D&D Celebrity Satine Phoenix & Husband Jamison Stone Accused Of Abuse Towards Freelancers

D&D influencer Satine Phoenix, and her husband Jamison Stone, who run tabletop gaming company Apotheosis Studios, have been accused of abusive behavior towards freelancers and contracted workers. Satine Phoenix is a well-known D&D personality and creator, and was the D&D Community Manager for about a year back in 2018. Both she and Stone have appeared in many events and streaming shows, and...

Status
Not open for further replies.
D&D influencer Satine Phoenix, and her husband Jamison Stone, who run tabletop gaming company Apotheosis Studios, have been accused of abusive behavior towards freelancers and contracted workers.

Satine Phoenix is a well-known D&D personality and creator, and was the D&D Community Manager for about a year back in 2018. Both she and Stone have appeared in many events and streaming shows, and have worked with WotC, Geek & Sundry, and other companies. Recently their Kickstarter campaign Sirens: Battle of the Bards raised over $300,000. At GaryCon, a US gaming convention, the couple held a public wedding.

sirens.jpg

Accusations were initially leveled last week against Stone by tattooist Chad Rowe, who tweeted about the abusive way in which Stone, as his client at the time, treated him. The artist was "insulted, berated, and talked down to as if I was a lesser person". Other reports started to roll in as people shared similar experiences, with people revealing how they had been bullied by them, and how the pair frequently portrayed themselves as 'better' than those they worked with. At the time of writing there have been many such reports including one from voice actress and designer Liisa Lee who was subjected to underhanded business practices by Phoenix and her then partner Ruty Rutenberg. Others indicated difficulties in getting paid for work done for Stone and Phoenix or their company.

Lysa Penrose reported on problematic interactions while Phoenix worked at WotC, who was the primary point of contact regarding a report of abuse. Penrose reports that Phoenix failed to pass on the reports of abuse, and continued to publicly associate with the abuser.

Jamison Stone has since resigned as CEO of Apotheosis Studios (though the pair do own the company) and issued a long apology which has been widely criticized. Phoenix released a statement about a week later. Screenshots leaked from a private channel indicate that they have adopted a strategy of shifting the blame onto Stone, so that Phoenix's public image remain intact, with Stone writing “I also am ensuring behind the scenes ... we shield Satine as much as physically possible from damage.”

D&D In A Castle, which is an event which hosts D&D games run by professional DMs in a weekend break in a castle, has dropped the pair from its lineup, as has Jasper's Game Day, an organization which works to prevent suicides. Origins Game Fair, at which the couple are celebrity guests, removed Stone from its guest list, but not Phoenix, stating that "staff assessed that there was no immediate risk of physical harm".

According to ComicBook.com. former collaborator of Phoenix, Ruty Rutenberg, is suing Phoenix, alleging misappropriation of $40,000 of stream network Maze Arcana's money.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

CleverNickName

Limit Break Dancing
Satine's video was incredibly painful to watch. I don't know her well enough to question her sincerity or motives, and all I can truthfully say is that I would never, ever, in a million years, open myself up to that kind of treatment by the public.

As others have said, her actions over the next few months will be the true test of sincerity. I'm not close enough to the topic to know what needs to be done, or what needs to be done first, but she'll have to figure all that out.

I expect she will spend the next few weeks doing damage control: hire a PR manager, make phone calls, write letters (and paychecks), go back through that video feed and block/report the people who threatened her and her husband with bodily harm, that sort of thing. Then she will probably go into reconstruction mode for a year or two: drop out of the public eye, meet with other people in the industry, repair some relationships and end some others, attend a few business workshops, focus on self-care, all while working behind the cameras and using a pen name to grow her resume. I don't know if she will ever be able to return to her original celebrity status...or if she even wants to.

Again, I'm not close enough to this person, her business, or the wronged parties to know any of this for sure. This is all just conjecture.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

I mean it's not actually a punishment in anything but their minds because rarely are canceled people deplatformed and rarely are people universally deplatformed. That's why we get to still hear them screaming after they apparently lost all their ability to reach people.

Basically, our best punishment is sending a kid to their room where all their toys are.
Perfectly put.

The only people who get universally deplatformed are those whose actions have been so egregious that they've pissed off everyone, on all parts of the political spectrum. And even they usually eventually come limping back into the public sphere. Jorp realized he'd basically done this so pre-emptively cancelled himself before anyone could do it for him, thus shortening the time he has to spend in his room (and he can spend that time writing books for when he comes out of said room).

Oh I guess there's also people who cannot stop breaking the rules of platforms and making threats or committing libel (a writer who supports JK Rowling eventually managed to make so many "actionable threats" which he thought were just "funny" that he basically got perma-banned everywhere - maybe don't make "actionable threats")?

The people who really get "cancelled" are those just no-one cares about anymore. This is part of why a lot of opinion-mongers get more and more extreme. They know that the moment no-one cares is when they truly lose their power.
Sure. I'm just observing some of the back and forth and it's one of those things where there isn't going to be a consensus, because Geek Social Fallacy #1.
Does anyone still believe that?

I hear a lot of silly arguments defending people who (largely falsely) claim to have been "cancelled", but it's been... more than a decade since I heard that one. That was the one used to defend Cat-pee Man and other classic figures of the early internet. "Noooo you can't not invite that guy because he stinks and refuses to do anything about it!" but then extending to "Noooooo you can't not invite that guy just because he makes women extremely uncomfortable with his behaviour and is probably a danger to them! That's uncool!". I'd literally forgotten it even existed. It's really not very different from typical Frat Boy stuff honestly.

The "Something Awful generation", which I guess technically I am one of, definitely used to believe a lot of that. Blizzard's "Old Guard" of high-level management and lead devs all believed most of that, but they're gone now, in large part because those beliefs lead directly to them enabling actual rapists and serial sex abusers and harassers and so on.

