Activision Blizzard Shareholder SOC Letter, Diablo II: Resurrected Early Access

[procne]

I'd like you to point out where I actually did. It is amusing how you say not to put words in your mouth when that is literally what you are doing here.

https://www.pcgamer.com/more-shockin...ve-her-killed/
She:

"I have been tokenized, marginalized, and discriminated against,"

you:

She wasn't "token"

It is insulting to directly contradict someone, especially when that person has more info. It implies that person is lying or at least is unable to properly assess the situation


Now your turn, how did I insult her today?

[rhorle]

It is insulting to directly contradict someone, especially when that person has more info. It implies that person is lying or at least is unable to properly assess the situation

So being offered a contract, the same as the other co-leader, for equal pay is being a token employee? We've seen information that clearly indicates her remarks were a PR spin on things. She knew a contract was being worked out and talks about being told of new offers in the works. It was a negotitation that she clearly didn't like. Of course she is going to spin it her way.

But at no point is did I say:

is an attention-seeking, entitled, self-cetenred bimbo

You insulted her by having such silly comments about her ready to go when none of it was actually said or remotely implied. That is what you read into comments talking in a civil manner about her and her situation.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

She wasn't "token". That isn't what happens when diversity and equity is asked for. She also wasn't paid less for her role as co-leader. Both were paid at their existing contract rates until new contracts, for the new position, were offered. When they were offered they were equal pay as both asked for. The only bad thing that happened was how slow Activision Blizzard was to offer the new contracts.

Normally when you get a new job/title/promotion you get the pay raise and benefits when you start your first day. I can't think of a single other instance of this sort of thing happening. Wacky coincidence I guess! There is no way Blizzard would do anything wrong! So so so so so so so so so so wacky that they didn't care to fix all this until after all these issues with her became public, and she quit.

Sexism in pay TOTALLY wouldn't go along with this massive pattern of sexism, grossness, rapiness, etc... yeah dude you;re right. "She wasn't paid less ..." right.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

So being offered a contract, the same as the other co-leader, for equal pay is being a token employee? We've seen information that clearly indicates her remarks were a PR spin on things. She knew a contract was being worked out and talks about being told of new offers in the works. It was a negotitation that she clearly didn't like. Of course she is going to spin it her way..

So you think she's just lying and she always knew she was going to get equal pay and chose to quit any way for some nonsensical reason?

[rhorle]

There is no way Blizzard would do anything wrong! So so so so so so so so so so wacky that they didn't care to fix all this until after all these issues with her became public, and she quit.

Her own statement indicates that she rejected offers. Negotiations take time and both co-leaders obviously agreed to take the positions with out a new contract being in place first. Both also stated they wanted equal pay.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Her own statement indicates that she rejected offers. Negotiations take time and both co-leaders obviously agreed to take the positions with out a new contract being in place first. Both also stated they wanted equal pay.

"Obviously" ... its weird, that isn't the narrative that I'm reading. But you're probably right. Blizzard wouldn't do anything offensive to women, would they.

She also said she rejected offers ... of NOT equal pay. Good try though. Being offered equal pay only after you tender resignation doesn't count.

No, negotiations do not take time. Its equal pay. Equal. ABK refused this.

“When Mike and I were placed in the same co-lead role, we went into the role with our previous compensation, which was not equivalent. It remained that way for some time well after we made multiple rejected requests to change it to parity,” she wrote. It remains unclear as to why Activision Blizzard rejected those requests.

She continued, “While the company informed me before I tendered my resignation that they were working on a new proposal, we were made equivalent offers only after I tendered that resignation.” (Emphasis Oneal’s)

https://www.ign.com/articles/blizzar...er-resignation

[rhorle]

"Obviously" ... its weird, that isn't the narrative that I'm reading. But you're probably right. Blizzard wouldn't do anything offensive to women, would they.

So the only way to be non-offensive towards women is to offer them the exact same contract? Obviously isn't the narrative you are reading? So she didn't choose to take the new position? Are you implying she is a slave now? Lol. Negotiations most certainly do take time. Equal pay is just one part of a contract. She they have accepted that part right away? Sure. That still doesn't make it offensive or her "token" simply because they were making offers she didn't like.

