Report: Blizzard Once Slapped With 'Misogyny Tax' (vice.com) 161
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Kotaku: A cybersecurity company whose security researcher had once been harassed by Blizzard employees at a hacking conference charged the game developer a 50 percent "misogyny tax" when it sought a quote for security services, according to a new report from Waypoint. The researcher, Emily Mitchell, told Waypoint that she approached the Blizzard booth during the annual Black Hat USA cybersecurity conference in 2015 to see if the major video game company had any open positions. Her shirt, which referenced [to] a security process known as "penetration testing," prompted two unnamed Blizzard employees to ask her questions laced with misogyny and sexual double entendre. "One of them asked me when was the last time I was personally penetrated, if I liked being penetrated, and how often I got penetrated," Mitchell said. "I was furious and felt humiliated, so I took the free swag and left."
Two years later, Blizzard approached cybersecurity firm Sagitta HPC (now known as Terahash) to request a quote on one of Sagitta HPC's password-cracking boxes. Mitchell, who was Sagitta HPC's chief operating officer at the time, saw Blizzard's request and immediately remembered what occurred at Black Hat USA 2015. After learning of the incident from Mitchell, Sagitta HPC founder and chief executive officer Jeremi M. Gosney responded to Blizzard's inquiry with a lengthy message decrying her treatment at the hands of Blizzard's employees. "[R]ather than dismiss you and tell you that we will not do business with you, we'd like to give Blizzard the opportunity to redeem themselves," Gosney wrote. (He eventually shared the email on Twitter with Blizzard's name redacted.) "We are committed to combating inequality, and I am calling on Blizzard to do the same. As you may or may not know, today is International Women's Day. And in honor of this day, we are attaching a few conditions if Blizzard wishes to do business with us."
These conditions included a 50 percent "misogyny tax" on any business Sagitta HPC did with Blizzard (to be used as a donation to three different organizations devoted to support girls and women in the tech industry), Blizzard becoming a Gold-level sponsor of the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing conference, and a formal letter of apology from Blizzard executives to Mitchell in which they'd further dedicate themselves to supporting equality for women and sexual harassment training. [...] In 2017, the organizers of Black Hat USA, the Las Vegas hacking conference at which Mitchell was originally accosted, promised her that they would not allow Blizzard back as a sponsor for future events. As far as Kotaku can tell from historical information, neither Blizzard nor Activision have had a presence at the cybersecurity event since the year Blizzard staff harassed Mitchell. "Once this incident was reported to us, the Company began an investigation, promptly removed all unauthorized cameras, and notified the authorities," Activision Blizzard told Waypoint. "The authorities conducted a thorough investigation, with the full cooperation of the Company. As soon as the authorities and Company identified the perpetrator, he was terminated for his abhorrent conduct. The Company provided crisis counselors to employees, onsite and virtually, and increased security."
Two years later, Blizzard approached cybersecurity firm Sagitta HPC (now known as Terahash) to request a quote on one of Sagitta HPC's password-cracking boxes. Mitchell, who was Sagitta HPC's chief operating officer at the time, saw Blizzard's request and immediately remembered what occurred at Black Hat USA 2015. After learning of the incident from Mitchell, Sagitta HPC founder and chief executive officer Jeremi M. Gosney responded to Blizzard's inquiry with a lengthy message decrying her treatment at the hands of Blizzard's employees. "[R]ather than dismiss you and tell you that we will not do business with you, we'd like to give Blizzard the opportunity to redeem themselves," Gosney wrote. (He eventually shared the email on Twitter with Blizzard's name redacted.) "We are committed to combating inequality, and I am calling on Blizzard to do the same. As you may or may not know, today is International Women's Day. And in honor of this day, we are attaching a few conditions if Blizzard wishes to do business with us."
