I've gotten to the point of feeling that her most dedicated haters are all about what she is or said before than really what she did now. But that aside, I can talk about my work in my free time, can't I? It didn't put her on clock, because she wasn't paid for it. Yes, she has acted noxiously, but tbh who cares? She's a prickly person, sure, but the only reason we're having this discussion is because someone popularized it. Otherwise I doubt her twitter followers would have cared (probably because they know her). You do realize that what you're saying is that nobody basically has free time, they're always the company employee, that nobody really has any privacy, because they have to keep representing. And I'm pretty sure this works for politicians, but why should it apply for ordinary people.

Have some wisdom, please, this all can turn against all of us, eventually.

Totally incorrect.. its all about what she said whether it be in her latest outburst to deroir or previous attacks resulting in here being released .She may think she is defending something but there is a time, a place and actual issues that warrants it.. this attempt at respectful open dialogue did not and only paints JP with the very substance at which we know are very real issues in society today no matter what your political preferences are.You like JP are trying to take something and plaster it over something completely harmless.. fact there was no ground or cause for JP to act like she did and say what she said other than for effect and perhaps a bit of "hey look at me" and its backfired on her... actions have consequence and its not the first time that lesson was given by all accounts.

As for repping ANET.. yes when she decided (no one else) to continue her AMA work by adding her own pro tip addendum to it whilst openly advertising she is an ANET dev on her Account she put herself on the clock to discuss with the community, work related content.. there is simply no argument to that and that is why her unprofessional, disrespectful and darn right obnoxious rant session caused the uproar and landed her in ANETS's and MO crosshairs.. it's that simple.As a company owner I would of taken the exact same view and also called that meeting... what we of course don't know, as I have said previously, is what went down at that point and whether there were already some undercurrents which caused the decisions to fire her to be made.. heck we don't even know if that's actually what MO wanted from all this.. except some one side gamerjourno rubbish that JP rushed to push out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kitsune.1437 said:

@Dragon.4032 said:You take out the humane aspect from an affair, that's your recipe for disaster.Exactly, she took out the humane aspect from it, multiple times if I may add, and that was the recipe for her disaster.

That was my reference to what you said about people following her strictly for work associations and nothing more. And I already made the point clear, which you failed to even understand, her twitter account wasn't the official medium for game discussion. You provoked her in her public place where she's allowed to express herself.

She posted a 29(?) tweet long explanation about why MMO characters are difficult to write, at no point did Deroir mention Guild Wars as he tried to engage in what she first talked about.

What? he talked specifically about Living Story, which IMO is one reason why she wasn't happy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Deihnyx.6318 said:

@"MorrisG.3681" said:It's really sad to see Arenanet do a heel turn like this. Firing someone on the spot is not something that's acceptable, or even legal, where I live. I'm usually a part of the very silent majority but I felt I had to express my disappointment, even if I'm just farting into the wind. I'm a player and a fan, and this is my meager attempt at showing we're not all whiny children, I guess. I really shouldn't have to say this, but since Deroir taught us we can be as condescending as we want towards Anet, here goes:

Really interesting firing! However, allow me to disagree
slightly
with how you've handled this. Some companies, when they're unhappy with how their employees act, try to
talk
with their employees to work out a solution. If this proves difficult, try picking a different dialogue option. Make them issue a public apology. You can do that, you know. You're the boss! Great, isn't it? If they refuse to apologise, you can even do it for them! Of course, if that's the case you might want to issue a warning, let them know this sort of thing isn't appreciated. Over in my end of the world, silly little socialist Europe, it's the law to issue written warnings. (A written warning is a warning that's written down, for example on a piece of paper.) I guess you don't have to over there, but I still think it's a decent thing to do, don't you? And the cool thing is, if it happens again, then you actually have cause to fire them! Without coming off as a word that's not allowed on the forum! Boy oh boy, treating people like people sure is exhausting. Nonetheless, super interesting the way you treat your employees like trash! (End)

So first, given this is your first post to this forum I guess you're reacting after reading some of these awfully one sided articles from video game medias.Let me just show you how much of a fan of that specific dev this Deroir that you're calling "condescending" was:
Done before the whole incident. Since people like you are calling people guilty until proven innocent (something that HEY, doesn't fly AT ALL in your dear Europe :) ) here's a hard factual proof that the guy admired that dev. You're falling for the "condescending" argument like many other, but that's an agenda pushed right at your face.

