Turns out Alison Rapp was a prostitute

Trenchalicious

CAGiversary!
Feedback
2 (100%)
Technically an Escort, but that is just another name for it.

I guess maybe Nintendo wasn't wrong in firing her for her second job like the internet claims. Everyone owes Nintendo a big apology on that part.

All of this doesn't justify the harassment, which still shouldn't have happened.

However to say the harassment was the cause of the firing is misguided.

On another note, her husband is also appears to be an escort.

Some family business they got started.

I can cite sources and pictures if need be.

Or you could just search for Maria Mint.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Regardless of the reasons she was fired, it was unacceptable that Nintendo sat on the sidelines while she was repeatedly harassed. Full stop. If they were doing an internal investigation or something, they still could have supported her publicly. In the end, the perception is that Nintendo caved to these jackasses; that is not a precedent that needs setting.

 
Regardless of the reasons she was fired, it was unacceptable that Nintendo sat on the sidelines while she was repeatedly harassed. Full stop. If they were doing an internal investigation or something, they still could have supported her publicly. In the end, the perception is that Nintendo caved to these jackasses; that is not a precedent that needs setting.
You don't know Nintendo set on the sidelines. Maybe the offered her therapy on the company's dime or offered her other support. Large corporations aren't going to put out a press release every time one of there employees attracts some online harassment.

Also, why would they support her publicly? She is a prostitute that has defended some sick stuff. As a representative of Nintendo she was required to adhere to their values and culture. Obviously, that was not happening. Not even considering the whole escort part of the story, posting inappropriate pictures of herself on public social media under the same account that she acknowledges she works for Nintendo? Yeah, ok... I know it's hard for people to understand, but a business isn't going to support someone who stands for something that is in direct contrast to that company's values.

"In the end, the perception is that Nintendo caved to these jackasses"

Lol, what? There is such a disconnect between online gaming communities and the real world, it's hilarious. When a prostitute gets fired from a family friendly and kid friendly company no one with more than 10 brain cells is going to believe that Nintendo "caved" to online harassers and fired her for petty reasons. Not only that, let's ignore the moral and un-family friendly aspect of her "moonlighting" job. She was doing something ILLEGAL. I love no one talks about that aspect.

"Yeah i'm Bob's manager what's up? Oh? Bob is moonlighting as a thief breaking into residential properties and knocking over gas station registers? Huh, well Bob is Bob so let's not fire him. Also, he getting a lot of online harassment because he doesn't think cp is that bad. Poor Bob, let's go ahead and put out a statement saying Bob is a good guy and the meanie online people should stop being so mean to poor Bob. Yes, I realize Bob is a public representative of our company. Yes, I know we make products for children and claim to family friendly. Yeah, I understand being a thief is illegal. Yes, I realize Bob is vocal about his views which are in direct contrast of our company values. Oh yeah I did see those racy photos Bob put up on twitter while holding our products. But the online harassers. They say mean things to Bob. Let's put out a press release supporting poor Bob."

:wall:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You don't know Nintendo set on the sidelines. Maybe the offered her therapy on the company's dime or offered her other support. Large corporations aren't going to put out a press release every time one of there employees attracts some online harassment.

Also, why would they support her publicly? She is a prostitute that has defended some sick stuff. As a representative of Nintendo she was required to adhere to their values and culture. Obviously, that was not happening. Not even considering the whole escort part of the story, posting inappropriate pictures of herself on public social media under the same account that she acknowledges she works for Nintendo? Yeah, ok... I know it's hard for people to understand, but a business isn't going to support someone who stands for something that is in direct contrast to that company's values.

"In the end, the perception is that Nintendo caved to these jackasses"

Lol, what? There is such a disconnect between online gaming communities and the real world, it's hilarious. When a prostitute gets fired from a family friendly and kid friendly company no one with more than 10 brain cells is going to believe that Nintendo "caved" to online harassers and fired her for petty reasons. Not only that, let's ignore the moral and un-family friendly aspect of her "moonlighting" job. She was doing something ILLEGAL. I love no one talks about that aspect.

