Evolve Community Mgr Fired After Tweet on Donald Sterling - Update

[StriderShinryu]

While there is certainly truth to the fact that Sterling can hold whatever views he wants to hold in private, those views are no longer private (well, as much as they ever were given his history). Yes, he may be a victim of having his "private" views exposed to the public, they are now exposed. There is no going back on that now and he has to deal with the repercussions of that. That's not really being a victim, that's just getting caught.

 

[DrOswald]

I can't stand people who defend bigotry or racism by using "hurr durr 1st amendment" like it's some sort of shield.If I had my way every bigoted or racist person would get fined for the filth they spew, and hardcore racists get the crap beat out of them by the group they throw bigoted slurs at.

Also to all the people who think it's petty to not buy something from a business because one of it's employees defends bigotry?You're wrong.Just like people have a right to be a bigoted fuck,everyone else has a right to not do business with them or anyone who defends this shit.

The 1st Amendment should not be used as a shield for every bigoted asshole out there.

He was not defending bigotry. He is talking about a right to privacy. Sterling, asshole that he is, was recorded without his permission in a place he had every reason to believe he would not be. His privacy was violated just as much as a woman who was recorded naked with a hidden camera.

I am glad Sterling is getting his comeuppance, but from everything I have read this should have happened long ago and there should have been no need for his privacy to be violated. In a society steadily moving towards constant recorded surveillance this incident is extremely alarming. And the fact that so many are fine with the way this went down is deeply disturbing.

 

[chikusho]

a whole bunch of stuff but also:
I am not content to believe that the route by which Sterling, however deservingly, came to be sanctioned will not be used against people who do not deserve it. Full stop.

I don't see what you're getting at.
He's not being prosecuted for anything. This is not a matter of illegally collecting evidence to be used against him in a legal action. If he wants to sue whoever made the recording and released it, he's completely free to do so.

The fact remains that he's an awful, hateful, tragic human being, and how people eventually find out about it is irrelevant.

To quote myself from earlier in the thread:

Imagine you heard a friend of yours saying that they hate your guts and find you repulsive.
Would you reason that:
"oh, but he said that in a private conversation, so it's fine. he has a right to hate my guts and find me repulsive without any reaction or consequences from me. we can still hang out and stuff, it's all good!"?

Sure he has a right to privacy. Sure, he has the right to be as bigoted as he wants to. But you can't just expect people to forget it happened just because it comes from a possibly illegal source.

 

[Amnesiac Pigeon]

The fact he name dropped him as an "old bigot" surely shows that he is not endorsing that sort of behaviour.

Turtlerock might have over reacted a little to this.

 

[StriderShinryu]

And... he's been fired.

"Game studio Turtle Rock (Left 4 Dead, Evolve) has let go of their community manager following a controversial tweet in which he called disgraced L.A. Clippers owner Donald Sterling "a victim" who "has the right as an American to be an old bigot in the security of his own home."

http://kotaku.com/community-manager-fired-after-calling-donald-sterling-a-1570567303

Well, that didn't take long.

 

[Vegosiux]

And... he's been fired.

"Game studio Turtle Rock (Left 4 Dead, Evolve) has let go of their community manager following a controversial tweet in which he called disgraced L.A. Clippers owner Donald Sterling "a victim" who "has the right as an American to be an old bigot in the security of his own home."

http://kotaku.com/community-manager-fired-after-calling-donald-sterling-a-1570567303

Well, that didn't take long.

Cue a lot of people patting themselves on the back and moving on and the underlying issues continuing to not be solved because everyone moved on to something else, I suppose.

 

[Easton Dark]

For starters she actually segregated the entrances black and white people can enter through.

Pfffff

And... he's been fired.

No controversial opinions. People don't understand what being a representative means.

 

[DrOswald]

a whole bunch of stuff but also:
I am not content to believe that the route by which Sterling, however deservingly, came to be sanctioned will not be used against people who do not deserve it. Full stop.

I don't see what you're getting at.
He's not being prosecuted for anything. This is not a matter of illegally collecting evidence to be used against him in a legal action. If he wants to sue whoever made the recording and released it, he's completely free to do so.

The fact remains that he's an awful, hateful, tragic human being, and how people eventually find out about it is irrelevant.

To quote myself from earlier in the thread:

Imagine you heard a friend of yours saying that they hate your guts and find you repulsive.
Would you reason that:
"oh, but he said that in a private conversation, so it's fine. he has a right to hate my guts and find me repulsive without any reaction or consequences from me. we can still hang out and stuff, it's all good!"?

Sure he has a right to privacy. Sure, he has the right to be as bigoted as he wants to. But you can't just expect people to forget it happened just because it comes from a possibly illegal source.

The fact that none of what happened was legal action makes it even worse. We aren't talking about legal rights but rights as an ideal, which are what legal rights are based on. Everyone should be able to live, everyone should be free, and everyone should have the right to pursue happiness. Everyone should be able to have a reasonable expectation of privacy. In the case of Sterling we threw away out ideal of privacy because we don't like him. How quickly we abandon our ideals.

