|
We understand that this topic evokes strong feelings. In the interest of maintaining a necessary and productive discussion, we will be taking a strong stance against posters that clearly do not contribute to this aim. Dishonest and bad faith arguments, victim blaming, and attacks on other users, will be strictly moderated. A post which only serves to muddy the waters and dishonestly portray the nature of assault and harassment (and corresponding accusations) is also unwelcome. |
Does anyone know what practices are in place within the e-sports industry to specifically combat against this kind of thing. Is there some form of HR regularly on hand at events for professionals or is there only limited recourse for professionals within the e-sports industry? How many checks and balances actually are there to prevent these kind of things from happening?
|
On June 27 2020 02:21 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 02:18 ploguidice wrote:
Since everyone is talking about the presumption of innocence (and presumably waiting to assign guilt until someone is proven beyond reasonable doubt) I figured I'd throw my two cents in.
Those two legal standards are used because the bar to use the threat of state violence strip someone of their liberty IS and SHOULD BE. As an aside I'd actually like it to be higher (criminalize less things, get rid of plea bargains and bail so prosecutors have to actually make decisions about what cases they'd like to bring to trial, increase funding for public defenders and so on.)
That being said the bar to stop hiring people for esports events does not need to be nearly that high. Again the first standard is for situations where the consequence is people with guns will come and put you in prison, and if you fail to comply they can legally inflict violence on you. It's just not comparable to esports organizations not wanting to hire you because your reputation is tanked.
To take it out of the realm of criminal allegations here's a scenario:
Imagine if a bunch of people tell you caster XYZ sucks to work with. They're not punctual, they complain constantly, showed up hungover, were rude to other staff, caused broadcast delays and so on. If you found the people telling you this credible would you hire them anyway because innocent until proven guilty? Or would you decide to hire someone that didn't suck to work with? Great post, I think this is the proper way to frame it.
I am not one of the people who say "beyond resonable doubt", but in Your example there is a proof, You have witness statements. Also You made an assumption that the people telling this are credible, we dont have that luxury on internet. For me usually both the acuser and acused are totally neutral, they dont have negative or positive credibility, i dont know these people, i never interacted with them. How can i be the judge in something like this without semblence of a proof ???
|
On June 27 2020 02:41 Z3nith wrote:
Does anyone know what practices are in place within the e-sports industry to specifically combat against this kind of thing. Is there some form of HR regularly on hand at events for professionals or is there only limited recourse for professionals within the e-sports industry? How many checks and balances actually are there to prevent these kind of things from happening?
I don t know, but based on that story, where a victim told the teams coach (or manager?) about it and nothing happend, probably close to 0, wich is a problem.
I know from his twitter, that Apollo is aware of all of this and have high hopes, that as soon as offline events are in place again, there will be some kind of reporting place there.
On June 27 2020 02:46 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 02:21 farvacola wrote:On June 27 2020 02:18 ploguidice wrote:
Since everyone is talking about the presumption of innocence (and presumably waiting to assign guilt until someone is proven beyond reasonable doubt) I figured I'd throw my two cents in.
Those two legal standards are used because the bar to use the threat of state violence strip someone of their liberty IS and SHOULD BE. As an aside I'd actually like it to be higher (criminalize less things, get rid of plea bargains and bail so prosecutors have to actually make decisions about what cases they'd like to bring to trial, increase funding for public defenders and so on.)
That being said the bar to stop hiring people for esports events does not need to be nearly that high. Again the first standard is for situations where the consequence is people with guns will come and put you in prison, and if you fail to comply they can legally inflict violence on you. It's just not comparable to esports organizations not wanting to hire you because your reputation is tanked.
To take it out of the realm of criminal allegations here's a scenario:
Imagine if a bunch of people tell you caster XYZ sucks to work with. They're not punctual, they complain constantly, showed up hungover, were rude to other staff, caused broadcast delays and so on. If you found the people telling you this credible would you hire them anyway because innocent until proven guilty? Or would you decide to hire someone that didn't suck to work with? Great post, I think this is the proper way to frame it. I am not one of the people who say "beyond resonable doubt", but in Your example there is a proof, You have witness statements. Also You made an assumption that the people telling this are credible, we dont have that luxury on internet. For me usually both the acuser and acused are totally neutral, they dont have negative or positive credibility, i dont know these people, i never interacted with them. How can i be the judge in something like this without semblence of a proof ???
