UPDATE - The shard of domination set bonus nerfs have been reverted, however the changes might be implemented again later with the next weekly resets.

Patch 9.1 - Domination Shard Set Bonus Nerfs
According to multiple sources around the internet, it seems as if the set bonuses provided from Domination Shards have been heavily nerfed across the board. This is apparently already live in EU and we will update with hotfixes when we know more.


Blizzard Employees Stage Wednesday Walk Out
Blizzard employees have staged a walk out for tomorrow to protest the insulting response from company leadership regarding the recent lawsuit. You can read more about it by checking out the Polygon article below!


This article was originally published in forum thread: Domination Socket Set Bonus Nerfs, Blizzard Employees Stage Walk Out started by Stoy View original post
Comments 81 Comments
  1. Darknessvamp's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Santti View Post
    I don't know man, spitting into the eye of your boss is one weird PR stunt. And I checked the four points, they seem quite relevant and definitely something that would make the place better? And it's not the employees suing the company. I'd imagine they have a bit better grasp at the way they are treated.
    A four hour walkout with an intent that largely doesn't focus on their issues at their workplace alongside a social media campaign that has the additional goal of feeding funds towards questionable 'charities'? Sounds like a PR stunt to me.
    1.An end to mandatory arbitration clauses in all employee contracts, current and future. Arbitration clauses protect abusers and limit the ability of victims to seek restitution.
    The first point in their Statement of Intent actually addresses a problem they're having in their current contracts that is related to the alleged misconduct so it makes sense why it's there.

    2. The adoption of recruiting, interviewing, hiring, and promotion policies designed to improve representation among employees at all levels, agreed upon by employees in a company-wide Diversity, Equity & Inclusion organization. Current practices have led to women, in particular women of color and transgender women, nonbinary people, and other marginalized groups that are vulnerable to gender discrimination not being hired fairly for new roles when compared to men.
    The second is literally a demand for a diversity quota along the lines of sex, race and gender with a major assumption about how hiring and applications work at the company which even the lawsuit stated they don't have any numbers that show that to back up their own similar assumption regarding just female employee hiring. Also adopting a diversity quota isn't going to fix their problems in house and even has the potential to just add as many bad apples as they assume good ones.

    3. Publication of data on relative compensation (including equity grants and profit sharing), promotion rates, and salary ranges for employees of all genders and ethnicities at the company. Current practices have led to aforementioned groups not being paid or promoted fairly.
    The third point literally states they want the data published because they are assuming they're not being paid or promoted fairly but they don't know that which is why they want it published in the hope it fits their assumption which they don't know if it is correct and so- Basically they don't know and it has nothing to do with making the company better.

    4. Empower a company-wide Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion task force to hire a third party to audit ABK's reporting structure, HR department, and executive staff. It is imperative to identify how current systems have failed to prevent employee harassment, and to propose new solutions to address these issues.
    And the fourth point is they want job positions for a bunch of D&I Czars who have oversight and power over the other systems (HR, Executives and ABK) and can just throw funds at a nebulous third party to make suggestions on how they can 'be better'. This definitely isn't a point to make the company a better place if they want to consolidate that much power in one such fickle group that exists to just be paid and act as the hindsight committee that doesn't do anything.
  1. ThatsOurEric's Avatar
    Unsurprisingly, there continues to be a LOT of really really shitty takes by several posters in both this thread
    and the others regarding what's been going on at Bliz HQ.

