Scott Cawthon (FNaF guy) cancelled

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
6,314
1,514
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Acted on the customers' concerns, no question.

I say that based on the following:

1: I don't know what the exact security protocols were that evening, but I'm reminded of airports, where rules to keep in mind are to never leave baggage unattended, and to not make any jokes about carrying items, because security guards are obliged to act on these kinds of things, no matter how small the chance. I don't imagine that the area was as highly secured as an airport, but this was 2017, and Europe wasn't exactly running short of terrorist attacks round then.

2: I work with security guards on a regular basis, and even in the scope of my own position, if a customer expresses unease about something, I'm obliged to go and check it out. Sometimes it's nothing, other times it's serious (serious enough to even call the police in). But I can't simply say "don't worry about it." Fear of being called something, or intentionally harassing someone, or being anything else, isn't pleasant, but I can't not do my job based on what I find pleasant and not.
How many times do you think you've ever seen or heard a security guard say 'don't worry about it?"
What does 'check it out' mean to you?
How many terrorist were running around in Europe in 2017?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
6,294
1,918
118
Country
United Kingdom
Well I don't know about you but I don't really consider the following to be criticism. (these are based on real tweets I've seen floating about)

"Scott Cawthon supports killing children"
"Scott Cawthon should kill himself"
"Scott Cawthon wants [insert group] dead]"
"Scott Cawthon is a fascist who should be dragged out into the streets and shot"
"Scott Cawthon doesn't deserve to have a family"
"I hope his wife has a miscarriage"

This is the kind of bullshit people are objecting to. It's not criticism it's vitriol and bile being spewed often just done to reinforce narratives especially
in the case of the additional often unproven accusations of malice people are attributing to Scott.
OK, so those would be examples of extreme online harassment and abuse.

When most people talk about "cancel culture", that's not what they mean, because this isn't representative of the kind of "woke" criticisms that get labelled with that descriptor.

I mean... we were talking a few pages back about someone who offered pretty mild and polite criticism of Factorio on the official blog (right next to compliments about the quality of his work). No abuse, nothing even remotely close to what you describe above. But that was still considered "cancel culture" by him and others in this very thread.

So no, we ain't talking about abuse here.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
7,629
991
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
How many times do you think you've ever seen or heard a security guard say 'don't worry about it?"
In my experience? Never.

If anything, I'm the one who's had to tell security guards to not worry about something.

What does 'check it out' mean to you?
What does...what?

Check it out. Investigate. Dig into. Explore. Inquire. Ascertain.

What do you think "check it out" means? Christ...

How many terrorist were running around in Europe in 2017?

Quote: "The years 2014–16 saw more people killed by Islamic terrorist attacks in Europe than all previous years combined, and the highest rate of attack plots per year. Most of this terrorist activity was inspired by ISIL."

So, fine. Less than previous years, but still coming off a high.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dwarvenhobble

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,097
4,287
118
You're shifting the goalposts.
No, I'm not. You say 22 people are dead because a security guard was worried someone might think he was racist, which you emphasise the validity of by arguing that it is in an official report. It is valid to point out that the report can say no more or less than what the security guard told the investigation, and the guard may not have been entirely honest.

If we're playing this game, then anyone who says anything, in any report, or declaration, or anything similar, is up for debate.
Correct. And so it should be.

There is a world of difference between a fact that we can ascertain with forensics and material evidence, and one person's assertion of what they thought that cannot be meaningfully countered. A cop shoots a black man with no witnesses, and claims he thought the man was drawing a gun. Who's to gainsay that? And don't we think that cop might very plausibly lie, given the risk of punishment if he had no good reason?

