Draginol Draginol

The Internet isn’t real life

The Internet isn’t real life

First off, I want to thank all the people who have written their kind words of support these past few days.

I wish I could say this is the first time we’ve had to deal with a frivolous lawsuit and I wish I could say it was the last. It happens. It’s business. The only difference here is that one party doesn’t normally leak this sort of thing out to get press coverage.

It is amazing how many people will look at a bunch of unsubstantiated allegations and assume they’re true or assume that they are seeing even a tiny fraction of the full story.  I know I’m somewhat guilty of this since I have often taken the view “where there’s smoke, there’s fire”.

The emails I get often ask me how I “deal” with some of the vile and ignorant things that have been tweeted to me or said.  The answer is, you can’t take that sort of thing personally.  They’re reacting to drama they’re reading without really thinking any of it through.

I’ve been online for almost 30 years now – since Commodore 64 BBS days. It is extremely easy for someone to make things up and pass them off as fact.  I once got forwarded a claim by someone who said that we made female units in War of Magic weaker than males (they’re identical other than graphics).  But someone makes something up, it gets past on and it eventually becomes fact.

Heck, every time I go over to BluesNews.com, there’s some guy who insists I’m a Glenn Beck fan, a show I’ve never even watched. That’s why it is important to remember that the Internet isn’t real life.  That is why I’ve told my younger friends to be wary of taking their various virtual communities too seriously. It isn’t a replacement for personal relationships with people in real life.

When you are interacting with hateful people, don’t think of them as the norm. And while you can try to fathom where all that hate comes from, it’s ultimately irrelevant. People like that are always hating something. The phrase “haters are going to hate” is a truism. There are people out there who are miserable and there always will be.

There will always be people who will read unsubstantiated allegations, even ones that have direct contrary evidence, and still believe it because they have an inherent need to hate something or someone.  You can’t take those people personally. They’re facing an issue that you can never cure.

As someone who has had the opportunity to start their own business, literally from their dorm room, and build it up over many years, I’ve gotten to see this sort of thing ebb and flow.  My advice to those who have been tempted to lash back at these people who are filled with hate is to just ignore them. You might as well go out and yell at the rain.  You can’t change them. Only they can address whatever it is inside of them that makes them so ready to hate people they’ve never met (whether that be some Internet geek or a politician or celebrity).

The thing to remember is this: There is something fundamentally wrong with someone who is prepared to hate someone they've never even met. There's no point worrying about them.

108,868 views 68 replies
Reply #26 Top

On the Internet. Everyone is a lawyer except when they call tek support. Then they're an IT professional with decades exp.

Reply #27 Top

Wikipedia and google have made experts out of everyone overnight. They have replaced good old-fashioned exerience and common sense.

Reply #28 Top

Quoting Henry_Morgan, reply 26
I love all the armchair lawyers. I talked to my dad's cousin's friend's aunt's neighbor who knows a lawyer and he told me that so and so will be in trouble. Even if you are a lawyer, you aren't involved personally in the matter so you don't know jack.

I had a neighbour of one of my clients state "I am going to oppose anything you propose to build....I know my rights...I am a Lawyer" ....to which my client responded [I couldn't...it's Professionally inappropriate] "yes, but are you a good one?"

 

Quoting TheJaker, reply 27
On the Internet. Everyone is a lawyer except when they call tek support. Then they're an IT professional with decades exp.

You forgot also that every 16 year old girl on IRC is a 250lb trucker called Bubba and every 12 year old boy is an undercover FBI agent...;)

Reply #29 Top

"I may make ridiculous, disgusting, and sexist jokes, but I draw the line at you telling me that my jokes are ridiculous, disgusting, and sexist!" - Brad

Reply #30 Top

Quoting Swiss, reply 31
"I may make ridiculous, disgusting, and sexist jokes, but I draw the line at you telling me that my jokes are ridiculous, disgusting, and sexist!" - Brad

That's a quote I'm not familiar with.

