Acleacius wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 21:41:

Bubicus wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 18:12:

Acleacius wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 13:42:
What? These aren't the assault cases. Several game companies investigated inhouse and found enough evidence to fire him, iirc.
My best guess, is he went after low hanging accusations, after the fact. Afaik, this doesn't clear him, at all. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I'm going to call you on that, Acleacius. Which companies fired him, and on what evidence?

Techland ended a contract on mutual agreement, and there was no evidence made public of any wrongdoing while he did work for them.
Owlcat said they were disapppointed and surprised, but his work was already done.

Ok, did you actually read the post? There are literally two listed there, and you want me to type them out because your reading me not the post?
Do you research, they did their own in house investigations, isn't that the way all corps do it?
What am I missing here, you clearly didn't even read the base post and now I need to do your research for you?

Ok, my turn to ask questions. Why don't you tell us how it works, then, pick a corporation and give us a break down.
How, you put, I'm call you on this one?

No one said there was evidence, all I said was there was an internal investigation, which you just corroborated.
They never give out the details, well unless it's some idiot like 'tiny hands mcdrump'.
Just like the damn public post, that was ambiguous as hell, and as mentioned they are generally sealed.

Yes, I did read the original post. I also did research, reading Techland's and Owlcat's official statements, plus interviews by their representatives with media, plus Avellone's side of the story on his Medium page. I also tried to find any evidence made public showing illegal behavior by Avellone and found none... only hearsay.

You, on the other hand, claim "no one said there was evidence", yet it is clearly visible in the original post and in the following quotes that you used the phrase "several game companies investigated inhouse and found enough evidence to fire him". You are contradicting yourself. You yourself say there is enough evidence found to fire him. And anyway, if no one said there was evidence, then there was no public reason to fire him other than fear.

Perhaps you are correct in your generalized assumption that all corporations operate that way, but if a corporation found evidence of illegal behavior and did not report it to the police during an official crime investigation, the corporation may be breaking the law, and I doubt they would hide such evidence when lawyers come requesting it.

There is literally 0 chance 102 women all lied about this guy being a creep.

Maybe these two ladies are creeps too, and that's how he nailed them with this lawsuit. Both things are possible at the same time.

Unfortunately all the details of this settlement will probably remain a mystery, and we'll have people theorycrafting about it for the next decade.

PS: If you can't understand why the press release is creepy, just trust us. ONE reason is that the two women don't apologize or say they lied; instead, they imply they never said what they said. So either they're insane, or the statement is coerced, or he wrote it for them. It's very weird.

All this discussion about Bluesnews moderation, meanwhile people are getting permanently banned from many of the major videogame subreddits for even bringing this story up.

Make no mistake- we have it good here, lads.

I've noticed a few instances where comments have been removed that didn't appear to violate the forum rules but may have simply expressed a different viewpoint or opinion.

I am the Bluesnews arbiter of complete unbiased judgement and fairness. Self-appointed. I have been here for over 20 years and I can say that out of the dozens of times people have complained that their supposedly non-offending posts have been removed and therefore their must be a fundamental bias of certain ideas, I have never seen a single case in which I at least couldn't see their point. The vast majority of the time it is a no-brainer. The idealistic leaning of key people who make the decisions is not what determines it. Ever. What it usually boils down to is the judgement call of the remover and their personal view of what actually crosses a line versus just skirts it. It will be different from yours or mine, but this site doesn't belong to you or me, so that's basically moot.

And no, I have never, ever missed an instance of it happening. Ever. I am quite omnipotent that way.

Verno wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 14:49:

eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 11:25:
I had reported what I saw as disruptive before it was fully disrupting following the rules of the platform I am on. Which is obviously not 1:1 to this one. We only have 1 forum rule. No disruptive behavior and stuff like quote sniping and spambots and essentially, all the 6 rules here, are just a tiny subset of what is disruptive to a topic in the system I am following (because following the stricter of the 2 rulesets makes it easier for my brain). I ain't going to say more than that <3

You reported a single post as "Slander". I read the report, reviewed the post and did not find it actionable as per our rules. It was an on-topic post by a well known forum user discussing the settlement. He might be incorrect in his opinion but if we punished people for posting incorrect things on the internet then it would be a full time job. It's also not my place to judge who is right or wrong in a discussion. I can only assume JD and Blue had similar thoughts, though we didn't powwow on it.

