Madison reveals experiences working at LMG

[620R]

4 hours ago, Fnige said:

Tbh sex-related and sexual harassment are different things. One deals with the sex of the person (Male, Female, Intersex etc) and the other is generally related to sexual shenanigans. A bit of a nitpick but they are different things

You're right, but this shows how even the most seemingly innocent thing (calling a man "bald") could be labeled as harassment. That's why training on sexual harassment is so damn important for some people. They just don't see the bad in "asking a woman to twerk for them" or not knowing that "nice ass" might not be received as a compliment.

A perfect example was given to us during one of those meetings: "Imagine you're in a grocery store with your son/daughter. Some stranger comes up to them and says that phrase you're thinking of saying to that colleague. How would you react? Well, that's how that person you're talking to feels."

 

 

[Uttamattamakin]

Just now, HesCalledTheStig said:

Leans towards men meaning there are more men in that field.  You misunderstood me.  I wasnt discrediting women in the field at all.  Just addressing that more men tend to be in the tech field.

There are more men in the field because of people's gendered bias that says that men are better at Tech which is just not true.

 

If you go back in history there was a time when the field was mostly women right after World War II and up until the 1960s.

 

https://www.history.com/news/coding-used-to-be-a-womans-job-so-it-was-paid-less-and-undervalued

 

Read I didn't just find a few pictures also you might want to know that the kind of microchips in all the devices you're using were designed by principles that came from a trans woman named Lynn Conway.  There is nothing inherently straight white or male about tech other than the fact that people with those identities think that it is inherently their thing when it pays a lot of money. 

 

 

[HesCalledTheStig]

1 minute ago, Uttamattamakin said:

There are more men in the field because of people's gendered bias that says that men are better at Tech which is just not true.

 

If you go back in history there was a time when the field was mostly women right after World War II and up until the 1960s.

 

https://www.history.com/news/coding-used-to-be-a-womans-job-so-it-was-paid-less-and-undervalued

 

Read I didn't just find a few pictures also you might want to know that the kind of microchips in all the devices you're using were designed by principles that came from a trans woman named Lynn Conway.  There is nothing inherently straight white or male about tech other than the fact that people with those identities think that it is inherently their thing when it pays a lot of money. 

 

 

This is just dumb.  It has nothing to do with gender bias.

[Lothade]

I truly hope these are simply claims from a former disgruntled employee, this is common in many industries for former employees to lash out at their former employers but these claims need to be taken seriously and investigated properly.  

 

If her statements are true I truly hope that both former and current employees at LMG will come out to both defend her and corroborate her statements.  Without evidence this just becomes a he said, she said type situation that goes nowhere.

[Middcore]

1 minute ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

This is just dumb.  It has nothing to do with gender bias.

 

User you're talking to has their heart in the right place I think, but they have some weird ideas about diversity and inclusion.

 

I remember a discussion with them once where they argued that YouTube should collect ethnic demographic data on all of their users and then make sure that every video was served to an audience which perfectly mirrored the demographics of the population at large, regardless of the video's intended target audience. For example, a video by a Black commentator specifically intended for a Black audience discussing issues facing the Black community would be served mainly to White people if YouTube's data indicated Whites made up the majority of YouTube users. 

 

Now you see where in a seeming effort to champion gender equality in tech, they deny the obvious fact that tech in the present day is a male-dominated field, even when most of the people in the discussion are deploring that fact and talking about the problems it causes and what can be done to correct them. 

[HesCalledTheStig]

Just now, Lothade said:

I truly hope these are simply claims from a former disgruntled employee, this is common in many industries for former employees to lash out at their former employers but these claims need to be taken seriously and investigated properly.  

 

If her statements are true I truly hope that both former and current employees at LMG will come out to both defend her and corroborate her statements.  Without evidence this just becomes a he said, she said type situation that goes nowhere.

I dont doubt her statements, I cant see why she has a reason to lie.  There are a few things that strike me as odd, but I want get into them.  LMG is already addressing the issue and doing an internal investigation.  All we can do is wait to see how it plays out.  I hope both parties have the resolution they deserve.