Next, for this "legality" and "morality" issue you're talking about.There's nothing illegal, or even remotely unacceptable about that. At all. I work in IT in the US and just like Anet, my company would never let me talk kitten to our consumers. I would get fired, and rightfully so. It actually happened to one of my colleagues last year (male).-And- I lived in Europe before, in France particularly. A country where people go on strike for barely any reason and socialism is still strong. Well... the same clause applied the company I worked for. It's considered a "serious fault" and you can be fired for that. Common sense people.

You don't know that "internal" talking didn't take place, nobody knows, we can only assume. Usually it's good not to assume the worst.But ultimately, even if there was no discussion, someone who damaged the company that badly can totally be fired. For the second dev it's a bit more of a grey area I'll admit.

I wish all the people that create an account here just now would actually take the time to learn both sides of the story. The WP video is actually pretty great for that, because pretty neutral.

Look man, you do you. If you feel Arenanet was morally in the right, then that's your opinion and that's fine. It's clear we disagree on workers rights. But you are doing an awful lot of assuming for someone who claims to care about facts. First off, this may be my first post, but I've been lurking for years. I've played the game for years. I read that first, outraged thread on Reddit when it started and I've been following this thing since then. Normally, that would be it for me. But because the "fanbase" have been so ridiculously one-sided on this, I felt I had to give my take. You had no way of knowing this, naturally, and yet you assumed something out of the blue because it fit your own narrative. You were doing precisely what you accuse the media of doing.

Second, I can't refute your claim on specific laws in France, even if it sounds unlikely to me. But in Norway, you need to issue at least two warnings (IIRC) before you're allowed to fire someone, one of which needs to be in writing. There's a lot more to it than that, also. So, just to be clear, this sort of thing would most definitely be illegal over here. True, we don't know what happened behind closed doors but MO presented it a certain way in his post and that's what I'm going off.

On Deroirs comment being condescending: That was meant mostly to illustrate how his comment was read. He may not have intended it to be condescending, but he most definitely came off as it. I consider that to be largely irrelevant to this whole issue, though. If he liked the devs in question so much, maybe he should have contacted Arenanet and settled this whole thing out of the public eye. After all, he was the sole wronged party here, not the dogpiling angry "fans" on reddit. He could have prevented this from escalating, but didn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Dragon.4032 said:

@Loli Ruri.8307 said:Wow, Mike O'Brien personally fired her. And vented his feelings at her for most of the meeting, so she says.Shows you how much Mike cares about the community. Then he personally went here and told us about it. This guy is passionate.

Mike made a choice that he will have to regret despite the looney mobs taking his sides in the forum.

I think he will regret it because of the alt right support of his decision and their inflaming of the situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"MorrisG.3681" said:On Deroirs comment being condescending: That was meant mostly to illustrate how his comment was read. He may not have intended it to be condescending, but he most definitely came off as it. I consider that to be largely irrelevant to this whole issue, though. If he liked the devs in question so much, maybe he should have contacted Arenanet and settled this whole thing out of the public eye. After all, he was the sole wronged party here, not the dogpiling angry "fans" on reddit. He could have prevented this from escalating, but didn't.How on earth could he have done anything at all about what happened after he bowed out of the conversation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@thruine.8510 said:

Another new account...
stuff

Oh, so an amateur forum posters shouldn't engage with professional forum posters? I see, lets practice the same thing we had like JP did. It's this kind of hypocritical crap that pushes people to the extremes. Go look at Peter's tweets. There's nothing to be fired from in them at all. Painting him with the same brush as JP, just as MO did, is caving to mob mentality. Its cowardly. It seems its not going to settle down now that JP is loose to spin the story has she likes now that a number of YouTubers have picked it up and started spreading it further. Everyone involved deserved some punishment for unprofessional actions and that includes ArenaNet and MO.

