
The Story of Why I Left Riot Games - jlward4th
http://barryhawkins.com/blog/posts/the-story-of-why-i-left-riot-games/
======
anonymousturtle
I work in sales, not gaming. Maybe there is harassment at Riot Games, however
sayings like "no doesn't necessarily mean no" is part of a sales mindset. It
is not condoning rape, it is saying that just because the customer says no
doesn't mean you should give up. Sales takes some persistence to see if you
can get them to say yes. I imagine that is what the recruiter was saying, that
just because a candidate says no, does not mean you should take it and give
up.

That does not mean you should "rape" them, which in this analogy would either
be forcing them to buy from you, or forcing them to work for you, without
consent. That is obviously not going to happen.

It just means that you need to keep trying to get to yes, because you're going
to hear no a lot, and some of those nos will later become yeses.

Just because you interpreted that saying as being related to rape doesn't make
it a bad saying. It likely just means you're unfamiliar with sales, and
reading something else into it. If you do a search for: no doesn't mean no,
you will find a ton of sales material on it. For example off the top of a
search:

[https://youtube.com/watch?v=gtyq6Lyt5Vc](https://youtube.com/watch?v=gtyq6Lyt5Vc)

[https://www.amazon.com/Doesnt-Always-Mean-Influencing-
Cooper...](https://www.amazon.com/Doesnt-Always-Mean-Influencing-
Cooperation/dp/0615515231)

~~~
autarch
I get what you're saying, but if someone says "the way you phrased that really
bothers me because it sounds like a rape joke", I think the best response is
to say "sorry, I didn't mean it that way, let's find a better way to phrase
that", not "no, it's not a rape joke and you shouldn't be upset."

Hearing "no doesn't necessarily mean no" as a play on "no means no" is not
some insane unreasonable interpretation, and "no means no" has been pretty
consistently used as an anti-rape slogan for ages.

And maybe that phrase has been used that way in sales for ages, but the
commonly accepted language has changed over time and will continue to change
in response to changes in culture.

~~~
corndoge
Responding as "sorry, I didn't mean it that way" if you really didn't mean it
that way requires you to say "sorry" and thus take responsibility for an
offense that was not committed. Obviously if you prefer to say it that way,
maybe because your personality is leaned towards the conflict-avoidance side,
sure. But not everybody wants to be held culpable for something they didn't do
and don't want to say it that way. If you really meant no harm, then you
shouldn't lose cred for simply responding "it wasn't a rape joke" and
expecting to be taken at your word.

~~~
Volundr
It actually doesn't. "I'm sorry your mother is sick", in no way claims
responsibility for making your mother sick. It simply shows empathy toward how
the other person is feeling.

Even if it did, communication is a two way street. You can't accept even the
slightest bit of responsibility for not considering how your words might
affect other people? I apologize when I bump into someone in the hallway.
Doesn't mean I was out to get them, or it's all my fault, just that I was part
of this interaction.

------
DataJunkie
This is a bit more general...

I worked there for a very short time as a consultant and I remember Barry. I
remember being astonished at some of the things I saw and heard at that
company and I am surprised it's not them getting the scrutiny and instead the
larger tech companies.

Working at Riot Games was like working in a frat house where you get paid, and
I mean many of the bad parts of living in a frat house. Of the places I've
worked, Riot had to have the lowest median age (early 20s), which probably
contributes to the problem. The guys could be assholes, but I fear that some
of the women, being young and this being their first job and an amazing
opportunity, get disillusioned into thinking that this behavior is normal in
industry and that is really sad.

I am surprised not more have spoken out. Riot (and other gaming companies, not
just Riot) has some of the bro-est culture out there and it's going to cost
them in a lawsuit, just give it time.

~~~
shriver
I think if you look at the incentives in that situation it's very
understandable to not speak out. If you're a good employee working at Riot and
you have a problem with the culture you have two options: Speak out or leave.
If you speak out it can be incredibly damaging, you'll almost certainly
destroy your career at riot because you'll be actively attacking people you
work with. You stand a good chance of getting a reputation in the industry.
The likelihood of changing the culture is microscopic - especially if you find
out it's the CEO providing the lead in this behaviour. And if you succeed?
Your career at Riot is still probably damaged, Riot's culture will be like any
of the many other companies you could work at. During the time you're fighting
for that change it's likely to be incredibly emotionally draining and you're
bound to lose some friends.

If you leave, you have literally none of those downsides, you've still got a
good career and you can go off to one of the many other companies that are
just as successful without those downsides.

So to speak up you need to be incredibly principled AND you have to have some
very deep stake in making THIS particular multinational corporation better. I
think it makes perfect sense not to speak out for the vast majority of people.

~~~
rectang
> _you have two options: Speak out or leave._

While I think it's understandable when people don't speak out, I don't agree
that those are the only two options. The small stuff Barry did is meaningful:

"My personal preference was to respond with clarifying language while
addressing them by their first name, and convey 'can we just get through the
conversation we need to have' non-verbally with my facial expressions and
gestures..."

Not everyone has to be a leader like Barry, and not everyone feels the same
degree of urgency about these issues. But to feel at peace with yourself, it's
worth it to at least not actively participate and perhaps to push (however
gently) in the right direction.

------
lucidone
It is imperative more members of tech organizations consciously decide to act
in ways that are respectful, inclusive and professional, such that
environments like the one described are no longer the norm.

Any leadership rejecting this is indicative of their inability to grow up and
be adults. We aren't in high school anymore.

