Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CaesarCzech

Okay so Here is What Actually happened with Obsidian Writer that "Resigned"

Recommended Posts

so a guy posts bigoted nonsense over at rpgcodex (color us surprised) and ends up quitting 'cause somebody accurately identifies the author and shares intriguing pith such as, "if they're young and male and a muslim, you don't let them in, period," with the gaming community.  am not seeing a story.  share your brobdingnagian stoopidity or vile turpitude with the world and the world may decide to return the favor.  sure, is america, so the government can't punish you for your opinions, but your friends, neighbors and non-government employers can chastise you for bad behavior. thank god. 

 

yup, there will be grey areas where we should ask whether or not an employer is wise to punish employees for opinions which may offend. 60 years ago, an employee voicing an opinion that it were un-american to deny lgbt prospective employees equal consideration woulda' been deemed offensive.  heck, 60 years ago, and in much o' the us south, suggesting blacks deserved equality in the workplace woulda' shocked many.  am seeing value in questioning unpopular policies.  even so, am not recognizing the present speaker as dwelling in such a grey area, but perhaps others disagree. 

 

is nothing wrong or un-american in condemning your fellow american's opinions. heck, is precisely 'cause o' the first amendment that Gromnir sees, if not an affirmative duty, then a moral obligation for citizens to respond to the hateful or offensive speech o' their fellow americans.  stand by idle and quiet while bigots spew their venom is your right, just as much is it is the right o' any ex-obsidian freelance writer to be a bigot. 'course such silence is, in our mind, near as offensive as is the bigoted speech. we got unique speech rights here in the US, but such rights should carry with 'em a sense o' responsibility.  when confronted by small-minded bigots and purveyors o' hate, one should feel compelled to respond. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

  • Like 8

"Those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. They did not fear political change. They did not exalt order at the cost of liberty. To courageous, self-reliant men, with confidence in the power of free and fearless reasoning applied through the processes of popular government, no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present, unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion. If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."--Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way the group in question is called 'GamerGhazi' and Ghazi is a term for an Islamic Holy Warrior and this is now being blamed on 'SJWs'? I don't get that either. I mean is everybody who is not a right wing activist considered a 'SJW' these days?

Edited by Valmy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I hope Obsidian recognize the fact that these people are not their customers, fans and/or people who respect them. Heck, SJWs take pride in the fact they don't support the "dirty gaming industry".(not including candy crush)

 

So like I'm sure you'd call me an SJW (with all the misunderstanding applying that label entails) and I've been around since Black Isle. I'm not unique.

 

Not that there's any indication that anyone pressured Obsidian to fire the guy, or that Obsidian pressured the guy to quit.

 

 

So you think guy should have been fired for his opinions ?

 

 

I said nothing of the sort.

 

However, I think people should be careful about what they espouse in public, and should they espouse racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, transphobic stuff in public, they (and their supporters) should be neither surprised nor aggrieved when there are consequences. That doesn't necessarily translate to "I think the guy should have been fired." It does translate to "His departure in light of this information does not surprise or aggrieve me."

 

Free speech is nice but there is no freedom from consequences for that speech. He chose to be openly racist and sexist. No one compelled him to do it. No one held a gun to his head and forced him to write those posts. The choice to do so is entirely on him.

 

Also, as a point of clarification, my post was not actually about whether this guy should have been fired or whether he should have quit or whatever the heck happened because who knows what happened? Not anyone in this thread.

 

My post was simply to point out that "yes, in fact, people who might be called SJWs are gamers and fans of Obsidian." We're not on the outside looking in, we've been here all along. Even given my progressive politics I am a Deadfire backer, and I've been playing Obsidian's games since before it was Obsidian. Since people worked for Black Isle Studio and made Fallout.

Edited by Belle Sorciere
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I hope Obsidian recognize the fact that these people are not their customers, fans and/or people who respect them. Heck, SJWs take pride in the fact they don't support the "dirty gaming industry".(not including candy crush)

 

So like I'm sure you'd call me an SJW (with all the misunderstanding applying that label entails) and I've been around since Black Isle. I'm not unique.

 

Not that there's any indication that anyone pressured Obsidian to fire the guy, or that Obsidian pressured the guy to quit.