No, but a person that only posted on this thread is suspicious at best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@thruine.8510 said:

@"Harper.4173" said:

Another new account...
stuff

Oh, so an amateur forum posters shouldn't engage with professional forum posters? I see, lets practice the same thing we had like JP did. It's this kind of hypocritical crap that pushes people to the extremes. Go look at Peter's tweets. There's nothing to be fired from in them at all. Painting him with the same brush as JP, just as MO did, is caving to mob mentality. Its cowardly. It seems its not going to settle down now that JP is loose to spin the story has she likes now that a number of YouTubers have picked it up and started spreading it further. Everyone involved deserved some punishment for unprofessional actions and that includes ArenaNet and MO.

Not at all - I'm simply pointing out there are a lot of "new posters" and given this situation it's pretty hard to differentiate who's here because they're a member of the community and just didn't use the forums and who isn't a member of the community and is just here to pick a bone and defend their favorite internet "celebrity".

My point is this - too many new accounts have been defending her for a pattern not to be noticeable. I am firmly convinced a good amount of them are people that are ONLY here to defend her because of how they perceive the situation and in fact do not care for GW2, do not care for Anet and do not care for the game in general - nor do they play it.

If I was wrong prove me wrong - show us how much you play/have played the game. Show us you're part of the community. You can't do that can you? That's why you won't reply to me nor will you address this if you will.I'd suggest you look at cowardly a different way and add some introspection before you talk about MO. Anet doesn't deserve punishment. It defended its players and community - which was absolutely the right call.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@MorrisG.3681 said:

Second, I can't refute your claim on specific laws in France, even if it sounds unlikely to me. But in Norway, you need to issue at least two warnings (IIRC) before you're allowed to fire someone, one of which needs to be in writing. There's a lot more to it than that, also. So, just to be clear, this sort of thing would most definitely be illegal over here. True, we don't know what happened behind closed doors but MO presented it a certain way in his post and that's what I'm going off.

Australia requires 3 written warnings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Vayne.8563 said:

@"Harper.4173" said:
  1. "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.

This not only needs to change, it must change and if we have to legislate it then that's the solution. Corporate America needs to be brought to heel and learn that they can not and will not be allowed to control what employees say on their own personal social media accounts.

Public
social media posts are not different than your actions taken out in public places. Public Twitter posts=/=your private and secure home where jokes are kept between friends and families. People have always been judged by how they are presented in public places, there's no reason that needs to be changed. If you want to speak poorly of people and face zero consequences, then keep it in a private setting among your friends and family, no need to take out the megaphone and then complain when the consequences come at you.

There is zero reason for her response, and there is zero reason why any sort of business needs to tolerate sexism either, just because she's a female doesn't mean it's okay to hate on the opposite gender when the guy did nothing wrong, and had even complimented her not long before that.

I don't care if it's public, it's still your PERSONAL social media account and Corporate American has no right to sensor it...and if people are unable to separate a persons personal life from their professional life, then the person with the problem is the one unable to separate the two. Those are two distinct entities, you have a job that is your professional life, you go home after work and that is your personal life...they are not one and the same in the vast majority of cases, and Corporate America needs to be kicked out of our personal lives.

It’s not a private, personal place if you have over 13k strangers following you and it’s open to the world to look in. That’s public. It might be “personal” in that they put their name on a spot on someone else’s property (the people that own the site Twitter in this case) however if they set it to public which allows the whole world to see and answer you and if they brand themselves on that publicly accessible site as an employee of a particular company and if they discuss their work on that site with their settings on public so all can see and comment then no, it’s no longer
only
a personal social media where you are entitled to privacy.

