Bloodstealer.5978 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > @"Bloodstealer.5978" said: > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > @"squallaus.8321" said: > > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > > > > > > His last tweet to her is completely condescending, just read it, but it most likely extends from the fact that English is not his native language, so he might not know the nuances of writing to avoid sounding condescending. > > > > > > > > Go on quote it and explain why its condescending. > > > > > > > > > > Here's his last tweet, and there's no explanation necessary, just read it....it's condescending in tone, but like I said, most likely because English isn't his native tongue: > > > Deroir > > > @DeroirGaming > > > Jul 4 > > > More > > > You getting mad at my obvious attempt at creating dialogue and discussion with you, instead of just replying that I am wrong or otherwise correct me in my false assumptions, is really just disheartening for me. You do you though. I'm sorry if it offended. I'll leave you to it. > > > > > > If I need to explain why it's condescending then I'm afraid this whole thing is pointless...that screams condescending. > > > > Simply reposting something doesn't explain your point.. you made the statement it's condescending.. so please explain where and how.. personally if I was Deroir and been subjected to her absurdity I would of been a hell of a lot more direct and less apologetic for sure... > > There was nothing in any of his posts to even remotely suggest he was being condescending and absolutely had no gender related angled to play whatsoever.. its all in her head and a defence mechanism because she clearly just lacks the ability to take criticism or hold cordial, meaningful discussion with anyone that does not panda to her views and opinions.. pure and simple. > > Obviously I have to bold the part that is condescending since everyone seems to miss the obvious. > And I quote: **You do you though.** > > I've had plenty of people try to offend me, and I laugh in their face because absolutely nothing offends me...because nobody else's opinion of me matters, only my opinion of myself matters. Seriously is that all you have to go on.. the poster for a start is not English speaking by mother tongue, secondly it reads more like a typo than something expressive, 3rdly I am trying real hard to read it as condescending. Now lets read the rebuke from JP and it's full of nothing more than condescending, gender based narrative where its not in anyway warranted... serving only to show here as being the very thing she thinks she stands for. Lastly lets consider a few other statements she made not just directly at deroir but the community in general... "Rando Asshats".. Oh so we are nothing more than rando asshats just because we try to engage in meaningful conversation with a so called pro regarding a work related topic "SHE" decided was a cool idea to place out into the public domain for consideration and reply "Since we have a lot of hurt manfeels today, lemme make something clear, this is my feed, I am not on the clock here, I'm not your emotional courtesan just because I am a dev. Don't expect me to pretend I like you here." So aside from the offensive sexist undertone JP immediately throws out.. she also pushes a wider narrative that actually she seemingly has to pretends to like the community.. this right here makes me think - faker. So is this the norm, are ANET seeking their devs to fake their passions and supports of the community, should I spend another dime to support something being peddled now as fake.. or is this just about JP and her own bottled up disdain for anyone and everyone outside of her own warped mindset… thankfully I believe the latter, that on the most part the devs are passionate about supporting this community, working their fingers to the bone everyday to try to bring us the best experience they can, but know and understand that they cannot always make everyone happy., that there will always been some that don't like or agree with content they put out there. But the difference is they know hold to hold a professional, well mannered, meaningful dialogue with their community, their fans and in some cases like Deroir, a fan that ultimately respects them and holds them in high regard. I wonder how JP would of answered that same twitter post from deroir had he in fact been a woman.. I think likely very differently... I guess we must all be prepared to dream up and throw out some gender undertone whenever we are challenged or simply requested to hold dialogue with literally anyone and everyone who does not share the same opinions and beliefs right or do we only decide to do that when those challenges and differing opinions come from the opposite sex...there I believe is the true angle of JP's own sexism not Deroir's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > Flesh, I usually agree with on most of your posts, but on this point it appears I'm going to be disagreeing with most of the other posters on here. I'm sorry, but nobody is going to be allowed to dictate what I can post on my person social media account(s), other than what is considered against the law or the owner of the social media site. Not my family, not my friends and certainly not my employer...if I was posting on a company provided or owned social media site, then they can guide how and what I say. But on my own personal accounts whether I display their emblem or list them as my place of work...only over my dead body, and we will have to legislate it out of existence, because they won't back off on their own. Let me ask you this question: how many of a developer's followers on social media are following them because of their personality, because they are friends and family, and how many are following them EXACTLY because they are developers of a game those followers play? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon.4032 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Harper.4173" said: > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > @"Ephemiel.5694" said: > > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > > @"Mike O Brien.4613" said: > > > > > Recently two of our employees failed to uphold our standards of communicating with players. Their attacks on the community were unacceptable. As a result, they’re no longer with the company. > > > > > > > > > > I want to be clear that the statements they made do not reflect the views of ArenaNet at all. As a company we always strive to have a collaborative relationship with the Guild Wars community. We value your input. We make this game for you. > > > > > > > > > > Mo > > > > > > > > You have done poorly by firing the two employees who had contributed into making this game possible. It was rash, inappropriate and one sided. Clearly ArenaNet failed to take in considerations whatever that might have been upsetting for Jessica in her work environment. The consequence of this insensitive decision will likely come to affect the game community. I didn't respect your manner in handling this situation. > > > > > > JP was only a writer for less than a year, what are you talking about? > > > > > > Also, REALLY? You have the guts to say that ANet is to blame for not taking in considerations? DO YOU KNOW WHO SHE IS? Do you know what she has said? > > > > > > What the heck is this obsession with defending that woman? She's a monster that's happy that a man died of cancer, she's an insane social justice berserker that drops the "sexist" card every single time someone realizes she made a mistake or has an opinion different to hers. > > > > "Only a writer for less than a year". So that's how you think Anet should be maintaining their policy with the employees? In fact I'm seeing more than that, when Fries got fired for sharing his opinions in defense of his fellow colleague, and his involvement with Anet for 12 years meant nothing whatsoever. It's a flawed decision to fire any of them, almost like knee jerk reaction to a situation. It wasn't properly thought out and didn't leave a room for any kind of understanding. And people like you seem already poised against Jessica for whatever reason. > > So when this Jessica made the statements she made did it seem to you it left room for any kind of understanding? > You get dealt with in the same way you deal with others. It makes perfect sense for people who rally together against paying customers to get the boot. No it didn't. That's the whole point of needing to have rational talks. If you think once you get hit your choice of settling that dispute is by hitting back, that doesn't solve crap. While you players in the forum are jumping up and down like kids, the bigger mistake is coming from Mike. Mike here is in need of bigger lesson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haleydawn.3764 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > @"Harper.4173" said: > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > @"Ephemiel.5694" said: > > > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > > > @"Mike O Brien.4613" said: > > > > > > Recently two of our employees failed to uphold our standards of communicating with players. Their attacks on the community were unacceptable. As a result, they’re no longer with the company. > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to be clear that the statements they made do not reflect the views of ArenaNet at all. As a company we always strive to have a collaborative relationship with the Guild Wars community. We value your input. We make this game for you. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mo > > > > > > > > > > You have done poorly by firing the two employees who had contributed into making this game possible. It was rash, inappropriate and one sided. Clearly ArenaNet failed to take in considerations whatever that might have been upsetting for Jessica in her work environment. The consequence of this insensitive decision will likely come to affect the game community. I didn't respect your manner in handling this situation. > > > > > > > > JP was only a writer for less than a year, what are you talking about? > > > > > > > > Also, REALLY? You have the guts to say that ANet is to blame for not taking in considerations? DO YOU KNOW WHO SHE IS? Do you know what she has said? > > > > > > > > What the heck is this obsession with defending that woman? She's a monster that's happy that a man died of cancer, she's an insane social justice berserker that drops the "sexist" card every single time someone realizes she made a mistake or has an opinion different to hers. > > > > > > "Only a writer for less than a year". So that's how you think Anet should be maintaining their policy with the employees? In fact I'm seeing more than that, when Fries got fired for sharing his opinions in defense of his fellow colleague, and his involvement with Anet for 12 years meant nothing whatsoever. It's a flawed decision to fire any of them, almost like knee jerk reaction to a situation. It wasn't properly thought out and didn't leave a room for any kind of understanding. And people like you seem already poised against Jessica for whatever reason. > > > > So when this Jessica made the statements she made did it seem to you it left room for any kind of understanding? > > You get dealt with in the same way you deal with others. It makes perfect sense for people who rally together against paying customers to get the boot. > > No it didn't. That's the whole point of needing to have rational talks. If you think once you get hit your choice of settling that dispute is by hitting back, that doesn't solve crap. While you players in the forum are jumping up and down like kids, the bigger mistake is coming from Mike. Mike here is in need of bigger lesson. 1- Nobody on this forum knows the details behind these two employees, only that “they are no longer with the company.” There’s a big difference between that, and, “we had to let them go” or “they have been fired”. Don’t assume anything. 2- We don’t know how many warnings JP has had before she was “no longer with the company”, this was not the first community lash out that’s happened. Again, we don’t know details of what happened internally. 3- The only mistake MO made was to make the announcement that they are no longer with the company. It should have simply read “This issue has been resolved internally”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just a flesh wound.3589 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 One thing the people who say that you “have the right to say what you want” forget is there is a corresponding right from the people who hear you. Customers of ANet who were offended by her speech while repping as an ANet Dev had the right to say I don’t support bullying (continuing to attack long after the guy apologized and left). I don’t support sexist remarks (hurt manfeels) and I don’t support her cursing/insulting Anet’s customers, of which I am one. ANet also had a right to say we don’t support what you say, your actions have hurt our business and we no longer feel that you are the type of person we wish to employ. Yes, you do have the right to say what you want but your right to not be punished ends where your job and your customers begin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon.4032 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Batel.9206" said: > So, for the people who defend Price, please explain this to me: why are her actions acceptable? Why is what she said appropriate? Why is celebrating the death of a well-known streamer okay? Why is cursing someone out with no provocation a good thing to do? > > "Confronting sexism" isn't a valid excuse here. As Saelenthi pointed out, tone is infamously difficult to discern on the internet. Where is the sexism in Deroir's post? And EVEN IF THERE WAS, Price is an employee at a company, PUBLICLY REPRESENTING that company. It is her JOB to be one of the public faces of that company, to be professional and polite, because she does not represent herself, she represents the company. Privately - to a friend on the phone or in person or whatever - she's free to complain all she wants! But NOT in a public space, and NOT while she is representing a company. Your logic is all hotchpotch. I'm already certain telling you anything would make any sense. Her personal twitter account is not owned by Anet. She has every right to say whatever she wants in her own space. Public doesn't mean she has no legitimacy of her own but to go with what everyone dishes out. Don't be so naive, or maybe your intentionally biased like most of everyone. And you are debating over her remark on a twitch streamer who died, you seem mighty vengeful over someone you have no personal relations with, and yet you are quick to jump on Jessica who contributed to a game product that you are able to play. talk about hypocrisy. Although I would agree she wasn't at her most appropriate self but neither was Mike by firing her and Fries. You players are enjoying this rash decision bit too much with sexism excuse. She is a female dev, whether you needed to be reminded of or not. Either way she was right on her own standings. You guys just prefer the rose without the thorn. Go home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon.4032 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Loli Ruri.8307" said: > Wow, Mike O'Brien personally fired her. And vented his feelings at her for most of the meeting, so she says. > Shows you how much Mike cares about the community. Then he personally went here and told us about it. This guy is passionate. Mike made a choice that he will have to regret despite the looney mobs taking his sides in the forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KGS.9842 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > @"Loli Ruri.8307" said: > > Wow, Mike O'Brien personally fired her. And vented his feelings at her for most of the meeting, so she says. > > Shows you how much Mike cares about the community. Then he personally went here and told us about it. This guy is passionate. > > Mike made a choice that he will have to regret despite the looney mobs taking his sides in the forum. Yeah the sky will come down on him and god will smite him with divine fervor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon.4032 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > @"Yamazuki.6073" said: > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > @"White Dragon.5429" said: > > > > > > @"ponytheguardian.7439" said: > > > > > > > @"Harper.4173" said: > > > > > > > 17. "The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts. > > > > > > > > > > > > But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract. > > > > > While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses. > > > > > > > > This not only needs to change, it must change and if we have to legislate it then that's the solution. Corporate America needs to be brought to heel and learn that they can not and will not be allowed to control what employees say on their own personal social media accounts. > > > > > > **Public** social media posts are not different than your actions taken out in public places. Public Twitter posts=/=your private and secure home where jokes are kept between friends and families. People have always been judged by how they are presented in public places, there's no reason that needs to be changed. If you want to speak poorly of people and face zero consequences, then keep it in a private setting among your friends and family, no need to take out the megaphone and then complain when the consequences come at you. > > > > > > There is zero reason for her response, and there is zero reason why any sort of business needs to tolerate sexism either, just because she's a female doesn't mean it's okay to hate on the opposite gender when the guy did nothing wrong, and had even complimented her not long before that. > > > > I don't care if it's public, it's still your PERSONAL social media account and Corporate American has no right to sensor it...and if people are unable to separate a persons personal life from their professional life, then the person with the problem is the one unable to separate the two. Those are two distinct entities, you have a job that is your professional life, you go home after work and that is your personal life...they are not one and the same in the vast majority of cases, and Corporate America needs to be kicked out of our personal lives. > > It’s not a private, personal place if you have over 13k strangers following you and it’s open to the world to look in. That’s public. It might be “personal” in that they put their name on a spot on someone else’s property (the people that own the site Twitter in this case) however if they set it to public which allows the whole world to see and answer you and if they brand themselves on that publicly accessible site as an employee of a particular company and if they discuss their work on that site with their settings on public so all can see and comment then no, it’s no longer _only_ a personal social media where you are entitled to privacy. > > As @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said > > >You know, back when I worked at a bank, they had a certain way of phrasing it. Of course, it was all surrounded with cooperate newspeak and a bunch