Madison reveals experiences working at LMG

[HesCalledTheStig]

1 minute ago, Kisai said:

 

Meritocracy's never work because they starve the governing party of different view points. Like in politics, a meritocracy might end up being a government made up just lawyers, who never pass anything that might be of benefit to someone who isn't a lawyer. See what I mean?

 

When you have a company that has a very lop-sided gender balance, that isn't small, you are inevitably going to have situations where under-represented (eg gender, race) aspects get ignored, which results situations where the company continues to make gaffs, until something potentially fatal to the company happens.

 

Like look at the AI facial recognition tech. The reason it's so awful is because the the training data lacks the equal diversity necessary to not erase under-represented faces from being erased from the weights.

 

I pointed out the gender balance because gender balance is one of the easiest things to solve, simply hire, or create new positions to fix it. LMG could have a female host and a few female writers to do one segment and then slowly bring them into other content. If it doesn't work, then you keep trying until you find someone who does vibe well with everyone. 

 

Race balance is a lot harder to solve because the metro Vancouver area has few "black communities", they were displaced 50 years ago to build a freeway.  1.2% of the population. Where as Asian communities are 40%. But again, look at the team page, I'd say the race diversity could use some work, but it's a lot closer to the actual racial make up of Metro Vancouver, and better than some bigger businesses.

 

But again, I'm going to point out the hosts and writers are mostly white and that does not reflect the diversity of the Metro Vancouver. But it's less urgent to solve since the overall staff does.

 

There are companies that over-weight gender or race makeup, and it results in alienation of the under-represented groups, and potentially making the company unproductive during certain parts of the year (see Christmas - Hanukkah - Lunar/Chinese New Year) because too many people take the day/week off, and then you end up with communication problems from tasks being ignored.

 

The Madison issue, to me was that LMG hired her because she seemed like a good "fit" on camera. Maybe that wasn't the best idea. But nothing ventured, nothing gained. Maybe the next time LMG hires a woman for a writer or on-camera host role, they will recognize that the existing bro-culture that seems to exist is actually unproductively bad.

I'm going to stick with my opinion that gender balance and race balance has nothing to do with anything here.

[Booch121]

XQC and Linus seem to have just about the same amount of professionalism. Spoiled brats being "cancelled" for doing shitty things that deserve repercussion.

[yoc]

21 minutes ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out.  I'm giving both sides the benefit of the doubt at this point.  I hope regardless of the outcome, LMG can fix the issue and come back from all of this.

Still here, trying to be "impartial", friendo?
I mean, a lot has changed since yesterday, for instance:
1) 2 ex-employees partially corroborated her story.

2) We now know that a (extraordinary) HR meeting was held immediately after her departure.
Have you changed your opinion at all? Not judging, whatever, I'm just curious because we were talking about this yesterday.

[HesCalledTheStig]

1 minute ago, Booch121 said:

XQC and Linus seem to have just about the same amount of professionalism. Spoiled brats being "cancelled" for doing shitty things that deserve repercussion.

At least Linus has a Luke to keep him in line, sometimes.  Luke Tech Tips anyone?

[Sasha2D]

We have to remember that xQc is from Laval. You can't expect somebody from Laval to be trust worthy or intelligent.  

[Kisai]

Just now, HesCalledTheStig said:

I'm going to stick with my opinion that gender balance and race balance has nothing to do with anything here.

You didn't even read what I wrote. So I'm probably not going to change the mind of people who are only here to argue against reality.

 

A company does not need to be a perfect gender or racial mix. But that IS how you stop having your company make these kinds of mistakes that result in fatal PR.

[Erioch]

1 minute ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

At least Linus has a Luke to keep him in line, sometimes.  Luke Tech Tips anyone?

God no.  My ears couldn't take his laughing.

[HesCalledTheStig]

1 minute ago, yoc said:

Still here, trying to be "impartial", friendo?
I mean, a lot has changed since yesterday, for instance:
1) 2 ex-employees partially corroborated her story.

2) We now know that a (extraordinary) HR meeting was held immediately after her departure.
Have you changed your opinion at all? Not judging, whatever, I'm just curious because we were talking about this yesterday.

No.  I still stand impartial.

Nothing you've mentioned has proven anything.