"Yeah i'm Bob's manager what's up? Oh? Bob is moonlighting as a thief breaking into residential properties and knocking over gas station registers? Huh, well Bob is Bob so let's not fire him. Also, he getting a lot of online harassment because he doesn't think cp is that bad. Poor Bob, let's go ahead and put out a statement saying Bob is a good guy and the meanie online people should stop being so mean to poor Bob. Yes, I realize Bob is a public representative of our company. Yes, I know we make products for children and claim to family friendly. Yeah, I understand being a thief is illegal. Yes, I realize Bob is vocal about his views which are in direct contrast of our company values. Oh yeah I did see those racy photos Bob put up on twitter while holding our products. But the online harassers. They say mean things to Bob. Let's put out a press release supporting poor Bob."

:wall:
Is this the same Nintendo that gave Platinum the money to develop and publish Bayonetta 2 as an exclusive title? MY Nintendo would NEVER do that! :nottalking:

 
You don't know Nintendo set on the sidelines. Maybe the offered her therapy on the company's dime or offered her other support. Large corporations aren't going to put out a press release every time one of there employees attracts some online harassment.

Also, why would they support her publicly? She is a prostitute that has defended some sick stuff. As a representative of Nintendo she was required to adhere to their values and culture. Obviously, that was not happening. Not even considering the whole escort part of the story, posting inappropriate pictures of herself on public social media under the same account that she acknowledges she works for Nintendo? Yeah, ok... I know it's hard for people to understand, but a business isn't going to support someone who stands for something that is in direct contrast to that company's values.

"In the end, the perception is that Nintendo caved to these jackasses"

Lol, what? There is such a disconnect between online gaming communities and the real world, it's hilarious. When a prostitute gets fired from a family friendly and kid friendly company no one with more than 10 brain cells is going to believe that Nintendo "caved" to online harassers and fired her for petty reasons. Not only that, let's ignore the moral and un-family friendly aspect of her "moonlighting" job. She was doing something ILLEGAL. I love no one talks about that aspect.

"Yeah i'm Bob's manager what's up? Oh? Bob is moonlighting as a thief breaking into residential properties and knocking over gas station registers? Huh, well Bob is Bob so let's not fire him. Also, he getting a lot of online harassment because he doesn't think cp is that bad. Poor Bob, let's go ahead and put out a statement saying Bob is a good guy and the meanie online people should stop being so mean to poor Bob. Yes, I realize Bob is a public representative of our company. Yes, I know we make products for children and claim to family friendly. Yeah, I understand being a thief is illegal. Yes, I realize Bob is vocal about his views which are in direct contrast of our company values. Oh yeah I did see those racy photos Bob put up on twitter while holding our products. But the online harassers. They say mean things to Bob. Let's put out a press release supporting poor Bob."

:wall:
That's fair, but guess what: she was in their PR department. How do you think it looks for a company that does not defend its own, especially someone with a public face for that company? It wouldn't have even been that hard: "We are aware of the allegations concerning Mrs. Rapp and are internally reviewing them. However, the continual harassment that she has been subjected to does not align with Nintendo's core values." See how easy that was? I completely understand the reasons she might have been fired. They do not provide carte blanche for her harassment.

Pretty sure she wasn't defending CP explicitly, but okay, I can see how one might get that idea. It was more about the West imposing ours values on other cultures. Do I agree with her position? Not really, especially not on the idea of CP. However, it's not like this was a secret. She had a link to her essay (paper? dissertation?) on her LinkedIn page.

Thanks for the veiled insult to my intelligence. I always appreciate those.

I’ll leave you with this tweet. (And yes, it was tweeted before her being a prostitute came out.)

https://twitter.com/patrickklepek/status/715351288196640769

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's fair, but guess what: she was in their PR department. How do you think it looks for a company that does not defend its own, especially someone with a public face for that company? It wouldn't have even been that hard: "We are aware of the allegations concerning Mrs. Rapp and are internally reviewing them. However, the continual harassment that she has been subjected to does not align with Nintendo's core values." See how easy that was? I completely understand the reasons she might have been fired. They do not provide carte blanche for her harassment.

