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.

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.


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]
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lwaxy

Cute but dangerous
Seriously? To me it is so very obvious why the post was left up - to show what the problem with it was, especially so that other people won't post the exact same thing and then claiming ignorance about it. Oh sure, you could delete it and explain, but then you'd basically have to repeat the post, no? Because the quotation marks or what they are implying might not even have been obvious to everyone.

Your post makes it sound you believe the poster wasn't warned. But you can't know that.

My troll alarm goes of when I see someone with just 2 posts including this one shooting off at the owner of the site. A paper troll maybe, but still.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Caliban

Rules Monkey
For the life of me I cannot understand why you let the post where Victim is in quotation marks stay on the page.

For the life of me, I cannot understand why you think this fake moral outrage will fool anyone.

I mean, trying to claim the moral high ground so you can berate a moderator for not doing their job up to your personal "standards" is audacious, but still a rather obvious troll.

My guess is someone who was kicked off the thread decided to re-use a fake account originally created to give a positive review for a product.
 

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
A response to a different poster: Martin Luther believed in original sin and human depravity. He may believe that being drunk demonstrates someone's inner nature but he would argue that everyone has a horrible nature to begin with. Another poster is trying to claim that Webb's behavior drunk is a precise indicator of what Webb really is compared to the average angelic member of the community. I think that's ridiculous. What a guy does once when he is drunk isn't a personality test.
I presume that means me. How am I supposed to find your reply when you don't 'ping' me when you say it? :confused:
 


mythago

Hero
The incident happened. Those wronged felt that it had been resolved. Other people didn't and put it out there for armchair quarterbacks everywhere to draw their conclusions based on second-hand or third-hand information.

Some people seem to be indicating that the transgressor is irredeemable. One going so far as to essentially claim that how you behave when your are drunk is your "true self" as if it's a scientific diagnostic tool for personalities.

I think many of us are aware of the limited information we have to go on and an interest in a healthy resolution rather than getting several pounds of flesh. If the behavior is related to alcoholism then there are treatments available to help control those impulses.

This is an excellent example of how one can use the curious grammar of English to sanitize awkward facts.

"The incident happened" excises the actor. Mr. Webb didn't do anything; he certainly didn't make a decision to get drunk and harass someone to the point that he had to be physically restrained from doing so. An "incident" merely "happened", like an errant meteor striking the earth, or a freak lightning strike burning a house down. Mistakes were made. These things happen. Move along.

"Those wronged felt that it had been resolved" again centers that most-regrettable-but-certainly-blameless incident as the only thing that needs to be resolved; certainly not the question of why Mr. Webb felt he could get away with this or whether he is going to be a problem at future conventions. No need to discuss this; the people wronged by that unfortunate-but-morally-neutral incident feel it is over with, so shouldn't the rest of us shut our yaps and move along?
 

Gradine

🏳️‍⚧️ (she/her) 🇵🇸
Some people seem to be indicating that the transgressor is irredeemable. One going so far as to essentially claim that how you behave when your are drunk is your "true self" as if it's a scientific diagnostic tool for personalities.

If you'd bothered to read my posts at all you'd see the multiple times that I stated that I wanted the transgressor to redeem themselves, and in fact outlined the steps that would be required for me to believe and accept such redemption.

I also don't believe I used the phrase "true self" when describing somebody's behavior while drunk. Socialization is a pretty important part of a person's personality. That said, [MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION] said better than I did when he described being drunk as a lack of "impulse control". How you behave while drunk certainly indicates what your baser impulses are, and when those impulses involve demeaning and harassing women then that concerns me.
 

"Guilty until proven innocent"?

Whoa there, people.

The incident with Bill Webb was investigated by the company. They found that enough evidence existed that Bill was HR'd over the matter -- he's even admitted it happened and expressed regret for the events through the company spokesperson.

Let's just read that again: Bill Webb admitted that he sexually harassed the person in question.

As for Mentzer, much of what's got him into trouble is visible for all to see in the form of screen captures. It's not a matter of "did he do these things or didn't he?" It's a matter of whether or not people believe he did this stuff because he's a) just some guy who is so anti-social and unaware of how to properly interact with people that he was just being an antisocial idiot or b) a sexually harassing, creepy idiot. Regardless of whether you fall on the side of a) or b), the fact remains that he DID initially send some creepy messages and has since done his fair share of the sort of victim blaming you see from people who say things like "what did she expect wearing a skirt like that?"

So, let's just toss out the whole "guilty until proven innocent" schtick.

In both incidents, irrefutably the behaviour surrounding the complaints provably DID happen. Everything else is just a matter of how much your own lack of empathy for the women on the receiving end enables you to forgive the actors in those incidents.

As for this guy saying there's nothing wrong with inviting them both as special guests to this new convention so long as they, essentially, show up in their "gamer" personas and not their "sexual harasser" personas, well ... that just speaks all sorts of things about his level of empathy and consideration for the women who will be at that event. "We'll just have to see if they do something worth tossing them out for" is hardly providing a welcoming environment to attendees who, statistically speaking, are going to have suffered at the hands of people like Webb and Mentzer throughout their lives and, for their own part, just want to go there and game and not have to worry about a "let's wait and see if they f' up" policy. As someone else pointed out, it's like inviting someone who is under suspicion of pedophilia to babysit your kids, entrusting your kids' well-being to them with a "he's not a risk until we see him molest our kids" attitude. It's not an intellectual game -- it's a risk assessment where your priorities are all sorts of f'd up.

