Paizo Leadership Team Update

If you pay someone to investigate you for misdeeds, and they only disclose the results of the investigation to you and nobody else, what are you doing?

Jeff's intent has no bearing on the betrayal of trust and mishandling of customer information. If he had integrity he would step down from leadership.

The room issue is an explicitly discriminatory policy we have him admitting...

Yeah was giving benefit of the doubt before this but this pretty much eliminates all doubt.

keftiu wrote:

Why is it wrong to ask that someone responsible for misusing customer information and implementing transphobic policy no longer have such power? People are fired for infinitely less every single day. Jeff’s track record is repeated abuse of his position - how many chances does the man need?

I didn't say that, Keftiu. Like it or not, the law is the law is the law. They will have to go through procedures, especially if it is heresy and not concrete court-admissible or civil mediated evidence.

Washington is an at-will state; they could legally fire him if they wanted to. People keep saying “innocent until proven guilty,” but no one here is in court or facing criminal charges - yet, anyway.

And given my other posts on other threads, Trust has been broken but damn unless Jeff resigns what else can we do? Keep posting HELL NO WE WONT GO TIL JEFF GHOES?? :)

And given my other posts on other threads, Trust has been broken but damn unless Jeff resigns what else can we do? Keep posting HELL NO WE WONT GO TIL JEFF GHOES?? :)

Making lots of noise and withholding purchases got us this far. Why tell people they shouldn’t bother wanting things to improve? Why mock those who want accountability?

I’m transgender. Jeff Alvarez here has admitted to implementing a policy that tangibly discriminated against people like me. To act like those who want him gone are being unreasonable is as blind as it is cruel. I don’t want him to have the power to hurt people again.

Anorak wrote:

keftiu wrote:

Why is it wrong to ask that someone responsible for misusing customer information and implementing transphobic policy no longer have such power? People are fired for infinitely less every single day. Jeff’s track record is repeated abuse of his position - how many chances does the man need?

I didn't say that, Keftiu. Like it or not, the law is the law is the law. They will have to go through procedures, especially if it is heresy and not concrete court-admissible or civil mediated evidence.

Washington is an at-will state; they could legally fire him if they wanted to. People keep saying “innocent until proven guilty,” but no one here is in court or facing criminal charges - yet, anyway.

Hmm I'm by no means a lawyer but I think he could sue if wrongfully let go. Even at will. But then if at will that is Lisa's call to me right? Is Lisa who we need to then be calling for to be held accountable? As in the buck stops with Lisa?

The room issue is an explicitly discriminatory policy we have him admitting...

I was not talking about that part. I didn't recall that part being directly related to him other then a decision of a group of executive officials.

If you pay someone to investigate you for misdeeds, and they only disclose the results of the investigation to you and nobody else, what are you doing?

To be fair it sounded shady as all heck to me so I checked this out with my brother (who's a union rep) and apparently this part at least is pretty standard and no I dont get it either.

keftiu wrote:

The room issue is an explicitly discriminatory policy we have him admitting...

I was not talking about that part. I didn't recall that part being directly related to him other then a decision of a group of executive officials.

Jeff literally says “as the person in charge of trade shows…” which means this decision had to at least go through him, and quite possibly originated with him.

"Don't worry. The investigators we hired said there was no evidence of harm. And no we can't show you their report. Byeeee." ;)

Mishandling of private information and discrimination are not wrongful reasons for termination.

I’m transgender. Jeff Alvarez here has admitted to implementing a policy that tangibly discriminated against people like me. To act like those who want him gone are being unreasonable is as blind as it is cruel. I don’t want him to have the power to hurt people again.

All I was trying to say was disappointing as the statement is, I am not sure what recourse, if any, we can seek. By all means, keep protesting. I will support you in doing that!

Wait, they are deleting Diego's posts?

If you pay someone to investigate you for misdeeds, and they only disclose the results of the investigation to you and nobody else, what are you doing?

If they release the results while only redacting the names of victims and explaining the responding actions they will take in response to the inquiry, then I believe that would be fair.

I will not transform the lives of Paizo's working staff who just got unionized into a news drama. What they went through was bad enough, we should be focusing on their work and their successes, both in product and in working treatments/pay, not making the sole inference of their names to specific tragedies.

no one wants to be known only or initially for their suffering.