    These people worked and bring the game you're all playing, and the sheer lack of empathy towards them is
    beyond pathetic.
  1. Saltysquidoon's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Darknessvamp View Post
    The second is literally a demand for a diversity quota along the lines of sex, race and gender with a major assumption about how hiring and applications work at the company which even the lawsuit stated they don't have any numbers that show that to back up their own similar assumption regarding just female employee hiring. Also adopting a diversity quota isn't going to fix their problems in house and even has the potential to just add as many bad apples as they assume good ones.
    There are three women on blizzard's executive staff all of them have been added since 2019 (i.e since the investigation began), the ex bush advisor was appointed in March this year. I'm not going to go into postulating about race but I hope it is uncontroversial to say of the predominately male executives at blizzard they have been historically and perhaps even present overwhelmingly white.
    You don't just accidentally get predominantly while and male executives unless you are upholding a preexisting unequal power structure.
    Quote Originally Posted by Darknessvamp View Post
    The third point literally states they want the data published because they are assuming they're not being paid or promoted fairly but they don't know that which is why they want it published in the hope it fits their assumption which they don't know if it is correct and so- Basically they don't know and it has nothing to do with making the company better.
    Well, we'll see what comes of the suit seeing as how unequal restitution is the primary thrust of it. That said it's not shocking that the executive restitution shows the female executives being paid less than the males.
    Quote Originally Posted by Darknessvamp View Post
    And the fourth point is they want job positions for a bunch of D&I Czars who have oversight and power over the other systems (HR, Executives and ABK) and can just throw funds at a nebulous third party to make suggestions on how they can 'be better'. This definitely isn't a point to make the company a better place if they want to consolidate that much power in one such fickle group that exists to just be paid and act as the hindsight committee that doesn't do anything.
    The only option aside from an external audit is an internal review that would necessarily be headed up by the people accused of the present failings. What option aside from an independent third party is there?
  1. Chakah's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsOurEric View Post
    Unsurprisingly, there continues to be a LOT of really really shitty takes by several posters in both this thread
    and the others regarding what's been going on at Bliz HQ.
    lol, its a forum, of course there are shitty takes.

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsOurEric View Post
    These people worked and bring the game you're all playing, and the sheer lack of empathy towards them is
    beyond pathetic.
    Are you referring to the accusers or the accused? 'cause I can read this either way...

    Frankly, I think its tragic that 2 separate issues are being mixed here - discrimination and harassment.
    I have serious doubts that the alleged pay/promotion discrimination is real on a company wide level. It just boggles my mind. Just can't be. No company the size of ABK in the US can possibly have an official 'pay women less' policy. It would leak and the Feds would pwn them.

    I do believe that some amount of sexual harassment has happened and some victims exist, but again I seriously doubt it rises to the level of a class action suit. I have seen posts from maybe 4-5 women claiming some level of harassment. Its 4-5 too many, imo, but in a company of 10000+ current and former employees, I'd hardly say it was a typical experience.

    I guess we'll see if any other victims step forward and any other names beside Alex are added to the suit.
  1. Darknessvamp's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Saltysquidoon View Post
    There are three women on blizzard's executive staff all of them have been added since 2019 (i.e since the investigation began), the ex bush advisor was appointed in March this year. I'm not going to go into postulating about race but I hope it is uncontroversial to say of the predominately male executives at blizzard they have been historically and perhaps even present overwhelmingly white.
    You don't just accidentally get predominantly while and male executives unless you are upholding a preexisting unequal power structure.
    So you're privy to how these decisions were made as well as the total breakdown of the identity of everyone who has ever applied to Blizzard and all it's staff positions and why they were or were not hired or appointed to their positions and whether there may have specific involvement from Activision in some of these decisions?

    Well, we'll see what comes of the suit seeing as how unequal restitution is the primary thrust of it. That said it's not shocking that the executive restitution shows the female executives being paid less than the males.
    Is it shocking because you simply view it as they are paid less because they're female or is it shocking you don't know what the contract they accepted regarding their pay and benefits detailed which they accepted and signed when they joined the company?