Maybe the parity being asked wasn't through a flat equal salary but the extras in a contract. Also remember her studio was dissolved and made part of Blizzard. She might not have had a job to go back to if a contract couldn't be agreed upon. She might have been poached or got a better offer from a different company. There could be a lot of details involved that were not conveyed.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

So the only way to be non-offensive towards women is to offer them the exact same contract? Obviously isn't the narrative you are reading? So she didn't choose to take the new position? Are you implying she is a slave now? Lol. Negotiations most certainly do take time. Equal pay is just one part of a contract. She they have accepted that part right away? Sure. That still doesn't make it offensive or her "token" simply because they were making offers she didn't like.

Maybe the parity being asked wasn't through a flat equal salary but the extras in a contract. There could be a lot of details involved that were not conveyed.

So, lets see, so far you have lied about what happened here. And Blizzard has a long long long history of abusing women. I'm going to go ahead and apply Occams razor here.

I know you will say your preciousssssssss Blizzard never does anything wrong, but QUACK QUACK QUACKK.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

So the only way to be non-offensive towards women is to offer them the exact same contract? Obviously isn't the narrative you are reading? So she didn't choose to take the new position? Are you implying she is a slave now? Lol. Negotiations most certainly do take time. Equal pay is just one part of a contract. She they have accepted that part right away? Sure. That still doesn't make it offensive or her "token" simply because they were making offers she didn't like.

Maybe the parity being asked wasn't through a flat equal salary but the extras in a contract. Also remember her studio was dissolved and made part of Blizzard. She might not have had a job to go back to if a contract couldn't be agreed upon. She might have been poached or got a better offer from a different company. There could be a lot of details involved that were not conveyed.

Why don’t you just say she’s lying an blizzard gave her every thing she wanted but she quit any way just to make them look bad.

It’s obviously what you want every one to believe given that your just dismissing her own words about being tokenized and about how they rejected equal pay until after she said she was quitting.

[rhorle]

So, lets see, so far you have lied about what happened here. And Blizzard has a long long long history of abusing women. I'm going to go ahead and apply Occams razor here. I know you will say your preciousssssssss Blizzard never does anything wrong, but QUACK QUACK QUACKK.

I haven't lied about anything. I have never said that Blizzard can't do any wrong. I'm just not looking to hate for the sake of hating which seems to be all you can do since you keep interjecting BS into your responses to demean, insult, and dismiss anything I say.

No one forced her to take the promotion. No one forced her to do so with out a contract in place first. I've already said that Blizzard was shitty for taking so long to offer equal pay contract. She didn't like the offers so she left.

That still doesn't mean she was a token. It just means ABK screwed up with the offers and lost an employee. It happens all the time in the corporate world. She went somewhere else. It happened to be one of the many resources ABK employees stated they wanted to be worked with more, Women In Games International. A company that will presumably treat her better. A co-leader of Blizzard won't be able to change much when the issues are outside of Blizzard as well.

- - - Updated - - -

Why don’t you just say she’s lying an blizzard gave her every thing she wanted but she quit any way just to make them look bad. It’s obviously what you want every one to believe given that your just dismissing her own words about being tokenized and about how they rejected equal pay until after she said she was quitting.

Because that is not what I have said, or what I want to say? You want me to say she is lying by stating a lie my self. Lmao. I am not dismissing her own feelings. Of course she should be pissed that she didn't get a contract. That still doesn't mean that ABK promoted her to co-leader just to use her as a token. We also don't know when she knew the new offer would have equal pay or if it was just formally offered to her after she choose to leave. Are you going to say she made a split decision to just up and quit? Or could it be she was "poached" by WIGI and it would be an overall better position since the issues at ABK are greater then just Blizzard.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Because that is not what I have said, or what I want to say? You want me to say she is lying by stating a lie my self. Lmao. I am not dismissing her own feelings. Of course she should be pissed that she didn't get a contract. That still doesn't mean that ABK promoted her to co-leader just to use her as a token. We also don't know when she knew the new offer would have equal pay or if it was just formally offered to her after she choose to leave. Are you going to say she made a split decision to just up and quit? Or could it be she was "poached" by WIGI and it would be an overall better position since the issues at ABK are greater then just Blizzard.