Anyways you brought it up here so I wanted to address it so that you understood we are transparent and open to feedback. Moderation is inherently subjective after all.

I also reviewed the report, which is why I posted the rules in response. Re-reading my comment this morning, I come off as kind of dickish, but I didn't intend for that. Apologies. I just wanted to point out that the reported comments weren't in violation.

eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 11:25:
I had reported what I saw as disruptive before it was fully disrupting following the rules of the platform I am on. Which is obviously not 1:1 to this one. We only have 1 forum rule. No disruptive behavior and stuff like quote sniping and spambots and essentially, all the 6 rules here, are just a tiny subset of what is disruptive to a topic in the system I am following (because following the stricter of the 2 rulesets makes it easier for my brain). I ain't going to say more than that <3

You reported a single post as "Slander". I read the report, reviewed the post and did not find it actionable as per our rules. It was an on-topic post by a well known forum user discussing the settlement. He might be incorrect in his opinion but if we punished people for posting incorrect things on the internet then it would be a full time job. It's also not my place to judge who is right or wrong in a discussion. I can only assume JD and Blue had similar thoughts, though we didn't powwow on it.

Anyways you brought it up here so I wanted to address it so that you understood we are transparent and open to feedback. Moderation is inherently subjective after all.

Sepharo wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 08:12:
Does anyone know how to read anymore?
Like for actual meaning?
What is going on with you people?
Shit is frightening.

Interested and curious about your meaning.
Sepharo, can you please explain ?
( I agree with BoP that the thread was polite enough - and eRe4s3r provoked my "Uh?" - )

Meanwhile Vampire: The Masquerade Bloodlines 2 is in limbo

This comment was edited on Mar 27, 2023, 14:41.

I'd just like to say that, beside the one post, this has been a fairly civil and interesting thread. The first we've had of its kind with this many replies in a long, time time.

Well done, all around.

Myself excluded because I'm a cranky old bastard.

1badmf wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 05:54:
i kinda skimmed the comments, but i can say that there was no judgement here so there was no standard of malice to be applied. it was a settlement to make the case go away. the only role the judge has is to approve it.

that being said, as someone else mentioned, the women must've been fucked up shit's creek to agree to these terms. they admitted they lied AND they paid him a big settlement. they need to get a better lawyer cuz when big corps drop big settlements they NEVER admit guilt. i'm curious what he sued for cuz it must've been massive, to get them to 'only' pay out 7 figs and a public apology.

Thanks 1bad. You're right, the malice standard was never applied because they settled. The way the law works in the US, there must have been some smoking gun that was so terrible that the women settled instead of going to court, since the law is very much on their side. In the UK for example, where libel is much easier to prove, this case would have been a slam dunk for Avellone. But in the US based on my understanding of the law, the preponderance of the evidence seems to be in the womens' favor, so I'm curious what made them settle and pay. Did the women just have a change of heart? Was there some damning smoking gun that we haven't seen yet?

Beamer wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 12:22:

RedEye9 wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 10:58:

Beamer wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 01:40:

Ahumado wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 19:48:
* REMOVED *

I can't

@Beamer
That comment was dealt with, be kind and edit your post.
That dreck has no place in this thread.

I have to do it myself? These volunteer mods are the worst! They are only out for glory, especially that jdreyer guy!

🤣

Unfortunately, we mods only have the ability to whack offending posts. We can't go in and clean up replies. With your post so short, I considered whacking the entire thing, but didn't want you to feel like you'd done something wrong, so I left it.

This comment was edited on Mar 27, 2023, 13:22.

eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 03:53:
See, I call this topic "A good example why Blues needs better trained moderators" - or the rules need to get better to cover slander

"trained moderators"? I have yet to find more then a couple official forums, community, fan or small commercial sites that has any notable 'training' for moderators aside from 'you've been here for awhile and seem chill you want to be a mod?'. That's about all the 'vetting' that is done in most cases and they are shown HOW to mod on a technical level but rarely anything else. Few times do that have any experience in being a mod or at times even people skills. But just because they have been on the site in question for some time, befriended staff they get the position. So you have VASTLY higher expectations of how most becomes a mod, or their 'training' vs the reality.

And before the defensive replies start, no I am not talking about this site/mods specifically but broadly from my experience from being online since the early 80s and being a mod myself behind the scenes on a few large AAA dev forums.