 

 

So you think guy should have been fired for his opinions ?

 

 

I said nothing of the sort.

 

However, I think people should be careful about what they espouse in public, and should they espouse racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, transphobic stuff in public, they (and their supporters) should be neither surprised nor aggrieved when there are consequences. That doesn't necessarily translate to "I think the guy should have been fired." It does translate to "His departure in light of this information does not surprise or aggrieve me."

 

Free speech is nice but there is no freedom from consequences for that speech. He chose to be openly racist and sexist. No one compelled him to do it. No one held a gun to his head and forced him to write those posts. The choice to do so is entirely on him.

 

Also, as a point of clarification, my post was not actually about whether this guy should have been fired or whether he should have quit or whatever the heck happened because who knows what happened? Not anyone in this thread.

 

My post was simply to point out that "yes, in fact, people who might be called SJWs are gamers and fans of Obsidian." We're not on the outside looking in, we've been here all along. Even given my progressive politics I am a Deadfire backer, and I've been playing Obsidian's games since before it was Obsidian. Since people worked for Black Isle Studio and made Fallout.

 

Post of the week, as far as I am concerned.  Well phrased and formulated, and your stance... well, let's just say I sympathize vehemently. :)

  • Like 4

*** "The words of someone who feels ever more the ent among saplings when playing CRPGs" ***

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Scummer, pox and wound rot!" roared Tunstall, slamming his fist down on the bed. "Gods cursed the pig-tarsed mammering craven currish beef-witted bum-licking gut-griping louts that did this to me! May every flea, leech and hookworm in all creation find and feast upon them!”

― Tamora Pierce, Bloodhound


"It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole series is idiotic. People with agendas speculating about what maybe happened with a company they have no inside knowledge about. Simplest explanation : there's no conspiracy, one less writer wont change the overall quality of Deadfire and no, Obsidian isnt going "mainstream", whatever that means. Relax and take a long hike in nature. It'll do you a world of good.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wait, what was controversial about Raedric's Hold?

 

His comments were bad, but not that bad. Annoying but not worth trying to out him. Have you ever been fired? It sucks hard. You never really get over it. At least he was only freelance.

 

But if Obsidian ousted him it's because they don't want it going viral and toxic, not because they want a bland, safe story.

Raedric hold jeez I meant the Village under it. Sorry for confusion its some time since i played it. I meant The tree.

 

Yeah sadly Obsidian was put into **** position not helped by the fact that part of gaming media is symphatetic to ghazi types. And I doubt obsidian wants to piss them off What with them remembering the whole Fallout new Vegas Thing.

Gah. What was the Thing with FNV?

 

And seriously, the tree was just dark, not offensive. I'd have to go listen to the developer commentary about it again. I think they said they force a conversation there because they want the player to see it because it makes a point about the setting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Why would anyone ever use any form of social media? Anything you post, like, friend, follow or allow someone else to post on your site will be used against you. Voice an opinion and lose your job, like a post and you can be charged with a hate crime (at least in Germany).

well, in the US, getting charged for a hate crime based on a twitter or facebook post is almost ridiculous unlikely.  first amendment protections is a bit different than eu or german free speech protections.

 

even so, am in agreement 'bout social media, but Gromnir has never quite grasped the window/mirror o' social media.  our need for external validation is almost non-existent, and our curiosity 'bout the day-to-day thoughts and doings o' people outside our immediate circle o' friends is negligible. 

 

even so, am conscientious o' the fact that posting as Gromnir has effective killed any chance we will ever be a judge.  is not simple 'cause o' the Gromnir persona, but on such boards as these we admitted, more than once, we ain't a fan o' the law of Brown v. Board of Education. the Justices did the right thing, the moral thing, by ending school segregation, but the legal reasoning for the decision were weak and having a Court make law, instead of leaving to democratic process, arguable resulted in a decade o' blood and fire.  

 

no doubt you couldn't care less 'bout our feelings regarding brown v. board, but if we were ever being considered for a place on the bench, somebody would go through our history with gusto looking for any possible references brown v. board or roe v. wade.  kinda wacky to think how posts on a game board from as far back as the mid 90s could handicap our career, but am not naive 'bout the reality.