No one asks you to be the judge.
|
On June 27 2020 02:41 Z3nith wrote:
Does anyone know what practices are in place within the e-sports industry to specifically combat against this kind of thing. Is there some form of HR regularly on hand at events for professionals or is there only limited recourse for professionals within the e-sports industry? How many checks and balances actually are there to prevent these kind of things from happening?
Absolutely nothing. At least in my experiences in starcraft
|
On June 27 2020 02:36 ProTech wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 02:20 JimmiC wrote:On June 27 2020 01:23 ProTech wrote:On June 26 2020 23:22 JimmiC wrote:On June 26 2020 23:15 Maruisgoat1994 wrote:
What happened to AngryJoe is the PERFECT example of why "Believe all women" is fucking stupid and toxic.
He had to invest in lawyers and have is reputation affected. Then the girl simply says, "oh, maybe he did nothing wrong and he had no bad intention" then she deletes her accusations.
Its sad because not only it affects Joe heavily, but because of bitches like her, real victims lose a lot of credibility. Yes that sounds awful, so does some one being raped and no one believing her. And the second happens WAY more than the first. I get your a troll who just made this post to be banned, but it is still worth pointing out because we there is still people dumb enough to think you have a point. The reason the second happens way more than the first is because we have what's called " Due Process. " Without it, any allegation is true, so if you're going to make these allegations you need to provide the proof and evidence, and prove it without a shadow of a doubt to be true, otherwise don't you think we'd have a lot of innocent people in jail? Yes and that is why the burden off proof is higher for suspending someones freedom then it is for people to.chose not to support a public figure. In the particular situation though with 4 corroborated stories including screen shots and no even denial, I'd say it is a fair response. If you dont think its fair let us know where you would set the bar. I suspect it is unreasonably high which is why this behavior is so common, there is no consequences and when some one speaks out they get way more.voices of hate rather than support. I don't disagree with you in its entirety, however the bar IMO needs to be set high especially in cases like this, where it could potentially be a ruse to get more popular. I am not agreeing or disagreeing with the defendant or accusers in anyway, I just believe in the system of " Due Process " because without it, any allegation could be true if enough people get together and just decide that it's true.
Due Process is a legal requirement that exists to restrain the government's ability to remove your rights and inflict violence upon you. It's not a thing that has to govern social and business relations. If someone tells you a new restaurant sucks is declining to eat there a violation of due process. Is declining to take a job after someone tells you an employer is horrible a violation of due process?
As people we have to make the best judgments we can, and then make decisions based on those judgments. For what it's worth I genuinely believe that many of these accusations (as currently presented) would not meet the standard needed to lock someone up, and also think it's a good thing that standard is high. I'm also okay with there being a much lower standard for the consequence of "Having to get a normie job because you tanked your reputation in an industry where there's 100 hungry people for every one job opportunity and no one wants to work with you anymore".
Edit: Added a not between would and meet
|
On June 27 2020 02:47 dbRic1203 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 02:41 Z3nith wrote:
Does anyone know what practices are in place within the e-sports industry to specifically combat against this kind of thing. Is there some form of HR regularly on hand at events for professionals or is there only limited recourse for professionals within the e-sports industry? How many checks and balances actually are there to prevent these kind of things from happening? I don t know, but based on that story, where a victim told the teams coach (or manager?) about it and nothing happend, probably close to 0, wich is a problem. I know from his twitter, that Apollo is aware of all of this and have high hopes, that as soon as offline events are in place again, there will be some kind of reporting place there. Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 02:46 Silvanel wrote:On June 27 2020 02:21 farvacola wrote:On June 27 2020 02:18 ploguidice wrote:
Since everyone is talking about the presumption of innocence (and presumably waiting to assign guilt until someone is proven beyond reasonable doubt) I figured I'd throw my two cents in.
Those two legal standards are used because the bar to use the threat of state violence strip someone of their liberty IS and SHOULD BE. As an aside I'd actually like it to be higher (criminalize less things, get rid of plea bargains and bail so prosecutors have to actually make decisions about what cases they'd like to bring to trial, increase funding for public defenders and so on.)
That being said the bar to stop hiring people for esports events does not need to be nearly that high. Again the first standard is for situations where the consequence is people with guns will come and put you in prison, and if you fail to comply they can legally inflict violence on you. It's just not comparable to esports organizations not wanting to hire you because your reputation is tanked.
