Realizing I'm a little late to the party and otherwise mostly a lurker, but I thought I'd dip in with an additional fun fact about some stuff in the Twitch article... I worked there for about 4 years, and was there for the "locking up the bar" incident. One of the things that didn't make it to the article is that leading up to that incident, they hired a few FTEs who were bartenders. The idea being that having someone who's job was to cut people off would eliminate the problem of all the excess.
My first thought there is that that sounds like the dude has a kink (in addition to being a sexual predator), which, like. Somehow that's even more frustrating to me. We can't seem to get men to control themselves when "all" they want is sex; now add on top of that a desire specifically for non-consensual sexual interactions :mad:
"Hey @KINGDOMHEARTS, the English voice actor for Axel is an absolute creep who preys on his fanbase through social media. You could easily replace him with Matt Mercer or somebody who's not a predator."
Account is understandably anonymous and has....... a lot of receipts.
I am so fucking disappointed. His podcasts were very informative, and taught the parts of Greek History that I never really learned about. When I first heard rumours, I thought they were talking about another guy with the same name. Time to take out the trash.
My only solace is that the history podcast community, with Mike Duncan as the most famous, has immediately cut him out.
"Hey @KINGDOMHEARTS, the English voice actor for Axel is an absolute creep who preys on his fanbase through social media. You could easily replace him with Matt Mercer or somebody who's not a predator."
Account is understandably anonymous and has....... a lot of receipts.
I am having trouble parsing this one.
Quinn appears to be... hitting on someone who has sent him videos of herself masturbating, apparently with limited solicitation. The audio recording also appears to be in response to a similar video, and one of her tweet chains imply that he was lying about them being in some form of serious long distance relationship.
I'm not saying it's not bad, and not saying he isn't a creep, but as it stands it seems like it's being presented as "incredibly inappropriate and brazen sexual harassment" when it's more that he was unclear or lying ahout the premise of the relationship? Which is still bad, but not the same thing.
"Hey @KINGDOMHEARTS, the English voice actor for Axel is an absolute creep who preys on his fanbase through social media. You could easily replace him with Matt Mercer or somebody who's not a predator."
Account is understandably anonymous and has....... a lot of receipts.
I am having trouble parsing this one.
Quinn appears to be... hitting on someone who has sent him videos of herself masturbating, apparently with limited solicitation. The audio recording also appears to be in response to a similar video, and one of her tweet chains imply that he was lying about them being in some form of serious long distance relationship.
I'm not saying it's not bad, and not saying he isn't a creep, but as it stands it seems like it's being presented as "incredibly inappropriate and brazen sexual harassment" when it's more that he was unclear or lying ahout the premise of the relationship? Which is still bad, but not the same thing.
If you go directly to that account there seems to be a lot more posts from different people with accounts going back several years. Him at a con where a fan goes in for a hug and he pulls her in for a kiss, being creepy to 16/17 year old fans, using his status to target fans from cons and so forth.
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
Smash Community Conduct Panel falls apart, due to simply having so many allegations there just isn't enough time for them to deal with it. Not to mention I imagine it's an unpaid position and having to deal with this sort of thing can be really traumatic to actually go through. It's not surprising they couldn't manage to deal with it, as I'm guessing they are getting next to zero support from Nintendo about it either.
Smash Community Conduct Panel falls apart, due to simply having so many allegations there just isn't enough time for them to deal with it. Not to mention I imagine it's an unpaid position and having to deal with this sort of thing can be really traumatic to actually go through. It's not surprising they couldn't manage to deal with it, as I'm guessing they are getting next to zero support from Nintendo about it either.
While it sucks that there are too many allegations to work on simultaneously, I don't understand why they couldn't just work on one allegation at a time and still do good work taking people down that way? A slow and steady purge of individuals may even help cut down on some predatory behaviors by a few. It isn't ideal, but any progress is still achieving something and shows -some- commitment to help the community.
Trauma, being unpaid, and continued harassment are better arguments for having trouble continuing doing the work, but saying there are too many cases doesn't scream "We should just give up"
TehSpectre on
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
Because it was thousands of hours to go through everything and more were piling up before they could finish what they had.
Because it was thousands of hours to go through everything and more were piling up before they could finish what they had.
It was pretty bad.
I get everything as a sum total being thousands of hours being daunting, but working on one person at a time =/= thousands of hours.
You pick and allegation and work on it, finish it, and move onto the next. Much like doing any massive task list, looking at the whole thing doesn't work, but picking a single task from said list, finishing it, and then moving onto the next is how you do the work.
Might they never finish? Sure. Would they still do good for the community by excising vile folks? Yes.
I think calling it an "objection" oversells it, but my only objection to criticizing the panel for disbanding is that it's an all-volunteer effort. If a group decided to give up doing work that we normally pay people for and supply grief counseling to as a necessary tool of the industry because they're being compensated in net negative attaboys, I wouldn't hold it against them.
My favorite musical instrument is the air-raid siren.
Because it was thousands of hours to go through everything and more were piling up before they could finish what they had.
It was pretty bad.
I get everything as a sum total being thousands of hours being daunting, but working on one person at a time =/= thousands of hours.
You pick and allegation and work on it, finish it, and move onto the next. Much like doing any massive task list, looking at the whole thing doesn't work, but picking a single task from said list, finishing it, and then moving onto the next is how you do the work.
Might they never finish? Sure. Would they still do good for the community by excising vile folks? Yes.
First off, depending on the accusations and the individual, one individual could easily become several hundred hours of work on their own. Second, we're talking about a board of unpaid members, who were dealing with soul-shattering recollections. It seems that burnout and trauma were significant players in the collapse,from what was said, especially with the explosion in cases from this summer.