~~~
simplysimple
It's pretty ridiculous to me that this even needs to be said. "We need to make
a conscious effort to be professional in a professional environment". What is
happening to our culture...

~~~
Barrin92
>What is happening to our culture..

In this case I feel it's a particularly bad combination of the environment of
a video game company and young male employees coming directly out of college,
which especially in the US seems to be daycare for adults.

No part of the pipeline seems to teach these individuals what it means to
behave professionally in a workplace environment, and often software companies
do indirectly promote it by purposefully mixing up private and work-life
(drinking at work, casual attitude, no hierarchies etc..)

As much as people lament corporate culture these days, I prefer it a great
deal to the arrangement described in the post.

~~~
mikekchar
Feeling like very much the old guy leaving a comment here, but I've been
shocked about behaviour of young employees before. When I was 40, I move to
Japan and taught English. This is after a good 20 years of working
professionally as a programmer. They sent a bunch of us English teachers to a
conference (at considerable expense to the tax payer). The night before the
conference a bunch of the younger people decided it was a good time for a
party and ended up drinking until the wee hours. The next day, the supervisor
was yelling at a group of them. Apparently they had decided to "call in sick".
Their main argument was that if they didn't feel up to going to work, then it
was their right to take the day off. You can imagine that this didn't go over
well with the supervisor :-)

I remember thinking that I'd never seen anything like this kind of behaviour
when I was young and first starting out -- well never mind that the startups I
worked at would never send new grads to a conference. That was a privilege
(and responsibility) for someone with more experience. But I remember thinking
that nobody would do that.

Since I've returned to working as a programmer, I've noticed this kind of
thing rearing its ugly head more and more. The idea of being a "professional"
has changed quite a bit. For one thing, there is a lot more money in the
profession and this has attracted a very different set of people to the
industry. Back when I first started out, if you said you were a computer
programmer, people kind of looked at you in pity. Now this is the "get rich
quick" job. People who would have previously entered into more normal
businesses with an aim to climbing the ladder into executive positions are
looking more and more at programming as a good entry point.

Not only that, but the rise of the internet has also given rise to the
programmer rock star. So not only money, but also fame is on the line. I think
especially at a well known game studio, people are lining up not for money,
but for status. This attracts a completely different sort of person than "Come
join our startup that's writing new accounting software for airlines". I think
that rock star attitude brings with it the rock star behaviour.

The thing is, I don't think this attitude is new to humanity. It's always been
around. Drinking yourself unconscious has always been a thing on sales
junkets. Rock star executives have always been doing incredibly inappropriate
things. Back in my day, women would choose programming jobs because it was one
of the few jobs where there _wasn 't_ a lot of discrimination and sexual
harassment. I knew lots of women who became programmers because they perceived
that the first glass ceiling (getting into management) was totally gone. When
I first started hearing that discrimination based on gender was a systemic
problem in IT, I couldn't believe it at first -- because it was not in the
organisations where I worked at that time.

I honestly believe that this is just an evening out in culture. In my day
quite a lot of people entering into university had never used a computer
before. Now _everybody_ is computer literate and they carry computers that are
vastly more powerful that I started with _in their pockets_. They grow up
playing video games with $100 million budgets and lead programmers/designers
that are practically house hold names. When they start out as programmers,
they read blog posts from people who have millions of followers and who
influence thousands of companies. It's an attractive job for normal people in
society. And, unfortunately, society still has a lot of problems to work
through.

~~~
taurath
> Since I've returned to working as a programmer, I've noticed this kind of
> thing rearing its ugly head more and more. The idea of being a
> "professional" has changed quite a bit.

I'd argue that especially in the culture of HN and startups that the term
"professional" only means your ability to interface between people in actual
lines of work. A "professional" programmer is more akin to "professional"
musician than a "professional" Dentist.

There's an overall lessening of professional employment almost everywhere - at
a certain point teachers would always have suits and tie's and parents would
have to dress up to go see them the same as they would a Judge or
Congressperson. Nowadays the only professionals anyone actually interfaces
with are doctors, and maybe lawyers.

------
rndmize
> So, when people would say things to the group like “the other team raped us
> because our mid kept jungling,” I would attempt to reflect back more
> appropriate language by saying back to them “so you’re saying your team lost
> because you weren’t working together.”

I've noticed this in my gaming group and in the gaming culture at large.
There's been this integration of much more sexual terms in the last three or
four years - "raped", "cucked", "my butthole", "gaping", "shoved down the
throat", etc. I feel like 10 years ago the words/phrases were less offensive -
"destroyed", "wrecked", "owned", "dumpstered", "get shit on", etc.

I'm not really sure why this is, but I'm not a fan of the change. It feels
like in the last half a decade stuff that used to be limited to the uglier
parts of the web has bled out across a much greater area and become more
accepted.

