What the heck is going on with the professional RPG industry in regards to Zak S?

[D351]

IMO, (and I did not read the seven pages of replies this post has already received) an abuser's reputation isn't enough to effect business relationships until someone makes that reputation into news. The latest allegations made it news. You don't lose business connections for being a bad person; you lose them for being outed as a bad person to the right people or enough people. It's not a perfect system, but it seems to have worked in this case (if not a bit late). There are certainly enough allegations and enough corroborating witnesses to presume that they are not simply made up. And no business, especially in an industry that is currently working hard against its own reputation of failing at inclusivity, wants to be attached to a reputation like ZS's.

 

[Imaro]

This is where I think WotC's response may be a bit on the excessive side. I have grave misgivings about a corporation erasing someone's credit - whether that person is a toad or not - without also removing the impact they've had on the product. But removing all of the consultants? If I had been involved at that level and had a credit removed, I'd be kind of pissed off.

Eh, I think it may be a way to avoid any legal entanglements... this way they can just claim they are no longer giving consultant credits in their book moving forward as opposed to specific reasons for specific consultants being removed... which could get messy. I don't think it's a big deal either way they weren't developers or designers and I'm not sure listing consultants in a book is a common practice.

 

[Ratskinner]

Does anyone actually think this gross capatlism is acceptable?

erm...have you heard of the United States? We have companies here that you can literally prove caused cancer and deaths in little children to save a few bucks, but because it couldn't be proved which children got cancer from the company's actions and which ones would have gotten cancer anyway they're off the hook.

 

[Sadras]

The Sugar Lobby and World Health Organisation say hello

 

[dco]

If you want to know if he is considered a rapist legally you have to wait until he is judged.
The roleplaying industry? Marketing and hipocrisy, they want to sell books, that's all.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I said my part on the matter on the last thread. I'm just going to add this here:

The DMs Guild currently has a series of PDF Bundles on sale in support of RAINN (you can also just make a donation as well):

https://www.dmsguild.com/featured.php?promotion_id=RAINN-02-19

I

 

[Umbran]

But removing all of the consultants? If I had been involved at that level and had a credit removed, I'd be kind of pissed off.

We don't know what his feedback was, or what of his even got used, so I don't know if his "level" of involvement is something we can speak to.

But, ultimately, consultants are not authors. In most industries, anyone called a "consultant" is a person who is hired on temporarily to lend a hand with something. They don't typically get insurance benefits or vacation days, much less get public credit outside the company for successes. If you were to get "pissed" about that, don't hire on as a consultant, as your expectations of what that means are a bit high.

 

[Gradine]

Dialogue is good even if you disagree and no matter the topic of conversation - be it politics, religion or otherwise. People are becoming less tolerant of disagreement which, for me, is a bad thing.

I don't disagree in the slightest. I should have been a bit more clear; I was referring more to the concern trolling a la "will no one think of the poor harassers!" Obviously a legitimate dialogue about the reach and impact of any industry or community reaction to sexual harassment is a good thing. But when the folks pop out of the woodwork, as they inevitably do, to shout "well we can't ever prove it in a court of law so I guess we just have to keep letting sexualized violence get a pass, THAT'S THE PRICE WE PAY FOR FREEDOM" I can't help but feel a bit leery of them. Understandably so, I'd hope.

That said, and all due respect to the Darryl Davis's of the world, and the amazing work that they're doing, but nobody should be questioned for refusing to tolerate intolerance, Popper's Paradox and all that. That kind of work has a tremendous cost, and it's not one everybody has the ability to bear (nor should anybody be expected to bear it).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Put differently: while we can’t all be saints, we can aspire to sainthood. But those who can’t achieve such a lofty goal shouldn’t be disparaged for falling short.

 

[D351]

After reading five dozen comments on this one post, you probably know 'why' by now.

Some people have the privilege of not knowing anything at all about abusive relationships. They should consider themselves fortunate and live their lives in humility, because a great number of us know entirely too much about them.

I believe Hannah, Vivka, Mandy, and Jennifer. I support the decisions of DriveThruRPG, WotC and GenCon. And that's all I came here to say.

What decision did Gen Con make? I haven't been able to find any response from them other than a non-committal tweet.