The problem was that there wasn't the needed support for the group, starting with the fact that is was a volunteer effort. They need funding and mental health support.
Smash Community Conduct Panel falls apart, due to simply having so many allegations there just isn't enough time for them to deal with it. Not to mention I imagine it's an unpaid position and having to deal with this sort of thing can be really traumatic to actually go through. It's not surprising they couldn't manage to deal with it, as I'm guessing they are getting next to zero support from Nintendo about it either.
While it sucks that there are too many allegations to work on simultaneously, I don't understand why they couldn't just work on one allegation at a time and still do good work taking people down that way? A slow and steady purge of individuals may even help cut down on some predatory behaviors by a few. It isn't ideal, but any progress is still achieving something and shows -some- commitment to help the community.
Trauma, being unpaid, and continued harassment are better arguments for having trouble continuing doing the work, but saying there are too many cases doesn't scream "We should just give up"
I feel leading with them saying there was too much work was my biggest issue.
I clearly agreed with the other things you mentioned.
Smash Community Conduct Panel falls apart, due to simply having so many allegations there just isn't enough time for them to deal with it. Not to mention I imagine it's an unpaid position and having to deal with this sort of thing can be really traumatic to actually go through. It's not surprising they couldn't manage to deal with it, as I'm guessing they are getting next to zero support from Nintendo about it either.
While it sucks that there are too many allegations to work on simultaneously, I don't understand why they couldn't just work on one allegation at a time and still do good work taking people down that way? A slow and steady purge of individuals may even help cut down on some predatory behaviors by a few. It isn't ideal, but any progress is still achieving something and shows -some- commitment to help the community.
Trauma, being unpaid, and continued harassment are better arguments for having trouble continuing doing the work, but saying there are too many cases doesn't scream "We should just give up"
I feel leading with them saying there was too much work was my biggest issue.
I clearly agreed with the other things you mentioned.
Except that they weren't saying there was too much work, but that the process was no longer sustainable:
“[T]he reality is that at, our current pace of work, we would need five or ten years just to go through all the accusations and possible cases brought up this summer,” project manager Josh Kassel writes in the panel’s official statement. “Thousands of hours would be spent listening to testimonies or getting details of the darkest parts of our community, and that is when you consider only the people from this summer. Any questionable behaviour in the meantime would get added to a waiting list that could be a decade long.”
The point he's making is that either they would need to somehow increase their workload capacity (and given this was a volunteer effort, they were likely struggling with finding people to serve), or they were facing being rendered irrelevant due to the volume, as justice delayed is often justice denied - the board taking half a decade to rule on an accusation would effectively render it ineffectual in several key ways.
Misrepresenting one case as possibly taking half a decade when they themselves said it would take a decade or more to go though all of their cases is hyperbole and you know it.
They have shown that they can complete individual cases in less than a single year.
And justice delayed often meaning justice denied as proof that they should stop is garbage.
Once again, I am stating that there is an issue with how the panel was handled by not giving them the resources they needed, but leading with the amount of accusations and using it as part of their reason for stopping is my issue. I feel criticism is appropriate regardless of if they were ultimately unable to have the panel be tenable with the other issues presented.
Misrepresenting one case as possibly taking half a decade when they themselves said it would take a decade or more to go though all of their cases is hyperbole and you know it.
They have shown that they can complete individual cases in less than a single year.
And justice delayed often meaning justice denied as proof that they should stop is garbage.
Once again, I am stating that there is an issue with how the panel was handled by not giving them the resources they needed, but leading with the amount of accusations and using it as part of their reason for stopping is my issue. I feel criticism is appropriate regardless of if they were ultimately unable to have the panel be tenable with the other issues presented.
Looking at it as taking a decade to resolve is a good way to frame it though. From the time they actively take up the case to resolution can be less than a year. The time from the complaint being lodged to resolution is the more relevant metric. If sketchy shit happened today then it could likely be resolved no sooner than 2030 by their estimations.
I would also like to highlight the message sent by not having the conduct panel. The existence of the panel gives Nintendo and the greater Smash community plausible deniability over allegations. It can be pointed to when whispers of a problem get brought out as active work being done to improve. Until and unless there is a serious investment into making the panel work then disbanding it is the most effective move. It ratchets up the tension on the question of why isn't anything being done.
Misrepresenting one case as possibly taking half a decade when they themselves said it would take a decade or more to go though all of their cases is hyperbole and you know it.
They have shown that they can complete individual cases in less than a single year.
And justice delayed often meaning justice denied as proof that they should stop is garbage.
Once again, I am stating that there is an issue with how the panel was handled by not giving them the resources they needed, but leading with the amount of accusations and using it as part of their reason for stopping is my issue. I feel criticism is appropriate regardless of if they were ultimately unable to have the panel be tenable with the other issues presented.
If you have a half-decade backlog, that necessarily means that any future cases will take a half decade to get through the process because of that backlog. Which is exactly what was pointed out by the project manager - even if this current glut of cases was a one time event (it's not), without any improvement on processing it would mean that it would become a permanent sizeable delay in the processing of any future accusations.
So no, I'm not engaging in hyperbole - I'm just pointing out how queues work.
And if they're only able to render decisions that are moot because of the time they take to deliver, with the individuals involved no longer competing, then the value of the panel is diminished. The point of the panel is to address accusations in a timely manner, to remove predators from the Smash community and protect members of that community.