~~~
taurath
10 years ago it 12 year olds on xbox-live shouting as many overtly racist
terms as they had ever heard in their lives. Now thats generally going to get
you banned, at least. I don't honestly think its gotten worse. The stupid
thing is if you go and play League of Legends and say most of those sexual
terms you will be BANNED or at least muted for a week. And yet its cool to say
that in the office.

~~~
bigiain
Exactly. Some of those kids are now 22 year old "team leads" or "managers" or
"founders". And way too many of them haven't grown up at all.

------
klagermkii
While I'm not going to condone those kinds of comments in the workforce or
elsewhere, I'm not quite sure what the general justification is for putting
"rape analogies" on such a pedestal compared to other major crimes.

Murder - "That went so badly, we just got slaughtered in that meeting"

Rape - "If we aren't careful the competition's going to rape us"

Theft - "We need to put in a plan to steal their customers ASAP"

What throws me is all of those are Big Bad Things, especially murder, but I
don't feel like there would be anywhere nearly the same kind of pushback to
anything except making a rape analogy. Maybe a slavery analogy would do it as
well? People have gone through terrible experiences where someone they love
has been murdered etc, so I'm not sure it's just about the level of trauma it
can induce.

~~~
stone-monkey
I'd argue the difference is that rape is on a higher pedestal, simply because
it's always unacceptable.

Regarding the slaughter analogy: it's not explicitly about murder, but
killing. Slaughter doesn't apply only to humans, of course. Slaughter is
typically associated with the killing of animals for food, after all. The
difference between rape, killing, and stealing, en mi opinion, is society
still grapples with killing and thievery, for certain edge cases. There's no
such gray area for rape.

Stealing if you're starving isn't condoned, but people do have more sympathy
if you have extenuating circumstances. Murder is wrong, of course, but killing
people in self defense is understandable. Killing animals for sustenance is
okay. We need to eat or we'll die. Killing animals for pleasure is also okay.
I could cut out steaks/Popeyes/breakfast sausages from my diet, but I've
calculated the cost of a dead cow/chicken/pig is worth a nice meal.

There's no equivalent case in society where people find it defensible to rape.

~~~
simmanian
>Slaughter doesn't apply only to humans

Rape doesn't apply only to humans.

>Killing people in self defense is understandable

Nobody's thinking of self-defense when they say "we absolutely massacred
them."

I think arguing rape analogy is somehow worse than murder analogy because rape
is always unacceptable is self-deprecating. NOTHING should be black and white
in this world if you subscribe to the belief that murder is acceptable in some
situations.

~~~
stone-monkey
>Rape doesn't apply only to humans.

Yes, and society generally doesn't find it acceptable to rape animals, either,
which was my point. As a counterpoint, try to think of the most contrived
example where rape can somehow be justified. My argument is it doesn't exist
in western society, whereas this isn't the case for killing and stealing.

>>Nobody's thinking of self-defense when they say "we absolutely massacred
them."

My point is that there are other cases where the of killing people is
justifiable in some way. Self defense may not apply, but that phrase could be
used when both parties are complicit in the killing. Generally, you'd use the
above phrase in competitive events - that is, two parties fighting each other
and one side winning in a landslide. Same difference in warfare - what
separate it from murder is the complicity of both sides. Murder keeps getting
thrown out there, but again, the analogies are more in line with general
killing than murder.

~~~
simmanian
> Same difference in warfare - what separate it from murder is the complicity
> of both sides.

I'm a little shocked that you think warfare has two sides that are complicit
when in reality it's full of young clueless kids who don't know what they're
doing. Are you implying that soldiers are like UFC fighters on a ring? That
there's some competitive element to killing in war and that makes rape worse
than murder? I'm going to argue again that your argument is self-deprecating.

Rape happens a lot in war too, for strategic reasons. Are you going to argue
that rape in war is also competitive?

~~~
stone-monkey
>>Rape happens a lot in war too, for strategic reasons. Are you going to argue
that rape in war is also competitive?

I'm honestly baffled at how you came to any of these conclusions.

I don't condone war at all. I don't condone murder or rape either. Like I said
earlier, my point is that there are certain scenarios in which western society
rationalizes killing as acceptable. There is no equivalent for rape.

------
robinduckett
I applied for a job at Riot Games a few years back, after I came out of
hospital following my appendix bursting. I was still in pretty bad shape, and
my initial phone interview went poorly, mostly due to the fact that I couldn't
breathe properly as a result of a partially collapsed lung. The hiring guy was
particularly pushy, and didn't really take no for an answer, encouraging me to
take the phone interview anyway. That's when I decided not to bother. Probably
blacklisted from ever working there in future, but having read this article, I
know I definitely won't be wanting to anyway.

------
poisonarena
"So, when people would say things to the group like “the other team raped us
because our mid kept jungling,” I would attempt to reflect back more
appropriate language by saying back to them “so you’re saying your team lost
because you weren’t working together.” I can’t say that I think it had much
impact, but I figured this was the long game, and slow and steady would win
the race. Cultural change requires perseverance and consistency over a
prolonged period of time, right?"

As a Colombian guy, all these fuss over using certain words is really a
problem when there are no other problems to be solved.. When you are are lucky
to go to nice school, get paid lots of money, and work at a job in a really
fun environment, and really, compared to our standards a perfect life, when
you don't have problems, you create them.. If I tried to explain the type of
problems this guy is having working at Riot Games to my friends or colleagues
they would think it is absolutely ridiculous. Why would he work there if he
was not expecting that? I have played LoL and this is how people being
friendly talk to eachother, its not about hating women or something..