Frankly, I can relate to him, because I've experienced people playing the race card, and it isn't pleasant. I still have to do my job though, even if people are accusing me of being intentionally difficult for them (which thankfully rarely happens, but it does stick out).
Yes, many of us have. I can't honestly say it's stopped me doing my job, though.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
4,422
494
88
If he's donating to people like Trump it doesn't matter how he explains himself or what he has to say about the matter. That's not people building a narrative, it's people judging him on his actions.
When the country only has two options and people are that vehemently opposed to people who supported Trump it's going to be fun seeing them still unable to put such differences aside and having to deliberately avoid and refuse to work with or buy from ~40%+ of the country.
But that won't happen. It's weirdly selective outrage where Scott has become the enemy of the month personifying all the things people see as wrong with the "enemies" so said people don't have to actually hold to their purported ideals and actually you know boycott a ton of companies they like who were big Trump donors too.
Scott is just the chosen whipping boy of the week for people who are vindictive and butthurt mostly but still can't even manage to just buy something other than the Chick' Fil A chicken sandwich because it's the one they find best or whatever.

Hey, if Scott Cawthon actually comes to the realization now that 'Shit, I've actually been donating money to a bunch evil scumbags. I didn't know.' and proceeds to stop doing this then that's cool.
Won't be enough for the people after him. There is no true redemption only perpetual servitude to them allowed as a way to stop the outrage seemingly.

But somehow I doubt that. And Jesus Christ, everyone knew what Trump was about the moment he started running for president. If by 2020 Cawthon (who was still donating for Trump's reelection) still didn't know, then I'm sorry, but I find that hard to believe.
Supporting the rebublican party NOW pretty much equates to supporting a bunch of facists who want gays, trans people, and non-whites to go away. So saying 'Hey Scott, I disagree with you' and saying 'Fuck you Scott for supporting these facist shitheels' pretty much comes down to the same thing.
And who decides what is and isn't reasoned criticism? (And no, I'm not talking about death threats.) The very fact that Cawthon is getting pushback of any kind is already seen as unreasonable by the usual crowd.
And the mentality that Trump truly really wants people dead is the mentality that lead to the congressional baseball shooting in 2017 by a shooter who believed he was saving lives.
This is not a way forward this is a way down a dark path of recriminations and petty vindictive tit for tat actions and or possible civil war 2.0 because people just can't accept other voting a different way and supporting a different party.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
4,422
494
88
OK, so those would be examples of extreme online harassment and abuse.

When most people talk about "cancel culture", that's not what they mean, because this isn't representative of the kind of "woke" criticisms that get labelled with that descriptor.
Except it very much does seem to be a large chunk of the woke "criticism" and as has been said

So saying 'Hey Scott, I disagree with you' and saying 'Fuck you Scott for supporting these facist shitheels' pretty much comes down to the same thing.
And who decides what is and isn't reasoned criticism? (And no, I'm not talking about death threats.) The very fact that Cawthon is getting pushback of any kind is already seen as unreasonable by the usual crowd.
So yeh that is being presented at least by Shinji in this very thread as acceptable criticism.

I mean... we were talking a few pages back about someone who offered pretty mild and polite criticism of Factorio on the official blog (right next to compliments about the quality of his work). No abuse, nothing even remotely close to what you describe above. But that was still considered "cancel culture" by him and others in this very thread.

So no, we ain't talking about abuse here.
Mild criticism based purely on a political lens and wanting language changed on some honestly bullshit idea that it wasn't inclusive enough.
Pulling the "oh you're not being inclusive" really is a weasel worded way to try and manipulate a developer into action and a veiled accusation against them. It wasn't mild and polite criticism in reality it was deliberately manipulative and anyone aware of it would see such compliments as just some-one trying to suck up more to get said person to consider and push said changes. It's a regular method used by sociopaths, I should know I used to know one for years and the pattern becomes very damn obvious.
Just because a person calls another a bastard with fancy words it's no less calling them a bastard in the end and in reality no more polite.

