Activision-Blizzard Sued By California

[Endus]

You didn't get sent to HR because the women you pursued were not the types I'm describing. I'm describing those types who are either actually trying to get men in trouble by baiting them or are just confused about what sexual harassment is.

And I'm calling bullshit on it. I don't believe it actually happened the way you're describing.

I gave a scenario that I actually witnessed (HR was never involved). That was someone doing just what I described.

Wait, so despite all the comments about HR, literally all you saw was a guy ask a female co-worker out and she said "nah"? And that's supposed to represent women being devious temptresses trying to entrap men?

Come the fuck on.

[wunksta]

You keep missing what I said.

When that hypothetical woman goes to HR, her complaint was not "he asked me to dinner". She conveniently leaves out that little detail. That's why HR will hear both sides and once they determine that's all that happened, that's when they drop it. Understand now?

Your original hypothetical scenario was that a woman flirted with a man, who asked her on a date leading to him being called into the HR office.

I'm talking about women who flirt with men, heavily come onto them and when they say "would you like to go to dinner?" find themselves sitting in HR.

Now in this hypothetical scenario, you are saying the woman went to HR and told a lie? Am I understanding this correctly?

[Endus]

You did not want to see the point, this is the difference. As usual, you make your own rules. Must be fun to work with you.

I saw your "point". That "point" was that nobody should have opinions you don't like. That's it. That's as deep as your "point" was.

I reject it for being insufferably silly.

[Forogil]

We've only heard the filing from the DEFH and the response from Blizzard. Do you have access to the supporting court documents? I currently don't have any access to the evidence, but if you do, please share it.

The supporting court documents might not be clearer; as it might be word against word.

However, even looking at that Blizzard's response they don't fully deny they had problems in the past - but instead indicate that they have improved.

And we do have additional information suggesting that the accusations of past transgressions are true: Alex mysteriously leaving Blizzard without any explanation, and that Blizzard's old job adverts did very much give the "frat house" vibe.

Note that most the accusations are clearly at least a year in the past - as I believe they have been working from home for quite some time; and there are no mentions of creepy things on zoom (or whatever).

That means that the really murky issue to me is whether Blizzard really were cleaning this up - or it was just a show. I hope the court documents will clarify that - but I'm far from certain.

[MoanaLisa]

The next phase is an actual trial where evidence is presented from both sides.

Most likely Blizzard and the state will come to some sort of agreement and the case will be settled. I personally think the odds that this ever becomes a trial are practically nil.

[Necromantic]

And I'm calling bullshit on it. I don't believe it actually happened the way you're describing.

Ok cool.

Wait, so despite all the comments about HR, literally all you saw was a guy ask a female co-worker out and she said "nah"? And that's supposed to represent women being devious temptresses trying to entrap men?

Come the fuck on.

You misconstrue a lot of what I say. I can't tell if you're doing it on purpose or not.

[Elegiac]

Most likely Blizzard and the state will come to some sort of agreement and the case will be settled. I personally think the odds that this ever becomes a trial are practically nil.

This: the likely outcome is that a fine will be paid and Blizzard will be put under compliance audit for X amount of time, same as when people violate HIPAA or SOX.

[Elegiac]

Why wouldn't they be in compliance with state agencies and work with state agencies to make sure problems are addressed?

Hint: You don't generally have HIPAA or OSHA compliance officers walking around your clinic if there's not a problem, to use a healthcare analogue.

[Necromantic]

Most likely Blizzard and the state will come to some sort of agreement and the case will be settled. I personally think the odds that this ever becomes a trial are practically nil.

It depends on how much Blizzard dangles in front of their faces.

Many companies pay a nice sum to sweep things under the rug.

[MoanaLisa]

Note that most the accusations are clearly at least a year in the past - as I believe they have been working from home for quite some time; and there are no mentions of creepy things on zoom (or whatever).

The very important issues of pay equity, promotions and advancements, etc. are ongoing. Likely well documented too. We can concentrate on the salacious "frat house" aspects but the meat of this legally is going to be their apparent hypocrisy about other things.