 

HA! Good Fun!

  • Like 1

"Those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. They did not fear political change. They did not exalt order at the cost of liberty. To courageous, self-reliant men, with confidence in the power of free and fearless reasoning applied through the processes of popular government, no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present, unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion. If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."--Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 Why would anyone ever use any form of social media? Anything you post, like, friend, follow or allow someone else to post on your site will be used against you. Voice an opinion and lose your job, like a post and you can be charged with a hate crime (at least in Germany).

well, in the US, getting charged for a hate crime based on a twitter or facebook post is almost ridiculous unlikely.  first amendment protections is a bit different than eu or german free speech protections.

 

even so, am in agreement 'bout social media, but Gromnir has never quite grasped the window/mirror o' social media.  our need for external validation is almost non-existent, and our curiosity 'bout the day-to-day thoughts and doings o' people outside our immediate circle o' friends is negligible. 

 

even so, am conscientious o' the fact that posting as Gromnir has effective killed any chance we will ever be a judge.  is not simple 'cause o' the Gromnir persona, but on such boards as these we admitted, more than once, we ain't a fan o' the law of Brown v. Board of Education. the Justices did the right thing, the moral thing, by ending school segregation, but the legal reasoning for the decision were weak and having a Court make law, instead of leaving to democratic process, arguable resulted in a decade o' blood and fire.  

 

no doubt you couldn't care less 'bout our feelings regarding brown v. board, but if we were ever being considered for a place on the bench, somebody would go through our history with gusto looking for any possible references brown v. board or roe v. wade.  kinda wacky to think how posts on a game board from as far back as the mid 90s could handicap our career, but am not naive 'bout the reality.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Well thi is nice attempt at derail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

this is an outrage

 

Do you smoulder with generic rage?

 

 

So you are insulting somebody who is outraged about this. i have to wonder why you do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Wait, what was controversial about Raedric's Hold?

 

His comments were bad, but not that bad. Annoying but not worth trying to out him. Have you ever been fired? It sucks hard. You never really get over it. At least he was only freelance.

 

But if Obsidian ousted him it's because they don't want it going viral and toxic, not because they want a bland, safe story.

Raedric hold jeez I meant the Village under it. Sorry for confusion its some time since i played it. I meant The tree.

 

Yeah sadly Obsidian was put into **** position not helped by the fact that part of gaming media is symphatetic to ghazi types. And I doubt obsidian wants to piss them off What with them remembering the whole Fallout new Vegas Thing.

Gah. What was the Thing with FNV?

 

And seriously, the tree was just dark, not offensive. I'd have to go listen to the developer commentary about it again. I think they said they force a conversation there because they want the player to see it because it makes a point about the setting.

 

 

I be blunt some rewiers would have let  this Impact Rewiew scores if The Writer wasnt "Resigned". Due to their bias

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/06/game-writer-resigns-after-social-justice-warriors-crucify-him-for-conservative-opinions/

 

Honestly while these are not Opinions  I'd endorse,  It doesnt seem to me, That this should have blown up as it has. I'm seriously afraid of what might happen/ Will the situation repeat another time with less  controversial remarks because of the slippery  slope of Appeasment ?

 

 

Will it impact the story ? because if this company encouraged the writer to resign because of this, It could signal that Obsidian will shy away from the deep writing   and avoid Philosophical questions and other things that could be  considered remotely controversial, and That could make it significantly harder to create Great Game like the KOTOR 2.

 

I dont even know If Raedric Hold would make it into the game. If PoE 1 were made today,

The Atmosphere certainly changed with certain  segment of population believing that Art should not be sorely for Art but for the message and for the influence of said message to "guide" the society.

 

I think there could be Worthwhile discusion of both this case,what it might signal and in general  the direction obsidian  might be taking in terms of story, storytelling and ultimately Narrative.

 

His biggest Sin was offending Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn. Whenever those women are mentioned, and if it's less than pure adulation, they mobilize against their critic. Even if they're not directly involved, companies just don't want to deal with them.

 

The real problem here is the effect this has on story telling and character development. I want multiple perspectives from a diverse pool of opinions and experiences. If I want stories that focus on intersectional feminism, I can go to Feminist Frequency or read a modern Marvel comic.

