Former Valve employee seeks $3.1M in trans. discrimination suit - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=NixNax123;50391775]do you honestly believe people just run around at valve and do whatever the hell they want with no supervision[/QUOTE] The whole "FLAT MANAGEMENT ITS A MADHOUSE OVER THERE" line that everyone constantly hammers on is so annoying. Everyone read that stupid handbook leak and now feels entitled to talk with some sort of authority on what it's like to work at Valve as if they were a 10 year veteran of the company.

I think the fact that people don't realize valve does more than make titles adds to that narrative. People think they aren't productive but they definitely are, just not on IP like they used to. I think they're dead set on pioneering new gaming tech and improving their platform.

[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50391991]I think the fact that people don't realize valve does more than make titles adds to that narrative. People think they aren't productive but they definitely are, just not on IP like they used to. I think they're dead set on pioneering new gaming tech and improving their platform.[/QUOTE] They half ass all of the projects they release that are intended to add to the "valve experience" and let their main product languish. Have you seen steam on OS X? it's a piece of garbage and doesn't even utilize high DPI screens to their fullest yet. Steam on windows isn't even great, and I can't talk about linux but I assume it's even more tragic than the OS X version. All of their stuff comes out half baked. Greenlight, steam controller, steam boxes (do those even exist anymore), etc. Valve tries to do way too much and they end up being mediocre at all of it. Steam as an application hasn't had a significant change in a while for the better. They keep adding new features on top of the shakiest base ever and it's just a mess.

That's just not true. Sure they focus on PC but I've used both Linux and Mac steams and vive and steam controllers are not bad. Yes steam box exists I have the Alienware one. [editline]25th May 2016[/editline] And steam has definitely gotten new features and improvements over these past couple years alone

[QUOTE=Lysander32;50388819]What the hell? Being trans isn't a choice. It's not a trans persons fault they get ridiculed, it's the person who's not accepting of them. There's nothing inherently wrong with being trans so it's on the person who can't get over themselves and their biased views on gender, not on the trans person who's done absolutely nothing wrong by transitioning. While the cause is not exactly known, scientists have been switching from behavioral psychological standpoints of research on gender dysphoria to biological causes and have made some progress. So if someones biology literally is working against them, how can you blame them for trying to fix what is wrong with them?[/QUOTE] As far as I'm concerned, people should focus on their own problems and give less of a shit about other people's. No one should be obligated to give a damn about another person, because that's horseshit and insincere. This whole "if you're not with us, you're against us" mentality that's plaguing progressive movements is troubling, especially when it comes down to identity and supporting groups who revolve around it. Anyway, accepting people on the basis of what they are, no matter what they are, is bullshit. People/groups need to earn acceptance within their communities, not expect it.

Solution: Fire Torsten fucking [url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160209211205/https://www.reddit.com/r/Steam/comments/44yl24/how_a_whole_language_of_the_steam_translation/]cunt[/url]

[QUOTE=Ardosos;50387010]It's a shame "they" can be plural, though. We need a singular gender-neutral pronoun.[/QUOTE] I swear this comes up every single thread. They is both singular and plural. It always has been. Example: Doorbell ringing "Some[B]one[/B] is at the door. I wonder what [B]they[/B] want."

[QUOTE=Doneeh;50392687]As far as I'm concerned, people should focus on their own problems and give less of a shit about other people's. No one should be obligated to give a damn about another person, because that's horseshit and insincere. This whole "if you're not with us, you're against us" mentality that's plaguing progressive movements is troubling, especially when it comes down to identity and supporting groups who revolve around it. Anyway, accepting people on the basis of what they are, no matter what they are, is bullshit. People/groups need to earn acceptance within their communities, not expect it.[/QUOTE] The more you force a grey sitution to be seen as a black and white situation, the more people either tune out or, finding that they're suddenly demons for what they considered a good position (like the current huge backlash against colorblindism, even though many were taught it the 90s as a good thing), are going to say "Welp, I guess I'm A Bad Person. Fuck those jackasses".

[QUOTE=VenomousBeetle;50391991]I think the fact that people don't realize valve does more than make titles adds to that narrative. People think they aren't productive but they definitely are, just not on IP like they used to. I think they're dead set on pioneering new gaming tech and improving their platform.[/QUOTE] I think this is especially true when you consider that Half-Life 2 was kind of making use of external opportunities, which was the advancement of computer technology at the time, as well as the creation of their in-house engine. It's all about creating a foundation for their work, and I think they've been very focused on establishing new ground. [editline]25th May 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=ZestyLemons;50393024]I swear this comes up every single thread. They is both singular and plural. It always has been. Example: Doorbell ringing "Some[B]one[/B] is at the door. I wonder what [B]they[/B] want."[/QUOTE] Agreed. You have to be really bad with language to not know how to use "they".

