-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nick Robinson (Polygon) answers to sexual harassment allegations, leaves Polygon
- Thread starter LordKano
- Start date
the compilation has been updated.
People in the biz or knew him still have their tweets up. I'm not ready to put much stock in the redditor yet though.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CoolGamesI...y_people_close_to_nick_arent_accepting_nicks/
People in the biz or knew him still have their tweets up. I'm not ready to put much stock in the redditor yet though.
https://www.reddit.com/r/CoolGamesI...y_people_close_to_nick_arent_accepting_nicks/
RazielCuts
Member
Is this the world's most savage anime-avatars-are-a-red-flag joke? I only watched like forty seconds.
Bobo Dakes
Member
I think they were referring to the tweets that were in response to the Overcooked thing.
Yearsoflurking
Member
Sarcastic comment wasn't needed. The post is full of random redditor tweets who i assume is accurate .it's huge compilation of internet post in a detective like manner. It's creepy and scary to me. Internet isn't truly anonymous at all.
RumbleHumble
Banned
Got it! I think I misunderstood your initial question. I frankly don't have an answer as to whether Austin would've been able to report this to Polygon via confidential means. He very possibly could have. And you are totally correct as to hiring and firing policies. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if someone could make a lawsuit out of that for tortious interference with a business relationship, so that might be a motivation as to why that wasn't done.
jellies_two
Member
No I just feel his aw shucks I am shy but cute attitude is working the audience of females by conscious choice. You know trump and his when you get famous they let you do anything? I think he was aware of that for a while.
RumbleHumble
Banned
Pretty much. The whole damn thing is a fucking mess, no way around it. I'm glad that Nick has to deal with some consequences now, but I don't have a whole lot of faith that there isn't more of this shit out there.
ClayKavalier
Banned
I'm surprised Griffin hasn't said anything more, he and his brothers seem so conscious of creating a welcome environment on their other podcasts and Griffin seems to be one of Nick's more common collaborators.
RumbleHumble
Banned
Why are you assuming he's talking about you? Also why are you assuming what he's saying has anything to do with a supposed echo chamber if he is?
RumbleHumble
Banned
Gies tweeted about how he wasn't allowed to say anything even though he really wanted to after Nick's apology was released. And he doesn't even work there anymore. I don't see how Griffin or Justin can say anything without breaking some non-disclosure agreement likely already in place if Geis can't talk.
Sorry, that's what I meant.
https://twitter.com/bloodyhoney_/status/893257429378621440
That's Sidney Fussel, a freelance writer. He's definitely friends with Gita and probably others affected. Key difference from Hannibal Burress outing Cosby.
I think Gies last day is technically the 15th, but you're right either way. Their hands are probably tied on this.
RazielCuts
Member
That was my point? Internet detective is how it pans out, which is probably best for everyone. As of seeing the original thread with the OP, I think a lot of people were in the dark with what was posted before passing 'judgement.' As we so freely do without having the full picture. (Which obviously as a bystander we will probably never have.)
I didn't see any other way this would happen for, Nick, just yeah. Echoing his reponse, although not appreciated by all. The line between internet persona and real life person has definitely blurred. Especially when you become that 'big.' How you conduct yourself online can definitely have an effect to your meatspace life and I think this is a good bell to remind everyone of that. I've never been that way, but the anonymity the internet can afford people shoudnt be thunk as an easy pass to be a creep, just because it's 'virtual.'
Why are you assuming that I was assuming he was talking to me? I just like discourse. When people aim to shut it down with weak thoughtless posts, sometimes I decide to comment on it. If you know what an echo chamber refers to, I think you can get it.
ClayKavalier
Banned
Oh damn, I hadn't heard that. Aren't Gies and Justin two of the more powerful decision makers at Polygon? Did Chris Grant decide no one should make statement or do lawyers dictate all that?
I kind of doubt that though, why would it be a legal issue?
No legal complaints have been filed by victims. Anyone adjacent to this that comments too specifically or in the capacity of the job they do (i.e. Patrick's report for Waypoint) needs to tread lightly so as not to open themselves up to a potential defamation suit, I'd think.
mr teaspoon
Member
Turned it off at 0:32 and somehow hate him even more now. Thank you.
