Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
So does Zenimax Studios have an explanation for this situation involving a Trans employee ?
-
Aislinna✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Making a non-consenting recording like that in Maryland is a felony. Hope Leona has good legal representation.
Yup. We don't know that's it is non-consenting. It appears like that right now. But, we don't know for sure. We also don't know the terms of her gender reassignment agreement that barred her from suing. It's possible that there was a non-disclosure in that as well.
We do know; I think Leona apologizing for lying about whether she had recorded conversations (2:14:00) with the manager who was standing up for her, shows clearly that there was not consent. If there was consent, why would the manager ask if he'd been recorded? If there was consent why would Leona lie and say no?
Yup. Missed that part. Yeah, looks like she's basically admitting to it when it comes to at least one of the parties. Foolish thing to do.
Additionally saying "after it came out that I recorded Elphaba" shows non-consent there too. If there was consent, why would it have to come out that she'd done it, both parties would know it had been done.
Listening to the entire 4 hours of this video, shows a lot more of the story than the 23 minute "TL/DR" hype rage video shared.
I'm not sure why it matters so much to some people in this thread whether or not the recording was made properly under Maryland law, aside from salivating over the thought of a trans person being punished for trying to protect herself. Nothing about the contents of the recording changes no matter what Maryland law says. And, not that it matters, but a DA is never going to waste their time filing charges over something like this. The only thing this might do is cause harm to a potential wrongful termination suit on Leona's part - but that is her problem, not anyone else's.
My replies were in response to the "we don't know if the recordings were consented to"; nothing about the legalities of it and no "salivating". Many opinions and emotions are being laid down in this thread as "facts" when they aren't.11 -
Tyrant_Tim✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Making a non-consenting recording like that in Maryland is a felony. Hope Leona has good legal representation.
Yup. We don't know that's it is non-consenting. It appears like that right now. But, we don't know for sure. We also don't know the terms of her gender reassignment agreement that barred her from suing. It's possible that there was a non-disclosure in that as well.
We do know; I think Leona apologizing for lying about whether she had recorded conversations (2:14:00) with the manager who was standing up for her, shows clearly that there was not consent. If there was consent, why would the manager ask if he'd been recorded? If there was consent why would Leona lie and say no?
Yup. Missed that part. Yeah, looks like she's basically admitting to it when it comes to at least one of the parties. Foolish thing to do.
Additionally saying "after it came out that I recorded Elphaba" shows non-consent there too. If there was consent, why would it have to come out that she'd done it, both parties would know it had been done.
Listening to the entire 4 hours of this video, shows a lot more of the story than the 23 minute "TL/DR" hype rage video shared.
I'm not sure why it matters so much to some people in this thread whether or not the recording was made properly under Maryland law, aside from salivating over the thought of a trans person being punished for trying to protect herself. Nothing about the contents of the recording changes no matter what Maryland law says. And, not that it matters, but a DA is never going to waste their time filing charges over something like this. The only thing this might do is cause harm to a potential wrongful termination suit on Leona's part - but that is her problem, not anyone else's.
Why do you keep injecting the word “trans” into your comments when it involves victimization? It’s as if you feel that adding it as a describing characteristics adds more strength to your comment. It’s very weird to say the least. You could have made that same post without throwing that in there but felt it was necessary.
Feels forced, like you’re pushing a narrative.Edited by Tyrant_Tim on July 19, 2023 3:25AM15 -
fall0athboy✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Making a non-consenting recording like that in Maryland is a felony. Hope Leona has good legal representation.
Yup. We don't know that's it is non-consenting. It appears like that right now. But, we don't know for sure. We also don't know the terms of her gender reassignment agreement that barred her from suing. It's possible that there was a non-disclosure in that as well.
We do know; I think Leona apologizing for lying about whether she had recorded conversations (2:14:00) with the manager who was standing up for her, shows clearly that there was not consent. If there was consent, why would the manager ask if he'd been recorded? If there was consent why would Leona lie and say no?
Yup. Missed that part. Yeah, looks like she's basically admitting to it when it comes to at least one of the parties. Foolish thing to do.
Additionally saying "after it came out that I recorded Elphaba" shows non-consent there too. If there was consent, why would it have to come out that she'd done it, both parties would know it had been done.
Listening to the entire 4 hours of this video, shows a lot more of the story than the 23 minute "TL/DR" hype rage video shared.