I wish I had problems like that.. You can't understand how hard it is for me
to comprehend leaving a place of work that seems like heaven because some
small language offends you..

~~~
xtracto
I know where you are coming from. I myself being from Mexico find the
"political correctness" trend happening in the USA quite interesting.

I used to work for a company that had HQ in California and offices down in
Mexico. The head of HR was horrified when she visited the offices in Mexico
and saw the interaction between colleagues... of particular interesting to her
was that _people were hugging each other!_. She instructed our Country Manager
to ask us not to hug each other. Of course everybody laughed when this was
mentioned during an internal office meeting.

It is the same problem as with the "Puto" chant of Mexicans during soccer
games. Sure, literaly it is a homophogic connocation, but in practice it is
used just to show animosity to the goalkeeper. It does not mean that 5000
people believe the male goalkeeper preffers to have sexual relationships with
other men... they don't care.

~~~
chickenfries
> Sure, literaly it is a homophogic connocation, but in practice it is used
> just to show animosity to the goalkeeper. It does not mean that 5000 people
> believe the male goalkeeper preffers to have sexual relationships with other
> men... they don't care.

I don't understand how you can say that "puto" has a homophobic connotation
but then say it's not homophobic. Your argument is the same as a child who
thinks calling things they don't like "fucking gay" isn't really homophobic.
Yes the thing they are calling "gay" may not have anything actually to do with
homosexuality, but the practice of associating the word "gay" with negative
things is homophobia.

~~~
poisonarena
"the practice of associating the word "gay" with negative things is
homophobia."

In the USA...

~~~
chipotle_coyote
Um, no. If I say "that movie is so gay" and you understand that as an insult,
even a joking one, it's because you understand "gay" to be an insulting thing.
_That is homophobic._ That's not a United States thing, it's a "this is
literally how language works" thing.

~~~
poisonarena
Well I don't hate gay people, and I think it is fine to say it.. Marica,
Maricon, lo que sea parx

~~~
axlprose
La verdad es que no creo que valga la pena tratar de explicarle a gente de
paises privilegiados como trabajan las culturas de nuestros paises mas pobres,
hermano. Es algo que des-afortunadamente no se puede explicar, si no que se
tiene que vivir. Cuando uno experiencia tantas realidades duras del mundo
viviendo en un lugar tan pobre y corrupto, con opciones limitadas, rapidamente
se da uno cuenta en lo que verdaderamente mas importa, y digan lo que digan,
las opiniones de otras personas, lo mas maldito que sean, de verdad no son
causa para molestarnos tanto. Mientras tu y tu familia esten bien, y nada te
esta previniendo vivir tu vida, siempre podemos confiar que todo esta bien.
Pero eso lo sabemos porque emos visto y sobrevivido situaciones mucho mas
peores, y solo la experiencia puede dar ese punto de vista. Si alguien no a
sabido como es tener problemas mas grandes que lo que otra personas piensan
del, por supuesto que les va a costar imaginarse como le gente puede tolerar
ciertas cosas, aunque para nosotros sean pequenas.

Por supuesto que siempre van haber personas que tienen malas intenciones
cuando dicen palabras como "maricon", pero la diferencia entre nosotros y los
de paises mas estables, es que a ellos no les vale la intencion de uno, solo
ven a las propias palabras como que si usar esas partes del lenguaje fuera
pecado. Como que no tomaran en cuenta la realidad que el lenguaje y las
definiciones de palabras son construidas por la gente que las usa, y que
cambian todo el tiempo. He vivido en los estados por muchos anos ya, y todavia
no entiendo por que la cultura es asi, pero ni modo, asi es la vida.

~~~
evilturnip
I wholeheartedly agree with you; even having grown up in the US. I've come to
realize the unimaginable hardships of people in other parts of the world. Only
in a hyper-privileged country like the US can people find insignificant 'wars'
to fight because they have not experienced the reality that most people
historically and around the world face.

I've always wondered if people here were to live in true hardship for just one
month as truly deprived people did, then magically transported back to their
privileged life, would they come to realize how truly petty their squabbling
over language is? And perhaps even be grateful for their station.

I'd even like to indulge a bit and say there's too much focus on how the
system 'fails' while being blind to the unimaginable good it has produced by
the very fact that they can sit in comfort and complain. Not enough gratitude
for the suffering of others (contemporary and historical) that has brought
them to this point.

~~~
DoreenMichele
I spent nearly six years homeless. I have a serious genetic disorder and
raised two special needs kids. I've known plenty of genuine hardship.

I think respect as expressed via language matters.

Hardship has given me more sympathy for the suffering of others and made me
somewhat more patient with certain things. But it hasn't convinced me that
arguing about language is too petty to bother with.

Quite the contrary. I think demanding respectful language is a gateway to
demanding equal rights.

~~~
evilturnip
The very reason they are taboo or sensitive words are the reason we use them
to express extremity. We are violating the fragility of the term as a means of
expression. It's somewhat like what extreme art or film can do, but on a much
smaller scale.

If people in a culture say that they are using terms as a means of expression
and don't believe they are actually homophobic, isn't it a little presumptuous
to assume they are? Maybe they are, but if they otherwise don't exhibit
homophobic _behavior_ , I tend to believe they are not. Words and actions are
entirely different.

Also, who should judge whether the word is 'good' or 'bad'? You? A committee?
Language evolves organically, and a small cadre of privileged Westerners don't
get to decide how a culture uses them. Especially if that culture otherwise
doesn't condone violent or homophobic behavior.