Pretty sure she wasn't defending CP explicitly, but okay, I can see how one might get that idea. It was more about the West imposing ours values on other cultures. Do I agree with her position? Not really, especially not on the idea of CP. However, it's not like this was a secret. She had a link to her essay (paper? dissertation?) on her LinkedIn page.

Thanks for the veiled insult to my intelligence. I always appreciate those.

I’ll leave you with this tweet. (And yes, it was tweeted before her being a prostitute came out.)

https://twitter.com/patrickklepek/status/715351288196640769
Wait...have you no read Nintendo's statement on the issue?

Let me break this down for you:

1. Nintendo hired a prostitute.

2. Said prostitute came under a lot of online harassment.

3. Nintendo looked into the personal side of said prostitute.

4. Nintendo found about her "moonlighting".

5. Nintendo said "Oh crap, we hired a prostitute! We are a family friendly business that sells products to children. We can let her keep working here."

6. Nintendo fired said prostitute and put out a statement saying they 'firmly reject the harassment' said prostitute was under.

7. Gamerz are mad at Nintendo for...reasons?

Thanks for the veiled insult to my intelligence. I always appreciate those.
I apologize. I didn't realize you hadn't read Nintendo official statement.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ehh, what?

Wait...have you no read Nintendo's statement on the issue?

Let me break this down for you:

1. Nintendo hired a prostitute.

2. Said prostitute came under a lot of online harassment.

3. Nintendo looked into the personal side of said prostitute.

4. Nintendo found about her "moonlighting".

5. Nintendo said "Oh crap, we hired a prostitute! We are a family friendly business that sells products to children. We can let her keep working here."

6. Nintendo fired said prostitute and put out a statement saying they 'firmly reject the harassment' said prostitute was under.

7. Gamerz are mad at Nintendo for...reasons?

I apologize. I didn't realize you hadn't read Nintendo official statement.
The core value of Nintendo is getting those $$$$$$$$'s. The reason why they're seen as family friendly is because that's their current niche. The second they can break back into more mature content and get them dollas, do you think they wouldn't? We've already seen that they're willing to go in that direction with Bayonetta, which did well enough that they did a second pressing. Oh how people forget about Killer Instinct, Mortal Kombat, Pit Fighter, and wait for it...Doom, which was at the center of all those videogame violence hearings.

It's a bit more complicated than, as you so eloquently put it, "hiring a prostitute." That's not her entire identity or career or how she defines herself, so characterizing her solely as a prostitute is more than just "stating the facts." The harassment has absolutely nothing to do with what Rapp did on the clock or off it. What most likely happened is that someone at Nintendo got an anonymous email from someone with an agenda(and probably harassed her as well), about her being an escort, which HR followed up on. After it was confirmed, they decided to cut her loose and fed her to the wolves in lieu of dealing with the shitstorm when it eventually would've been made public. There could've been a negotiated resignation like in cases where people had done worse and Nintendo's PR team could've easily spun it as if they had no idea about Rapp's off-the-clock activities with some PR speak about her looking for new opportunities blah blah blah. But nah, Nintendo is soooo family oriented that they threw one of their employees under the bus because of some bullshit line about corporate culture. That's the first and last thing I do when someone in my family fucks up or does something I don't like too!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The core value of Nintendo is getting those $$$$$$$$'s.
Yes, that's the point of a business.

The reason why they're seen as family friendly is because that's their current niche. The second they can break back into more mature content and get them dollas, do you think they wouldn't?
Um yes? I never said otherwise. Once again, to "get them dollas" is the point of a business. Especially a business with shareholders.

