- Sep 6, 2008
Look, I told you I had no knowledge of your background with the corporate world. I didn't go making assumptions. Go read the quote again, or better yet, let me post it for you again.nipsen said:Such as the comment about my corporate background?
Problem is - he speaks about games and the customers he has. It's not a confidential job, he doesn't specify anyone - he could simply be working as a clerk in any store that sells games, and make that same comment.
So what is the thinking going on here? That he attaches the thought of piracy to Gamestop? That there is an image of shinyness and cellophaned cleanness that Gamestop feels their employee did something negative towards?
Obviously we have no idea if that actually was the reason - but here we are, aren't we, with both the article writer and many posters /defending/ that idea. That we don't know if actually was the reason.
So yes, I feel I can question people's ..bi...lateral thinking process because of that.
You are right that we are speculating, that is what we do! It's a discussion forum, of course we are going to throw our collective two cents in on why we think he was fired, and it isn't too much of a stretch to think it had something to do with mentioning piracy, a game involving simulated rape, and his employer in the same unsanctioned interview. The job may not be confidential, but like I said, it is something you just don't do.I don't know if you've had any experience in the corporate world, but if you currently do or ever do in the future, keep this story in the back of your mind.
I hate analogies, but let's say I worked for Burger King. I'm giving an interview, going on the record, and I give my opinion on how meat is disgusting, and talk to the press about how cruelly the animals are slaughtered. It wouldn't matter that what I said was really of no concern to my employer, as long as the headlines read "Burger King employee opens up about the horrifying reality of meat". Companies carefully craft thier image to cater to whatever audience they need to, and when something like that happenes it's like throwing a wrench into all the work they have done, and it means they may even have to backpedal a bit to correct it.
If he was just a clerk in any game store, if he didn't give his employer or his name or anything else to the media, more than likely he would have been fine. He probably also signed something before he started working there that involved him not talking to the media and using the company name, I forget what they call it. A Non-disclosure agreement perhaps? I've had to sign a couple for different jobs, even working for small-time television networks.
It doesn't make it a "chilling policy" just because you keep repeating that it is.SaintWaldo said:So, you're defending a chilling policy?