Page 39 of 49 FirstFirst ...
29
37
38
39
40
41
... LastLast
  1. #761
    Quote Originally Posted by Eapoe View Post
    That somehow changes the point?
    Well duh? The Michael Jackson accusations were known by everyone. The Bill Cosby accusations were mere rumors heard only by few.

  2. #762
    Quote Originally Posted by Eapoe View Post
    As stated to other people, it’s quite possible that it was an off the cuff joke that took on a life of its own. I’ve never stated that Blizzard employees ever assaulted anyone. I’ve only stated that it’s quite possible it has nothing to do with ugly walls or carpet, especially when the walls in the photos are white.

    - - - Updated - - -



    There possibly was. We don’t know. There very well could have been people going “that’s just wrong.” Just not in a manner that made them give pause or any deep thought to it.
    It’s also very easy to get caught up in a joke without ever realizing that it’s gone too far. Just look at how many celebrities we have today apologizing for jokes they’ve made in the past.

    - - - Updated - - -



    That somehow changes the point?
    And you re right on that also. The thing is that how moral is it to judge said celebrities jokes for example with the values of today when these jokes were made under different moral values that at the time were morally and socially accepted?

  3. #763
    Quote Originally Posted by Saltysquidoon View Post
    Yes, it is by default a work event. Any interaction between two employees in or out of the office is as a starting position a work event, it is up to the employer to show the interaction was so entirely removed from the course of employment it should not be considered so.
    I don't know if there's any legal basis for you to say that, but as far as I'm concerned a party between employees isn't a "work party" unless it was organized by/at and for work. Employees are humans and they're free to do whatever they want when they're not at work. You might be right for the purposes of the lawsuit, it just doesn't make much sense to me personally.

    Now sure, during a Blizzcon they are effectively on a work trip, almost certainly with hotel rooms paid by the company, so there's definitely a bit of grey area there, but I don't think that makes the company responsible for every little thing they might do. Let's say a husband and wife work on the same company and go on work trip. They stay in the same hotel. Is it wrong for them to behave like a couple inside their hotel room because they are "at work"?

    I'm all for responsibilizing companies and protecting employees when it makes sense, but this seems like a stretch to me personally, it would be like saying if an employee runs over someone with the company car the company is somehow guilty. When they are at the blizzcon arena, they are at work, representing their company. When they go to their hotel rooms at night not so much.

    Quote Originally Posted by Saltysquidoon View Post
    It's very likely a stretch to think a shadowy cabal where using blizzard as a cover to intentionally in concert abuse women and all attendees of said events either approved of this or intentionally fail to act.
    Is it likely this is just emblematic of a problematic culture at blizzard that allowed predators like afrasiabi to flourish and opened the door for unequal treatment of women and minorities, probably.
    I suppose I'm looking at it more from a human perspective, rather than what it might mean for the company and the lawsuit. I'm not at all against the lawsuit or against investigating it further, just about the people who are immediately judging everyone remotely involved based on very little information.

    Does it look bad? Hell yeah. Is it inappropriate? I would personally say so. Does it prove that anyone was harassed or abused at that party, or that everyone who attended is a shitty person? I don't think so.
    Last edited by Kolvarg; 2021-07-30 at 03:17 PM.

  4. #764
    Quote Originally Posted by PixelFox View Post
    If your police department consists of nothing but white officers who are regularly killing black people, it's generally considered a reasonable move to replace the chief with someone who is black in order to boost confidence that reform measures are more than simply lip-service. In Blizzard's case, so far all the management people have been making excuses for themselves or suggesting it didn't happen or was just a joke, etc. and I don't feel it's going to be possible for them to survive this until they have someone in charge who can't be accused of being just another sexist male.
    Wouldn't it be even better to get a male who changes things around, so people see that there are "normal" males too?
    Or even better, wouldn't it be best to have a _person_ to changes things around? Not a sex!

  5. #765
    Quote Originally Posted by zorkuus View Post
    Well duh? The Michael Jackson accusations were known by everyone. The Bill Cosby accusations were mere rumors heard only by few.
    And you’re saying that people in Blizzard had absolutely no way of knowing? Cosby had public accusations in 2004 and 2006. Just because it wasn’t mainstream media at the time doesn’t mean it had no coverage at all. Hell, I’m pretty sure I heard about it back then. There were rumors and dark humor jokes back as far as the 90’s being told about him. It was just never mainstream until 2014 because nothing ever stuck and no one could believe Cosby could be guilty of such a thing.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Delever View Post
    And you re right on that also. The thing is that how moral is it to judge said celebrities jokes for example with the values of today when these jokes were made under different moral values that at the time were morally and socially accepted?
    That would happen to be the million dollar question.