It's a bit more complicated than, as you so eloquently put it, "hiring a prostitute." That's not her entire identity or career or how she defines herself, so characterizing her solely as a prostitute is more than just "stating the facts."
To understand Nintendo's position you need to stop thinking with your emotions. It's very simple, really. It's not complicated at all when you separate your emotional opinions from the logical business side of it. As you already said, Nintendo is a family friendly business because that is currently the niche that brings in the money. If Nintendo was to publicly be called out for hiring people who do illegal non-family friendly things while being a face of or representative of Nintendo, there would be some major problems.

What most likely happened is that someone at Nintendo got an anonymous email from someone with an agenda(and probably harassed her as well), about her being an escort, which HR followed up on. After it was confirmed, they decided to cut her loose and fed her to the wolves in lieu of dealing with the shitstorm when it eventually would've been made public.
It doesn't matter. That's what you and others don't understand. It doesn't matter if Nintendo found out about Rapp's prosittution from someone with an agenda. The fact is, a PR person who works for a family friendly company was partaking in illegal non-family friendly activities. That's it. That's grounds for being fired. Also, how did Nintendo feed her to the wolves? The fired her for a good reason and put out a respectful professional letter saying they do not condone the harassment and they wish her well in her future.

There could've been a negotiated resignation like in cases where people had done worse
What does that even mean? In the business world, people get fired for doing FAR LESS than Rapp.

Nintendo's PR team could've easily spun it as if they had no idea about Rapp's off-the-clock activities with some PR speak about her looking for new opportunities blah blah blah
The statement said she was fired for holding a second job in conflict with Nintendo's culture. They literally made no mention about her off-the-clock activities being illegal or morally wrong (i'm not here to argue the morality of prostitution). They certainly could have but they took the high road and made a very vague statement.

But nah, Nintendo is soooo family oriented that they threw one of their employees under the bus because of some bullshit line about corporate culture.
Um no. They fired an employee for illegally prostituting herself while being a public figure for the company. Once again, it's not hard to understand.

That's the first and last thing I do when someone in my family fucks up or does something I don't like too!
Haha who are you? Michael Scott? The business you work for isn't your family. It's...a business.

 
Yes, that's the point of a business.

Um yes? I never said otherwise. Once again, to "get them dollas" is the point of a business. Especially a business with shareholders.

To understand Nintendo's position you need to stop thinking with your emotions. It's very simple, really. It's not complicated at all when you separate your emotional opinions from the logical business side of it. As you already said, Nintendo is a family friendly business because that is currently the niche that brings in the money. If Nintendo was to publicly be called out for hiring people who do illegal non-family friendly things while being a face of or representative of Nintendo, there would be some major problems.

It doesn't matter. That's what you and others don't understand. It doesn't matter if Nintendo found out about Rapp's prosittution from someone with an agenda. The fact is, a PR person who works for a family friendly company was partaking in illegal non-family friendly activities. That's it. That's grounds for being fired. Also, how did Nintendo feed her to the wolves? The fired her for a good reason and put out a respectful professional letter saying they do not condone the harassment and they wish her well in her future.

What does that even mean? In the business world, people get fired for doing FAR LESS than Rapp.

The statement said she was fired for holding a second job in conflict with Nintendo's culture. They literally made no mention about her off-the-clock activities being illegal or morally wrong (i'm not here to argue the morality of prostitution). They certainly could have but they took the high road and made a very vague statement.

Um no. They fired an employee for illegally prostituting herself while being a public figure for the company. Once again, it's not hard to understand.

Haha who are you? Michael Scott? The business you work for isn't your family. It's...a business.
Stop thinking with my emotions? Right...as if emotions weren't the reason why she was fired. :roll:

Does Nintendo check on any of their employees to see if they're in line with company culture? There are bound to be some drug abusers and domestic violence perpetrators on their payroll. If you look hard enough, there's always some shit that can get someone fired that isn't in line with "culture."

edit: In case the point is missed, and it was, Nintendo doesn't give a shit about being "family friendly." There is no such thing as "logical business" and that's why economics is considered a social science, not to mention that there'd me no such thing as advertising, of which the whole point is to make money off your emotions. If it was really that family friendly, they would've never funded Bayonetta 2, muchless do a second pressing.