[QUOTE=ZestyLemons;50393024]I swear this comes up every single thread. They is both singular and plural. It always has been. Example: Doorbell ringing "Some[B]one[/B] is at the door. I wonder what [B]they[/B] want."[/QUOTE] I said [I]can[/I], the fact that "they" [I]can[/I] be plural. I didn't say it's always plural.

[QUOTE=Ardosos;50393350]I said [I]can[/I], the fact that "they" [I]can[/I] be plural. I didn't say it's always plural.[/QUOTE] It's pretty ironic that people are criticizing your understanding of English based on this misconception.

[QUOTE=Doneeh;50392687]As far as I'm concerned, people should focus on their own problems and give less of a shit about other people's. No one should be obligated to give a damn about another person, because that's horseshit and insincere. This whole "if you're not with us, you're against us" mentality that's plaguing progressive movements is troubling, especially when it comes down to identity and supporting groups who revolve around it. Anyway, accepting people on the basis of what they are, no matter what they are, is bullshit. People/groups need to earn acceptance within their communities, not expect it.[/QUOTE] I actually have no words for this, other than the fact it makes me sad you actually think hatred of transgender people is acceptable. No one is expecting to be accepted if they act like an asshole to everyone, they're expecting to not be hated just because they're transgender. What the hell is wrong saying "It's not really okay to dislike someone for factors outside their control". You can dislike people, just not because they're gay/black/trans/etc because there's absolutely no reason to hate someone for something like that. This "rugged individualism" thing has made the US one of the most behind Western nations in the world. People need to support each other and that means being advocates for issues against discrimination and advocating for things like universal healthcare, paid parental leave, etc. I can't believe I just saw someone basically say "Fuck helping people"

[QUOTE=Doneeh;50392687]As far as I'm concerned, people should focus on their own problems and give less of a shit about other people's. No one should be obligated to give a damn about another person, because that's horseshit and insincere. This whole "if you're not with us, you're against us" mentality that's plaguing progressive movements is troubling, especially when it comes down to identity and supporting groups who revolve around it. Anyway, accepting people on the basis of what they are, no matter what they are, is bullshit. People/groups need to earn acceptance within their communities, not expect it.[/QUOTE] Holy shit is this what the world would be like if empathy was nonexistent. [editline]25th May 2016[/editline] Hell the last part of your statement goes against individualism because you're basically aaying your worth is your worth to your community.

[QUOTE=Ardosos;50393350]I said [I]can[/I], the fact that "they" [I]can[/I] be plural. I didn't say it's always plural.[/QUOTE] That's the beauty about languages. Words can mean two or more things depending on context. Even more beautiful is that the more people that use it, the more accepted it gets.

[QUOTE=Doneeh;50392687]As far as I'm concerned, people should focus on their own problems and give less of a shit about other people's. No one should be obligated to give a damn about another person, because that's horseshit and insincere. This whole "if you're not with us, you're against us" mentality that's plaguing progressive movements is troubling, especially when it comes down to identity and supporting groups who revolve around it. Anyway, accepting people on the basis of what they are, no matter what they are, is bullshit. People/groups need to earn acceptance within their communities, not expect it.[/QUOTE] Have you ever heard of "empathy" There's no "if you're not with us, you're against us" for being LGBT. It's not some complex ideology, it's who you are. You imply that there's choice in the matter and it's a choice that has basis to be rejected by peers which is bullshit. The fact that you think that trans individuals need to "earn acceptance" leaves a very sour taste in my mouth.

What I've been wondering as I've pondered this news article for the past few days is how much influence the lawyer has over how the case is presented. If she came to a lawyer with a bunch of different ideas, what are the chances that the lawyer takes those ideas and comes up with a case he think will score big? What if it's the lawyer that's being heavy handed with making this a transgender issue in this specific way, and what if he suggested the million-dollar settlement? These are all questions I have. I'm not suggesting this is the reality. But I am interested in what other people think, because I think the nature of US law kind of represents people with the lawsuit itself as opposed to how they actually think and feel.

[QUOTE=Doneeh;50392687]Anyway, accepting people on the basis of what they are, no matter what they are, is bullshit. People/groups need to earn acceptance within their communities, not expect it.[/QUOTE] What do you mean by "earn acceptance"? How do you propose that marginalized people earn their acceptance?