generic praise, but ultimately the message was this: > > >The job doesn't start when you punch the clock. The job starts when you put on the uniform. If you are out in the world, the moment you wear our emblem, you represent us. If somebody sees you and recognizing you as an employee of our company, then you represent us. > > She was wearing ANet’s emblem when she tagged her account as an ANet dev and posted a discussion about her work. At that point she was repping ANet and anything she said reflects on them also. Just like anything you say while at work reflects on your employee. She cursed at and insulted customers of her job while repping ANet and she got the same punishment as you would get if you cursed and insulted customers while repping your job. > > Edit: spelling > Yea as long as you are sending family mails through that gmail account in public domain, everyone should have the right to probe into your emails whether you like to have your own space or not. Get real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon.4032 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Haleydawn.3764" said: > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > @"Harper.4173" said: > > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > > @"Ephemiel.5694" said: > > > > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > > > > @"Mike O Brien.4613" said: > > > > > > > Recently two of our employees failed to uphold our standards of communicating with players. Their attacks on the community were unacceptable. As a result, they’re no longer with the company. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to be clear that the statements they made do not reflect the views of ArenaNet at all. As a company we always strive to have a collaborative relationship with the Guild Wars community. We value your input. We make this game for you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mo > > > > > > > > > > > > You have done poorly by firing the two employees who had contributed into making this game possible. It was rash, inappropriate and one sided. Clearly ArenaNet failed to take in considerations whatever that might have been upsetting for Jessica in her work environment. The consequence of this insensitive decision will likely come to affect the game community. I didn't respect your manner in handling this situation. > > > > > > > > > > JP was only a writer for less than a year, what are you talking about? > > > > > > > > > > Also, REALLY? You have the guts to say that ANet is to blame for not taking in considerations? DO YOU KNOW WHO SHE IS? Do you know what she has said? > > > > > > > > > > What the heck is this obsession with defending that woman? She's a monster that's happy that a man died of cancer, she's an insane social justice berserker that drops the "sexist" card every single time someone realizes she made a mistake or has an opinion different to hers. > > > > > > > > "Only a writer for less than a year". So that's how you think Anet should be maintaining their policy with the employees? In fact I'm seeing more than that, when Fries got fired for sharing his opinions in defense of his fellow colleague, and his involvement with Anet for 12 years meant nothing whatsoever. It's a flawed decision to fire any of them, almost like knee jerk reaction to a situation. It wasn't properly thought out and didn't leave a room for any kind of understanding. And people like you seem already poised against Jessica for whatever reason. > > > > > > So when this Jessica made the statements she made did it seem to you it left room for any kind of understanding? > > > You get dealt with in the same way you deal with others. It makes perfect sense for people who rally together against paying customers to get the boot. > > > > No it didn't. That's the whole point of needing to have rational talks. If you think once you get hit your choice of settling that dispute is by hitting back, that doesn't solve crap. While you players in the forum are jumping up and down like kids, the bigger mistake is coming from Mike. Mike here is in need of bigger lesson. > > 1- Nobody on this forum knows the details behind these two employees, only that “they are no longer with the company.” There’s a big difference between that, and, “we had to let them go” or “they have been fired”. Don’t assume anything. > 2- We don’t know how many warnings JP has had before she was “no longer with the company”, this was not the first community lash out that’s happened. Again, we don’t know details of what happened internally. > 3- The only mistake MO made was to make the announcement that they are no longer with the company. It should have simply read “This issue has been resolved internally”. You are talking about tactfulness. But you're overlooking the genuine point and motive in this situation and how it developed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just a flesh wound.3589 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > @"Yamazuki.6073" said: > > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > > @"White Dragon.5429" said: > > > > > > > @"ponytheguardian.7439" said: > > > > > > > > @"Harper.4173" said: > > > > > > > > 17. "The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract. > > > > > > While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses. > > > > > > > > > > This not only needs to change, it must change and if we have to legislate it then that's the solution. Corporate America needs to be brought to heel and learn that they can not and will not be allowed to control what employees say on their own personal social media accounts. > > > > > > > > **Public** social media posts are not different than your actions taken out in public places. Public Twitter posts=/=your private and secure home where jokes are kept between friends and families. People have always been judged by how they are presented in public places, there's no reason that needs to be changed. If you want to speak poorly of people and face zero consequences, then keep it in a private setting among your friends and family, no need to take out the megaphone and then complain when the consequences come at you. > > > > > > > > There is zero reason for her response, and there is zero reason why any sort of business needs to tolerate sexism either, just because she's a female doesn't mean it's okay to hate on the opposite gender when the guy did nothing wrong, and had even complimented her not long before that. > > > > > > I don't care if it's public, it's still your PERSONAL social media account and Corporate American has no right to sensor it...and if people are unable to separate a persons personal life from their professional life, then the person with the problem is the one unable to separate the two. Those are two distinct entities, you have a job that is your professional life, you go home after work and that is your personal life...they are not one and the same in the vast majority of cases, and Corporate America needs to be kicked out of our personal lives. > > > > It’s not a private, personal place if you have over 13k strangers following you and it’s open to the world to look in. That’s public. It might be “personal” in that they put their name on a spot on someone else’s property (the people that own the site Twitter in this case) however if they set it to public which allows the whole world to see and answer you and if they brand themselves on that publicly accessible site as an employee of a particular company and if they discuss their work on that site with their settings on public so all can see and comment then no, it’s no longer _only_ a personal social media where you are entitled to privacy. > > > > As @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said > > > > >You know, back when I worked at a bank, they had a certain way of phrasing it. Of course, it was all surrounded with cooperate newspeak and a bunch generic praise, but ultimately the message was this: > > > > >The job doesn't start when you punch the clock. The job starts when you put on the uniform. If you are out in the world, the moment you wear our emblem, you represent us. If somebody sees you and recognizing you as an employee of our company, then you represent us. > > > > She was wearing ANet’s emblem when she tagged her account as an ANet dev and posted a discussion about her work. At that point she was repping ANet and anything she said reflects on them also. Just like anything you say while at work reflects on your employee. She cursed at and insulted customers of her job while repping ANet and she got the same punishment as you would get if you cursed and insulted customers while repping your job. > > > > Edit: spelling > > > > Yea as long as you are sending family mails through that gmail account in public domain, everyone should have the right to probe into your emails whether you like to have your own space or not. Get real. That is not the same. You are not broadcasting your emails for everyone to see but sending them to one or a select few to read. If you post your emails on a public site that anyone can see then that would be different. If you're going to argue the point try to make a comparison that is relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haleydawn.3764 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > @"Haleydawn.3764" said: > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > @"Harper.4173" said: > > > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > > > @"Ephemiel.5694" said: > > > > > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > > > > > @"Mike O Brien.4613" said: > > > > > > > > Recently two of our employees failed to uphold our standards of communicating with players. Their attacks on the community were unacceptable. As a result, they’re no longer with the company. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to be clear that the statements they made do not reflect the views of ArenaNet at all. As a company we always strive to have a collaborative relationship with the Guild Wars community. We value your input. We make this game for you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You have done poorly by firing the two employees who had contributed into making this game possible. It was rash, inappropriate and one sided. Clearly ArenaNet failed to take in considerations whatever that might have been upsetting for Jessica in her work environment. The consequence of this insensitive decision will likely come to affect the game community. I didn't respect your manner in handling this situation. > > > > > > > > > > > > JP was only a writer for less than a year, what are you talking about? > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, REALLY? You have the guts to say that ANet is to blame for not taking in considerations? DO YOU KNOW WHO SHE IS? Do you know what she has said? > > > > > > > > > > > > What the heck is this obsession with defending that woman? She's a monster that's happy that a man died of cancer, she's an insane social justice berserker that drops the "sexist" card every single time someone realizes she made a mistake or has an opinion different to hers. > > > > > > > > > > "Only a writer for less than a year". So that's how you think Anet should be maintaining their policy with the employees? In fact I'm seeing more than that, when Fries got fired for sharing his opinions in defense of his fellow colleague, and his involvement with Anet for 12 years meant nothing whatsoever. It's a flawed decision to fire any of them, almost like knee jerk reaction to a situation. It wasn't properly thought out and didn't leave a room for any kind of understanding. And people like you seem already poised against Jessica for whatever reason. > > > > > > > > So when this Jessica made the statements she made did it seem to you it left room for any kind of understanding? > > > > You get dealt with in the same way you deal with others. It makes perfect sense for people who rally together against paying customers to get the boot. > > > > > > No it didn't. That's the whole point of needing to have rational talks. If you think once you get hit your choice of settling that dispute is by hitting back, that doesn't solve crap. While you players in the forum are jumping up and down like kids, the bigger mistake is coming from Mike. Mike here is in need of bigger lesson. > > > > 1- Nobody on this forum knows the details behind these two employees, only that “they are no longer with the company.” There’s a big difference between that, and, “we had to let them go” or “they have been fired”. Don’t assume anything. > > 2- We don’t know how many warnings JP has had before she was “no longer with the company”, this was not the first community lash out that’s happened. Again, we don’t know details of what happened internally. > > 3- The only mistake MO made was to make the announcement that they are no longer with the company. It should have simply read “This issue has been resolved internally”. > > You are talking about tactfulness. But you're overlooking the genuine point and motive in this situation and how it developed. I know exactly how this developed. I followed it live as it happened on Twitter starting with comments made to Inks, and being told of previous comments made to/about other players/Anet community partners, then on Reddit and these forums. I’ve been blocked by Jessica Price because I’ve voiced my own opinions on Twitter, even though they were tactfully non-biased, only viewing/commenting on what is known public information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon.4032 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > @"Yamazuki.6073" said: > > > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > > > @"White Dragon.5429" said: > > > > > > > > @"ponytheguardian.7439" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Harper.4173" said: > > > > > > > > > 17. "The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract. > > > > > > > While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > This not only needs to change, it must change and if we have to legislate it then that's the solution. Corporate America needs to be brought to heel and learn that they can not and will not be allowed to control what employees say on their own personal social media accounts. > > > > > > > > > > **Public** social media posts are not different than your actions taken out in public places. Public Twitter posts=/=your private and secure home where jokes are kept between friends and families. People have always been judged by how they are presented in public places, there's no reason that needs to be changed. If you want to speak poorly of people and face zero consequences, then keep it in a private setting among your friends and family, no need to take out the megaphone and then complain when the consequences come at you. > > > > > > > > > > There is zero reason for her response, and there is zero reason why any sort of business needs to tolerate sexism either, just because she's a female doesn't mean it's okay to hate on the opposite gender when the guy did nothing wrong, and had even complimented her not long before that. > > > > > > > > I don't care if it's public, it's still your PERSONAL social media account and Corporate American has no right to sensor it...and if people are unable to separate a persons personal life from their professional life, then the person with the problem is the one unable to separate the two. Those are two distinct entities, you have a job that is your professional life, you go home after work and that is your personal life...they are not one and the same in the vast majority of cases, and Corporate America needs to be kicked out of our personal lives. > > > > > > It’s not a private, personal place if you have over 13k strangers following you and it’s open to the world to look in. That’s public. It might be “personal” in that they put their name on a spot on someone else’s property (the people that own the site Twitter in this case) however if they set it to public which allows the whole world to see and answer you and if they brand themselves on that publicly accessible site as an employee of a particular company and if they discuss their work on that site with their settings on public so all can see and comment then no, it’s no longer _only_ a personal social media where you are entitled to privacy. > > > > > > As @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said > > > > > > >You know, back when I worked at a bank, they had a certain way of phrasing it. Of course, it was all surrounded with cooperate newspeak and a bunch generic praise, but ultimately the message was this: > > > > > > >The job doesn't start when you punch the clock. The job starts when you put on the uniform. If you are out in the world, the moment you wear our emblem, you represent us. If somebody sees you and recognizing you as an employee of our company, then you represent us. > > > > > > She was wearing ANet’s emblem when she tagged her account as an ANet dev and posted a discussion about her work. At that point she was repping ANet and anything she said reflects on them also. Just like anything you say while at work reflects on your employee. She cursed at and insulted customers of her job while repping ANet and she got the same punishment as you would get if you cursed and insulted customers while repping your job. > > > > > > Edit: spelling > > > > > > > Yea as long as you are sending family mails through that gmail account in public domain, everyone should have the right to probe into your emails whether you like to have your own space or not. Get real. > > That is not the same. You are not broadcasting your emails for everyone to see but sending them to one or a select few to read. If you post your emails on a public site that anyone can see then that would be different. If you're going to argue the point try to make a comparison that is relevant. You are raising irrelevant points actually. But to draw technical relevance Gmail is a public server not your room space. And when they prefer to boost their sales by selling your content to the advertisers you should be fine with it. The direct point is her twitter account is not the official gw2 account. and nor was it owned by Anet. She can express her views in her own account as she pleases. And even if she was posting alarming topics about Anet (which wasn't the case) its something to take notice of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vayne.8563 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > @"Yamazuki.6073" said: > > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > > @"White Dragon.5429" said: > > > > > > > @"ponytheguardian.7439" said: > > > > > > > > @"Harper.4173" said: > > > > > > > > 17. "The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract. > > > > > > While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses. > > > > > > > > > > This not only needs to change, it must change and if we have to legislate it then that's the solution. Corporate America needs to be brought to heel and learn that they can not and will not be allowed to control what employees say on their own personal social media accounts. > > > > > > > > **Public** social media posts are not different than your actions taken out in public places. Public Twitter posts=/=your private and secure home where jokes are kept between friends and