I'm not sure why it matters so much to some people in this thread whether or not the recording was made properly under Maryland law, aside from salivating over the thought of a trans person being punished for trying to protect herself. Nothing about the contents of the recording changes no matter what Maryland law says. And, not that it matters, but a DA is never going to waste their time filing charges over something like this. The only thing this might do is cause harm to a potential wrongful termination suit on Leona's part - but that is her problem, not anyone else's.
I'm not "salivating over [that]", I'm saying that the legal aspect is important because if this ends up as a legal fight, any of the employee's recorded evidence could be struck and not used in the case because of the illegality of the recording.
Also, you say "a potential wrongful termination suit". The court filings can be found online. It doesn't seem to be a wrongful termination suit, but it does seem to be in regards to benefits.Edited by fall0athboy on July 19, 2023 3:30AM0 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Tyrant_Tim wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Tyrant_Tim wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Tyrant_Tim wrote: »You can turn it into whatever you want
There's nothing turning about it. The manager tells her to go by a deadname and intentionally outed her in front of her colleagues.
There's not a chance that they aren't familiar with how to change names properly. People change their names all the time. It's customary for married women to change their names. Names get recorded incorrectly and need to be fixed. Unique names get misspelled and have to be updated.
It's far easier to believe that there was weaponized incompetence because they didn't support Leona's name change than it is to believe that a multimillion dollar corporation that's been around decades has never had to change someone's name before.
They certainly didn't pay for her expensive surgeries on the agreement she not sue them because name changes are generally beyond their capability.
They paid her to leave quietly because they didn’t want to have to build an extremely expensive defense team to combat her in court.
They wouldn't be worried about that if things were as cut and dry as you're trying to paint them to be. Her manager outed her and noticeably failed to do bare minimum things to the point other employees complained.
And yes, they can absolutely counter sue for legal fees.
Name changes literally happen all the time. I'm not talking about print name tags.
It’s more than likely not cut and dry, I’m sure there might have been some negligence at some point but whether or not it’s enough to get this bent over is another thing entirely. The best lies have some truth in them.
Under what premise could they counter-sue pre-deal? How is a corporation going to tell someone they are wrong for feeling emotional damage? At best they can not owe anything at settlement.
Also, name changes do not literally happen all the time, otherwise ZOS would have simply just done so. If it was as simple as you want to believe, they would have saved themselves the headache entirely.
They couldn't counter sue predeal. But you made the claim they were trying to avoid lawyers fees they couldn't get back if she decided to sue and they fought it. Totally bogus. They could most certainly have counter sued for lawyer fees had she taken legal action. The suit can also be tossed for being frivolous unless there is evidence of wrongdoing, in which case it would go to trial.
Name changes do happen all the time. People get married and that's a name change is the most common one, and that happens frequently. Saying if it was simple, they would have saved the headache completely disregards the idea that someone could have weaponized incompetence out of bigotry. When that's an incredibly common workplace discrimination tactic to try and lower the quality of the employee you want to quit's work. Employers get caught creating hostile work environments and having to pay up is an entire field of law because absolutely happens.
The actual bottom line is that there is not enough evidence to claim she was not discriminated against or that she wasn't. All claims to the contrary is just pushing personal politics. Her being trans is relevant to the case.
If things happened as she alleged, she could prevail in a discrimination suit. But, just because she alleges it doesn't make it so, and they may have good defense for what happened.
Regardless claims that it has nothing to do with being trans is just an attempt to personal politics on a case that is actually not resolved.Edited by spartaxoxo on July 19, 2023 3:34AM8 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I'm not sure why it matters so much to some people in this thread whether or not the recording was made properly under Maryland law, aside from salivating over the thought of a trans person being punished for trying to protect herself. Nothing about the contents of the recording changes no matter what Maryland law says. And, not that it matters, but a DA is never going to waste their time filing charges over something like this. The only thing this might do is cause harm to a potential wrongful termination suit on Leona's part - but that is her problem, not anyone else's.
It matters in the sense of understanding the case. It really does not change anything those people said. Maryland's law makes it harder to prove wrongdoing on behalf of the company. That's my main problem with it. But, I live in a single party consent state like most of the US.Edited by spartaxoxo on July 19, 2023 3:31AM0 -
tyrobia✭✭✭✭Tyrant_Tim wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Making a non-consenting recording like that in Maryland is a felony. Hope Leona has good legal representation.