These conditions included a 50 percent "misogyny tax" on any business Sagitta HPC did with Blizzard (to be used as a donation to three different organizations devoted to support girls and women in the tech industry), Blizzard becoming a Gold-level sponsor of the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing conference, and a formal letter of apology from Blizzard executives to Mitchell in which they'd further dedicate themselves to supporting equality for women and sexual harassment training. [...] In 2017, the organizers of Black Hat USA, the Las Vegas hacking conference at which Mitchell was originally accosted, promised her that they would not allow Blizzard back as a sponsor for future events. As far as Kotaku can tell from historical information, neither Blizzard nor Activision have had a presence at the cybersecurity event since the year Blizzard staff harassed Mitchell. "Once this incident was reported to us, the Company began an investigation, promptly removed all unauthorized cameras, and notified the authorities," Activision Blizzard told Waypoint. "The authorities conducted a thorough investigation, with the full cooperation of the Company. As soon as the authorities and Company identified the perpetrator, he was terminated for his abhorrent conduct. The Company provided crisis counselors to employees, onsite and virtually, and increased security."
Anecdotes (Score:4, Insightful)
The plural of anecdotes is data... and the data showing that something was (is?) seriously wrong with Blizzard's culture is mounting.
Oh, and the summary is kinda broken. That quote about the cameras isn't related to Black Hat USA, it's related to this:
In the wake of this publicity, Waypoint also learned of a 2018 incident in which an Activision IT worker set up a camera in one of the Eden Prairie, Minnesota campus’ unisex bathrooms and recorded employees using the toilet. That worker, Tony Ray Nixon, was fired by Activision and ultimately pled guilty to an “Interference with Privacy” charge.
Re:Anecdotes (Score:5, Informative)
> The plural of anecdotes is data...
Your quote is backwards, you're missing a "not" in there ("the plural of anecdote is *not* data"). The related term "anecdata" is a pejorative word, because it's an unreliable reasoning process.
I won't say anything about Blizzard because I have no idea whether these allegations are true or false and would instead reserve judgement until all sides present their evidence in court.
Re: (Score:3)
> The plural of anecdotes is data...
Your quote is backwards, you're missing a "not" in there ("the plural of anecdote is *not* data"). The related term "anecdata" is a pejorative word, because it's an unreliable reasoning process.
I won't say anything about Blizzard because I have no idea whether these allegations are true or false and would instead reserve judgement until all sides present their evidence in court.
Good point... though realistically, multiple anecdotes coming from independent sources do start becoming data. There's been enough documented instances, enough former employees endorsing the narrative, that I'd say there's fairly strong evidence of a real problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Harumph.
that's it, no sociology degree for you.
Next you'll probably claim that the scientific method is oppressive and needs to go . . .
Wait, what??? (Score:2, Insightful)
Okay, hold up...
Unaut
Re:Wait, what??? (Score:4, Informative)
Okay, hold up...
Unauthorized cameras? Crisis counsellors??? What does that have to do with the original story, and where is this from?
Either OP messed up during the copy-paste, or this story got a lot more terrifying...
More terrifying. From TFA:
In the wake of this publicity, Waypoint also learned of a 2018 incident in which an Activision IT worker set up a camera in one of the Eden Prairie, Minnesota campus’ unisex bathrooms and recorded employees using the toilet. That worker, Tony Ray Nixon, was fired by Activision and ultimately pled guilty to an “Interference with Privacy” charge.
Oh, forgot.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Mitchell said. "I was furious and felt humiliated, so I took the free swag and left."
Not humiliated enough to avoid taking the freebies with Blizzard's logo. Did she then put them in a darkened room to avoid looking at them?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I couldn't help but to notice that as well... took the free swag... If she was so "offended" by this, she wouldn't have taken the swag...
Re:Oh, forgot.. (Score:5, Interesting)
I want to see the shirt, because 20 bucks said the shirt itself was a double entendre.
Re:Oh, forgot.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: Oh, forgot.. (Score:5, Insightful)
A fellow slashdotter in a thread below posted this link [facebook.com] claiming it's the T-shirt in question.
If that's true, that's prerty much a 180 on the angle on this story.
If that's not true, it at least shows how important it is to actually see the T-shirt in question before further judgment.
Re: Oh, forgot.. (Score:4, Insightful)
If you wear a shirt with a double entendre on it, the expectation is that you get jokes related to the double entendre. If you wear a shirt with bad dad jokes on it, you expect bad dad jokes in return. If you wear a shirt with a swastika on it, in the western world you would most likely be treated like a leper and would expect that reaction. Assuming that was actually the shirt in question jokes like those described would be par for the course. Also, the idea that Black Hat is a formal conference, at least during the time period described, is funny as hell.