  6. #766
    Quote Originally Posted by Eapoe View Post
    And you’re saying that people in Blizzard had absolutely no way of knowing?
    We have no way of knowing what they knew. It's kinda pointless to dwell on that point.

  7. #767
    Quote Originally Posted by Saltysquidoon View Post
    Street is copping shit because he released a public statement with the usual platitudes and vague tut tuting a day before the whole cosby suit thing dropped which implicated he was present and knew about more of the culture (not necessarily any harassment) than he let on.
    Basically, he's got a bit of a case of foot in mouth, unless something significantly worse comes out he'll be fine he just looks like a tool.
    What are you on about, you are litterly part of the cancelmob based on barely nothing.

  8. #768
    Over 9000! Soon-TM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Netherstorm
    Posts
    9,411
    Quote Originally Posted by Saltysquidoon View Post
    How about instead of defending a ridiculously fraught workplace party hosted by a sex pest wherein they 'allegedly' did some sex pesting, we do some critical analysis of why we feel the need to defend said party.
    Don't waste your breath, you are talking to the same guy who says that women cannot be trusted because when they say "no", they actually mean the opposite /facepalm

    EDIT: https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post53311059
    Quote Originally Posted by THEORACLE64 View Post
    It's not really retconning though. There's plenty we didn't know from WC3 - a story which is just about 20 years old. The Jailer is the backbone of that story.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerovar View Post
    It's interesting how a character that didn't exist back then could be the backbone of the story. Guess that story must have been an invertebrate then.

  9. #769
    Quote Originally Posted by Eapoe View Post
    Cosby had public accusations in 2004 and 2006. Just because it wasn’t mainstream media at the time doesn’t mean it had no coverage at all. Hell, I’m pretty sure I heard about it back then. There were rumors and dark humor jokes back as far as the 90’s being told about him. It was just never mainstream until 2014 because nothing ever stuck and no one could believe Cosby could be guilty of such a thing.
    I think even if they did know about the accusations, Cosby's reputation and public image still was incredibly different.

    Here's some info from Google Trends: 2013 2014
    Rape allegations related to bill cosby searches don't show up at all in 2013, either in top 25 or in trending. The top #6 related topic to Bill Cosby in 2013 was "Sweater". Other popular related topics include "meme" and "internet meme". It's in September 2014 that the association starts, and in October that it really becomes predominant.

    If it was common knowledge by 2013, then Hannibal Buress' stand-up routine (that went viral and seems to trully have brought it to the public) wouldn't make much sense, considering it was centered about Cosby's public perception still being positive despite the allegations. "When the audience responded to Buress's accusation with incredulity (Philadelphia being Cosby's home town), he encouraged everyone to search for 'Bill Cosby rape' on Google when they got home".

    Moreover, some of Cosby's victims who came forward after it went viral in late 2014 said themselves that they didn't know about the accusations previously.

    48 allegations were made against him on 2014 and onwards, vs 13 on or before 2013.

    Even if the allegations were "common knowledge", Bill Cosby's public image was still that of an old TV icon, not of a serial rapist, by 2013. Which makes the context completely different than people are judging it for. Certainly not anywhere near what it is today.

    On top of that, the joke was shared multiple times publicly - you can see in the tweets that people dug out that no one even raised an eyebrow at them back then - which again suggests it did not have a negative connotation at all back then.


    Is it still possible that they knew of the allegations and were making a "secret" rape joke? I suppose. But it's extremely unlikely imo.

  10. #770
    Quote Originally Posted by Scathan View Post
    Hello, restaurant industry worker here. White dudes get made fun of all the time for being white.

    Power and privilege is relative and not confined to any race or sex, no matter what you want to believe
    Anecdotal evidence is just that, anecdotal. There's a reason why derogatory names for white people get laughed off as inconsequential whilst those for other races most certainly do not. Power, privilege and the weight of sheer history radically scale the impact of these things, no matter what you want to believe.

  11. #771
    Quote Originally Posted by Ezzet View Post
    What are you on about, you are litterly part of the cancelmob based on barely nothing.
    In the post you quoted I said he'll be fine, what are you on about I was just pointing out why he's copping flak.