Yup. We don't know that's it is non-consenting. It appears like that right now. But, we don't know for sure. We also don't know the terms of her gender reassignment agreement that barred her from suing. It's possible that there was a non-disclosure in that as well.
We do know; I think Leona apologizing for lying about whether she had recorded conversations (2:14:00) with the manager who was standing up for her, shows clearly that there was not consent. If there was consent, why would the manager ask if he'd been recorded? If there was consent why would Leona lie and say no?
Yup. Missed that part. Yeah, looks like she's basically admitting to it when it comes to at least one of the parties. Foolish thing to do.
Additionally saying "after it came out that I recorded Elphaba" shows non-consent there too. If there was consent, why would it have to come out that she'd done it, both parties would know it had been done.
Listening to the entire 4 hours of this video, shows a lot more of the story than the 23 minute "TL/DR" hype rage video shared.
I'm not sure why it matters so much to some people in this thread whether or not the recording was made properly under Maryland law, aside from salivating over the thought of a trans person being punished for trying to protect herself. Nothing about the contents of the recording changes no matter what Maryland law says. And, not that it matters, but a DA is never going to waste their time filing charges over something like this. The only thing this might do is cause harm to a potential wrongful termination suit on Leona's part - but that is her problem, not anyone else's.
Why do you keep injecting the word “trans” into your comments when it involves victimization? It’s as if you feel that adding it as a describing characteristics adds more strength to your comment. It’s very weird to say the least. You could have made that same post without throwing that in there but felt it was necessary.
Feels forced, like you’re pushing a narrative.
This whole situation is about trans rights.24 -
Tyrant_Tim✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »Tyrant_Tim wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Tyrant_Tim wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Tyrant_Tim wrote: »You can turn it into whatever you want
There's nothing turning about it. The manager tells her to go by a deadname and intentionally outed her in front of her colleagues.
There's not a chance that they aren't familiar with how to change names properly. People change their names all the time. It's customary for married women to change their names. Names get recorded incorrectly and need to be fixed. Unique names get misspelled and have to be updated.
It's far easier to believe that there was weaponized incompetence because they didn't support Leona's name change than it is to believe that a multimillion dollar corporation that's been around decades has never had to change someone's name before.
They certainly didn't pay for her expensive surgeries on the agreement she not sue them because name changes are generally beyond their capability.
They paid her to leave quietly because they didn’t want to have to build an extremely expensive defense team to combat her in court.
They wouldn't be worried about that if things were as cut and dry as you're trying to paint them to be. Her manager outed her and noticeably failed to do bare minimum things to the point other employees complained.
And yes, they can absolutely counter sue for legal fees.
Name changes literally happen all the time. I'm not talking about print name tags.
It’s more than likely not cut and dry, I’m sure there might have been some negligence at some point but whether or not it’s enough to get this bent over is another thing entirely. The best lies have some truth in them.
Under what premise could they counter-sue pre-deal? How is a corporation going to tell someone they are wrong for feeling emotional damage? At best they can not owe anything at settlement.
Also, name changes do not literally happen all the time, otherwise ZOS would have simply just done so. If it was as simple as you want to believe, they would have saved themselves the headache entirely.
They couldn't counter sue predeal. But you made the claim they were trying to avoid lawyers fees they couldn't get back if she decided to sue and they fought it. Totally bogus. They could most certainly have counter sued for lawyer fees had she taken legal action. The suit can also be tossed for being frivolous unless there is evidence of wrongdoing, in which case it would go to trial.
Name changes do happen all the time. People get married and that's a name change is the most common one, and that happens frequently. Saying if it was simple, they would have saved the headache completely disregards the idea that someone could have weaponized incompetence out of bigotry. When that's an incredibly common workplace discrimination tactic to try and lower the quality of the employee you want to quit's work.
The actual bottom line is that there is not enough evidence to claim she was not discriminated against or that she wasn't. All claims to the contrary is just pushing personal politics.
If things happened as she alleged, she would likely prevail in a discrimination suit. But, just because she alleges it doesn't make it so, and they may have good defense for what happened.
Regardless claims that it has nothing to do with being trans is just an attempt to personal politics on a case that is actually not resolved.
You say they could sue for the lawyer retention fees, but that would only happen if a settlement isn’t made, which you know there will be a settlement due to whatever neglect she might have faced, and whatever judge is assigned the case would presume it too, as ZOS is on record providing deals, creating a history. Even if it’s for a formal apology or a dollar, you can’t write off emotional damage when you encouraged an employee to resign.
It is far more damaging to your reputation and inclusion score to deal with an on-going court case regarding a minority group, you have yet to dispute that, which is the main reason ZOS didn’t want to deal with this to begin with.
A name change isn’t going to lower your work quality, you simply use your old one until you’ve been updated in the system, that’s what my mother did at her job as a secretary, when she got re-married, it took three months before her request was processed and documentation started printing with her new name.
We can begin having a real discussion about how and why these things happen when you take a minute to do some research.Edited by Tyrant_Tim on July 19, 2023 3:52AM2 -
Tyrant_Tim✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Tyrant_Tim wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Making a non-consenting recording like that in Maryland is a felony. Hope Leona has good legal representation.
Yup. We don't know that's it is non-consenting. It appears like that right now. But, we don't know for sure. We also don't know the terms of her gender reassignment agreement that barred her from suing. It's possible that there was a non-disclosure in that as well.
We do know; I think Leona apologizing for lying about whether she had recorded conversations (2:14:00) with the manager who was standing up for her, shows clearly that there was not consent. If there was consent, why would the manager ask if he'd been recorded? If there was consent why would Leona lie and say no?
Yup. Missed that part. Yeah, looks like she's basically admitting to it when it comes to at least one of the parties. Foolish thing to do.
Additionally saying "after it came out that I recorded Elphaba" shows non-consent there too. If there was consent, why would it have to come out that she'd done it, both parties would know it had been done.
Listening to the entire 4 hours of this video, shows a lot more of the story than the 23 minute "TL/DR" hype rage video shared.
I'm not sure why it matters so much to some people in this thread whether or not the recording was made properly under Maryland law, aside from salivating over the thought of a trans person being punished for trying to protect herself. Nothing about the contents of the recording changes no matter what Maryland law says. And, not that it matters, but a DA is never going to waste their time filing charges over something like this. The only thing this might do is cause harm to a potential wrongful termination suit on Leona's part - but that is her problem, not anyone else's.
Why do you keep injecting the word “trans” into your comments when it involves victimization? It’s as if you feel that adding it as a describing characteristics adds more strength to your comment. It’s very weird to say the least. You could have made that same post without throwing that in there but felt it was necessary.
Feels forced, like you’re pushing a narrative.
This whole situation is about trans rights.
No, it is about worker’s rights, and whether she expressed hers properly.
You keep using the word “trans” as some weird victim rallying cry when in all reality, you could go through this whole thread and how it pertains to Leona and completely remove the word while retaining the same talking points.
Did her manager reveal her medical info?
Did her manager stall with the account change?
Did her manager present bias towards her?
All of those things would be wrong, regardless of whether or not she was transitioning.
You can accomplish the same message without having to twist up the narrative.
Don’t believe me? Try it.Edited by Tyrant_Tim on July 19, 2023 4:52AM20 -
JavaRen✭✭✭✭✭
✭The legality of the recording is absolutely relevant to the level of sympathy Leona deserves, if she is indeed a felon who violated the privacy rights of others. It is very true that this does not change the accuracy of her claims however.3 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭The legality of the recording is absolutely relevant to the level of sympathy Leona deserves, if she is indeed a felon who violated the privacy rights of others. It is very true that this does not change the accuracy of her claims however.
It's a felony in a minority of states. It doesn't effect my sympathy at all because "she is required to gather evidence but it's illegal to gather evidence since she lives in the minority of states that don't allow this" just means to me that MD needs to update it's law. Recording abuse to use as evidence should be an obvious exception.Edited by spartaxoxo on July 19, 2023 6:36AM7 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Tyrant_Tim wrote: »You keep using the word “trans” as some weird victim rallying cry when in all reality,
A pertinent allegation is specifically that she was illegally discriminated against for being transgender. So no, it is not weird to accurately describe the allegations. It is weird to claim it is weird that facts of the case be ignored.Tyrant_Tim wrote: »A name change isn’t going to lower your work quality.
She was unable to login because her account was messed up due to a botched name change that she tried to get them to correct for the course of 3 months. This often resulted in her completely locked out of her account and unable to login.