Re: Oh, forgot.. (Score:2)
I've been in plenty of circumstances where I was able to laugh with people I'd just met at conventions without asking if they'd recently been penetrated.
Well, if you've never come across filthy sexual humor (both from men AND women) in processional encounters, then you've had a very limited line of professional acquaintances (sparking from a cultural diversity point of view). That's ok, but don't make the mistake and declare that the norm.
Re: Oh, forgot.. (Score:2)
*speaking
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds like you are signing up for your future well-deserved misogyny tax with that comment.
Was that appropriate? (Score:2, Insightful)
If I'm looking for a job, I usually dress for the part. Wearing a T-Shirt that says "Penetration Testing" just seems a tad bit of an innuendo. She could have worn something like, "Pentesting" or "OWASP" or "MetaSploit" but instead wore something implicitly innuendish.
Seems like someone was trying to find a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
The summary reads:
Her shirt, which referenced [to] a security process known as...
That doesn't mean it verbatim said "penetration testing", though their use of quotes around that phrase was confusing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Is that the geek version of "She's wearing it, so she's asking for it"?
Re: (Score:2)
So you are equating people making innuendos based on a shirt that itself may be an innuendo, with rape? I'm not going to ask, I'm telling you you're fucked in the head.
"She's wearing it, so she's asking for it"? refers to more than rape. It also refers to cat-calling and sexual harassment, which this was arguably bordering on.
Yes, the shirt had a little innuendo, so I could excuse some mild innuendo in return. But the repeated aggressive comments that were mentioned speaks to a very unhealthy dynamic in that vendor booth.
Re: Was that appropriate? (Score:4, Insightful)
Here's what someone claims the shirt loks like: https://www.facebook.com/Secur... [facebook.com]
Half of what that "dynamic" is, literally, written on the back of the shirt itself (maybe she wasn't aware of that?). The follow-up questions "when" and "how many times" are pretty much on par with the music here, I don't see any new dynamics.
Then there's another thing: if you have the guts to wear THAT, it can be reasonably expected that you at least warn your peer by saying something along the lines of "guys, stop it, this is becoming awkward" before you let yourself get offended.
Re: Was that appropriate? (Score:3)
Half of what that "dynamic" is, literally, written on the back of the shirt itself (maybe she wasn't aware of that?).
Oh FFS! She went to an industry conference looking for a job, and you want to believe she just threw on a t-shirt with no idea what was written on it, front or back? Stop bending over backwards to remove any responsibility from her!
Have you ever gone looking for a job wearing a random t-shirt with no idea what it said on it? Most educated people I know read their shirts before wearing them...
Re: (Score:2)
Whoa there, buster. We're on the same side here.
I was just trying to search for the least backhanded interpretation of her complaint: she complained, among other things, that she was asked when was the last time she was penetrated -- pretty much the same words that were on the back of her T-shirt. But she somehow neglected to mention that that particular phrase was on the back of her T-shirt. How come that?
Either that:
1) she's a lying, manipulative b!@#,
2) or someone cut the description of events from her t
Re: (Score:2)
It's funny, saw my comment was modded -1 troll with a bunch of #metoo folks trashing me. When I see that I usually steer away for a few days. Came back and was pleasantly surprised to see comments like yours and back up to +2 insightful.
Also seeing the exact T-Shirt she wore bolstered my point even further. There was one comment that's currently +5 where the commenter says "Oh everyone dresses like that!" Admittedly I haven't been to a security conference since the late 90's defcon when Captain Crunch w
Re: (Score:2)
I equate people making innuendos based on a shirt as unprofessional. You can literally wear a shirt saying "statistics is to say that 4 out of 5 people like mass rape" and I will NOT comment on it. I will not hire you because you wear that shirt to an interview and I cannot consider you professional because of it, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Was that appropriate? (Score:4, Interesting)
If you're there on your own and consider it funny, go ahead. If you're there as a representative of my company you WILL NOT comment on the slogan of a shirt someone else is wearing. Ever. I am actually pretty sure that we have something like this in the clauses for the people who represent us (something along the lines of refraining from making personal comments on a person based on race, gender, appearance, etc).
You represent my company at this position. You WILL NOT make any comments that could possibly shed a negative light on me. Ever.
Re: Was that appropriate? (Score:2)
This is what I just answered to another poster suggesting similar ideas, and it fits here, too:
That's a matter of opinion.
