Harassment At PaizoCon 2017

In our post-Harvey Weinstein world, more and more people in the various entertainment industries are coming forward with allegations of abuse and harassment, both sexual and psychological. The tabletop gaming industry isn't isolated from this wave of revelation as incidents surface, and will likely continue to surface about professionals, and fans, within the gaming communities.

View attachment 90166​

Stories of harassment within tabletop gaming, at conventions and stores, and even in local gaming groups are nothing new. That is probably the saddest fact of this whole thing: that despite stories being brought to light, not only does harassment continue to happen but the existence of it continues to be denied by some. This denial is one of the factors that allows abuse and harassment to continue within tabletop RPGs.

Allegations of improper behavior at the 2017 PaizoCon by Frog God Games CEO Bill Webb were brought to life by Pathfinder content creator Robert Brookes. Brookes was attending PaizoCon and has written for Paizo and Legendary Games, among others. In an incident involving alcohol, Webb allegedly sexually harassed another guest at the convention and when a staffer attempted to intervene and injury occurred with the staffer.

In a thread about harassment and abuse on gaming forum RPGNet, Frog God Games partner Matt Finch, creator of the Swords & Wizardry retroclone, confirmed that the incident with Webb occurred, and revealed some details about an internal investigation that the partners of Frog God Games conducted into the incident:

"I am Matt Finch, the partner of Frog God Games appointed by the partners to investigate a sexual harassment complaint filed against Mr. Webb at PaizoCon 2017. Mr. Webb was not consulted by the partners on this decision. Due to recent accusations made on Twitter by a third party, I will outline the aspects of the situation to the extent that they do not compromise the confidentiality of the person who filed the report, I will describe the nature of our internal investigation, and will also address the recently-raised tweets by Robert Brookes on his twitter feed. This report will not necessarily be updated; it stands for itself at the time of posting, based on the knowledge I currently have.

"First, it is correct that a complaint was filed with Paizo at PaizoCon against Bill. I was made aware of this by phone on the day it happened (I was not present at the convention). Frog God is aware of the identity of the person who made the complaint, because they spoke to three of our partners at the convention after the event. We have not been invited to share that person’s identity, and although we are not under legal obligation to protect that confidentiality we have elected to respect that person’s desire not to have the event brought into the spotlight.

"Gathering information in a situation like this is necessarily limited due to Paizo’s own confidentiality obligations. To assemble information, I spoke to the three partners who had talked with the person who filed the complaint, and obtained their accounts of what they were told. Secondhand accounts are not perfect, and I had to weigh that against the fact that an attorney making direct contact with someone who has filed such a report can be seen as a threat or intimidation, and weighing those two issues, I chose to rely on a comparison of the conversations between the individual and our partners, plus Paizo’s own resolution of the matter at the time, plus a necessarily-cautious review of Bill’s account. There has been contact between the person who filed the complaint and Frog God partners since the event, and I will provide a screenshot of one such communication with the name redacted. I believe the screenshot provides a great deal of clarification.

"Reducing the event to a level that will maintain confidentiality, my understanding based on my investigation was that Bill Webb took an action and engaged in speech that could be construed as a sexual advance or as gender-dismissive.

"In consequence of this finding, I and another senior partner of the company had a meeting with Mr. Webb about expectations, standards of behavior, and future protocol. We addressed that one’s lack of bad intentions does not excuse problematic behavior.

"Some people have asked that Mr. Webb acknowledge and apologize for the situation. Bill does deeply regret his actions, and understands that they were inappropriate and upsetting. I have told Mr. Webb not to contact the person directly, for the same reason that I have not done so myself: the potential for that contact to appear intimidating or threatening. However, at whatever time the person lets us know that a direct apology from Mr. Webb would be welcomed, that apology will be immediately forthcoming. Mr. Webb is also under instruction not to discuss this matter in public, in case peripheral details were to be inadvertently disclosed that might allow the identification of the person by another party. This is also the reason we chose to have me, as the investigating partner, write the public report, given that a report has become necessary in response to a recent description of the event on Twitter."

We reached out to Webb for comment upon this incident, and we were directed to the RPGNet post by Finch. This is the company's official statement on what happened at PaizoCon. Whether or not there will be further repercussions within Frog God Games due to this incident and Webb's actions remain to be seen.