    The only option aside from an external audit is an internal review that would necessarily be headed up by the people accused of the present failings. What option aside from an independent third party is there?
    Except they literally state in the point the third party would be answering to the newly created job positions for an internal task force (which I'm fairly certain they want to be hiring for from within the 'good' ones in the company instead of filled with outsiders to the company) so it's hardly going to be independent when the Task Force is the one having the final say.
  1. Saltysquidoon's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Darknessvamp View Post
    So you're privy to how these decisions were made as well as the total breakdown of the identity of everyone who has ever applied to Blizzard and all it's staff positions and why they were or were not hired or appointed to their positions and whether there may have specific involvement from Activision in some of these decisions?
    How I any of that a response to what I wrote? I am not the state of California or blizzard I can only trade on publicly available knowledge.
    That knowledge is that the identity of blizzard's publicly announced executives are overwhelmingly male and white and the extremely damning knowledge that all of the sitting female executives have been appointed post-investigation into unfair workplace conditions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Darknessvamp View Post
    Is it shocking because you simply view it as they are paid less because they're female or is it shocking you don't know what the contract they accepted regarding their pay and benefits detailed which they accepted and signed when they joined the company?
    Ah yes, maybe I am the real sexist and not the company being sued for sexist resitution.
    Also "you signed a contract, therefore, it is ok' is not an argument, that's not how the law of contract or corporate/employment regulation works.
    Quote Originally Posted by Darknessvamp View Post
    Except they literally state in the point the third party would be answering to the newly created job positions for an internal task force (which I'm fairly certain they want to be hiring for from within the 'good' ones in the company instead of filled with outsiders to the company) so it's hardly going to be independent when the Task Force is the one having the final say.
    No, the external auditor wouldn't be beholden to the proposed taskforce, it would just have the final say over which auditor is hired. Because again otherwise the executives currently being accused of misconduct would get to choose if there was an audit and who the auditor would be.
    You either massively misread the point or are misrepresenting it to push your narrative about how diversity and inclusion is somehow worse than sexism and harassment.
  1. Darknessvamp's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Saltysquidoon View Post
    How I any of that a response to what I wrote? I am not the state of California or blizzard I can only trade on publicly available knowledge.
    That knowledge is that the identity of blizzard's publicly announced executives are overwhelmingly male and white and the extremely damning knowledge that all of the sitting female executives have been appointed post-investigation into unfair workplace conditions.
    It's a response to you making the insinuation "You don't just accidentally get predominantly while and male executives unless you are upholding a preexisting unequal power structure." that you must have some insider knowledge as to who has applied for or were made available to executive positions at the company, their identity and why they were or were not hired potentially due to some sort of system that only checks for the specific qualifiers and allows for 'white' and 'males' to be in that position and not whether it may be related to other reasons for said hiring decisions that could potentially also involve Activison after it bought the company.

    Ah yes, maybe I am the real sexist and not the company being sued for sexist resitution.
    Also "you signed a contract, therefore, it is ok' is not an argument, that's not how the law of contract or corporate/employment regulation works.
    Where did I call you sexist? I was questioning where the shock was coming from and where did I say "you signed a contract, therefore it's ok'? There likely was some form of negotiations before they reached the final contract, especially for someone joining at the executive level, and since we're not privy to what's written in their agreed contracts we don't know how their pay is handled, if there's some clauses related to pay increases such as so many years spent at the company, whether they get bonuses or benefits or even how long till contract renegotiation is an option.

    No, the external auditor wouldn't be beholden to the proposed taskforce, it would just have the final say over which auditor is hired. Because again otherwise the executives currently being accused of misconduct would get to choose if there was an audit and who the auditor would be.
    You either massively misread the point or are misrepresenting it to push your narrative about how diversity and inclusion is somehow worse than sexism and harassment.
    Go read the point again if you don't believe me, they want the third party to be hired by the Internal Task Force, as in answering to them, with power over ABK, HR and other executives so they identify and provide suggestions that tell them how to 'do better'. They literally haven't made a case for how it deals with the sexism and harassment issues they allegedly have and it is just them making a demand for something unrelated to their current in house issues based largely on assumption.
  1. Soon-TM's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ShadowyFanatic View Post
    How is "we do not automatically believe everything women say because women" and "no, you are not a victim just because you allege you are one" insulting? California is pure AIDS and if Blizz has any sense they'll immediately relocated to somewhere like Texas, just to protect themselves from the rabid feminists and their crusade against gaming. Why do feminists hate gaming and gamers? Because it is something they can't gatekeep or control. Women, and some men, at least in gay relationships, want to monopolize their spouse or significant others time and attention. Gaming demands the same. It should be possible to strike a balance, but I have seen relationship after relationship fail because an entitled woman couldn't accept that her boyfriend/husband wanted to do something without her or her consent.