You can behave dryly as a fart in a professional environment, or choose to be a human being. (I come from a high-context culture unlike the anglo-saxon one, so I prefer the latter, but I lived most of my life amongst people of the former, so I see merits to both).
Which one better is not the matter here (if there is an absolute "better" anyway), but whether the girl was verbally abused in any way. The answer is probably "no" (unless other, yet unknown details, suggest otherwise). She set both the amount and the tone of extra-professional context with that shirt.
I'd like to add: you can have your company represented as you like, but this is not what this here is about.
Re: (Score:2)
The point is that as an adult, you should know what is appropriate in what setting.
Re: Was that appropriate? (Score:2)
That's also a matter if opinion.
Going with a joke doesn't seem inappropriate to me. If anything, it's refreshing to see that not everyone has a stick up their ass once they pass age 18.
I find the penetration joke of the (presumable) T-shirt in question bad adolescent humor in the first place, but this isn't what the accusation is focused on. So I am eating my own dogfood and saying: also a matter of opinion *shrug* and I'm trying not to mind the stick in my own ass in this regard.
In any case I don't see any
Re: (Score:2)
Between people who know each other well, yes, it's a joke. But not with someone I never met.
Re: Was that appropriate? (Score:2)
And yet wearing that T-shirt is forcing that particular joke constantly on people one has never met. Who's comfortable with that doesn't get to not be comfortable with the other.
Re: (Score:2)
Like I said, wearing that shirt to an interview would be a surefire way to not get hired by me, because I'd know I cannot trust you to behave professionally.
It's back to the "among people you know" bit. Wearing that shirt after you get hired, while you're not going to be interacting with clients, I wouldn't have a problem. I wouldn't even have a problem if coworkers comment on it.
But NOT in a public environment with people you don't know!
Re: Was that appropriate? (Score:2)
I don't think we disagree substantially here: provocation and reaction were not far apart, and that was the issue here.
As about how one should behave professionally, you & I do have different opinions. Bu t that's ok, you get to run your business however you see fit, and I get to run mine my way.
Re: (Score:2)
That means the company should be mad at them, not her.
Re: (Score:2)
Umm... not it's not? How is this in any way relevant to the topic at hand?
We're not talking about them not doing something the company (probably) told them to do, we're talking about them doing something the company (hopefully) told them not to do. The question everything hinges on is whether the company knew what they were doing.
Besides, do I really have to make it a policy to not be an asshole when you represent me? I dare expect my employees to know this by themselves. If they don't, they're not at a lev
Re: Was that appropriate? (Score:2)
The threshold here on slashdot for "newsworthy" is a bit low, in case you hadn't noticed. I don't see this being covered by any actual news agencies outside the tech industry.
Re:Was that appropriate? (Score:4, Insightful)
You are part of the problem. But you COULD be part of the solution. Wouldn't that be better?
Re:Was that appropriate? (Score:5, Interesting)
If I'm looking for a job, I usually dress for the part. Wearing a T-Shirt that says "Penetration Testing" just seems a tad bit of an innuendo.
And at Black Hat, that IS dressing for the part.
Re:Was that appropriate? (Score:5, Insightful)
The shirt said "when was the last time YOU were PENETRATED?", the innuendo laid in open deliberately. I agree that it is indeed dressing for part, as infosec confs are full of juvenile folks like this. The shirt worked better than expected though, not only it's attention grabbing IRL, but with good enough spin on the internet as well (the heart of the "issue" here is just that of self-promotion).
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree, just gonna copy paste some stuff I wrote above...
Also seeing the exact T-Shirt she wore bolstered my point even further. There was one comment that's currently +5 where the commenter says "Oh everyone dresses like that!" Admittedly I haven't been to a security conference since the late 90's defcon when Captain Crunch was trying to lure little boys to his room, but the last I saw was there was a wide array of attire, so saying everyone just wears T-shirts is bunk. I saw folks dressed like Kurt Co
Bad Jokes... (Score:3, Insightful)
Sex is a need for almost every human. Yes, there are some people that will tell you they don't need it, they are extremely, extremely rare. They are called incels, and most folks don't want to be an incel.
I get that she may not appreciate a stupid joke about sex, but to label everyone that jokes about sex a bad person, is ridiculous. For all of these folks to label anyone that makes bad jokes about sex as bad people is insane.