Geez, people, the fact that this has to be explained to so many posters in this thread gives me little hope for humanity. By how some of you talk, it's like this is a hypothetical intellectual exercise with no real people involved.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MackMcMacky

First Post
This is an excellent example of how one can use the curious grammar of English to sanitize awkward facts.

"The incident happened" excises the actor. Mr. Webb didn't do anything; he certainly didn't make a decision to get drunk and harass someone to the point that he had to be physically restrained from doing so. An "incident" merely "happened", like an errant meteor striking the earth, or a freak lightning strike burning a house down. Mistakes were made. These things happen. Move along.

"Those wronged felt that it had been resolved" again centers that most-regrettable-but-certainly-blameless incident as the only thing that needs to be resolved; certainly not the question of why Mr. Webb felt he could get away with this or whether he is going to be a problem at future conventions. No need to discuss this; the people wronged by that unfortunate-but-morally-neutral incident feel it is over with, so shouldn't the rest of us shut our yaps and move along?
This is an excellent example of how one can twist anything to fit a preferred narrative.

The incident happened. It was resolved. Is not "sanitizing" anything. Bill Webb's conduct has been discussed ad infinitum. I didn't feel like wasting words on covered ground. No one is "white washing", "sanitizing", or "deflecting" in any way. Apparently, some of you think a small con needs to have legalistic, codified rules about sexual harassment and some of us disagree with you.
 

MackMcMacky

First Post
"Guilty until proven innocent"?

Whoa there, people.

The incident with Bill Webb was investigated by the company. They found that enough evidence existed that Bill was HR'd over the matter -- he's even admitted it happened and expressed regret for the events through the company spokesperson.

Let's just read that again: Bill Webb admitted that he sexually harassed the person in question.

As for Mentzer, much of what's got him into trouble is visible for all to see in the form of screen captures. It's not a matter of "did he do these things or didn't he?" It's a matter of whether or not people believe he did this stuff because he's a) just some guy who is so anti-social and unaware of how to properly interact with people that he was just being an antisocial idiot or b) a sexually harassing, creepy idiot. Regardless of whether you fall on the side of a) or b), the fact remains that he DID initially send some creepy messages and has since done his fair share of the sort of victim blaming you see from people who say things like "what did she expect wearing a skirt like that?"

So, let's just toss out the whole "guilty until proven innocent" schtick.

In both incidents, irrefutably the behaviour surrounding the complaints provably DID happen. Everything else is just a matter of how much your own lack of empathy for the women on the receiving end enables you to forgive the actors in those incidents.

As for this guy saying there's nothing wrong with inviting them both as special guests to this new convention so long as they, essentially, show up in their "gamer" personas and not their "sexual harasser" personas, well ... that just speaks all sorts of things about his level of empathy and consideration for the women who will be at that event. "We'll just have to see if they do something worth tossing them out for" is hardly providing a welcoming environment to attendees who, statistically speaking, are going to have suffered at the hands of people like Webb and Mentzer throughout their lives and, for their own part, just want to go there and game and not have to worry about a "let's wait and see if they f' up" policy. As someone else pointed out, it's like inviting someone who is under suspicion of pedophilia to babysit your kids, entrusting your kids' well-being to them with a "he's not a risk until we see him molest our kids" attitude. It's not an intellectual game -- it's a risk assessment where your priorities are all sorts of f'd up.

Geez, people, the fact that this has to be explained to so many posters in this thread gives me little hope for humanity. By how some of you talk, it's like this is a hypothetical intellectual exercise with no real people involved.
I read what Mentzer wrote. I also read the back and forth about what it all meant. It all felt like a witch hunt to me. Bill Webb screwed up and the person he harassed felt it was resolved. I'm all for second chances. If Bill Webb, shows up sober and games that's great. I trust the people on the ground to make the judgment. We used to believe in redemption in this country. A whole host of reforms were implemented based on the notion of charity, mercy, and rehabilitation. I guess a lot of people are over that.
 

I read what Mentzer wrote. I also read the back and forth about what it all meant. It all felt like a witch hunt to me. Bill Webb screwed up and the person he harassed felt it was resolved. I'm all for second chances. If Bill Webb, shows up sober and games that's great. I trust the people on the ground to make the judgment. We used to believe in redemption in this country. A whole host of reforms were implemented based on the notion of charity, mercy, and rehabilitation. I guess a lot of people are over that.
"Witch hunt" ... yeah, funny how often that term gets brought up to defend people caught sexually harassing others. Almost like it's a favourite excuse used by people who don't truly understand what sexual harassment does to a person because they're not in the demographic most likely to be victimized by it.

Funny, that.

And redemption? Again, it's always funny how we have to give them a second chance when the only reason we know about the first chance is because they got caught THIS time. With Bill Webb, it's an example of repeated conduct that is apparently an open secret at cons with only the most recent incident being apologized for after he was investigated by his own company. Mentzer, on the other hand, is still in full on denial mode while still doing his best to keep digging the hole he's standing in deeper. So how does someone get redeemed when they aren't even able to admit their own fault?

Now consider that the person Webb harassed considers it resolved isn't the same as she forgives Webb and wants to be alone with him in a game room at a convention. It means she understands the steps taken and accepts them. Again, believing that "resolved" is victim-speak for "we're all peachy keen over here!" is an example of someone who doesn't understand sexual harassment very well, from just about every possible angle.

(BTW, I'm Canadian, so go wave that "America used to protect misogyny!" flag elsewhere, cowboy.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top