Well, that was a long read since my last post...
Well it's not like the government is forcing people to go back and change history. Any changes that have been done to someone's own personal history it's been of their own accord. Besides why is it such a big deal if someone changes the pronouns of an old article? It's one thing if they're trying to erase information or give out false info, but if it's just changing an he to she what's the deal? You can even leave an little editor's note explaining the change. Not trying to be an jerk, just trying to see where you're coming from.
Sry for the late response: i was just wondering, if there is a reason that someone is doing this,
is it because it ethically should be, or because they like to do it.
in other words: if it is something that should be generally considered good practice,
or a "if you want to" thing, and where the the lines are for the ethical good practice.
In my personal view:
you cant expect to change 5000 old tweets from one account,
especially without the tool to do so in on swoop,
but you can expect to change a profile, or an article, especially if the content is still fresh.
Changing all former forum posts for me falls in the first category,
which doesn't mean that i have a problem if someone has the time to change all the posts.
"You can even leave an little editor's note explaining the change" Would be my preferred
practice if someone wants to chance all mentions,
but i think you could argue that that directs the focus on the fact that there was a coming out,
which would be counterproductive to the edit?
and no, it has nothing to do with enforcing it thru law. And if someone wants to do it,
all freedom to him. Ironically, my last job was not far away from auditing and
versioning, ...
So no, i didn't had a Problem with the practice, i tried to understand the ethics and reasoning behind it =)
The document was just a collection of people's experiences and thoughts...there's no ranking of severity - implied or otherwise - just a document listing them all to be read as a better reference point than Twitter and it's branching comment threads. The "lesser" stories aren't downplaying anything, it's not a competition about who got fucked over the most.
Other comments calling it whining, and talking about how it happens in other workplaces...so? That doesn't make the treatment any better, it's shitty wherever and whenever it happens. Who sees this kind of thing and starts calling people "whiners" for daring to not be happy with their history at a workplace? The fuck guys?...come on. Hope the people you're close to don't do the same with you.
"Ohhh man, had a shitty day at work today..."
"Quit whining! Did they fire you? Murder you? Then shut up and deal with it".
That'd suck, right?
You either misunderstood my point or are strawmening me here.
I never said that these practices are OK, or that this is a contest.
i just found it weird, that people reacted to these smaller points
as strong as to the sexual allegations, extortionist tactics and illegal
practices (like the contract that Liz had to sign, AFTER she hurt herself),
as if people see these on the same level as just being an asshole.
When people around me had problems with abusive situations, i try to encourage them to try
muster up the courage and end the relationship, irrelevant if it was a friendship, a relationship or a job.
in 99% of the time it's not wort it. In the other parts, you get more out of it,
than you lose thru it. I would understand they're points more,
if CA was actively promoting them. No, no employer should be this shitty.
That's why i put whining under parenthesis, because it is whining.
but with a absolute solid reason, assholes in the management.
And they needed people that encouraged them to reassess if it is worth it,
or if they should just abandon the channel.
But is is as bad as being hurt and then being forced to sign a contract
that you cant sue them and they don't need to pay you or your medical bills?
tats physical AND physical abuse in my book, and illegal, in contrast to the other stuff.
(but still not an excuse for the rest of their practices!)
Use masculine pronouns- I went into this in the previous thread, but tldr: you should use the "new" pronouns retroactively.
I have always been really iffy on Jake- he acts really self-righteous and abrasive a lot of the time, and treats himself as an authority on a lot of media he really isn't an authority on, not based on his background.
Also, he has this weirdly consistent hatred for media popular with queer women (Utena, RWBY, Steven Universe, The Legend of Korra)
I get the feeling he is, because in a previous tweet he said that he had more grievances with other producers, and that he'd get around to talking about it eventually. So I get the feeling this is it.
He had/has a problem with korra? well, the show has its problems,...
but even with them its one of the best adventure animates series,
so ...he has bad taste if that's true =P
(but i liked his contributions in crossovers, hat a unique screen presence)
I remember when Brad raised $50k for Jesus Bro and then it came out and it still looked like the same amateur stuff they have always produced.
I have seen mumblecore thats produced on the most shoestring of budgets look like it wasn't made by a bunch of nerds out of their dad's garage.
In their defense, even mumblecore can cost. hell, most "indie" movies you see
on festivals cost hundreds of thousand $ , and some even cost 1-10 Million.
Catering (hehe), Locations, licensing.
It was clear from the beginning what they wanted to do,
the costs were not exorbitant (50k is a lot, but not a fortune)
and there were kickstarter rewards that needed to be produced (dvds mainly).
Not the best or modest production, but not a scam.
(The gameshow of channel awesome on the other hand... yeah, that was a disaster and a scam in the end)
Fredrik Knudsen is a voice actor in a web series I really love, so it concerns me that he's apparently pro-GG, or at least more sympathetic to them than is healthy.
What? really? I just a view weeks ago found him, and liked his content.
From were do you have this information?
Since people here started to throw stuff around with way less foundation than at the beginning,
i don't want to throw someone for false information under the bus.
------------------------------------------
On the actual situation:
Its a s**tfest.
Sure, some laundry on the contributor will/has come out, they are all still people,
and people have bad days, or not so great moments.
But tats not the point.
And the mass attacks are also not what the point was.
Lindsay is probably right in that the halfhearted excuse was the last straw,
but it has become so dirty because the interned looooves drama and witch hunts.
Tat's sad, and I'm sorry for the other contributors that got caught in the storm.