Apparently everyone thinks it is ok the ideal of privacy was violated because we caught a bigot in the act. The evil action is justified if it serves some good purpose. The end justify the means. I don't agree. The ideal of privacy is far to important and it is becoming ever more important as we move towards a society of near constant surveillance.

As far as people forgetting it happened? I don't expect that. The cat is out of the bag, so to speak. But that doesn't mean I am happy that people stooped so low in the first place.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

Really? I thought the victims were all the people he forcefully evicted and underpaid because of his illogical hatred of their skin colour.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Pretty much exactly what I said when this came on the news, as opposed to the two other people there who thought it was fine. It was a private comment of his private opinion and I don't think it should affect anything he does professionally unless those opinions become relevant in that area.

It's still fine to boycott or whatever you like if you think differently and are happy to live in a world where people are prosecuted for their private opinions in public life, as we saw with Eich of Mozilla. I just think if you held an unpopular opinion, you'd want the same opportunities as anyone else professionally. But it's your discretion.

and hardcore racists get the crap beat out of them by the group they throw bigoted slurs at.

I'd be down with that. If they're verbally assaulting another person or group, yeah, let's see them get the crap beat out of them. But don't fire them from their jobs unless they start doing it there.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Pretty much exactly what I said when this came on the news, as opposed to the two other people there who thought it was fine. It was a private comment of his private opinion and I don't think it should affect anything he does professionally unless those opinions become relevant in that area.

It's still fine to boycott or whatever you like if you think differently and are happy to live in a world where people are prosecuted for their private opinions in public life, as we saw with Eich of Mozilla. I just think if you held an unpopular opinion, you'd want the same opportunities as anyone else professionally. But it's your discretion.

and hardcore racists get the crap beat out of them by the group they throw bigoted slurs at.

I'd be down with that. If they're verbally assaulting another person or group, yeah, let's see them get the crap beat out of them. But don't fire them from their jobs unless they start doing it there.

What if they have a history of illegally evicting tenants or not paying employees a fair wage based on their skin color?Would it be okay for a employer to fire a known racist for damaging their company's reputation?

For the first case, those tenants would ideally be able to press charges for anything illegal the person does. As we all know this isn't actually the case because only rich people have access to the legal system but the principle is there. As far as people working for them, if they don't like the pay they shouldn't have taken the job. Unless he changed their pay while they were working there I do not see how they have been wronged. They're in his employ, he is giving them a specified amount of money for a specified job, that should have been clear when they were hired. If some races are being paid less than members of other races in similar positions in the same company then that is unfair but it's not my company.

For the second case, yes, but it all comes back to what damages a company's reputation. It's not necessarily fair, but sometimes essentially mandatory to fire someone for damaging company reputation. But what determines that is the public's reaction, and if they're going to boycott a company over the private opinions of an employee stated whilst not representing the company and fail to draw a distinction between public and private conduct, then it doesn't matter what is right or fair, the company is going to try to remedy the situation rather than exacerbate it, except in the very rare case that it makes a stand for its employee, potentially losing customers because they are too narrow-minded to accept that people can have different, even stupid or intolerant, opinions in the world. It is the company's discretion to hire or not hire someone and I would think that decision would be made based on their work-related skills.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

too bad Sterling's attitude was also during business. It's one thing to do it in the privacy of your own home, but subjecting your employees to such an attitude is where the 1st amendment is null and void. The guy isn't worthy of defense.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

Really? I thought the victims were all the people he forcefully evicted and underpaid because of his illogical hatred of their skin colour.

Not according to some people,apparently Donald Sterling is a victim because he unknowingly stuck his foot in his mouth.

Reminds me of that Southpark episode where Alec Baldwin says his thumbs are to blame for his homophobic tweets.

 

[Robert Marrs]

The fact that he was privately recorded does make me feel like he is at least somewhat of a victim. Pretty much everyone here does or says things in private that would not go over well if it was made public. It might not be hateful racism but its still something the public may not approve of. So long as he is not actively trying to keep other people down (which does not include not wanting them in his personal life) I don't really see the issues. You can't thought police people and a private conversation with someone is pretty much the same thing. So yea he is a racist asshole but he wasn't waving that around like a flag. He isn't the leader of the KKK and he is not hosting white supremacy podcasts every tuesday. I understand the NBA doing what they did and the backlash is understandable but I can't really dispute the fact that recording and leaking a private conversation like this is wrong. He kept it in private obviously and it should have stayed that way.

EDIT: Well apparently he has been accused of doing some shady racist stuff in the past. So I would say if he was a known racist because of his actions but that knowledge was just contained within the NBA or the people he works with then its a little less bad to expose him. Still troubling but understandable. IF that is true though. People love to make big deals bigger when the pot is easy to stir.

 

[BlumiereBleck]

Jesus....these comments are filled with more hate than any racist comment I've heard from this Sterling. And btw he does have a right to say it, the First Amendment doesn't end where your feelings begin.