Evil Genius Games bleeding personnel?

[Morrus]

Not sure if this is a "valid" response but... not sure what the drama is about...
I live in Israel and we are in a state of war for four months and counting with 136 hostages. Ukraine has been invaded by Russia almost two years ago and the war is still ongoing with magnitudes of orders more killed, tortured and kidnapped.

This really seems like a "First World problem" - Commercial use of AI or blockchain tech, even if it caused someone to quit a company, is such a relatively minor issue if I look at what my country (and ordinary Palestinians) is going through and even worse for Ukrainians.

We all understand that there are problems of differing scales around the world, and we hope we can have empathy for more than one thing at a time. Everything on--or indeed off--this forum is a minor issue when compared to war. However, we will continue to engage with the world around us nonetheless.

 

[Noven]

Not sure if this is a "valid" response but... not sure what the drama is about...
I live in Israel and we are in a state of war for four months and counting with 136 hostages. Ukraine has been invaded by Russia almost two years ago and the war is still ongoing with magnitudes of orders more killed, tortured and kidnapped.

This really seems like a "First World problem" - Commercial use of AI or blockchain tech, even if it caused someone to quit a company, is such a relatively minor issue if I look at what my country (and ordinary Palestinians) is going through and even worse for Ukrainians.
IMHO, definitely not a reason to bash a company (try to look at companies who avoid sanctions on russia etc..)

I mean yeah, war is much more important than role playing games, but I would suggest that this is an appropriate forum for the topic, considering that it is in the General Tabletop Discussion.

 

[technoextreme]

Yep. As far as I can tell:

Everyone involved seem like decent folks
There is no proof Mr. Scott used AI, blockchain, or sold customer information, and he has assured that he would not.

Here's the thing though, you (general you) don't need proof to feel like there might be a problem. We do it all the time. I will fully admit it might not be fair to Mr. Scott and EGG, but that's reality with businesses. Because we also know:

A blockchain and AI investor is a major investor into EGG
An investor of EGG publicly stated their intent with customer data
Several employees have all resigned stating the same reason (ethical concerns)

It is true that EGG has not been proven to have done anything wrong and also true for the above, which are red flags. I am only speaking for myself now, and will be using generic terms. If a CEO says they aren't doing things that their investors want them to do and investors have said themselves what they expect the company to do, that makes me worried that the company will end up doing that thing (me personally, as I understand others have no problems with a company using AI or selling customer data). And when several employees start resigning, that makes it more worrying.

So really, I think it all comes down to an individual person on what they are comfortable with when supporting a company. A person can be wary of supporting EGG while at the same time EGG not doing anything wrong. Just like someone can be happy supporting EGG even if they do end up using AI or selling customer data. It's something subjective as personal ethics. I've heard Mr. Scott's reassurances. I have no reason to not believe or trust him. It's also fair for me to still have reservations based on what the investors are saying because I know what influence investors traditionally have (EGG might be an exception, but we never know until time goes by).

I'd rather avoid the he said/they said part of this discussion because as mentioned, some folks can't tell their story, some don't want to rehash it, and often these things devolve into speculation and hurt feelings. I don't want anyone involved to have hurt feelings; that's not fair to them. For me, right now, I think that's the highest priority--how these folks are being impacted, and respecting the difficulty they are going through. I really want to avoid using these folks as "ammunition" to gotcha the other side. These are people, not data points.

I don't know how good the response was. The owner seems to underestimate how much of an issue this is for the company. Ivis and Mike are both pretty well known in the industry and its not going to be easy to smooth over for a lot of people given that it was part of the reason why people wanted to participate. Myself included.

 

[Umbran]

Personally, what I would love to see is everyone apply their own ethical standards to themselves before applying them to others. But I’m not the ethics police, so can’t make anyone - an occasional suggestion towards this ideal seems fair though.

Mod note:
One wonders how, after the last warning, the idea that it is okay to make passive-suggestions of what constitutes ethical behavior of posters would be appropriate.

If you need to be removed from the discussion for you to stop talking about poster's ethics, that can be arranged.

 

[J Gray]

I'd like to point something out.

Thus far, this conversation has been dominated by questions about blockchain, AI, and web3 technology. Mr. Scott, in fact, drove the conversation this way by hinting at it being the reason behind multiple people jumping ship. However, I don't think this is the case. At least, not excusively.

Note, Ms. Lilley's post in this thread specifically mentions helping ex-employees deal with emotional and psychological trauma. Certainly, people have strong feelings about web3 and AI but I doubt this caused trauma.

I think we need to consider this isn't about the ethics of technology exclusively but the morals and ethics of how employees are treated.

Thus far we've only really seen the resignation announcements, which were vague, and the full court press of Evil Genius employees in this thread. Please remember, when it comes to potential toxic workplaces, it takes time for victims to coordinate, to gather their thoughts, to pluck up their courage (and it does take courage), and to speak out.

So, please remember, this isn't about 1s and 0s, blocks and chains. This is about people leaving jobs in an hobby they love despite not having an exit strategy and despite a serious lack of similar jobs elsewhere in the industry. My personal feeling is this is about more than 1s and 0s and blocks and chains.

My disclaimer: I have no proof of Evil Genius being a toxic workplace. It may be the best place in the world to work - but I do feel we shouldn't be directed by clever words towards technological a boogie man when age old problems might be more likely. Either way, I'm willing to be patient and wait until those who left feel ready and able to speak out.

 

[MNblockhead]

Not sure if this is a "valid" response but... not sure what the drama is about...
I live in Israel and we are in a state of war for four months and counting with 136 hostages. Ukraine has been invaded by Russia almost two years ago and the war is still ongoing with magnitudes of orders more killed, tortured and kidnapped.

This really seems like a "First World problem" - Commercial use of AI or blockchain tech, even if it caused someone to quit a company, is such a relatively minor issue if I look at what my country (and ordinary Palestinians) is going through and even worse for Ukrainians.
IMHO, definitely not a reason to bash a company (try to look at companies who avoid sanctions on russia etc..)

Of course it is "a first world problem." It doesn't even raise to that level. Other than a small number of people, it has minimal impact on anyone. But this is a game-news forum, not a political discussion board. This is a niche hobby for those with the privilege to have the safety and free time to pretend to be elves and throw dice around. You think this is trivial, read the thousands of posts arguing over the OGL controversy or the 2024 rules revisions. I wish you safety and sincerely hope, someday, everyone in the world is fortunate enough to where arguing over the ethics of AI in gaming is the biggest fight they have to deal with.

 

[TreChriron]

Whatever may come of the internal goings on at EGG, I think it's obvious that a bunch of people felt EGG was a toxic workplace. It doesn't really matter what the specifics are, but the CEO might consider some hard self-reflection and adjust EGG's policies to help foster a better work environment. You don't just have 4+ major resignations from a small company because the boss said you can't use AI. It seems, from casual observation, there's a fire in this smoke.

What specifically happened is between the affected and the CEO. But from a customer perspective, I would like to see both a) more good products going forward and b) some encouraging action on the part of EGG to help us understand how they are going to foster a better workplace in the future. We are a cottage industry and it's hard to separate the work from the people. We just saw a bunch of people express anger, sadness, and apparent trauma. That is not trivial.

Again, I'm not saying there was any wrongdoing here (that should be decided in a court). It just LOOKS like something bad happened. All the glad-handling and statements so far are not really making me feel like EGG is a safe place to work. That could color my buying decisions in the future.

To be frank Dave Scott's messaging here has been so "corporate standard" that trying to see him as a "fellow gamer" while he sounds like a "typical corporate boss" is hard to take seriously. The statements here have neither a) convinced me EGG is cool or b) the people have been wronged somehow. It would have been better to have made one public statement and avoided the interaction all together (IMHO). But here we are...

So Mr. Scott. With the prevailing attitude that corporations value profits over people (not saying it's a fact, just a widely held perception...) -- and all this back-and-forth has been so vague and typical, what are you willing to do to convince your customer base that EGG is a place we want to support? The current approach is (in my estimation) not cutting it.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I'd like to point something out.

Thus far, this conversation has been dominated by questions about blockchain, AI, and web3 technology. Mr. Scott, in fact, drove the conversation this way by hinting at it being the reason behind multiple people jumping ship. However, I don't think this is the case. At least, not excusively.