    Frankly the fact this makes these shrieking harridans so unbelievably angry makes me giddy.

    Oh, and the employees of Blizzard are TRASH. They are not in it to make something fun or awesome, they are 9 to 5ers educated in Silicon Valley chasing money. The quality and direction of the game, as well as a declaration from Grummz himself on Twitter (Mark Kern, you should know who that is) demonstrate this. I read the lawsuit; they mention the female employee who killed herself and then say, "she was travelling with a male supervisor who brought butt plugs and lubricant." Ok. I kind of feel like that is leaving out some context. And details. And relevance.

    Frankly, I'm just annoyed that it looks like 16 year hobby is finally coming to an end. Maybe I'll increase my D&D sessions from once a month to twice.
    Man, I hadn't had such a good laugh for quite some time. It's almost an anthology of mysogynist tropes, copypasted one after the other. Putting Texas as an example of... whatever just told me anything I needed to know, if there was any doubt.
  1. agentsi's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Saltysquidoon View Post
    The argument that single action is in anyway stronger or more effective than collective action is manifestly incorrect.

    Personal responsibility and solutions to systemic issues is an insidious lie peddled by the powerful to maintain that power.
    I'm not saying one person, I'm saying if they can "collectively" get together to walk out at the same time, they could've also done it right then and there.

    Waiting, and delaying, just to "stage" it, devalues their issue their standing for. If it was that big of a deal, they would've dealt with it right then and there, not waited until it got the most sympathy.
  1. uuuhname's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by agentsi View Post
    not waited until it got the most sympathy.
    that seems rather counterproductive if the point is to garner sympathy lol. what is the issue here?
  1. Thelxi's Avatar
    Little did Ms. Townsend know.
  1. Ivank0v's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by xxdprussxx View Post
    If your unhappy with your employer theres nothing stopping them to find a better work place that will treat them properly
    Lol, Fran has a MMo-C account. gg.
  1. Caerrona's Avatar
    Man it's so good too see that people are taking a stand "now" and not 1, 3, 8 years ago.

    Everyone is popping out of the woodwork to say they knew. Hmmmm if sooooooo many knew wtf were they doing?

    2 scenarios here.
    A)Virtual signaling garbage for woke points.
    B)They are just as guilty as anyone else is and just as much guilty for that womans death and the harrassment. (If the allegations come out as true.)

    Spineless cowards either way.
  1. exochaft's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ONCHEhap View Post
    Things will never change as long as americans are afraid of trade unions
    Very common misconception, as most Americans aren't opposed to unionizing in the private sector of your own free will. What many Americans are opposed to are public unions (i.e. government unions) and not having a choice about joining a union when you take a job. The reason those two are a big issue is because unions are just as easily susceptible to corruption and immorality as ActiBlizz currently is.

    In America, it's not uncommon that your unions may not have your best interest at heart, especially when employees are forced to join their union when they accept a job. Tons of cash gets traded hands with politicians when it comes to unions, making up a large portion of union dues. Furthermore, it can be insanely hard to get rid of unionized workers, even if they're accused of doing what some ActiBlizz employees are doing, because the negotiations can go way too far in favor of the employee instead of the employer to where everyone loses. I still remember a 5th grade teacher where I used to live was a known to be complete scum, with his "raise your skirt, raise your grade" policies for the girls and giving the guys the test answers for free. He couldn't be fired because the union had negotiated out firings based upon such harassment, so he had to leave of his own accord... which he never did.