To take it out of the realm of criminal allegations here's a scenario:
Imagine if a bunch of people tell you caster XYZ sucks to work with. They're not punctual, they complain constantly, showed up hungover, were rude to other staff, caused broadcast delays and so on. If you found the people telling you this credible would you hire them anyway because innocent until proven guilty? Or would you decide to hire someone that didn't suck to work with? Great post, I think this is the proper way to frame it. I am not one of the people who say "beyond resonable doubt", but in Your example there is a proof, You have witness statements. Also You made an assumption that the people telling this are credible, we dont have that luxury on internet. For me usually both the acuser and acused are totally neutral, they dont have negative or positive credibility, i dont know these people, i never interacted with them. How can i be the judge in something like this without semblence of a proof ??? No one asks you to be the judge.
Asking company to fire someone or ban from competition is taking a stance and kinda judging the situation, dont You think?
|
Northern Ireland25814 Posts
On June 27 2020 02:36 ProTech wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 02:20 JimmiC wrote:On June 27 2020 01:23 ProTech wrote:On June 26 2020 23:22 JimmiC wrote:On June 26 2020 23:15 Maruisgoat1994 wrote:
What happened to AngryJoe is the PERFECT example of why "Believe all women" is fucking stupid and toxic.
He had to invest in lawyers and have is reputation affected. Then the girl simply says, "oh, maybe he did nothing wrong and he had no bad intention" then she deletes her accusations.
Its sad because not only it affects Joe heavily, but because of bitches like her, real victims lose a lot of credibility. Yes that sounds awful, so does some one being raped and no one believing her. And the second happens WAY more than the first. I get your a troll who just made this post to be banned, but it is still worth pointing out because we there is still people dumb enough to think you have a point. The reason the second happens way more than the first is because we have what's called " Due Process. " Without it, any allegation is true, so if you're going to make these allegations you need to provide the proof and evidence, and prove it without a shadow of a doubt to be true, otherwise don't you think we'd have a lot of innocent people in jail? Yes and that is why the burden off proof is higher for suspending someones freedom then it is for people to.chose not to support a public figure. In the particular situation though with 4 corroborated stories including screen shots and no even denial, I'd say it is a fair response. If you dont think its fair let us know where you would set the bar. I suspect it is unreasonably high which is why this behavior is so common, there is no consequences and when some one speaks out they get way more.voices of hate rather than support. I don't disagree with you in its entirety, however the bar IMO needs to be set high especially in cases like this, where it could potentially be a ruse to get more popular.I am not agreeing or disagreeing with the defendant or accusers in anyway, I just believe in the system of " Due Process " because without it, any allegation could be true if enough people get together and just decide that it's true.
Can you not?
This isn’t to say people don’t lie, of course they do. But for popularity?
Come on man .
|
On June 27 2020 02:36 ProTech wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 02:20 JimmiC wrote:On June 27 2020 01:23 ProTech wrote:On June 26 2020 23:22 JimmiC wrote:On June 26 2020 23:15 Maruisgoat1994 wrote:
What happened to AngryJoe is the PERFECT example of why "Believe all women" is fucking stupid and toxic.
He had to invest in lawyers and have is reputation affected. Then the girl simply says, "oh, maybe he did nothing wrong and he had no bad intention" then she deletes her accusations.
Its sad because not only it affects Joe heavily, but because of bitches like her, real victims lose a lot of credibility. Yes that sounds awful, so does some one being raped and no one believing her. And the second happens WAY more than the first. I get your a troll who just made this post to be banned, but it is still worth pointing out because we there is still people dumb enough to think you have a point. The reason the second happens way more than the first is because we have what's called " Due Process. " Without it, any allegation is true, so if you're going to make these allegations you need to provide the proof and evidence, and prove it without a shadow of a doubt to be true, otherwise don't you think we'd have a lot of innocent people in jail? Yes and that is why the burden off proof is higher for suspending someones freedom then it is for people to.chose not to support a public figure. In the particular situation though with 4 corroborated stories including screen shots and no even denial, I'd say it is a fair response. If you dont think its fair let us know where you would set the bar. I suspect it is unreasonably high which is why this behavior is so common, there is no consequences and when some one speaks out they get way more.voices of hate rather than support. I am not agreeing or disagreeing with the defendant or accusers in anyway, I just believe in the system of " Due Process " because without it, any allegation could be true if enough people get together and just decide that it's true.
If you post which country you are from, I can regardless of the country, provide you with verified cases of people reporting abuse ..... getting abused and raped by authorities.
There is a reason justice wears a blindfold and swings a sword because she is often blind and cruel.
Name a country with a just system of laws and protections and within seconds I can respond. It is that bad.
This isn't a fair world or a just world and pretending that there is some form of justice that anyone, anywhere can access is a fairy tale and signs of indoctrination.
In a perfect world you are totally right. Maybe even in a good world.
But, without money and in cases the right color skin or last name and justice is just another myth like equality.
Sounds great, until you realize justice has been Just-Us-White-Men in the west since before the Magna Carta, or you know .... in Russia you can beat you wife, in a few countries you can legally remove her eyes and hang her over burnt toast (real case), it was legal to rape your wife in my country, in every state until different parts of the 80's. Women couldn't have bank accounts or own property until the 70's in some cases.
Due process. I support it. As soon as we invent it.
|
On June 27 2020 02:50 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 02:47 dbRic1203 wrote:On June 27 2020 02:41 Z3nith wrote:
Does anyone know what practices are in place within the e-sports industry to specifically combat against this kind of thing. Is there some form of HR regularly on hand at events for professionals or is there only limited recourse for professionals within the e-sports industry? How many checks and balances actually are there to prevent these kind of things from happening? I don t know, but based on that story, where a victim told the teams coach (or manager?) about it and nothing happend, probably close to 0, wich is a problem. I know from his twitter, that Apollo is aware of all of this and have high hopes, that as soon as offline events are in place again, there will be some kind of reporting place there. On June 27 2020 02:46 Silvanel wrote:On June 27 2020 02:21 farvacola wrote:On June 27 2020 02:18 ploguidice wrote:
Since everyone is talking about the presumption of innocence (and presumably waiting to assign guilt until someone is proven beyond reasonable doubt) I figured I'd throw my two cents in.
Those two legal standards are used because the bar to use the threat of state violence strip someone of their liberty IS and SHOULD BE. As an aside I'd actually like it to be higher (criminalize less things, get rid of plea bargains and bail so prosecutors have to actually make decisions about what cases they'd like to bring to trial, increase funding for public defenders and so on.)
That being said the bar to stop hiring people for esports events does not need to be nearly that high. Again the first standard is for situations where the consequence is people with guns will come and put you in prison, and if you fail to comply they can legally inflict violence on you. It's just not comparable to esports organizations not wanting to hire you because your reputation is tanked.
To take it out of the realm of criminal allegations here's a scenario:
Imagine if a bunch of people tell you caster XYZ sucks to work with. They're not punctual, they complain constantly, showed up hungover, were rude to other staff, caused broadcast delays and so on. If you found the people telling you this credible would you hire them anyway because innocent until proven guilty? Or would you decide to hire someone that didn't suck to work with? Great post, I think this is the proper way to frame it. I am not one of the people who say "beyond resonable doubt", but in Your example there is a proof, You have witness statements. Also You made an assumption that the people telling this are credible, we dont have that luxury on internet. For me usually both the acuser and acused are totally neutral, they dont have negative or positive credibility, i dont know these people, i never interacted with them. How can i be the judge in something like this without semblence of a proof ??? No one asks you to be the judge. Asking company to fire someone or ban from competition is taking a stance and kinda judging the situation, dont You think?
Rapid, and everyone else who has been brought up in this thread, are all free to share their accounts of these incidents, or deny that it happened, or say whatever they want about it. I don't think many of them have taken those opportunities. Nobody is saying we shouldn't hear what they have to say, but if they don't say anything we cannot form opinions of their statements. The facts we I have seen in public point one way, if more facts arise I will take them into account and revise my opinions. I understand some people may want more facts, but we are not entitled to anything. It is entirely up to the people concerned to decide what they want to share and what they don't want to share.
|
On June 27 2020 02:50 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 02:47 dbRic1203 wrote:On June 27 2020 02:41 Z3nith wrote:
Does anyone know what practices are in place within the e-sports industry to specifically combat against this kind of thing. Is there some form of HR regularly on hand at events for professionals or is there only limited recourse for professionals within the e-sports industry? How many checks and balances actually are there to prevent these kind of things from happening? I don t know, but based on that story, where a victim told the teams coach (or manager?) about it and nothing happend, probably close to 0, wich is a problem. I know from his twitter, that Apollo is aware of all of this and have high hopes, that as soon as offline events are in place again, there will be some kind of reporting place there. On June 27 2020 02:46 Silvanel wrote:On June 27 2020 02:21 farvacola wrote:On June 27 2020 02:18 ploguidice wrote:
Since everyone is talking about the presumption of innocence (and presumably waiting to assign guilt until someone is proven beyond reasonable doubt) I figured I'd throw my two cents in.
Those two legal standards are used because the bar to use the threat of state violence strip someone of their liberty IS and SHOULD BE. As an aside I'd actually like it to be higher (criminalize less things, get rid of plea bargains and bail so prosecutors have to actually make decisions about what cases they'd like to bring to trial, increase funding for public defenders and so on.)
That being said the bar to stop hiring people for esports events does not need to be nearly that high. Again the first standard is for situations where the consequence is people with guns will come and put you in prison, and if you fail to comply they can legally inflict violence on you. It's just not comparable to esports organizations not wanting to hire you because your reputation is tanked.
To take it out of the realm of criminal allegations here's a scenario:
Imagine if a bunch of people tell you caster XYZ sucks to work with. They're not punctual, they complain constantly, showed up hungover, were rude to other staff, caused broadcast delays and so on. If you found the people telling you this credible would you hire them anyway because innocent until proven guilty? Or would you decide to hire someone that didn't suck to work with? Great post, I think this is the proper way to frame it. I am not one of the people who say "beyond resonable doubt", but in Your example there is a proof, You have witness statements. Also You made an assumption that the people telling this are credible, we dont have that luxury on internet. For me usually both the acuser and acused are totally neutral, they dont have negative or positive credibility, i dont know these people, i never interacted with them. How can i be the judge in something like this without semblence of a proof ??? No one asks you to be the judge. Asking company to fire someone or ban from competition is taking a stance and kinda judging the situation, dont You think?
I never asked any company to fire anyone. I ask for a different policy, that ecourages victims to speak about what happend to them, so we can prevent more cases like that in the future.
RAPID for example wasn t permabanned from ever casting again, he is currently suspended, until everything is sorted out. Wich is the reasonable thing to do imo.
With how many accusions there are allready I don t expect him to ever get back into casting, wich is also fine to me. But that is not a he said, she said situation, we have like 5 different storys allready and The last one and BeastyQT GF both have proof for it. So for me the Rapid case is 100% clear.
Because I choose to give the accusers the benefit of the doubt, simply because they have a potentially bigger damage from this, have less to gain and are statistically more prominent than false accusers.
|
I am not defending Rapid or Avilo, i think in those situations there are enough of a proof (and i dont think in other cases perpetrators were named, were they ???). I am arguing about principle.
My personal position is more or less:
-multiple accusers make accusation much more credible
-i dont want proof beyond resonable doubt, i want something that adds credibility to accusation
-the more serious accusation the more steep should be burdern of proof
-if we are talking about internet abuse in this year and age there should be some digital trace (should not be hard to present a proof -->a screenshot, a log, a recording, anything provign misbehavior)
|
On June 26 2020 09:10 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2020 08:59 DeepElemBlues wrote:
I don't really get the focus on rapid
Yes he should say something.
The evidence against him looks very strong and his silence speaks volumes.
People don't have to respond immediately but this serious... within a day at the most. Within 12 hours really.
This is about way more than rapid there's a lot of allegations just within the SC2 community. There's cases with lots of evidence of all kinds of bad behaviors - rapid, avilo come to mind - and lots of cases now and to come with less evidence. It isn't the rapids of the community that are going to ultimately cause the most infighting like in this thread if a good process for handling allegations isn't developed.
This thread is the first time I've posted a bunch at TL in a long time. I watch a lot of SC2 (and artosis bw of course) still, I come to TL usually to watch my streams because why idk lol and I love that both games are still going here in 2020. Im afraid this is a very threatening situation to victims, people who are or will get accused, organizations, and the whole damn thing. I don't want anyone or anything to get wrecked who shouldn't. Or anyone or anything who should to escape. That's impossible of course but I hope everyone does the best they can so the community is both much more unplagued by bad behavior and much more truly unified once it gets through this. I don't think a lot of things said both ways in this thread are helping that but I'm sure theyre nothing compared to lots of other places. And I expect that both those things will end up happening Very fair point. We should be having conversations about all of the abusers - not just Rapid - and seeing if there are still organizations affiliated with the abusers (and if they're aware of the allegations).
There's a saying I came across in a book years ago, can't remember which book, but it stuck with me. One loud fart in a room covers a multitude of quieter ones. It would definitely be a bad thing if focusing on one abuser, or a small number of them, sucked up all the oxygen and let others slip through the cracks. If I could mix metaphors horribly here lol
On June 26 2020 09:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2020 09:08 DeepElemBlues wrote:On June 26 2020 09:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 26 2020 08:41 Cele wrote:On June 26 2020 08:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 26 2020 07:57 LG)Sabbath wrote:On June 26 2020 07:54 Cele wrote:On June 26 2020 07:49 LG)Sabbath wrote:On June 26 2020 07:44 Cele wrote:
A history of discrimination and disregard towards womens rights does not entitle you to make a judgement about a person without even listening to him Literally zero people in this thread are arguing this. How many women have come out against Rapid so far? That is the evidence. Rapid did not speak out. You are just trolling. No, im saying it sets a precedenct if we decide here there is no need to hear im in the first place. There is to many people here arguing that here already. Ok imagine Rapid comes out and says he doesn't know what these people are talking about. What do you suggest should happen? I would like to hear an answer to this question too, if you don't mind, Cele. Other people (who have similarly asked the community to reserve judgment until Rapid has made a public announcement) have responded to this with a shrug and a simple "well now it's just a he-said/she-said discussion, so we'll call it a draw", which is obviously not acceptable, given the multiple corroborating stories against him. What are your thoughts on this, Cele? Thats actually a very good and interesting question which i asked myself. I admit i have no answer to it and i dont think there is any. See my answer above, the structural problem is that this forum cannot be an impartial judge (neither me as person) I think it would need an impartial esport ethics/antidiscrimination comitee to clear it up satisfactory, which would be in the interest of all parties. But thats like purely wishful thinking/an idea on the fly by me. I appreciate your answer; my personal answer to that same question (because I would like to hear what Rapid has to say for himself too) is that a mere denial wouldn't cut it for me. To me, the evidence is incredibly one-sided - lopsided against him - given the many corroborative stories. I think it's incredibly unlikely for a group of individuals to be running an organized conspiracy just to assassinate his character, and given the general reliability of abuse allegations and the risk that victims generally go through just to make their voices heard, Rapid would need an unbelievable amount of proof that everyone was lying. I know this isn't a court of law and I'm definitely not an authority on this, but that's where I stand on the issue. Could you elaborate more on what you think this proposed e-sports ethics committee would be deciding, or clearing up? The real legal system would be covering actual criminal activity, and the organizations the accused abuser works with would be in charge of deciding whether or not they're going to get rid of said abuser... So I'm not sure what the role of an ethics committee would be. There are professional processes and standards that could be looked to. Esports should be professional, it spent two decades striving for and achieving professional legitimacy... so be professional. Some of these accusations rise to bringing in the legal system as well as in some of the accused should have law enforcement or at least civil attorneys looking into them. Some of them have before. A liaison to the traditional legal system would be interesting. If run properly, it could help act as a deterrent for future issues, and also provide a safe and helpful environment for victims.
I think that would be a good idea and also that that is something Twitch, Blizz, and other game publishers should be at least partly responsible for. They have the resources. They make money off the community. They have some responsibility here to help.
I also think that there should be a standard where streamers and players (not all players have streams, most do but not all) are held to a level of behavior by Twitch, people participating in tournaments by the organization running the tournament, etc. Something simple and covering private and semi-private behavior, things like bad behavior in DMs or some private discord, or irl or whatever. Not exactly a vague (or extremely detailed and wide-ranging) moral turpitude clause like from back in the day, but something that basically says 'you want to participate, you have to sign this document agreeing to not be a creepy dick and possibly a criminal.' And if you break it, you gone. That's how it is in many professional industries.
|
|
|
Not sure how to feel about this one.
The other events were stuff that would get a person fired from a job, and arguably deserved to be public.
In this one, the events are fairly vague, and bottomline, we're talking about a long-lasting relationship between two consenting adults that was perceived as toxic and psychologically abusive by one person, but nothing illegal and no harassment. I honestly don't think that this deserves to be public. Just because he's a D-list esports celebrity, it doesn't justify Rapid's private life getting revealed in details and debated on a public forum.
|
In larping comunity which i am part of for even more years then sc, this kind of things are sorted by event organizers apointing "Persons of trust" for each event. Those people (usually a male and female) are some very trusted and respected members of cummunity,with good social skills. Event attendees are informed that should anything uncomfortable or unwanted happend they are free to talk to them, totally confidentiality is guaranteed. This really works and helps people feel safe at events.
I will elabarate that often the problem with reporting abuse is shame, fear of reprisal and social ostracism, especially if it involvs people that are "fillars of community". This way we lower the emotional threshold for reporting.
|
On June 27 2020 02:49 Scarlett` wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 02:41 Z3nith wrote:
Does anyone know what practices are in place within the e-sports industry to specifically combat against this kind of thing. Is there some form of HR regularly on hand at events for professionals or is there only limited recourse for professionals within the e-sports industry? How many checks and balances actually are there to prevent these kind of things from happening? Absolutely nothing. At least in my experiences in starcraft
And that's one thing that needs to change and help is going to be necessary from the organizations that have the money to help. The main hurdle to that is money.
|
On June 27 2020 03:17 mcgormack wrote:Not sure how to feel about this one. The other events were stuff that would get a person fired from a job, and arguably deserved to be public. In this one, the events are fairly vague, and bottomline, we're talking about a long-lasting relationship between two consenting adults that was perceived as toxic and psychologically abusive by one person, but nothing illegal and no harassment. I honestly don't think that this deserves to be public. Just because he's a D-list esports celebrity, if there's no crime, it doesn't justify Rapid's private life getting revealed in details and debated on a public forum.
You may have missed that that's yet another non-consensual dick pic situation.
|
On June 27 2020 03:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 03:17 mcgormack wrote:Not sure how to feel about this one. The other events were stuff that would get a person fired from a job, and arguably deserved to be public. In this one, the events are fairly vague, and bottomline, we're talking about a long-lasting relationship between two consenting adults that was perceived as toxic and psychologically abusive by one person, but nothing illegal and no harassment. I honestly don't think that this deserves to be public. Just because he's a D-list esports celebrity, if there's no crime, it doesn't justify Rapid's private life getting revealed in details and debated on a public forum. You may have missed that that's yet another non-consensual dick pic situation.
This one isn't too clear.
They had been talking for a week, and there was consent and sex in their relationship.
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On June 27 2020 03:28 mcgormack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 03:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 27 2020 03:17 mcgormack wrote:Not sure how to feel about this one. The other events were stuff that would get a person fired from a job, and arguably deserved to be public. In this one, the events are fairly vague, and bottomline, we're talking about a long-lasting relationship between two consenting adults that was perceived as toxic and psychologically abusive by one person, but nothing illegal and no harassment. I honestly don't think that this deserves to be public. Just because he's a D-list esports celebrity, if there's no crime, it doesn't justify Rapid's private life getting revealed in details and debated on a public forum. You may have missed that that's yet another non-consensual dick pic situation. This one isn't too clear. They had been talking for a week, and there was consent and sex in their relationship.
It was consent based on emotional abuse, wtf how can you be so dense.
|
On June 27 2020 03:28 mcgormack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2020 03:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 27 2020 03:17 mcgormack wrote:Not sure how to feel about this one. The other events were stuff that would get a person fired from a job, and arguably deserved to be public. In this one, the events are fairly vague, and bottomline, we're talking about a long-lasting relationship between two consenting adults that was perceived as toxic and psychologically abusive by one person, but nothing illegal and no harassment. I honestly don't think that this deserves to be public. Just because he's a D-list esports celebrity, if there's no crime, it doesn't justify Rapid's private life getting revealed in details and debated on a public forum. You may have missed that that's yet another non-consensual dick pic situation. This one isn't too clear. They had been talking for a week, and there was consent and sex in their relationship.
Having sex with someone, having a relationship with someone - does not make you immune from acting inappropriately.
Most victims are preyed upon by people they know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