    But seeing how you're accusing me of being in a cancel mob maybe you were just "confused". Are we to expect some more mask slippage in a future post?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by ellieg View Post
    This is not true at all. 2 coworkers are allowed to do stuff outside of work together and it is no where near considered a work event. I hang out with my boss all the time. Theres 2 coworkers that are married. Theres 2 that are best friends. We have a group of scientists and auditors that hang out at happy hour once a month. None of these are work events.
    If one of you sexually harasses the other I'm sure your employer will be glad to hear it. Besides you clearly didn't read what I wrote. I said the starting position not that the position is un-rebuttable.
    Otherwise, handsy Pete could get grabby with Suzanne at 5:01 pm one meter outside the office and it wouldn't be a workplace incident.
    Tonight for me is a special day. I want to go outside of the house of the girl I like with a gasoline barrel and write her name on the road and set it on fire and tell her to get out too see it (is this illegal)?

  12. #772
    Dreadlord Femininity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Woman in a Man's World
    Posts
    961
    Quote Originally Posted by Hauzhi View Post
    Zero tolerance for what? Sex jokes?
    In a mixed workplace.
    Remember: Words are not violence.
    Hyperion - Primal NA - Lone Hero

  13. #773
    Quote Originally Posted by Kolvarg View Post
    I don't know if there's any legal basis for you to say that, but as far as I'm concerned a party between employees isn't a "work party" unless it was organized by/at and for work. Employees are humans and they're free to do whatever they want when they're not at work. You might be right for the purposes of the lawsuit, it just doesn't make much sense to me personally.

    Now sure, during a Blizzcon they are effectively on a work trip, almost certainly with hotel rooms paid by the company, so there's definitely a bit of grey area there, but I don't think that makes the company responsible for every little thing they might do. Let's say a husband and wife work on the same company and go on work trip. They stay in the same hotel. Is it wrong for them to behave like a couple inside their hotel room because they are "at work"?
    Speaking to your first point you're entitled to your opinion. But I'm personally thankful no jurisdiction I've ever lived or worked in operates by those rules otherwise my example of handsy pete above would stop many people from recovering against their employer. Building on that as you correctly again pointed out, Blizzcon is a corporate event wherein the company hired the venue and paid for employee rooms it's just unambiguously a workplace event, im sorry you don't see it that way but I'm not really sure what merit there is in debating it, it just is on its face. And HR should have drilled that into the heads of employees attending three times a day for a week leading up to the event.

    As for the husband and wife thing. If they were staying in a room paid for by the company both at the location for the needs of the company and something happened? I can't say for sure no precedent comes immediately to mind, my gut reaction is the company would be on the hook unless they could show it was a pattern of behaviour the couple intentionally and knowingly hid. Unless they responded appropriately and took steps required of them to ameliorate the situation to the best of their ability as soon as they were made aware.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kolvarg View Post
    I'm all for responsibilizing companies and protecting employees when it makes sense, but this seems like a stretch to me personally, it would be like saying if an employee runs over someone with the company car the company is somehow guilty. When they are at the blizzcon arena, they are at work, representing their company. When they go to their hotel rooms at night not so much.
    This is literally the example used for how vicarious liability works you learn on day three of law school. If someone runs over someone else in a company car the first thing a company has to do is show they weren't doing company business or they're immediately and irrevocably sunk.
    Tonight for me is a special day. I want to go outside of the house of the girl I like with a gasoline barrel and write her name on the road and set it on fire and tell her to get out too see it (is this illegal)?

  14. #774
    Quote Originally Posted by zorkuus View Post
    We have no way of knowing what they knew. It's kinda pointless to dwell on that point.
    That’s been my point all along. We don’t know, but to blatantly say this person did, this person didn’t, is just speculation and should be talked about that way.

  15. #775
    Quote Originally Posted by Saltysquidoon View Post
    In the post you quoted I said he'll be fine, what are you on about I was just pointing out why he's copping flak.

    But seeing how you're accusing me of being in a cancel mob maybe you were just "confused". Are we to expect some more mask slippage in a future post?

    - - - Updated - - -


    If one of you sexually harasses the other I'm sure your employer will be glad to hear it. Besides you clearly didn't read what I wrote. I said the starting position not that the position is un-rebuttable.
    Otherwise, handsy Pete could get grabby with Suzanne at 5:01 pm one meter outside the office and it wouldn't be a workplace incident.
    And im saying you're full of shit for believing that is the starting position.

  16. #776
    Quote Originally Posted by Saltysquidoon View Post
    In the post you quoted I said he'll be fine, what are you on about I was just pointing out why he's copping flak.

    But seeing how you're accusing me of being in a cancel mob maybe you were just "confused". Are we to expect some more mask slippage in a future post?
    You said he admitted he knew about it when in his own words he is saying he didn't. You are going 2 parts with this, you say hes fine but at the same time saying he knew. Decide dude.

