Activision-Blizzard Sued By California

[uuuhname]

My only point is that they're not always the victims. Some pretend to be.

why you people feel this is necessary to making your point is beyond me.

[Necromantic]

Yes, you are, or else you wouldn't even be mentioning it.

Stop victim blaming. It's seriously despicable.

Me: No I'm not

You: Yes you are

???

There really isn't much more to say. I can see what you're doing and I'm not biting. I hope you have a nice day.

[Specialka]

Why shouldn't we give them the benefit of the doubt? That's why it's a court case and not a summary judgement. Both sides should get equal time to explain what happened and we should judge the *results* of what come out of court. Not rush to judgement on what was filed.

It's why due process is so important.

Dude, you are on mmo-C with armchair lawyer all around you, what do you expect ? They are all guilty because those said so.

[Narwhalosh Whalescream]

Chris Metzen.

[Orby]

imagine defending a multi billion dollar company that doesn't care about you...

Chris Metzen.

nothing been said about Metzen yet... hopefully it wont come to that... this whole mess is soul crushing enough.

[Elegiac]

A biased system that we know of.

Yes, we know it's biased. That's why whinging about people perjuring themselves is ridiculous since there is actually not a lot of profit to be made in fake harassment or rape claims.

Do you know who does want you to believe that it's profitable therefore anyone who brings suit against a company is suspect? Hint: It's the same folks who want you to think that suing you for keeping your coffee hot enough to cause third degree burns is "frivolous".

Y'all are part of the problem. And yeah:

imagine defending a multi billion dollar company that doesn't care about you...

They're forking out millions to a legion of HR drones and lawyers to do this for them and you do it for free. Some perspective.

[Necromantic]

We've heard both sides, dude. Not my fault you haven't been paying attention for the past 10+ years of ActiBlizzion's conduct.

Hearing both sides in media is not the same as hearing both sides in court. Let the actual lawyers pick apart what happened.

[Specialka]

Because doing so creates wiggle room that allows for additional victimization to occur and which can have a chilling effect on others coming forward.

For starters.



And now you're conflating the court proceedings with public opinion.

If a court's not able to prove someone's murdered their spouse beyond a reasonable doubt, but they probably definitely did murder them, it's completely reasonable for everyone to assume they got away with murder and to treat them accordingly.

Hopefully, you are not in charge of anything. Who are you to say that a person murders for sure another person while being not found guilty of it by a court ? You do realize how dangerous that reasoning is ?

[wunksta]

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. .

I doubt you have ever personally been in this situation nor have first hand knowledge of a situation like this. It sounds like internet hearsay.

[MoanaLisa]

it does, in fact he's the only one named directly, you'd know if again, any of you people took some time to read the suite.

Well, not quite. Brack is mentioned in that he knew about the incidents with Afrasiabi and only gave him a slap of the wrist for all of it. I expect there will be a lot surfacing over the next few weeks or months. There are many, many people that are going to come forward and I rather expect that quite a few of the old-timers and founders in management are going to have to deal with the "We knew, but stayed silent" thing. Silence is complicity. Simply setting up diversity panels and the like isn't enough. There needs to be follow-through and then consequences. We don't know much about the follow-through part of this although there are many reports that many stayed silent as it would hurt their future prospects to raise the issue. We also can read that the HR department was at best reluctant to go after management figures.

There's no secret whatsoever that male and female employees were treated differently in day-to-day office settings. It's an ugly thing.

I too hope that Metzen doesn't get called out and I don't expect that he in any way acted as Afrasiabi has been described. But again, did he know? Did he just shake his head and stayed quiet when he did know of office incidents. Was he tolerant of the office culture? We'll have to see. All of that is going to be examined for all of these guys from Morhaime on down. It's frankly unbelievable that Morhaime didn't know what his office culture was like. For whatever reason, he tolerated it for a decade at least. Those are the kinds of questions that need to be answered.

[Elegiac]

We've only heard the filing from the DEFH and the response from Blizzard unless you have access to the supporting court documents.

If you're not willing to actually look at Blizzard's history prior to this specific suit then I don't know what to tell you.

[Necromantic]

Yes, we know it's biased. That's why whinging about people perjuring themselves is ridiculous since there is actually not a lot of profit to be made in fake harassment or rape claims.

