Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 7977918" data-attributes="member: 18">You do not &quot;understand right&quot;.You seem to think people accusing someone of hurting and assaulting them or their friends is a &quot;campaign&quot; (presumably &quot;of harassment&quot;?), and that they, the victims, are not allowed to complain, and people are not allowed to voice agreement with or support for them.This is a bizarre sentiment, frankly. As was your earlier claim that in a democracy, people shouldn't be allowed to protest things or people. On the contrary, only in a democracy can they do that.Yeah, I get that's what you &quot;see&quot;, just like you think democracies shouldn't allow protest or complaint against people, and that people accusing someone of hurting them are &quot;campaigning against them&quot; and &quot;offenders&quot;. Not sure what to say to that, except it's... not a very reasonable position from any moral or rational or ethical perspective.I'm sure Mike Mearls did think people were being unfair on his buddy Zak S. That doesn't excuse any of his behaviour. He isn't just some random guy talking a private Facebook group or WhatsApp chat or whatever,&nbsp; or in person. He used his platform as the public face of Dungeons and Dragons, and thus of Wizards of the Coast, and thus of Hasbro, to intervene in this, in favour of a man who by his own (Zak S') descriptions, is a sleazy creep (Zak S), and who Mearls certainly knew was not a savoury character.He didn't appear to even consider the possibility that the accusations had merit, or that even if they didn't, this wasn't actually an appropriate thing for the face of D&amp;D to get involved in. He plunged in head-first, and starting behaving unprofessionally.It's also not like he &quot;didn't have time to think&quot;. His behaviour occurred over the course of days, not hours. Apparently WotC's PR were &quot;asleep at the wheel&quot;, probably because I don't think they ever had to deal with anything like this before (they would have if Tweet had stayed with WotC, given his &quot;race science&quot; trutherism phase, which he backed away from some months later but they got rid of him before he started talking about it publicly), and I don't anyone, least of all me, would have expected Mike Mearls to really do something like this.Anyway I'm more interested in Winniger. This discussion has been held. Mearls got off extremely lightly given the level of unprofessionalism involved (people at his level often do, I've seen it in my own line of work). Pretending he's a &quot;victim&quot; as he still has a senior and likely highly remunerated position in WotC is just bizarre. Winniger is much more exciting to discuss given his background and experience. I really hope he does bring something new and fresh to 5E.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 7977918, member: 18"] You do not "understand right". You seem to think people accusing someone of hurting and assaulting them or their friends is a "campaign" (presumably "of harassment"?), and that they, the victims, are not allowed to complain, and people are not allowed to voice agreement with or support for them. This is a bizarre sentiment, frankly. As was your earlier claim that in a democracy, people shouldn't be allowed to protest things or people. On the contrary,[I] only[/I] in a democracy can they do that. Yeah, I get that's what you "see", just like you think democracies shouldn't allow protest or complaint against people, and that people accusing someone of hurting them are "campaigning against them" and "offenders". Not sure what to say to that, except it's... not a very reasonable position from any moral or rational or ethical perspective. I'm sure Mike Mearls did think people were being unfair on his buddy Zak S. That doesn't excuse any of his behaviour. He isn't just some random guy talking a private Facebook group or WhatsApp chat or whatever, or in person. He used his platform as the public face of Dungeons and Dragons, and thus of Wizards of the Coast, and thus of Hasbro, to intervene in this, in favour of a man who by his [I]own [/I](Zak S') descriptions, is a sleazy creep (Zak S), and who Mearls certainly knew was not a savoury character. He didn't appear to even consider the possibility that the accusations had merit, or that even if they didn't, this wasn't actually an appropriate thing for the face of D&D to get involved in. He plunged in head-first, and starting behaving unprofessionally. It's also not like he "didn't have time to think". His behaviour occurred over the course of days, not hours. Apparently WotC's PR were "asleep at the wheel", probably because I don't think they ever had to deal with anything like this before (they would have if Tweet had stayed with WotC, given his "race science" trutherism phase, which he backed away from some months later but they got rid of him before he started talking about it publicly), and I don't anyone, least of all me, would have expected Mike Mearls to really do something like this. Anyway I'm more interested in Winniger. This discussion has been held. Mearls got off extremely lightly given the level of unprofessionalism involved (people at his level often do, I've seen it in my own line of work). Pretending he's a "victim" as he still has a senior and likely highly remunerated position in WotC is just bizarre. Winniger is much more exciting to discuss given his background and experience. I really hope he does bring something new and fresh to 5E. [/QUOTE]

Verification