If Rapp wasn't harassed and Nintendo miraculously found out she was an escort, I highly doubt they'd give a shit anymore than if they knew someone smoked weed off the clock while being in the same spotlight. Her outspokeness alone contradicts the reason for her firing about culture. How Nintendo came into that information and Why are very important because context matters. And btw, having a "polite" statement and then making a back-handed comment about "not being consistent with their (corporate)culture" doesn't make their statements complimentary when taken as a whole. Sorry, but that's not taking the "high road." Taking the high road would be to release a statement about resignation and departing on mutual terms without any statements about or alluding to being fired, which would also keep Rapp employable and moving forward in her career in the games industry aka her primary occupation, unlike how you switched it around and made being an escort her primary occupation. The difference is not so subtle now, right?

Sure, people get fired for far less, but people are kept on for far worse, which are both subjective measurements and my point still stands anyway. Releasing a statement about firing her is textbook for throwing someone to the wolves. There is no protection garnered from it and basically says that she's damaged goods and not worth keeping or protecting. The video game industry is about 5 shades of fucked up anyways, so this will ring hollow: If Nintendo, as an employer, doesn't protect their very visible employee from harassment, then maybe Nintendo is just a shitty company that no one really should want to work for. And THAT is a big reason why people are pissed at Nintendo.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I had to look up who this was and the whole deal... seems like a lot of stupidity on both parts. 

She was supposed to be Twitter rep for Nintendo but some of the shit she said is downright stupid. Like, WTF, you're using a company account to express your personal views. 

And I don't see what qualified her to be a rep of any kind in the first place... b/c she had a lot of followers and like Nintendo? I feel like there's a million of these "internet celebrities" who have a fairly common talent/trait (ie, being funny) and happen to have garnered more followers than the next person with the same talent/trait. Doesn't mean they'd be a good rep. Super surprised Nintendo took such a bold move (likely out of desperation) but clearly showed they didn't know what they were doing or how to handle the situation. 

Highly probable that I missed some important details here but kinda hard to care about such stupid shit. 

 
In some states, commonwealths especially, you can be fired for much much less. I'm not saying the harassment was right or justified, but when you are a major and family friendly company, having someone tied to your company that is doing things detrimental to the company image, you have to act, doesn't matter who brings it to light. That's just business.

 
"In case the point is missed, and it was, Nintendo doesn't give a shit about being 'family friendly.'"

Actually, you are contradicting yourself. We already established that Nintendo focuses on the family friendly niche because that's where they have found the most profit. With all due respect, Nintendo greatly cares about being family friendly and upholding the "family friendly" label. 

"There is no such thing as 'logical business' and that's why economics is considered a social science"

Yikes...that's a good clue to stop responding but I'll keep going, why not.

Umm no, economics is not considered a social science because there isn't such a thing as logical business practices. That doesn't even make sense. Economic is considered a social science because it is the study of a topic in relation to society and how those within that society interact with each other. 

not to mention that there'd me no such thing as advertising, of which the whole point is to make money off your emotions. 

Making money off of one's emotion in order to increase a business' profit? Sounds logical to me. Wouldn't you say?

"If it was really that family friendly, they would've never funded Bayonetta 2, muchless do a second pressing."

Why? Just because they are a family friendly company doesn't mean they can't make products that appeal to a mature audience. Creating content that targets your 17 year old and above audience doesn't mean you are automatically no longer a family friendly company.

Let's say Nintendo only published/developed M rated games. They would not be considered family friendly. With your line of reasoning, you are saying in that scenario that if Nintendo created one E rated game they would automatically become family friendly. Yeah...doesn't work that way.

If Rapp wasn't harassed and Nintendo miraculously found out she was an escort, I highly doubt they'd give a shit anymore than if they knew someone smoked weed off the clock while being in the same spotlight. 

You do understand why she was fired right? She wasn't fired because she was being harassed. She was fired because as someone who REPRESENTS NINTENDO she defended cp, was a prostitute, and did absolutely stupid things like going on social media and posting racy pictures of herself while holding Nintendo products. That's not a person Nintendo wants to represent their company. That's a person many businesses wouldn't want as a representative. 