  17. #777
    Quote Originally Posted by ellieg View Post
    And im saying you're full of shit for believing that is the starting position.
    Ok, go sexually harass your boss next time you see them and watch your employer take no action because the incident happened outside of work.

    Also, your riverboat story is wrong on its face, if something had happened at the after-party between employees and the employer had been made aware of it they would be responsible for investigating and taking the appropriate action/reporting the appropriate people to cover its ass.
    Like I said 'work' doesn't end for employees in harassment matters one minute after knock-off time one foot from the doorway. What do you think an employee can't make a harassment case if the harassment occurs over text message or after hours?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezzet View Post
    You said he admitted he knew about it when in his own words he is saying he didn't. You are going 2 parts with this, you say hes fine but at the same time saying he knew. Decide dude.
    I said he was present at the party, which he unambiguously was. I'm only explaining the backlash to you, do you think I'm the riot employees giving him shit? What are you even talking about?
    Tonight for me is a special day. I want to go outside of the house of the girl I like with a gasoline barrel and write her name on the road and set it on fire and tell her to get out too see it (is this illegal)?

  18. #778
    Quote Originally Posted by Saltysquidoon View Post
    Ok, go sexually harass your boss next time you see them and watch your employer take no action because the incident happened outside of work.

    Also, your riverboat story is wrong on its face, if something had happened at the after-party between employees and the employer had been made aware of it they would be responsible for investigating and taking the appropriate action/reporting the appropriate people to cover its ass.
    Like I said 'work' doesn't end for employees in harassment matters one minute after knock-off time one foot from the doorway. What do you think an employee can't make a harassment case if the harassment occurs over text message or after hours?

    - - - Updated - - -


    I said he was present at the party, which he unambiguously was. I'm only explaining the backlash to you, do you think I'm the riot employees giving him shit? What are you even talking about?
    I'm not talking abt sexual assault. Im talking about your presumption that "ANY" time 2 or more coworkers are together outside of work that its first considered a work event until proven not to be. Thats just an absolutely ridiculous idea lol.

    Your job is free to investigate it however they feel free.

  19. #779
    Quote Originally Posted by Eapoe View Post
    And you’re saying that people in Blizzard had absolutely no way of knowing? Cosby had public accusations in 2004 and 2006. Just because it wasn’t mainstream media at the time doesn’t mean it had no coverage at all. Hell, I’m pretty sure I heard about it back then. There were rumors and dark humor jokes back as far as the 90’s being told about him. It was just never mainstream until 2014 because nothing ever stuck and no one could believe Cosby could be guilty of such a thing.

    - - - Updated - - -



    That would happen to be the million dollar question.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_C..._assault_cases

    The only reason it became mainstream was because Hannibal Burress told the joke in Cosby's hometown and people didn't like it so he told them to google it. He had been doing the bit for 6 months and people just thought it was joke. Every source on the Wikipedia pre 2014 is about him being extorted by a possible daughter he had while having an affair. And two articles in Philidelphia magazines/newspapers are about allegations. Unless you are from Philidelphia or a comedian Imma have to call bullshit on you knowing back then. Fuck even the Philidephians that went to Burresses show didn't know about the allegations until he had em google it and they are from the town where the Newpaper/Magazine was published.

    If it was so mainstream they never would have took a public picture of it. And you can sure as shit would have had someone call them out on it and Blizzard would have dealt with it then.
    Last edited by qwerty123456; 2021-07-30 at 05:17 PM.

  20. #780
    I am Murloc! Noxx79's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Kansas. Yes, THAT Kansas.
    Posts
    5,445
    Quote Originally Posted by zorkuus View Post
    Well duh? The Michael Jackson accusations were known by everyone. The Bill Cosby accusations were mere rumors heard only by few.
    Nope. It was an open secret.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Delever View Post
    But all it takes is also a little bit of common sense to realize that all this fuss about the cosby suite doesn't make sense. And all it takes is to take the extreme into consideration. Even if we assume that they knew about cosby at that time and decided to name the suite after him as an intentional rape joke, why on earth would they PUBLICLY post chats from it and openly tweet the name?? It makes 0 sense. These people have a better idea of PR than most of us and this would be blatant PR suicide.
    This is not a downplay on any of the victims or their experiences and i strongly believe justice should be served on the likes of Afrasiabi.
    But the cosby suite is starting to seem like it's been taken completely out of context.
    “Why would people who don’t fear retaliation do stuff that may be retaliated against?” You’re sooooooo close to getting it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •