Paizo Update from Jeff Alvarez

Out of curiosity, do you feel any connection to the ways a person spends money, and morality/ responsibility?

Specifically related to discretionary spending, not essentials.

EDIT: I was also wondering if you felt that morality has a role in business, economics and markets?

Just wondering because many who philosophize about economics attribute different types of morality to markets and such. Even the Homo Economicus theory involves a consumer who considers all factors rationally. Although, many in economics consider morality to be irrational.

I just want to say that there's a gray area between "no ethical consumption under capitalism so why bother" and "if I buy a Hershey's chocolate bar I'm a child labor apologist", and I'm pretty sure everyone here falls within that gray area to some degree or another.

There's also a gray area between "this mega corporation is my best friend and they would never do anything immoral on purpose" and "the old lady who runs the small restaurant down the street is a class traitor and beyond redemption".

So you would buy from a company that [treated it's workers poorly], because you are not responsible for that companies actions?

Or are you saying that you would not support a business that [treated it's workers poorly] because that would make you an accessory (which would be morally wrong)?

Sorry if I missed some sarcasm or something in there.

EDIT: I would agree with you KC, but it seems like some here take a more absolute approach. I'm curious if they are in the camp that thinks morality is part of capitalism and free markets and such are inherently good, or if they feel the morality has no role and that direct economic concerns of supply and demand should be the only deciding factor.

EDIT2: I don't want hyperbole to derail the conversation. How about instead of genocide, we switch to how a company treats its workers.

EDIT3: OK last edit. I agree with what thejeff and KC wrote pretty much 100%. It seems to me that many others reject the concept of "responsible shopping" altogether. I'm attempting to figure out if that is indeed the case, or if I'm missing something. It seems that people are talking past each other, so I'm trying to understand the underlying beliefs.

Personally, I would try to minimize my support for that company wherever it was practical for me to do, like I think any responsible person would. If there was a serious active boycott going on, I'd cut support altogether.

You buy ethically where you can, but you can't treat that as a "get out of social responsibility free" card. At the same time, it's not an absolutist moral obligation. Responsible consumerism isn't the full extent of activism, and it's a luxury. Even a rich would-be do-gooder has to buy from privately-owned brands now and again. Ultimately, the evils of the world aren't solely of our own making, so they can't be our total responsibility to "fix". You can't fix the problems created by a profit-driven economy with profit-based solutions.

What I'm getting at here is, you aren't a bad person if you buy from Paizo or Wizards, but at the same time, you should at least think about where you draw the line and how badly you really need a given product. Maybe you should even think about why the line is where it is. For me, dehumanizing and isolating a trans employee is the line. If that's not the line for you, think about why not.

Small companies are complicated. They aren't United Fruit Co. There are real people behind these decisions, and sometimes those decisions have real positive or negative consequences independent from "the bottom line". Real people can be reasoned with, or can feel guilty, or can feel bitterly stubborn. That's why I do think there's some point in appealing to the better natures of the owners of Paizo.

That said, Paizo isn't a mom-and-pop shop, either. That's why I'm also being blunt about how this impacts their brand in my eyes, about my diminished my willingness to shop here. Contrary to some cynical assumptions I've heard, Paizo does have to care about how we see them, because their branding is a big part of their business model. Paizo has always modeled itself as a small, friendly, customer-focused company. Damage to that perception is damage to the company. If people stop thinking of Paizo as a brand they trust, even if they don't boycott Paizo actively, they may feel less motivated to buy the next expensive sourcebook that comes out.

Extremely well said, Kobold Cleaver.

It's hard for me to draw direct lines in much, but here's something I'll say: I skipped the 2017-2018-2019 PaizoCons, and the 2020-2021 virtual cons, explicitly because I'd been hearing disappointing things about how Paizo staffers were treated and I felt burned out on caring about a private company's success. It was getting harder to read Paizo as a notably progressive organization. I'd been playing in Serpent's Skull, which is, let's say, a complicated adventure path. Ex-employees were talking about bad experiences with the company, and half-assed company apologies were getting issued in response. PFO was predictably collapsing in on itself, and the community I'd grown attached to along with it. PaizoCons felt swallowed up by PFS, by scandals, and overall, by a deep sense of loneliness for me. Some of my favorite employees were quitting. Kalindlara and Mikaze and too many others to name weren't posting anymore. Overall, Paizo no longer felt any better or worse to me than Wizards of the Coast. It was just... a company.

