WotC WotC blacklist. Discussion

[Parmandur]

Yeah, there's a MUCH smarter way of doing it. You create a list of preferred vendors, a WHITELIST, and put people on it with whom product people (or whomever makes these calls) are automatically cleared to work with. If they have some really good reason they need some non-approved people, they can make the case for that with vendor management or whatever, and either add people to the list or make an exception. Vendor management itself MIGHT keep a list of 'non-preferred providers' that you probably won't get approved to work with. That's how most bigger companies do it. Nobody is actually blacklisted, and any preference for/against is limited to a very specific context.

The problem with just making lists of 'bad people' is obviously how easy it is to abuse, but also how fraught it is. If I find out I've been put on your list, I may very well have a cause for action against you! OTOH a whitelist is completely uncontroversial, its just 'supply chain management'.

Yup. Part of the issue with what has come out about Satine Phoenix's behavior while she was a community manager at WotC is that she manipulated people who she disliked onto a "do not work with" status by spreading gossip.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

You are thinking of Scott Rouse. I remember how he used to post here.

I remember Mike Mearls posting here as well.

Mearls also posted a couple times on rpg.net, and that never happened again either. I don't think any of that is related to any blacklist, WotC told ALL their people "DO NOT POST" and that has just been an absolute rule. Heck, VERY few companies won't get pissed at employees who make posts that appear to be associated with their official capacity, and someone like Mike essentially cannot post anywhere and not have that appearance. I don't even mention the name of my employer, except very rarely in specific situations where it would be very clear I am not speaking for them. I'm 100% sure I'd get a boot in arse if I did, too! (and my employers are great people, they just have their own PR and don't need me messing it up).

 

[MGibster]

Sorry, aren't informal blacklists for companies.... normal?

We keep a formal list of former employees we won't ever hire again. These are folks who have things like gross misconduct and falsification of documents listed as the reason they were terminated in the first place.

So, per Morrus - I don't think, "Not invited to get information you already had gotten yourself beforehand," counts as being, "blacklisted".

He should market the heck out of that! "Banned by WotC! Get the truth they don't want you to see!" I'm probably not the right guy to listen to for marketing advice...

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

I dont remember it when I was younger either. First time I remember encountering this type of logic was in the late 90s/early 2000's when the participation trophy was instituted in tee ball. Now those kids are adults, see the connection.

Your memory appears faulty, participation trophies were definitely a thing at least in the early 80's. So I guess blame the boomers that gave them out if you're looking to point fingers lol.

 

[GreyLord]

I don't think WotC has a "Blacklist" per se (that's just my opinion, though...so...).

They have various reasons why they may not include many groups or organizations out there...because there are a LOT of organizations and groups out there. They have to select which ones will be the best for the specific situation they wish to utilize in the best way. Just because one isn't invited to do something doesn't mean they are blacklisted at all. It can simply be that they aren't seen as the right item to use at that specific instance.

If someone is rather against WotC and particularly aggressive at trying to tear down WotC (or Hasbro for that matter) there may be a refusal by staff to work with that individual or company, but that is more selection due to experiences with them, rather than an organized "Blacklist" from what I would say. I don't think ENworld would fall into that category either.

But that's just my opinion.

 

[GreyLord]

Double post for some reason

 

[Urriak]

It is if you're on the list.

The problem with informal blacklists is that there can be all kinds of reasons why someone ends up on them - they might be legitimate (like you were hired to do a job but you didn't do it properly) or not (like the manager who has you blacklisted is mad because they asked you out and you said no). They also stretch across companies and into whole industries where the actual reason that you're considered a "problem" isn't as well known as the "fact" that you're a "problem". And that can be a huge issue if the reason you're a "problem" is a lie that you can't fight back against.

I'll be honest, but this just feels like a normal part of being employed in the 21st century. It's important to make constructive relationships and networks, especially if your a contractor. And that means having to work with, tolerate, and cooperate with some frustrating people. And if someone is really out to get for illegitimate reasons, you kind of need to combat that with documentation and coworkers who are willing to speak on your behalf.

The problems you've detailed are kind of universal and not really tied to an informal blacklist at all, just more that people in positions of power can screw with you when they want to.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

Yeah, there's a MUCH smarter way of doing it. You create a list of preferred vendors, a WHITELIST, and put people on it with whom product people (or whomever makes these calls) are automatically cleared to work with. If they have some really good reason they need some non-approved people, they can make the case for that with vendor management or whatever, and either add people to the list or make an exception. Vendor management itself MIGHT keep a list of 'non-preferred providers' that you probably won't get approved to work with. That's how most bigger companies do it. Nobody is actually blacklisted, and any preference for/against is limited to a very specific context.

The problem with just making lists of 'bad people' is obviously how easy it is to abuse, but also how fraught it is. If I find out I've been put on your list, I may very well have a cause for action against you! OTOH a whitelist is completely uncontroversial, its just 'supply chain management'.

Whitelists are lazy and get people to not try out new companies/vendors/products/etc. "You are not on our list? Then sorry, it does not matter how awesome you/your product seem to be, but we can't have anything to do with you."

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yup. Part of the issue with what has come out about Satine Phoenix's behavior while she was a community manager at WotC is that she manipulated people who she disliked onto a "do not work with" status by spreading gossip.

Right, and under the right circumstances you could bring an action for 'Restraint of Trade' or 'Tortuous Interference' against someone like that. I mean, I doubt those sorts of actions are super easy to launch, but they do happen. I'd assume that all of this was highly informal though in any case. While I know next to nothing about all these people, it sure seems like Ms Phoenix and associates fall into a category of persons whom my experience classifies as toxic bad news. Of course I'd have to actually meet them to really know. Our hobby certainly has a number of this type of persons in it, as they tend to be both attention seeking AND poor socializers. I guess its still a lot better than someplace like Hollywood! lol.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Whitelists are lazy and get people to not try out new companies/vendors/products/etc. "You are not on our list? Then sorry, it does not matter how awesome you/your product seem to be, but we can't have anything to do with you."

Everything has its downsides, but heck, it ain't like 5e wants to tread into some new territory anyway, lol. It is thoroughly the edition of "do what works, stick to the formula!"