Madison reveals experiences working at LMG

[djksm]

3 hours ago, satzmann666 said:

Well you seem to care enough to create a fresh account, I to reclaim mine after years of inactivity and many others too.

he didnt its from MARCH

[Majestic12]

12 hours ago, Mertrodome said:

Stop pretending you don't know the difference between a "deez nuts" video made for social media in a company that makes those kinds of jokes in videos all the time and someone asking you in a not-for-air office setting how you like to fuck, asking you to twerk for them or suggesting interpersonal conflict is "just sexual tension".

I'll say what I already said before here: unless we know the circumstances this happened in, we can't know the severity.

 

If you want to think the worst, you can imagine a guy drooling over Madison asking the lewdest things of her = seems very unlikely.

On the other end of the road it could be colleagues talking about sex stuff openly and them trying to let her join in.

 

The truth is likely in the middle.

 

It made me think back some 15 years when I was in my 20's and female co-workers were crowded around a screen talking about sex toys and one of them had brought her new vibrator with her to work to show the others. They knew this embarrassed me so they made a show of asking my opinion like "what colour should I chose?". I think my head hasn't looked that red since then. 

[GenericCereal]

Social media being the judge, jury and executioner as always.  

 

If a few twitter posts by someone convinced you they're the victim, NEVER serve on a jury.  "It's a woman so she must be telling the truth."

 

Watch how she conducts herself on youtube videos.  If you think it's anything other than obnoxious immaturity I'll be surprised.

 

Nobody thinks this timing is all too convenient? 

 

While I've lost loads of respect for Linus over the Billet Labs fiasco this doesn't make LMG guilty of sexual harrassment (and assault) by default.

[Mertrodome]

20 minutes ago, Majestic12 said:

I'll say what I already said before here: unless we know the circumstances this happened in, we can't know the severity.

Ah, my point wasn't to lay any claim to knowing the severity of what may or may not of happened, or even to suggest who I do or don't believe.

 

I was merely pointing out to the Two-bob Sherlocks in this thread that the video they were talking about has no impact on this discussion.

 

Either she's not being truthful, in which case who even cares that she made a deez nuts joke in a work social media video, or she is being truthful, in which case her making that video doesn't excuse things.

 

Or maybe the truth is somewhere between, like you say. It still doesn't matter in the slightest that she made that video. There is no scenario in which making a deez nuts jokes for work social media affects what is okay in the office, regardless of the severity.

[Distinctly Average]

24 minutes ago, Majestic12 said:

I'll say what I already said before here: unless we know the circumstances this happened in, we can't know the severity.

 

If you want to think the worst, you can imagine a guy drooling over Madison asking the lewdest things of her = seems very unlikely.

On the other end of the road it could be colleagues talking about sex stuff openly and them trying to let her join in.

 

The truth is likely in the middle.

 

It made me think back some 15 years when I was in my 20's and female co-workers were crowded around a screen talking about sex toys and one of them had brought her new vibrator with her to work to show the others. They knew this embarrassed me so they made a show of asking my opinion like "what colour should I chose?". I think my head hasn't looked that red since then. 

What worries me most is that Madisson self harmed herself. This is not the action of someone with a clear mind. For that alone care of her mental state should be considered, now and back then. None of us know the full story and never will, but I do feel that anyone who has been or is into self harm needs help. I can only imagine the stress, supportive posts and attacks that she is now undergoing as a result of her recent actions. I think we all need to take care not to drive Madisson over the edge.

 

like you, I have been in a similar situation in the workplace with women. Fortunately I was more mature so was able to deal with it in a more relaxed way. It wasn’t the same when I was seeing racism and bigotry in a workplace. I can guarantee my anger was bottled up for a long time.

[Skipple]

6 minutes ago, GenericCereal said:

Watch how she conducts herself on youtube videos.  If you think it's anything other than obnoxious immaturity I'll be surprised.

Ah yes. Someone who is silly and immature on videos couldn't have been sexually harassed. Outstanding logic.

[GenericCereal]

6 minutes ago, Skipple said:

Ah yes. Someone who is silly and immature on videos couldn't have been sexually harassed. Outstanding logic.

I never said that.  I'm just saying the entire community has decided LMG is guilty of sexual assault because of a twitter post.  How logical is that?

[Clasmir]

8 hours ago, Uzrathixius said:

Literally no. I hear that every other day at my work. Younger / smaller companies don't have to be censored, generally speaking. But once they start growing past 50ish, that's when problems start to arise. For a multitude of reasons. Regulations, requiring HR, people like you. 

This is very dependent on the type of work, the disposition of the boss. in general over my 50 years of professional work life, I've seen a handful of places that are as toxic as you describe. But it was back when the movie blazing saddles was ok to be on air. 

 

Today - no way.