As @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said

You know, back when I worked at a bank, they had a certain way of phrasing it. Of course, it was all surrounded with cooperate newspeak and a bunch generic praise, but ultimately the message was this:

The job doesn't start when you punch the clock. The job starts when you put on the uniform. If you are out in the world, the moment you wear our emblem, you represent us. If somebody sees you and recognizing you as an employee of our company, then you represent us.

She was wearing ANet’s emblem when she tagged her account as an ANet dev and posted a discussion about her work. At that point she was repping ANet and anything she said reflects on them also. Just like anything you say while at work reflects on your employee. She cursed at and insulted customers of her job while repping ANet and she got the same punishment as you would get if you cursed and insulted customers while repping your job.

Edit: spelling

Yea as long as you are sending family mails through that gmail account in public domain, everyone should have the right to probe into your emails whether you like to have your own space or not. Get real.

You have an option to open twitter up to the public, or to just friends. If you open it up to the public, you're making a choice. Presumably family emails aren't posted publicly so the analogy doesn't work.

When I managed a computer store, I met a customer at Typhoon Lagoon in Disney World. Not planned. He just happened to be there at the same time as me, behind me in the same line waiting for food. Weird, weird coincidence. He starts asking me computer questions on my vacation.

Just so happens I liked the guy and chatted with him until we got our food. But the point is, even if I couldn't stand the guy, I'd have been civil because he's a paying customer and there's zero reason to offend him. None. Unless he threatened me or outright insulted me.

Deroir wasn't correct in what he was saying, and JP was very much correct. She probably took what he was saying wrong. She just typed a whole page explaining stuff that's pretty well understood, not the first time I've heard convos like this from professionals, and he's like I disagree "slightly". But his disagreement wasn't actually slight and it probably rubbed her the wrong way.

Doesn't excuse her saying something later like I'm not on the clock and I don't have to pretend to like you. She could have said a lot of things. She could have explained to him why the footprint of an MMO doesn't support branching storylines. She could have even said that this is something the dev community has discussed for years, and I assure you this is the case, even if you don't realize it. Instead, she chose to see his comments as an attack on her because she's a woman. Would he have said the same thing to a male dev? I think so. Not all of us think in terms of gender on twitter or facebook or forums. I know I don't.

If I insulted a customer who did nothing more than express an opinion, then I would be in the wrong and I'd expect some sort of penalty for it.

Sure I understand your views. I'm not here to disagree with you at all. But you need to understand not to take Jessica's point of view for granted and how she should have reacted in her own shoes. How she reacted wasn't very pleasing but there is a reason, but to completely neglect that side of the reason doesn't seem very ethical, at least not in the way Mike had to fire them.

We don't know what happened in that office in private. We have no idea. Not a clue. Mike could have asked her to apologize and she could have refused. To me that would be grounds for firing. Frankly I think that sort of bad judgement reflecting on the company probably would have been enough to fire her anyway, but I always like to give people the benefit of the doubt. I wasn't one of the mob calling for her to be fired. Which doesn't mean I didn't feel she was wrong.

Neither was I.. I don't follow reddit unless I have to and I am not part of the Twitter brigade.. but even I know if you want stuff to be your private thoughts and discussions.. you keep your account private or act responsibly if you choose to offer content out for others to read and critique publicly.And if there is something you don't want to answer or dislike the tone of a reply etc.. its that simple to just ignore/block. I mean it's like JP said herself no one owns her or her time and she owes none to us.. so ignore/block go about the rest of your day... but of course we all know what went down instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@MorrisG.3681 said:Second, I can't refute your claim on specific laws in France, even if it sounds unlikely to me. But in Norway, you need to issue at least two warnings (IIRC) before you're allowed to fire someone, one of which needs to be in writing. There's a lot more to it than that, also. So, just to be clear, this sort of thing would most definitely be illegal over here. True, we don't know what happened behind closed doors but MO presented it a certain way in his post and that's what I'm going off.