It was cancel culture because (and again I'm saying this based on precedent of knowing some-one who was a sociopath) the next step is to push harder and then push for cancellation. The Factorio dev had 3 options in reality: Delay and hope it goes away, pull the trigger on attempted cancellation now before a mob and narrative can get built up or pull the trigger on cancellation later. The Dev chose option 2. The cancel attempt mostly failed (the dev still got banned from their games on subreddit) and that's that. Now I would bet this won't be fully over yet and over the next I dunno 2 months the Factorio subreddit with slowly morph into something either attacking the game or pushing people to other games or carrying on the cancel attempt considering how such activists who would ban a dev from their own games subreddit tend to act.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
4,422
494
88
No, I'm not. You say 22 people are dead because a security guard was worried someone might think he was racist, which you emphasise the validity of by arguing that it is in an official report. It is valid to point out that the report can say no more or less than what the security guard told the investigation, and the guard may not have been entirely honest.



Correct. And so it should be.

There is a world of difference between a fact that we can ascertain with forensics and material evidence, and one person's assertion of what they thought that cannot be meaningfully countered. A cop shoots a black man with no witnesses, and claims he thought the man was drawing a gun. Who's to gainsay that? And don't we think that cop might very plausibly lie, given the risk of punishment if he had no good reason?



Yes, many of us have. I can't honestly say it's stopped me doing my job, though.
The Guard may not have been honest.
Then again in the UK there was a mass of rape accusations not looked into at one point for fear of people being called racist.
It wouldn't be without precedent.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
6,294
1,918
118
Country
United Kingdom
Except it very much does seem to be a large chunk of the woke "criticism" and as has been said
Nothing of that is "woke". Ridiculous, exploitative online abusers exist in every sphere of online discourse.

You already have numerous examples in this thread alone of criticism-- not death threats, not abuse-- being described and understood as "cancel culture", including by the targets of that criticism. That's what I'm talking about, and that's what people in this thread are defending.

If mere criticism does not constitute "cancel culture" to you, then congratulations: your understanding of it is completely at odds with most other people condemning cancel culture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
6,314
1,514
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
The Guard may not have been honest.
Then again in the UK there was a mass of rape accusations not looked into at one point for fear of people being called racist.
It wouldn't be without precedent.
'For fear of being called racist'

Some people are SO scared of a word they dont do their job. Man, it must hurt you guys physically, like a stab in the back or something, when someone says it
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
6,314
1,514
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
In my experience? Never.

If anything, I'm the one who's had to tell security guards to not worry about something.

What does...what?

Check it out. Investigate. Dig into. Explore. Inquire. Ascertain.

What do you think "check it out" means? Christ...
So.. what this guard did is incredibly weird... right? Like out of the norm?

Like, specifically, how do you think the guard should have approached. He's so worried about harassing people (I think the term was in the article). Does that sound like a security guard
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
4,422
494
88
'For fear of being called racist'

Some people are SO scared of a word they dont do their job. Man, it must hurt you guys physically, like a stab in the back or something, when someone says it
Because it can cost them their jobs or job prospects now. While screwing up like this gets swept under the rug.
No-one wants to have to deal with months of inquiry and personal investigation over racism accusations.
Being part of a larger systemic failing inquiry? Sure because then you're not in it alone at least.

Nothing of that is "woke". Ridiculous, exploitative online abusers exist in every sphere of online discourse.

You already have numerous examples in this thread alone of criticism-- not death threats, not abuse-- being described and understood as "cancel culture", including by the targets of that criticism. That's what I'm talking about, and that's what people in this thread are defending.

If mere criticism does not constitute "cancel culture" to you, then congratulations: your understanding of it is completely at odds with most other people condemning cancel culture.
You're right they do exist in all sphere.
Mostly though they've moved into the woke sphere because they can bully and harass people and be seen as the good guy for it.
Wanna accuse a dead man of being a monster and call on his wife to "repair his legacy" on the anniversary of what would have been their wedding? Yeh it happened and some people even tried to defend the writer over doing so and then claiming that his widow needed to use her platform to set in and stop the backlash she was getting from his fans and the guys other content creator friends.

In this thread people are criticising him. In the wider twitter sphere and places that went after him it's fare more toxic vitriol and bile being spewed mostly by people hungry for clout who want to be seen as the most righteous by denouncing him loudest and most vehemently.