Paizo CEO Lisa Stevens has released an official statement on the incident on the Paizo forums. When EN World reached out to Paizo for official comment, we were directed to this statement:

"My name is Lisa Stevens and I am the CEO and owner of Paizo Inc. Events of the past few weeks have compelled me to make this statement.

"My company will never condone any sexual harassment or assault against any of our employees, male or female. We will never condone any sexual harassment or assault against any of our customers on paizo.com or at sanctioned organized play activities. Whenever I hear any allegations of sexual harassment or assault related to Paizo’s activities, I always immediately drop whatever I'm doing and I make getting to the bottom of these issues my top priority. We have banned people from paizo.com. We have banned people from participating in our organized play activities. We have stopped doing business with individuals. And we will continue to do so.
"As a woman and a survivor of sexual harassment, sexual assault, and rape, I know what it is like to be on the receiving end of these attacks. I know what it is like to feel the shame, the terror, how it changes your life forever. And because of this, I will never stand for my company to condone this behavior.

"Paizo’s employees are encouraged to come forward with any allegations of sexual harassment or assault and let a manager know as soon as possible. If criminal activities have taken place, they are encouraged to report it to the police and take legal action against the perpetrator. We have asked our employees to not engage in explosive and angry dialogue on paizo.com. We want our website to be a place where our customers feel safe and among friends. If there is problem on paizo.com, then our community team will handle it and, where appropriate, ban the perpetrator.

"In closing, you have my word that I have zero tolerance for sexual harassment and assault, and the same is true of Paizo. Please be aware that we treat these issues with tremendous sensitivity, and only disclose the specifics and resolutions of any such incidents on a need-to-know basis, even within Paizo or with our legal counsel. We do not and will not discuss these matters publicly. Every instance that I am aware of has been thoroughly investigated, and appropriate actions have been taken or are in the process of being taken. You have my word on this."

Unrelated to the PaizoCon incident, Brookes also revealed an incident of harassment within the Pathfinder Society organized play program. When a volunteer staffer reported this incident, their supervisor informed them that an NDA they had signed to be part of the program would not allow her to discuss this incident. Paizo has not officially commented on this incident or commented on whether or not there is an investigation into it.

If tabletop role-playing games are truly going to be an inclusive, we have to be better about not just reporting incidents of abuse and harassment but being dedicated to creating spaces that are safe and free of harassment of our fellow gamers. We also need to shine a spotlight onto the incidents of harassment that occur, it is the responsibility of journalists, bloggers and gamers to do this and let people know that their actions will come to light and that they will be held responsible. It is also important to not just talk about those parts of the gaming communities that we don't agree with, but to also bring to light the improper actions of those companies and communities with whom we do agree, because unless every act of harassment is revealed there will be no change within our communities.

Remember that EN World is an inclusive community.

[FONT=&quot]Save[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Save[/FONT]​

 

[Atlictoatl]

Here's a core problem with the "innocent until proven guilty" and "ruin an innocent life" defensive arguments: they don't spend as much time thinking about other crimes as they do sexual crime.

Any purported criminal activity within a community results in a social community response. If someone in a community gains a reputation as a thief, mugger, con artist, drug addict, serial abuser, extortionist, embezzler, etc., that person will receive different treatment in that community as a result. This happens regardless of what happens in a court of law and any legal punishment, and is wholly separate from the process of determining guilt for the purpose of legal action.

This has always been a benefit and drawback of community. People who gain a reputation as anything negative will suffer under the stigma of that reputation. This has the positive effect of providing protection for the community against bad actors who may escape the legal system. It has the negative effect of making it more difficult for bad actors to reform, and for occasionally catching people who aren't bad actors in the social net. The only recourses for people suffering under a bad reputation are to a) suffer under it, b) demonstrate as best they are able over time a reformation in that reputation, or c) relocating to a different community.

Sexual violence is a weird offense in our society, because it generally isn't prosecuted well and even when it is perpetrators are not generally kept in prison for life (as they usually are with major crimes like murder). Yet it's viewed as heinous enough that we've instituted things like the sex offender registry, which makes it very hard (appropriately) for sex offenders to reduce their societal stigma by relocation to a new community. We don't have that same condition for thieves, etc.