Do you know how many other warnings she got before being fired? Was there ANY reason at all for MO to tell us about any other such warnings? No there wasn't. You are assuming she's been fired only because of that twitter post, but judging by how hateful the rest of her twitter posts are I'd imagine she already got multiple warnings in the past.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are lots of native speakers here, so I have a question. In a face-to-face communication if one wants to say "one", one would say "one" and not "you", right? Because Deroir wrote in his Twitter conversation with JP:

"When you want the outcome to be the same across the board for all players' experiences, then yes, by design you are extremely limited in how you can contruct the personality of the PC. (2 of 3)" - could it be possible that JP took all the yous in this sentence personal and not understood them as "one" like Deroir most likely meant?

"When you want ... then yes, by design you are extremely limited ..." - What would my design be? To be a woman, ofc. And JP as a story writer most likely is much more sensitive with words and wording than people who do not work with language that way.

Couldn't this just have been a big misunderstanding?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@MorrisG.3681 said:Second, I can't refute your claim on specific laws in France, even if it sounds unlikely to me. But in Norway, you need to issue at least two warnings (IIRC) before you're allowed to fire someone, one of which needs to be in writing. There's a lot more to it than that, also. So, just to be clear, this sort of thing would most definitely be illegal over here. True, we don't know what happened behind closed doors but MO presented it a certain way in his post and that's what I'm going off.

Do you know how many other warnings she got before being fired? Was there ANY reason at all for MO to tell us about any other such warnings? No there wasn't. You are assuming she's been fired only because of that twitter post, but judging by how hateful the rest of her twitter posts are I'd imagine she already got multiple warnings in the past.

Mo couldn't tell us anything specific because he chose to withhold the identities of the people involved, which is doing them a favor if anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@MorrisG.3681 said:Second, I can't refute your claim on specific laws in France, even if it sounds unlikely to me. But in Norway, you need to issue at least two warnings (IIRC) before you're allowed to fire someone, one of which needs to be in writing. There's a lot more to it than that, also. So, just to be clear, this sort of thing would most definitely be illegal over here. True, we don't know what happened behind closed doors but MO presented it a certain way in his post and that's what I'm going off.

Do you know how many other warnings she got before being fired? Was there ANY reason at all for MO to tell us about any other such warnings? No there wasn't. You are assuming she's been fired only because of that twitter post, but judging by how hateful the rest of her twitter posts are I'd imagine she already got multiple warnings in the past.

He referenced this event and nothing else, so that's how Anet chose to present it. I'm simply taking the statement at face value. At this point it would probably be wise to revise the statement if there was more to it. It's very possible to do this without going into specifics. Until then I feel it's fair to assume they were fired because of this specific incident.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Lanhelin.3480" said:There are lots of native speakers here, so I have a question. In a face-to-face communication if one wants to say "one", one would say "one" and not "you", right? Because Deroir wrote in his Twitter conversation with JP:

"When you want the outcome to be the same across the board for all players' experiences, then yes, by design you are extremely limited in how you can contruct the personality of the PC. (2 of 3)" - could it be possible that JP took all the yous in this sentence personal and not understood them as "one" like Deroir most likely meant?

"When you want ... then yes, by design you are extremely limited ..." - What would my design be? To be a woman, ofc. And JP as a story writer most likely is much more sensitive with words and wording than people who do not work with language that way.

Couldn't this just have been a big misunderstanding?

One might use the word one in place of you but it to me feels awkward and it’s something I would only use if I was being very precise and needed to separate (generic)you from (personal)you. However it would be a prior decision for reasons and not something I would do offhand if I was just talking. If I was asking Deroir’s question I doubt I would use one instead of you.