I have a whole lot of female friends that can joke about sex just like anyone else. If I were the type to get offended at stupid shit, some of the stuff that has come out the mouths of females I know is just as bad or even worse than the stuff that comes out of males I know.
Lets get real here.... I've had my dick grabbed so many times by women, I lost count. They thought it was fun on the dance floor to reach down my pants. They thought it was fun walking alone. They thought they were being edgy. I don't think they are bad people even though I didn't want to hook up with them. Every one of those relationships worked out just fine, these women weren't "lost causes." I chalked it up to human nature... go figure, they were horny. OMG. Not one of them, nor I wanted to make a culture war about it.
So again, why are bad sex jokes now equivalent to violence? Is that because we have less violence today that we ever did as a population and everyone lost perspective? Is it something else?
Re:Bad Jokes... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Bad Jokes... (Score:3)
Re:Bad Jokes... (Score:4, Insightful)
Sex is a need for almost every human. Yes, there are some people that will tell you they don't need it, they are extremely, extremely rare. They are called incels, and most folks don't want to be an incel.
I get that she may not appreciate a stupid joke about sex, but to label everyone that jokes about sex a bad person, is ridiculous. For all of these folks to label anyone that makes bad jokes about sex as bad people is insane.
I have a whole lot of female friends that can joke about sex just like anyone else. If I were the type to get offended at stupid shit, some of the stuff that has come out the mouths of females I know is just as bad or even worse than the stuff that comes out of males I know.
Lets get real here.... I've had my dick grabbed so many times by women, I lost count. They thought it was fun on the dance floor to reach down my pants. They thought it was fun walking alone. They thought they were being edgy. I don't think they are bad people even though I didn't want to hook up with them. Every one of those relationships worked out just fine, these women weren't "lost causes." I chalked it up to human nature... go figure, they were horny. OMG. Not one of them, nor I wanted to make a culture war about it.
So again, why are bad sex jokes now equivalent to violence? Is that because we have less violence today that we ever did as a population and everyone lost perspective? Is it something else?
There's a difference between people getting handsy on the dance floor and harassing people looking for a job.
Re: Bad Jokes... (Score:2)
There's a difference between people getting handsy on the dance floor and harassing people looking for a job.
Normally I'd agree, but that depends.
As an AC pointed out, we don't know everything, for example what the T-shirt actually looked like. It's called "pentesting". You usually don't say "penetration testing". There's th real.possibility that the T-shirt itself was a tongue-in-cheek play of words humorising a sexual topic. If that's the case, then the Blizzard people maybe just tried to queue in in the joke and failed - yes, that's stupid, but it has a totally different taste than what's presented here.
And if
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Bad Jokes... (Score:5, Insightful)
Is this a joke?
Because if it isn't, then this is T shirt has written "go ahead, it's ok to engage in dirty sex jokes with me" written in bold letters all over it.
And the question the girl in question felt volated about, "when was the last time you were penetrated" is, literally, on the back of the shirt.
You don't get to wear THAT and get all snowflakey when someone queues in on it.
Re: Bad Jokes... (Score:2)
Normally I'd agree, but that depends.
No.
Dancing is an activity people engage in while considering romantic activity with another person. Attending an industry event is not the same thing, even remotely.
On a date, people test boundaries and explore possibilities consensually - not so much at industry events while manning their employers booth, representing their employer.
Re: (Score:2)
On a date, people test boundaries and explore possibilities consensually - not so much at industry events while manning their employers booth, representing their employer.
By the same metrics, on an industry event people also don't wear T-shirts that say "when was the last time you were PENETRATED".
And no, grabbing cocks on a dance floor does not qualify as "testing boundaries". Some people qualify that also as full-fledged harassment. Others don't.
And no tits, vaginas, cocks or other body parts were grabbed during this encounter, as far as related. Someone took the queue on a (arguably pretty cheeky) joke with sexual undertone. The correct answer when overstepping that line
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, there are some people that will tell you they don't need it, they are extremely, extremely rare. They are called incels, and most folks don't want to be an incel.
What exactly do you think the "in" part of "incel" means?
Re: (Score:2)
I get that she may not appreciate a stupid joke about sex, but to label everyone that jokes about sex a bad person, is ridiculous.