I didn't consciously decide to "boycott" or anything. I just felt less interested in what the company was doing. I felt sad and disappointed and like it was time to move on.

I've really missed this community, and 2E sounds really interesting and solid. Some of the recent APs are genuinely riveting to me. The "Sending kindness out" thread sort of helped remind me how Paizo the Corporation is still also Paizo, the Sum of Its Employees. I like that side of Paizo. If I feel some genuine certainty that Paizo is treating its employees well, that Paizo is a safe place for trans women, I'll come back, and I'll encourage my friends to buy Paizo products.

If not, well, this is a hobby anyways. I don't, like, need anything here. It just would be nice. I like buying nice things! And I like supporting a healthy industry! Those are both products I place value on. I'm just not sure Paizo's offering both of them right now.

There are real people behind these decisions, and sometimes those decisions have real positive or negative consequences independent from "the bottom line".

I tried pointing this out a few posts/threads ago, now deleted, and certain posters told me it was wholly irrelevant.

I don't know what to say about that since I don't know the context, sorry.

I got into Pathfinder with the launch of 2e and the word that being more critical about representation was something the writing team was working on. I’m not on these forums or buying these books if Paizo hadn’t put that focus on treating race and gender with respect front and center.

If that courtesy doesn’t extend to the real humans who make these books happen, I’m content to spend my money elsewhere - but I’d prefer not to! I hope we can get a tangible admission of mistreatment and a concrete dedication to how that will be resolved, and not an attempt at the latter without anything for the former like we currently have.

You put trans characters on the covers of your books, Paizo. Can you admit when you drop the ball with the real trans folks who make your company shine?

I don't know what to say about that since I don't know the context, sorry.

No need to apologize; not yer fault. We cool. I’m just happy to see you posting again on the regular.

I agree with everything keftiu said. Crystal was one of the people who made Paizo great. As consumers, we have the right to expect better of Paizo.

Telling a trans person who is understandably upset and hurt by the allegations of paizo's transphobia that she's "entitled" for wanting an explanation is quite frankly... kind of a bad faith reading of everything keftiu has said so far. She's been incredibly patient and respectful and I wholeheartedly agree with what she's said

Also really don't like using his/her to reference a trans person. Even if you don't know their pronouns the word their exists for just such a reason.

Removed another series of posts, one problematic and a series of quotes. Questioning a person's motives is inappropriate behavior, please stop.

My stance has always been a very consistent “I’m not buying things until transphobia allegations are addressed” in every single thread… but they seem to be confused about several obvious things :)

EDIT: Seems to be gone now. Thanks, folks!

Pretty much what keftiu said. My subs will return only once I see some major, substantive change. At worst, I have enough Paizo material to last me a lifetime of gaming already, and there are other exciting games and settings out there.

Great answer Jeff. I hope this will be enough in the long run, but for the moment I feel it is.

I completely agree. I’m impressed with the level of transparency and accountability in that statement. I think the most important thing stated was the back filling of a full time HR. Hard to move forward on these topics without one. Keep going!

There's several reasons I don't cheerlead for this company anymore, my interest in organized play has all but dried up, and I don't really use the boards here even for PBP. These persistent problems have been a major factor.

I still purchase products on occasion and drop the odd post here and there but the boards are poorly formatted and spotily moderated not to mention some impressively toxic individuals lurking around.

The laundry list of allegations from previous insiders and the stuff that boils into public consciousness is just embarrassing and should never have gotten to this point. It really makes the hard work of the ground-level employees to make an inclusive and progressive game feel hollow and that they are being exploited. The business model of Paizo is better than, say, Wizards of the Coast but that is really not saying anything.