families. People have always been judged by how they are presented in public places, there's no reason that needs to be changed. If you want to speak poorly of people and face zero consequences, then keep it in a private setting among your friends and family, no need to take out the megaphone and then complain when the consequences come at you. > > > > > > > > There is zero reason for her response, and there is zero reason why any sort of business needs to tolerate sexism either, just because she's a female doesn't mean it's okay to hate on the opposite gender when the guy did nothing wrong, and had even complimented her not long before that. > > > > > > I don't care if it's public, it's still your PERSONAL social media account and Corporate American has no right to sensor it...and if people are unable to separate a persons personal life from their professional life, then the person with the problem is the one unable to separate the two. Those are two distinct entities, you have a job that is your professional life, you go home after work and that is your personal life...they are not one and the same in the vast majority of cases, and Corporate America needs to be kicked out of our personal lives. > > > > It’s not a private, personal place if you have over 13k strangers following you and it’s open to the world to look in. That’s public. It might be “personal” in that they put their name on a spot on someone else’s property (the people that own the site Twitter in this case) however if they set it to public which allows the whole world to see and answer you and if they brand themselves on that publicly accessible site as an employee of a particular company and if they discuss their work on that site with their settings on public so all can see and comment then no, it’s no longer _only_ a personal social media where you are entitled to privacy. > > > > As @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said > > > > >You know, back when I worked at a bank, they had a certain way of phrasing it. Of course, it was all surrounded with cooperate newspeak and a bunch generic praise, but ultimately the message was this: > > > > >The job doesn't start when you punch the clock. The job starts when you put on the uniform. If you are out in the world, the moment you wear our emblem, you represent us. If somebody sees you and recognizing you as an employee of our company, then you represent us. > > > > She was wearing ANet’s emblem when she tagged her account as an ANet dev and posted a discussion about her work. At that point she was repping ANet and anything she said reflects on them also. Just like anything you say while at work reflects on your employee. She cursed at and insulted customers of her job while repping ANet and she got the same punishment as you would get if you cursed and insulted customers while repping your job. > > > > Edit: spelling > > > > Yea as long as you are sending family mails through that gmail account in public domain, everyone should have the right to probe into your emails whether you like to have your own space or not. Get real. You have an option to open twitter up to the public, or to just friends. If you open it up to the public, you're making a choice. Presumably family emails aren't posted publicly so the analogy doesn't work. When I managed a computer store, I met a customer at Typhoon Lagoon in Disney World. Not planned. He just happened to be there at the same time as me, behind me in the same line waiting for food. Weird, weird coincidence. He starts asking me computer questions on my vacation. Just so happens I liked the guy and chatted with him until we got our food. But the point is, even if I couldn't stand the guy, I'd have been civil because he's a paying customer and there's zero reason to offend him. None. Unless he threatened me or outright insulted me. Deroir wasn't correct in what he was saying, and JP was very much correct. She probably took what he was saying wrong. She just typed a whole page explaining stuff that's pretty well understood, not the first time I've heard convos like this from professionals, and he's like I disagree "slightly". But his disagreement wasn't actually slight and it probably rubbed her the wrong way. Doesn't excuse her saying something later like I'm not on the clock and I don't have to pretend to like you. She could have said a lot of things. She could have explained to him why the footprint of an MMO doesn't support branching storylines. She could have even said that this is something the dev community has discussed for years, and I assure you this is the case, even if you don't realize it. Instead, she chose to see his comments as an attack on her because she's a woman. Would he have said the same thing to a male dev? I think so. Not all of us think in terms of gender on twitter or facebook or forums. I know I don't. If I insulted a customer who did nothing more than express an opinion, then I would be in the wrong and I'd expect some sort of penalty for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon.4032 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Haleydawn.3764" said: > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > @"Haleydawn.3764" said: > > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > > @"Harper.4173" said: > > > > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > > > > @"Ephemiel.5694" said: > > > > > > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Mike O Brien.4613" said: > > > > > > > > > Recently two of our employees failed to uphold our standards of communicating with players. Their attacks on the community were unacceptable. As a result, they’re no longer with the company. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to be clear that the statements they made do not reflect the views of ArenaNet at all. As a company we always strive to have a collaborative relationship with the Guild Wars community. We value your input. We make this game for you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You have done poorly by firing the two employees who had contributed into making this game possible. It was rash, inappropriate and one sided. Clearly ArenaNet failed to take in considerations whatever that might have been upsetting for Jessica in her work environment. The consequence of this insensitive decision will likely come to affect the game community. I didn't respect your manner in handling this situation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > JP was only a writer for less than a year, what are you talking about? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, REALLY? You have the guts to say that ANet is to blame for not taking in considerations? DO YOU KNOW WHO SHE IS? Do you know what she has said? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What the heck is this obsession with defending that woman? She's a monster that's happy that a man died of cancer, she's an insane social justice berserker that drops the "sexist" card every single time someone realizes she made a mistake or has an opinion different to hers. > > > > > > > > > > > > "Only a writer for less than a year". So that's how you think Anet should be maintaining their policy with the employees? In fact I'm seeing more than that, when Fries got fired for sharing his opinions in defense of his fellow colleague, and his involvement with Anet for 12 years meant nothing whatsoever. It's a flawed decision to fire any of them, almost like knee jerk reaction to a situation. It wasn't properly thought out and didn't leave a room for any kind of understanding. And people like you seem already poised against Jessica for whatever reason. > > > > > > > > > > So when this Jessica made the statements she made did it seem to you it left room for any kind of understanding? > > > > > You get dealt with in the same way you deal with others. It makes perfect sense for people who rally together against paying customers to get the boot. > > > > > > > > No it didn't. That's the whole point of needing to have rational talks. If you think once you get hit your choice of settling that dispute is by hitting back, that doesn't solve crap. While you players in the forum are jumping up and down like kids, the bigger mistake is coming from Mike. Mike here is in need of bigger lesson. > > > > > > 1- Nobody on this forum knows the details behind these two employees, only that “they are no longer with the company.” There’s a big difference between that, and, “we had to let them go” or “they have been fired”. Don’t assume anything. > > > 2- We don’t know how many warnings JP has had before she was “no longer with the company”, this was not the first community lash out that’s happened. Again, we don’t know details of what happened internally. > > > 3- The only mistake MO made was to make the announcement that they are no longer with the company. It should have simply read “This issue has been resolved internally”. > > > > You are talking about tactfulness. But you're overlooking the genuine point and motive in this situation and how it developed. > > I know exactly how this developed. I followed it live as it happened on Twitter starting with comments made to Inks, and being told of previous comments made to/about other players/Anet community partners, then on Reddit and these forums. I’ve been blocked by Jessica Price because I’ve voiced my own opinions on Twitter, even though they were neutral. Fair enough. Obviously there is some discrepancy in all of this, and everyone's too busy taking sides. That's not how you solve a problem. Mike's decision was rash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haleydawn.3764 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Dragon.4032" said: >Mike's decision was rash. Was it? Do display why it was rash. Are you privy to Anets employees HR files? No? Then don’t assume that nothing went off internally before hand. You, nor is anyone else entitled to know these details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon.4032 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Vayne.8563" said: > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > @"Yamazuki.6073" said: > > > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > > > @"White Dragon.5429" said: > > > > > > > > @"ponytheguardian.7439" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Harper.4173" said: > > > > > > > > > 17. "The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract. > > > > > > > While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > This not only needs to change, it must change and if we have to legislate it then that's the solution. Corporate America needs to be brought to heel and learn that they can not and will not be allowed to control what employees say on their own personal social media accounts. > > > > > > > > > > **Public** social media posts are not different than your actions taken out in public places. Public Twitter posts=/=your private and secure home where jokes are kept between friends and families. People have always been judged by how they are presented in public places, there's no reason that needs to be changed. If you want to speak poorly of people and face zero consequences, then keep it in a private setting among your friends and family, no need to take out the megaphone and then complain when the consequences come at you. > > > > > > > > > > There is zero reason for her response, and there is zero reason why any sort of business needs to tolerate sexism either, just because she's a female doesn't mean it's okay to hate on the opposite gender when the guy did nothing wrong, and had even complimented her not long before that. > > > > > > > > I don't care if it's public, it's still your PERSONAL social media account and Corporate American has no right to sensor it...and if people are unable to separate a persons personal life from their professional life, then the person with the problem is the one unable to separate the two. Those are two distinct entities, you have a job that is your professional life, you go home after work and that is your personal life...they are not one and the same in the vast majority of cases, and Corporate America needs to be kicked out of our personal lives. > > > > > > It’s not a private, personal place if you have over 13k strangers following you and it’s open to the world to look in. That’s public. It might be “personal” in that they put their name on a spot on someone else’s property (the people that own the site Twitter in this case) however if they set it to public which allows the whole world to see and answer you and if they brand themselves on that publicly accessible site as an employee of a particular company and if they discuss their work on that site with their settings on public so all can see and comment then no, it’s no longer _only_ a personal social media where you are entitled to privacy. > > > > > > As @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said > > > > > > >You know, back when I worked at a bank, they had a certain way of phrasing it. Of course, it was all surrounded with cooperate newspeak and a bunch generic praise, but ultimately the message was this: > > > > > > >The job doesn't start when you punch the clock. The job starts when you put on the uniform. If you are out in the world, the moment you wear our emblem, you represent us. If somebody sees you and recognizing you as an employee of our company, then you represent us. > > > > > > She was wearing ANet’s emblem when she tagged her account as an ANet dev and posted a discussion about her work. At that point she was repping ANet and anything she said reflects on them also. Just like anything you say while at work reflects on your employee. She cursed at and insulted customers of her job while repping ANet and she got the same punishment as you would get if you cursed and insulted customers while repping your job. > > > > > > Edit: spelling > > > > > > > Yea as long as you are sending family mails through that gmail account in public domain, everyone should have the right to probe into your emails whether you like to have your own space or not. Get real. > > You have an option to open twitter up to the public, or to just friends. If you open it up to the public, you're making a choice. Presumably family emails aren't posted publicly so the analogy doesn't work. > > When I managed a computer store, I met a customer at Typhoon Lagoon in Disney World. Not planned. He just happened to be there at the same time as me, behind me in the same line waiting for food. Weird, weird coincidence. He starts asking me computer questions on my vacation. > > Just so happens I liked the guy and chatted with him until we got our food. But the point is, even if I couldn't stand the guy, I'd have been civil because he's a paying customer and there's zero reason to offend him. None. Unless he threatened me or outright insulted me. > > Deroir wasn't correct in what he was saying, and JP was very much correct. She probably took what he was saying wrong. She just typed a whole page explaining stuff that's pretty well understood, not the first time I've heard convos like this from professionals, and he's like I disagree "slightly". But his disagreement wasn't actually slight and it probably rubbed her the wrong way. > > Doesn't excuse her saying something later like I'm not on the clock and I don't have to pretend to like you. She could have said a lot of things. She could have explained to him why the footprint of an MMO doesn't support branching storylines. She could have even said that this is something the dev community has discussed for years, and I assure you this is the case, even if you don't realize it. Instead, she chose to see his comments as an attack on her because she's a woman. Would he have said the same thing to a male dev? I think so. Not all of us think in terms of gender on twitter or facebook or forums. I know I don't. > > If I insulted a customer who did nothing more than express an opinion, then I would be in the wrong and I'd expect some sort of penalty for it. Sure I understand your views. I'm not here to disagree with you at all. But you need to understand not to take Jessica's point of view for granted and how she should have reacted in her own shoes. How she reacted wasn't very pleasing but there is a reason, but to completely neglect that side of the reason doesn't seem very ethical, at least not in the way Mike had to fire them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just a flesh wound.3589 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > > @"Yamazuki.6073" said: > > > > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > > > > @"White Dragon.5429" said: > > > > > > > > > @"ponytheguardian.7439" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Harper.4173" said: > > > > > > > > > > 17. "The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract. > > > > > > > > While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This not only needs to change, it must change and if we have to legislate it then that's the solution. Corporate America needs to be brought to heel and learn that they can not and will not be allowed to control what employees say on their own personal social media accounts. > > > > > > > > > > > > **Public** social media posts are not different than your actions taken out in public places. Public Twitter posts=/=your private and secure home where jokes are kept between friends and families. People have always been judged by how they are presented in public places, there's no reason that needs to be changed. If you want to speak poorly of people and face zero consequences, then keep it in a private setting among your friends and family, no need to take out the megaphone and then complain when the consequences come at you. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is zero reason for her response, and there is zero reason why any sort of business needs to tolerate sexism either, just because she's a female doesn't mean it's okay to hate on the opposite gender when the guy did nothing wrong, and had even complimented her not long before that. > > > > > > > > > > I don't care if it's public, it's still your PERSONAL social media account and Corporate American has no right to sensor it...and if people are unable to separate a persons personal life from their professional life, then the person with the problem is the one unable to separate the two. Those are two distinct entities, you have a job that is your professional life, you go home after work and that is your personal life...they are not one and the same in the vast majority of cases, and Corporate America needs to be kicked out of our personal lives. > > > > > > > > It’s not a private, personal place if you have over 13k strangers following you and it’s open to the world to look in. That’s public. It might be “personal” in that they put their name on a spot on someone else’s property (the people that own the site Twitter in this case) however if they set it to public which allows the whole world to see and answer you and if they brand themselves on that publicly accessible site as an employee of a particular company and if they discuss their work on that site with their settings on public so all can see and comment then no, it’s no longer _only_ a personal social media where you are entitled to privacy. > > > > > > > > As @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said > > > > > > > > >You know, back when I worked at a bank, they had a certain way of phrasing it. Of course, it was all surrounded with cooperate newspeak and a bunch generic praise, but ultimately the message was this: > > > > > > > > >The job doesn't start when you punch the clock. The job starts when you put on the uniform. If you are out in the world, the moment you wear our emblem, you represent us. If somebody sees you and recognizing you as an employee of our company, then you represent us. > > > > > > > > She was wearing ANet’s emblem when she tagged her account as an ANet dev and posted a discussion about her work. At that point she was repping ANet and anything she said reflects on them also. Just like anything you say while at work reflects on your employee. She cursed at and insulted customers of her job while repping ANet and she got the same punishment as you would get if you cursed and insulted customers while repping your job. > > > > > > > > Edit: spelling > > > > > > > > > > Yea as long as you are sending family mails through that gmail account in public domain, everyone should have the right to probe into your emails whether you like to have your own space or not. Get real. > > > > That is not the same. You are not broadcasting your emails for everyone to see but sending them to one or a select few to read. If you post your emails on a public site that anyone can see then that would be different. If you're going to argue the point try to make a comparison that is relevant. > > You are raising irrelevant points actually. But to draw technical relevance Gmail is a public server not your room space. And when they prefer to boost their sales by selling your content to the advertisers you should be fine with it. The direct point is her twitter account is not the official gw2 account. and nor was it owned by Anet. She can express her views in her own account as she pleases. And even if she was posting alarming topics about Anet (which wasn't the case) its something to take notice of. No one argues that she can’t express what she wants. However 1) she was posting _as_ an ANet dev _and_ posting on work related topics _and_ she was speaking to customers. That makes what she says as relevant to her job and her state of employment. 2) no one ever in the history of mankind has been free from the consequences of what you say or do. Society has always applied social constraints to behavior and speech. The right to publicly say what you want comes with the corresponding right of your hearers to disprove and apply these social restraints and it came with the right for her employee to disapprove and terminate employment. You have no right to be free from consequences of public action or speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBravery.9615 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 This thread needs to get locked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon.4032 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Haleydawn.3764" said: > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > >Mike's decision was rash. > > Was it? Do display why it was rash. Are you privy to Anets employees HR files? No? Then don’t assume that nothing went off internally before hand. You, nor is anyone else entitled to know these details. I'm not claiming to know the detail and you trying to justify my reasons on that point is ridiculous. My point was clear enough, there was a problem that needed attention that would benefit both end of the situation. What Mike did was secure his Anet revenue mechanism by firing the two employees to look good in the public eye. That's down right unethical when the dev's pour their creativity into the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haleydawn.3764 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > > > @"Yamazuki.6073" said: > > > > > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > > > > > @"White Dragon.5429" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"ponytheguardian.7439" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Harper.4173" said: > > > > > > > > > > > 17. "The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract. > > > > > > > > > While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This not only needs to change, it must change and if we have to legislate it then that's the solution. Corporate America needs to be brought to heel and learn that they can not and will not be allowed to control what employees say on their own personal social media accounts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > **Public** social media posts are not different than your actions taken out in public places. Public Twitter posts=/=your private and secure home where jokes are kept between friends and families. People have always been judged by how they are presented in public places, there's no reason that needs to be changed. If you want to speak poorly of people and face zero consequences, then keep it in a private setting among your friends and family, no need to take out the megaphone and then complain when the consequences come at you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is zero reason for her response, and there is zero reason why any sort of business needs to tolerate sexism either, just because she's a female doesn't mean it's okay to hate on the opposite gender when the guy did nothing wrong, and had even complimented her not long before that. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't care if it's public, it's still your PERSONAL social media account and Corporate American has no right to sensor it...and if people are unable to separate a persons personal life from their professional life, then the person with the problem is the one unable to separate the two. Those are two distinct entities, you have a job that is your professional life, you go home after work and that is your personal life...they are not one and the same in the vast majority of cases, and Corporate America needs to be kicked out of our personal lives. > > > > > > > > > > It’s not a private, personal place if you have over 13k strangers following you and it’s open to the world to look in. That’s public. It might be “personal” in that they put their name on a spot on someone else’s property (the people that own the site Twitter in this case) however if they set it to public which allows the whole world to see and answer you and if they brand themselves on that publicly accessible site as an employee of a particular company and if they discuss their work on that site with their settings on public so all can see and comment then no, it’s no longer _only_ a personal social media where you are entitled to privacy. > > > > > > > > > > As @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said > > > > > > > > > > >You know, back when I worked at a bank, they had a certain way of phrasing it. Of course, it was all surrounded with cooperate newspeak and a bunch generic praise, but ultimately the message was this: > > > > > > > > > > >The job doesn't start when you punch the clock. The job starts when you put on the uniform. If you are out in the world, the moment you wear our emblem, you represent us. If somebody sees you and recognizing you as an employee of our company, then you represent us. > > > > > > > > > > She was wearing ANet’s emblem when she tagged her account as an ANet dev and posted a discussion about her work. At that point she was repping ANet and anything she said reflects on them also. Just like anything you say while at work reflects on your employee. She cursed at and insulted customers of her job while repping ANet and she got the same punishment as you would get if you cursed and insulted customers while repping your job. > > > > > > > > > > Edit: spelling > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yea as long as you are sending family mails through that gmail account in public domain, everyone should have the right to probe into your emails whether you like to have your own space or not. Get real. > > > > > > That is not the same. You are not broadcasting your emails for everyone to see but sending them to one or a select few to read. If you post your emails on a public site that anyone can see then that would be different. If you're going to argue the point try to make a comparison that is relevant. > > > > You are raising irrelevant points actually. But to draw technical relevance Gmail is a public server not your room space. And when they prefer to boost their sales by selling your content to the advertisers you should be fine with it. The direct point is her twitter account is not the official gw2 account. and nor was it owned by Anet. She can express her views in her own account as she pleases. And even if she was posting alarming topics about Anet (which wasn't the case) its something to take notice of. > > No one argues that she can’t express what she wants. However > 1) she was posting _as_ an ANet dev _and_ posting on work related topics _and_ she was speaking to customers. That makes what she says as relevant to her job and her state of employment. > 2) no one ever in the history of mankind has been free from the consequences of what you say or do. Society has always applied social constraints to behavior and speech. The right to publicly say what you want comes with the corresponding right of your hearers to disprove and apply these social restraints and it came with the right for her employee to disapprove and terminate employment. > > You have no right to be free from consequences of public action or speech. In such beautiful irony, Jessica herself tweeted sometime last year, “social/financial consequences of what you say are