Except no one is doing that and we both know it.
Did she say "no one should joke about sex"?
No, she did not. Just keep your sex jokes between you and your buddies, out of professional contexts and certainly not with random strangers.
Re: Bad Jokes... (Score:2)
Why doesn't the same metric apply to her T-shirt?
Re: (Score:2)
Eh?
First, what T-shirt? Someone posted a facebook link I can't see without cookies or JS enabled (no the hell way I'm enabling facebook). I've no idea what it says or whether it's actually this person.
I'm assuming you believe her T-shirt is a sex joke? You know if something's a poor idea then it's not a good idea to double down and do it more just because someone else did. Why do I have to explain the sort of thing you try to teach 5 year olds to a grown adult?
Re: Bad Jokes... (Score:2)
If you haven't seen the shirt, you're hardly fit to discuss. Bye.
Re: (Score:2)
If a man gets accused of sexual harassment and you bend over backwards in innocent until proven guilty. And yet you credulously swallow an anonymously posted, unverified Facebook link.
Re: Bad Jokes... (Score:2)
I'm not "bending", over backwards or anywhere else. It's called common sense.
The Facebook T-shirt seems plausible. Show me a more plausible version, and I'll rethink my conclusion.
Re: (Score:2)
The Facebook T-shirt seems plausible.
I think it's plausible you sexually harass co workers. See how that works?
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's plausible you sexually harass co workers. See how that works?
I think it's plausible that you cry "Wolf! Harassment! Misogyny!"/ whenever you need attention.
Yeah, I think I'm getting the hang of it.
Re: (Score:2)
yes I understand, you believe in guilty on accusation if the accusation is of the right sort. Ironically it's what you rail against when the accusation is of the wrong sort.
Re: Bad Jokes... (Score:2)
How do you figure?
There's only one accusation standing, the one of misogyny. And the facts I know of don't add up. So I choose not to side with it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Bad Jokes... (Score:2)
But the facts do add up. You're looking for excuses to ignore them, so you take a non-fact, an anonymous poster claiming the victim was wearing a T-shirt that made a dirty joke
If you weren't a headless chicken you'd probably use some of the brain nature normally entrust you with...
But things being as they are, I see the need to walk you through it.
First, I made it entirely clear that I don't rely on that post actually being the T-shirt she wore. It's just one possibility.
Second, it's the only T-shirt with "penetration" and "security" that I know of that was presented in this context; whether it's the real one or not is not important for the accusation itself. What is important is
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Bad Jokes... (Score:2)
Exactly. And I'm judging based on that, because it seems plausible enough.
If you want me to judge based on something else, show me a more plausible one. Show me nothing, and I there is nothing - not even an accusation I can believe.
Re: (Score:2)
There are many more people who are asexual than you think. Also incel is short for "involuntary celibate", i.e. they very much do want sex but can't get it.
As for jokes, it's an industry conference where people come to network and find business opportunities. She was there to look for a job. I'm fairly sure they wouldn't have asked guys walking up if they were regularly penetrated either.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a whole lot of female friends that can joke about sex just like anyone else.
So you have friends as your example. Now go out to complete strangers in a professional capacity and joke about sex, let us know how far you get and what your employer thinks of you when they lose a contract as a result.
If you can't tell the difference *YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM*.
The misogyny tax... (Score:2)
Did she die? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Different person with the same name. She is still COO of the same company.
Yeah (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not endorsing the way these idiots went "full seventh grader" in what should have been a professional setting, but are we pretending that there's NO invited double entendre wearing a shirt that says "PENETRATION TESTER", really?
What a weird article about a non-event ! (Score:3)
Would that have happened in nearly any other country, the woman would have laughed or at worst told the guys their jokes were not funny. If you feel humiliated by a sex joke you are a puritan and need to see a therapist to interact with human beings. Why when i do read a stupid article like this one do they always come from United States !?
And "misogyny" is an actual word which exists in the dictionary: it is the HATRED of women. Lewd jokes are not misogyny. Saying "we don't want to hire women here" would be misogyny. But it is not what happened.
That remind me of the other stupid non event about a certain Sarah (not) Sharp and a USB thumb joke.
Slightly related, i once met a guy who had the ridiculous job title of "penetration engineer". Complete with the silly business card. He was extremely amused a lots of lewd jokes were exchanged in good mood.