I doubt though that was the issue. Whether he had used one or you I think she would have been offended by a man questioning her on something she considers Dev narrative theory 101.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bloodstealer.5978 said:

@inubasiri.8745 said:Congratulations, some of you have just had 2 actual people fired. I hope it was worth being offended on the internet. Sick age we're living in.She was offended too. So was he. Because accountability is a sick age we live in. Amazing right?

Yeah well if everyone was accountable for making others offended on the internet, we'd all be in jail now. But I guess in this case only the devs got the short straw. As I said, congratulations people (you know who you are), your outcry was heard by the mighty Mo, you don't need to be offended anymore.Don't worry, the UK is working on that. lol

Great so now you agree with me?It's not a good idea for law to be punishing people based upon feelings. Because the law should be objective, not subjective. However in this case, we can look at objective and see clearly what was wrong.

But that's precisely the point. Was what they did illegal? If not why are they getting fired for it? Because it hurt someone's feelings which is why they made a reddit thread about it and other people went there and agreed with it. You have to self-censor yourself if you want to keep your job, then?

Illegal? I understand who you are replying to, and what they said, but the situation still had nothing to do with actual law. They were employees acting like kitten. More so Price since from what I saw of the other guy, crap was tame. I don't know if you know how businesses work, but normally you don't want employees attacking your fans/customers unprovoked. Also censor yourself? no. Just don't act like an kitten for no reason in this case. Unless the person is naturally an kitten, then yes, self-censor.

Yeah but they weren't acting as employees. Remember those were their personal accounts. My point isn't that she wasn't acting noxious, my point is that it should have no bearing on her employment. And also if someone didn't put it on reddit, most people wouldn't be offended by it because they wouldn't have known about it. Because what is said between individuals should sometimes just stay between individuals.

No.. sorry your incorrect imo.When someone openly advertises their workplace publicly and then puts out material that is absolutely work related then by their own choice they are putting themselves and the company into the public eye.. by offering out her pro tip AMA she decided, no one else, to put herself on the clock.. what ensued was a lack of professionalism and an abhorrent attack on a respectful community member, a content partner and a person who less than 24hrs previous was calling this person a God, someone he admired for her work.Simple fact is she let both herself down and the company in the way she acted and the things she decided to accuse the poster and similarly ANET of.. and continues to do so reading some of here journo interviews.. which hopefully no one in their right mind would take seriously knowing her history.

As you may have admitted in the end, it's more about her than what she said, isn't it? No really, I've gotten to the point of feeling that her most dedicated haters are all about what she is or said before than really what she did now. But that aside, I can talk about my work in my free time, can't I? It didn't put her on clock, because she wasn't paid for it. Yes, she has acted noxiously, but tbh who cares? She's a prickly person, sure, but the only reason we're having this discussion is because someone popularized it. Otherwise I doubt her twitter followers would have cared (probably because they know her). You do realize that what you're saying is that nobody basically has free time, they're always the company employee, that nobody really has any privacy, because they have to keep representing. And I'm pretty sure this works for politicians, but why should it apply for ordinary people.

Have some wisdom, please, this all can turn against all of us, eventually.

Totally incorrect.. its all about what she said whether it be in her latest outburst to deroir or previous attacks resulting in here being released .She may think she is defending something but there is a time, a place and actual issues that warrants it.. this attempt at respectful open dialogue did not and only paints JP with the very substance at which we know are very real issues in society today no matter what your political preferences are.You like JP are trying to take something and plaster it over something completely harmless.. fact there was no ground or cause for JP to act like she did and say what she said other than for effect and perhaps a bit of "hey look at me" and its backfired on her... actions have consequence and its not the first time that lesson was given by all accounts.

As for repping ANET.. yes when she decided (no one else) to continue her AMA work by adding her own pro tip addendum to it whilst openly advertising she is an ANET dev on her Account she put herself on the clock to discuss with the community, work related content.. there is simply no argument to that and that is why her unprofessional, disrespectful and darn right obnoxious rant session caused the uproar and landed her in ANETS's and MO crosshairs.. it's that simple.As a company owner I would of taken the exact same view and also called that meeting... what we of course don't know, as I have said previously, is what went down at that point and whether there were already some undercurrents which caused the decisions to fire her to be made.. heck we don't even know if that's actually what MO wanted from all this.. except some one side gamerjourno rubbish that JP rushed to push out.