Haha um weed isn't illegal in Washington. Nintendo isn't a company who sells products promoting the illegalization or non-use of weed. 

How Nintendo came into that information and Why are very important because context matters.

You are going to have a very bad time in life if you don't understand the basic idea that if you work a company, especially in PR, and do something that is highly controversial, contradicts company culture, and is illegal, you will be fired. Context doesn't matter. No half decent manager or c level executive is going to give a damn how the information came about if it's true and if it's true. Really simple concept to understand.

Taking the high road would be to release a statement about resignation and departing on mutual terms without any statements about or alluding to being fired

She was fired. Nintendo isn't going to put a press release (press releases are actually huge deals in major corporation btw) lying to their customers and lying to their shareholders. That's a huge no no. 

which would also keep Rapp employable and moving forward in her career in the games industry aka her primary occupation,

I'm not trying to be condescending but it seems like you have no idea how hiring works. When someone goes to hire a potential employ they do research into that employ. They contact their previous company, manager, etc. etc. A press release lying and saying she resigned wouldn't automatically hide everything and keep the fact that she was fired for multiple reasons from other companies who researched her work history.

"Sure, people get fired for far less, but people are kept on for far worse"

Give me sources. Show me where people in PR positions where allow to keep their job when doing multiple things on the level that Rapp did.

Releasing a statement about firing her is textbook for throwing someone to the wolves. There is no protection garnered from it and basically says that she's damaged goods and not worth keeping or protecting.
 

Um no that's actually pretty normal when the person who is being fired is in PR and recently had the spotlight turned on them.

Yeah not really. People get fired and they also get hired at other jobs. Maybe she won't be able to find a job in the games industry (I'm sure she will have no problem at all) but she plays her cards right she shouldn't have trouble finding another job. Also, if she is an escort charging $250 hours is sounds like she doesn't need another job. 

Also, here is the thing. I don't think you realize this. People's actions have direct consequences. Rapp is getting fired for thing she did. She was in a PR position at Nintendo and did some really really stupid things. Could Nintendo have handled it better? Maybe...probably but there isn't anything wrong with how they did handle it.

"If Nintendo, as an employer, doesn't protect their very visible employee from harassment, then maybe Nintendo is just a shitty company that no one really should want to work for"

Once again with this line. You are purposely and ignorantly spouting out something that has just as much potential of being untrue as true yet you are stating it as a fact in order to belittle Nintendo. 

"then maybe Nintendo is just a shitty company that no one really should want to work for"

Lol

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nice hack job, buddy.

Nintendo being family friendly is an image and not the reality. They were pushed out of certain genres by Sony and MS and family friendly games is the only niche they have left, but they never stopped trying to get back in the mature content game. Can you even count the number of those types of games that started off on a Nintendo system before they were ported to PS or XB? Bayonetta just happened to be that last big name attempt to get back into that market. Would you describe that game as family friendly? How about House of the Dead Overkill? Resident Evil Chronicles? Hell, Metroid Other M? Sorry, but I have absolutely no illusions about Nintendo's image. It's not just about one game; it's freaking a pattern over decades.

As for her firing, you know absolutely jack shit about labor laws. They don't have to tell anyone anything about her firing and it's in their best interest not to say anything period. Do you know what info is requested for reference checks? Dates of employment, title, and occasionally wage information. Do you know why? Because someone can sue your ass if you say something that prevents them from getting a job. How do I know? I'll give you 3 guesses as to who handles that stuff where I work.

All that stuff you say about promoting child porn and sexually suggestive product promotion makes me laugh. If it was really that bad, they would've never hired her in the first place nor kept her on as long as they did. Nintendo is not on some moral high ground here and I'm sure they are more than ok with having pose with her boobs out to promote their products. Not to mention that everything's on her linkedin/social media pages and easily accessible at anytime. You act like all of this stuff happened over night, but it was fucking months of harassment and how long was she an employee again? Around 2 years?