Re: (Score:2)
I find it interesting that you find "penetration engineer" a ridiculous job title. I'm guessing you don't talk with a lot of folks in physical or cyber security much.
> If you feel humiliated by a sex joke you are a puritan...
Okay, let's clear the air here.
The employees were (a) representing their company (b) at a convention, and (c) were talking within earshot of ... potential employees, customers (and potential customers), reporters, their bosses....
It simply does not matter whether the person reportin
Suspect Timing? (Score:2)
All these leaks, reports, and suits all happening right as Blizzard is starting to get desperate with their rapid failure of WoW?
Come on, they are leaking these stories themselves to try and make WoW cool again. It is just too perfect. WoW has a pasty nerd vibe that scares away most of the public but also predominantly women.
So they launch a secret campaign to replace that image with the exact opposite: WoW is not programed by nerds, but Hugh Hefner-esk frat boys who have orgies in the office and drawers fu
Re: (Score:2)
You lost me here. Women are some how going to want to go work at a frat house as opposed to working with nerds? Sounds like a lose lose either way, except maybe around the nerds they may get farther because nerds are more socially inept then sexism douche bags.
Re: (Score:2)
Look at the Clinton Sex Scandal Impeachment. Bill Clinton is one of the most popular presidents in modern history, especially by women. Women love him.
And his approval rating went up significantly during his impeachment trials.
Blizzard at Black Con Cybersecurity... (Score:2)
I've never been to Black Con but I imagine it's suppose to be something like Def Con. Why is a video game company even here? I haven't been to a big convention in quite a while, so maybe I'm just confusing what I thought was more of a technical conference where people listened to presenters show off some new concepts they were working on or otherwise interesting security stuff.
Seems silly for a video game company to have a booth at a security show. Shrugs. IDK.
Re:Not a tax (Score:5, Insightful)
In the context of something this political (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
it's bait. It's meant to get people riled up so they'll hate click and post and whatnot.
So.. they're targeting hot-headed pedants who react so quickly that they don't notice important details like the term they're bitching about being wrapped in quotes?
Re:Not a tax (Score:4, Funny)
Your post is why my tag line exists.
Re:Not a tax (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep. This is just smart private sector management; you don't owe anybody your services, like the government does, nor can you compel anyone to pay for them. You can only set an appropriate price.
There is an important corollary to the maxim the customer is always right that they don't tell you: choose your customers wisely.
Here's the problem with toxic customers: you don't get paid for the extra time and grief they cause you. You should *insist* on getting paid for that because it's costing you. Good employees are hard to find and don't come cheap; right off the bat an asshole will bleed you in morale and retention costs. Toxic customers also take your time and attention away from good customers, the ones who pay on time and are conscientious about their end of the deal and are a pleasure to work with. You shouldn't spend all your time greasing squeaky wheels, you should be looking for better wheels.
So figure out how much is reasonable to deal with the asshole's bullshit, and insist on getting paid that much. The worst case is that the asshole agrees to pony up. The best an more likely case is that they decide not to be your customer any more. When a relationship with a toxic customer ends he will bad mouth you, but in this case he'll be telling everyone you're too damned expensive. That's not too bad; you can work with that.
Re: (Score:2)
No their bad business is their bad business. First quote you do for them, rough quick safe quote you double. You remain polite and firm on the price, you do no dob employees in, it kills trust, their employees, their problem, you might be a competitor one day and the more toxic employees they have the better. You remain polite and distant and do not budge one iota on price. Provided little information and just politely let the business go. They will know from the business distance and the inflated price, that you do not want to do business with them.
That's stupid. Your approach does nothing to correct the original problem, because you never let them know why you have a problem with them, so they can never take action to correct it unless they hear about the problem from someone else... and then you'll probably never know they did. Sagitta HPC's approach, on the other hand, told Blizzard exactly what the issue was, enabling Blizzard to take steps to correct it. I expect that after Blizzard's formal apology and promise to do better, and donation to Gra
Re: Not a tax (Score:2)
Her responsibility lies in the delay of justice - she chose to simply walk away, almost condoning their behavior, which I'm pretty confident these "coding bros" repeated with other women because...why not, no one ever gave them negative feedback over their behavior.