[RatKnight]

Just now, yoc said:

Still here, trying to be "impartial", friendo?
I mean, a lot has changed since yesterday, for instance:
1) 2 ex-employees partially corroborated her story.

2) We now know that a (extraordinary) HR meeting was held immediately after her departure.
Have you changed your opinion at all? Not judging, whatever, I'm just curious because we were talking about this yesterday.

Who is the other ex-employee?

 

1) I have only seen Colin, and all he really said was that her story matches what he was told / heard... not that he actually experienced, or saw any of it.  I saw David liked her tweets... but that is basically showing support, and afaik he has said nothing.

 

2) That HR meeting sounded like just about every HR meeting I have ever sat in following an employee leaving and having an exit interview where they complained about something.  That was obviously a speech and training given to them to do by the outside HR firm following these complaints probably being given during an exit interview.  - I should note that is speculation, but that is basically a type of meeting I have had to sit through before (and sounded about the same) after an unhappy employee left.

[ProbablyNotFidel]

3 minutes ago, Booch121 said:

XQC and Linus seem to have just about the same amount of professionalism. Spoiled brats being "cancelled" for doing shitty things that deserve repercussion.

Doesn't the story sound more like Linus could be kinda freaking out and looking to someone who has experienced something similar to vent? 

 

To have that "leak" from the other party is pretty bullshit. 

[HesCalledTheStig]

1 minute ago, Kisai said:

You didn't even read what I wrote. So I'm probably not going to change the mind of people who are only here to argue against reality.

 

A company does not need to be a perfect gender or racial mix. But that IS how you stop having your company make these kinds of mistakes that result in fatal PR.

Or you just put policies in place to keep your employee's in line. 

[Dom1252]

18 minutes ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

I get it.  But in court it would not hold up.  It would be dismissed as hearsay.

hearsay can be admissible in court, in some places hearsay is always allowed even 

so... no, something is not dismissed just because it's hearsay

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xGluGlQgdA

 

[saintlouisbagels]

Just now, HesCalledTheStig said:

Or you just put policies in place to keep your employee's in line. 

Right, 'cause rules and policies have always prevented crime and insubordination.

[yoc]

4 minutes ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

No.  I still stand impartial.

Nothing you've mentioned has proven anything.

Hm, I find hard to believe that they are both lying for no particular reason... And seems to be too much of a coincidence to have the meeting (and I believe we both have listened to the audio so we know what was said in concrete) exactly 1 day after she leaving, hum.
Whatever, I was just curious about your current stance.

[HesCalledTheStig]

Just now, saintlouisbagels said:

Right, 'cause rules and policies have always prevented crime and insubordination.

Granted they need to be enforced as well. 

[RatKnight]

Just now, Dom1252 said:

hearsay is admissible in court, in some places hearsay is always allowed even 

so... no, something is not dismissed just because it's hearsay

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xGluGlQgdA

 

I am not going to speak on whether it is admissible or not, but what I will state is that Legal Eagle is an American lawyer, talking about American law.  As has been pointed out by myself, and others in this thread, Canadian law differs in VERY big ways from American law, especially in civil matters.

[HesCalledTheStig]

2 minutes ago, Dom1252 said:

hearsay can be admissible in court, in some places hearsay is always allowed even 

so... no, something is not dismissed just because it's hearsay

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xGluGlQgdA

 

Maybe it's admissible, maybe it isn't.  But right now its just he said, she said and cant be proven unless the employee steps forward.

[digitalscream]

11 minutes ago, RatKnight said:

It is XQC... I give it a 30% chance it is true, and a 70% chance he is referencing some other time something happened, or someone changed their name to Linus on twitter and messaged him and he was too dumb to notice.  I do not think Linus is dumb enough (especially considering his past interactions and statements about XQC) would vent to especially him, and especially knowing that XQC can't keep his mouth shut to save his life.

I doubt it was venting, but I can totally believe Linus calling the only other person he knows with recent experience of being cancelled, and asking for advice on handling the social media side of things.

 

And, lest we forget, xQc didn't quote him exactly - he even said he was liberally paraphrasing.

[spartaman64]

3 minutes ago, yoc said:

Still here, trying to be "impartial", friendo?
I mean, a lot has changed since yesterday, for instance:
1) 2 ex-employees partially corroborated her story.

