Madison reveals experiences working at LMG

[Astetine]

2 minutes ago, codemak said:

You can't say that because something happens all the time that it means that she is telling the truth.  There is a serious lapse in logic and lack of due diligence in that argument.  It's the same lapse of logic and diligence that just because she acts like a teenage girl and seems a bit quirky that she made it all up.

If you are going to call out logic do your part and read carefully. I'm saying I believe her words and it needs to be investigated.

What I'm describing are mechanisms. Mechanisms that she is also describing in her thread - this is what is making it believable for me. Believable doesn't always mean true, we need to hear the other side of the story.

[HesCalledTheStig]

1 minute ago, Legitsu said:

exactly and people wonder  why we doubt the veracity of her claims 

Do the previous posts she made still exist?

[W33DKILL3R]

1 hour ago, DakotaCx said:

This is not the case in my field. An employee reporting does not face a disciplinary process for reporting, nor can they be let go for reporting. I believe that's actually illegal. 

I also feel it's far easier to be fired for SA/harassment now than ever before given the negative PR surrounding companies who protect it these days being far more impactful than the worth of the employee. Look at the incredible list of high-profile individuals that have lost jobs, positions, roles, etc for just accusations. Companies want nothing to do with it. 

 

Yes it is illegal but companies still do it, hence why there are court cases and tribunals.

 

You are looking at high profile companies with high profile people who leave with a golden parachute as their position becomes untenable. But what do you think happens in all those millions of smaller companies where no one in the media cares?

[DakotaCx]

5 minutes ago, Orthusaku said:

@DakotaCx Looks like she said she didn't want to look at sexual organs for work and was told a little longer, that should be good enough to count as sexual harassment and hostile work environment.

Linus made an employee look at dicks and vaginas

Allegedly. 

If it falls within her job description I'm unsure if that fits the mark - especially when you consider their OF account was not NSFW, but parody. It would be another thing if the content of their account was NSFW, but seeing something inadvertently here or there.. I'm not sure that would meet the threshold. It would certainly be an interesting argument. I can all but guarantee she received the same on Twitter knowing that crowd, but made no mention of that there? Again, all of this falls within the reality of working social media, the job she accepted. 

The "little longer" part I take to be a reference to what they were playing up at the time as a bit until it concluded, and she seemingly agreed to that by continuing the role. 

Seems like a stretch to go from there to SA, but I genuinely don't know how that would play out. 

[Toriyan]

1 minute ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

Do the previous posts she made still exist?

That's what I'm wondering.

[0catt]

1 minute ago, Godiwa said:

so you would jail 99 people without proof + 1 innocent... I'd hate to be near you... too risky... not gonna go to jail because you lie on a whim... sorry to say...

Or like you who looks at the metoo movement and feels bad for the few people who where wrongly accused instead of the other thousand that where actually hurt?

lmao dude

[HolographicOne]

1 minute ago, Legitsu said:

exactly and people wonder  why we doubt the veracity of her claims 

To be fair, I'm not calling anyone a liar, but I cannot blindly take a side. 

[will0hlep]

9 minutes ago, coopa said:

We do not need pitchforks...

I'm not saying we do need pitchforks, just trying to keep up to date with this situation.

[Orthusaku]

1 minute ago, DakotaCx said:

Allegedly. 

If it falls within her job description I'm unsure if that fits the mark - especially when you consider their OF account was not NSFW, but parody. It would be another thing if the content of their account was NSFW, but seeing something inadvertently here or there.. I'm not sure that would meet the threshold. It would certainly be an interesting argument. I can all but guarantee she received the same on Twitter knowing that crowd, but made no mention of that there? Again, all of this falls within the reality of working social media, the job she accepted. 

The "little longer" part I take to be a reference to what they were playing up at the time as a bit until it concluded, and she seemingly agreed to that by continuing the role. 

Seems like a stretch to go from there to SA, but I genuinely don't know how that would play out. 

I highly doubt porn in part of her job description

[MiltownClowns]

1 minute ago, DakotaCx said:

Allegedly. 

If it falls within her job description I'm unsure if that fits the mark - especially when you consider their OF account was not NSFW, but parody. It would be another thing if the content of their account was NSFW, but seeing something inadvertently here or there.. I'm not sure that would meet the threshold. It would certainly be an interesting argument. I can all but guarantee she received the same on Twitter knowing that crowd, but made no mention of that there? Again, all of this falls within the reality of working social media, the job she accepted. 

The "little longer" part I take to be a reference to what they were playing up at the time as a bit until it concluded, and she seemingly agreed to that by continuing the role. 

Seems like a stretch to go from there to SA, but I genuinely don't know how that would play out. 

When an employee tells you they no longer want to look at genitals you should probably listen to them. Just good business.

[the_real_ch3]

1 hour ago, DakotaCx said:

This is not the case in my field. An employee reporting does not face a disciplinary process for reporting, nor can they be let go for reporting. I believe that's actually illegal. 

I also feel it's far easier to be fired for SA/harassment now than ever before given the negative PR surrounding companies who protect it these days being far more impactful than the worth of the employee. Look at the incredible list of high-profile individuals that have lost jobs, positions, roles, etc for just accusations. