dave2008
Legend
That is correctUnless I am somehow misreading who you are referring to, Orion is nonbinary and uses they/them pronouns.
That is correctUnless I am somehow misreading who you are referring to, Orion is nonbinary and uses they/them pronouns.
tl;dr Orion felt they were brought on as part of a serious push to improve D&D's Diversity and Inclusion. Instead, Orion ran up against an insiders-only culture that Orion felt only brought them on to improve their image rather than make actual change. Furthermore, Orion felt that leadership was inadequately supporting the actual work they did, both through a lack of assignments and through stolen credit. This capped off with WotC's "Diversity" statement that was in part a response to controversies around Orc representation, which Orion publicly criticized as all talk no action. Orion's freelance contract wasn't renewed, which Orion claimed was retaliation for going public with concerns that had been ignored in private forums.
Not true, if this becomes an investor relations problem and a brand problem, corporate will micromanage.Mention in an earnings call is not reason to expect they're engaging on the level of what contractors work on which projects, as Orion described, especially when the brand is doing fantastically well, from a historical perspective. I don't think the products they put out have shown signs of that kind of micromanagement from distant corporate overlords.
Honestly, sounds to me like a story with no bad guys and no good guys. WotC could do more for diversity and may have partially hired Orion for diversity's sake. OTOH, Orion's complaint's about not being able to publicly post things that aren't aligned with the company and not getting enough attention as a contractor sounds like someone who might be a little naive about working with larger corporate entities. The biggest rifts seems more like a business culture mismatch than anything else.
Not true, if this becomes an investor relations problem and a brand problem, corporate will micromanage.
I agree in the past, but the current actions and responses being taken do have more of a corporate stamp. Hence getting the product name wrong in the disclaimer. That would include micromanaging staff now.I think you misunderstand. Orion Black said that they were passed over for projects. I'm saying that's unlikely to have been Hasbro's fault.
Unfortunately, corporations and professionals get punished for apologizing because it can suggest legal liability. Hence, the silence.Sounds like someone actually decided to listen to Greg Tito on the issue - he said he'd been trying to get them to see sense for ages.
It's typical corporate stuff but any kind of acknowledgement and apology is better than stark silence. It's probably got to be a little better for Orion too, it's not what it could be but basic public acknowledgement can mean a lot in this kind of situation.