 

I noticed the usual "who cares" or "why is this an issue" posts, but these people are in the minority. They will support whatever Obsidian puts out and do not represent the market at large. After seeing what happened to Tim Soret, among other witch hunts, it's pretty clear that the censors are coming at video games from the left as opposed to the right. This is a serious problem.

 

Hollywood movies suck because everyone thinks the same. They grew up in the same economic class, most are from big cities, they went to the same schools and studied the same majors. What is the consequence? They tell the same stories over and over with the occasional gender or race swap to "freshen" things up. If Obsidian is capitulating to the Zoe Quinn's of the gaming industry, then their product is going to suffer.

 

There are so many games to choose from these days that this news has convinced me not to buy Pillars 2 at launch. I will wait for a price drop which should give me enough time to find out if the writers are a bunch of sanctimonious SJW preachers.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 Why would anyone ever use any form of social media? Anything you post, like, friend, follow or allow someone else to post on your site will be used against you. Voice an opinion and lose your job, like a post and you can be charged with a hate crime (at least in Germany).

well, in the US, getting charged for a hate crime based on a twitter or facebook post is almost ridiculous unlikely.  first amendment protections is a bit different than eu or german free speech protections.

 

even so, am in agreement 'bout social media, but Gromnir has never quite grasped the window/mirror o' social media.  our need for external validation is almost non-existent, and our curiosity 'bout the day-to-day thoughts and doings o' people outside our immediate circle o' friends is negligible. 

 

even so, am conscientious o' the fact that posting as Gromnir has effective killed any chance we will ever be a judge.  is not simple 'cause o' the Gromnir persona, but on such boards as these we admitted, more than once, we ain't a fan o' the law of Brown v. Board of Education. the Justices did the right thing, the moral thing, by ending school segregation, but the legal reasoning for the decision were weak and having a Court make law, instead of leaving to democratic process, arguable resulted in a decade o' blood and fire.  

 

no doubt you couldn't care less 'bout our feelings regarding brown v. board, but if we were ever being considered for a place on the bench, somebody would go through our history with gusto looking for any possible references brown v. board or roe v. wade.  kinda wacky to think how posts on a game board from as far back as the mid 90s could handicap our career, but am not naive 'bout the reality.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Well thi is nice attempt at derail.

 

 

where exact is the rails on this crazy train o' a thread?  to be relevant to deadfire we somehow gotta imagine a domino effect or slippery slope or absurdist extreme evolution whereby the loss o' one freelance developer, who's contributions to the project were largely unknown by folks following this board, somehow has noteworthy impact on the subject matter o' this forum, i.e. deadfire. Sherman's march to the ocean caused less derailment than were inherent in this thread from the start.

 

that being said, kdubya actual posed an interesting query, even if it weren't specific game related.  the internet never complete forgets.  what you post online can theoretical follow you forever.  if you wanna be a game developer, then you gotta be conscientious o' the fact your words will follow you.  particular if one posts at sites o' dubious integrity, one should understand the peril in such behavior. is possible the only thing o' value to be learned from the incident in question.

 

hc svnt dracones.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

  • Like 1

"Those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. They did not fear political change. They did not exalt order at the cost of liberty. To courageous, self-reliant men, with confidence in the power of free and fearless reasoning applied through the processes of popular government, no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present, unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion. If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."--Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does a corporation have the right to fire an employee (I mean suggest he resign  :skeptical:  *) for an opinion voiced as a private citizen**?

 

An opinion that is legal to have, but might be distasteful to some?

 

If so where does it stop? Can you be fired for voting or supporting a political view that differs from the corporation's?

 

 

* being fired would have drastic repercussions on your ability to be hired in the future. Resigning at least would avoid that and only run the risk of being blacklisted by corporations with similar viewpoints.

 

** An opinion voiced as a representative of a corporation is different and the corporation would be well within their rights to discipline an employee who acted in an official capacity.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gromnir,

 

When you say they see nothing wrong with "blank" the blank in question is racism and sexism. They see nothing wrong with racism and sexism. What exactly is the middle ground between being racist and sexist and being against racism and sexism? Why should there be a middle ground? Is there anything at all redeemable about racism or sexism, or arguments in favor of either? What is the reasonable discussion that involves compromise to allow for racism and sexism?