It's also a challenging offense because sexual assault can be a major crime, but it's one that both leaves the victim alive and is very personal, meaning they can generally name their abuser. That most likely isn't case with other major crimes, where the victim is either killed or the crime is very impersonal. Those crimes require professional investigation, and as a society we're invested in trusting that our detectives generally get it right. The policing is done behind a veil of authority that we mostly trust (because to not do so is chaotic, socially). There is no such veil of authority with sexual crimes wherein a victim accuses a perpetrator; it becomes a contest between two people, and generally the perpetrator has greater social status than the victim, which introduces all manner of bias in the process.

Using the argument of "innocent until proven guilty" is making the claim that the social mechanism should not exist separate from the legal mechanism, which completely ignores the entirety of human communal behavior. It's a nonsensical argument.

The argument of "ruining a human life" is unaware that it is reinforcing social status bias, by placing the decayed social status of the perpetrator above the trauma to the victim. This is especially sour, because it's the greatest vulnerability of redress for sexual assault: victims do not come forward because they rightfully believe they cannot overcome the social status of their perpetrator, and prosecution is weak because superior social status is very difficult to penetrate. As a result, we as a society need to carefully monitor ourselves to ensure we're not participating in that bias, and arguments that appeal to that bias will either sound well-reasoned or completely tone-deaf, depending on the degree to which individuals realize that a bias exists.

What the people who appeal to the "but what about those falsely accused of sexual crime?" emotional appeal are failing to see is that they are, at the core, making a social status argument. Every category of crime sees some amount of false conviction. Most crimes, however, are perceived as being committed by lower status individuals against higher status individuals, so false prosecution is perceived societally as worth the benefit. Whenever we see a higher status perpetrator, we hear some noises of concern about how the accusation of criminal behavior will affect the high status person. Because so much sexual crime is perpetrated by higher status individuals, we hear these noises in disproportionate amounts.

Someday, hopefully, more corners of our society will understand that those of lower social status require enhanced protection against those of higher social status, as a moral imperative in a functional society. Ideally, gender would cease to be any measure of social status at all. We've still got a long road to climb there, though.

 

[Eltab]

The ancient Biblical admonition is to take things on the testimony of two or three witnesses before rendering judgement on a matter.

In the incident at hand, we had MANY witnesses and multiple participants testifying. This isn't 'he-said/she-said' or a charge made up out of nothing. Even late-to-the-party commenters (such as almost everybody on this thread) can review the testimony and say "I understand what happened."

 

[Atlictoatl]

The ancient Biblical admonition is to take things on the testimony of two or three witnesses before rendering judgement on a matter.

In the incident at hand, we had MANY witnesses and multiple participants testifying. This isn't 'he-said/she-said' or a charge made up out of nothing. Even late-to-the-party commenters (such as almost everybody on this thread) can review the testimony and say "I understand what happened."

Even in an absence of additional witnesses beyond the victim of sexual assault, we as a society should be moving more fully towards believing the victim. While we can police against false accusation, the incidence of actual sexual violence is orders of magnitude greater than the incidence of false accusation (and, in fact, the "what about false accusation" movement is hyperbolized for political reasons).

One of the difficulties here is that the change in state for the victim is often more ephemeral than in cases other than sexual violence. If someone is physically assaulted, or an object is stolen or damaged, the evidence is physical. Some forms of sexual violence primarily confer emotional or mental damage, and we lack some ability in measuring that change in state.

Why we have to fight to move towards societal acceptance of claims of sexual violence is because sexual violence is generally committed by those of higher social status against those of lower social status, and the victims in such cases will not have forms of redress if society doesn't work hard to protect them.

High social status individuals perpetrating sexual violence on those of lower status is as old as time, but we're now living in a society that purports to no longer tolerate sexual violence. If if's true that that is our new societal value, then it's incumbent upon us to contribute to the environment that persecutes sexual violence, which is an environment of belief and acceptance of the accusation of the victim.

 

[oknazevad]

When someone says she's been harassed, I offer sympathy. But you expect me to believe that you say "I hope you're lying, because that would be easier for you to cope with".

