Catulle's page

Seeing as there isn't a means for reporting it through the flag system, I felt it may be worth querying why this is both a sticky and closed thread. Is it okay to discuss the union situation and developments in here, or should that thread closure be read as dissuaded commentary?

As comforting as that info may be I'm pretty sure that is considered personal information related to their account and cannot be exposed as you have suggested or at the very least would represent a non-consensual alteration of user data that is also similarly illegal.

Laws passed in recent years have made modifying user information on the behalf of the user, even after they have their Account deactivated, make this at BEST a gray area in terms of what's allowed and more realistically is not something that can be done without breaking those regulations.

Can you point towards any? This is not cohesive with any iteration of law that I've come into contact with, and I'm in the (former) EU state that hasn't been bothered to change any of those oppressive data regulations I am unreliably told exist.

What trouble did they get into for doxxing?

Quite.

The consultant and legal firm aspects remain, to my mind, a bit of a red herring. Better to retain focus on the observable data than project our fears into that particular void.

I'll admit, I read that as "we asked our mate and they suggested..." but it's far from the meat of of the issue to my mind.

Yep. After two outright illegal actions and a number of immoral ones, let alone the unprovable middle ground... and the response being essentially "well, I told myself off but you plebeians are never going to get closure"

Yeah. Nothing so long as that remains unaddressed.

It's not about hiring a law firm as the last pages might indicate, it's about the fact that trust has been breached and leadership has done nothing but hide from any shred of accountability.

For shame.

Again, it's not the hiring of the law firm we're taking as bad faith, it's the LYING about what they specialize in that is bad faith.

Honestly, any and all lies, but to be so transparent is frankly insulting.

This is appalling.

I think "electric boogaloo" is pretty clearly distinct from the "boogaloo boys", honestly. It's still a very common sequel joke title.

Just noting that I in my comfortable privilege had a tonal "eh..?" moment, so it may be worth considering for those more in the firing line - but it's totally not up to me, nor do I think for a second the OP intended the reference! It's a "would this be kinder?"

(Context: I'm currently wading through the Sines v. Kessler case so may be more wary than normal)

I also don't want to flag the OP, so writing and self-flagging here that a better title for the thread may be Forum Culture: Moderation or something? Bugaloo and it's derivatives carry some pretty tainted baggage these days with respect to extremism :(

I am sorry. Whilst I felt I had a concern, said concern was one out of ignorance. I jumped as to not lose my train of thought. I'm going to take the next few days to be more passive in my approach and just read and learn from the forums and try to be better when I return to posting. I should have more faith in the moderation of this forums.. but paizo is not quite in my good books yet.

That's all fair commentary, and it *is* useful to have an up-to-date thread running on critical concerns both for sustained pressure and visibility, so please don't be too hard on yourself.

Reflexive practice really is a great skill to develop, though; go you!

It's heartening to see the needle moving on this, and is something the leadership team should take note of with respect to msking demonstrable change.

Ohhh the hypocrisy...

Huh?

Not to mention systems of justice ;)

You're heard.

What I wish they would do: Ever speak up for us. I can count on one hand the number of times I’ve seen a cis person, even an outspoken ally, go to bat against transphobia unless they were joining a conversation that was already ongoing and being les by us. You can call hate and nonsense out when you see it - we would all like a break from defending ourselves 24/7, and that’s what being an “ally” is supposed to be for.

This is so thorny for me (and I imagine a few others besides) - there is definitely a conversation to be had about "nothing about us without us" as a guiding principle versus the degree to which people with privilege (and thus a degree of social capital) can really move the needle I terms of rejecting normalised transphobia. The primary thing that stays my hand is the sense of not wanting to talk for trans people - how to square that circle is something that really does eat at me.

My partner informs me that while spending an entire week being aware of them may be a profound display of endurance, please could I stop with the staring right now?

*wink*

So there it is. Transgender people worried about who else here might harbour transphobic sentiment are now 'creepy stalkers'. :(

"How very dare you hold me to account for the things that I do?"

Unless it's that insidious *weekend* bigotry, of course!

Utterly tracks with my experience of working in the visual,impairment sphere.

In the trade, we're trained to draw a distinction between *empathy* and *sympathy* for pretty much those reasons (and what you're describing seems to lie closer to what we would call sympathy).

