Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 570 posts

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#521

Post by iamstupidsimple »

pmarreck wrote: post #498
andrewzah wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How hard is it to not make inappropriate comments about someone or their body? It's -exceedingly- easy to not be a creepy dick to one's coworkers and fellow human beings. One only has to act like a robot if they have zero social awareness or tact.

> One only has to act like a robot if they have zero social awareness or tact. Just noting here that the vast majority of people do not have 100% perfect social awareness or tact, and making this the bar for harsh judgment of human behavior is arguably inhumane.

Not to mention it basically makes the workplace extremely hostile to somebody who isn't neurotypical.

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#522

Post by licebmi__at__ »

crooked-v wrote: post #167
fxtentacle wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I remember correctly, the gamergate controversy was about a female indie developer dating a male indie game journalist. I can imagine why that would make people search for conflicts of interests.

Zoe Quinn's ex-boyfriend claimed that she was dating a gaming journalist to get good reviews. She was dating that gaming journalist, but the only things he'd written about her work were from before they'd met. Despite that, an endless parade of assholes on the internet immediately used that to justify harassment, doxxing, rape and death threats, hacking of accounts, etc.

The ex-boyfriend wrote a post about her infidelity. I have seen the claim that he constructed the story to maximize impact, but the fact that she cheated on him was not disputed. Also the other claim was that the positive coverage was made before they were dating, not before they met, you have to take their word that they were not involved earlier so that point is rightly controversial.

My take is/was similar to David Pakman's: there's evidence of non ethical behavior in the videogame journalism and how the topic was handled, but so what? it's not really one of the greatest issues that plague mankind at this moment. With that in mind, I bear no doubt that the whole thing was astroturfed to culture war topic by right talking heads. But this is in my opinion mishandled on the left, as I dare to say most of the people following the event were not really involved in politics, and were fed a narrative by the misogynists and anti-sjw types.

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#523

Post by ranguna »

sangnoir wrote: post #425
yarg wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Culture fit doesn't have to stretch that far - it does not need to be pervasive and it does not need to be toxic. We had a guy from Gaza in our office - he complained about informal emails sent to invite people for drinks because it was sinful, he complained about a manikin that got dressed up at special occasions because it was immodest. I don't know what lines to draw here - but be careful when playing with double-…

He should have insinuated being a recovered alcoholic instead, that works for me when I feel I'm being unduly pressured. As someone who doesn't care for drinks, the quickest way to shut-down all that drinks-are-vital-to-our-culture talk is to declare that I used to have a problem with the drink, but I'm sober now, and watch them stammer something about the event being optional.

That's fine if it's true, if not, why tell lies?

Just tell them you don't like drinking. We organize the same kind of meetings over at where I work, and if someone says they don't like drinking, we tell them that water is fine, if they say they don't want to join for whatever or no reason, then we say fine and let them know that the meeting will be always open to them.

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#524

Post by danmaz74 »

sangnoir wrote: post #425
yarg wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Culture fit doesn't have to stretch that far - it does not need to be pervasive and it does not need to be toxic. We had a guy from Gaza in our office - he complained about informal emails sent to invite people for drinks because it was sinful, he complained about a manikin that got dressed up at special occasions because it was immodest. I don't know what lines to draw here - but be careful when playing with double-…

He should have insinuated being a recovered alcoholic instead, that works for me when I feel I'm being unduly pressured. As someone who doesn't care for drinks, the quickest way to shut-down all that drinks-are-vital-to-our-culture talk is to declare that I used to have a problem with the drink, but I'm sober now, and watch them stammer something about the event being optional.

Not the OP, but some people are offended by the mere mention of drinks, and that looked like the case there. I personally don't like to go out for drinks, and this can be detrimental to my career, but I wouldn't impose my preference on others.

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#525

Post by ben_w »

pmarreck wrote: post #490
ben_w wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by “ribbing”? Especially in the context of your military culture (about which my entire knowledge comes from hoping the fiction I read was based on more than imagination)?

rib·bing /ˈribiNG/ noun: ribbing 1. a riblike structure or pattern, especially a band of knitting in rib. "a fleecy sweatshirt with ribbing at neck, cuffs, and hem" 2. informal good-natured teasing. "he took a good deal of ribbing with the utmost good humor" I refer to the 2nd definition

I already knew the definition, I was asking for examples. Were they sexual, anatomical, scatalogical, combative, suggesting one person was someone else’s toy, something else, or all of the above?