I could issue an ultimatum that Paizo should 'do better' but that would be similarly hollow. This is just me screaming exhausted frustration into the void. If I end up fully ceasing interactions with Paizo products, it won't be because I am boycotting, it will be because Paizo and the industry as a whole has driven me away for good.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts, Han Del. I am really hoping the next statement they issue is substantive and meaningful, because you're right - right now, the real danger isn't a boycott, the danger is burning people out of even engaging with the hobby as anything resembling a "community". It's September #2 of 2020, and we're all tired. We could really use some good news for a change.

Paizo is having internal discussions, meetings and action reports. The company is working on the things they said they would do in the last statement. I have no timeline for additional official statements, but "There will be more messages, and more concrete actions, to come."

Paizo is having internal discussions, meetings and action reports. The company is working on the things they said they would do in the last statement. I have no timeline for additional official statements, but "There will be more messages, and more concrete actions, to come."

Thanks for the update, Aaron. Paizo's generally sober response to this crisis has left me pretty optimistic with where things are going, yours included. There's one concern that's weighing me down though: is there going to be any direct response to allegations of transphobia?

It hurts to say Jeff's response didn't really address the issue to my satisfaction, as (unless I'm missing something) a single room policy doesn't really prevent the company from opting not to send transfolk to cons anyway. It frankly feels like it completely sidesteps the real issue. I believe in this company and the people belonging to it (as much as I can believe in people I don't know personally) — but I need to know, with as much certainty as can be reasonably had, there's isn't transphobic behavior happening behind the scenes. That sort of behavior is a violation against everything Paizo stands for, and something I absolutely won't stand for.

I'm confident this will be addressed. It's just tough watching this hang in the air, without explicit confirmation that this important issue is even being talked about.

Aaron may not be able to comment on that right now, but I think we'd all like to know if there's more coming on that topic, if possible. The impression I've gotten, though, is that we are meant to assume more is on the way.

Sorry but statements of intent and conciliatory actions after the fact only ever do so much. It should never have gotten to this point in the first place. This is not something that can be 'statemented' away, it is a pattern of behavior from the higher ups.

Unless we see something truly major like a union forming to protect ttrpg workers, and the executives of major publishing companies engaging in good faith with it, my confidence in this company will not be returning.

Trying to unionize is tough at one company, let alone an industry. Companies can clean house and hire non-union employees too.
I wish every job had a union though. I'm thankful for my medical and retirement benefits provided by my union.

I agree, Han Del. They've indicated meaningful changes are underway, and I'm waiting to see what they do. If the next update doesn't show some real action, I'm done.

To be clear, when we say "we want a real statement on x from Paizo", we aren't asking for mere assurances - at least, I'm sure not. We're asking for them to tell us what they're doing to fix this.

I agree, Han Del. They've indicated meaningful changes are underway, and I'm waiting to see what they do. If the next update doesn't show some real action, I'm done.

To be clear, when we say "we want a real statement on x from Paizo", we aren't asking for mere assurances - at least, I'm sure not. We're asking for them to tell us what they're doing to fix this.

You're probably not going to get more than that, I am afraid. For a variety of possible reasons. The Law is the Law is the Law. Here in the States even more so. Anything said outside of word salad, boiler plate, or more than We Hear you or we are working on an Action Plan is likely all you will ever get until any possibility of a lawsuit, by any of the involved parties, passes.

And outside of WotC powered by Hasbro, you will never see a union in this niche industry. Most of these companies operate out of peoples houses, apartments, or vans.

And let's be honesty, I can *Hands waves at Mountain of Corporations* that we are using this very moment who make Paizo look like Angels made of the Tears of Holiness. Hell all RPG books are printed in China. Along with the rest of the worlds products. They're committing genocide.

So yes, what certain individuals may have done is terrible. That doesn't mean you toss the baby out with the bathwater or castigate Paizo the Whole as some vile transphobic villain. It was the act of 1 or 2 alleged individuals. That is all we know.

Given that, we need to focus on what they did and shaming them, if it is proven, until they step down and hand over the reins of their positions.

Aaron Shanks wrote:

Paizo is having internal discussions, meetings and action reports. The company is working on the things they said they would do in the last statement. I have no timeline for additional official statements, but "There will be more messages, and more concrete actions, to come."