 

Note: I removed the "don't be misleading" comment because I do not believe Gromnir is actually trying to mislead. So apologies for that.

 

kdubya: Yes, they do. The opinions in question, however, are not simply "distasteful to some." That's a serious understatement. The person in question expressed hatred and disdain for entire groups of people, such as black women. That goes a bit beyond "distasteful" and directly into racism and misogyny. If a company doesn't want to endorse racist or misogynist views, then they would be well-served to take some action.

Edited by Belle Sorciere
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does a corporation have the right to fire an employee (I mean suggest he resign  :skeptical:  *) for an opinion voiced as a private citizen**?

 

An opinion that is legal to have, but might be distasteful to some?

 

 

is a serious question?  answer is obvious a "yes."  you got an opinion that widgets made by Generico is the worst widgets on the market.  furthermore, you share opinion, with any who will listen, that Generico is a monolithic and evil corporation which exploits slave wage labor in south east asia, pollutes the environment, and hates old people, children and dogs.   oh, and you work for Generico.

 

of course you can be fired for voicing legal but distasteful opinions.   as an at-will employee (am assuming no contract) chances are you can be fired for any reason, or no reason at all... just as long as the reason itself is not violating a law.  e.g. whistleblower statues, and civil rights violations.  

 

as we noted already, there is a valid question 'bout whether a business should fire folks for their offensive opinions, but able to?  able is not actual at issue. 

 

HA! Good Fun!


"Those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. They did not fear political change. They did not exalt order at the cost of liberty. To courageous, self-reliant men, with confidence in the power of free and fearless reasoning applied through the processes of popular government, no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present, unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion. If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."--Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eurgh not sure why I re clicked on this topic. How has it gone on this far? Why give time to this nonsense?

  • Like 3

nowt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are insulting somebody who is outraged about this. i have to wonder why you do that.

 

What was the insult exactly? I can't see it myself, since it was a joke, but perhaps you can see something that's not there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gromnir,

 

When you say they see nothing wrong with "blank" the blank in question is racism and sexism. They see nothing wrong with racism and sexism. What exactly is the middle ground between being racist and sexist and being against racism and sexism? Why should there be a middle ground? Is there anything at all redeemable about racism or sexism, or arguments in favor of either? What is the reasonable discussion that involves compromise to allow for racism and sexism?

 

Note: I removed the "don't be misleading" comment because I do not believe Gromnir is actually trying to mislead. So apologies for that.

 

kdubya: Yes, they do. The opinions in question, however, are not simply "distasteful to some." That's a serious understatement. The person in question expressed hatred and disdain for entire groups of people, such as black women. That goes a bit beyond "distasteful" and directly into racism and misogyny. If a company doesn't want to endorse racist or misogynist views, then they would be well-served to take some action.

 

 

The comment about not allowing unlimited numbers of young men from Muslim countries into a country considering the present issues of terrorism and lack of assimilation sounds prudent to me. Maybe you and your thought police buddies should track me down and try to get me fired as well?

 

So you'd be fine with a company with conservatives in charge policing the internet for employee posts and firing anyone who supported Bernie Sanders (socialism) or Black Lives Matter (racism) and firing them?

 

 

 

 

 

Does a corporation have the right to fire an employee (I mean suggest he resign  :skeptical:  *) for an opinion voiced as a private citizen**?

 

An opinion that is legal to have, but might be distasteful to some?

 

 

is a serious question?  answer is obvious a "yes."  you got an opinion that widgets made by Generico is the worst widgets on the market.  furthermore, you share opinion, with any who will listen, that Generico is a monolithic and evil corporation which exploits slave wage labor in south east asia, pollutes the environment, and hates old people, children and dogs.   oh, and you work for Generico.

 

of course you can be fired for voicing legal but distasteful opinions.   as an at-will employee (am assuming no contract) chances are you can be fired for any reason, or no reason at all... just as long as the reason itself is not violating a law.  e.g. whistleblower statues, and civil rights violations.  