Worse. He's saying "I hope you're lying, because that would be easier for me to cope with." What cruel, stupid, self-centered, childish .

And there's nothing "grey" about sexual harassment. Asinine apologists.

 

[mudbunny]

Even in an absence of additional witnesses beyond the victim of sexual assault, we as a society should be moving more fully towards believing the victim. While we can police against false accusation, the incidence of actual sexual violence is orders of magnitude greater than the incidence of false accusation (and, in fact, the "what about false accusation" movement is hyperbolized for political reasons).

I just wanted to isolate this and re-emphasize it.

The rate of false accusation is so insignificantly small as to be non-existent. People should be much more concerned with the number of assaults that do not get reported because of the way the justice system (and society as a whole, as evidenced by some people in this thread) treat those who accuse someone of assault.

 

[Morrus]

I just wanted to isolate this and re-emphasize it.

The rate of false accusation is so insignificantly small as to be non-existent. People should be much more concerned with the number of assaults that do not get reported because of the way the justice system (and society as a whole, as evidenced by some people in this thread) treat those who accuse someone of assault.

Agreed. And, of course, irrelevant to this case except to those who want to distract from empathy with the victim in favour of their philosophical expertise...

 

[Eltab]

The rate of false accusation is so insignificantly small as to be non-existent.

Tell that to Rolling Stone magazine, which made a headline article out of one without doing their due diligence (Univ. of Virginia).
They have - properly - been slammed down in Court. I hope that even the Press will figure out they can't keep muddying the waters by amplifying false claims while poo-pooing real ones.

Another factor which protects high-status individuals* is having the resources to operate a Bimbo Eruptions Unit - one of which became famous in the 1990s.

* possibly a mis-description. I think the protection is offered to members of a specific group / class of people who think they are separate, above, and 'better than' general society.

Fortunately not relevant to the incident which sparked this thread, but difficult to adjudicate justly: what do you do when both individuals were drunk &c at the time and nobody else was around?
He-said/she-said incidents are easily taken and run with by people on both opposite ends of the "blame them not us" axis. I am thankful this incident happened out in public (but better that it had never happened at all) so there WERE third parties available to corroborate testimony.

 

[MackMcMacky]

I believe BJ Hensley. Bill Webb sexually harassed her.

I am not attempting to distract from anything. Others have argued that we should choose to believe accusers in regard to sexual harassment and assault to the point of what? Do we have a duty to condemn a person of sexual harassment based on an accusation alone without any other evidence? (In the case of Bill Webb there is plenty of evidence.) If so, I disagree. I think why I would disagree would be obvious to anyone who understands due process.

I agree there needs to be more done about sexual harassment. I don't believe changing due process/burden of proof is the solution. In fact, I think it would do more harm than good for everyone. However, I am open to other ideas.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Tell that to Rolling Stone magazine, which made a headline article out of one without doing their due diligence (Virginia Tech).
They have - properly - been slammed down in Court. I hope that even the Press will figure out they can't keep muddying the waters by amplifying false claims while poo-pooing real ones.

And the Tawana Brawley case before it. Yes, those things did happen.

But I reiterate: according to the FBI, the DOJ, and numerous academic studies, the rate of demonstrably false reporting of sexual assault and other sex-related crimes is 2-8%, roughly the same as for other crimes in general. The fact that occasional cases of that nature do get national exposure does not justify the amount and character of skepticism that faces most victims who come forward and make a complaint.

We simply don’t do that with other crimes. Despite the extremely high profile erroneous Richard Jewel bombing case accusations, when we see news that someone has been accused of committing a terrorist act or a mass shooting, very few of us go “Yeah, right!”

 

[Cergorach]

What happened is nasty. No discussion about that.

The issue imho is not what happened, the issue is that it's not our job to 'convict' this person in the media (either of them). That's the police's job, that's why it's important for victims to go to the police. In this case the victim has stated VERY CLEARLY that she's not interested in doing that, and that is absolutely her choice. She views the case closed, maybe we should act as humans for once, respect that choice, and let the matter rest.

I'm a suspicious person, I always consider the worst in people, they could be the worst people. But always acting that way is not only unhealthy, but downright unhelpful. In this case it doesn't matter, the case is closed by the only person that has any say in the matter.