~~~
DoreenMichele
Since I do not speak fluent Spanish, I wouldn't dare judge this specific use
case.

I was merely disputing the idea that if privileged people knew real suffering,
they wouldn't bother to argue about language.

My maternal grandmother came from a low level noble family. The family sold
the title when they fell on hard times, which is why I am not nobility. I was
homeless for about a year before I finally grasped how upper-class my mother's
expectations are.

I think I fully qualify as someone from a very privileged background who has
experienced real hardship, and for far more than a mere month.

~~~
axlprose
Hardship is hardship regardless of where it's experienced, or by whom, it
doesn't make it any less real, but it does take on very different flavors
depending on the cultural context, and that can shape one's outlook a lot.
Being in a bad spot while surrounded by examples of people that are doing well
is inevitably going to be a different experience from going through hardship
somewhere where everyone around you is also in a shit situation. They both
suck, and I'm not about to try and compare one to the other, but it wouldn't
surprise me that alone produces different results for the people experiencing
the hardship.

For example, since I moved to the US ages ago, I've regularly found a lot more
in common between myself (a central american) and the world views of
immigrants from china, vietnam, and russia, than I have with people from the
US, and it wasn't because my american friends were all super well off (most of
them live paycheck to paycheck, and more than a few have dealt with
homelessness, drug addiction, or involvement with other dubious activities).
It's hard to describe, but it encompasses a sort of "what doesn't kill you
makes you stronger" type of outlook that seems to form the basis of much of
the thinking in these cultures. At least in my experience.

And in the case of slurs in spanish in particular, it's actually part of a
broader context that includes the casual use of words that would be considered
blunt insults in the west (though not necessarily slurs), as expected parts of
conversation, and often times even as terms of endearment. Like, getting
someone's attention by calling them the spanish equivalent of "fatso",
"bastard", or "idiot" would be considered normal and non-offensive by the
person receiving the remark. It's viewed in the same vein as calling someone
skinny/short/tall/black/white/asian/etc, which is to say, it's treated as
light-hearted mocking that doesn't really mean anything other than something
to get your attention by. If a person wants to take a mild jab at you, they
might call you one of the more infamous "slur" words like
puto/pendejo/maricon/idiota/etc, but the terms in this group vary wildly by
region, and they're generally not considered to be any more severe than
calling someone an ass here. If you really want to get under the skin of
someone in spanish, you have to basically insult their mothers or physically
threaten them somehow. Basically, so long as you aren't literally threatening
a person's family or physical safety, it's not really taken seriously very
much, and I believe this is largely because your physical safety can _very
realistically_ be in serious danger in those parts of the world. For example,
it's been several years, and I still find it odd to not hear gunshots going
off outside my house at night every now and then; which is weird because it's
not something you'd normally associate with a comforting sound that would
remind someone of "home".

That being said, latin-america is huge, and I don't claim to speak for all the
countries there, but there is a decent amount of overlap in the cultures.

~~~
DoreenMichele
While homeless, I camped someplace where hearing gunshots happened, though
not, say, nightly.

My father grew up in the Great Depression and fought in two wars. My mother
grew up in Germany during WW2 and it's aftermath.

Let me suggest that cultural misunderstanding and difficulty adequately
translating a word is universal and not simply a rich versus poor thing.

Let me also suggest that if language mattered so very little to you because
your hardships have made it clear to you that this is trivial and not worth
arguing over, then you would have dropped it already. You yourself disprove
the idea that people who have really suffered wouldn't bother with such a
minor detail as it's unimportant.

Also: love your handle.

~~~
axlprose
You admitted that you don't speak fluent spanish, yet you decided to put words
in my mouth about a post I wrote entirely in spanish, that was written that
way because it was directed very specifically at the poster I replied to. I
never said language was a "rich versus poor thing", and I never belittled your
hardships, especially since the first thing I did in the post you're
responding to was validate them, yet you interpret this as us having an
argument: why? If anything, it is that very interpretation that proves the
entire point I've been making about the cultures picking their battles very
differently. I might not see why any of these things need to be met with such
emotional resistance, but it is clear that some people do, and that's the only
difference I was pointing at. Everything else I said was an attempt at having
a discussion clarifying why such a difference might arise.

And if in a bit of irony, I'm misinterpreting you, then please do clarify,
cause I might be fairly assimilated, but I'm still not perfect. I can't even
begin to describe how many egg shells I regularly walk on trying to talk with
americans to this day still.

~~~
DoreenMichele
I don't think I've said anything about your post in Spanish. A third party
replied to that post fully in English and I responded to that.

Let me suggest this is a misunderstanding.

I haven't said anything was taboo. I merely said that people who have suffered
can still believe use of language is worth arguing over and that your
willingness to continue this argument aligns better with that assertion than
with the assertion that if you've known real suffering, you wouldn't bother to
argue such a thing.

I don't believe I've put words in your mouth. Yet, you feel disrespected at
the idea that I might do so. Disrespected and affronted. And you feel
compelled to defend your words.

