4 ms·

Activision Blizzard is a very large company (10,000+ employees in 196(!!) countries), and this suit claims that a proportionally small number of allegations ove

Activision Blizzard is a very large company (10,000+ employees in 196(!!) countries), and this suit claims that a proportionally small number of allegations over the course of many years is indicative of widespread corporate culture. meanwhile, like I said, it pulls in a suicide and dudes drinking and being hungover on the job, as well as pay issues and sexual harassment. notice that I did not claim any allegations were untruthful or lacked merit, merely that the overall picture being painted seems disingenuous. if the suicide connection was less tenuous (or omitted entirely), the drinking/hungover stuff wasn't mentioned, and the suit wasn't trying to paint the whole company's culture in a negative light, I would have no comment except, "cool, assuming these allegations are true, I wish the people filing the suit the best of luck in getting justice." it's the extrapolation of discrete events into a scathing indictment of the corporate culture and the tangential, tenuous things mentioned (as a means of bolstering the idea the the corporate culture is misogynistic) that gives me pause. I don't see a problem with this line of thinking. maybe the corporate culture really is as anti-woman as depicted here—that's for the courts to determine. meanwhile, I find it hard to believe 100% at face value, like many people here and elsewhere on social media are doing. I don't understand what my sex has to do with this evaluation—you said you hated to "play that card," but you didn't play any card at all, you just pointed out my presumed sex based on my handle, and didn't connect it to anything.

arkitaip 5y ago
> meanwhile, I find it hard to believe 100% at face value, like many people here and elsewhere on social media are doing. > I don't understand what my sex has to do with this evaluation—you said you hated to "play that card," but you didn't play any card at all, you just pointed out my presumed sex based on my handle, and didn't connect it to anything. You are incredibly clueless and this is typical of many guys in not just gaming but tech in general. It's a cluelessness that puts countless women in danger by constantly undermining the harassment they face at work.
- adamrezich 5y ago
  surely you're not actually calling me (perhaps unwittingly(?)) sexist, purely on account of my (still presumed) sex and my interpretation of events? surely you must see the irony of dismissing someone else's take on a given scenario about alleged widespread sexist corporate culture, by saying, "oh you're a dude, 'nuff said"? I expect a higher baseline level of discourse here
  - arkitaip 5y ago
    Dude, your sexism is stinking up the place. It's the same shitty old takes that we keep seeing on HN year after year where dudes dismiss serious allegations about sexual harassment under the thinnest of pretenses.
    - adamrezich 5y ago
      please point out where I dismissed any allegations, and please keep your personal ad hominem attacks to a minimum
  - taurath 5y ago
    You’re certainly not going to believe someone if they ever came to you for help, by the level of which you’re willing to twist continuous actions as one-offs - “oh I’m sure it was just a temporary mistake”. The systemic part is that complaints were not followed up on, and the people being abusive continuously over time not being punished or removed. Saying it’s a company of 10,000 and that this is a small amount of accusations is really minimizing and that calls into question your motives. That there are so many well documented cases of abuse, retaliation, and discrimination, compared to other organizations of that size should tell you there’s far more going on. How many is enough for you, Adamrezich? Is 100 cases, or 1% of the company, enough for you? It’s probably about that right now, but even if it’s 10 cases the culture created around non punishment of abuse in itself makes it a more dangerous environment.
    - adamrezich 5y ago
      > You’re certainly not going to believe someone if they ever came to you for help why would you presume this? nowhere in any post in this thread have I ever doubted the truthfulness of the individual allegations. nowhere have I stated anything that in any way implies that I don't believe accusations from anyone, and that I wouldn't believe anyone if they accused anyone else of anything. where did you get this idea? > by the level of which you’re willing to twist continuous actions as one-offs - “oh I’m sure it was just a temporary mistake”. when did I say anything remotely like that? you're inventing a strawman and arguing against it. > Saying it’s a company of 10,000 and that this is a small amount of accusations is really minimizing and that calls into question your motives. what motives am I supposed to have been pretending to have, and what motives am I supposed to actually have? I said I think the portrayal of an overall culture of systemic, deep-seated misogyny in the workplace at Activision Blizzard is pretty flimsy given the evidence presented thus far, all the while stating that I have no reason to disbelieve individual allegations and I hope that justice is found in court with regards to them. the huge joke here is that I actually strongly dislike Activision Blizzard as a company, both in general principle, and with regards to the games they make, with regards to my personal taste. I just think the narrative being portrayed here is disingenuous. why are people taking such strong issue with this position, creating a strawman version of what I said and then putting words into his mouth and arguing against it? completely baffling
cycomanic 5y ago
Let me ask you this. What would you rate as sufficient evidence of systemic, deep-seated misogyny in a company? Or is your argument a company with 10000 employees can not display of systemic mysogyny, because there are just too many people? Is the argument then that a company of that size can not have any systemic behaviour or failures? If that is not your argument, then I don't sure what you are trying to say. You specifically mentioned that the number of cases brought forward made you sceptical. So would have less cases of harassment been better evidence of systemic mysogyny? If not how many cases are needed to be sufficient?
stale2002 5y ago
> " it's the extrapolation of discrete events into a scathing indictment How much evidence must we have, to make such an indictment? Your position is basically unfalsifiable. It feels as if no matter how many people come forward, no matter how many women identify these issues, that you will just hand wave it all away. When person after person after person comes forward, eventually that makes a pattern. > that's for the courts to determine No. It is also for all of us to determine. Everyone can look at the evidence, and decide for themselves if that is the kind of company that they want to answer recruiter calls from, or work for. If you have some actual evidence to the contrary, that proves anything of value, then feel free to show it. But don't just be a devils advocate, and ignore literally everything, that anyone ever brings up. Eventually, if you see enough evidence, that proves a pattern.

