This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
June 22 2020, PCGamer - Chris Avellone accused of sexual misconduct by multiple women
June 29 2021, PCGamer - Chris Avellone files libel suit over last year's sexual misconduct allegations
March 25 2023, Chris Avellone's blog - JOINT STATEMENT FROM KARISSA BARROWS, KELLY BRISTOL, AND CHRIS AVELLONE
March 25 2023, PCGamer - crickets
March 25 2023, Kotaku - crickets
It's remarkable that rpgcodex had the coverage that aged best.
Erik Kain working his beat as a based games journalist as well.
I'm not sure what more to add to this that hasn't already been said. Mostly I felt like summing up the entire event from primary sources for posterity and clarity, so that it's obvious who the liars are, and who the good faith actors are.
Christ.
It's good to know he didn't actually do it. Apparently any of it. And that justice, ultimately, was served.
Not so good that it took two years and a "seven figure" lawsuit to clear his name. I can hope that the relevant outlets get around to their mea culpa, but like you, I am not optimistic.
Justice delayed is justice denied, and anyway he's still cancelled and will still be known for the accusations. We already see people here in this thread rationalizing away the retraction.
TBH I don't even know why people settle like this. The damage is done, you should do as much damage to them as possible.
It's especially inexplicable imo in cases like Johnny Depp's. Avellone might have wanted to avoid a public and embarrassing trial about his sex life. Depp had basically exposed everything anyway.
Why settle with Heard unless she full retracted everything in public?
What more would he get from a full victory in court? I doubt the women have substantial assets to seize, they've admitted to fabricating the original claims. A judgment in civil court isn't going to convince anyone not also convinced by the settlement statement.
I suppose if you really wanted to release a bunch of embarrassing evidence about one side, fighting to the end might help but there is always some uncertainty around the jury so I'd imagine it's tough to pass up an offer that gives 80% of what you were claimed as damages.
More options
Context Copy link
Because that sort of lawsuit is probably terrible and stressful to go through and he wanted it over?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link