We will be keeping vigil as to what they do with both the final report and in response to it.

Wait, they are deleting Diego's posts?

Yes, several of his posts about what he experienced as an employee were deleted.

Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:

Wait, they are deleting Diego's posts?

Yes, several of his posts about what he experienced as an employee were deleted.

Now that pisses me off LOL Right or wrong, let his posts stand the light of day for analyses.

Wait, they are deleting Diego's posts?

Yes indeed. Well, at least his post in this thread. Not sure it's a unilateral thing. Probably well deserved snark at this statement.

We'll see how it goes, but I'm cautiously optimistic. To me this reads as a company giving a measured mea culpa and outlines what they're doing now to address the issues. None of this will be happening quickly and change does not happen overnight, nor should it.

This, combined with Paizo execs formally recognizing the union and the union's progress so far are positive signs. We'll see what the results of these moves are, but realistically this is what a company that is trying to do better can get done at this juncture (or at least try to *look like* they're doing better).

Add in that these actions have costs (lawyers sure as hell ain't cheap), and its definitely NOT nothing.

Umbral Reaver wrote:

Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:

Wait, they are deleting Diego's posts?

Yes, several of his posts about what he experienced as an employee were deleted.

Now that pisses me off LOL Right or wrong, let his posts stand the light of day for analyses.

If they were made after he left, then his posts should remain up as they would no longer exist under any employee messageboard regulations.

keftiu wrote:

zergtitan wrote:

I know some people will want more immediate action in response to the accusations, But considering the mixed nature of the efficacy of the accusations made(some true, some inaccurate, Some debated by staff outside executive staff), I'm not against having an inquiry done before more affirmative action is taken as I have seen enough "witch hunt" style responses(Some just, some later found false) to know that three main goals of any response to accusations like these is,

We have Jeff admitting to being responsible for both doxxing and implementing discriminatory policy in this very post. It’s not a “witch hunt” to say that those admissions should be enough to see him removed.

Blog wrote:

Discussion in the past several months has resurfaced two instances in which a Paizo executive mishandled user data when replying to message board posts, resulting in allegations of doxxing. These actions were contrary to Paizo policy, and corrective actions were taken to ensure that this does not happen again.

“This was a huge mistake on my part and I am deeply sorry for any issues that have arisen from these actions. This was not the right way to treat our customers and I apologize,” said Paizo President Jeff Alvarez. “As President, I know I need to hold myself to a higher standard.”

As much as I would agree with you, again we are an "Innocent Till Proven Guilty" Justice System, which means if Jeff believes his actions were mistakes and not malicious in intent he does have the right to retain his job until the inquiry says otherwise.

I'm not happy about what happened behind the curtains of Paizo either and felt betrayed and angered by what was happening, but we don't know all the details ourselves. When the Inquiry is done we will have the full right to demand then for all the information and request the proper response.

Hey so exactly what court of law are we in? What criminal charges have been brought? This is an employment issue, and therefore "Innocent until proven guilty" does not apply in the same way.

Removed a post. Reiterating my request to respond with your reactions and to not judge/target others' reactions. Thank you

Kudos Paizo. A good beginning!

Tonya, if you are the one that us deleting Diego's posts that is wrong and perhaps you are more ingrained in other problems of the company.

Maintaining holding pattern.

Tonya, if you are the one that us deleting Diego's posts that is wrong and perhaps you are more ingrained in other problems of the company.

I took one of his this afternoon when I started looking at flags, but it was part of an entire sub-thread that got removed. I've removed two posts from this thread, neither were from him. I've been trying to leave as many posts as possible when I'm moderating threads, as the conversation should stand.

Removed a post. Reiterating my request to respond with your reactions and to not judge/target others' reactions. Thank you

Pores some coffee for Tonya

Note: "Innocent until proven guilty" is a lie told to children. In basically every legal system in the world, you are presumed guilty upon being accused by an agent of the State. You are then assumed to be guilty, and the fun begins. There are many people in the US who have been in jail for years without being convicted (or tried) of any crime.

So others are deleting his posts here?

*****, if you are the one that us deleting Diego's posts that is wrong and perhaps you are more ingrained in other problems of the company.

Stop.....this is the type of response that creates the 'witch hunt" problem I was warning about. We should not start throwing out accusations indiscriminately like this. We don't know and making this sort of direct call out is what will by policy get your post deleted.