Physically being unable to work tends to lower work quality.It is far more damaging to your reputation and inclusion score to deal with an on-going court case regarding a minority group, you have yet to dispute that
They likely made that deal because they didn't want it to go trial. It's not proof of guilt, but it is proof that her argument is solid enough there is a risk they'd go to trial and possibly even lose. And therefore cannot and shouldn't be dismissed without a review of all the facts. Attempting to claim either side is meritless without that is just bias and nothing more.Edited by spartaxoxo on July 19, 2023 6:34AM14 -
Hurbster✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭This is a bad thing that needs to be kept in the light.So they raised the floor and lowered the ceiling. Except the ceiling has spikes in it now and the floor is also lava.11 -
tembukiSoul ShrivenThere was a similar thread to this on the German ESO forums, and the mods there locked it then changed their minds and said it was allowed. It might be the same here.
Her allegations are pretty serious and her recordings and other evidence paint a pretty grim picture. I know they won't respond here, but I hope ZOS responds somewhere.10 -
MachineGod✭✭✭✭Literally from their own TOS:
2.12 We do not allow the discussion of any legal matters involving ZeniMax Media Inc, its affiliates or any of their associated companies through ZeniMax Services and Sites.
Yet here we are.
23 -
Jaraal✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MachineGod wrote: »Literally from their own TOS:
2.12 We do not allow the discussion of any legal matters involving ZeniMax Media Inc, its affiliates or any of their associated companies through ZeniMax Services and Sites.
Yet here we are.
Maybe start talking about their union/non-union status and see what happens.5 -
Holycannoli✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭luen79rwb17_ESO wrote: »Won't comment until an unbiased source do the proper investigation on the case
I agree. We need unbiased facts from both sides.7 -
BXR_Lonestar✭✭✭✭✭
✭This is probably going to be an unpopular opinion here, but this is a gaming forum. They don't need to explain an HR decision on a forum where people are intended to post about stuff going on in the game. Honestly, I play the game to have fun and escape the real world, not to get drug into this political, culture-war non-sense. These kinds of discussions should be had in an off-topic forum or another forum that is off-site.22 -
freespirit✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭There was a similar thread to this on the German ESO forums, and the mods there locked it then changed their minds and said it was allowed. It might be the same here.
Her allegations are pretty serious and her recordings and other evidence paint a pretty grim picture. I know they won't respond here, but I hope ZOS responds somewhere.
First off I have read many of the articles on the internet about this and agree the evidence seems pretty damning but it is still just one side, so I don't feel informed enough to comment.
However I am absolutely baffled by the forum moderators apparent disappearance, what on earth is going on??
Now reading that a similar thread on the German forums was closed and then re-opened makes me even more confused!
Regardless of the subject, the previous eight pages are generously stocked with multiple TOS violations, yet nothing is being done. Is there some hidden benefit to ZoS which is keeping this thread untouched?
We all know how heavy handed the mods usually are, I am truly quite confused!
When people say to me........
"You're going to regret that in the morning"
I sleep until midday cos I'm a problem solver!10 -
thejadefalcon✭✭✭✭✭
✭Man, I'm only on page three of this thread and I've already hit the apparent spam filter on reports about six times. Have to go out now, so will be back later, but it's been a pleasure reading about how trans people are "woke identity politics". Lovely crowd from the ESO playerbase, as always. Bet they're the same people who claim that the playerbase never says anything homophobic and all the abuse towards LGBT+ guilds are for totally unrelated reasons entirely.18 -
Lumenn✭✭✭✭✭
✭freespirit wrote: »There was a similar thread to this on the German ESO forums, and the mods there locked it then changed their minds and said it was allowed. It might be the same here.
Her allegations are pretty serious and her recordings and other evidence paint a pretty grim picture. I know they won't respond here, but I hope ZOS responds somewhere.
First off I have read many of the articles on the internet about this and agree the evidence seems pretty damning but it is still just one side, so I don't feel informed enough to comment.
However I am absolutely baffled by the forum moderators apparent disappearance, what on earth is going on??
Now reading that a similar thread on the German forums was closed and then re-opened makes me even more confused!
Regardless of the subject, the previous eight pages are generously stocked with multiple TOS violations, yet nothing is being done. Is there some hidden benefit to ZoS which is keeping this thread untouched?
We all know how heavy handed the mods usually are, I am truly quite confused!