Finally, the point is that everything is connected - the lack of support leads to limited capacity to handle accusations, which means a large number of accusations can easily overwhelm the panel, diminishing its capability to perform the task it was created for, leading to demoralization and burn out, further reducing capacity - and we're now in a death spiral. Blaming them for being overwhelmed (and the resultant morale issues that follow) strikes me as counterproductive.
Having known people in the Smash community, there's so much toxicity on the whole, not even counting the rampant sexually assault/grooming accusations, I doubt the majority of the smash community actually cares much as it is and unless more pressure is put on larger tournaments to remove smash all together until shit gets fixed, I don't see much getting accomplished aside of lip service to folks outside of the Smash bubble.
I understand my criticism isn't a popular one at this point, I just wish more could have been done with the panel and should be done in the future.
Let's say there's a hoarder in your neighborhood who's been putting off throwing out the trash for way too long, and now you've got a giant pile festering out on their front lawn stinking up the neighborhood and encroaching on the neighbors' properties. City officials have said that it's not their problem, so if you want it cleaned up, it's going to take months of unpaid work by volunteers to do so.
At first, it looks like the community's engaged, you're ready to go, you start working at it but... after a week... you realize that this is never going to get done in a reasonable time frame so then... what? Everyone just packs up and moves to a different neighborhood and leaves the garbage to the raccoons and wild dogs? What about the neighbors who have garbage on their lawn? "Sorry guys, too hard, can't help you".
I get that it's hard work but walking away hardly feels like an appropriate response. What about crowdfunding? Public outreach? Education? I dunno, I feel like there are other options available here besides just "oh well, bye"
Let's say there's a hoarder in your neighborhood who's been putting off throwing out the trash for way too long, and now you've got a giant pile festering out on their front lawn stinking up the neighborhood and encroaching on the neighbors' properties. City officials have said that it's not their problem, so if you want it cleaned up, it's going to take months of unpaid work by volunteers to do so.
At first, it looks like the community's engaged, you're ready to go, you start working at it but... after a week... you realize that this is never going to get done in a reasonable time frame so then... what? Everyone just packs up and moves to a different neighborhood and leaves the garbage to the raccoons and wild dogs? What about the neighbors who have garbage on their lawn? "Sorry guys, too hard, can't help you".
I get that it's hard work but walking away hardly feels like an appropriate response. What about crowdfunding? Public outreach? Education? I dunno, I feel like there are other options available here besides just "oh well, bye"
The "after a week" in the analogy is uncharitable given the panel existed for over two years.
Let's say there's a hoarder in your neighborhood who's been putting off throwing out the trash for way too long, and now you've got a giant pile festering out on their front lawn stinking up the neighborhood and encroaching on the neighbors' properties. City officials have said that it's not their problem, so if you want it cleaned up, it's going to take months of unpaid work by volunteers to do so.
At first, it looks like the community's engaged, you're ready to go, you start working at it but... after a week... you realize that this is never going to get done in a reasonable time frame so then... what? Everyone just packs up and moves to a different neighborhood and leaves the garbage to the raccoons and wild dogs? What about the neighbors who have garbage on their lawn? "Sorry guys, too hard, can't help you".
I get that it's hard work but walking away hardly feels like an appropriate response. What about crowdfunding? Public outreach? Education? I dunno, I feel like there are other options available here besides just "oh well, bye"
It only works as an analogy until you realize the very real toll these stories take on a person. Sitting with the worst humanity has to offer, and then trying to walk away is an incredibly difficult task. Trained professionals often fail to manage to do it while they are being paid. This is not a task that is easily left at home. Very often you take that shit home with you, and it lives with you for a long time. Secondary trauma is a very fascinating phenomenon to read about, but it is less awesome to live.
Framing this as throwing their hands up because there is just soooo much work is, at best, extremely disingenuous. This is a group of people who decided that they didn't want to have all of their free time taken up by talking to child rapists, and the survivors of sexual trauma. Having done that for a living, I am more impressed it took them 2 years to hit their breaking point. That shows an incredible dedication to helping others worthy of praise and not scorn.
Let's say there's a hoarder in your neighborhood who's been putting off throwing out the trash for way too long, and now you've got a giant pile festering out on their front lawn stinking up the neighborhood and encroaching on the neighbors' properties. City officials have said that it's not their problem, so if you want it cleaned up, it's going to take months of unpaid work by volunteers to do so.
At first, it looks like the community's engaged, you're ready to go, you start working at it but... after a week... you realize that this is never going to get done in a reasonable time frame so then... what? Everyone just packs up and moves to a different neighborhood and leaves the garbage to the raccoons and wild dogs? What about the neighbors who have garbage on their lawn? "Sorry guys, too hard, can't help you".
I get that it's hard work but walking away hardly feels like an appropriate response. What about crowdfunding? Public outreach? Education? I dunno, I feel like there are other options available here besides just "oh well, bye"
If there are other options, why don't you pursue them yourself?
No one is obligated to be a volunteer. That's kinda the point of the term. These people are doing this of their own volition in their own free time for no reason other then that they wanted to. They don't owe anyone shit here.
The issue is the panel wasn't properly supported. It needed to be funded with paid staff, that were given the proper monetary and mental health support these kinds of things need. That failure really falls on the leadership within the smash community and any wealthy interests that have stake in how it shapes up.
That support is key because as AngelHedgie points out, time is of the essence. Punishment can't be punishment if by the time it can be rendered, it has no teeth. If a predator has left by the time they get found out, well the sanction of a ban has no impact. There is also the whole issue of when you do get something that requires law enforcement to look into, well if your backlog is long enough you might be running into statute of limitations or even if you don't, it might have been long enough for a victim to finally get free before you find it and then to no one's surprise, they might not want to get dragged back into the mess either and that can be all that it takes for some of the scum to get to walk free (I'm aware the state brings charges in such matters, but that hardly helps if you get a situations where you absolutely need the victim to testify in order to maybe get the conviction). That has to be hell on moral; especially, when some of this stuff is likely soul destroying to com across and this is a volunteer group with inadequate support.