RumbleHumble
Banned
There's the possibility of a defamation/tortious interference with a business relationship on Nick's end and a possibility of a vicarious liability suit on the part of Nick's victims. Which means a whole lot of not being allowed to say anything without opening yourself up to a whole lot of headache and potential legal fees. That's not to justify the silence, but to explain why a person should expect it.
RumbleHumble
Banned
Fair point. I have a knee-jerk gag reflex to seeing the word echo-chamber because I find it equally dismissive to actual discourse so I understand how you feel.
ClayKavalier
Banned
Yeah, I wondered if it was to stay safe from a potential defamation suit, but there's been so many accusations that Nick would have to be pretty fucking bold to try that.
Vicarious liability on the part of people he's hurt like Rumble said above doesn't make sense to me, seems like people like Gies and Griffin should be able to condemn his actions without naming specific people he affected.
Absolutely. Thanks, this is in better terms than I could put it.
RumbleHumble
Banned
If there's a chance Polygon knew or had reason to know that Nick engaged in this behavior while working as a representative of Polygon, there's grounds for a summons and complaint on vicarious liability by the victims as against Polygon/Vox. Not saying they'd win, just saying there's a chance. Any public admission by employees or former employees as to Nick's behavior while they worked with Nick at Polygon could be used against Polygon and Vox in a suit. It's not that the suit would be successful, but it's to prevent the chances of a suit coming even at all.
So not to go against your point (they are friends with Gita; a lot of the people whose tweets started this are friends), but at the risk of making an ass of myself: I don't think that's Sidney Fussell! I mean, beyond their name, I've followed them for a while and they're a game dev, not a writer.
It looks like there's a Sidney Fussell using @sidneyfussell that writes at Gizmodo that you might be confusing them with.
Nose Master
Member
So, there's no way that Klepek story ever sees the light of day now, hey? Scoops working for someone as big as Vice kind of sucks, really.
RumbleHumble
Banned
It's possible, but if it does happen, we probably won't see it for a while.
We'll probably hear what's up with it if he's on Waypoint Radio on Monday.
ElBoxyBrown
Banned
Idk. Like, I would say men instead of boys in an opposite situation. Just trying to correct myself on how I say certain words.
I don't see myself as pussyfooting around the issue at all. I've said what I needed to said about this whole thing.
ClayKavalier
Banned
I see, makes sense.
Social media personalities are typically so outspoken it's odd seeing everyone clam up about something like this. I wonder if Gies will speak out once there's more distance between him and Polygon.
Bobo Dakes
Member
What groundbreaking tweet are you expecting from Gies exactly?
what story?
RumbleHumble
Banned
Klepek said he was working on a story covering the whole scandal, but it was heavily implied that publishing it is delayed indefinitely for a number of reasons in the Waypoint Radio episode from Monday.
He was working on a story about the situation and Nick's past "slides" into dms.
Incandenza
Banned
Patrick was missing from the Waypoint Radio today because he was "heads down on a story", which makes me think it ain't dead yet.
Oh, huh! I'd just seen that he and Austin were out and hadn't listened yet. That might be a good sign then?
You should add "I am not a lawyer" to your posts.
Far as I'm concerned, Nick did apologize for his crass flirting, which yes, is a form of sexual harassment. I highly doubt that fact is lost on him after the internet dogpiled on him this week.
I can understand why some in this thread find his response disingenuous, he did stop short of directly spelling it out as sexual harassment, but consider for a moment what that label can mean. Not how it applies here (and it does), but what actions "sexual harassment" or "sexual predator" are most frequently associated with. Just uttering those words lead people to believe the worst of the worst happened. Nick's actions were bad in their own right, but I don't blame him for avoiding that language. Similarly, it's in his best interest to keep it light on the details.
If you were hoping Nick would write an apology that would, in writing, cement his record for life as a sexual predator and list off a litamy of his wrong-doings, then perhaps it's time to re-read the Scarlet Letter for a little perspective. Nick does owe these girls a further apology, but it should not have to be another public spectical. People calling for more to scrutinize are honestly a little sick in their own way. Let everyone directly involved take it from here.
I can understand why some in this thread find his response disingenuous, he did stop short of directly spelling it out as sexual harassment, but consider for a moment what that label can mean. Not how it applies here (and it does), but what actions "sexual harassment" or "sexual predator" are most frequently associated with. Just uttering those words lead people to believe the worst of the worst happened. Nick's actions were bad in their own right, but I don't blame him for avoiding that language. Similarly, it's in his best interest to keep it light on the details.