FWIW, I did run your comment through Google translate since I can only pick
out a few words here and there. I think it likely butchered it and I believe
it also cut it off somewhere in the middle.

It struck me as both impassioned and compassionate. I wish I had a proper
English version of it to consider. But my desire to enjoy your thoughts seemed
too trivial to remark upon and it struck me as egomaniacal hubris to impose
upon you with such a request, so I didn't bother.

Peace.

~~~
axlprose
> _Let me suggest this is a misunderstanding._

I'm cool with that. Misunderstandings happen more often than people like to
admit, even when speaking the same language; the interpretation of language
seems to be universally subjective and particular to the person interpreting
it. You never know for sure how something will be received until you throw it
out there.

> _your willingness to continue this argument aligns better with that
> assertion than with the assertion that if you 've known real suffering, you
> wouldn't bother to argue such a thing_

I agree with that, because I never argued to the contrary, like the person
that first responded to me might've. I believe it's most likely the product of
an _entire country /population suffering_ without any sources of comparison
nearby that can produce a certain cultural cynicism/stoicism that habitually
overlooks a lot of things. There will always be exceptions when it comes to
individuals from these cultures, but I think it's at least worth exploring why
some debates that are popular in the US right now likely wouldn't rise up to
the level of national discourse in countries like
china/russia/colombia/guatemala/etc anytime soon (dubious political regimes
aside).

> _I don 't believe I've put words in your mouth._

The notion of word translations ever being suggested as a "rich vs poor thing"
was a pretty notable one, but since I just explained my position a bit more,
it's fine. Hopefully it's clear that it's a far more nuanced observation than
"americans are spoiled" or something like that.

> _Yet, you feel disrespected at the idea that I might do so. Disrespected and
> affronted_

One thing I've learned in interacting with people from a variety of different
cultures, is that their ideas of what's considered "respectful" or
"disrespectful" are often quite different from each other. In this case for
example, I would never use the word "disrespected" to describe myself in this
situation. I actually think "confusion" would suit my interpretation of the
whole language debate a lot better, which is why I usually try to respond with
clarifications of some sort (which I can see how that can come off as
"defending my words", but I'm usually much more concerned with being
understood than I am with defending any particular point of view). In my mind,
"disrespect" is something I associate mostly with gang members getting upset
and overreacting about trivial nonsense. But that could just be me!

~~~
DoreenMichele
_but I think it 's at least worth exploring why some debates that are popular
in the US right now likely wouldn't rise up to the level of national discourse
in countries like china/russia/colombia/guatemala/etc anytime soon (dubious
political regimes aside)._

That's a completely different sentiment from (roughly) "Hey, brother, the
truth is that folks in privileged countries simply can't comprehend the lived
experience of those from poor countries where corruption is the norm."

I would say that you need a certain amount of cultural capital and baseline
material wealth to have the resources to spare for certain things that might
be deemed luxuries or trivial details when you are really struggling to simply
survive. That doesn't mean they actually are trivial.

There is also the complicating detail that sometimes people argue about
trivialities because it is vastly less threatening than wrestling with the
real problems.

We can discuss such further if you like. But I'm not interested in being
perceived as _arguing_ it in the sense of fighting about it or being
confrontational.

------
ahansen
"The head of Communications said that we were edgy, and that if we as Riot
started chipping away those edges, we would become shapeless and bland, like
EA or Blizzard. I responded that if we told everyone starting today there
could be no more rape jokes in presentations and talks, it would still be a
multi-year effort for us to no longer be edgy.”

By the sounds of it Riot is in a very deep culture hole. I hope they can turn
it around in the years to come.

~~~
taurath
Riot isn't regarded by anyone as edgy, because they police their players
speech, apparently more strongly than they do internal speech. The most common
refrain in the reddit thread on this article is "Wait, they thought they were
edgy?"

[https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/9aslos/the...](https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/9aslos/the_story_of_why_i_left_riot_games_barry_hawkins/)

------
orf
Thanks for the interesting read.

Clearly there was a culture clash and that can take a terrible toll on a
person - if you've invested a lot into a company should you adapt to them,
even if it's against what you believe is right? At what point does the
compensation or sunk costs make adapting easier? I'm sure that's more common
(and not always related to toxicity) than people think.

The _head of the company_ made an incredibly poor play on words by mocking a
popular anti-rape slogan, by anyone's judgement. Sure, it's perhaps a sales
slogan, but context matters. And by this account it's pretty clear what he was
doing and what he was saying. That being said, this is the only account I've
read and there is always another side to the story. But it takes a lot of guts
to stand up for what you believe in and the author clearly believed Mark
crossed his line. Right or wrong, bravo for not being swallowed up.

------
rboyd
the whole thing sounds crazy but I'm genuinely confused why the author didn't
take a stand at the crazy offensive statements that were shared earlier in the
article. is it because the female colleagues took issue?

if someone at my place of work used some of the language about my wife, etc, I
would be trying to get it on audio and have that person terminated.

~~~
rectang
It is hard and risky to take a stand against the prevailing culture. I
completely understand it when people hesitate.

There are techniques to do it less confrontationally, as suggested by the
poster elsethread who urged giving people the "opportunity for personal
growth". I'd argue that the author of the article did an admirable job of
handling things, under extreme duress -- even though he was not ultimately
successful.