There's always the spectacular idiocy of Blizzard's original Real ID design to show how they believed all this, particularly GSF4 and GSF5.
 

Social consequences are nothing without social pressure, and behavior doesn't change without consequences.
I agree with this. If someone abuses you, or mistreats you, or doesn't pay you for contracted work, you should speak up. If you witness someone else being abused, you should speak up. If you speak up, maybe others who have been wronged will find the courage to speak up as well. That's social pressure and it's good and important.

If you were not wronged, if you are an anonymous person on the internet who does not know the accused or the accuser and has no knowledge whatsoever about any of it, you do not have to insert yourself into this good and important process. If you do feel the need to insert yourself, a kind word of support for the accuser might be welcome and appreciated and provide social support for their speaking up.

Now go read those Twitter threads and live-stream comments. You'll find some of those kind words there. You'll also find a lot of people who literally have no actual knowledge about any of it jumping on the pile and ripping to shreds, usually anonymously, a person who they do not even know.

And I think that's bad.
 

If everyone posting mean tweets about S&J had personally witnessed their bad behavior, would it no longer be "dogpiling"?
Correct.

ETA: Even better to speak up at the time when you see someone being mistreated, and not just later when they make a Twitter thread about it, even if there's no one around to see you speak up.
 
Last edited:

Now go read those Twitter threads and live-stream comments. You'll find some of those kind words there. You'll also find a lot of people who literally have no actual knowledge about any of it jumping on the pile and ripping to shreds, usually anonymously, a person who they do not even know.
That you can't see the miles-deep irony/hypocrisy here is pretty funny.

You're taking a huge dump on literally every single person who has ever expressed an opinion about something that doesn't directly impact them, and to you, that's fine, but if they say something you don't like, that's not okay.

Are you going to answer about my example with the politician? Because by your logic in your earlier post AND in this post, I am not allowed to criticise the politician and/or a bad person for criticising the politician.

I think a society where we're not allowed to criticise politicians for bad actions unless we were directly impacted by them is a society that is not going to run well. And how do you even define "witnessed"? Like, does it have to be first-hand as in we were literally present? Or does a screenshot or video count? By your logic, it seems like if I saw a politician hitting their kids on a TV news station's reporting, I would not have "witnessed" it sufficiently. But if I was in the park where they were doing it, and saw them, I would have? This is pretty incoherent stuff dude.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
And this is exactly why I personally think making "public apologies" to the general populace on stuff like this is more or less a waste of time. You are apologizing to a lot of people who have nothing to do with the actual situation and who are just looking to get a self-congratulatory pat on the back after acting the jerk to the person by demanding restitution for something they had nothing to do with.

Apologize to the actual people who your hurt? Absolutely. Apologize to the mass of humanity out in social media-land who are demanding a pound of flesh because they need their public-facing online presence to seem holier-than-thou? No thanks.
Public figure, public apology.
The thing I just shrug about "cancel culture" is that it really seems to me to highlight the difference between those of us who didn't grow up with social media, and the ones that do. Because when you think about it... what is "cancelling"? It is people telling someone "We aren't going to let you be famous anymore."
Well, no. Cancelling is a warning to other people in a community. Deplatforming is a bonus, when it can be accomplished.
I think you're pretty wrong there. It isn't the worst they can think of. It is the one and only punishment that they actually can implement.

The world at large cannot take your money, or send you to prison - those are for the courts. And making you suffer physically would in most forms be highly illegal. The world at large has been handed one tool to work with, so that's what they work with.
And it’s not so ephemeral as they suggest, anyway. Social reputation death is literally painful for most people. That’s why it’s been an effective “punishment” (insofar as punishment is even the point) for thousands of years.
You're clearly being sensationalist, don't try to put words in my mouth. I don't know what's going on in your day but don't jump down my throat.
It’s not sensationalist, it’s a valid point.
I mean it's not actually a punishment in anything but their minds because rarely are canceled people deplatformed and rarely are people universally deplatformed. That's why we get to still hear them screaming after they apparently lost all their ability to reach people.

Basically, our best punishment is sending a kid to their room where all their toys are.
Hardly. Joss Whedon had several projects cancelled and is barely working now, Satine and Jamison had basically their whole current careers pulled out from under them, and you seem to be ignoring the fact that it is extremely painful for the vast majority of people to have the people around them turn against them.

Besides which, so what? What’s your point?
 

Vaalingrade

Legend
If you were not wronged, if you are an anonymous person on the internet who does not know the accused or the accuser and has no knowledge whatsoever about any of it, you do not have to insert yourself into this good and important process. If you do feel the need to insert yourself, a kind word of support for the accuser might be welcome and appreciated and provide social support for their speaking up.
How are us sad nobodies, who are essentially the plankton of all industries (basically the food from which everything grows off, but never respected or cared about) supposed to actually stand up to the abusers without others having our backs?

If everyone just minded their business, the abusers just plain win and get to keep doing what they're doing.
 


That you can't see the miles-deep irony/hypocrisy here is pretty funny.
Honestly, while I'm not going to block you or anything like that, I'm not going to engage with you any further, either. Judging by several of these little comments in multiple posts, now, you seem to find in me a considerable deficit of either intellectual capacity or intellectual honesty. I feel I've made my position very clear, so I'll no longer trouble you with it.
 

Vaalingrade

Legend
and you seem to be ignoring the fact that it is extremely painful for the vast majority of people to have the people around them turn against them.
What exactly do you expect when someone shows the people around them what they are in the dark and it's terrible?

No, they f'd around and found out. Now they have a crossroads where they can choose to stop f'ing around or get an education.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top