If you were hoping Nick would write an apology that would, in writing, cement his record for life as a sexual predator and list off a litamy of his wrong-doings, then perhaps it's time to re-read the Scarlet Letter for a little perspective. Nick does owe these girls a further apology, but it should not have to be another public spectical. People calling for more to scrutinize are honestly a little sick in their own way. Let everyone directly involved take it from here.
I have a question.
As a result of all this, I've been introduced to the concept of "soft boy culture." It's still somewhat vague in my mind, but my understanding is that it describes a form of manipulation in which someone consciously distances themselves from toxic conceptions of masculinity in order to cover up their intention to exploit someone. Basically, the term reflects a double adaptation: the adaptation of predators to a new social environment, and the adaptation of potential victims to a new form of manipulation.
What I don't know is how Nick Robinson sparked the discussion around soft boy culture. Or rather, the screenshots and allegations I've seen make it counterintuitive for me to imagine Nick as "soft." Is it generally understood that this is how he approached most of his victims? Or is"soft boy" just how people are understanding the fact that a total nerd ended up being capable of this kind of manipulation and harassment?
I'm not asking for specifics on what Nick did - just trying to fully understand the conversation. Until ~10 minutes ago, the soft boy thing was totally foreign to me.
As a result of all this, I've been introduced to the concept of "soft boy culture." It's still somewhat vague in my mind, but my understanding is that it describes a form of manipulation in which someone consciously distances themselves from toxic conceptions of masculinity in order to cover up their intention to exploit someone. Basically, the term reflects a double adaptation: the adaptation of predators to a new social environment, and the adaptation of potential victims to a new form of manipulation.
What I don't know is how Nick Robinson sparked the discussion around soft boy culture. Or rather, the screenshots and allegations I've seen make it counterintuitive for me to imagine Nick as "soft." Is it generally understood that this is how he approached most of his victims? Or is"soft boy" just how people are understanding the fact that a total nerd ended up being capable of this kind of manipulation and harassment?
I'm not asking for specifics on what Nick did - just trying to fully understand the conversation. Until ~10 minutes ago, the soft boy thing was totally foreign to me.
Holy crap, I was almost going ask the same thing lol.
If soft boy is a negative term, why does Nick use it as his image?
Bobo Dakes
Member
People started to see through it, like when guys used to say "but I'm a nice guy, why do we always finish last".
"Nerds" are truly some of the angriest, most bitter assholes you will ever meet.
Random Human
They were trying to grab your prize. They work for the mercenary. The masked man.
.
OriginalPoe
Banned
Just curious, is this thread appropriate for discussing reactions from other industry people?
I'm not super familiar with it (hadn't heard of it before this stuff happened), but my sense is that it's not intentionally about manipulating women.
Seems originally its a concept or term to acknowledge rejection of traditional roles of masculinity. Perhaps because they feel these definitions of masculinity contribute to a patriachical society or is ultimately self-damaging.
So in a way, it might cause others to "lower their guard" around such individuals. As such, perhaps predators or manipulative types will try to use these labels, but my sense is that this is the exact opposite of the intended meaning.
It's the new "Nice Guy."
Polygonal_Sprite
Member
Pretty weak apology imo.
I'm sure he'll make far more money from his inevitable patreon and twitch / youtube channels than he was being paid at Polygon anyway and he'll be free to slide into as many dm's as he wants.
I'm sure he'll make far more money from his inevitable patreon and twitch / youtube channels than he was being paid at Polygon anyway and he'll be free to slide into as many dm's as he wants.
Ginger Hail
Member
The more I see people picking the apology apart, the less sincere it comes across.
A lot of people in the previous thread were saying that they liked Nick Robinson because he seemed like a "soft boy". Unless I'm confused. This is the first time I've heard the term.
There's a whole bunch of information on that padlet that I didn't know. It's kind of a pain to go through the whole thing, but I think it paints a pretty clear image, and makes it even more understandable why those closer to the women affected here don't buy the naive innocent act in the apology.
There's a whole bunch of information on that padlet that I didn't know. It's kind of a pain to go through the whole thing, but I think it paints a pretty clear image, and makes it even more understandable why those closer to the women affected here don't buy the naive innocent act in the apology.