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]​

 

[Gradine]

Unless HR or other persons within the company are active in suppressing action against Webb for anything he may be doing to employees at the company proper, I'm not going to hold the company as a whole accountable for Webb. I do not believe we live in an economy with enough economic choice and mobility where people who hold extremely niche jobs (writing/developing content for TTRPGs) can just jump ship and expect to be employed again without substantial downtime. And I won't put it on Webb's employees to make public overtures that they're trying to straighten Bill out. It's not their responsibility and I won't make them responsible by association.

I don't find myself able to argue against the bulk of this. It's true that many FGG employees probably can't just walk away or find work elsewhere. And yet... Bill Webb is their responsibility. He is the public face of their hard work; he goes to the cons, he markets and sells everything they do. And if his actions are hurting their livelihood, they have just as much responsibility to demand a change as anybody else. One could argue they have an even greater responsibility.

I'm not going to argue whether this is fair to them or not, because the answer to that is obvious; of course it isn't. This would involve putting their necks on the line. I don't want to diminish how difficult, scary, or dangerous this would be for them. Unfortunately whether something is fair or not does not make it any less true.

Which is why my response was targetted at Guang's post talking about how goodly someone is when they boycott guys like Webb.

Gotcha, my bad.

 

[MackMcMacky]

By talking about taking steps to transform himself as part of a public apology, for starters. Did I miss this? It's possible I missed this.



I think it instead speaks to how powerfully socialization constricts and inhibits our behaviors. To get Freudian, drunk you is your Id, free of the shackles of your Superego. Neurologically speaking, alcohol basically hands the keys of your body over to the "primitive" parts of the brain. Clearly that means that drunk you is going to do the things that you know better not to do. But it still means that you're going to do the things you want to do. That's essentially the point that I'm making.

And everyone has antisocial impulses that are regulated by socialization. So, there is nothing particularly revealing about any particular person misbehaving being drunk. Their "true" nature is not shown. Their "drunk at that moment" nature is shown.

 

[MackMcMacky]

"If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality." - Desmond Tutu

Bill Webb (and, let's be honest, plenty of others like him) remaining a part of the industry without choosing to correct his behavior makes the industry a less safe place for women. I can't imagine how this could be a face in dispute. Therefore, choosing to do nothing (and in fact, continuing to financially support Webb and his role in this industry) is necessarily choosing a side.

I'll dial back a bit in that I can recognize that there are ways other than a boycott to apply pressure on Webb to change his behavior beyond. But continuing along as if nobody has any responsibility to change? That's choosing a side.

Or, perhaps, you are in no place to judge whether someone has made a positive change and should leave it to those who are.

 

[Gradine]

And everyone has antisocial impulses that are regulated by socialization.

Do they? I don't really believe that. And even if I did, I'd still say there's a significant difference in the nature different types of antisocial impulses and what those might possible say about a person's self. Not every man has impulses to sexually harass and stalk women that are regulated entirely through socialization, just as a for instance.

 

[MackMcMacky]

I think it's interesting that we are to trust an accuser of sexual harassment but we have many people who feel we should not trust the very same person concerning when they think the matter has been resolved.

 

[Gradine]

Or, perhaps, you are in no place to judge whether someone has made a positive change and should leave it to those who are.

Except as a consumer of the types of products he sells I'm exactly in the place to judge whether someone has made a positive change because my choice to continue to buy products from his company or not is entirely dependent on whether he has or not. And, to this point, I judge that he has not, and that's a judgment that seems to be the general consensus.

 

[Gradine]

I think it's interesting that we are to trust an accuser of sexual harassment but we have many people who feel we should not trust the very same person concerning when they think the matter has been resolved.

We're well past the point where this is a private, isolated incident between two individuals. You raise a point, and a good one, about respecting the wishes the victim. But this is no longer about litigating the single instance of what happened at PaizoCon. That's a fairly settled and resolved matter, for the most part. This is about what Bill Webb plans to do to make sure something like this doesn't happen again. That the answer so far seems to be "nothing, except maybe farm it for lols in a marketing campaign" is unacceptable to many of us.

 

[MackMcMacky]

Except as a consumer of the types of products he sells I'm exactly in the place to judge whether someone has made a positive change because my choice to continue to buy products from his company or not is entirely dependent on whether he has or not. And, to this point, I judge that he has not, and that's a judgment that seems to be the general consensus.

I thought it was pretty clear that I was pointing out that you lack information to make the judgment. No one is disputing your "power of the purse".

 

[MackMcMacky]

We're well past the point where this is a private, isolated incident between two individuals. You raise a point, and a good one, about respecting the wishes the victim. But this is no longer about litigating the single instance of what happened at PaizoCon. That's a fairly settled and resolved matter, for the most part. This is about what Bill Webb plans to do to make sure something like this doesn't happen again. That the answer so far seems to be "nothing, except maybe farm it for lols in a marketing campaign" is unacceptable to many of us.

You seem so sure of what really transpired and what has transpired from your internet vantage point. I think we should all exercise some caution about sweeping claims about something we aren't a party to. I think your response claiming this is a "public" matter could be described as lacking sufficient empathy for the victim.

 

[Gradine]

You seem so sure of what really transpired and what has transpired from your internet vantage point. I think we should all exercise some caution about sweeping claims about something we aren't a party to. I think your response claiming this is a "public" matter could be described as lacking sufficient empathy for the victim.

There is literally no dispute as to what actually transpired except from those with only an "internet vantage point". There are zero facts in contention from anyone who was actually involved in what happened at PaizoCon, and I completely agree with Hensley that the matter that specific incident is well and truly settled. I can empathize strongly with the desire to leave it well enough alone, and I am more than happy to leave her and what she had go through out of any conversation that moves forward.

The "public" matter is what happens next. The "public" matter, at this point, has nothing to do with the victim ad everything to do with the perpetrator.