[Mertrodome]

5 minutes ago, GenericCereal said:

I never said that.  I'm just saying the entire community has decided LMG is guilty of sexual assault because of a twitter post.  How logical is that?

They haven't though? I'd say the majority in this thread have fallen on some variety of "we need to wait and see what the investigation turns up".

 

Sure some have been a little more "I don't see why she'd make it up" and some have been a little more "her story doesn't ring true for me", but the numbers who are hard one way or the other are fairly minimal.

 

Being on "her side" doesn't mean people have removed any possibility of it being untruthful or an exaggeration of the facts, it just means people are showing support and wanting her to get things properly investigated, which is what appears to be happening.

[castlev]

13 hours ago, Uttamattamakin said:

However, a subordinate cannot harass a superior (in general). 

Absolutely incorrect, at least according to any employee policy handbook I've ever read.

[Neroon]

22 minutes ago, Mertrodome said:

They haven't though? I'd say the majority in this thread have fallen on some variety of "we need to wait and see what the investigation turns up".

 

Sure some have been a little more "I don't see why she'd make it up" and some have been a little more "her story doesn't ring true for me", but the numbers who are hard one way or the other are fairly minimal.

 

Being on "her side" doesn't mean people have removed any possibility of it being untruthful or an exaggeration of the facts, it just means people are showing support and wanting her to get things properly investigated, which is what appears to be happening.

While they may not have removed any possibility, they have clearly made up their mind for about 99%.

 

If you are neutral, you either stay out of it, or you want both sides to get the truth out.

So far we have LMG who claims that these are not the values of the company, and would not accept these. Who have stated in the past that any of the accused misconduct would NOT fall under any NDA, and she would be free to talk about this.

Madison claims a lot of abuse, and requests that were sexual in nature, while offering no context or names.

 

Someone isn't being honest, and even if you look at this purely objectively, you cannot claim either side is at fault.

 

So why are picking people sides? Because they let their feelings decide what is right or not. Those who believe Madison, believe LMG is a place of business where these things are normal, and get covered up. Those who don't believe Madison, believe she is either making this up, or taking this way out of context. Either way, by showing support to either side, you are picking a side, and you choose to not believe the other side.

 

But no, showing support to Madison is not as simple as wanting an investigation, you can be objective, want the investigation, and not support either side.

[Erioch]

7 hours ago, RoseLuck462 said:

Your workplace sounds pretty toxic ngl

I had the exact same thought and wondered how often those words come out of his mouth.  Since it's okay with him, you know.

[vorg.eth]

1 hour ago, Distinctly Average said:

What worries me most is that Madisson self harmed herself. This is not the action of someone with a clear mind. For that alone care of her mental state should be considered, now and back then. None of us know the full story and never will, but I do feel that anyone who has been or is into self harm needs help. I can only imagine the stress, supportive posts and attacks that she is now undergoing as a result of her recent actions. I think we all need to take care not to drive Madisson over the edge.

Agreed that is not the behavior of a rational person. She should be hospitalized and people need to stop feeding her delusions on social media. 
 

It’s pure attention seeking behavior. She will continue to aggrandize her recollection of “abuses” to keep the spotlight on herself. 
 

I don’t know how it all works up in Canada but I wish this was happening down here in the States where I know LMG could end this manufactured scandal in the courts.  Suop can be a lesson to all insane wannabe influencers that social media is not real life. Real life has consequences. 

[Sasha2D]

if it was a male ex employee this thread would be half as many pages long

[vorg.eth]

5 minutes ago, Sasha2D said:

if it was a male ex employee this thread would be half as many pages long

Agreed. A man wouldn’t get blindly supported by internet strangers with personal agendas and YouTuber envy.

[vorg.eth]

14 hours ago, Someona said:

Except no,

 

Context is "Dance for me" joke made to Linus and posters here made the point on how it was sexual harassment as well if anyone didn't like the joke,

and how it's evidence that "Sexual harassment" was a regular thing in the office.

 

But those people didn't know that Madison as well has told sex jokes to Linus at the workplace, so they've implicitly made her a potential sexual harasses by trying so hard to paint the company as bad.

 

And now that I've pointed it out the hypocrisy of course you go """try a bit harder than "but but but she said deez nuts in a video!" """

 

Now it is magically okay to tell sex jokes at the workplace since Madison was the one to tell them,

 

It just further proves the hypocrisy and agenda of the posters here,

Projecting your own sexual mindset into that video is weird. Just really weird. 
 

It wasn’t “dance for me” it was something like “are you gonna keep standing on that table or dance”.  That’s a fucking Tom cruise on Oprah reference to normal people. 

[Mertrodome]

13 minutes ago, vorg.eth said:

Agreed that is not the behavior of a rational person. She should be hospitalized and people need to stop feeding her delusions on social media. 
 