Well, my guess, considering that the laws in this person's state make the secret recordings possibly inadmissible(is each one a felony? Or just a misdemeanor? Either way, yikes), and also depending on what was in the contract they signed on the exit deal, public sentiment might be the only leverage this person has against zos. Legal and the PR department are probably studying every word on every forum regarding this situation. Do they settle out of court and offer an apology or would it be cheaper to fight in court, etc etc.
Edit: I am in no way claiming that I think zos should or shouldn't apologize. Neither I, nor anyone else here, has all the facts.Edited by Lumenn on July 19, 2023 3:11PM5 -
Tyrant_Tim✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭thejadefalcon wrote: »Man, I'm only on page three of this thread and I've already hit the apparent spam filter on reports about six times. Have to go out now, so will be back later, but it's been a pleasure reading about how trans people are "woke identity politics". Lovely crowd from the ESO playerbase, as always. Bet they're the same people who claim that the playerbase never says anything homophobic and all the abuse towards LGBT+ guilds are for totally unrelated reasons entirely.
When you use your identity and assumed uniqueness as a shield, yes, it’s called “woke identity politics” you are literally politicking around your identity.
It has nothing to do with hate speech, or ignoring real world issues, and everything to do with entitlement. Because Leona identifies as trans, she felt obligated to different standards, and when she didn’t receive those, it was because she was being discriminated for being trans.
Until we know for certain any discrimination took place specifically because her gender, it’s about worker’s rights.
Feel free to keep reporting opinions that don’t align with yours, while slinging gross allegations.
It’s a great look.Edited by Tyrant_Tim on July 19, 2023 3:12PM24 -
DragonRacer✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »Tyrant_Tim wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Tyrant_Tim wrote: »You can turn it into whatever you want
There's nothing turning about it. The manager tells her to go by a deadname and intentionally outed her in front of her colleagues.
There's not a chance that they aren't familiar with how to change names properly. People change their names all the time. It's customary for married women to change their names. Names get recorded incorrectly and need to be fixed. Unique names get misspelled and have to be updated.
It's far easier to believe that there was weaponized incompetence because they didn't support Leona's name change than it is to believe that a multimillion dollar corporation that's been around decades has never had to change someone's name before.
They certainly didn't pay for her expensive surgeries on the agreement she not sue them because name changes are generally beyond their capability.
They paid her to leave quietly because they didn’t want to have to build an extremely expensive defense team to combat her in court.
They wouldn't be worried about that if things were as cut and dry as you're trying to paint them to be. Her manager outed her and noticeably failed to do bare minimum things to the point other employees complained.
And yes, they can absolutely counter sue for legal fees.
Name changes literally happen all the time. I'm not talking about print name tags.
I feel like people not recognizing name changes happen have never worked in a company where a woman began working there under her maiden name, then got married. Traditionally, that means taking your husband’s last name for your own and you have to jump through all the legal hoops - new Social Security card, new driver’s license, updating soooo many documents, etc.
Funny thing is, company I worked at during that time had an IT dude who basically described how much of a pain in the butt apparently changing my login identity would be and how I might be locked out of the system for days, etc that I did actually end up having to log in with my maiden name for YEARS before a new company bought us and new software systems meant I could finally change my login to my married name.
Wild. Just mind-blowing, honestly.
PS5 NA. GM of The PTK's - a free trading guild (CP 500+). Also a werewolf, bites are free when they're available. PSN = DragonRacer1313 -
AzuraFan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Legal and the PR department are probably studying every word on every forum regarding this situation.
I think it's obvious that the mods have been told "hands off" regarding this thread, because just the multiple TOS violations should have closed it long ago. Like you said, I'm sure ZOS is reading every word. So maybe by keeping this thread going, we're helping to strengthen their legal case in some way. Just speculation.
7 -
RinaldoGandolphi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭I see it as a non-issue.
Maryland is "At Will Employment State"
https://www.dllr.state.md.us/labor/wagepay/wpatwill.shtml
proving discrimination will be next to impossible, case will get thrown out. Bethesda gave the employee a good deal, paying for her medical costs could easily be worth about 200,000 dollars.
Im not saying something didn't happen here, but people of all types are treated like garbage by employers everyday, this isn't nothing new. Sometimes things are not a good fit. Its unfortunate, but it is what it is. They at least gave her the option to not have "I was fired" on their employment record and a decent severance, they were doing them a favor.