The legality of weed is irrelevant unless you think it's a family friendly activity and should be promoted to kids, but feel free to use that excuse that it's legal in WA when the feds are breaking down your door for it. Something being legal or illegal is practically meaningless. Do you think the reaction would be any different if prostitution was legal? Of course not, so let's not pretend like legality makes a difference unless you want to argue that posing with large amounts of alcohol would somehow be acceptable while showing varying levels of T&A are ACTUALLY PROVEN to be acceptable.

Looks like you're also walking back your statement about Nintendo taking the high road now, eh? Let's look what happened here: Nintendo localized a game and made some decisions that anger a certain segment of the fanbase to the point of them doxxing an employee that only handles marketing of the product. This goes on for months and everyday you're receiving tons of letters asking for the termination of said employee. Eventually, you get a letter that alleges said employee is an escort. What do you do? Any c-level executive could tell you that you don't fire someone right away and would realize that the situation needs to be handled with some delicacy.

You ask if Nintendo could've done better and answer with "maybe...probably?" That means that yes, they could've handled it a lot better. If Rapp wasn't such a visible figure due to the harassment, they would've never had a press release, so yeah, it was a big fucking deal hence the need to think though the steps to avoid a complete shitstorm and do your best to come out smelling like roses instead of looking like callous pricks or heroes to those that wanted her gone and actively sought to destroy her life.

As for your stuttering about me stating that Nintendo being a shitty company to work for, I stand by it 100%. They made no effort to address it and only did so when they knew firing her would make them look bad.

fuck.Nintendo.

Butcher that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually if you put down a name as a reference, they can say whatever without repercussions. If you put down as a previous employer then the only info that can be shared is actual time at the company. Nothing personal can be said.
 
Butcher that.
Nah, I don't think I will waste my time. It's obvious it's hard for you to have a rational conversation without filling your sentences with your emotional outrage. If you want e-peen points that's no problem. I'll even give you some :)

+10 E-Peen Points Awarded to dohdough!

Although, I will leave you with this one little tidbit.

As for her firing, you know absolutely jack shit about labor laws. They don't have to tell anyone anything about her firing and it's in their best interest not to say anything period....Do you know why? Because someone can sue your ass if you say something that prevents them from getting a job
Actually, I do know a little bit about labor laws. Only the absolute bare minimum though. What I do know is that if a potential employer asked Nintendo about Rapp's termination, it's absolutely not against the law for them to state she was fired lol. If Nintendo wants to tell them they fired her and tell them the reason she was fired that's perfectly legal. Since you claim to work in the HR field or something similar, you should know that. As far as it being in Nintendo's best interest not to say anything, that's also false. If Nintendo tells her future employer that her termination was a firing and they give the exact factual details without adding in any personal opinion or characterization of Rapp, they have nothing to worry about. Once again, you should know that.

It's also wrong that a company can be sued for saying something that prevents a former employee to be hired at another location. If the employee's former company says something false or slanderous that causes that person to not get hired, that's when they can get sued. If the former company tells the potential employer facts about the employee's work history and those facts are what causes the employee not to be hired, the former company is in no way at fault. You should also know that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nah, I don't think I will waste my time. It's obvious it's hard for you to have a rational conversation without filling your sentences with your emotional outrage. If you want e-peen points that's no problem. I'll even give you some :)

+10 E-Peen Points Awarded to dohdough!

Although, I will leave you with this one little tidbit.

Actually, I do know a little bit about labor laws. Only the absolute bare minimum though. What I do know is that if a potential employer asked Nintendo about Rapp's termination, it's absolutely not against the law for them to state she was fired lol. If Nintendo wants to tell them they fired her and tell them the reason she was fired that's perfectly legal. Since you claim to work in the HR field or something similar, you should know that. As far as it being in Nintendo's best interest not to say anything, that's also false. If Nintendo tells her future employer that her termination was a firing and they give the exact factual details without adding in any personal opinion or characterization of Rapp, they have nothing to worry about. Once again, you should know that.