People aren't saying this thread is cancel culture. This thread was made about people trying and seemingly succeeding in pushing for a cancellation (in this case a self cancellation).

As I said before this kind of crap of accusing people of harm and escalation into death threats against people and their families was done to Stanley Kubrick in the UK over A Clockwork Orange. It was cancellation then. It's cancellation now and going "Oh but some people were offering actual criticism". Yeh and what about the rest? Those sending the threats and pushing the claims of harm?.
Applying the same logic there is no terrorism in the world if we ignore the minority of people who are terrorist so we don't have to see terrorism as a problem or take precaution against that right?
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
6,294
1,918
118
Country
United Kingdom
As I said before this kind of crap of accusing people of harm and escalation into death threats against people and their families was done to Stanley Kubrick in the UK over A Clockwork Orange. It was cancellation then. It's cancellation now and going "Oh but some people were offering actual criticism". Yeh and what about the rest? Those sending the threats and pushing the claims of harm?
Actually think about it for a second.

Nobody is defending death threats or harassment or abuse. People in this thread have consistently been objecting to the use of the term "cancel culture" to describe criticism. Not abuse or harassment. Criticism. The notion that if somebody decides not to buy FNAF and mouths off about Cawthon, they're "cancelling" him. The notion that the fans "cancelled" Factorio by criticising him on that blog.

Criticism is what we're describing here. Because no death threats or legitimate harassment were described in the article posted by the OP.

You ask "what about the rest"-- what about them? They're universally condemned. They have not a single defender here. Their existence has absolutely zero reflection on people criticising Cawthon.

===

If you believe that death threats/ harassment/ abuse are requisites for something to be "cancel culture", then you can logically agree that those who are merely criticising Cawthon and not buying his game are not guilty of cancel culture. Right? Hell, that would mean that most people who're accused of cancel culture are innocent of it, if they haven't been sending threats and abuse! Your position would actually absolve most people accused of it, and show it to be the empty accusation it usually is!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buyetyen

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
4,422
494
88
Actually think about it for a second.

Nobody is defending death threats or harassment or abuse. People in this thread have consistently been objecting to the use of the term "cancel culture" to describe criticism. Not abuse or harassment. Criticism. The notion that if somebody decides not to buy FNAF and mouths off about Cawthon, they're "cancelling" him. The notion that the fans "cancelled" Factorio by criticising him on that blog.
Yet would you not say with the death threats and accusations of harm and claims against Scott that that does constitute cancel culture?

That is what people are calling out in this thread and objecting to mostly.

People trying to get the games pulled from stores.
People making up insane bullshit to paint Scott as a monster.
People really stretching the truth to try and paint Scott as a monster with "Oh he should have know that months or years later the politicians he supported would put forward bills like this". That's no more a valid criticism than if people in here want to blame all Biden supporters and backers for the likely large number of Covid-19 deaths resulting from the overcrowded migrant camps where conditions were more crowded and worse than under Trump.

Criticism is what we're describing here. Because no death threats or legitimate harassment were described in the article posted by the OP.

You ask "what about the rest"-- what about them? They're universally condemned. They have not a single defender here. Their existence has absolutely zero reflection on people criticising Cawthon.

===

If you believe that death threats/ harassment/ abuse are requisites for something to be "cancel culture", then you can logically agree that those who are merely criticising Cawthon and not buying his game are not guilty of cancel culture. Right? Hell, that would mean that most people who're accused of cancel culture are innocent of it, if they haven't been sending threats and abuse! Your position would actually absolve most people accused of it, and show it to be the empty accusation it usually is!
And as Shinji pointed out he sees some of the more hyperboic claims of harm and malice being made against Scott as just criticism.

I'm talking about more than just the article as in what can be found and reported to have happened other places too and the wider backlash to Scott. Which would be cancel culture.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
6,294
1,918
118
Country
United Kingdom
Yet would you not say with the death threats and accusations of harm and claims against Scott that that does constitute cancel culture?
I'd say that's a hundred miles away from what most people are describing when they use the term. And that includes people who decry it.