I do not want to see this thread locked and Paizo to respond to this behavior by silencing all communication about this matter. Which they could do if we don't tread on this matter carefully.

Everyone is walking on emotional eggshells so If you need to, take a breather and come back to this thread tomorrow. I will be doing the same myself.

Kevin Mack wrote:

keftiu wrote:

Kevin Mack wrote:

keftiu wrote:

Why is it wrong to ask that someone responsible for both misuse of customer information and implementation of transphobic policy no longer have such power? People are fired for infinitely less every single day. Jeff’s track record is repeated abuse of his position - how many chances does the man need?

Um is there anyone in the company capable of firing him? Since he's basically top of the pecking order.

One would hope Lisa might not like him being a walking, talking PR/HR disaster for the brand.

Yeah but can she actually just flat out fire him? (Not trying to be argumentative but I honestly have no idea how this works)

She absolutely *could* if she wanted to; Washington State employment is at-will, meaning they don't need a reason to fire anyone. Unless, of course, you're covered by a union, which changes your employment status to "represented." Which Jeff would not be, because he's in a managerial position.

And they've fired at-will employees for much, much less. =)

I don't know anything about Paizo's structure, but upper management often has contracts even when low level employees don't. If so, they're bound by the contract terms as far as firing him goes.

Assuming they wanted to, of course.

Paizo appeared to take a giant step forward a few weeks ago with the recognition of UPW. This blog post is nothing but them walking through the yard stepping on rakes and having the rakes smack them in the face.

Twice. TWICE. Twice you have the President of Paizo admit he was the main reason for terrible actions. And, yet, he retains his job. I believe we can all figure out why he still has his job.

And it comes across as shady AF to hear that Paizo may be deleting every post by Diego. Shady AF.

For the one giant step forward Paizo took, they managed to take about 15 steps back with this post.

Interesting notes on the law firm being employed: https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Moritt-Hock-&-Hamroff-LLP/reviews

Pretty disheartening, even with the small steps forward.

Let's see how the negotiations with the union go. Something tells me that they won't be particularly happy with this statement.

Washington is an at-will state; they could legally fire him if they wanted to.

...He should join the union and get some protection then.

Paizo appeared to take a giant step forward a few weeks ago with the recognition of UPW. This blog post is nothing but them walking through the yard stepping on rakes and having the rakes smack them in the face.

Twice. TWICE. Twice you have the President of Paizo admit he was the main reason for terrible actions. And, yet, he retains his job. I believe we can all figure out why he still has his job.

And it comes across as shady AF to hear that Paizo may be deleting every post by Diego. Shady AF.

For the one giant step forward Paizo took, they managed to take about 15 steps back with this post.

I don't think they're deleting every post by Diego - Tonya said one earlier today, which was part of the clean up of a digression smearing Sara. Maybe it shouldn't have gone, but it would have been out of place without the posts it was defending her against.

I didn't see one in this thread, but I could have missed it before it was removed.

Mogloth wrote:

Paizo appeared to take a giant step forward a few weeks ago with the recognition of UPW. This blog post is nothing but them walking through the yard stepping on rakes and having the rakes smack them in the face.

Twice. TWICE. Twice you have the President of Paizo admit he was the main reason for terrible actions. And, yet, he retains his job. I believe we can all figure out why he still has his job.

And it comes across as shady AF to hear that Paizo may be deleting every post by Diego. Shady AF.

For the one giant step forward Paizo took, they managed to take about 15 steps back with this post.

I don't think they're deleting every post by Diego - Tonya said one earlier today, which was part of the clean up of a digression smearing Sara. Maybe it shouldn't have gone, but it would have been out of place without the posts it was defending her against.

I didn't see one in this thread, but I could have missed it before it was removed.

I also only saw a singular post by Diego (which I felt the need to throw on archive.org) that ended up being deleted.

Removed a post. Again, please do not ascribe reasons to other posters' actions. Instead, please focus on the message and your response. Thank you

"Allegations of doxing" if by allegations you mean it was literally the definition and posted clearly for everyone to see, sure; "allegations". Why did it take years for "corrective actions" to be taken?