Saying she is lying is exactly what you are doing when you say she was just using “pr spin” or that she was rejecting offers when said offers didn’t include equal pay and you are most definitely dismissing her feelings with every post you’ve made.

She wasn’t just offered a contract she didn’t like she asked for equal pay and instead of giving her that they made multiple attempts to pay her less which she rejected the only time they actually gave in was when she made it clear she wasn’t going to be there token woman and told them she was quitting which lead to them to them then finally trying to hold onto her. And we know when she was given the offer of equal pay and we know it’s after she gave in her resignation unless you want to say that was just more “pr spin”

[Triceron]

No one forced her to take the promotion. No one forced her to do so with out a contract in place first. I've already said that Blizzard was shitty for taking so long to offer equal pay contract. She didn't like the offers so she left.

And she could be considered a token all the same. Not sure why you would argue against it since it could be a case of her getting a raw deal once she took the job, and so she decided to leave altogether after realizing it. It's just as possible that she got Lando Calrossian'd.

[rhorle]

And we know when she was given the offer of equal pay and we know it’s after she gave in her resignation unless you want to say that was just more “pr spin”

Of course it is PR spin. That is what most statements of these types are. Notice how you keep ignoring the part where she knew that a new offer was being worked on. Did she have knowledge of anything from that offer? Did she already decide she wanted to leave a company that was terrible at all levels? Was she mistreated in other ways? We don't have the full picture.

- - - Updated - - -

And she could be considered a token all the same. Not sure why you would argue against it since it could be a case of her getting a raw deal once she took the job, and so she decided to leave altogether after realizing it. It's just as possible that she got Lando Calrossian'd.

All of the possible things are not "She was a token promotion". Why only accept that she was a token and not that the way everything went down made it feel that way to her when she was genuinely picked to be a co-leader? There are a lot of different possibilities from the non-detailed stuff that has been released from the involved parties.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Of course it is PR spin. That is what most statements of these types are. Notice how you keep ignoring the part where she knew that a new offer was being worked on. Did she have knowledge of anything from that offer? Did she already decide she wanted to leave a company that was terrible at all levels? Was she mistreated in other ways? We don't have the full picture.

- - - Updated - - -



All of the possible things are not "She was a token promotion". Why only accept that she was a token and not that the way everything went down made it feel that way to her when she was genuinely picked to be a co-leader? There are a lot of different possibilities from the non-detailed stuff that has been released from the involved parties.

I'm not ignoring it your just trying to twist it into something it doesn't mean as they flatly said they they proposed equal pay multiple times and it was rejected multiple times, a new contract without that is meaningless and the the point they gave in was after she said she was leaving.

we know she wasn't offered equal pay before deciding to leave, we know she was willing to stay until they kept denying her equal pay even though the other co leader wanted it as well, we know they were trying to skirt the issue by saying the contract was being worked on, we have a perfectly clear picture which your trying to muddy with by implying again and again that she's lying about what happened and that her views on her own experience are wrong.

[rhorle]

a new contract without that is meaningless and the the point they gave in was after she said she was leaving.

Except that isn't what is said. It was said that a new offer was being worked on but it wasn't presented to her before she gave her resignation. One interpretation is just an issue of timing and a person that already made their mind up. Another is that they deliberately used equal pay as a reason to stop her from resigning. Both are possible yet only one keeps getting ignored in order for you to keep pushing the other.

We don't know she was willing to stay. We know she took a promotion. We don't know how long she has been thinking about leaving Activision and the studio she was the head of was recently merged into Blizzard and "dissolved". We know she isn't leaving right away so she is still willing to work with the company and honor her contracts, or whatever, until she isn't needed.