However, but let's imagine someone used a murderer, like say Lenin, as their Internet avatar (hypothetically of course). And someone called them out on it and said, "I find it extremely sexist, vulgar and inappropriate for you have a disgusting avatar like that and that you must change it."

Now, I suspect a lot of people would say, "What the hell gives you the right to tell me what my avatar is?"

But let's assume you don't. Let's assume you say "Oh, I apologize, I'll change it, I didn't mean to offend you."  

But then they also say "And in addition, you do a lot of other, unspecified, stuff I similarly find offensive and you must change that."

Now, obviously I'm just giving you a hard time. But do you see how easy it can be for someone to claim offense when they don't even specify what they're offended about? I think a lot of people would be tempted to tell them to pound sand.

That's where context matters. 

 

 

Reply #31 Top

Re: Title

 

There are many of us that would say "Life isn't real Internet." I think neither of them really compare to the nomena we loosely base life and internet off of.

Reply #32 Top

Quoting Frogboy, reply 32

Quoting Swiss Knight, reply 31"I may make ridiculous, disgusting, and sexist jokes, but I draw the line at you telling me that my jokes are ridiculous, disgusting, and sexist!" - Brad

That's a quote I'm not familiar with.

However, but let's imagine someone used a murderer, like say Lenin, as their Internet avatar (hypothetically of course). And someone called them out on it and said, "I find it extremely sexist, vulgar and inappropriate for you have a disgusting avatar like that and that you must change it."

Now, I suspect a lot of people would say, "What the hell gives you the right to tell me what my avatar is?"

But let's assume you don't. Let's assume you say "Oh, I apologize, I'll change it, I didn't mean to offend you."  

But then they also say "And in addition, you do a lot of other, unspecified, stuff I similarly find offensive and you must change that."

Now, obviously I'm just giving you a hard time. But do you see how easy it can be for someone to claim offense when they don't even specify what they're offended about? I think a lot of people would be tempted to tell them to pound sand.

That's where context matters. 

 

the difference is lenin killed a bunch of capitalists and your conduct couldn't possibly make it any more evident that he did the right thing

i bet you also get really mad you can't say racial slurs you enormous child

Reply #33 Top

Someone adcocates murder and fails to imagine how that might be offensive.

I think you should go away for awhile and grow up.

Reply #34 Top

i hope to live in a world where people like brad wardell are subjected to harassing emails about whether they've been tortured before but i dont think theyd put computers in gulags

Reply #35 Top

The Internet should have a minimum age limit.

Reply #36 Top

Before wishing death or torture on people they should probably remember that this is a moderated forum. 

Reply #37 Top

Quoting Jafo, reply 36
The Internet should have a minimum age limit.

 

 

IQ as well..

 

Reply #38 Top

Quoting Frogboy, reply 37
Before wishing death or torture on people they should probably remember that this is a moderated forum. 

Perhaps they ARE aware...but are related to the species 'Lemming'...;)

Reply #39 Top

I find it interesting that it seems really only 2 people know the actual truth of the matter, but folks who are totally uninvolved are so quick to pass judgement and wish harm on another. 

Reply #40 Top

Quoting Nasarog, reply 20
Yup. I doubt most of the people attacking Brad actually read the document.

Here here.  All trolls aside, I hope the truth prevails.

Reply #41 Top

I'm curious to know if you agree or dispute (I'm trying hard to come up with neutral words for this which don't sound like I'm supposing any conclusion) the email the Kotaku article quotes as from you, or perhaps if you would change the phrasing somewhat.  If you take that email as phrased, then you have called yourself sexist (the text given says that about you, not simply the jokes that you make). I have to say, my estimate of the probability that a workplace run by someone who is openly sexist is welcoming to a woman they employ is rather low.

Reply #42 Top

Having read all the documents last night (it took sometime ;) ), if I were this individual's current employer she would be out of a job first thing Monday - I'd also be watching my back.