[thebakerman]

36 minutes ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

Leans towards men meaning there are more men in that field.  You misunderstood me.  I wasnt discrediting women in the field at all.  Just addressing that more men tend to be in the tech field.

But this is not true either, as  is well documented in the history of computing, such as the link that was sent to you alongside the picture. You specifically stated that technology ALWAYS leant towards men. This is blatantly false, showing that there’s no innate reason for the current situation, as you seem to claim. It was the result of deliberate decisions made by various parties.

 

Computers (the people doing calculations in a room) were historically women as it was associated with attention to detail/handiwork, and the principles of automating tasks evolved from mechanical looms that were programmed to create different weaves from yarn. Men only became dominant in the space once the business applications became clear in the 50s-60s, and the “computers are for men” paradigm was created in the cultural consciousness once IBM realised they needed to find a way to market very expensive PCs to male managers who can procure them in the 80s, which looked like a typewriter (belonging on a female secretary’s desk, not the boss’s) and the use case were all things that managers at the time considered below themselves (like answering mail or typing up documents) and delegated to woman office workers. Obviously no man would spend that much money on a tool intended for a secretary, so they needed to shift the marketing to target the managers themselves.

 

Computer games being primarily marketed to men were a direct consequence, and this cemented the audience PCs were marketed towards, thereby who had the means, inclination, and reason to use them. The rest is history.

[HesCalledTheStig]

Just now, thebakerman said:

But this is not true either, as  is well documented in the history of computing, such as the link that was sent to you alongside the picture.

 

Computers (the people doing calculations in a room) were historically women as the technology was adjacent to mechanical looms and attention to detail/handiwork. Men only became dominant in the space once the business applications became clear in the 50s-60s, and „computers are for men” paradigm was created in the cultural consciousness once IBM realised they needed to find a way to market PCs  to male managers in the 80s, who wouldn’t touch them with a five-foot pole as it was super expensive but looked like a typewriter (belonging on a female secretary’s desk, not the boss’s) and the use case were all things that managers at the time considered below themselves (like answering mail or typing up documents).

 

Computer games being primarily marketed to men were a direct consequence. The rest is history.

 

 Please educate yourself on the matter a bit more…

 

I am NOT saying that there are no women in tech or that women haven't made huge advances in tech.  I'm saying that there are more men in the field.  Nothing more.

[creat0r]

12 minutes ago, yoc said:

Just listen on reddit.

 

Thank you. I’m traveling and on my phone and it’s hard to find things in the Reddit app. I’m wondering who recorded this? It kind of looks/sounds like a security camera. But why would it be setup filming a PC? More importantly, who leaked this? (I guess no one knows but it’s still interesting). 

[Majestic12]

18 minutes ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

Possibly because she had changed countries and they gave her the benefit of the doubt because it would have been hard for her to just pack back up and move back to the US if she didn't work out?  I dunno.  Just speculating.  It could have been a number of things.  Maybe her work in the first 90 days was good.  It was probably more training than anything so the workload wasnt there yet.  We can only assume at this point.

I wondered about that as well. I liked her a lot in that initial video because I could tell she was kind of a "wild" character and she got an insane amount of attention because of that. I think Linus hired her because he thought it would make fans happy and him more popular. I think this is a big reason why it all fell apart as well. 

 

I actually talked about this today at work and a (female) colleague had her own view of it. She believes Madison vastly underestimated the job she was getting and couldn't easily back out because of the attention on her. You have loads of fans pushing for her to get hired (on both sides) so she may have felt compelled to accept the job just as much as Linus might have felt compelled to hire her. People wanted her to be in videos, not to be behind the scenes handling social media so why did we see so little of her on-screen? I remember her briefly being in view behind the camera and that's it. So imagine leaving your country, getting pressured into a job that then turns out to not be to your liking. You're not experienced at it, it takes more effort to do it than you expect, you didn't expect to be given a job that puts so much pressure on you and you're also not doing what you wanted to do. Considering she didn't feature in any video even after months I wonder if it was clear early on that she wasn't happy.