It’s pure attention seeking behavior. She will continue to aggrandize her recollection of “abuses” to keep the spotlight on herself. 
 

I don’t know how it all works up in Canada but I wish this was happening down here in the States where I know LMG could end this manufactured scandal in the courts.  Suop can be a lesson to all insane wannabe influencers that social media is not real life. Real life has consequences. 

Imagine genuinely thinking you were smart enough to diagnose somebody based on a twitter thread.

[vorg.eth]

Just now, Mertrodome said:

Imagine genuinely thinking you were smart enough to diagnose somebody based on a twitter thread.

Imagine genuinely thinking self-harm is a tweet.

[Skipple]

2 hours ago, GenericCereal said:

I never said that.  I'm just saying the entire community has decided LMG is guilty of sexual assault because of a twitter post.  How logical is that?

Then why would you even bring up her behavior on camera? What in the world does it have to do with any accusation of sexual harassment?

[tech.guru]

12 hours ago, NavyEmt said:

Define "repercussions" There may of been a punishment we do not know about nor Madison.

We know that madison didnt feel safe and ultimately quit her job.

 

If fault was found, LTT had a duty to protect madison from further abuse and make her feel safe in the workplace. We know that didn't happen because she quit.

 

So even if we were to believe LTT investigated at the time and implemented punishment. LTT did not protect madison and did not prevent further abuse. 

See basic logic?

 

Also if LTT did investigation at the time and assigned displine they would be aware of the abuse. So why an investigation now?

 

Far more believable LTT did nothing at the time and prioritized long time staff members relationships over madison who was a relatively recent hire at the time.

They implemented disguised displine in order to push her out of the company or frustrated her to the point of quitting which she did.

 

Regardless LTT doesnt sound like a great place to work in my opnion.

 

 

[wanderingfool2]

13 minutes ago, vorg.eth said:

Projecting your own sexual mindset into that video is weird. Just really weird. 
 

It wasn’t “dance for me” it was something like “are you gonna keep standing on that table or dance”.  That’s a fucking Tom cruise on Oprah reference to normal people. 

Anyone who hasn't lived a sheltered life will know that telling someone who is standing on a table to dance is a sexual reference.  Tom Cruise was a couch not a table; and if you literally google Table Dance you will find yes it is 100% sexual in nature.  A comment like that should never exist in an HR meeting, especially one that was fueled by harassment in the workplace

[Sasha2D]

<Removed moderation comment>

I actually wholeheartedly believe that if the disgruntled employee was 'tech dude number 3' and had all kinds of criticisms about how the workflow and company worked, the response to that would of been way less argumentative. I'm not saying that 100% of people would believe him but the discussion would not be 154 pages long. A lot of people would believe him but even the die hard supporters would not be AS tight assed about it.

Pretending that this has nothing to do with gender is farcical. Men tend not to sexually abuse other men in the workplace, and when it does happen they don't report it because that would not be seen as manly. What we have here is a textbook woman in the workplace dynamic, and because it's THAT as well as the above workflow/company problems; that is why we are having such a huge argument. The die hard supporters want to completely deny this as even being a possibility. Like it could never ever happen at your favourite internet tech review company. And that is extremely annoying.  

[tech.guru]

9 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Anyone who hasn't lived a sheltered life will know that telling someone who is standing on a table to dance is a sexual reference.  Tom Cruise was a couch not a table; and if you literally google Table Dance you will find yes it is 100% sexual in nature.  A comment like that should never exist in an HR meeting, especially one that was fueled by harassment in the workplace

It points to a culture in the workplace. The tabletop comment was an obvious defiance to keep the status qou that was unchallenged.

 

We should not also ignore his position hes a manager in a leadership position when he made that comment. Staff were looking at situation and seeing look nothings changing same old same old.

 

The CEO was present did not call out and say that was unacceptable and we set the standards for the staff. Just ignored it.

 

Which shows alot to be honest.

[Mertrodome]

13 minutes ago, vorg.eth said:

Imagine genuinely thinking self-harm is a tweet.

Of course I don't think that. Self-harm is obviously serious and alarming, and I hope she has sought help for that.

 

But you're saying she should be hospitalised, that she's suffering from delusions and that it's "pure attention seeking behaviour". How do you know those things to be true if not armchair diagnostics based on what she's written?

[tech.guru]

1 minute ago, Mertrodome said:

Of course I don't think that. Self-harm is obviously serious and alarming, and I hope she has sought help for that.

 

But you're saying she should be hospitalised, that she's suffering from delusions and that it's "pure attention seeking behaviour". How do you know those things to be true if not armchair diagnostics based on what she's written?

Even if she has other issues outside the workplace. It doesnt change anything about the allegations of abuse.

 

She has a right to feel safe in her workplace free from sexual harrassnent.