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#526

Post by randomswede »

kayodelycaon wrote: post #427
rdaystrom wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't all swords double-edged? I would think that a single-edged sword would simply be a knife. Or an axe.

Sabers? Katanas?

For sabres, I'd say "it depends". A non-trivial fraction will have a portion of the back sharpened (about a quarter to a third).

But, yes, there are more definitely single-edged swords. Add falchion to the list (or a langmesser, although that literally means "long knife").

I guess it is genuinely hard to draw a non-fuzzy line between "knife" and "sword"...

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#527

Post by anilgulecha »

ranguna wrote: post #523
sangnoir wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He should have insinuated being a recovered alcoholic instead, that works for me when I feel I'm being unduly pressured. As someone who doesn't care for drinks, the quickest way to shut-down all that drinks-are-vital-to-our-culture talk is to declare that I used to have a problem with the drink, but I'm sober now, and watch them stammer something about the event being optional.

That's fine if it's true, if not, why tell lies? Just tell them you don't like drinking. We organize the same kind of meetings over at where I work, and if someone says they don't like drinking, we tell them that water is fine, if they say they don't want to join for whatever or no reason, then we say fine and let them know that the meeting will be always open to them.

Isn't a better approach to pick types of meetings that don't have these outcast properties?

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#528

Post by nlitened »

deertick1 wrote: post #497
nineplay wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I want to make a point about "culture fit" "culture fit" is one of the biggest causes of workplace discrimination and I still see it pushed in 'hiring training' as perfectly valid criteria. Things I've seen teams consider "culture" - will the candidate go to our weekly study session at the micro-brewery? - will the candidate stay after work to play multi-player games with us? - is the candidate entertained by all t…

As a compliment to this point : Tgings I'd consider valid culture fit criteria : 1) does this candidate have a positive attitude about the work that they do? 2) is this candidate respectful to the clients they work with? (E.g. a coworker of mine routinely calls our client contacts a "fucking bitch" on internal calls. These aren't really possible to evaluate in the hiring process, but can be a big problem once theyve…

I think these two things are not examples of “culture fit”, but rather common work requirements. I don’t think there’s a company hiring specifically people that have negative attitude about the work they do and who are disrespectful to clients.

In my opinion, evaluation of culture fit is about things that are specific to the company, not “good” vs “bad”, but rather “we do this way, although other ways might be valid in other companies” and “we don’t do this way, although doing so in other companies has merit”.

For example, “we work as a family”. Surely work in this kind of company might bring more joy to some people, but will degrade work-life balance. Other company might have a culture of “work-life balance”, and if observed strictly, it will reduce the quality of team work, but will be much better long term for mental health of employees.

Both cultures are possible, and there are certainly people with strong preference for one culture or the other. I think it is crucial to articulate what kind of culture you have in your company, and select candidates who fit.

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#529

Post by dougmwne »

pseudo0 wrote: post #516
nineplay wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make very good points - sometimes the best discussions are well down in the comments. Currently, while men hold the majority of the economic and political power in the US. From a purely Machiavellian viewpoint, why should they hire anyone besides other white men? They only stand to lose if business and politics become more egalitarian. What's changed in the past century or so is that it can no longer appear blata…

It seems more like a prisoner's dilemma situation, where hiring from an in-group only works if you trust other members of the in-group enough to return the favor. Otherwise they could "betray", hiring a better candidate from outside the group who will perform better in the role. The person betraying would get both a better employee and the social kudos of having a diverse hiring record. I'd expect the trust strategy…

I believe that's exactly the sentiment behind the term "race traitor."

Re: Video game developers at Activision Blizzard say they'll walk out Wednesday

#530

Post by bennysomething »

cletus wrote: post #415
bennysomething wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if I'm hiring someone at what point am I allowed to use my own personal discretion? Am I allowed to dislike someone? Am I allowed to say I don't like them so please don't hire them?

A lot of behaviour is obvious in aggregate but hard to identify in particular cases. If you make a job posting, get 5 applicants, interview 3 of them and hire 1 it's hard to point a finger and say you did (or didn't) do anything wrong. But let's say over the course of a year you receive 10,000 applications for various positions and 15% of those are African American. Now say that 10% of applicants get to the interview…

Someone company or gov organisation I can't recall who removed all names and gender data from their application process, it decreased the likelyhood of a woman getting hired. Everyone keeps saying we're all stained with some original sin of not being able to hire without awful biases, we're not to be trusted with our own thoughts.

Ah found the thing I was talking about: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-tri...

Post reply on HN