 

It sounds to me like this would sour her mood quite quickly and if you read between the lines of her Twitter posts, it seems my colleague might be right. The way she talks about her contract, this is not someone who is happy to be offered this chance but someone who already feels like they're being duped and poorly treated. It would set the tone for how she approaches her work & colleagues and as a young person at their first job with zero experience with a proper job is like, this could well have been emotionally hard on her and cause friction with other colleagues.

[Middcore]

1 minute ago, thebakerman said:

But this is not true either, as  is well documented in the history of computing, such as the link that was sent to you alongside the picture.

 

Computers (the people doing calculations in a room) were historically women as the technology was adjacent to mechanical looms and attention to detail/handiwork. Men only became dominant in the space once the business applications became clear in the 50s-60s, and „computers are for men” paradigm was created in the cultural consciousness once IBM realised they needed to find a way to market PCs  to male managers in the 80s, who wouldn’t touch them with a five-foot pole as it was super expensive but looked like a typewriter (belonging on a female secretary’s desk, not the boss’s) and the use case were all things that managers at the time considered below themselves (like answering mail or typing up documents).

 

Computer games being primarily marketed to men were a direct consequence. The rest is history.

 

 Please educate yourself on the matter a bit more…

 

 

We are talking about the breakdown of people currently employed in tech-related fields. It is undeniable that currently men predominate. 

 

Nobody is minimizing the historical contributions of women in tech fields, and nobody (at least nobody worth listening to) is saying that it should be the case people working in tech are overwhelmingly men. But right now it is the case, and it leads to problems. Those problems don't get solved by refusing to acknowledge the reality. 

[wanderingfool2]

So as a note, listening to the HR meeting post Madison and also the leaked handbook (from post Madison as well)...man their policy is terrible in regards to how to deal with workplace harassment.

 

It doesn't make a single mention of there being a 3rd party HR.  Instead it essentially tells you to go to your manager and report it, and then effectively work your way up the chain.

[castlev]

16 minutes ago, thebakerman said:

But this is not true either, as  is well documented in the history of computing, such as the link that was sent to you alongside the picture.

 

Computers (the people doing calculations in a room) were historically women as the technology was adjacent to mechanical looms and attention to detail/handiwork. Men only became dominant in the space once the business applications became clear in the 50s-60s, and „computers are for men” paradigm was created in the cultural consciousness once IBM realised they needed to find a way to market PCs  to male managers in the 80s, who wouldn’t touch them with a five-foot pole as it was super expensive but looked like a typewriter (belonging on a female secretary’s desk, not the boss’s) and the use case were all things that managers at the time considered below themselves (like answering mail or typing up documents).

 

Computer games being primarily marketed to men were a direct consequence. The rest is history.

 

 Please educate yourself on the matter a bit more…

 

 

Women make up about 47% of the total workforce, but they remain statistically underrepresented in STEM. Women only represent about 27% of STEM workers in 2019 in the United States, compared with just 8% in 1970, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. This also means men still make up 73% of the workforce in the industry.

The numbers are similar in Canada. Women make up less than 25% of people employed in STEM careers. According to Statistics Canada, 34% of Canadians with a STEM degree are women. They make up only 23% of Canadians working in science and technology.

 

https://www.randstad.ca/employers/workplace-insights/women-in-the-workplace/women-in-stem-where-we-are-now/

 

TLDR: female participation in STEM has nearly trippled in the US since 1970, while still less than half of the male participation.

[schwarzerrogen]

2 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

So as a note, listening to the HR meeting post Madison and also the leaked handbook (from post Madison as well)...man their policy is terrible in regards to how to deal with workplace harassment.

 

It doesn't make a single mention of there being a 3rd party HR.  Instead it essentially tells you to go to your manager and report it, and then effectively work your way up the chain.

That's pretty standard for most Harassment or WPHC complaints. It's your manager's job to act on it and either deal with it, or go to HR on your behalf and start an HR-led review. If your manager is the issue, then you can go to another manager or HR directly. 