Social Justice is a rabbit hole that leads to nothing but hate.
the left leaning politcial parts in this country focuses too much on "Racial and sexual identity" by doing so they segregate people into members of groups. This mentality is inherently racist and bigoted. This will continue to endure until we stop thinking of people as members of groups and begin thinking in terms of individual liberty. Each individual person no matter who they are, what they look like, what they identify as, should be treated the same way, but that will never happen as long as the lefts racist and bigoted narrative of Racial and Sexual identity is continued to be pushed putting people into groups that leave us at odds with one another.
this thread is proof of it.Rinaldo Gandolphi-Breton Sorcerer Daggerfall Covenant
Juste Gandolphi Dark Elf Templar Daggerfall Covenant
Richter Gandolphi - Dark Elf Dragonknight Daggerfall Covenant
Mathias Gandolphi - Breton Nightblade Daggerfall Covenant
RinaldoGandolphi - High Elf Sorcerer Aldmeri Dominion
Officer Fire and Ice
Co-GM - MVP
Sorcerer's - The ONLY class in the game that is punished for using its class defining skill (Bolt Escape)
"Here in his shrine, that they have forgotten. Here do we toil, that we might remember. By night we reclaim, what by day was stolen. Far from ourselves, he grows ever near to us. Our eyes once were blinded, now through him do we see. Our hands once were idle, now through them does he speak. And when the world shall listen, and when the world shall see, and when the world remembers, that world will cease to be. - Miraak14 -
Cazador✭✭✭✭✭thejadefalcon wrote: »Man, I'm only on page three of this thread and I've already hit the apparent spam filter on reports about six times. Have to go out now, so will be back later, but it's been a pleasure reading about how trans people are "woke identity politics". Lovely crowd from the ESO playerbase, as always. Bet they're the same people who claim that the playerbase never says anything homophobic and all the abuse towards LGBT+ guilds are for totally unrelated reasons entirely.
On the plus side this thread is what got me to finally try out the ignore user feature, it's certainly made the forum experience better. I can't recommend it enough.9 -
Lumenn✭✭✭✭✭
✭Legal and the PR department are probably studying every word on every forum regarding this situation.
I think it's obvious that the mods have been told "hands off" regarding this thread, because just the multiple TOS violations should have closed it long ago. Like you said, I'm sure ZOS is reading every word. So maybe by keeping this thread going, we're helping to strengthen their legal case in some way. Just speculation.
I've seen posts deciding zos' guilt, the person's guilt, and several claiming there aren't enough facts, so I wouldn't weigh too heavily on our little thread here. It's a part, but a tiny part.
There's much more to consider such as zos' reputation. How many discrimination cases have been brought up over the years? I'm not fond of their management decisions, but I've always understood them to be diverse even if they catch flak for it. Would a settlement encourage people to fake cases in the future? How will each possible action affect their diversity score that's become so important? Can they get on top of public opinion or should they wait it out? There's a million decisions to make, and make no mistake, zos' lawyers can probably rake this person over hot coals in court should they decide to. But when asked why the mods are ignoring the thread, I thought I'd offer my opinion based off my past experience.1 -
freespirit✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Legal and the PR department are probably studying every word on every forum regarding this situation.
I think it's obvious that the mods have been told "hands off" regarding this thread, because just the multiple TOS violations should have closed it long ago. Like you said, I'm sure ZOS is reading every word. So maybe by keeping this thread going, we're helping to strengthen their legal case in some way. Just speculation.
I suspect you are correct in your speculation!
I worry the person at the root of this may have done their case a great deal of harm by telling their story on the internet. There are probably many discussions like this one going on now. 🙁When people say to me........
"You're going to regret that in the morning"
I sleep until midday cos I'm a problem solver!4 -
Lumenn✭✭✭✭✭
✭RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »I see it as a non-issue.
Maryland is "At Will Employment State"
https://www.dllr.state.md.us/labor/wagepay/wpatwill.shtml
proving discrimination will be next to impossible, case will get thrown out. Bethesda gave the employee a good deal, paying for her medical costs could easily be worth about 200,000 dollars.
.
I agree with you. An at will employment state, secret recordings in a two party consent state(with proof all over the internet) and an acceptance and (possible) breach in the exit contract, unless I'm missing something I'd say public "feelings" might be all they can bring against zos. We'll have to wait and see how it plays out in the end of course, even my old company made unexpected decisions, but it looks pretty solid on these things alone against this person even without bringing in any other evidence zos may have.
4
This discussion has been closed.