All work places need to have a high standard of professional conduct. Where the line is drawn is part of how formal/informal a workplace is, within minimum standards of professional conduct which should be accepted everywhere. This standard of conduct applies to the employer and employee equally.

People who know me, know I have a wicked sense of humour at times (step forward all you victims, hehe). However, I work in a college. I do not make jokes or comments of any kind; it has been known for people to appear in front of HR for what most people would consider to be normal banter ;) My previous employer was in manufacturing and some of our 'shop floor' ladies had the kind of crudeness to make most of you cringe - a different environment entirely.

Sadly, when it comes to the internet, there isn't any kind of professional conduct at all. However, those of you wishing to troll or display ignorance, please remember everything on the internet is visible to everyone and you cannot take it back.

Reply #43 Top

I'm glad that our legal system is so wonderful, and that justice will prevail in all cases, and that the amount of money you're able to pour into a lawsuit will have nothing to do with the outcome in the end.

Reply #44 Top

You didn't get to my point, or answer my question, though. I'm not asking about what someone else called you or said about you; I'm asking about something you said about yourself. I wanted to know (and still want to know) if you really do view yourself or describe yourself as sexist.

Reply #45 Top

Quoting JVTruman, reply 47
You didn't get to my point, or answer my question, though. I'm not asking about what someone else called you or said about you; I'm asking about something you said about yourself. I wanted to know (and still want to know) if you really do view yourself or describe yourself as sexist.

I don't.  And see, this is where the "reporting" really fails. Because all those documents were there. Remember, this whole thing, including our case against her (it's total BS to pretend that a change in venue is the same as us waiting two years to file charges against her, we filed charges against her almost 2 years ago).

IF they wanted to have a non-sensational story, they could have quoted from the various documents where I and every witness named are asked that very question to which the answer is: NO.   

All of that information is available in the public now. No, I'm not a sexist, vulgar, etc. person. That's why context matters.  It is up to the accuser to then say "Well, I then complained about specific incident X, Y, and Z and they did nothing to rectify it."  But there's no assertion like that.  Instead, we get a bunch of wild allegations in which *every* witness, including her "Best friend" said didn't happen.

But, even though the docs are there, that's not what gets reported. Consider that next time you see some sensational headline. And most people will fixate on some snippet without any context.

I, and Stardock, don't care what sex, race, nationality, or sexual orientation you are. We only care whether you can do the job.  I believe it's one of the big reasons we've been so successful over the years.  We're one of the oldest software studios around (20 years next year since incorporation).  If we didn't have such a good environment, we wouldn't be able to attract and keep world class talent. But, obviously, a hater is incapable of making that obvious logical conclusion.

 

Reply #46 Top

Hi Brad, I nearly posted on here in response to Truman earlier (these haters are so friggin dense) but I held off because you're right about it being futile - haters gonna hate.

 

I hope this woman doesn't get a dime off you and I reckon most of her accusations will fold quickly under scrutiny and cross-examination. However isnt she also going to accuse you of failing to act on her harassment complaints once she raised them? I don't know how it works in the States but here in the UK there has to be investigations etc if someone makes a harassment complaint. Anyway I wish you all the best on this

Reply #47 Top

I wish they had loser pay laws here. That would shut down this kind of nonsense in a hurry.

I was looking at the Kotaku article (which has the court filings she gave them - which, astonishingly, have a lot of personal information about  witnesses -- if I had done this, the haters would be all over me but I'm sure she'll get a pass).

Anyway, there's enough evidence there to make it pretty obvious that her allegations are ridiculous. The testimony comes from her friends. And I don't even mean former friends, I mean, people who are still her friends. Today.  Page after page of affadavits from witnesses who say her claims are false.

But these people aren't interested in facts. They just want to hate someone.

Here's an example from one of HER friends who testified, under oath. And I'm just grabbing this from the Kotaku article. It's not stuff we provided.

