According to this statement it is what happened, he went for protective order.
Well, since in a lot of these cases we don’t see the evidence the court gets to see… Since it’s usually quite private lives, we almost never have much ‘evidence’ to go off of except for someone’s claim or word or perhaps flirty texts which are often very conveniently cropped or missing context. I think it’s dumb to outright remove people from things they worked on, and the things they worked on or even NPCs just because ‘someone said they did something bad’ over the internet if you’re talking about ‘facts’. Unless I’m misunderstanding your point? As previously stated, if it’s about risk Roux would be gone. They’re not.
1 Like
The counterpoint is that if we aren’t privy to all the information, what gives us the right to jump to a conclusion either way?
The counterpoint to that, is if they’re not going to give out all the information; what gives them the right to go public with the accusations alone? Especially when the accusation alone is enough to cause long lasting damage to the person.
3 Likes
Who is the “they”? Blizzard said nothing except they aren’t working with him anymore, as is their right. So no, thats not really a valid counterpoint.
1 Like
and that they stripped previous work from the game. Of which, they also did with swifty… So yes, it is a valid counterpoint. The fact that you’re saying that while taking your stance, as expect of the ‘bad faith’ crew.
Nothing bad faith in my pov. But its typical of the reductive reasoning here that someone who disagrees with the sheep is “bad faith” or “sjw” or “insert witty internet meme” here.
Much like Vix, actually pretty much all your posts are made in bad faith. Quite a few of the community here know this even if you don’t want to admit the most simple things out there like how this guy was wronged and his voice work should be back in the game because some crazy decided to make an accusation 2 days after they found out he got married to someone that wasn’t them.
But hey, your defense mechanism is just ‘oh you just think I’m an sjw’ when guess what? I’m actually one of the people that fight for my rights and speak out about stuff. Funnily enough, YOU were one of the people to misgender me intentionally repeatadly in a previous thread. So yes, bad faith.
2 Likes
Wholeheartedly agree that Blizzard should NOT replace old Kael’thas voice acting. I hope a lot more people express their disapproval of Blizzard’s decision and help Quinton Flynn with his lawsuit, if he were to seek justice for the reputational damage caused by the accuser.
Ahh, here we get to the crux of the matter.
Noted.
1 Like
Nah, just supplying what you call ‘evidence’ on the claim of you being bad faith. Which isn’t hard in the least to do. But hey, the bad always try to brush off or rectify what they’ve done don’t they? Wonder how you’ll try to spin it instead of admitting what you are and what you do.
The US is a democracy with at-will employment. They keep voting for it time and again so clearly the working population wants to be fired without cause or evidence. Let us be gracious and allow them to enjoy their democratic freedoms.
2 Likes
What are you on about? I don’t want future work with Blizzard? That would imply I had done -any- work for them, which I most certainly have not. I would love a good contract like that. That would be pretty sweet. I have a contract for a series of audiobooks, that have nothing to do with Blizzard at all!
I think general public opinion is that they were both as bad as each other, I could be wrong.
Yeah…that isn’t how it happens…
Yeah, but do you take out a can of spam on the bus and say it is a bomb? Because I’ve seen that…-that- was crazy…
True. Their employment laws are atrocious, but then so is their healthcare system, and attitude to a lot of things.
You know that someone really patient and stubborn could destroy literally every company with such logic? This has to stop.
7 Likes
and the rest of my post? In this thread all I’ve seen you do is nitpick stuff then ignore people who have proved you wrong about the subject. You’re all good at making large paragraphs about one or two lines out of someones post while avoiding the point.
I still can’t wrap my head around someone who’s willing to lose all of their work due to an unproven accusation. makes zero sense to me.
1 Like
Investigations took place with clear evidence, Nobody in this thread has implied that people are never guilty, However jumping the gun before facts are 100% verified from trained proffesionals should never be done. It’s ok to throw anyone under a bus because of Jimmy Saville? What is this logic? No wonder there is so much issues with this stuff.
9 Likes
I don’t. Bus trips make me sick so I just sit still, shut up and hope for it to end as soon as possible. Spam bombing sounds like it would extend the agony 
1 Like
Oh please, this is the guy that earlier in the thread said “You know there are employment laws right!”
Blissfully unaware the guy isn’t even an employee. I mean, you’re sure in possession of facts arent you?
1 Like
It’s almost like I’m not a trained proffesional. Just like you. I would like to see how smug you are if you ever got false accusations made against you, While people like you are hitting out with stuff like this.
Also way to take points out of context, That conversation between me and the other guy was in a broad context of situations like this in general.
It’s all fine as long as it doesn’t happen to me!
People who want to follow innocent until proven guilty and not jump the gun before professionals investigate are Jimmy Saville supporters. 
2 Likes
“Throw people under the bus” is you implying this can only ever be done in a situation where the accused is innocent.
Consider for one second that not all situations are false accusations, and that in doing nothing, you allow such to continue.
And yes, people are right to bring up Savile, because that attitude right there of “well none of this is proof, just accusations, so we’ll do nothing” is precisely what allowed him continued access to minors and allowed him to abuse them further, and technically speaking his employer facilitated him in doing so by granting the access.
This is not equivalent to saying people need to have their lives destroyed over social media, but at least TRY to imagine why people might take such precautions vas opposed to suspecting the whole thing is simply borne of a recent “kneejerk” phenomenon.
We are where we are because if we care to look at history, of which JS I am example, this attitude of “not my business to do anything” led to loads of abuse cases which could have been prevented if the employer had taken precautions.
Think about how you would feel if someone you knew was targeted by an individual whom was suspected of such, but their employer kept them on in the meantime. Would you simply say “well yeah, because there was no proof, so…”?
And before the reverse us thrown back at me, I have known someone whom was targeted with false accusations, and I sympathised, and advised them as to how to proceed to help them clear their name and what steps they could take next to help support rebuilding their life. The difference is I’m not going to tear down a sensible precaution simply because of this because I understand there are situations that may arise where it’s a very good thing to have in place, and they completely overshadow the situations where it’s being applied where uneccessary in my opinion.
1 Like