|
Alex is verbose, and you owe it to yourself (and the rest of us) to read the statement in its entirety. Remember, when making comments/claims to provide proper evidence, facts etc. Arguments based on incorrect assumptions, facts and straw men, will be dealt with swiftly. If in doubt, PM a mod or ask IRC. Do NOT spread misinformation, when in doubt, check your sources. In short, be smart. Alex comments on Idra: Orbs Statement: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=319038Personal attacks against other posters in this thread will be met with a ban -- 14:20 KST |
I would also ask that, in the future, if you're unhappy with something that happens in eSports, you guys give the offending party a chance to respond and/or act before seeking vigilante justice via contacting said party's sponsors.
Couldn't disagree more for two reasons. Firstly the boycott or even a threatened boycott is a completely valid mechanism for expressing one's displeasure of the actions of a commercial entity or its agents and to make that displeasure crystal clear in a "I will be voting on this issue with my dollars..." kind of way. Given that this issue happened some time ago and there was no recourse, it stands to reason that allowing EG more time to figure things out would not have been productive. Secondly, by your own admission this strategy was completely and promptly effective in bringing necessary recourse. We will never know if EG would have responded like they did today without pressure from sponsors, but it is very troubling that this issue went unnoticed for so long, until people from the community began to contact sponsors issuing their displeasure.
I understand the difficulty of getting sponsors into eSports, but you cannot twist that into an implicit protection from the community for any actions of EG that could be seen as undesirable to fans/sponsors.
|
On March 10 2012 09:10 EpiCenteR wrote:
I think this shows how incredibly thin-skinned our culture has become. The only people who should have ANY input in the matter is the people in the African American starcraft community.
Makes you wonder if it would have caused a stir if he had used the word cracker, spik, chink, etc. I doubt it would have.
that is your opinion NOT the communities.
EDIT: not all black people are African American as well.
|
On March 10 2012 09:14 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 09:11 sam!zdat wrote:On March 10 2012 09:08 JackDT wrote:
One factor completely apart from any ethical considerations:
I'd love to get my coworkers interested in Starcraft. But every time I'm on ladder and my opponent goes off an a racist/homophobic/misogynistic tirade, of is just generically an asshole, I am reminded of why I haven't yet.
I'd be embarrassed if they tried Starcraft on my suggestion and were like, "So THIS is the awesome community you were talking about?"
We're getting close. I'll probably mention they should check out an MLG the next time they have a free one. But the stigma and tone of 'just words' has a real impact. This is probably the biggest deal to me, as well. I still can't get my wife to come to terms with Day 9's funny faces. I don't know how the hell I'd explain Orb's behaviour to her.
Which is why this is an important step in growing esports to a wider audience!
|
I still don't understand why EG signed Orb in the first place if they were just going to release him because of this. It was pretty well-known among anyone who frequented teamliquid that Orb rages a lot on the ladder.
|
On March 10 2012 09:10 EpiCenteR wrote:
I think this shows how incredibly thin-skinned our culture has become. The only people who should have ANY input in the matter is the people in the African American starcraft community.
Makes you wonder if it would have caused a stir if he had used the word cracker, spik, chink, etc. I doubt it would have.
So you're saying black people from countries other than the US shouldn't have any input on the subject?
|
On March 10 2012 09:14 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 09:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 10 2012 08:55 Zaros wrote:On March 10 2012 08:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 10 2012 08:49 Zaros wrote:On March 10 2012 08:48 iloveAthene wrote:On March 10 2012 08:46 CommanchyWattkins wrote:
ah so true.... Eg only cares if reddit cares.
SIGHHH.... saying the N word over a game shows that Orb had little respect towards black people. Why say Nigger when there are so many other slurs to use \o_O/.