There is no clear picture of events. Just some clear glimpses. I have never said, or implied, that her views on her own experience are wrong. I've told you that before but you keep trying to interject your own BS just to demean. Stop it.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Except that isn't what is said. It was said that a new offer was being worked on but it wasn't presented to her before she gave her resignation. One interpretation is just an issue of timing and a person that already made their mind up. Another is that they deliberately used equal pay as a reason to stop her from resigning. Both are possible yet only one keeps getting ignored in order for you to keep pushing the other.

because when we have quotes from her saying

When Mike and I were placed in the same co-lead role, we went into the role with our previous compensation, which was not equivalent. It remained that way for some time well after we made multiple rejected requests to change it to parity

the former interpretation goes out the window no matter how many times you want to peddle the bs that she wasn't paid less or that they were "negotiating" or any other nonsense.

I have never said, or implied, that her views on her own experience are wrong.

you know other then when you did exactly that by minimizing her experience as "PR spin".

So being offered a contract, the same as the other co-leader, for equal pay is being a token employee? We've seen information that clearly indicates her remarks were a PR spin on things.

[Paperfox]

"Obviously" ... its weird, that isn't the narrative that I'm reading. But you're probably right. Blizzard wouldn't do anything offensive to women, would they.

She also said she rejected offers ... of NOT equal pay. Good try though. Being offered equal pay only after you tender resignation doesn't count.

No, negotiations do not take time. Its equal pay. Equal. ABK refused this.



https://www.ign.com/articles/blizzar...er-resignation

This is all on Blizz. Two to three months. I just have to look at the launcher to find out when my time expires, and it tells me to the minute.

[rhorle]

because when we have quotes from her saying the former interpretation goes out the window no matter how many times you want to peddle the bs that she wasn't paid less or that they were "negotiating" or any other nonsense.

"While the company informed me before I tendered my resignation that they were working on a new proposal, we were made equivalent offers only after I tendered that resignation"

Her statement doesn't indicate that ABK only gave in after resignation. Only that the proposal became an offer after she gave her resignation. Of course she was paid less. Her previous contract dictated her pay. She had no new contract to pay her more and make her equal to the other co-leader in salary. That is the entire reason why she resigned. A new contract could not be agreed upon.

It only goes out the window when you cherry pick which statements to keep and which to ignore. I didn't minimize her experience as PR spin. I said her statements were a PR spin on somethings. That made no comment on her feelings.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

"While the company informed me before I tendered my resignation that they were working on a new proposal, we were made equivalent offers only after I tendered that resignation"

Her statement doesn't indicate that ABK only gave in after resignation. Only that the proposal became an offer after she gave her resignation. Of course she was paid less. Her previous contract dictated her pay. She had no new contract to pay her more and make her equal to the other co-leader in salary. That is the entire reason why she resigned. A new contract could not be agreed upon.

It only goes out the window when you cherry pick which statements to keep and which to ignore. I didn't minimize her experience as PR spin. I said her statements were a PR spin on somethings. That made no comment on her feelings.

Proposal and offer are literally synonyms…..

Her statement literally reads that they only gave in after her resignation. The company could have paid them the same off the bat the company could have not rejected there multiple proposals to pay them equally the company choose not to do that and instead chose to string her along with offers of lower pay until she resigned.

And when some one says “ I have been tokenized, marginalized, and discriminated against” and you say that it’s not true that they weren’t tokenized and that it’s just “PR spin” thats minimizing there experience.

[MoanaLisa]

I'm not ignoring it your just trying to twist it into something it doesn't mean as they flatly said they they proposed equal pay multiple times and it was rejected multiple times, a new contract without that is meaningless and the the point they gave in was after she said she was leaving.

The sequence of events matters. It's beyond belief that Blizzard didn't change both of their contracts when they were promoted to co-lead the division. All it would take was a phone call from Kotick to set their salaries to be equal. There didn't need to be a "worked on" component to the contracts. The latter offer for equal pay after she had announced she was leaving was something of an insult in itself. I get it that things are likely a mess both in Irvine (Blizzard HQ) and Santa Monica (Activision HQ) but given the circumstances of what was happening and why, it's just not credible that Jen Oneal wasn't taken care of. I loathe the phrase 'slap in the face' but in this case there's tons of evidence to show that this is exactly what it was for Jen.