What LMG needs is a very comprehensive review of their standards across the board. HR, employment, payroll, etc.

[thebakerman]

35 minutes ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

Some fields will tend to be more gender unbalanced than others.  Tech has always leaned more towards the male side.  It all depends on the situation.

I and the others were responding to this message of yours. You may have misspoken, but his sentence is just completely incorrect. Computing  was a woman dominated or at least pretty gender-balanced field until the adoption of the personal computer. This is what we’re trying to tell you.

[HesCalledTheStig]

6 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

So as a note, listening to the HR meeting post Madison and also the leaked handbook (from post Madison as well)...man their policy is terrible in regards to how to deal with workplace harassment.

 

It doesn't make a single mention of there being a 3rd party HR.  Instead it essentially tells you to go to your manager and report it, and then effectively work your way up the chain.

I agree.  Makes me wonder if it isn't why Linus stepped down and brought in a new CEO.  Maybe he knew he just wasnt up to the task of running the company?

[HesCalledTheStig]

2 minutes ago, thebakerman said:

I and the others were responding to this message of yours. You may have misspoken, but his sentence is just completely incorrect. Computing  was a woman dominated or at least pretty gender-balanced field until the adoption of the personal computer. This is what we’re trying to tell you.

The first sentence says that the filed is gender unbalanced.  I was saying that there is just more men in the field than women.  Nothing more.  Perhaps I should have said it differently.

[Middcore]

4 minutes ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

I agree.  Makes me wonder if it isn't why Linus stepped down and brought in a new CEO.  Maybe he knew he just wasnt up to the task of running the company?

 

I go back and forth on that. I think part of it maybe is that he knows he isn't cut out to do the day to day management of a ~100-employee company and wants to just focus on content, which would be good. On the other hand, if he thinks that simply because he doesn't have the title "CEO" anymore he can exercise the same type of poor judgment and emotional outbursts while he remains undeniably the face and driving force of the company, then it will do no good at all and is arguably a cynical move. 

[HesCalledTheStig]

1 minute ago, Middcore said:

 

I go back and forth on that. I think part of it maybe that he knows he isn't cut out to do the day to day management of a ~100-employee company and wants to just focus on content, which would be good. On the other hand, if he thinks that simply because he doesn't have the title "CEO" anymore he can exercise the same type of poor judgment and emotional outbursts while he remains undeniably the face and driving force of the company, then it will do no good at all and is arguably a cynical move. 

He definitely needs to work on that second part.  He's always spoke before thinking and ends up with his foot in his mouth.  He is extremely cocky by nature and tries to hide it, but it shows through.  I dont watch LTT solely for Linus.  I am invested in all of the faces that are there.  Thats why I hope this gets worked out.  Not for Linus's sake but for the sake of the rest of the company and for Madison.

[Magnus33]

They hired a independent entity to investigate as they should but i suspect it wont take them long.

 

When we investigate things like this we start with the facts of what said and does it add up to simple examination.

 

Here  problems start to show with it because its rather hard to be silenced when you can quite literately walk down the hall into either Yvonne or Linus office.

Then there other aspects which don't make much sense  and would get further looking into.

 

We also talk to others coming forward and here there are crickets and silence.

Lmg been around 15 years yet no with employees past and present have come forward unlike activision where floodgates opened.

 

We also look at the person saying this which some may think is unfair and punishing the victim but if you remember Amber heard sometimes they aren't the victim.

 

If i was investigating this i have multiple red flags showing even before i walked into the door.

This doesn't preclude this from having happened and you still take the steps you need to to do things properly .

 

Why don't the facts in the story add up to what would have been possible for her to do.

Why is there no one else coming forward?

Then there the person themselves.

 

[loonks]

2 minutes ago, Magnus33 said:

They hired a independent entity to investigate as they should but i suspect it wont take them long.

 

When we investigate things like this we start with the facts of what said and does it add up to simple examination.

 

Here  problems start to show with it because its rather hard to be silenced when you can quite literately walk down the hall into either Yvonne or Linus office.