Note, Ms. Lilley's post in this thread specifically mentions helping ex-employees deal with emotional and psychological trauma. Certainly, people have strong feelings about web3 and AI but I doubt this caused trauma.

I think we need to consider this isn't about the ethics of technology exclusively but the morals and ethics of how employees are treated.

Thus far we've only really seen the resignation announcements, which were vague, and the full court press of Evil Genius employees in this thread. Please remember, when it comes to potential toxic workplaces, it takes time for victims to coordinate, to gather their thoughts, to pluck up their courage (and it does take courage), and to speak out.

So, please remember, this isn't about 1s and 0s, blocks and chains. This is about people leaving jobs in an hobby they love despite not having an exit strategy and despite a serious lack of similar jobs elsewhere in the industry. My personal feeling is this is about more than 1s and 0s and blocks and chains.

My disclaimer: I have no proof of Evil Genius being a toxic workplace. It may be the best place in the world to work - but I do feel we shouldn't be directed by clever words towards technological a boogie man when age old problems might be more likely. Either way, I'm willing to be patient and wait until those who left feel ready and able to speak out.

This is all a good point, I'd just add everyone defines "trauma" differently. We don't get to tell someone that they didn't encounter a traumatic experience because the topic is AI, blockchain, or selling customer data. I.e., maybe they had a heated discussion around those topics, and that was the traumatic part? In that context, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss these as non-issues, or assume that something else must have happened that was way worse.

 

[kenmarable]

This is all a good point, I'd just add everyone defines "trauma" differently. We don't get to tell someone that they didn't encounter a traumatic experience because the topic is AI, blockchain, or selling customer data. I.e., maybe they had a heated discussion around those topics, and that was the traumatic part? In that context, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss these as non-issues, or assume that something else must have happened that was way worse.

Precisely. Just echoing and elaborating… simply going from full time employment in your dream industry to suddenly unemployed can be traumatic as well. Furthermore, I know many in the generations younger than this 50 year old grognard recognize a wider range of circumstances as harm and trauma than my generation typically does (rightfully and thankfully), especially considering everyone’s situation is unique. Either way, reading between the lines and putting a lot of weight into particular word choices to assume missing details is not helpful to anyone impacted.

Edit to add: I also want to be clear that it could, of course, mean something deeper! I realized my post could come off as minimizing the situation, and I absolutely do not want to do that. All I'm saying is that the words chosen could cover a wide range of circumstances, and there have been people in this thread taking very little information + particular word choices, leaping to their own conclusions, and then stating it as obvious fact. That is not helpful and actually muddies the entire situation further.

 

[sigfried]

I'd like to point something out.

Thus far, this conversation has been dominated by questions about blockchain, AI, and web3 technology. Mr. Scott, in fact, drove the conversation this way by hinting at it being the reason behind multiple people jumping ship. However, I don't think this is the case. At least, not excusively.

You are insightful in this. The relationships are complex and there are concerns beyond technology. I can't speak for others, but my impression is that would be the turning point or catalyst. I spoke about the technology portion because its not very personal so I could address it directly and not make any value judgements of anyone. Its a fact we debated the matter internally, a fact that almost the entire staff opposed those technologies, and a fact that in the end the owner committed not to use them. (I can't speak to the future other than to say I don't think Crypto has or will have any valid place in the hobby gaming world.)

Beyond that, we get in to personal relationships in the work environment. That area is messy, complicated, and delicate. It's not for me to speak about anyone other than myself. I want to care for and be kind and gentle to everyone if I can manage it.

I think you can all see all is not well at EGG. It's obvious. I can say that the work environment has been difficult for me at times, but never harmful to me. That said, I have plenty of privileges in life that insulate me and its clear my colleagues were hurt and my heart goes out to them.

It then becomes, are these conflicts within the company worthy of public debate and speculation? I can't say. Were there something happening that would be criminal or strictly immortal (such as a intentional abuse, wage theft, discrimination, etc..) the I wouldn't accept it myself. That said, there could be things I've not been told or don't know. But I try to act on the information I have rather than speculation.