There's also a place for in-your-face obnoxious confrontation (e.g. ACT-UP),
civil disobedience (breaking the law when the law is unjust), and even
violence (American Revolution). None of those are the easy path.

~~~
rboyd
While I agree with everything you've written, it seems like taking a stand
against the executive would require a lot more courage than wrecking someone
lower in the ranks.

~~~
rectang
Well, rather than argue the finer points... let me just join you in a toast to
those who _do_ stand up!

------
axilmar
Respect to one's employees should be total. There shouldn't be respect up to
what the majority finds respectful.

That the CEO of Riot Games chose to make such an inappropriate remark in a
meeting with his employees says that he an immature person.

The author could only win though only by consesus: if enough people came out
to complain, then he would have a legit case.

We should have in mind that the employees of Riot might like such an
environment, and therefore whoever doesn't like it simply doesn't belong
there.

------
Sumaso
I wonder if the culture has changed since riot did its whole "People who are
toxic in game are toxic in the workplace" and axed 25% of its OG staff.

Edit: [https://rework.withgoogle.com/case-studies/riot-games-
assess...](https://rework.withgoogle.com/case-studies/riot-games-assessing-
toxicity/)

~~~
tomjakubowski
> and axed 25% of its OG staff.

That's not what the article says at all. It says that 25% of the staff fired
in the year prior to the experiment would have been given the "toxic" label
had they been subject to the experiment rather than fired for whatever reason.
Most of the employees labeled "toxic" were, as you might expect, younger and
junior, with less experience in "the working world". The article suggests
nothing about some huge portion of Riot's "OG" staff being fired by this
policy.

> Riot looked at the preceding 12 months of gameplay of every employee and
> discovered there was a correlation between in-game and in-Riot toxicity.
> They determined that 25% of employees who had been let go in the previous
> year were players with unusually high in-game toxicity

------
koonsolo
It doesn't surprise me that this comes straight from the top leadership.

I worked in varies companies (maybe too many). But there was 1 things that was
always clear: the company culture always reflects the top leadership.

I also once wanted to change something within a company, and had the support
of various other managers. We were all pushing hard for the best of the entire
company. But then I learned something: you can't change the top management,
and you can't change the top managements opinion. Either accept it, or move
on. All of us moved on to other jobs, and the company went bust a few years
later.

When I read the recent stories about Riot Games, I knew it was trickled down
from top management. It always is. They define the company culture more than
you would imagine.

------
Apocryphon
Does anyone have a good reason for why workers in the video game industry
should _not_ be unionized? Because if Susan Fowler and wage-fixing don't
convince you that the tech industry as a whole shouldn't have labor unions,
what about all of these horror stories coming out of games?

------
washadjeffmad
"On a personal level, I feel very alone and "unsafe" at work, having to watch
what I say around whom and always be filtering what I say based on how it
might be misinterpreted or misused."

An interesting quote by the author, referring to himself. His tale went the
long way around to being in total understanding with his former colleagues and
employers, except he still seems to be viewing himself in a somewhat special,
if not superior, light.

He 1) gave his colleagues examples of how he thought their behavior should be,
2) gave them every opportunity to change their behavior to what he expected,
3) challenged them on what their standards of humor were, 4) brought in others
on his concerns to witness them, 5) had a fear of potential liability or
reprisal over something he felt could not be compromised on, 6) decided that
he wasn't a good culture fit.

I don't know that the irony ever struck him along the way. And I wonder, did
he start out wanting to be martyred, or was it a decision he made somewhere
further down the line?

------
laretluval
[https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-
dict...](https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-
of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15)

------
chillidoor
>Approximately 160 people, all the hiring managers at Riot at the time

Just how big was Riot Games that they need 160 hiring managers? The only big
game they made was League of Legends, right?

~~~
zimpenfish
I think "hiring manager" just means "anyone who wants to hire someone" \-
which would include pretty much everyone above peon level.

[ Riot Games have 2500 employees, most in the same place (per
[https://www.inc.com/magazine/201612/burt-helm-lindsay-
blakel...](https://www.inc.com/magazine/201612/burt-helm-lindsay-
blakely/company-of-the-year-riot-games.html)) which makes 160 people with
hiring privileges seem reasonable. ]

~~~
chillidoor
Ah, 2500. That's ~15 people per hiring manager so you're right, that does seem
more reasonable.

------
cafard
Geezer here: can somebody explain to me the offensiveness of the iceberg tee
shirt?

------
bsaul
I wonder if people advocating for extreme sensitivy on sexual jokes at the
workplace also ban rap music at the workplace because of the lyrics.

