D&D 5E Mike Mearls is back on the D&D RPG Team

Three weeks ago, WotC's Jeremy Crawford told us that Mike Mearls was no longer working on the tabletop RPG, and hadn't since some time in 2019. Today, the (newish) D&D head Ray Winninger said on the company's Twitch livestream that Mearls is now back full-time on the tabletop game.

Mike Mearls is back full time on the RPG again. He was splitting his time working on some computer game stuff for us, but he’s back.

He still doesn't appear to be back on social media since his final tweet back in 2019.

 

[Mistwell]

That's because he would be considered a public figure (regular or limited) for the purposes of this suit and the defense would merely have to say that, based on what they were shown/knew about him, that they were within their rights to make statements that they thought he was an abuser/etc.

No. I do not think Zak qualifies as a public figure under U.S. defamation laws.

But again, most states in the US have anti-SLAPP statutes, which are designed to prevent frivolous lawsuits and even if it didn't get summarily dismissed before a trial hearing, at the hearing all the defense would have to do is present his long and sordid reputation and history and say "based on this, I sincerely believed he was an abuser" and the lawsuit would be tossed and he would be on the hook to pay the legal fees of the defense. If it gets tossed during the anti-SLAPP, he'd be on the hook for even more money as they usually assess additional penalties as a way of saying "Yeah you knew you weren't supposed to do this but you tried anyway."

No. I do not think such a lawsuit would be dismissed under anti-SLAPP lawsuits. It's actually rather difficult to use those laws.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

Unfortunately, most of the big-name RPG companies have similar stories. Zak S. is all over the industry, he’s worked with White Wolf, WotC, Paizo, and plenty of others. Most large developers are content to claim ignorance until directly confronted, conduct a cursory investigation, and try to sweep it under the rug with noncommittal statements like Mearls’ tweet, though internally pretty much everyone agrees Zak’s a horrible piece of work. At this point a lot of companies have finally cut ties with Zak thanks to the business with his ex-wife making it impossible to keep feigning ignorance. But he’s a symptom of a bigger problem in the industry as a whole.

Yeah, honestly if you try to avoid stuff that POS's have worked on, you're not gonna have a lot of things.

What's that quote? Love is an illusion and happiness is fleeting, there's no such thing as God and all your favorite musicians beat their wives…ALLEGEDLY.

 

[Charlaquin]

I have no idea what happened on social media. I don't use social media. As a result, I've never seen or seen "cyber bulling" or "cyber-stalking." But those two phenomena see only to arise when people engage in social media, which is very easy to remove one's self from. It's a personal choice to use or not to use it. I see "cyber bulling" or "cyber-stalking" one of the risk associated with using social media.

So it’s ok that people send other people death threats and disturbing images because the recipients can choose to ignore them?

Is it good? No. But it seems common enough.

It is pretty common, yes. It ought not to be. It certainly ought not to be treated as acceptable.

Also, I don't know exactly what Zak did on social media. I don't know what "stir up a mob" means or what damage it caused. Simply stirring up a mob in itself doesn't need problematic.

Wait, so when a prominent public figure incites their followers to send death threats to someone they don’t like it “doesn’t need to be problematic” but when people call said public figure out for said harassment, that’s a problem? Really?

As for pictures? Yeah. That's why I find social media a problematic technology and don't use it. I'm not sure our ape brains can handle it.

Not social media. Cell phone.

Why is victim warranted?

I figured death threats and pictures of one’s children’s school would speak for itself. If you don’t think the subject of such attacks warrants being referred to as a victim, I question your standard for application of the term,

 

[Todd Roybark]

I know next to nothing about Zak, other than what I have read here, on EnWorld.
So me objecting to epistemological errors, and people conflating opinion with fact is in no way a statement of support or condemnation of Zak.

So calling people, whom raise objections with the broad brush of Zak supporters, is an error.

If your employer thinks you stole office supplies, they can presume you are guilty without proving anything

An “At Will” employment position can be terminated without cause. If that employer were to say in a reference check that “you stole” that is illegal in many jurisdictions.

If that employer stated that you were ineligible for rehire, which implies termination for cause, a reason should be provided, and maintained in HR records.

So Elfcrusher, the rash passions of a mob is justice? In USA history, mob justice tends to hurt the less powerful.

Ok, enough with this thread. Can it be moved to RPG general or Meta or a more appropriate category? There is no D&D content.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yeah, honestly if you try to avoid stuff that POS's have worked on, you're not gonna have a lot of things.