 

And on..and on.  In this person's case, she was his boss. They're still friends.  Today. Every single one of her subordinates and every single one of her friends has responded like this - even ones who don't work at Stardock and have no relationship with me one way or the other. 

But the haters will grasp on to some private email I sent to my sister-in-law (my wife's sister) where I huffed about taking my ball and going home and proof I'm nuts. As if most people never get mad and say things privately they don't mean.

But that's what makes these people so screwed up. They'll feign false concern that I shouldn't point this stuff out in public (god I've heard that so many times over the years from people who have no idea what they're talking about). But what they really hate is having the obvious pointed out -she made a bunch of baseless accusations and all her witnesses say the same thing - it's bullshit.

Someone who was genuinely interested -- and I mean genuinely, could go to the Kotaku article and read through all her allegations (Which sound horrific) but then read all the witness testimony - from her friends - that objects to it.  The only person who was not a witness btw, but the only person who has given her any support was Phil Madis. Not a friend of mine but a very good friend of hers. And long before he provided any testimony, his name had come up:

And keep in mind, it's not like we are asking anyone to take sides. Just withhold judgment. But it tells you something when someone admits that the existence of this case automatically makes them "angry". Angry enough to start and participate in a thread in which they call someone names or wish death on them or what have you.  

And BTW, the above exerpt, from the Kotaku article again, was made by another one of her *current* friends.  

And so it goes.  This isn't even a close call. So yea, since we won't settle it, I'm pretty comfortable talking about what what is actually *publicly* filed (our lawyers would kill me if I divulged anything beyond what is in the documents they put up -- or at least laugh all the way to the bank with all the extra legal expenses it would cause <g>).

Reply #48 Top

I think that there is an obvious trend towards more publicity in our lives. Sometimes its involuntary, such as legal documents which used to be fairly obscure when they existed in paperwork and are now easily searchable when put in an electronic format. Advertising firms and other companies are collecting vast sums of information about us that could easily be turned into a life-long profile. We are voluntarily posting huge amounts of information such as pictures, location data, videos, as well as our opinions and life stories online.

 

We are becoming so reliant on the Internet for communication and forming our identities that less and less people will be living off the grid as we go into the future. Some think that once everyone has their closeted skeletons thrust into plain view we as a society will become more accepting and less judgmental. Others think that we will have an apathetic society where individuals are preyed upon on a daily basis by hackers, government agents, or corporations seeking to shape our behavior.  

 

Either way, it seems to me that participation will increase as more products and services are created. There is just too much value for people to wall themselves off.

 

Even though I grew up alongside the Internet and understand it really well, there are people being born who have a much stronger attachment to it than any of us do. For them, the Internet might be just as real as anything that happens offline.

Reply #49 Top

You know, I agree with the specific case of this as it relates to Stardock's current legal dispute. But I do think that "They hate because they're haters, so I don't need to listen to them" is a dangerous viewpoint to take. There are certainly people like that, but there are also people with legitimate criticisms that might merely be wrapped in vitriol for whatever reason, be it (sub)cultural or due to emotion. I feel it's important to be careful that you don't ignore good advice when you think you're disregarding pointless hate.

Reply #50 Top

Quoting Cruxador, reply 50
You know, I agree with the specific case of this as it relates to Stardock's current legal dispute. But I do think that "They hate because they're haters, so I don't need to listen to them" is a dangerous viewpoint to take. There are certainly people like that, but there are also people with legitimate criticisms that might merely be wrapped in vitriol for whatever reason, be it (sub)cultural or due to emotion. I feel it's important to be careful that you don't ignore good advice when you think you're disregarding pointless hate.

I agree wi you. Luckily, if you look at a couple of the haters who volunteered to serve as examples, they make it pretty obvious.

A general rule of thumb I use: if you hope a total stranger dies or gets tortured, you might be a hater. ;)