Do you know who does want you to believe that it's profitable therefore anyone who brings suit against a company is suspect? Hint: It's the same folks who want you to think that suing you for keeping your coffee hot enough to cause third degree burns is "frivolous".

Who is "we?" Got a mouse in your pocket?

And "profit" doesn't always come directly. It sometimes comes after. Once someone is found guilty in that sense, lawyers have turned around and collected damages... mental anguish for some.

Y'all are part of the problem. And yeah:

I'm sorry you feel that way, I really am.

I doubt you have ever personally been in this situation nor have first hand knowledge of a situation like this. It sounds like internet hearsay.

Cool

[wunksta]

Cool

Then stop peddling these examples as though it's how HR handless sexual harassment incidents.

[Elegiac]

And "profit" doesn't always come directly. It sometimes comes after. Once someone is found guilty in that sense, lawyers have turned around and collected damages... mental anguish for some.

"Well see they benefit in this really nebulous way I can't define ergo it actually is profitable" is a dumb argument.

Again: the notion that fake harassment claims are a gravy train is something pushed by those wanting to avoid actual harassment claims being taken seriously. Good on you for helping maintain the culture. *slow clap*

[Endus]

I never said to sexually harass someone. That's a stretch.

That's literally what you were defending. Guys making repeated unsolicited romantic overtures to a woman is, definitively, sexual harassment.

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.

Pretty sure the company's gonna have some pretty clear "no fraternization" policies that their actions clearly violate, then. So yeah; not the lady's fault, there. In any way whatsoever.

If they don't have such a policy, then it wouldn't have ever gone to HR. Unless it went beyond that. Which is sorta the point I'm making.

Hopefully, you are not in charge of anything. Who are you to say that a person murders for sure another person while being not found guilty of it by a court ? You do realize how dangerous that reasoning is ?

It's called "having a mind of my own". Kudos for being outraged that I think for myself rather than blindly agreeing with whatever a court decrees.

[Necromantic]

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.

While the filing is meant to be filed truthfully, there's still the entire rest of the case that should happen before we rush to judgement. There's plenty of time to condemn Blizzard later if the allegations are true.

There are people who don't understand due process. A bunch of people making a claim doesn't necessarily make it so. The ones filing the complaint may very well be telling the truth! It's up to the justice system to decide.

[Edge-]

Maybe they are afraid to speak up because of the cultural environment. Both sexes are capable of harassment, believe it or not.

I never believed otherwise, but why your response to women at a company being harassed to the point where at least one took her own life with, "Yeah, but I bet men are being harassed too." despite a multi-year investigation not turning up evidence speaks volumes.

[Elegiac]

The ones filing the complaint

So, the State of California?

It's very clear y'all are trying to spin this into another #metoo case when the really is this proceeding is the result of two years of investigation by state level agencies.

This isn't an HR dispute. It's the equivalent of a drug bust; that's why "benefit of the doubt" is silly unless y'all are insinuating the state is just making shit up for reasons.

[Specialka]

That's literally what you were defending. Guys making repeated unsolicited romantic overtures to a woman is, definitively, sexual harassment.



Pretty sure the company's gonna have some pretty clear "no fraternization" policies that their actions clearly violate, then. So yeah; not the lady's fault, there. In any way whatsoever.

If they don't have such a policy, then it wouldn't have ever gone to HR. Unless it went beyond that. Which is sorta the point I'm making.



It's called "having a mind of my own". Kudos for being outraged that I think for myself rather than blindly agreeing with whatever a court decrees.

So a guy could be sued for something, found not guilty (and he is actually not guilty) but you would still find him guilty because it suits you ? Nice "having a mind of my own".

[Forogil]

Due process and presumption of innocence are things the courts are required to operate under.

They have no relevance whatsoever to public discussion or opinion.

In many jurisdictions something similar have relevance - as the public "discussion" might be seen as defamation of the alleged perpetrator if the statements are untrue. (In some jurisdictions it can be seen as defamation regardless of the facts.)

However, I doubt that anyone care enough about this forum to make a point about it - but the risk of defamation mean that many others operate under some form of presumption of innocence.

Note that kotaku writes "... alleges has led to years of harassment and abuse targeting the women in its workforce" - giving it a guise of presumption of innocence, and most news organizations don't name Alex Afrasiabi (ars technica states that Brack gave him a slap on the wrist without naming him; although polygon names him).