Using Nigger as a way to express your rage makes orb look like a redneck ... I mean ffs, just call the other person a fucker or mother fucker... Pathetic to use a racial slur. cunt motherfucking cocksucker is so much more enjoyable to say imo cocksucker is just as bad of an insult tbh it has a sexist and homophobic vibe to it. Girlfriends :D what? Girlfriends... can... be... The slur doesn't need to only be... Never mind. i said its sexist and homophobic what else is left to cover?
I'll PM you because it's sexual, NSFW, generally inappropriate for an open thread, etc. 
|
Those of you claiming this isn't a big deal have obviously never been in a professional setting. It's not like Orb was making a drunken fool of himself at a bar (which would clearly be his personal life) - he was calling people niggers in Starcraft (the game he is contracted to cast).
The fact is, when you represent a professional organization you are held to a higher standard. No resepectable company would tolerate someone who represents them calling people niggers while attending (playing in this case) an event directly related to business. Not only is it immoral, it's horrible PR.
Orb chose this for himself. This was the correct move by EG.
|
On March 10 2012 09:13 teamsolid wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 08:44 figq wrote:Alright, I apologize for having to post a third time about the same topic, apparently my thoughts about it come to me very slowly. My previous two responses were about EG's policy, because their official decision can be associated with them as an organization: + Show Spoiler [previous posts] +On March 09 2012 13:20 figq wrote:
Well, EG is free to hire and fire whoever they want, and the esports audience is free to follow Orb's excellent casting to whatever other leagues that are lucky enough to get him as a caster.
As I said in the other thread, I consider all this in the end more of an attack that hurts EG (for losing Orb as a caster), than an attack that hurts Orb, who will continue to be such a great caster anyway, and probably find an even better position. On March 09 2012 23:27 figq wrote:
As I said before, EG, of course, is free to hire and fire people as they wish, but after some more contemplation, I can't hide that I'm personally disappointed with EG (yet again). In a case that revolves around what usually would be called "progressive thinking" (though I dislike the term, as I find it absurd and relative), issuing any kind of irreversible punishment is disturbing. The whole premise of overcoming any kind of bigotry and segregation is the belief in the human ability to adapt, change, evolve and not be set in stone by the past. In view of this, I find it disheartening to see doors being closed forever, for anyone, even for a murderer, let alone for a verbal abuser. That's not a sign of purity of principles, but rather a sign of fear and weakness. It took me some time to realize what was it that I found so subtly disturbing in EG's official position, and then I realized it was this. However, this post is more about Alex Garfield's personal reasoning, which he outlines so eloquently in the OP, and which of course cannot be fully attributed to EG as a whole. Three things bothered me about the presentation of the case by Alex. First of all, he didn't manage to convince me. He had a very interesting preface designed around pointing out how much he can't stand a word. Then he proceeded to announce that his employee is therefore fired, never to return. Sure, a CEO's decision-making process is solely under his own power, and dictatorship, if you will. But then again why is this decision-making even presented to the public. It didn't seem substantiated enough for me. Basically, it's at the same level as "I hate black people, so I fired that black guy". I'm trying to be supportive of Alex about his personal phobia of the word "nigger", but I wouldn't expect a CEO to be so open about applying professional decisions about people's career, based on his own personal reaction towards something as simple as a word. And then the second thing to mention - though both are obviously inseparable - is just the fact that a CEO would be so vulnerable, in his reasoning, to a word, by itself. As far as not willing to write it, read it, hear it. You know, most German people I've met don't have such fearful reaction about Hitler jokes, the holocaust, or swastikas. They appreciate context, humor, intent. In Slasher's public shows, you can often hear jew jokes, and Slasher himself laughs about them, or even initiates them. Why is that? It's because it's more important what people actually mean. I can write a system of equations using for variables "nigger", "nigger1", "nigger2"...; the equations work just the same. Has mathematics not witnessed the centuries of oppression? It has, it existed all along, but it doesn't care about formal sequences of characters, only about the value you put behind them. I can write a computer program and replace all identifiers in it with "nigger", "nigger1", "nigger2"...; the program works just the same. It's also based inherently on the formal languages that have basis in mathematics