She can literally do whatever she wants - from arguing to giving up social media - and expect to be supported. I am flabbergasted that you don't understand that or think it's a dodge.
A target of harassment's only duty is to themselves - self-care and self-protection, as they see fit. Anything else they choose to do (or not do) for whatever reason or out of whatever set of emotions (fear, anger, whatever) they are feeling is their business and their business alone. I am not going to waste time theorycrafting scenarios or playing what-if games with you when I've said no less than three times now that they can do what they want, and expect support.
The responsibility to confront the antisocial behaviors at play rests with the community at large, not with the target (except insofar as they themselves decide to take part).
Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
It was a yes or no question. And yet, you
still did not answer it. Yes, she can expect to be supported...
but you refuse to openly and plainly state your support for her. This tells me that you actually
do not support her in this.
And, really, you're surprised? I outright called you on lying earlier in the thread. Why does it surprise you that someone who has openly stated they think you're a liar doesn't trust you when you refuse to give a simple statement?
So, yes. You've proven you won't support her in this. That your support is conditional. And at this point, I don't think we really have anything further to say to each other on this matter.
Good grief @
ArchfiendBobbie talk about mountains out of molehills.
You want to completely derail this person's career so that we can use her as a poster child for equal opportunity? Are you serious? Talk about letting the trolls win. They wanted to gate keep the hobby to make sure that gurl cooties don't spread to published works and you want to make this poor woman a token?
Since when is WotC or any RPG company in the business of being at the forefront of social change? Why would you expect them to be?
No, sorry, this response is far more direct, and far more effective. As a community, when we see behavious like this, EVERYONE should call it out and condemn it. Force these people out of the community and make it abundantly clear that they will not be tolerated, catered to or even engaged.
Talk about humiliating. Someone gets a new job. Bunch of self-righteous Internet trolls jump up and down on their favorite political hobby horse and you want to force this poor woman out of the job that she applied for so that we can parade her in front of everyone to show how inclusive we all are being?
No.
There is only one proper response to this sort of thing. Complete ostracisation from the group. Publicly and openly. Let everyone know that NO, we do not tolerate this. NO this is not anything I want associated with my hobby and chosen social group. This is 2018. If you didn't already know that publicly humialiting and denigrating women was bad, well, you're (and I don't mean you, I mean that in the generic sense) no longer a paid up member of the human race. Either pay up and join the human race or piss off.
She would have the option of whether or not she would accept it. It would be a different position, but also with different pay.
The thing you're missing is, you're playing right into troll hands. They want her invisible, or eliminated from the hobby. What is her job? It's a design position that doesn't necessarily involve much customer interaction. Basically... just doing her job. she would be effectively invisible. They can claim victory afterward, when she's not a visible component of the game. Just like they did with the Ghostbusters remake; the Ghostbusters fanbase is primarily conservative, so a feminist-oriented remake was
never going to do well. And just like they did with Marvel; the comics in question were comics that were going to be cancelled anyway eventually, and Marvel has had a bunch more problems that suggest the company doesn't really support any "SJW" causes (the vice president of sales is not the only one to drop a hint the company really backs a more conservative stance in who it hires).
It's part of a strategy. Take on battles where a normal operation or easily-predicted result will come about anyway, but set it up so that when it does you can take credit and build the illusion of power from it. And, realistically, a lot of real world power is purely the perception of power; if people perceive you as having a lot of influence, you suddenly do because the mechanisms of society react accordingly. Someone who understands this, understands social media, and is of enough of a predatory mindset can use this to their advantage to fight savagely against a cause they do not like.
So, my strategy is to use that same thought line against the trolls. They want her to be some kind of visible problem? Poof. She's always visible, always engaging, always there. Suddenly, instead of being someone who disappears like they expect, she's someone they can't get rid of. They want to argue WotC is going too far with "affirmative action" and similar "SJW" actions? Well, suddenly, it is going a lot farther than it was. It's open about it, always following that stance, always engaging. And, hey, look... the game improves as a result. So not only do we get to spite the trolls, but we also get to improve the game itself and include some material it has been needing. And by engaging the fanbase in creating some of that material, the relationship between company and fanbase strengthens... which, in turn, quite likely translates to even more sales.
Really, there's actually a number of good reasons for WotC to adopt some parts of what I wrote up, even if it's not to counter trolls; they serve as a form of advertisement, help strengthen the franchise, and serve as a way to encourage the fanbase to be more engaged with the company and in turn buy more products. Admittedly, at least half of what I wrote up is basically a complex marketing strategy. But, then, I did state earlier in the thread that one of my goals is to have WotC survive this conflict, so it does make sense that at least some of what I do would be groundwork for growth of the franchise.
Hey, I never claimed my actions would be entirely altruistic. Especially since half of that plan has origins in pure spite. But if there's an opportunity to support diversity, be spiteful to a bunch of trolls, advance the career of an employee now in the spotlight, and grow the franchise? Too good to pass up.
Unfortunately for your argument, the ship on a company being at the forefront of social change sailed years ago. Paizo makes it part of their mission, and I've heard several people say Evil Hat does as well. Though, if so, Evil Hat is even sneakier than Paizo is, and Paizo is pretty damned sneaky about how they project the message; you almost don't notice the areas it crops up in Pathfinder. I've always been a fan of Paizo's approach to this. But, anyway, WotC following Paizo's lead is only a natural evolution of the hobby at this point.
Incidentally, you say we should ostracize the trolls and not engage them, yet you are praising Mearls for engaging them and being critical of my strategy of ostracizing and not engaging them. I'm confused about which stance you actually back, because your words indicate one stance but your actions seem to indicate the other. I might just be misreading your criticism of me, but it's also early morning and I haven't had my coffee yet. And pure rage becomes a poor wake-up drug after the 67th time.
So, anyway... I gave a strategy for ostracizing them and not engaging them, yet still acting to counter them. Mearls... he pretty much told them to
off while wading in to engage them directly. So far, from your post, it seems you really don't like either solution... Do you have a plan of your own? One that doesn't involve the parts of my plan you detest, yet doesn't do the opposite of what you want like Mearls is doing?