What passing-bells for these who die as cattle?
Only the monstrous anger of the guns.
Only the stuttering rifles' rapid rattle
Can patter out their hasty orisons.
No mockeries now for them; no prayers nor bells,
Nor any voice of mourning save the choirs, -
The shrill, demented choirs of wailing shells;
And bugles calling for them from sad shires.

What candles may be held to speed them all?
Not in the hands of boys, but in their eyes
Shall shine the holy glimmers of goodbyes.
The pallor of girls' brows shall be their pall;
Their flowers the tenderness of patient minds,
And each slow dusk a drawing down of blinds.

I understand that it is not our call, I wonder if Lisa is aware or even cares of the damage Jeff has done to the company?

She most certainly knows better than we do ;)

ETA: It's what you might call a feedback loop

Maybe it would be best if Jeff stepped down.

*That* call is gonna have to come from inside the house (as much as I agree with it; from initial incident to response, he's been ultimately responsible and *will* not (apparently) take action of his own initiative. This seems to be a bad fit for a leader in a company professing the ideals that Paizo does, but...) the corporate culture is what it is.

At the sake of being tongue-in-beak, are we being profiled because people have a hard time telling us apart? :>

Just getting antsy about the attempted murder...

;)

thejeff wrote:

That may happen elsewhere on the internets, but it doesn't seem to me like the problems here are rooted in trans folk and their allies being needlessly nitpicky.

Those are all direct examples from these boards I believe one is from this thread.

Your recent posting activity ran a jewish poster back off into lurk-mode after they tried to explain some cultural context. I feel it may be worth your entertaining the possibility that your calibration is off on this regard.

At the risk of attempting to introduce an analogy to an argument, shutting down the forums would be more like shooting a dog because he has fleas. Look, I get being tired or frustrated or burnt out, but we have every right to appeal for better moderation and for making this place better. We do not need to give in to this kind of despairing drivel.

"What do you *mean*, the dog needs feeding *every* day? We can't just leave it over the weekend? Sorry, Rover, time to go..."

Welcome to Whose Side Is It Anyway, where all the offense is made up and the threads don't matter.

One favourite is not enough.

Well played, indeed!

I have a copy of the Malleus Malefacarum right here thought I'd get some use out of it.

You might start by reading the title.

At this point I'm almost content to leave the forums behind and just stick to the discords of my favorite actual play podcasts, as those spaces have been actively welcoming.

It's like curation works, or something..?

Catulle wrote:

Pathetic, seeing how in-house moderation scrubs the record out. There was nothing even vaguely off-topic in there, especially with regards to how late-stage capitalism shapes the relationship of a company with its consumers and how the officers of such might be held to account.

It's like that was the essence of the conversation anyway.

I’m a rabid anticapitalist and I still don’t think a forum thread about misconduct from Paizo’s management is the place to discuss the broad strokes of macroeconomics. Trying to foster outrage over perfectly mundane forum moderation when there are very real problems going unaddressed doesn’t help our cause any.

Okay, I'll buy that from you and take your lead from here on in.

And yet what was deleted was utterly on-topic.

How awful is it that criticism of the structures that enable Jeff Alvarez' abuse of authority and data control get deleted away - Jeff is not the sole issue here, it's the structures that enabled his abuses to thrive... and that, my friends, is late-stage capitalism.

By this stage it seems clear to me that part of the problem is Paizo's Director of Community, who is more invested in hiding complaints than addressing them. Let's see how long this lasts, huh?

Pathetic, seeing how in-house moderation scrubs the record out. There was nothing even vaguely off-topic in there, especially with regards to how late-stage capitalism shapes the relationship of a company with its consumers and how the officers of such might be held to account.

It's like that was the essence of the conversation anyway.

We're not seeking perfection, just that this company that trades on our queer family and acceptance thereof, *does not* engage in abuse of power elsewhere, as its president has verifiably done.

At the very least, that guy should not be the president of this company - the values seem so dissonant.

We saw it (abuse of power) twice in-person with an identifiable trail. Right here.

There are further allegations that further abuses of power happened behind closed doors.

In the light of the first, what makes the second *less* believeable?

KC, I'm pretty sure there's a moral alignment between us in these issues, so I'm totally quoting you upthread in a "yes, and..." capacity. I've just worked in social care networks that are highly sensitive to information crime and negligence to the point of criminal, so my radar may be calibrated with all of that in mind.