I wouldn't shit on the panel here, that's really unfair given that weren't given the setup that is required here. Hell, as a panel of volunteers, chances are pretty good most actually did give a shit about the victims and wanted to make sure justice was served, but they couldn't because they weren't given the tools to make it happen. A death spiral was pretty much inevitable, if people realize their efforts, which they are doing on their own personal time, will amount to nothing, they won't want to be on the panel anymore. After all, why waste your time on a doomed venture when you can either take that time back or find another venture that yields results; especially, when this is shit that does do mental harm to those that have to shift through it.
Again, this falls on the leadership within community and any moneyed stakeholders that either did nothing to help with the matter at best or at worst actively undermined it. As always we get the wonderful shit show question of how much of that was people being fucking cheap for the sake of the bottom line and how much of that was people in power protecting their and their buddies asses and reputations at the expense of the victims.
Let's say there's a hoarder in your neighborhood who's been putting off throwing out the trash for way too long, and now you've got a giant pile festering out on their front lawn stinking up the neighborhood and encroaching on the neighbors' properties. City officials have said that it's not their problem, so if you want it cleaned up, it's going to take months of unpaid work by volunteers to do so.
At first, it looks like the community's engaged, you're ready to go, you start working at it but... after a week... you realize that this is never going to get done in a reasonable time frame so then... what? Everyone just packs up and moves to a different neighborhood and leaves the garbage to the raccoons and wild dogs? What about the neighbors who have garbage on their lawn? "Sorry guys, too hard, can't help you".
I get that it's hard work but walking away hardly feels like an appropriate response. What about crowdfunding? Public outreach? Education? I dunno, I feel like there are other options available here besides just "oh well, bye"
What your analogy leaves out is that the hoarder keeps shoveling more and more shit onto the pile, until the volunteers realize that they will never make a dent in the pile. All they can do is slightly slow its rate of growth.
At that point they decide, correctly, that their energy is better spent elsewhere.
We need to kill the myth that individuals alone can fix systemic problems. "The Smash Community" (and gaming, esports) isn't getting better until some regulation with teeth incentives these terrible systems to stop being terrible.
+27
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
We need to kill the myth that individuals alone can fix systemic problems. "The Smash Community" (and gaming, esports) isn't getting better until some regulation with teeth incentives these terrible systems to stop being terrible.
And who would do that? I mean, the corporations could step up and sponsor things, but they have a vested interest in pushing their product over the wellbeing of the athletes. The major leagues of sports are essentially monopolies. The NCAA and International Olympic Committee also have tons of problems, and then you have things like RSOs and the like.
I'm not saying it is insurmountable... it's just you need to make an org that does more good than bad, that people want to invest in.
We need to kill the myth that individuals alone can fix systemic problems. "The Smash Community" (and gaming, esports) isn't getting better until some regulation with teeth incentives these terrible systems to stop being terrible.
And who would do that? I mean, the corporations could step up and sponsor things, but they have a vested interest in pushing their product over the wellbeing of the athletes. The major leagues of sports are essentially monopolies. The NCAA and International Olympic Committee also have tons of problems, and then you have things like RSOs and the like.
I'm not saying it is insurmountable... it's just you need to make an org that does more good than bad, that people want to invest in.
Think that what Lilnoobs means that is going to come to actual laws. From the government.
TryCatcher on
+8
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Ahh, sorry. I am used to the government using regulation like that to punish some and make others rich. It's pretty systemic in sports.
I don't see the government helping much here. It sounds like this is actually a relatively disorganized hobbyist community. Effectively regulating a hundred individual small events is difficult, and it's easy to just push them underground. It would actually be much easier if Nintendo ran an official e-sports league, but they seem actively opposed to that. With no central authority, there is no one who can enact sweeping measures. And even regulation is hampered by a lack of a central authority to regulate.
While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
These things kinda need to be stopped before crimes occure, and due to the power structures involved reporting to police tends to not happen until things are nightmarishly fucked, and frankly cops are pretty awful, perpetrators charismatic, and victims tend to be vulnerable for social and psychological reasons.
Looking for the government to do something about it is basically arguing for the status quo.
My understanding is Nintendo wants nothing to due with the smash community, largely because they see being associated with a toxic and abusive bunch of people who can't just play games for fun as huge liability for their image.
I imagine Bacardi feels the same way about abusive alcoholics and drinking at frat parties.
My understanding is that their support for the Smash community is a) Making the thing b) actually putting some pretty technical press out there targeted at competitive players and c) not actively, or only lightly, opposing tournaments for games that are currently being published.
I don't know if there's anything to demanding that Nintendo starts taking a more active role in esports, and maybe a social media push to show that, regardless of their feeling, they have some responsibility for the damage that happens around their products. I don't really know of an alternative though.
Nintendo's solution so far has been to just send Cease and Dessist letters to any tournament that gets big enough or to any existent e-sports organization trying to take over Smash tournaments.
Though I disagree that is mostly about the Smash community per-se, it seems more about Nintendo having a very, very strict idea of their market and wanting nothing that deviates from it.
Also, let's see what a company associated with Nintendo has to do in order to support a competitive scene, with the Pokemon TCG. First off, The Pokemon Company is not a mere Nintendo subsidiary, but a stock company owned by all three of Nintendo, Game Freak and Creatures Inc., the owners of the Pokemon brand.