Ah I see you tend to ignore the rules for discussion that Gaile put up.Also how can you speak for others with your "totally incorrect"? You can't, I believe, so your statement is not based in logic.She has numerously stated that she sees a difference between being in her personal twitter feed and corporate one and she acted accordingly. Mo then treated it as a professional CEO quelling a PR disaster. But the disaster has come out of some people in the community who got offended over her words, rather than her words themselves. And no you can't be back on the clock for mentioning the work you do, as I said you don't get paid for it. As I said she wasn't paid for it. It was not on company time, it was not on clock. Do you understand that term?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@MorrisG.3681 said:

@MorrisG.3681 said:Second, I can't refute your claim on specific laws in France, even if it sounds unlikely to me. But in Norway, you need to issue at least two warnings (IIRC) before you're allowed to fire someone, one of which needs to be in writing. There's a lot more to it than that, also. So, just to be clear, this sort of thing would most definitely be illegal over here. True, we don't know what happened behind closed doors but MO presented it a certain way in his post and that's what I'm going off.

Do you know how many other warnings she got before being fired? Was there ANY reason at all for MO to tell us about any other such warnings? No there wasn't. You are assuming she's been fired only because of that twitter post, but judging by how hateful the rest of her twitter posts are I'd imagine she already got multiple warnings in the past.

He referenced this event and nothing else, so that's how Anet chose to present it. I'm simply taking the statement at face value. At this point it would probably be wise to revise the statement if there was more to it. It's very possible to do this without going into specifics. Until then I feel it's fair to assume they were fired because of this specific incident.

I don't think "revising" the statement would make any kind of sense. What internal company deals are going on shouldn't be made public in any way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@MorrisG.3681 said:

Second, I can't refute your claim on specific laws in France, even if it sounds unlikely to me. But in Norway, you need to issue at least two warnings (IIRC) before you're allowed to fire someone, one of which needs to be in writing. There's a lot more to it than that, also. So, just to be clear, this sort of thing would most definitely be illegal over here. True, we don't know what happened behind closed doors but MO presented it a certain way in his post and that's what I'm going off.

If MOs comment, which was concise and to the point without to much to go off of (as it should be in such a situation) is a problem for you, yet you have no issue with how the conversation on twitter went, you are heavily biased.

I'm amazed people still defend anti consumer behavior or abuse from developers. Take a look at how that has worked out for EA or Star Wars. Is all jelly with the twitter/reddit crowd? Hell no, some of the most vile scum lurks there (right after 4-chan). That does not warrant developer abuse towards respected customers (Deroir was well known enough to have a NPC named after him and he certainly has no toxic reputation).

Here is what it boils down to:

  • yes there is a lot of think skin developers have to develop (as does just about every person in a customer serving profession no matter how far up the food chain)
  • yes female developers often take unwarranted abuse (as do their male colleagues but I will agree that females get singled out often)
  • no, that is no justification to become unprofessional
  • a private account which is so heavily connected to work and makes prestigious use of its relation to the workplace is not private (and this one in question was already very difficult to look at. It's never okay to gloat over someone dying. Keep your trap shut and move on at the very least publicly, no matter how much you despised the passed. That's basic common decency 101)

As far as employment, none of us have any background information of what transpired. Making things up or interpreting things only because you want to sympathize with one side or the other is useless. We can only assume that legally arenanet and MO acted in such a way that no repercussions to the company can or will be taken. That alone implies legal rightfulness.