It's also wrong that a company can be sued for saying something that prevents a former employee to be hired at another location. If the employee's former company says something false or slanderous that causes that person to not get hired, that's when they can get sued. If the former company tells the potential employer facts about the employee's work history and those facts are what causes the employee not to be hired, the former company is in no way at fault. You should also know that.
If she puts down someone for a "reference" from Nintendo then she is stupid. That person could say whatever they wanted Free from repercussion. If she just lists Nintendo as a former employer then the only thing that Nintendo can say is yes or no that she worked there at the times she listed. If they say otherwise, she can sue.

This is a very important distinction between the two. Especially for younger applicants. References should only by given as needed unless you have 100% trust in this person. That person can say virtually anything from moral character to work ethics.
 
If she puts down someone for a "reference" from Nintendo then she is stupid. That person could say whatever they wanted Free from repercussion. If she just lists Nintendo as a former employer then the only thing that Nintendo can say is yes or no that she worked there at the times she listed. If they say otherwise, she can sue.

This is a very important distinction between the two. Especially for younger applicants. References should only by given as needed unless you have 100% trust in this person. That person can say virtually anything from moral character to work ethics.
Can I get a source for that?

Everything I have heard and read is that a "reference" can say anything they want without repercussions. A former employer can't say anything that is false or based on a malicious motive. Former employers can say whatever they way as long as it's factual. They are not confined to just saying if the employee worked there and dates. That doesn't mean that the company doesn't have a policy of only stating those things. Company policy doesn't equal law though. Of course, I could be wrong or it could be different in Texas (where I live) than in Washington.

 
Nah, I don't think I will waste my time. It's obvious it's hard for you to have a rational conversation without filling your sentences with your emotional outrage. If you want e-peen points that's no problem. I'll even give you some :)

+10 E-Peen Points Awarded to dohdough!

Although, I will leave you with this one little tidbit.

Actually, I do know a little bit about labor laws. Only the absolute bare minimum though. What I do know is that if a potential employer asked Nintendo about Rapp's termination, it's absolutely not against the law for them to state she was fired lol. If Nintendo wants to tell them they fired her and tell them the reason she was fired that's perfectly legal. Since you claim to work in the HR field or something similar, you should know that. As far as it being in Nintendo's best interest not to say anything, that's also false. If Nintendo tells her future employer that her termination was a firing and they give the exact factual details without adding in any personal opinion or characterization of Rapp, they have nothing to worry about. Once again, you should know that.

It's also wrong that a company can be sued for saying something that prevents a former employee to be hired at another location. If the employee's former company says something false or slanderous that causes that person to not get hired, that's when they can get sued. If the former company tells the potential employer facts about the employee's work history and those facts are what causes the employee not to be hired, the former company is in no way at fault. You should also know that.
It's almost as if context is a concept that escapes you. How is what you said any different from my quote? The reason why you're not addressing anything is because there's nothing really untrue about what I've said.

Btw, your dislike of my tone doesn't make my points any less valid. That's a really lame argument and you make a terrible case for Nintendo. You already said that Nintendo fucked up anyways, so I'm going to take that as your concession. You know what's even funnier? You've actually convinced me never to buy another Nintendo product, so thanks for saving me some money! You are a true CAGer.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
How is what you said any different from my quote?
Haha I explained it...in my post. Maybe you should read it again.

You've actually convinced me never to buy another Nintendo product, so thanks for saving me some money! You are a true CAGer.
Cool, always glad to help out! I have no financial stake in Nintendo so your 12 year old reply of "So take that meanie pants!" humors me. Also, thanks for the compliment, that was nice thing to say.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've been reading about this and all I can say is that there is no justification for what one side is doing, whether or not Rapp is in the wrong. Doxxing, online harrassment, and all that crap, all because of a stupid video game. It reminded me of how one year EA was the worst company in America just because of the ending of Mass Effect 3 on steroids, when there are clearly worse companies who literally kill people.

 
bread's done
Back
Top