RedEye9 wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 10:58:

Beamer wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 01:40:

Ahumado wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 19:48:
* REMOVED *

I can't

@Beamer
That comment was dealt with, be kind and edit your post.
That dreck has no place in this thread.

I have to do it myself? These volunteer mods are the worst! They are only out for glory, especially that jdreyer guy!

Verno wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 09:18:

eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 03:53:

Argonius the 3rd wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 14:20:
People, this was a defamation case settlement, why are you making up asinine conspiracy theories ?

See, I call this topic "A good example why Blues needs better trained moderators" - or the rules need to get better to cover slander

What exactly do you want done here? We just operate based on the forum rules. If you want changes to those rules then you should email Blue.

I had reported what I saw as disruptive before it was fully disrupting following the rules of the platform I am on. Which is obviously not 1:1 to this one. We only have 1 forum rule. No disruptive behavior and stuff like quote sniping and spambots and essentially, all the 6 rules here, are just a tiny subset of what is disruptive to a topic in the system I am following (because following the stricter of the 2 rulesets makes it easier for my brain). I ain't going to say more than that <3

Verno wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 09:18:

eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 03:53:

Argonius the 3rd wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 14:20:
People, this was a defamation case settlement, why are you making up asinine conspiracy theories ?

See, I call this topic "A good example why Blues needs better trained moderators" - or the rules need to get better to cover slander

What exactly do you want done here? We just operate based on the forum rules. If you want changes to those rules then you should email Blue.

Hi there, I just wanted to take a moment to express my concerns about some of the recent moderation decisions on the forum. First off, I want to thank you for your hard work and dedication to keeping the forum a safe and productive space for everyone.

However, I've noticed a few instances where comments have been removed that didn't appear to violate the forum rules but may have simply expressed a different viewpoint or opinion. As a user of the forum, I believe it's important to allow for diverse perspectives and respectful debate, even if we don't always agree with one another.

I wanted to bring this to your attention because I believe it's important to maintain a fair and consistent approach to moderation. I understand that moderating a forum can be challenging, but I hope we can work together to ensure that the forum remains a welcoming and inclusive space for all users.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Beamer wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 01:40:

Ahumado wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 19:48:
* REMOVED *

I can't

@Beamer
That comment was dealt with, be kind and edit your post.
That dreck has no place in this thread.

LordSteev wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 19:12:
Every time there's a he said/she said situation these days, the default seems to be go with the she said.

As if f'n should. Only ~5% of sexual assaults by women are proven to be false. With most going unreported. So YES we should always side with the woman as the odds are GREATLY in the favor of it being legit.

People like you will use this to now use to dismiss and attack other 'me too' claims as you already have by using the false equivalency implying there is just as many false claims as legit. The public stats by the FBI and related say otherwise.

eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 03:53:

Argonius the 3rd wrote on Mar 26, 2023, 14:20:
People, this was a defamation case settlement, why are you making up asinine conspiracy theories ?

See, I call this topic "A good example why Blues needs better trained moderators" - or the rules need to get better to cover slander

What exactly do you want done here? We just operate based on the forum rules. If you want changes to those rules then you should email Blue.

The real culprit behind these suits is the litigation lawyer, of course. These women likely went to see one to discuss ways to promote women in the industry, or something similar, and the lawyer, sensing blood in the water as they often do, parlayed the whole thing into a sexual-predator lawsuit simply to soak Avellone into a big settlement. I'm glad to see that Avellone was exonerated, as he deserved to be. This is what comes of people believing accusations without proof--accusations are not evidence of wrong-doing, despite what some obviously believe. If you are going to stand up and attempt to ruin someone's career and life, you had best have your ducks in a row. I also think the comment about "working with the women to address issues within the game community," was simply a bone tossed to these women--Avellone making a magnanimous statement towards the women who caused him so much trouble over the last couple of years. The really weird thing is that even though these women have recanted the whole thing, there will still be people out there who refuse to believe anything positive about Avellone. Go figure.

jdreyer wrote on Mar 27, 2023, 04:25:
Forum Rules:

4. Do not post links to warez sites, or instructions on how to obtain pirated software.

Awww -- I haven't heard the term "warez" in so long! A good decade at least. Thanks for the memories
*EDITTED for further brevity

Does anyone know how to read anymore?
Like for actual meaning?
What is going on with you people?
Shit is frightening.