That is what people are calling out in this thread and objecting to mostly.
Absolute nonsense. You're the only one who even brought up absolutely extreme behaviour like that. Most people were just talking about people moaning.

People trying to get the games pulled from stores.
People making up insane bullshit to paint Scott as a monster.
People really stretching the truth to try and paint Scott as a monster with "Oh he should have know that months or years later the politicians he supported would put forward bills like this". That's no more a valid criticism than if people in here want to blame all Biden supporters and backers for the likely large number of Covid-19 deaths resulting from the overcrowded migrant camps where conditions were more crowded and worse than under Trump.
OK, so now you're not talking about death threats or harassment any more, then...?

And, no, you don't need to predict what kind of bills they would put forward. Most of them had a well-established pattern of anti-LGBT legislation. That's a perfectly valid avenue of criticism.

And as Shinji pointed out he sees some of the more hyperboic claims of harm and malice being made against Scott as just criticism.
I mean, people like McConnell and Carton have a very real, very severely negative impact on LGBT peoples' lives. That's not hyperbole; that's a statement of fact.

And I don't think it's unreasonable to say significant party donations help bring that about.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
7,629
991
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Correct. And so it should be.

There is a world of difference between a fact that we can ascertain with forensics and material evidence, and one person's assertion of what they thought that cannot be meaningfully countered. A cop shoots a black man with no witnesses, and claims he thought the man was drawing a gun. Who's to gainsay that? And don't we think that cop might very plausibly lie, given the risk of punishment if he had no good reason?
I agree there's a difference between forensics and statements, but again, that goes to every scenario ever. An inquiry was held, questions were asked, and if the inquiry is doing its job, I doubt it's going to ask a single question of a single person. I can pick and choose what to believe as well, even in the light of inquiries that go against what I choose to believe.

As for the cop scenario, there's a number of mitigating circumstances. First, even if there's no witnesses, there's still body cameras, so if it wasn't on/working, why? Second, if the officer is alone, again, why, because that would usually be a rarity. Third, you mentioned forensics - this is a scenario where forensics could potentially come into play, so if the forensics look damning on the officer, then there's evidence against his statements.

The officer very might plausibly lie, but I don't think it's really an equivalant scenario.

Yes, many of us have. I can't honestly say it's stopped me doing my job, though.
Which is good. Hasn't stopped you from doing your job, hasn't stopped me from doing my job, shouldn't have stopped the security guard from doing his job.

So.. what this guard did is incredibly weird... right? Like out of the norm?
Don't know about "incredibly weird" per se, but the unease would be normal, not acting on it isn't.

Like, specifically, how do you think the guard should have approached. He's so worried about harassing people (I think the term was in the article). Does that sound like a security guard
Should act on the customer feedback, approach the person, and then act from there (I say act from there because there's a strong chance that guidelines are in place for approaching members of the public). At least ask to open the backpack.

And yes, that does sound like a security guard. I know the stereotype of the security guard who's a bully, who gets off on a power high and all that, and I've no doubt that there's security guards like that, but I've never worked with or met anyone who works in security who's actually like that. Most security guards want to get through the day with as little trouble as possible, and if there is trouble, approach it with trepidation (I've been asked to come with them to provide support multiple occasions). If anything, security guards are less active than I'd like because a lot of the time they spend time sitting down and/or looking at their phones rather than moving around the library and making sure everything's fine.

So yes, the guard's unease is very understandable. It doesn't excuse him from not acting on it. I mean, hypothetically Agema is right, and he's lying (though then I can accuse anyone here of lying for lack of evidence), and if that's the case, that makes the situation even worse.

'For fear of being called racist'

Some people are SO scared of a word they dont do their job. Man, it must hurt you guys physically, like a stab in the back or something, when someone says it
I'm sorry, but I don't know what your point is.

People feared being called racist (understandably) and didn't act (not understandably). If you're criticizing the authorities, then yes, they deserve to be criticized. Well done. We agree. Have a cookie.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
6,314
1,514
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
I'm sorry, but I don't know what your point is.