My personal thoughts on this: it's unfortunate that 2 developers, one of which was a very well liked and long term one, had to leave. I never gloat over someone losing their job. I do feel that one person was poking way to far outside what was okay though and as such am not surprised at the companies stance and reaction. I've seen people get fired (not let go, fired!) for less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no3 strikes and you're out system in WA. It's an "at-will employment state". That means employers can terminate working relationships at will as long as they do not apply to the following: In WA workers cannot be fired for issuing a safety complaint, filing a workplace rights complaint, and /or filing an injured worker claim...none of which applies here. If JP wants a written notice of why (like that would actually be needed in this case) her employment was terminated she will need to do so in writing and ANet must reply in 10 days time.

All of this information can be found very easily at https://www.lni.wa.gov/

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@MorrisG.3681 said:Second, I can't refute your claim on specific laws in France, even if it sounds unlikely to me. But in Norway, you need to issue at least two warnings (IIRC) before you're allowed to fire someone, one of which needs to be in writing. There's a lot more to it than that, also. So, just to be clear, this sort of thing would most definitely be illegal over here. True, we don't know what happened behind closed doors but MO presented it a certain way in his post and that's what I'm going off.

Do you know how many other warnings she got before being fired? Was there ANY reason at all for MO to tell us about any other such warnings? No there wasn't. You are assuming she's been fired only because of that twitter post, but judging by how hateful the rest of her twitter posts are I'd imagine she already got multiple warnings in the past.

He referenced this event and nothing else, so that's how Anet chose to present it. I'm simply taking the statement at face value. At this point it would probably be wise to revise the statement if there was more to it. It's very possible to do this without going into specifics. Until then I feel it's fair to assume they were fired because of this specific incident.

I don't think "revising" the statement would make any kind of sense. What internal company deals are going on shouldn't be made public in any way.

It already mentions specifics, though. It should have just been a vague "two employees were fired, 'nuff said" if they followed that reasoning. But it specifically references the statements made. In other words, they already talked about internal stuff. They could obviously mention other incidents if there had been any other incidents. But they didn't, so it's a safe assumption that there wasn't. I'm assuming this, you're assuming that. Only assumptions, either way, and without them there's nothing to discuss.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@morrolan.9608 said:

@Loli Ruri.8307 said:Wow, Mike O'Brien personally fired her. And vented his feelings at her for most of the meeting, so she says.Shows you how much Mike cares about the community. Then he personally went here and told us about it. This guy is passionate.

Mike made a choice that he will have to regret despite the looney mobs taking his sides in the forum.

I think he will regret it because of the alt right support of his decision and their inflaming of the situation.

I really think people should stop bringing dumb extremist political groups into this that have nothing to do with anything. And if you think they do, then I’d like some evidence.

Speaking of evidence, I’m still waiting for that quote that proves that Deroir was being condescending and/or douchey.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Zaklex.6308 said:

@"Harper.4173" said:
  1. "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.

This not only needs to change, it must change and if we have to legislate it then that's the solution. Corporate America needs to be brought to heel and learn that they can not and will not be allowed to control what employees say on their own personal social media accounts.

Public
social media posts are not different than your actions taken out in public places. Public Twitter posts=/=your private and secure home where jokes are kept between friends and families. People have always been judged by how they are presented in public places, there's no reason that needs to be changed. If you want to speak poorly of people and face zero consequences, then keep it in a private setting among your friends and family, no need to take out the megaphone and then complain when the consequences come at you.

There is zero reason for her response, and there is zero reason why any sort of business needs to tolerate sexism either, just because she's a female doesn't mean it's okay to hate on the opposite gender when the guy did nothing wrong, and had even complimented her not long before that.

I don't care if it's public, it's still your PERSONAL social media account and Corporate American has no right to sensor it...and if people are unable to separate a persons personal life from their professional life, then the person with the problem is the one unable to separate the two. Those are two distinct entities, you have a job that is your professional life, you go home after work and that is your personal life...they are not one and the same in the vast majority of cases, and Corporate America needs to be kicked out of our personal lives.

What happens when someone talk about their jobs on that personal social media account? Who is unable to differentiate the two then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...