2) We now know that a (extraordinary) HR meeting was held immediately after her departure.
Have you changed your opinion at all? Not judging, whatever, I'm just curious because we were talking about this yesterday.

can you link the other employee statements? i believe you I just want to update my friend who is also interested in this situation

[castlev]

3 minutes ago, ProbablyNotFidel said:

Doesn't the story sound more like Linus could be kinda freaking out and looking to someone who has experienced something similar to vent? 

 

To have that "leak" from the other party is pretty bullshit. 

Last night into this morning is really when the larger media outside of the tech community caught wind of this and started posting articles. It's likely he was referring to that, but I'm not a mind reader. By the same token, it is disingenuous to believe he was blaming Madison for some type of cancel campaign. He wouldn't be that stupid.

[Dom1252]

2 minutes ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

Maybe it's admissible, maybe it isn't.  But right now its just he said, she said and cant be proven unless the employee steps forward.

yeah but that would be to court to decide, it would 100% not be just straight up "dismissed as hearsay" - there are processes to handle these 

"he said she said" is basically almost every court hearing that ever happened 

 

also how did you watch that part of video where they explain hearsay so fast? 

[VisibleXela]

5 minutes ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

Granted they need to be enforced as well. 

When people say stuff like this I can't help but remember the recent situation where Wizards of the Coast sent a Pinkerton hit squad to a customer for accidentally receiving the wrong product and getting one that hadn't released yet.

 

Not an employee, and a wildly different situation, but I mean, let's be real, that's really not all that much different than "listen to me or you lose your livelihood."

 

Seems far more productive and healthy, to me, to instead actively promote and build a healthy work culture and use "enforcement" as a last resort.

[mMontana]

17 hours ago, 1982 Original said:

She's clearly a scorned employee who is clout chasing.   If she had real accusations, she should go to the police and make real accusations and name real people.  

I hope in whole your life to never get in touch/know/befriend to a person that received some kind of personal violence. For that person, because could be hurted a lot by your absolutism.

You have your convinction/opinion, I don't want to take that out of you, I'm for free thinking, not a marketing person who want to make people think "something" I'm convinced I'm correct.

 

In this situation I never stood for any of the parts, because I was not there, so there's no chance that I know what exactly happened. And neither you, who call that person liar.

 

My "rephrase" of that words are simply a fact: the phrase in that email was legally calibrated and sized for say something without creating more possible issues for the company. This cannot be debated from your point of view.

 

[HesCalledTheStig]

1 minute ago, Dom1252 said:

yeah but that would be to court to decide, it would 100% not be just straight up "dismissed as hearsay" - there are processes to handle these 

"he said she said" is basically almost every court hearing that ever happened 

 

also how did you watch that part of video where they explain hearsay so fast? 

Unfortunately I cant view the video being at work.  I'm lucky I can access the forums here, lol.

 

All I'm saying is that its unlikely to hold up unless the person he belittled speaks up.

[Kisai]

10 minutes ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

Or you just put policies in place to keep your employee's in line. 

You can't make a policy with no experience as to why that policy needs to exist or any ability to identify what the policy is saying.

 

Like work for any big company, they will usually print out a half inch thick book of polices that most employees will just toss in the bottom drawer of their desk, unread. The company will have you sign something that says "Yes I read, and agree to this".

 

Here's a specific example from one place I worked.

 

So on TWO separate occasions, women were harassed by someone for dress code violations. So the manager, literately came to the person's desk with a tape measure. For one, the lady is just tall, and nothing came of it, but the lady herself was insulted and offended that the complaint was made. This is the kind of thing that happens when you have a policy in place that people use as TO harass people. In the other case, the lady came to work in what I'd call a "party dress" and left crying in tears.

 

Dress code is supposed to exist for YOUR SAFETY, and some professionalism reasons when meeting with clients. If your workplace has a "jeans friday" then there is no reason why every day can't be Jeans Friday. That means the dress code is BS. There is a difference between having dress code that says "you must wear clean clothing that at least comes to you knees and elbows, without any brands/logos"  and one that says "no skirts shorter than 24 inches", because the latter is absolutely targeting women for harassment.