 

as we noted already, there is a valid question 'bout whether a business should fire folks for their offensive opinions, but able to?  able is not actual at issue. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Let me re-phrase then, should a company have the right? Also isn't being fired for your opinion a violation of your civil rights? 

 

In your example the employee is bad mouthing the products of his employer, for sure that should get you fired. What about the example of voicing an opinion on immigration when your employer is a game developer?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gromnir,

 

When you say they see nothing wrong with "blank" the blank in question is racism and sexism. They see nothing wrong with racism and sexism. What exactly is the middle ground between being racist and sexist and being against racism and sexism? Why should there be a middle ground? Is there anything at all redeemable about racism or sexism, or arguments in favor of either? What is the reasonable discussion that involves compromise to allow for racism and sexism?

 

Note: I removed the "don't be misleading" comment because I do not believe Gromnir is actually trying to mislead. So apologies for that.

 

kdubya: Yes, they do. The opinions in question, however, are not simply "distasteful to some." That's a serious understatement. The person in question expressed hatred and disdain for entire groups of people, such as black women. That goes a bit beyond "distasteful" and directly into racism and misogyny. If a company doesn't want to endorse racist or misogynist views, then they would be well-served to take some action.

 

Do you believe voting Trump is endorsing racist and misoginist views ? just curious

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Gromnir,

 

When you say they see nothing wrong with "blank" the blank in question is racism and sexism. They see nothing wrong with racism and sexism. What exactly is the middle ground between being racist and sexist and being against racism and sexism? Why should there be a middle ground? Is there anything at all redeemable about racism or sexism, or arguments in favor of either? What is the reasonable discussion that involves compromise to allow for racism and sexism?

 

Note: I removed the "don't be misleading" comment because I do not believe Gromnir is actually trying to mislead. So apologies for that.

 

kdubya: Yes, they do. The opinions in question, however, are not simply "distasteful to some." That's a serious understatement. The person in question expressed hatred and disdain for entire groups of people, such as black women. That goes a bit beyond "distasteful" and directly into racism and misogyny. If a company doesn't want to endorse racist or misogynist views, then they would be well-served to take some action.

 

 

The comment about not allowing unlimited numbers of young men from Muslim countries into a country considering the present issues of terrorism and lack of assimilation sounds prudent to me. Maybe you and your thought police buddies should track me down and try to get me fired as well?

 

So you'd be fine with a company with conservatives in charge policing the internet for employee posts and firing anyone who supported Bernie Sanders (socialism) or Black Lives Matter (racism) and firing them?

 

 

 

 

 

Does a corporation have the right to fire an employee (I mean suggest he resign  :skeptical:  *) for an opinion voiced as a private citizen**?

 

An opinion that is legal to have, but might be distasteful to some?

 

 

is a serious question?  answer is obvious a "yes."  you got an opinion that widgets made by Generico is the worst widgets on the market.  furthermore, you share opinion, with any who will listen, that Generico is a monolithic and evil corporation which exploits slave wage labor in south east asia, pollutes the environment, and hates old people, children and dogs.   oh, and you work for Generico.

 

of course you can be fired for voicing legal but distasteful opinions.   as an at-will employee (am assuming no contract) chances are you can be fired for any reason, or no reason at all... just as long as the reason itself is not violating a law.  e.g. whistleblower statues, and civil rights violations.  

 

as we noted already, there is a valid question 'bout whether a business should fire folks for their offensive opinions, but able to?  able is not actual at issue. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Let me re-phrase then, should a company have the right? Also isn't being fired for your opinion a violation of your civil rights? 

 

In your example the employee is bad mouthing the products of his employer, for sure that should get you fired. What about the example of voicing an opinion on immigration when your employer is a game developer?

 

 

Lets also note that what he Suggested is Actually CANADA's imigration policy. so here is that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I guess OP's facade of "not actually agreeing" with the writer's ideology didn't last long. Is this thread just going to be an argument about immigration and race?

 

And, as always, I find it endlessly amusing that feminists are accused of being oversensitive and seeking things to be outraged about... but then you've got threads like these, furiously trying to stir up a big storm in a tiny teacup.

Edited by MortyTheGobbo
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...