There’s a phrase that sums this problem up pretty concisely. It’s about ethical consumption and its existence (or lack thereof) under certain systems. If you know it, you know it.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

So it’s ok that people send other people death threats and disturbing images because the sendees can choose to ignore them?

It's not ok to send, but everyone knows social media is a cesspool. Anyone who chooses to engage with it does so as his or her own peril.

It is pretty common, yes. It ought not to be. It certainly ought not to be treated as acceptable.

Is anyone treating it as acceptable. I'm just not seeing where complete social ostracism with apology is warranted here.

Wait, so when a prominent public figure incites their followers to send death threats to someone they don’t like it “doesn’t need to be problematic” but when people call said public figure out for said harassment, that’s a problem? Really?

Is Zak really a public figure? He seems pretty niche.

I figured death threats and pictures of one’s children’s school would speak for itself. If you don’t think the subject of such attacks warrants being referred to as a victim, I question your standard for application of the term,

If that were true, Zak should be prosecuted in criminal court, no?

 

[Mecheon]

Also, I don't know exactly what Zak did on social media.

So you're defending him, not knowing what he did, not knowing about how he got people together to harass people to the point they had to leave the industry, and then also surrounded himself with people to believe his side of the story to ignore those trying to raise these issues?

Well, hey, guess what buddy-o? My pals include some of those who Zak forced out of the industry.

I'm not sure our ape brains can handle it.

Oh come off it. We're social animals with brains wired to communicate with each other. Social media is merely another forum of conversation. If the idea of typing via computers is that scary, well, video conferencing is the way of the day at the moment (Mind I wouldn't go with Zoom given all of the issues)

 

[OblivionDrive]

No. I do not think Zak qualifies as a public figure under U.S. defamation laws.



No. I do not think such a lawsuit would be dismissed under anti-SLAPP lawsuits. It's actually rather difficult to use those laws.

He is an author, game developer, painter who has had his work in galleries, former porn actor. He almost definitely counts as at least a "limited public figure" for these purposes.

This is also my last reply to you on this too, as I have spent too much time engaging with his bad faith defenders. Have a nice day.

 

[Guest 6801328]

So Elfcrusher, the rash passions of a mob is justice? In USA history, mob justice tends to hurt the less powerful.

True, when the mobs are defending privilege. Especially when the authorities wink at them while they’re doing it.

And also in USA (and World) history, the high bar of proof has meant that most perpetrators of harassment and assault get away with it, which in turn leads to more harassment and assault.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

So you're defending him, not knowing what he did, not knowing about how he got people together to harass people to the point they had to leave the industry, and then also surrounded himself with people to believe his side of the story to ignore those trying to raise these issues?

Of course I'll defend Zak. I'm a sinner. I've done things wrong. If I were in Nazi Germany in WII, I probably would have gone along with the Holocaust.

I'm not saying he didn't do something ugly. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. Maybe he did part of it. Maybe we have proof for part of it. But isn't much easier to spoil someone's or one's own reputation than recover from it?

I'm in favor of better, more universal paths to redemption.

Personally, I find Zak, on the whole, to be a good guy. I wouldn't have a problem bringing my daughter over to his house. I'm not sure I'd be happy if my daughter dated him, but I'm not sure I'd be happy if she dated anyone.

Well, hey, guess what buddy-o? My pals include some of those who Zak forced out of the industry.

That is very sad and unfortunate. How were they "forced out of the industry."

Oh come off it. We're social animals with brains wired to communicate with each other. Social media is merely another forum of conversation. If the idea of typing via computers is that scary, well, video conferencing is the way of the day at the moment (Mind I wouldn't go with Zoom given all of the issues)

I never denied humans were social animals. Conversation is also scary. Any conversation that matters is, anyway. It's the same way that reading history or psychological research is terrifying. Ugly truths are always going to be exposed.

We're all imperfect. We all make mistakes. I don't see Zak's mistakes as being more problematic than other stories I've heard, where livelihoods weren't ruined. The only difference is that Zak's mistakes were public.

Which is why I'm not sure we're ready for social media. I don't know if we all have the wisdom to handle it. I know I don't, so I stay away.

Zak, like other public figures, put his life on display. That is a dangerous choice. In some ways, he got what was coming to him for doing so. But I also don't believe that two wrongs make a right. And I don't believe in accusing someone without evidence. As I said above, it's much easier to spoil someone's or one's own reputation than recover from it.

I don't have the wisdom to foresee the consequences of all my actions. I don't know someone who does. I think we all need a little more humility, and instead of point fingers and casting blame, we should try to find a path to recovery.