Why are organizers asked to submit to a background check?
The Pokémon Company International, Inc. is committed to helping to create a safe environment for children who participate in Tournaments affiliated with Pokémon. In furtherance of that goal, The Pokémon Company International will be conducting both regular and random background checks on people involved in running Pokémon Tournaments.
Please keep in mind that applicants will have a finite number of opportunities to complete the background process. Taking some measure of care to ensure the accuracy and completeness of requested information, can prevent a scenario where you are unable to hold a Professor role.
Why is it so hard to apply to be a Tournament Organizer or League Owner?
The application process is usually the only way we can gather information on how well suited a person will be for our program. Things like the way a person asks for information or assistance, past interactions with POP, the application itself, the results of a required background check, and any conversations we have with a venue over the phone all give us some indication about a potential applicant. By looking at these interactions we are able to get a fairly good idea of an applicant’s professionalism, ability to communicate with tact and clarity, and ability to follow instructions. Because these traits are all extremely important parts of being a good League Owner or Tournament Organizer, and because we dedicate a lot of effort and resources to supporting these applicants once they have been approved, we do have a system in place which requires some effort and communication on your part.
That is the kind of effort that The Pokemon Company and Nintendo consider neccesary to even consider not actively oppose competitive play, nevermind actual support.
Nintendo's solution so far has been to just send Cease and Dessist letters to any tournament that gets big enough or to any existent e-sports organization trying to take over Smash tournaments.
Though I disagree that is mostly about the Smash community per-se, it seems more about Nintendo having a very, very strict idea of their market and wanting nothing that deviates from it.
Also, let's see what a company associated with Nintendo has to do in order to support a competitive scene, with the Pokemon TCG. First off, The Pokemon Company is not a mere Nintendo subsidiary, but a stock company owned by all three of Nintendo, Game Freak and Creatures Inc., the owners of the Pokemon brand.
Why are organizers asked to submit to a background check?
The Pokémon Company International, Inc. is committed to helping to create a safe environment for children who participate in Tournaments affiliated with Pokémon. In furtherance of that goal, The Pokémon Company International will be conducting both regular and random background checks on people involved in running Pokémon Tournaments.
Please keep in mind that applicants will have a finite number of opportunities to complete the background process. Taking some measure of care to ensure the accuracy and completeness of requested information, can prevent a scenario where you are unable to hold a Professor role.
Why is it so hard to apply to be a Tournament Organizer or League Owner?
The application process is usually the only way we can gather information on how well suited a person will be for our program. Things like the way a person asks for information or assistance, past interactions with POP, the application itself, the results of a required background check, and any conversations we have with a venue over the phone all give us some indication about a potential applicant. By looking at these interactions we are able to get a fairly good idea of an applicant’s professionalism, ability to communicate with tact and clarity, and ability to follow instructions. Because these traits are all extremely important parts of being a good League Owner or Tournament Organizer, and because we dedicate a lot of effort and resources to supporting these applicants once they have been approved, we do have a system in place which requires some effort and communication on your part.
That is the kind of effort that The Pokemon Company and Nintendo consider neccesary to even consider not actively oppose competitive play, nevermind actual support.
Nintendo's solution so far has been to just send Cease and Dessist letters to any tournament that gets big enough or to any existent e-sports organization trying to take over Smash tournaments.
Though I disagree that is mostly about the Smash community per-se, it seems more about Nintendo having a very, very strict idea of their market and wanting nothing that deviates from it.
Also, let's see what a company associated with Nintendo has to do in order to support a competitive scene, with the Pokemon TCG. First off, The Pokemon Company is not a mere Nintendo subsidiary, but a stock company owned by all three of Nintendo, Game Freak and Creatures Inc., the owners of the Pokemon brand.
Why are organizers asked to submit to a background check?
The Pokémon Company International, Inc. is committed to helping to create a safe environment for children who participate in Tournaments affiliated with Pokémon. In furtherance of that goal, The Pokémon Company International will be conducting both regular and random background checks on people involved in running Pokémon Tournaments.
Please keep in mind that applicants will have a finite number of opportunities to complete the background process. Taking some measure of care to ensure the accuracy and completeness of requested information, can prevent a scenario where you are unable to hold a Professor role.
Why is it so hard to apply to be a Tournament Organizer or League Owner?
The application process is usually the only way we can gather information on how well suited a person will be for our program. Things like the way a person asks for information or assistance, past interactions with POP, the application itself, the results of a required background check, and any conversations we have with a venue over the phone all give us some indication about a potential applicant. By looking at these interactions we are able to get a fairly good idea of an applicant’s professionalism, ability to communicate with tact and clarity, and ability to follow instructions. Because these traits are all extremely important parts of being a good League Owner or Tournament Organizer, and because we dedicate a lot of effort and resources to supporting these applicants once they have been approved, we do have a system in place which requires some effort and communication on your part.
That is the kind of effort that The Pokemon Company and Nintendo consider neccesary to even consider not actively oppose competitive play, nevermind actual support.
And honestly? Good for them.
Every new piece of news from the Smash Bros competitive scene seems to justify their decision not to touch that shit with a 10 foot pole.
As a brand that wants to be associated with safe entertainment, I would not want to be anywhere near the esports thing in general.
Nintendo's solution so far has been to just send Cease and Dessist letters to any tournament that gets big enough or to any existent e-sports organization trying to take over Smash tournaments.
Though I disagree that is mostly about the Smash community per-se, it seems more about Nintendo having a very, very strict idea of their market and wanting nothing that deviates from it.