Thanks for the update, Aaron. Paizo's generally sober response to this crisis has left me pretty optimistic with where things are going, yours included. There's one concern that's weighing me down though: is there going to be any direct response to allegations of transphobia?

It hurts to say Jeff's response didn't really address the issue to my satisfaction, as (unless I'm missing something) a single room policy doesn't really prevent the company from opting not to send transfolk to cons anyway. It frankly feels like it completely sidesteps the real issue. I believe in this company and the people belonging to it (as much as I can believe in people I don't know personally) — but I need to know, with as much certainty as can be reasonably had, there's isn't transphobic behavior happening behind the scenes. That sort of behavior is a violation against everything Paizo stands for, and something I absolutely won't stand for.

I'm confident this will be addressed. It's just tough watching this hang in the air, without explicit confirmation that this important issue is even being talked about.

I have two trans godchildren out of five, one I just officiated his marriage last summer and the other, a minor, just announced her new name last week. So, I'd like think, I get it.

Personally, while I understand the emotional and intellectual tension of this ambiguous state, I think it is better for the company to talk to the staff, and third party experts, to take the time to get it right. That is what I see happening from my limited work-from-home vantage point.

My job is half Marketing and half PR. I love the opportunity to work with influencers and interview the staff. So I am focused on shining the spotlight on them and their work.

As as far as PR goes, the managers are all talking to the staff and each other, working on statements and actions—both words and change. There is nothing for me to do to wait, advise when asked, and amplify what they decide.

Crisis Management is about what happened, why it happened, and why it won't happen again. This is juxtaposed against existing law and liability decisions, that frankly requires HR and legal expertise beyond my training (a business degree and 25 years of business communications experience). It takes time and that expertise is being sought.

My personal vision statement is that Paizo will be a better company for this experience. Accountability, though not complete public transparency to everyone's satisfaction, will occur. Talent and quality storytelling will flourish. This is a setback of the great momentum we had, but there is no way forward, but though. And we will be better for it as a company and community.

I will say I support regular communication for the foreseeable future. I want us to be trusted leaders in the industry. I think that is a sincere, authentic value that my coworkers share with me.

It is deeply regrettable that some have and will continue to choose to depart the community, but I, and every coworker I know, are committed to making it as large and welcoming as possible, within our circles of influence. It is our daily work.

To others in the thread above,

Also, I am a proud union member in the stage actor's union. I've enjoyed a fair wage, health benefits, and retirement benefits, exclusively from non-profit organizations. I've volunteered my time and energy to serve on many committees for nearly 20 years. I don't have this company or industry figured out yet, so I don't know what is right, but unions start with workers, not management. I think that ball is in their court.

Adventures Ahead.

I have two trans godchildren out of five, one I just officiated his marriage last summer and the other, a minor, just announced her new name last week. So, I'd like think, I get it.

Personally, while I understand the emotional and intellectual tension of this ambiguous state, I think it is better for the company to talk to the staff, and third party experts, to take the time to get it right. That is what I see happening from my limited work-from-home vantage point.

My job is half Marketing and half PR. I love the opportunity to work with influencers and interview the staff. So I...

Aaron, unless there is *some* acknowledgement and response to the company's President publicly and on the record exposing a (okay, two) community member's(') identities in order to "underscore how seriously he takes things" on top of the trans-discrimination issues, there will be questions about how trustworthy Paizo can be about data (mis)management. There is using information for a specific purpose, and then there's that purpose being to win forum arguments.

Can you explain that? I'm not sure I understand it. What does it refer to?

It’s referring to the time Jeff posted someone’s full given name in the midst of a heated exchange, and then admitted he had done so to drive home a point about forum civility.

Opsylum wrote:

Aaron Shanks wrote:

Paizo is having internal discussions, meetings and action reports. The company is working on the things they said they would do in the last statement. I have no timeline for additional official statements, but "There will be more messages, and more concrete actions, to come."