    Public unions can have the same issues of private unions, but they have even less restrictions because it's literally the government bargaining with itself. The reason private unions can work is due to the balance between the employee and the employers when negotiating terms. If the employer gains too much power, people leave and the business fails. If the employee gains too much power, the company can't sustain itself and fails. Private unions have the benefit of all parties to keep things balanced, as anything unreasonable hurts everyone... although there are some masochists out there. Public unions can basically just fleece the taxpayers for all they're worth without much/any pushback, since these unions tend to always operate in massive debt. Even in California, where Blizz HQ is, the public unions are in massive debt because the employees bargained for massive perks than any equivalent private company would go belly-up instantly... and the union leadership makes bank, as well, since there's little accountability.

    So yeah, unions are not a magic bullet that solves everything, that's just magical thinking and/or propaganda. Unions have their place and can be useful, but they are just as likely to become corrupt and ruin the lives of people as any non-union company. This is why, as someone else mentioned and was berated for saying despite it being quite true, the ultimate decision is whether one just leaves their job or not. No one said it would be easy, and being employed at a company is not a guarantee of anything outside of any negotiated contract. If you don't like where you work and it's getting to dangerous levels, no amount of money is worth staying at the job.
  1. chaoticcrono's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Garymorilix View Post
    Man, it's crazy.

    Literally every single big name already said something about how "sorry they are".
    Old leadership has wiped their hands clean.
    Most of the accused does not even work at Blizzard anymore.
    The heaviest criticism against the lawsuit comes from an executive WOMAN.
    The devs are collectively sending letters and refuse to work.

    Who is being oppressed here exactly? I thought according to the legal document the devs are always drunk during the day playing video games and crawling under cubicles.
    Now they are so clean they have time to take time off and protest against themselves or what?

    Or maybe, hear me out, maybe, there ain't a fucking thing going on...
    Read the legal document, it is literally nonsensical in its structure with zero evidence towards anything.
    yep, sadly too many just "listen and believe".

    if this was so bad and the workers agree thats the case why did they wait for a response they didnt like to do a walk out? why not do this ... O i dunno... WHEN THIS WAS SUPPOSEDLY TAKING PLACE?!

    Like I said in another post, this just sounds like more "me too" bs
  1. Ryzeth's Avatar
    Nobody wants to sign your dumbass petition, can you please stop linking it. The only thing worse than your petition, was the thread you made to advertise said petition.

    It's sad at best. Hell your thread even got closed, it was that sad.
  1. Saltysquidoon's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Darknessvamp View Post
    It's a response to you making the insinuation "You don't just accidentally get predominantly while and male executives unless you are upholding a preexisting unequal power structure." that you must have some insider knowledge as to who has applied for or were made available to executive positions at the company, their identity and why they were or were not hired potentially due to some sort of system that only checks for the specific qualifiers and allows for 'white' and 'males' to be in that position and not whether it may be related to other reasons for said hiring decisions that could potentially also involve Activison after it bought the company.
    You seem to be misunderstanding where the onus of proof here is. First of all I in my capacity as a private citizen have no onus and am perfectly free to make statements about trends present in publicly available information. Further, it is not beholden to the state to show every single person was hired equally and received equal restitution. They needs only show that a single person was hired unequally or received unequal restitution.
    My pointing out the hilarious fact that all three sitting female executives were hired after the investigation began only serves to show in my mind there probably is at least one.

    Pseudo Edit:
    Actually, all of this doesn't matter I just read BobbyB's letter essentially capitulating (except making sure he's got the reigns of the auditor) looks like that smoke did portend a fire after all.
  1. Soikona's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by bonch View Post
    There's a little thing stopping you called unemployment.
    You should really read what you quoted. You know, the part that’s says find a better place. Not get unemployed.
  1. natham's Avatar
    Its really funny how everyone pretend they actually give a damn about all this ))))))
  1. Hellobolis's Avatar
    are they calling it a walkout because if they used the word strike they are afraid they would get fired immediately?

    (not that a half day is much of a strike anyways)

Site Navigation