free speech working as intended” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon.4032 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > > > @"Dragon.4032" said: > > > > > @"Just a flesh wound.3589" said: > > > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > > > @"Yamazuki.6073" said: > > > > > > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > > > > > > @"White Dragon.5429" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"ponytheguardian.7439" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Harper.4173" said: > > > > > > > > > > > 17. "The real discussion is the lack of segregation between personal and corporate communications and corporate policies dictating far too much about personal communications (think church and state here). In this case, it was personal communications that the community made corporate and the outcome has been disastrous for all parties involved." - maybe employees should be more aware of these issues and try to clarify things better before they sign contracts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But no-one has seen what kind of terms ArenaNet has in place for their employees who have signed the contract. > > > > > > > > > While we can't see exactly what is on their contract, it is common practice for someone who customers may see as a "face of the company" to be required to put forth a good appearance even while not on duty. If you are a known, recognizable employee, all actions in a public space can be interpreted by customers (whether or not they should) to be actions of the company, and so you must act accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That being said, it is understandable for someone to lose their calm while under stress. I would expect some kind of warning and expectation of public apology, followed by termination if the employee refuses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This not only needs to change, it must change and if we have to legislate it then that's the solution. Corporate America needs to be brought to heel and learn that they can not and will not be allowed to control what employees say on their own personal social media accounts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > **Public** social media posts are not different than your actions taken out in public places. Public Twitter posts=/=your private and secure home where jokes are kept between friends and families. People have always been judged by how they are presented in public places, there's no reason that needs to be changed. If you want to speak poorly of people and face zero consequences, then keep it in a private setting among your friends and family, no need to take out the megaphone and then complain when the consequences come at you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is zero reason for her response, and there is zero reason why any sort of business needs to tolerate sexism either, just because she's a female doesn't mean it's okay to hate on the opposite gender when the guy did nothing wrong, and had even complimented her not long before that. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't care if it's public, it's still your PERSONAL social media account and Corporate American has no right to sensor it...and if people are unable to separate a persons personal life from their professional life, then the person with the problem is the one unable to separate the two. Those are two distinct entities, you have a job that is your professional life, you go home after work and that is your personal life...they are not one and the same in the vast majority of cases, and Corporate America needs to be kicked out of our personal lives. > > > > > > > > > > It’s not a private, personal place if you have over 13k strangers following you and it’s open to the world to look in. That’s public. It might be “personal” in that they put their name on a spot on someone else’s property (the people that own the site Twitter in this case) however if they set it to public which allows the whole world to see and answer you and if they brand themselves on that publicly accessible site as an employee of a particular company and if they discuss their work on that site with their settings on public so all can see and comment then no, it’s no longer _only_ a personal social media where you are entitled to privacy. > > > > > > > > > > As @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said > > > > > > > > > > >You know, back when I worked at a bank, they had a certain way of phrasing it. Of course, it was all surrounded with cooperate newspeak and a bunch generic praise, but ultimately the message was this: > > > > > > > > > > >The job doesn't start when you punch the clock. The job starts when you put on the uniform. If you are out in the world, the moment you wear our emblem, you represent us. If somebody sees you and recognizing you as an employee of our company, then you represent us. > > > > > > > > > > She was wearing ANet’s emblem when she tagged her account as an ANet dev and posted a discussion about her work. At that point she was repping ANet and anything she said reflects on them also. Just like anything you say while at work reflects on your employee. She cursed at and insulted customers of her job while repping ANet and she got the same punishment as you would get if you cursed and insulted customers while repping your job. > > > > > > > > > > Edit: spelling > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yea as long as you are sending family mails through that gmail account in public domain, everyone should have the right to probe into your emails whether you like to have your own space or not. Get real. > > > > > > That is not the same. You are not broadcasting your emails for everyone to see but sending them to one or a select few to read. If you post your emails on a public site that anyone can see then that would be different. If you're going to argue the point try to make a comparison that is relevant. > > > > You are raising irrelevant points actually. But to draw technical relevance Gmail is a public server not your room space. And when they prefer to boost their sales by selling your content to the advertisers you should be fine with it. The direct point is her twitter account is not the official gw2 account. and nor was it owned by Anet. She can express her views in her own account as she pleases. And even if she was posting alarming topics about Anet (which wasn't the case) its something to take notice of. > > No one argues that she can’t express what she wants. However > 1) she was posting _as_ an ANet dev _and_ posting on work related topics _and_ she was speaking to customers. That makes what she says as relevant to her job and her state of employment. > 2) no one ever in the history of mankind has been free from the consequences of what you say or do. Society has always applied social constraints to behavior and speech. The right to publicly say what you want comes with the corresponding right of your hearers to disprove and apply these social restraints and it came with the right for her employee to disapprove and terminate employment. > > You have no right to be free from consequences of public action or speech. I agree. The whole situation wasn't pleasing at all. Even to look at it from an outside point of view. I had hoped Mike would have been more rational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Dragon.4032" said: > The direct point is her twitter account is not the official gw2 account. and nor was it owned by Anet. She can express her views in her own account as she pleases. And even if she was posting alarming topics about Anet (which wasn't the case) its something to take notice of. No she can't do that. Those followers of hers are not there to read comments about her life or her charming personality. They are following her BECAUSE she was part of a company that developed their favorite game. Most of those followers exist because of her JOB, not her personality, which means they see her as part of a company and don't care about her personal feelings but her WORK on that company. If she didn't want that kind of attention from people only coming to her twitter because they like the game, she would've made her account private and visible only to her friends and family instead. But she did not do that. When someone that is part of team behaves badly, it reflects badly on the entire team. I've seen players in football teams get banned from their teams based on their behavior in and out of the pitch, if it was offensive to the public. You can't keep a liability in your team when they cause bad publicity, and why should you? It's the same here, she was rude and offensive towards members of the community, even now she hasn't apologized, she still plays the victim! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon.4032 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 You take out the humane aspect from an affair, that's your recipe for disaster. And btw, I never followed her twitter account for my game related matters. That was her space in public places to speak her own voice. If I was subscribed to her and didn't like it, I could just unfollow her and my game play wouldn't have been affected in any manner whatsoever. Over staying your welcome in her personal space in public domain is simply provocation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 > @"Dragon.4032" said: > You take out the humane aspect from an affair, that's your recipe for disaster. Exactly, she took out the humane aspect from it, multiple times if I may add, and that was the recipe for her disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now