[QUOTE=Doneeh;50392687]As far as I'm concerned, people should focus on their own problems and give less of a shit about other people's. No one should be obligated to give a damn about another person, because that's horseshit and insincere. This whole "if you're not with us, you're against us" mentality that's plaguing progressive movements is troubling, especially when it comes down to identity and supporting groups who revolve around it. Anyway, accepting people on the basis of what they are, no matter what they are, is bullshit. People/groups need to earn acceptance within their communities, not expect it.[/QUOTE] There's that famous poem... [I]"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."[/I] Suggesting that you shouldn't care for people who are potentially being discriminated against is very, very unfair. If you see other people dealing with that type of shit, [B]do something about it[/B]. Don't be an asshole and say, "Oh, they'll figure it out." The bystanders during the Civil Rights movement were just as bad as the enemies.

$3 million? Get the fuck out of here.

[QUOTE=Chernobyl426;50394763]$3 million? Get the fuck out of here.[/QUOTE] I see this in every thread related to civil suits and no matter how many times it's been explained it keeps happening, even if it's already been explained multiple times in the same thread. If you want ridiculous suits, try Hulk Hogan suing Gawker for 100 million.

[QUOTE=Chernobyl426;50394763]$3 million? Get the fuck out of here.[/QUOTE] I swear to god, EVERY time the legal fees for a proceeding are brought up people are like "Whaaat thats way too much!!" when that's just how legal fees work. You think people would get with the program eventually after seeing similar exorbitant figures so often. See hexpunks post: [QUOTE=hexpunK;50385415]You tend to ask for a shitload of money in damages or whatever so you don't look like a bellend when the amount mandated to be paid to you is haggled down to something actually reasonable, rather than you futilely haggling up. This is bartering 101, it applies even when making legal claims.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Lysander32;50394791]I see this in every thread related to civil suits and no matter how many times it's been explained it keeps happening, even if it's already been explained multiple times in the same thread. If you want ridiculous suits, try Hulk Hogan suing Gawker for 100 million.[/QUOTE] Are you seriously comparing a long time celebrities image, breach of privacy, a goddamnit sex tape, and a repeated failure to listen to courts on gawkers part to being called it? Hogan's trial was not ridiculous.

[QUOTE=Lysander32;50394791]I see this in every thread related to civil suits and no matter how many times it's been explained it keeps happening, even if it's already been explained multiple times in the same thread. If you want ridiculous suits, try Hulk Hogan suing Gawker for 100 million.[/QUOTE] Gawker 100% deserved it. They exist only to be toxic.

[QUOTE=Doneeh;50392687]As far as I'm concerned, people should focus on their own problems and give less of a shit about other people's. No one should be obligated to give a damn about another person, because that's horseshit and insincere. This whole "if you're not with us, you're against us" mentality that's plaguing progressive movements is troubling, especially when it comes down to identity and supporting groups who revolve around it. Anyway, accepting people on the basis of what they are, no matter what they are, is bullshit. People/groups need to earn acceptance within their communities, not expect it.[/QUOTE] Which is it, do you not care or do you want them to prove their worth it can't be both

Big bump, but in November of last year Valve won the lawsuit. JUDGMENT BY JURY AND DECISION BY COURT: Pursuant to the verdict of the jury rendered on November 2, 2017, docket no. 145, and the Court's ruling in open court on November 2, 2017, see Minute Entry, docket no. 144, judgment is hereby entered in favor of defendant Valve Corporation and against plaintiff Antonella Maddalena. Plaintiff's claims are dismissed with prejudice. Defendant may tax costs in the manner set forth in Local Civil Rule 54(d). (SWT) (Entered: 11/06/2017) Can see a timeline of the lawsuit here.

TL;DR: A year into the suit, Valve offered to pay her attorney fees for "all the things that were actually our fault" (only the unpaid wages allegations, not the various discrimination allegations) which was only like a quarter of her legal fees. She refused to take the deal, but made the mistake of taking the money "this is just the first check of the rest I'm going to get anyway" which made her look bad and soured her case. As for the rest, Valve argued that because she was just a contractor, she didn't have the right to complain about how she was treated, and this argument ultimately won.

Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me that the manager was transphobic, but due to the way that Valve operates, was able to change it to something else and voted her out of a job by gathering up allies to do so who may not even know.

seems like there's a lot going on in this case.

the worst part is her claims were dismissed with prejudice, meaning she can't try again with a lawyer that isn't a fucking moron

Does it make sense to allow someone to continue sueing others over the exact same thing?