4 ms·

Minor disagreement? This was a series of tweets related to an AMA. The other person made some perfectly civil remarks pertinent to the discussion that could hav

Minor disagreement? This was a series of tweets related to an AMA. The other person made some perfectly civil remarks pertinent to the discussion that could have been engaged with, or could have been ignored. Instead the employee went on an ad hominem rampage, calling the commenter a "rando asshat" who was purporting to tell her how to do her job. Then she brags about her 10 years of work experience in game dev, which apparently makes her infallible. Then she made it about gender. From my third-party disinterested point of view, she was the one harassing him at this point. It makes sense to me that the company broke off their association with her after this.

romanovcode 8y ago
I have the feeling they already wanted to fire the problem person but did not had a reason yet.
js8 8y ago
Whatever she said, it has nothing to do with her company and her company shouldn't get involved in the punishment (should there be any at all). Let's say I am employee of a company, which makes computers, and I have a disagreement with my neighbor. He is a customer of that company, because he bought a computer from them. Does that mean I can be fired? How is that different from a police state? No, society needs to wake up and determine where are the boundaries of this. The truth is, social media put everything, even companies, under wider scrutiny than ever before. It's like when a printing press was invented, it put governments under wider scrutiny. They fought back, and it took 500 years before it became generally accepted that we should have free speech.
- 0xBA5ED 8y ago
  Well, if you posted about your company's work on a public forum, and the disagreement was with regard to that, I believe it's fair if the company feels your behavior, good or bad, reflects on them. Employment is more of a relationship than a right. It's just bad form to blow up at customers like that.
  - js8 8y ago
    You could also say: "If you posted about your nation's situation on a public forum, and the disagreement was with regard to that, I believe it's fair if the government feels your behavior, good or bad, reflects on them. Citizenship is more of a relationship than a right." Yet, in the West at least, we disagree with this view, that people should be punished if they talk badly about their nation (and the government). It didn't come naturally to this point; it was a huge effort of many activists over centuries to get to that point. And I think the same should be true about employees, and that it's time we have a debate about that.
    - 0xBA5ED 8y ago
      This is absurd. Employee/employer relationship is nowhere near the same as citizen/government relationship.
      - js8 8y ago
        It's not the same, of course. In the past, citizen/government relationship was the only social hierarchy in town and not offending people in the hierarchy was a matter of life and death. Eventually, we replaced it with many little social hierarchies, like employee/employer, but social hierarchies nonetheless. Now it's only a minor inconvenience in life to make any of those little emperors angry. However, that said, the arguments for free speech are the same. People should have freedom to speak truth to power and this freedom is beneficial. This includes freedom to speak truth to the outsiders of the social group in which the hierarchy happens to be. And it also establishes the boundary where that social hierarchy can extends its power.
        0xBA5ED 8y ago
        You're overthinking it. ArenaNet is a business. She was their employee. This relationship is voluntary on both sides. If she behaves in a manner which undermines their interests, they have every right to terminate the relationship. The person she blew up on is a streamer with significant exposure to their target market. If she wasn't mixing "work talk" into her personal account and the disagreement was not related to work, I think it would be a different story, but that isn't what happened.
- philliphaydon 8y ago
  Unfortunately it reflects on the company, evident by the reaction on reddit with the floating of her being fired and them being responsible. I think people shouldn’t advertise where they work.

romanovcode 8y ago

I have the feeling they already wanted to fire the problem person but did not had a reason yet.

js8 8y ago

Whatever she said, it has nothing to do with her company and her company shouldn't get involved in the punishment (should there be any at all). Let's say I am employee of a company, which makes computers, and I have a disagreement with my neighbor. He is a customer of that company, because he bought a computer from them. Does that mean I can be fired? How is that different from a police state? No, society needs to wake up and determine where are the boundaries of this. The truth is, social media put everything, even companies, under wider scrutiny than ever before. It's like when a printing press was invented, it put governments under wider scrutiny. They fought back, and it took 500 years before it became generally accepted that we should have free speech.

0xBA5ED 8y ago
Well, if you posted about your company's work on a public forum, and the disagreement was with regard to that, I believe it's fair if the company feels your behavior, good or bad, reflects on them. Employment is more of a relationship than a right. It's just bad form to blow up at customers like that.
- js8 8y ago
  You could also say: "If you posted about your nation's situation on a public forum, and the disagreement was with regard to that, I believe it's fair if the government feels your behavior, good or bad, reflects on them. Citizenship is more of a relationship than a right." Yet, in the West at least, we disagree with this view, that people should be punished if they talk badly about their nation (and the government). It didn't come naturally to this point; it was a huge effort of many activists over centuries to get to that point. And I think the same should be true about employees, and that it's time we have a debate about that.
  - 0xBA5ED 8y ago
    This is absurd. Employee/employer relationship is nowhere near the same as citizen/government relationship.
    - js8 8y ago
      It's not the same, of course. In the past, citizen/government relationship was the only social hierarchy in town and not offending people in the hierarchy was a matter of life and death. Eventually, we replaced it with many little social hierarchies, like employee/employer, but social hierarchies nonetheless. Now it's only a minor inconvenience in life to make any of those little emperors angry. However, that said, the arguments for free speech are the same. People should have freedom to speak truth to power and this freedom is beneficial. This includes freedom to speak truth to the outsiders of the social group in which the hierarchy happens to be. And it also establishes the boundary where that social hierarchy can extends its power.
      - 0xBA5ED 8y ago
        You're overthinking it. ArenaNet is a business. She was their employee. This relationship is voluntary on both sides. If she behaves in a manner which undermines their interests, they have every right to terminate the relationship. The person she blew up on is a streamer with significant exposure to their target market. If she wasn't mixing "work talk" into her personal account and the disagreement was not related to work, I think it would be a different story, but that isn't what happened.
philliphaydon 8y ago
Unfortunately it reflects on the company, evident by the reaction on reddit with the floating of her being fired and them being responsible. I think people shouldn’t advertise where they work.