Also, let's see what a company associated with Nintendo has to do in order to support a competitive scene, with the Pokemon TCG. First off, The Pokemon Company is not a mere Nintendo subsidiary, but a stock company owned by all three of Nintendo, Game Freak and Creatures Inc., the owners of the Pokemon brand.
Why are organizers asked to submit to a background check?
The Pokémon Company International, Inc. is committed to helping to create a safe environment for children who participate in Tournaments affiliated with Pokémon. In furtherance of that goal, The Pokémon Company International will be conducting both regular and random background checks on people involved in running Pokémon Tournaments.
Please keep in mind that applicants will have a finite number of opportunities to complete the background process. Taking some measure of care to ensure the accuracy and completeness of requested information, can prevent a scenario where you are unable to hold a Professor role.
Why is it so hard to apply to be a Tournament Organizer or League Owner?
The application process is usually the only way we can gather information on how well suited a person will be for our program. Things like the way a person asks for information or assistance, past interactions with POP, the application itself, the results of a required background check, and any conversations we have with a venue over the phone all give us some indication about a potential applicant. By looking at these interactions we are able to get a fairly good idea of an applicant’s professionalism, ability to communicate with tact and clarity, and ability to follow instructions. Because these traits are all extremely important parts of being a good League Owner or Tournament Organizer, and because we dedicate a lot of effort and resources to supporting these applicants once they have been approved, we do have a system in place which requires some effort and communication on your part.
That is the kind of effort that The Pokemon Company and Nintendo consider neccesary to even consider not actively oppose competitive play, nevermind actual support.
And honestly? Good for them.
Every new piece of news from the Smash Bros competitive scene seems to justify their decision not to touch that shit with a 10 foot pole.
As a brand that wants to be associated with safe entertainment, I would not want to be anywhere near the esports thing in general.
Except their actions are also directly responsible for keeping it a disorganized wild west which naturally results in a lack of oversight. The other solution to forcing Nintendo to take responsibility is to fix our IP laws so that Nintendo has no power over what people do with their games post sale (which they shouldn't) and then someone who actually wants to could create the NFL equivalent for Smash and then there would actually be a central organization that could enforce rules of conduct, do background checks, investigate accusations, etc for the entire sport and everyone involved in it (and these would naturally trickle down to events not directly affiliated as well) and that could actually be put under public pressure or regulation if they weren't doing a good enough job.
People just not playing Smash is not an actual option.
While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
Nintendo's solution so far has been to just send Cease and Dessist letters to any tournament that gets big enough or to any existent e-sports organization trying to take over Smash tournaments.
Though I disagree that is mostly about the Smash community per-se, it seems more about Nintendo having a very, very strict idea of their market and wanting nothing that deviates from it.
Also, let's see what a company associated with Nintendo has to do in order to support a competitive scene, with the Pokemon TCG. First off, The Pokemon Company is not a mere Nintendo subsidiary, but a stock company owned by all three of Nintendo, Game Freak and Creatures Inc., the owners of the Pokemon brand.
Why are organizers asked to submit to a background check?
The Pokémon Company International, Inc. is committed to helping to create a safe environment for children who participate in Tournaments affiliated with Pokémon. In furtherance of that goal, The Pokémon Company International will be conducting both regular and random background checks on people involved in running Pokémon Tournaments.
Please keep in mind that applicants will have a finite number of opportunities to complete the background process. Taking some measure of care to ensure the accuracy and completeness of requested information, can prevent a scenario where you are unable to hold a Professor role.
Why is it so hard to apply to be a Tournament Organizer or League Owner?
The application process is usually the only way we can gather information on how well suited a person will be for our program. Things like the way a person asks for information or assistance, past interactions with POP, the application itself, the results of a required background check, and any conversations we have with a venue over the phone all give us some indication about a potential applicant. By looking at these interactions we are able to get a fairly good idea of an applicant’s professionalism, ability to communicate with tact and clarity, and ability to follow instructions. Because these traits are all extremely important parts of being a good League Owner or Tournament Organizer, and because we dedicate a lot of effort and resources to supporting these applicants once they have been approved, we do have a system in place which requires some effort and communication on your part.
That is the kind of effort that The Pokemon Company and Nintendo consider neccesary to even consider not actively oppose competitive play, nevermind actual support.
And honestly? Good for them.
Every new piece of news from the Smash Bros competitive scene seems to justify their decision not to touch that shit with a 10 foot pole.
As a brand that wants to be associated with safe entertainment, I would not want to be anywhere near the esports thing in general.
Except their actions are also directly responsible for keeping it a disorganized wild west which naturally results in a lack of oversight. The other solution to forcing Nintendo to take responsibility is to fix our IP laws so that Nintendo has no power over what people do with their games post sale (which they shouldn't) and then someone who actually wants to could create the NFL equivalent for Smash and then there would actually be a central organization that could enforce rules of conduct, do background checks, investigate accusations, etc for the entire sport and everyone involved in it (and these would naturally trickle down to events not directly affiliated as well) and that could actually be put under public pressure or regulation if they weren't doing a good enough job.
People just not playing Smash is not an actual option.
In what way?
As far as I've read the only thing Nintendo does re: Competitive Smash is occasionally slap them around for using their branding or their software in ways that violate the IP.
Yeah, no. Nintendo gave approval for it to be in 2019 Evo, because they wanted the publicity. Like, they were trying to prevent it, until Evo decided to move Melee to a side tournament, and put their newly released Ultimate center stage.
They put out 45 minute videos detailing new characters movements and attacks, distances and timings, because they are catering to competitive players.
Posts
Narrator: "It didn't."
"Hey @KINGDOMHEARTS, the English voice actor for Axel is an absolute creep who preys on his fanbase through social media. You could easily replace him with Matt Mercer or somebody who's not a predator."