and more specifically logic. The understanding that there's a great separation between an identifier and the value that it carries is fundamental for the existence of modern computers - and thus computer games. So, especially in the gaming community, people are much more likely to comprehend that difference between symbols, avatars, nicknames, and the actual value behind them. I'm surprised, and a little scared, that a CEO within the gaming industry would have so much hard time given by a word. And that it would be so difficult to separate all its historical connotations with its meaning in a completely different context. Finally, the third thing that bothers me is that apparently the intention is of so very little value. So Alex admits that he doesn't really think Orb to be a racist. Good, I'm glad about that. Apparently that's not enough though, because just calling someone "racist" nowadays is of almost no meaning, as Alex again so very well has described. Then it becomes unclear exactly what is the accusation towards Orb. Apparently his behavior did contain a trait of what could be seen in our modern day as racially offensive language and that's enough for him to be fired, never to return. What about his intentions? If we all agree that in fact he never had any racially offensive intentions to mind and separating people by their color hasn't been a part of his real life reasoning, then again what is his real fault? Is his fault entirely formal, is there any substance to it? It bothers me that a formal fault would be more important than a true character evaluation. For all we know, someone could be an active racist - to the point of actually discriminating people of other races when having the opportunity to get away with it, but still maintain a completely clean sheet in the formal department. Isn't it really more important to analyze people's real intentions and goals rather than their formal means? So to summarize my three posts and their points: - EG is free to conduct their business as they wish, of course - EG loses more than Orb, the attack here could have been against EG - "Progressive" reasoning should not lead to irreversible punishment, even for a murderer - The transition to the decision itself was not convincing enough, and too personal - A CEO in the gaming industry should not be so intimidated by identifiers, by themselves - Value should be more important than a formal expression, especially in the gaming community That said, despite a lot of criticism in my posts, I enjoy Alex's presentations a lot, they are always so educating, well written and a pleasure to read, even when I disagree with many points. So, I thank you. Alex, for taking time to write to us, and I would greatly appreciate any future threads of yours too, hopefully on less troubling matters for EG. It's not just "formal" when you have a team and corporate sponsors involved. Even if Alex doesn't believe Orb is racist, at least a portion of the general public now believes he is because of his usage of the word nigger. So it's bad for their image, period. That is the substance. I can see that it could seem that way, yeah. Although I'm not even sure how big is the portion of the general public to think that way, and how important it is for the real profit of EG's sponsors. For all we know, a small group of people, who were angered by Orb's ladder behavior in the past, managed to be loud enough at the sponsors' doors, to get him fired. (and now probably wonder "Wait, why did we even do that?", after it's done)
|
On March 10 2012 09:14 Daehlie wrote:Show nested quote +I would also ask that, in the future, if you're unhappy with something that happens in eSports, you guys give the offending party a chance to respond and/or act before seeking vigilante justice via contacting said party's sponsors. Couldn't disagree more for two reasons. Firstly the boycott or even a threatened boycott is a completely valid mechanism for expressing one's displeasure of the actions of a commercial entity or its agents and to make that displeasure crystal clear in a "I will be voting on this issue with my dollars..." kind of way. Given that this issue happened some time ago and there was no recourse, it stands to reason that allowing EG more time to figure things out would not have been productive. Secondly, by your own admission this strategy was completely and promptly effective in bringing necessary recourse. We will never know if EG would have responded like they did today without pressure from sponsors, but it is very troubling that this issue went unnoticed for so long, until people from the community began to contact sponsors issuing their displeasure. I understand the difficulty of getting sponsors into eSports, but you cannot twist that into an implicit protection from the community for any actions of EG that could be seen as undesirable to fans/sponsors.
No, this issue did not "happen some time ago". Orb was not affiliated with EG at the point of most of the screenshots, and only recently has this issue been brought up. Just because they're trying to not be judge, jury and executioner in one doesn't mean they're ignoring the issue.
Informing the sponsors was an effective strategy regarding your one goal; forcing others into doing something. However, what you failed to realize is that nothing is that easy. You've potentially scared millions upon millions of dollars away from this industry, just to have your own sense of justice, which in this case is just getting what you want.
|
On March 10 2012 09:19 Radin wrote:
Those of you claiming this isn't a big deal have obviously never been in a professional setting. It's not like Orb was making a drunken fool of himself at a bar (which would clearly be his personal life) - he was calling people niggers in Starcraft (the game he is contracted to cast).
The fact is, when you represent a professional organization you are held to a higher standard. No resepectable company would tolerate someone who represents them calling people niggers while attending (playing in this case) an event directly related to business. Not only is it immoral, it's horrible PR.
Orb chose this for himself. This was the correct move by EG.
He did it long before he was contracted by EG though(to my knowledge). So I don't see how this is pertinent.
|
incontrol is racist 24/7 on state of the games lolllll
he takes the piss out of asians etc all the time because guess what it's 2012 and we're multicultural and it's funny to all
fun fun fun lets all be happy and not get hung up on unimportant words
bye
|
On March 10 2012 09:20 Megabuster123 wrote:
He did it long before he was contracted by EG though(to my knowledge). So I don't see how this is pertinent.
Nope, Scoots said it was just a few days ago.
|
On March 10 2012 09:21 UnholyRai wrote:
incontrol is racist 24/7 on state of the games lolllll
he takes the piss out of asians etc all the time because guess what it's 2012 and we're multicultural and it's funny to all
fun fun fun lets all be happy and not get hung up on unimportant words
bye
lol at how bad you fail at trolling
|
I actually find a lot of the replies in this thread hilarious. People blaming EG for having to get rid of orb and bashing EG over it. Do you not understand that 1: orb did more than just rage, he lied about it, lied about it again to his team, lied some more, and called everyone calling him out on it a retard. And 2: EG really had no choice, even if for some reason they did want to keep orb, by having their sponsors contacted and pestered about this. If you want to keep defending orb and raging about the decision, be angry at the people that went straight to EGs sponsors before EG even had time to look into what happened. If you want to think rationally about this, be angry at orb, because I'm sure if he had admitted to what he did and apologized in the first place, rather than lying continually and bashing the people that were calling him out on it, I'm sure he would still have his job, though probably would've had a talking to, maybe a suspension.
|
On March 10 2012 09:20 Megabuster123 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 09:19 Radin wrote:
Those of you claiming this isn't a big deal have obviously never been in a professional setting. It's not like Orb was making a drunken fool of himself at a bar (which would clearly be his personal life) - he was calling people niggers in Starcraft (the game he is contracted to cast).
The fact is, when you represent a professional organization you are held to a higher standard. No resepectable company would tolerate someone who represents them calling people niggers while attending (playing in this case) an event directly related to business. Not only is it immoral, it's horrible PR.
Orb chose this for himself. This was the correct move by EG. He did it long before he was contracted by EG though(to my knowledge). So I don't see how this is pertinent.
Lying to EG saying it wasn't him. Sorta dropped the ball on that one. Don't lie to your employer.
|
On March 10 2012 09:19 figq wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 09:13 teamsolid wrote:On March 10 2012 08:44 figq wrote:Alright, I apologize for having to post a third time about the same topic, apparently my thoughts about it come to me very slowly. My previous two responses were about EG's policy, because their official decision can be associated with them as an organization: + Show Spoiler [previous posts] +On March 09 2012 13:20 figq wrote:
Well, EG is free to hire and fire whoever they want, and the esports audience is free to follow Orb's excellent casting to whatever other leagues that are lucky enough to get him as a caster.