arkitaip 5y ago

> meanwhile, I find it hard to believe 100% at face value, like many people here and elsewhere on social media are doing. > I don't understand what my sex has to do with this evaluation—you said you hated to "play that card," but you didn't play any card at all, you just pointed out my presumed sex based on my handle, and didn't connect it to anything. You are incredibly clueless and this is typical of many guys in not just gaming but tech in general. It's a cluelessness that puts countless women in danger by constantly undermining the harassment they face at work.

adamrezich 5y ago
surely you're not actually calling me (perhaps unwittingly(?)) sexist, purely on account of my (still presumed) sex and my interpretation of events? surely you must see the irony of dismissing someone else's take on a given scenario about alleged widespread sexist corporate culture, by saying, "oh you're a dude, 'nuff said"? I expect a higher baseline level of discourse here
- arkitaip 5y ago
  Dude, your sexism is stinking up the place. It's the same shitty old takes that we keep seeing on HN year after year where dudes dismiss serious allegations about sexual harassment under the thinnest of pretenses.
  - adamrezich 5y ago
    please point out where I dismissed any allegations, and please keep your personal ad hominem attacks to a minimum
- taurath 5y ago
  You’re certainly not going to believe someone if they ever came to you for help, by the level of which you’re willing to twist continuous actions as one-offs - “oh I’m sure it was just a temporary mistake”. The systemic part is that complaints were not followed up on, and the people being abusive continuously over time not being punished or removed. Saying it’s a company of 10,000 and that this is a small amount of accusations is really minimizing and that calls into question your motives. That there are so many well documented cases of abuse, retaliation, and discrimination, compared to other organizations of that size should tell you there’s far more going on. How many is enough for you, Adamrezich? Is 100 cases, or 1% of the company, enough for you? It’s probably about that right now, but even if it’s 10 cases the culture created around non punishment of abuse in itself makes it a more dangerous environment.
  - adamrezich 5y ago
    > You’re certainly not going to believe someone if they ever came to you for help why would you presume this? nowhere in any post in this thread have I ever doubted the truthfulness of the individual allegations. nowhere have I stated anything that in any way implies that I don't believe accusations from anyone, and that I wouldn't believe anyone if they accused anyone else of anything. where did you get this idea? > by the level of which you’re willing to twist continuous actions as one-offs - “oh I’m sure it was just a temporary mistake”. when did I say anything remotely like that? you're inventing a strawman and arguing against it. > Saying it’s a company of 10,000 and that this is a small amount of accusations is really minimizing and that calls into question your motives. what motives am I supposed to have been pretending to have, and what motives am I supposed to actually have? I said I think the portrayal of an overall culture of systemic, deep-seated misogyny in the workplace at Activision Blizzard is pretty flimsy given the evidence presented thus far, all the while stating that I have no reason to disbelieve individual allegations and I hope that justice is found in court with regards to them. the huge joke here is that I actually strongly dislike Activision Blizzard as a company, both in general principle, and with regards to the games they make, with regards to my personal taste. I just think the narrative being portrayed here is disingenuous. why are people taking such strong issue with this position, creating a strawman version of what I said and then putting words into his mouth and arguing against it? completely baffling

cycomanic 5y ago

Let me ask you this. What would you rate as sufficient evidence of systemic, deep-seated misogyny in a company? Or is your argument a company with 10000 employees can not display of systemic mysogyny, because there are just too many people? Is the argument then that a company of that size can not have any systemic behaviour or failures? If that is not your argument, then I don't sure what you are trying to say. You specifically mentioned that the number of cases brought forward made you sceptical. So would have less cases of harassment been better evidence of systemic mysogyny? If not how many cases are needed to be sufficient?

stale2002 5y ago

> " it's the extrapolation of discrete events into a scathing indictment How much evidence must we have, to make such an indictment? Your position is basically unfalsifiable. It feels as if no matter how many people come forward, no matter how many women identify these issues, that you will just hand wave it all away. When person after person after person comes forward, eventually that makes a pattern. > that's for the courts to determine No. It is also for all of us to determine. Everyone can look at the evidence, and decide for themselves if that is the kind of company that they want to answer recruiter calls from, or work for. If you have some actual evidence to the contrary, that proves anything of value, then feel free to show it. But don't just be a devils advocate, and ignore literally everything, that anyone ever brings up. Eventually, if you see enough evidence, that proves a pattern.