no, not really. care to enlighten me?
Yep, its the modern day equivalent of lynching.
10 Likes
No that’s fine. Im not arguing with you. Just stating a different pov.
2 Likes
It’s funny how people will always keep going “Well you don’t KNOW if he’s innocent…” forever with this stuff. You know what? The person that accused him of such things, I know they’re not innocent and even the court of law agrees with that one.
The whole “Oh this is just PR control from Blizzard and if anyone at the company/or a contractor is accused of something bad they would always sever ties” has also proven to be untrue. So maybe, stop speaking untruths and just state things for what they are in evidence.
Not one person has been apologized to for being dropped from false accusations at Blizzard, same goes for players NPCs that have been removed. Not one has been reinstated, or ‘brought back’ yet. Until that happens? It’s unacceptable.
6 Likes
I’d feel rubbish.
I’d probably feel better than an individual whom was assaulted, reported it, and whilst that person was being investigated they have to work around them still and see them interacting with other individuals in a similar manner.
That it sucks for those of the end of it “when it goes wrong” does not justify overturning the principle entirely because the ramifications of “getting it wrong” if you do nothing when an individual IS guilty are far worse.
Also, note, the consequences said individual suffers are dealings between private individuals. For example employment offers, reputation. A criminal court has no right of interference in civil affairs, all their verdict does is render the individual immune to criminal charges in that instance, nothing more. So in that respect their innocence label is applied correctly.
Now, regarding the damages they suffer, they are civil in nature, and the VA in question is at complete liberty to take civil legal action against the accuser by also anyone whom may have treated them unfairly due to said allegations.
The vehicles are there to resolve this, it is just not dealt with in a single criminal court hearing. Criminal courts do not arbitrate dealings between private individuals that fall outside of criminal law, and it’s a damn good job they don’t as well. It’s up to the VA to seek civil action here, and if indeed they were refused work or damaged as a result of this, then they will win such cases and recover renumeration as well as demonstrate in a civil respect how the claims have no basis.
Whether he “goes after them” is up to him, but he is perfectly entitled to, so the idea “Twitter” can just endlessly punish him is fiction. He can go after them with civil action if he wants.
You had a good example of this in the UK some years ago where a Tory MP was accused of child abuse and criminally cleared of charges, and yet Twitter went on and fanned the flame during the trial etc, and after the conclusion he recovered large sums of damages from those who kept spreading tweets suggesting he was guilty directly, but also those that were merely alluding to his reputation negatively on that basis. One such individual was the spouse of another politician and it caused him by proxy quite the embarrassment that due to her stirring the pot and on twitter She’d (and him by proxy) had been slapped with a hefty damages bill.
Their mistake was thinking that nobody would call them to account, but I’m this case the chap in question went after the people whom engaged In defamation with some rigour, and the result was a significant amount of busybodies whom were of pretty inconsequential relevance were made to look like prats by having to pay an already stupidly wealthy Tory MP loads of money AND issue statements apologising because that was one of the conditions he requested as a mitigation for reducing their damages bills slightly.
1 Like
also wasnt methodjosh charged but not found guilty yet?
1 Like
thats just your assumption. i havent even really a clue what the whole discussion is about as i dont follow such things. i just saw Punies statement and thought i d try to explain what she meant at the core of it. 
1 Like
I can see some people are reacting in an over emotional way and presuming I’m saying something I’m not.
It was really just meant as a off the cuff remark. I’m always intrigued by stuff like this (not this specific case, just how judges rule and meanings etc).
1 Like
I think most people realise things works like that. Most people will already hold their own opinions about it, wether or not he’s guilty or proven to be innocent, or lack of evidence so he’s spoken free that way.
Well no disrespect ofcourse. I would’ve just held it at 1 or 2 comments. If people still don’t get what you mean, it’s their problem.
When you keep coming back, it comes off as you’re displeased with people stating that he’s innocent. I don’t know how to phrase it correctly, but actions and behavior speak louder than words sometimes.
2 Likes
Speaking of voice actors wtf happened to Darion Mograine?
Actually, no. He should be Innocent by default, UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. People, you have some weird idea of how justice works.
This guilty until proven innocent is DARK AGES stuff. Wanna be modern witch hunters?
10 Likes
Nobody is saying abandon the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Rather actually understand what innocence means in this case.
If innocent is to be treated as “you didn’t do it” as a fact, then why would you even begin bringing criminal charges? The fact you’re doing so concedes there must be a chance they did, so clearly the presumption of innocence is not the same as saying you definitely didn’t do X, rather “at current we have no legal basis to say you did X and sanction you”.
2 Likes
I really hate the whole idea of this cancel culture.
If anyone ever accuses Metzen…
6 Likes
Why would anyone ever accuse a reindeer? 
1 Like
Do I have to repeat this again? He didn’t -HAVE- a job at Blizzard to be fired from! He was a VA, they are hired by contract, his contract expired in TBC, long before these allegations came out.
I don’t get why people can’t get over this fact. He was not a Blizz employee, he was not on their payroll…
2 Likes
Playing wording police much like Puny in such a thread doesn’t serve you well, because you know what they mean and you’re just causing conflict to try to prove a point. Change out job with gig, will Blizzard hire/contract him for future Kael’thas VO? If not, then yeah he lost his gig.
12 Likes
Just a typical day in the USA nowadays. Are you a white heterosexual male? Then you already don’t mean much to the people. A women said something bad about you on top of that? That’s unlucky, because your carrier is over. It doesn’t matter if the judge will find you innocent, because that can be months after the accusations (which are most likely made on twitter just to get some social justice points) and by that time your reputation is as bad as it can be. Nowadays, people can only be truly innocent if the internet cancel culture mob decides that they are innocent, not judges. It’s laughable.
4 Likes
You really are quibbling in semantics here.
If we don’t have a juristical system then what can we have? How about what we have right now, as in point the finger and assume they are guilty.
One could easily respond to your statement with “An accusation is not guilt.”
People who weren’t witnesses always have to deal in probability and never certainty-- also in this kind of allegation they never report (for reasons of sensitivity and taste I imagine, but still it clouds the matter) the details. It’s extremely difficult to get to the bottom of the case when it’s muddled with possible motives, interpretation and context.
All this is exactly why it should be kept out of the public sphere, because we don’t ever need witch hunts (even if the person is guilty). Once it is concluded in court that the accused is guilty, THEN you can make it public.
We don’t need Bob and Sue Smith watching the news and saying “Well he looks kind of weird-- so he must be guilty.” and then proceed to be outraged.
6 Likes
That -isn’t- how it works, and never has! It is nothing to do with the allegations against him, but just how the industry works. You don’t have a ‘gig’, that isn’t how it works. If you have a specific contract, that -is- how it works, but you don’t make a contract with someone who basically does nothing, and adds nothing to your business for more than a decade! That just simply isn’t how it works! People are trying to build up outrage here without understanding the basics of how that industry works? Though I am hardly surprised by that these days…
1 Like
All of the civil fallout is for the civil courts to decide though.
Innocent into proven guilty is a concept applied to criminal law, not civil law. In this case it was maintained as at point of accusation no criminal actions were brought against the accused, only civil consequences which fall outside the scope of what IuPG actually relates to as a principle.
As said above, when it comes to visiting consequences upon people whom do such (Twitter rumouring) the onus is on the complainant to bring forth the case, no one else, and the vehicle to do such is there.
1 Like