~~~
foozed
I wouldn't say that having a problem with rape jokes at big presentations that
make it into the recruiting material qualifies as "extreme sensitivity on
sexual jokes"...

~~~
bsaul
Do you think anybody in that riot story thought rape was fine ? Either the guy
that did the joke, or the HR that wrote it on the slide ?

It is a lousy joke, with bad taste, and it sure would offend anyone who had
any real life experience of a rape ( like probably half the joke woukd
probably hurt somebody somewhere for some reason) . But that’s all it is.

I don’t think this should be confused with actual sexual harrasment ( which
maybe also took place at Riot, i don’t know).

------
subjectsigma
I am confused as to why this specific issue has to be so slathered in a gross
layer of politics and 'progressive' thinking.

Tons of people in the thread (as usual) are discussing it as a left vs right,
men vs women, libertarian vs authoritarian, young vs old, etc. kind of issue.
Why the fuck can't we all just agree that what they said was inappropriate and
warranted professional consequences? Everyone deserves basic human decency and
a professional attitude in their workplace, regardless of demographic, and
thus it is silly to have the first sentence of your complaint be "As a white
man..." or "As a woman..." To do so is to constantly compare the value of
someone's experience over other experiences, when the answer is too obvious
for this to be necessary.

If you were talking about society or public policy it would make more sense I
suppose, but this is not a society, it's a game company with a terrible
culture. I think part of it might be that HNers (myself included, to be
honest) like to hear themselves talk and have a lot to say that some of these
comments come about.

------
darepublic
> There was more talk about culture and some people being too sensitive. The
> head of Legal spoke up again, saying that it wasn’t that hearing guys say
> the stupid stuff they did all day made her sad or upset, it just made her
> want to punch them in the throat because she was sick of having to hear it
> all the time. I really liked that part.

^ Isn't it hypocritical to crusade against certain types of insensitive speech
and yet enjoy casual references to violence against males?

------
randrews
I've never played anything by Riot Games, but based on this article, I think
I'm going to start.

------
cal5k
I'd like to ask a provocative question: if this was always the culture at
Riot, why are people who joined the company surprised by it? Would it be wrong
for people to self-select into a workplace that was tolerant of such jokes,
knowing that it would not be totally inclusive?

At some point if you have enough employees leadership needs to grow the hell
up - but it doesn't exactly surprise me to learn that game developers use
language at work that anyone with gamer friends has certainly heard in
private.

~~~
badloginagain
Because they don't say "We do rape jokes. Be cool with that." in the interview
process.

------
Viker
Please teach your children that perseverance, trying hard, again and again.
Does not pay off. And should be looked down apon.

Teach them that when they face resistance they should just say ok and walk
away in the other way, because it is not for them.

Teach them to be compliant and subservient.

Teach them that weakness of character and self respect are not for them.

------
andrewmcwatters
It's clear to me that there are two distinct camps in scenarios like this:

There's one camp (camp A) whose cultural norms contain offensive practices to
those outside of the culture, and another camp (camp B) who perceives those
norms at face value, without context and _intent_ , for their offense. Another
poster here used _The F Word (South Park)_ as a great example of this.

> This behavior of male-on-male aggression seemed to be a mechanism of
> asserting control.

I don't know where Barry gets this, and it's written like a National
Geographic-esque piece of a man trying to understand the actions and intents
of animals in the Serengeti. He doesn't "get" them, cannot establish trust,
and as a result can't influence anyone in this piece's mind about how these
actions are perceived by others outside of camp A.

> now I am having to speak to you like an exasperated camp counselor.

This is reinforced by statements like this. This isn't edifying. This is
belittling, and completely ineffective. Barry's downfall here is that he
believes this is "the long game, and slow and steady would win the race." He's
correct, but his execution is fruitless.

Instead, what about trying to befriend these people, and then have down to
earth dialogues such as, "I'm not trying to be a buzzkill, but maybe we could
tone it down with the rape stuff, my dudes. It's kinda not cool."

I'm sure there are better methods for getting the idea across, but ultimately
you change people's hearts and minds by appealing to them and winning them
over.

~~~
InclinedPlane
The entire industry and gaming culture in general has been having the "let's
tone down the rape jokes, guys" conversation for years and years. At this
point if it's part of your corporate culture in 2018 then it means it's
something you value.

~~~
andrewmcwatters
Of course from an organizational perspective, it's not sufficient to address
this in interpersonal relationships. My bottom line is that if you're going to
attempt this, which is more relevant for most people, that you can't expect to
belittle people and think you're going to "win" them over.

------
m3mpp
From virtue signaling to virtue resigning. I wonder what's the next step,
virtue self-immolation?

Let's keep giving berth to that kind of sensitivity in the work place and very
soon, all the people will be exactly the same, bland, smooth, completely
passive people.

The creative, the geniuses of this world are always full of spikes, full of
defects, against the norm. Well, I guess we will just have to do without them
from now on...

~~~
codyb
Isn't quitting your job to stand up for something just about one of the most
individualistic things you could do?

~~~
m3mpp
There's standing up for your value and there's drama. This is drama. This is
"look at how good I am". You stand up for your values by going to the guy and
tell him "you're an asshole for joking about that, and since I don't work for
assholes, I'm gone". That is standing up for your values. Don't you think?

~~~
andrewprock
He did stand up for his values. He went to the guy, and said that jokes like
that are a problem. When the problem wasn't resolved he quit.

Are you saying that because he wasn't an asshole back, that it was drama?

~~~
m3mpp
The drama is the blog post, the length, the minute details of everything, like
if it was so big, so important. It's just a guy who said a stupid joke. If you
feel so strongly, confront him for real, not with a bland "it's a problem" and
then write a 5000 words blog post about it. Go tell him he's a piece of shit,
something the guy could actually use to adjust his behavior. My 2 cents.

~~~
andrewprock
Telling someone that something is a problem is confronting them for real.

Going to tell someone that they are a "piece of shit" is not acceptable
behavior.