They own their actions, she owns the delayed feedback that allowed this behavior to continue.
Re: Not a tax (Score:2)
As a reminder, she chose not to tell Blizzard about her treatment by their employees for YEARS - I wonder how many other women were treated just as badly because she chose to keep their behavior a secret.
Blizzard, for its part, did exactly what they should have done, and likely would have years earlier, had she bothered to tell them.
Re: Not a tax (Score:2)
As a reminder, charging for sex talk makes her a whore, objecting to sex talk makes her a stuck up bint.
ffs there is nothing wrong with a bit of flirting, she had "penetration testing" written on her shirt for crying out loud.
sounds to me more that she was one of those lesbians that is afraid of cock.
Re:Oh dear (Score:5, Insightful)
If it happened at a public venue where they were expressly representing your company, and you didn't take immediate, concrete steps to address it? Yes, absolutely.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Did they even know about it? Did she complain to Blizzard about the behaviour of their staff?
Re:Oh dear (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know, but considering Blizzard has a long history of this sort of behavior being common, it is just a single datapoint. The reason they're in the news right now is because of the lawsuits, walkouts, and their culture of misogany. They didn't get to that point blindly.
I stand by my original point. Employees are representatives of their companies, espectially when they're -- representing the company. Bad behavior by the employees is bad behavior by the company and deserves to be sanctioned.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Employees represent their company in official dealings. Yes. But I can only reprimand my employees if I know about an inappropriate behaviour. How was Blizzard supposed to know about it if nobody reports it?
Re: (Score:2)
You're making a big assumption here. Based on TFS this was reported to the event organisers. Even if they were just playing lip-service when saying Blizzard won't be back it would at the very least have been reported to Blizzard.
Re: (Score:2)
Event organizers in general have no big incentive to piss off large corporations that pay them a lot of money. Sadly, I could well imagine that Blizzard never got to hear about this.
If they did, we have another puzzle piece for the whole imagine of a company that has more than a bit of a problem with employee treatment. But before I add that piece, I'd like to know that the relevant people at Blizzard did know about it.
The thing is that it's even possible that the upper echelons at Blizzard are suddenly con
Re:Oh dear (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, they shouldn't. But I can only get mad at a company if they know about the behaviour of their employees.
Imagine having a company and hiring people to represent you. They seem to be ok because they know how to behave in an interview, but at the booth, they turn out to be total assholes and basically make passes on every woman they see.
Would you fire them if you know? I know I would. And make sure that everyone I know in the business knows of it.
But if nobody tells you, and then suddenly an angry mob shows up at your door with torches and pitchforks, do you consider this fair? Should that happen?
Re: (Score:2)
If they felt empowered to act like that in public with people outside the company, then think about what nightmares they must have been behind closed doors. Someone knew.
Re: (Score:2)
And this is exactly what I want to know. Did they do this because they felt that they got the backing of the company in this kind of behaviour?
Re: Oh dear (Score:2)
Re:Oh dear (Score:5, Informative)
Blizzard has a long and well documented history of this kind of bad behavior. So it wasn't just one dude years ago. It's the company culture.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends. How many of them are straight, white and male?
Seriously, have you been living under a rock for last decade? Answer to your question is an obvious, resounding "yes". We're back in era of witch hunts and guilt by association.
Re: Oh dear (Score:2)
The company's responsibility comes into play the moment they become aware of bad behavior, assuming they have corporate training to the contrary.
Re: (Score:2)
Donglegate was juvenile humour not targeted at an individual.
This (as reported) is juvenile humour but it was targeted personally and in person. I can see a qualitative difference there.
Donglegate should never have led to demands to cancel two men sharing a joke. This incident should have been resolved with a conversation between a senior manager from each company and appropriate disciplinary action for the individual(s) that targeted someone.
So both got an overreaction, but on this occasion there was at le
Re: What a weakling (Score:2)
This incident should have been resolved with a conversation between a senior manager from each company and appropriate disciplinary action for the individual(s) that targeted someone.
No.
She was (presumably) working for someone, went to the event to find a new job, and then, years after the mistreatment, she is now working for another company and asserts a 'tax' for the employee's bad behavior years ago.
You mean she should have had her then current employer defend her against mistreatment by blizzard employees as she was looking for a new job?
I think you lost the context here.