Account is understandably anonymous and has....... a lot of receipts.
I am so fucking disappointed. His podcasts were very informative, and taught the parts of Greek History that I never really learned about. When I first heard rumours, I thought they were talking about another guy with the same name. Time to take out the trash.
My only solace is that the history podcast community, with Mike Duncan as the most famous, has immediately cut him out.
WoW
Dear Satan.....
I am having trouble parsing this one.
Quinn appears to be... hitting on someone who has sent him videos of herself masturbating, apparently with limited solicitation. The audio recording also appears to be in response to a similar video, and one of her tweet chains imply that he was lying about them being in some form of serious long distance relationship.
I'm not saying it's not bad, and not saying he isn't a creep, but as it stands it seems like it's being presented as "incredibly inappropriate and brazen sexual harassment" when it's more that he was unclear or lying ahout the premise of the relationship? Which is still bad, but not the same thing.
If you go directly to that account there seems to be a lot more posts from different people with accounts going back several years. Him at a con where a fan goes in for a hug and he pulls her in for a kiss, being creepy to 16/17 year old fans, using his status to target fans from cons and so forth.
Do... Re... Mi... So... Fa.... Do... Re.... Do...
Forget it...
Trauma, being unpaid, and continued harassment are better arguments for having trouble continuing doing the work, but saying there are too many cases doesn't scream "We should just give up"
It was pretty bad.
You pick and allegation and work on it, finish it, and move onto the next. Much like doing any massive task list, looking at the whole thing doesn't work, but picking a single task from said list, finishing it, and then moving onto the next is how you do the work.
Might they never finish? Sure. Would they still do good for the community by excising vile folks? Yes.
First off, depending on the accusations and the individual, one individual could easily become several hundred hours of work on their own. Second, we're talking about a board of unpaid members, who were dealing with soul-shattering recollections. It seems that burnout and trauma were significant players in the collapse,from what was said, especially with the explosion in cases from this summer.
The problem was that there wasn't the needed support for the group, starting with the fact that is was a volunteer effort. They need funding and mental health support.
I clearly agreed with the other things you mentioned.
Except that they weren't saying there was too much work, but that the process was no longer sustainable:
The point he's making is that either they would need to somehow increase their workload capacity (and given this was a volunteer effort, they were likely struggling with finding people to serve), or they were facing being rendered irrelevant due to the volume, as justice delayed is often justice denied - the board taking half a decade to rule on an accusation would effectively render it ineffectual in several key ways.
They have shown that they can complete individual cases in less than a single year.
And justice delayed often meaning justice denied as proof that they should stop is garbage.
Once again, I am stating that there is an issue with how the panel was handled by not giving them the resources they needed, but leading with the amount of accusations and using it as part of their reason for stopping is my issue. I feel criticism is appropriate regardless of if they were ultimately unable to have the panel be tenable with the other issues presented.
Looking at it as taking a decade to resolve is a good way to frame it though. From the time they actively take up the case to resolution can be less than a year. The time from the complaint being lodged to resolution is the more relevant metric. If sketchy shit happened today then it could likely be resolved no sooner than 2030 by their estimations.
I would also like to highlight the message sent by not having the conduct panel. The existence of the panel gives Nintendo and the greater Smash community plausible deniability over allegations. It can be pointed to when whispers of a problem get brought out as active work being done to improve. Until and unless there is a serious investment into making the panel work then disbanding it is the most effective move. It ratchets up the tension on the question of why isn't anything being done.
If you have a half-decade backlog, that necessarily means that any future cases will take a half decade to get through the process because of that backlog. Which is exactly what was pointed out by the project manager - even if this current glut of cases was a one time event (it's not), without any improvement on processing it would mean that it would become a permanent sizeable delay in the processing of any future accusations.
So no, I'm not engaging in hyperbole - I'm just pointing out how queues work.
And if they're only able to render decisions that are moot because of the time they take to deliver, with the individuals involved no longer competing, then the value of the panel is diminished. The point of the panel is to address accusations in a timely manner, to remove predators from the Smash community and protect members of that community.
Finally, the point is that everything is connected - the lack of support leads to limited capacity to handle accusations, which means a large number of accusations can easily overwhelm the panel, diminishing its capability to perform the task it was created for, leading to demoralization and burn out, further reducing capacity - and we're now in a death spiral. Blaming them for being overwhelmed (and the resultant morale issues that follow) strikes me as counterproductive.
I understand my criticism isn't a popular one at this point, I just wish more could have been done with the panel and should be done in the future.
If I may offer an analogy:
Let's say there's a hoarder in your neighborhood who's been putting off throwing out the trash for way too long, and now you've got a giant pile festering out on their front lawn stinking up the neighborhood and encroaching on the neighbors' properties. City officials have said that it's not their problem, so if you want it cleaned up, it's going to take months of unpaid work by volunteers to do so.
At first, it looks like the community's engaged, you're ready to go, you start working at it but... after a week... you realize that this is never going to get done in a reasonable time frame so then... what? Everyone just packs up and moves to a different neighborhood and leaves the garbage to the raccoons and wild dogs? What about the neighbors who have garbage on their lawn? "Sorry guys, too hard, can't help you".
I get that it's hard work but walking away hardly feels like an appropriate response. What about crowdfunding? Public outreach? Education? I dunno, I feel like there are other options available here besides just "oh well, bye"
The "after a week" in the analogy is uncharitable given the panel existed for over two years.