In all fairness, that is also part of the problem.

If it happened again after it's been addressed the first time... That's when people would likely be fired for something. Or at the very least put on some sort of improvement plan or write up.

It *did* happen twice, and is evidenced in Yoshua's documentation.

There wasn't nothing, since, like, he did acknowledge wrongdoing. But the situation demanded more.

But yes, agreed.

That there has been nothing in years until any pressure is applied tells us a great deal.

That Paizo feels that somebody who is willing to abuse data security is worthy to stand as their president years later tells us a lot more.

There wasn't nothing, since, like, he did acknowledge wrongdoing. But the situation demanded more. At the very least, an up-front post explaining why it was wrong, fully and deeply apologizing, and promising to do better. I can fully believe it was a rookie screwup - he'd only been president for five months, the situation was hectic, and Paizo has often been pretty informal when engaging with posters - but it was a serious mistake to make.

Catulle wrote:

But we also know there will be *absolute silence* on any issue that matters from the likes of the affiliates - from the Glass Cannon, from Find the Path. And any action must involve them as well until they're willing to stand up for the values they claim.

And that wrecks me. It's hard to reconcile, but they're supporting the status quo and benefiting away from it. "No" to participation in the structure is also "no" to participation with affiliates, since the money talks.

I'm pretty sure if these companies don't do business with Paizo, they cease to exist. The TTRPG industry is stupid fragile. It always has been. That's not to say there's no expectations for accountability, but they have to tread pretty lightly.

I believe it's technically called subinfeudation.

But we also know there will be *absolute silence* on any issue that matters from the likes of the affiliates - from the Glass Cannon, from Find the Path. And any action must involve them as well until they're willing to stand up for the values they claim.

And that wrecks me. It's hard to reconcile, but they're supporting the status quo and benefiting away from it. "No" to participation in the structure is also "no" to participation with affiliates, since the money talks.

Steve Geddes wrote:

Also exasperated, I suspect. The Ninja Division fiasco is not an easy thing to deal with.

Obviously, I don't think it's okay to dig out a user's name they've chosen to keep secret and publish it on the website, even if you are exasperated. But that part, in particular, isn't a regular, business-as-usual event, in my opinion.

It needs addressing, but it's different from claims of long-running discrimination and poor working conditions.

EDIT: In my mind, anyhow. I appreciate everyone has their own boundaries and events that are a bridge too far. If that's yours I'm certainly not trying to talk anyone out of it.

No argument there, and for sure I care more about other issues than that one, but this is *indisputable* malfeasance and yet... silence.

And to be clear, not a one-off scenario. That's from the very top of the company, and there has never been any consequence that matters in regard to it. It's pretty plain.

Also exasperated, I suspect. The Ninja Division fiasco is not an easy thing to deal with.

Obviously, I don't think it's okay to dig out a user's name they've chosen to keep secret and publish it on the website, even if you are exasperated. But that part, in particular, isn't a regular, business-as-usual event, in my opinion.

It needs addressing, but it's different from claims of long-running discrimination and poor working conditions.

EDIT: In my mind, anyhow. I appreciate everyone has their own boundaries and events that are a bridge too far. If that's yours I'm certainly not trying to talk anyone out of it.

No argument there, and for sure I care more about other issues than that one, but this is *indisputable* malfeasance and yet... silence.

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*

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.

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.

Catulle wrote:

As an afterthought that really shouldn't be after- I'd like to extend my thanks to our trans comrades for eating a lot of the aggro on this; while I'm a cis white dude, my partner is trans-NB and making the world better space for them is a lot of what motivates me. I just wish you folks didn't end up carrying so much of the burden.

It means a lot that someone acknowledges that - having to deal with people coming out of the woodwork to debate our existence every time something happens is really exhausting.

It's miserably unfair, innit? :(

As an afterthought that really shouldn't be after- I'd like to extend my thanks to our trans comrades for eating a lot of the aggro on this; while I'm a cis white dude, my partner is trans-NB and making the world better space for them is a lot of what motivates me. I just wish you folks didn't end up carrying so much of the burden.

Also, Al Franken resigned in a rare display of integrity. As should anyone in a position of power who abused that power. If only there were more like him, says I.