Then there other aspects which don't make much sense which don't make sense and would get further looking into.

 

We also talk to others coming forward and here there are crickets and silence.

Lmg been around 15 years no with employees past and present yet unlike activision there no one else.

 

We also look at the person saying this which some may think is unfair and punishing the victim but if you remember Amber heard sometimes they aren't the victim.

 

If i was investigating this i have multiple red flags showing even before i walked into the door.

This doesn't preclude this from having happened and you still take the steps you need to to do things properly .

 

Why don't the facts in the story add up to what would have been possible for her to do.

Why is there no one else coming forward?

Then there the person themselves.

Who are "we" you're talking about?

[agatong439]

8 minutes ago, Magnus33 said:

They hired a independent entity to investigate as they should but i suspect it wont take them long.

 

When we investigate things like this we start with the facts of what said and does it add up to simple examination.

 

Here  problems start to show with it because its rather hard to be silenced when you can quite literately walk down the hall into either Yvonne or Linus office.

Then there other aspects which don't make much sense  and would get further looking into.

 

We also talk to others coming forward and here there are crickets and silence.

Lmg been around 15 years yet no with employees past and present have come forward unlike activision where floodgates opened.

 

We also look at the person saying this which some may think is unfair and punishing the victim but if you remember Amber heard sometimes they aren't the victim.

 

If i was investigating this i have multiple red flags showing even before i walked into the door.

This doesn't preclude this from having happened and you still take the steps you need to to do things properly .

 

Why don't the facts in the story add up to what would have been possible for her to do.

Why is there no one else coming forward?

Then there the person themselves.

 

 

 

Ex - employee did stand up for her. 

[post_screen]

6 minutes ago, Magnus33 said:

They hired a independent entity to investigate as they should but i suspect it wont take them long.

 

When we investigate things like this we start with the facts of what said and does it add up to simple examination.

 

Here  problems start to show with it because its rather hard to be silenced when you can quite literately walk down the hall into either Yvonne or Linus office.

Then there other aspects which don't make much sense  and would get further looking into.

 

We also talk to others coming forward and here there are crickets and silence.

Lmg been around 15 years yet no with employees past and present have come forward unlike activision where floodgates opened.

 

We also look at the person saying this which some may think is unfair and punishing the victim but if you remember Amber heard sometimes they aren't the victim.

 

If i was investigating this i have multiple red flags showing even before i walked into the door.

This doesn't preclude this from having happened and you still take the steps you need to to do things properly .

 

Why don't the facts in the story add up to what would have been possible for her to do.

Why is there no one else coming forward?

Then there the person themselves.

 

A large issue seems to be the conflict of interests with having the HR being lead by part owner and the wife of the other owner. Considering that there seems to be a problem on multiple levels, even with some higher management, doing something about Madison's allegations would mean going against some of their longest tenured and most important employees. I can understand why they wanted to ignore it. Not to mention that that kind of HR is nowhere near competent and large enough to handle the company of that size. HR at the time was also doing accounting and handling other positions and probably didn't have time to deal with this 

[HesCalledTheStig]

1 minute ago, agatong439 said:

 

 

Ex - employee did stand up for her. 

But which part of her accusation is he referring to?  All of it?  Parts of it?  Was it the sexual harassment, the belittlement or just the over work?  Not downplaying it but, its still very vague.

[yoc]

41 minutes ago, creat0r said:

Thank you. I’m traveling and on my phone and it’s hard to find things in the Reddit app. I’m wondering who recorded this? It kind of looks/sounds like a security camera. But why would it be setup filming a PC? More importantly, who leaked this? (I guess no one knows but it’s still interesting). 

The video was added later, only the audio was recorded.
I don't have any of those answers but if had to bet would be that someone that had a good relationship with Madison recorded it and shared it with her like "Yup, they're talking about it.". The rest is history. I don't believe that the burner account owner has any more information. I do believe tho, that a lot of people know a lot more about this situation and are choosing to stay silent about it and I also believe that there are similar cases with other LTT (former or current) employees that we don't know (yet).