As I said in the other thread, I consider all this in the end more of an attack that hurts EG (for losing Orb as a caster), than an attack that hurts Orb, who will continue to be such a great caster anyway, and probably find an even better position. On March 09 2012 23:27 figq wrote:
As I said before, EG, of course, is free to hire and fire people as they wish, but after some more contemplation, I can't hide that I'm personally disappointed with EG (yet again). In a case that revolves around what usually would be called "progressive thinking" (though I dislike the term, as I find it absurd and relative), issuing any kind of irreversible punishment is disturbing. The whole premise of overcoming any kind of bigotry and segregation is the belief in the human ability to adapt, change, evolve and not be set in stone by the past. In view of this, I find it disheartening to see doors being closed forever, for anyone, even for a murderer, let alone for a verbal abuser. That's not a sign of purity of principles, but rather a sign of fear and weakness. It took me some time to realize what was it that I found so subtly disturbing in EG's official position, and then I realized it was this. However, this post is more about Alex Garfield's personal reasoning, which he outlines so eloquently in the OP, and which of course cannot be fully attributed to EG as a whole. Three things bothered me about the presentation of the case by Alex. First of all, he didn't manage to convince me. He had a very interesting preface designed around pointing out how much he can't stand a word. Then he proceeded to announce that his employee is therefore fired, never to return. Sure, a CEO's decision-making process is solely under his own power, and dictatorship, if you will. But then again why is this decision-making even presented to the public. It didn't seem substantiated enough for me. Basically, it's at the same level as "I hate black people, so I fired that black guy". I'm trying to be supportive of Alex about his personal phobia of the word "nigger", but I wouldn't expect a CEO to be so open about applying professional decisions about people's career, based on his own personal reaction towards something as simple as a word. And then the second thing to mention - though both are obviously inseparable - is just the fact that a CEO would be so vulnerable, in his reasoning, to a word, by itself. As far as not willing to write it, read it, hear it. You know, most German people I've met don't have such fearful reaction about Hitler jokes, the holocaust, or swastikas. They appreciate context, humor, intent. In Slasher's public shows, you can often hear jew jokes, and Slasher himself laughs about them, or even initiates them. Why is that? It's because it's more important what people actually mean. I can write a system of equations using for variables "nigger", "nigger1", "nigger2"...; the equations work just the same. Has mathematics not witnessed the centuries of oppression? It has, it existed all along, but it doesn't care about formal sequences of characters, only about the value you put behind them. I can write a computer program and replace all identifiers in it with "nigger", "nigger1", "nigger2"...; the program works just the same. It's also based inherently on the formal languages that have basis in mathematics and more specifically logic. The understanding that there's a great separation between an identifier and the value that it carries is fundamental for the existence of modern computers - and thus computer games. So, especially in the gaming community, people are much more likely to comprehend that difference between symbols, avatars, nicknames, and the actual value behind them. I'm surprised, and a little scared, that a CEO within the gaming industry would have so much hard time given by a word. And that it would be so difficult to separate all its historical connotations with its meaning in a completely different context. Finally, the third thing that bothers me is that apparently the intention is of so very little value. So Alex admits that he doesn't really think Orb to be a racist. Good, I'm glad about that. Apparently that's not enough though, because just calling someone "racist" nowadays is of almost no meaning, as Alex again so very well has described. Then it becomes unclear exactly what is the accusation towards Orb. Apparently his behavior did contain a trait of what could be seen in our modern day as racially offensive language and that's enough for him to be fired, never to return. What about his intentions? If we all agree that in fact he never had any racially offensive intentions to mind and separating people by their color hasn't been a part of his real life reasoning, then again what is his real fault? Is his fault entirely formal, is there any substance to it? It bothers me that a formal fault would be more important than a true character evaluation. For all we know, someone could be an active racist - to the point of actually discriminating people of other races when having the opportunity to get away with it, but still maintain a completely clean sheet in the formal department. Isn't it really more important to analyze people's real intentions and goals rather than their formal means? So to summarize my three posts and their points: - EG is free to conduct their business as they wish, of course - EG loses more than Orb, the attack here could have been against EG - "Progressive" reasoning should not lead to irreversible punishment, even for a murderer - The transition to the decision itself was not convincing enough, and too personal - A CEO in the gaming industry should not be so intimidated by identifiers, by themselves - Value should be more important than a formal expression, especially in the gaming community That said, despite a lot of criticism in my posts, I enjoy Alex's presentations a lot, they are always so educating, well written and a pleasure to read, even when I disagree with many points. So, I thank you. Alex, for taking time to write to us, and I would greatly appreciate any future threads of yours too, hopefully on less troubling matters for EG. It's not just "formal" when you have a team and corporate sponsors involved. Even if Alex doesn't believe Orb is racist, at least a portion of the general public now believes he is because of his usage of the word nigger. So it's bad for their image, period. That is the substance. I can see that it could seem that way, yeah. Although I'm not even sure how big is the portion of the general public to think that way, and how important it is for the real profit of EG's sponsors. For all we know, a small group of people, who were angered by Orb's ladder behavior in the past, managed to be loud enough at the sponsors' doors, to get him fired. (and now probably wonder "Wait, why did we even do that?", after it's done)
If you read Alex's addendum, he's already begging people to be patient before complaining to EG's sponsors. So it doesn't even matter exactly how large the group is, they're making themselves heard loud and clear to the people who call the shots.
|
I really dont understand why people keep getting so worked up over a word, it was used in a heated moment that was it. But also i dont understand if eg is going to get upset with a guy using a word why do they stop there. They allow Idra to go on and demean other players "MKP sucks , Destiny sucks...". I would think that as esports is trying to grow that players would have things to say that would at least be constructive rather than a player sucks. But idra is allowed to say what he wants about other players , its his opinion, but as long as he doesnt say a word when the cameras on thats fine???? Incontrol is allowed to throw a hissy on stream about a tournements map choice make them seem like they are tards but its fine cause he didnt say a word. Garfield say that he doesnt think Orb is racist but he pretty much, by actions that EG has done , blantanly slandered Orb and made him look like that. People say things in frustration thats only human. Seems over kill what they did to Orb.
|
On March 10 2012 09:22 Utinni wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2012 09:20 Megabuster123 wrote:On March 10 2012 09:19 Radin wrote:
Those of you claiming this isn't a big deal have obviously never been in a professional setting. It's not like Orb was making a drunken fool of himself at a bar (which would clearly be his personal life) - he was calling people niggers in Starcraft (the game he is contracted to cast).
The fact is, when you represent a professional organization you are held to a higher standard. No resepectable company would tolerate someone who represents them calling people niggers while attending (playing in this case) an event directly related to business. Not only is it immoral, it's horrible PR.
Orb chose this for himself. This was the correct move by EG. He did it long before he was contracted by EG though(to my knowledge). So I don't see how this is pertinent. Lying to EG saying it wasn't him. Sorta dropped the ball on that one. Don't lie to your employer.
I agree with this, the lying is why he should get sacked, if he was indeed lying.
|
On March 10 2012 09:19 Radin wrote:
Those of you claiming this isn't a big deal have obviously never been in a professional setting. It's not like Orb was making a drunken fool of himself at a bar (which would clearly be his personal life) - he was calling people niggers in Starcraft (the game he is contracted to cast).
The fact is, when you represent a professional organization you are held to a higher standard. No resepectable company would tolerate someone who represents them calling people niggers while attending (playing in this case) an event directly related to business. Not only is it immoral, it's horrible PR.
Orb chose this for himself. This was the correct move by EG.
Actually it is the exact same as him "making a drunken fool of himself at a bar." This all happened before he was signed with EG. He was playing starcraft 2 as a past time, on his own time. (Most of the time, he WAS intoxicated.) Just because he was not out in a public setting doesn't mean it wasn't his personal life.
|
Ehh, The 'n' word is used so differently now a days, especially people who come from the ghetto. I really don't think using the 'n' word is considered racist anymore, people just overlook it, BUT using it in the professional scene is definitely uncalled for. You should always watch yourself with what you say, especially if you have influential power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