Thanks for the update, Aaron. Paizo's generally sober response to this crisis has left me pretty optimistic with where things are going, yours included. There's one concern that's weighing me down though: is there going to be any direct response to allegations of transphobia?

It hurts to say Jeff's response didn't really address the issue to my satisfaction, as (unless I'm missing something) a single room policy doesn't really prevent the company from opting not to send transfolk to cons anyway. It frankly feels like it completely sidesteps the real issue. I believe in this company and the people belonging to it (as much as I can believe in people I don't know personally) — but I need to know, with as much certainty as can be reasonably had, there's isn't transphobic behavior happening behind the scenes. That sort of behavior is a violation against everything Paizo stands for, and something I absolutely won't stand for.

I'm confident this will be addressed. It's just tough watching this hang in the air, without explicit confirmation that this important issue is even being talked about.

I have two trans godchildren out of five, one I just officiated his marriage last summer and the other, a minor, just announced her new name last week. So, I'd like think, I get it.

Personally, while I understand the emotional and intellectual tension of this ambiguous state, I think it is better for the company to talk to the staff, and third party experts, to take the time to get it right. That is what I see happening from my limited work-from-home vantage point.

My job is half Marketing and half PR. I love the opportunity to work with influencers and interview the staff. So I...

I appreciate your openness and willingness to share, Aaron. Thanks.

How things resolve is going to be difficult to judge from the outside, for the same reasons the problems were difficult to see.

Big picture - a few weeks or months is a blink. Worth doing right over quickly, in my view.

Oh, yeah. That's also such a specious idea at the core. "People would be civil if we knew each other's real names". Like, have these people seen Facebook? Anonymity isn't the problem; fleeting interactions are. Forums solve a huge bulk of that problem simply by creating familiar faces, regardless of what names we go by. Regular posters become polite posters when they start to care what the community thinks of them. What you're left with isn't always as civil as we'd like, but it's about as civil as the real life equivalent would be--just with more potential for misunderstandings and accidental escalations and less potential for physical intimidation/talking over people.

If these communities seem more toxic than real life, a big part of that is simply that a lot of these communities just kind of have toxic communication styles, on- or offline, that haven't been fully unpacked yet by everyone here. Most D&D horror stories are about IRL gaming groups where everybody knows each other's names. Meanwhile, you know who I see really benefiting from anonymity? Queer people who get to be themselves. Internet anonymity is actually pretty cool.

Anyways, I agree, that's something that needs to be talked about. It sounds like an unprofessional misstep, so it's probably easier to address than some of the other problems we've brought up, but no less important.

Anyways, I agree, that's something that needs to be talked about. It sounds like an unprofessional misstep, so it's probably easier to address than some of the other problems we've brought up, but no less important.

It also happened twice. That we have identified. In public. It's both tremendously inappropriate and easily identified. And has had *no* clear repercussions for that actor's access to personal data. In fact, this is corporate leadership. It seems utterly tone-deaf.

Oh, yeah. That's also such a specious idea at the core. "People would be civil if we knew each other's real names".

It was more threatening than that. I can’t relocate the link though.

No, I think I read the vibe. It's a creepy power play thing, "I know where you live." I can understand someone not realizing how it came across, or thinking that it was his "privilege" to flex like that, but someone in a position of power should have known better.

Relevant post

Wow. Yeah, that is... deeply unprofessional. Reading it as kindly as I can, it's incredibly ignorant and reckless and dangerous. My deadname has been available to the company for a long time. Do I get to feel safe buying from Paizo if that name is seen as a potential tool to put me in my place? I don't think that would ever happen, but that's the kind of thing I shouldn't have to even worry about with a private company!

His apology wasn't off the mark, but still... that is such a serious breach of consumer trust. I can understand it being a nonstarter for people in the absence of any visible consequences.

I'm honestly speechless.

His apology wasn't off the mark, but still... that is such a serious breach of consumer trust. I can understand it being a nonstarter for people in the absence of any visible consequences.

I'll put money on it now - there will be no accountability because this will be an exercise in empty action. This is Paizo. If it *mattered* to them, they wouldn't have tolerated it even once. Twice? From the very top? That's *policy*