L Pellazar wrote:

She absolutely *could* if she wanted to; Washington State employment is at-will, meaning they don't need a reason to fire anyone. Unless, of course, you're covered by a union, which changes your employment status to "represented." Which Jeff would not be, because he's in a managerial position.

And they've fired at-will employees for much, much less. =)

I don't know anything about Paizo's structure, but upper management often has contracts even when low level employees don't. If so, they're bound by the contract terms as far as firing him goes.

Assuming they wanted to, of course.

That's a good point. And if that were the case—executives/high-level employees getting contractual protection while the lower-level employees don't—then that's a whole other problem in and of itself, IMO. =\

Mogloth wrote:

Paizo appeared to take a giant step forward a few weeks ago with the recognition of UPW. This blog post is nothing but them walking through the yard stepping on rakes and having the rakes smack them in the face.

Twice. TWICE. Twice you have the President of Paizo admit he was the main reason for terrible actions. And, yet, he retains his job. I believe we can all figure out why he still has his job.

And it comes across as shady AF to hear that Paizo may be deleting every post by Diego. Shady AF.

For the one giant step forward Paizo took, they managed to take about 15 steps back with this post.

I don't think they're deleting every post by Diego - Tonya said one earlier today, which was part of the clean up of a digression smearing Sara. Maybe it shouldn't have gone, but it would have been out of place without the posts it was defending her against.

I didn't see one in this thread, but I could have missed it before it was removed.

That's why I said 'may be' as opposed to saying they were. :-)

To my knowledge only one of my posts has been removed. It was removed along with the posts it was responding to. It was also a bit aggressive. I feel that it was an appropriate removal on both accounts. There are plenty of reasons to be angry at Paizo, but at least for now I feel this isn’t one of them.

Glad to see Paizo taking positive steps toward addressing problems and working with their employees to build a better business culture. It is sad that these actions come after several years of inaction, but this is far too often what happens in the business world.

Regardless, I am happy to see Paizo taking positive steps and hope they continue to rebuild their office culture into one we can all be proud to purchase products from.

I held off on reading this all day so I wouldn't spend my whole work shift fuming. Seems I was right to do so.

What we got was a lot of corporate apologia complete with an impressive non-apology for an objectively transphobic policy and no real public-facing efforts to visibly address obvious problems apart from an executive-lead investigation into problems reportedly caused by the executives and upper management. It makes you sound like Ubisoft. You do not want to sound like Ubisoft.

You even now have an organization that could perform that investigation without nearly as egregious a conflict of interest. The Union.

Congrats, you failed successfully.

Essentially unless the union backs up your efforts and cosigns them, I'm back to assuming the 'Leadership Team' is out of touch, if not overtly exploitative. Hopefully UPW can force some healthy changes here.

This token effort was barely enough to buy some more time from me, mostly so I can stay apprised of the efforts of the union, but you have likely permanently lost the trust and respect of many people that thought you had their interests at heart. You've certainly lost mine.

My sympathies go out to those who feel betrayed and hurt by this profoundly mediocre response.

Interesting notes on the law firm being employed: https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Moritt-Hock-&-Hamroff-LLP/reviews

Thank you for sharing this information. Very telling. VERY telling indeed.

Transphobes aren’t fired from management - and no matter what Jeff might say otherwise, his actions and policies outweigh his words. Transphobes aren’t banned from the forums, even after repeated and overt hate.

Seems to be an issue from the top to the bottom.

Diego, thank you for clarifying about the posting concerns.

While I'm still processing the statement, knowing that your standards would have probably led to the removal of the post you made speaks volumes about your integrity and fortitude.

thejeff wrote:

L Pellazar wrote:

She absolutely *could* if she wanted to; Washington State employment is at-will, meaning they don't need a reason to fire anyone. Unless, of course, you're covered by a union, which changes your employment status to "represented." Which Jeff would not be, because he's in a managerial position.

And they've fired at-will employees for much, much less. =)

I don't know anything about Paizo's structure, but upper management often has contracts even when low level employees don't. If so, they're bound by the contract terms as far as firing him goes.

Assuming they wanted to, of course.

That's a good point. And if that were the case—executives/high-level employees getting contractual protection while the lower-level employees don't—then that's a whole other problem in and of itself, IMO. =\

True, but that's not a Paizo problem, but a corporate America problem. Theoretically it works both ways - executives have protections, but also can't leave on a whim.