People feared being called racist (understandably) and didn't act (not understandably). If you're criticizing the authorities, then yes, they deserve to be criticized. Well done. We agree. Have a cookie.
Because it can cost them their jobs or job prospects now. While screwing up like this gets swept under the rug.
No-one wants to have to deal with months of inquiry and personal investigation over racism accusations.
Let me tell you guys a story about my day yesterday. I had an assumption about some of my staff at work. Generally, I've noticed that Asian staff at the child care centre are more 'rough' with the children than other nationalities. Not like slapping or something serious like that, like having their hand on the kids shoulder to guide them in a certain direction. I, as a white dude, went down to them to have a chat. We discussed how some of them think that being more rough is a good thing as it keeps the children in line. Others said they felt guilty as they couldn't communicate effectively to keep them in line and had to resort to other means. Others cited examples of how they were usually less rough than other demographics. Other said it's only one or two kids who maybe violent to other children and that's when they might be rough. Others cited their culture, as that's how they were brought up.

I can also tell you a store about our pool. A person dropped off there kid for swimming lessons and wanted to sunbake while they waited. Without their shirt on and thus had their breasts out. A staff member came over and asked them to cover up and the person stated that they identified as a man so what they were doing was fine.

Another story I have is about a mum at the same child care who doesn't want to male staff member to change their kids nappy. Obviously this is sexists and not on.

This is some of my stories from June... let alone the rest of the year. I have to deal with an assortment of racial and trans issues. Guess how many times I've been canceled? Nor has any of my staff.

And most importantly, I dont go into a conversation thinking that a different race, sex or gender identity is out to get me. Because, its incredibly rare. Trans people and other races and genders aren't evil monsters trying to demonise you. Despite what the media says
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
4,422
494
88
I'd say that's a hundred miles away from what most people are describing when they use the term. And that includes people who decry it.
No it's really not.

In the case of the Factorio dev the Uncle Bob stuff was trying to pull him in to an effort to cancel Uncle Bob by reducing his exposure. Uncle Bob apparently codes well and is seen as a figure to look up to for coding skill and quality. People who disagree with Uncle Bob's politics think he shouldn't be allowed to be praised or get positive attention or a platform for his coding skills. The Factorio dev call it out for what it was.

Then also called out the calls to change terms like "Craftsmanship" as the set up it was to create and excuse to cancel him. He failed to appease the cocodile so now it was coming for him.


The Factorio Dev was banned from the games subreddit for his efforts and saw his game face a review bomb (which failed spectacularly)

Most other examples I brought up in this thread that I'm informed on I can happily point out how it's cancel culture and not just some criticism.

Mostly because it's not criticism more like struggle sessions going on and either the person relents or the mob finds some other way to punish them because they can't or won't accept anything but getting their own way. It's not about understanding. It's not about trying to learn and understand it's about people looking to punish others for not doing and saying what they want.

Absolute nonsense. You're the only one who even brought up absolutely extreme behaviour like that. Most people were just talking about people moaning.
Actually I'm not the one who brought it up first here I'm pretty sure either Specter or Criticalgaming who did many pages ago initially.

OK, so now you're not talking about death threats or harassment any more, then...?

And, no, you don't need to predict what kind of bills they would put forward. Most of them had a well-established pattern of anti-LGBT legislation. That's a perfectly valid avenue of criticism.
What has Tulsi Gabbard done before again in that pattern?
I say this because she is one of the ones sites like Kotaku chose to specifically highlight Scott as having supported and her being Anti-LGBT
Also why can't Biden be blamed for the massive wave of illegal border crossings when his campaign was about giving people to right to come to the USA etc etc then?


I mean, people like McConnell and Carton have a very real, very severely negative impact on LGBT peoples' lives. That's not hyperbole; that's a statement of fact.

And I don't think it's unreasonable to say significant party donations help bring that about.
And saying "Scott tried to kill us" or "Scott wants us dead" is very much not criticism especially given his response and reasoning etc.