It only works as an analogy until you realize the very real toll these stories take on a person. Sitting with the worst humanity has to offer, and then trying to walk away is an incredibly difficult task. Trained professionals often fail to manage to do it while they are being paid. This is not a task that is easily left at home. Very often you take that shit home with you, and it lives with you for a long time. Secondary trauma is a very fascinating phenomenon to read about, but it is less awesome to live.
Framing this as throwing their hands up because there is just soooo much work is, at best, extremely disingenuous. This is a group of people who decided that they didn't want to have all of their free time taken up by talking to child rapists, and the survivors of sexual trauma. Having done that for a living, I am more impressed it took them 2 years to hit their breaking point. That shows an incredible dedication to helping others worthy of praise and not scorn.
If there are other options, why don't you pursue them yourself?
No one is obligated to be a volunteer. That's kinda the point of the term. These people are doing this of their own volition in their own free time for no reason other then that they wanted to. They don't owe anyone shit here.
That support is key because as AngelHedgie points out, time is of the essence. Punishment can't be punishment if by the time it can be rendered, it has no teeth. If a predator has left by the time they get found out, well the sanction of a ban has no impact. There is also the whole issue of when you do get something that requires law enforcement to look into, well if your backlog is long enough you might be running into statute of limitations or even if you don't, it might have been long enough for a victim to finally get free before you find it and then to no one's surprise, they might not want to get dragged back into the mess either and that can be all that it takes for some of the scum to get to walk free (I'm aware the state brings charges in such matters, but that hardly helps if you get a situations where you absolutely need the victim to testify in order to maybe get the conviction). That has to be hell on moral; especially, when some of this stuff is likely soul destroying to com across and this is a volunteer group with inadequate support.
I wouldn't shit on the panel here, that's really unfair given that weren't given the setup that is required here. Hell, as a panel of volunteers, chances are pretty good most actually did give a shit about the victims and wanted to make sure justice was served, but they couldn't because they weren't given the tools to make it happen. A death spiral was pretty much inevitable, if people realize their efforts, which they are doing on their own personal time, will amount to nothing, they won't want to be on the panel anymore. After all, why waste your time on a doomed venture when you can either take that time back or find another venture that yields results; especially, when this is shit that does do mental harm to those that have to shift through it.
Again, this falls on the leadership within community and any moneyed stakeholders that either did nothing to help with the matter at best or at worst actively undermined it. As always we get the wonderful shit show question of how much of that was people being fucking cheap for the sake of the bottom line and how much of that was people in power protecting their and their buddies asses and reputations at the expense of the victims.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
What your analogy leaves out is that the hoarder keeps shoveling more and more shit onto the pile, until the volunteers realize that they will never make a dent in the pile. All they can do is slightly slow its rate of growth.
At that point they decide, correctly, that their energy is better spent elsewhere.
And who would do that? I mean, the corporations could step up and sponsor things, but they have a vested interest in pushing their product over the wellbeing of the athletes. The major leagues of sports are essentially monopolies. The NCAA and International Olympic Committee also have tons of problems, and then you have things like RSOs and the like.
I'm not saying it is insurmountable... it's just you need to make an org that does more good than bad, that people want to invest in.
Think that what Lilnoobs means that is going to come to actual laws. From the government.
I shouldn't be so cynical.
Looking for the government to do something about it is basically arguing for the status quo.
My understanding is Nintendo wants nothing to due with the smash community, largely because they see being associated with a toxic and abusive bunch of people who can't just play games for fun as huge liability for their image.
I imagine Bacardi feels the same way about abusive alcoholics and drinking at frat parties.
My understanding is that their support for the Smash community is a) Making the thing b) actually putting some pretty technical press out there targeted at competitive players and c) not actively, or only lightly, opposing tournaments for games that are currently being published.
I don't know if there's anything to demanding that Nintendo starts taking a more active role in esports, and maybe a social media push to show that, regardless of their feeling, they have some responsibility for the damage that happens around their products. I don't really know of an alternative though.
Though I disagree that is mostly about the Smash community per-se, it seems more about Nintendo having a very, very strict idea of their market and wanting nothing that deviates from it.
Also, let's see what a company associated with Nintendo has to do in order to support a competitive scene, with the Pokemon TCG. First off, The Pokemon Company is not a mere Nintendo subsidiary, but a stock company owned by all three of Nintendo, Game Freak and Creatures Inc., the owners of the Pokemon brand.
Second, their judges and event organizers have to pass background checks.
And that's a mere part of a larger process:
That is the kind of effort that The Pokemon Company and Nintendo consider neccesary to even consider not actively oppose competitive play, nevermind actual support.
And honestly? Good for them.
Every new piece of news from the Smash Bros competitive scene seems to justify their decision not to touch that shit with a 10 foot pole.
As a brand that wants to be associated with safe entertainment, I would not want to be anywhere near the esports thing in general.
Except their actions are also directly responsible for keeping it a disorganized wild west which naturally results in a lack of oversight. The other solution to forcing Nintendo to take responsibility is to fix our IP laws so that Nintendo has no power over what people do with their games post sale (which they shouldn't) and then someone who actually wants to could create the NFL equivalent for Smash and then there would actually be a central organization that could enforce rules of conduct, do background checks, investigate accusations, etc for the entire sport and everyone involved in it (and these would naturally trickle down to events not directly affiliated as well) and that could actually be put under public pressure or regulation if they weren't doing a good enough job.
People just not playing Smash is not an actual option.
In what way?
As far as I've read the only thing Nintendo does re: Competitive Smash is occasionally slap them around for using their branding or their software in ways that violate the IP.
They put out 45 minute videos detailing new characters movements and attacks, distances and timings, because they are catering to competitive players.
They want the money without the risk.