[Endus]

You misconstrue a lot of what I say. I can't tell if you're doing it on purpose or not.

You started out claiming this;

I'm talking about women who flirt with men, heavily come onto them and when they say "would you like to go to dinner?" find themselves sitting in HR.

You then shifted to admitting this;

I gave a scenario that I actually witnessed (HR was never involved). That was someone doing just what I described.

Emphases mine.

What I'm doing is assuming you're making a coherent position based on a set of facts, rather than just shifting goalposts willy-nilly as needed. First the issue was guys being sent to HR, then it wasn't ever about HR. That's not staying consistent, and that's on you.

[Elegiac]

Yes, but you still have to assert with HIPAA and OSHA compliance officers that you're following protocol.

And Blizzard's failure to do so in the case of complying with these regulations demonstrates that, at the minimum, there was a toxic workplace culture in the past - so giving them the benefit of the doubt is, again, silly.

While they might not be present in the office, they are engaged in the process

Which is not what was meant by "working with DEFH" in this case.

This is the state saying Blizzard failed to make changes to its toxic culture, not a simple assertion that it has one.

[Specialka]

I saw your "point". That "point" was that nobody should have opinions you don't like. That's it. That's as deep as your "point" was.

I reject it for being insufferably silly.

Haha, pot meets kettle then xD and you do not even realize it. That makes it even more delicious. As soon as someone has an opinion you do not like you disregard it, call him bigot etc...

[Necromantic]

You started out claiming this;


You then shifted to admitting this;


Emphases mine.

What I'm doing is assuming you're making a coherent position based on a set of facts, rather than just shifting goalposts willy-nilly as needed. First the issue was guys being sent to HR, then it wasn't ever about HR. That's not staying consistent, and that's on you.

I gave multiple scenarios for different points. I think that's where you got confused.

[MoanaLisa]

It depends on how much Blizzard dangles in front of their faces.

Many companies pay a nice sum to sweep things under the rug.

"Sweeping under the rug" implies keeping things a secret. It's too late for that. If the case is settled then there will clearly be a fine and requirements made for Blizzard to fix their office culture, promotions and pay equity (at least). This is not going to be swept under any rug. That option disappeared yesterday.

[Necromantic]

"Sweeping under the rug" implies keeping things a secret. It's too late for that. If the case is settled then there will clearly be a fine and requirements made for Blizzard to fix their office culture. This is not going to be swept under any rug. That option disappeared yesterday.

If they settle outside of court, they do not have to admit to specifics. This is not uncommon. Settlements usually always come with signed agreements. The victims who are compensated cannot talk about it, they usually agree that the source "did no wrong", etc. I've seen this many times in similar cases and with cases of brutality.

[Evilfish]

If they settle outside of court, they do not have to admit to specifics. This is not uncommon. Settlements usually always come with signed agreements. The victims who are compensated cannot talk about it, they usually agree that the source "did no wrong", etc. I've seen this many times in similar cases and with cases of brutality.

That probably won't happen here. I have some experience in the logistical part of these happenings and to be honest, especially in a state like CA, they'll try to go for the full mile because quite frankly there is no downside. You get the money AND the attention which will bring on more money.

[Elegiac]

Which Blizzard denies. We don't know what lead to the DFEH complaint.

Enough that they felt it needed two years worth of compliance investigation, so.

Remind me why we need to give a massive for-profit corporation that has a long history of problematic publicity when it comes to social issues the benefit of the doubt, again?

[Necromantic]

That probably won't happen here. I have some experience in the logistical part of these happenings and to be honest, especially in a state like CA, they'll try to go for the full mile because quite frankly there is no downside. You get the money AND the attention which will bring on more money.

That very well may happen too. I was only referring to if they settle and how most settlements end up.

It would be very interesting if this went to trial.

- - - Updated - - -

Remind me why we need to give a massive for-profit corporation that has a long history of problematic publicity when it comes to social issues the benefit of the doubt, again?

Due process. I can quote the post of his where he said that.

[Elegiac]

Due process.

They've been given due process and found wanting.

That's how compliance violations work, bruh. Getting taken to court is strike three, not strike one.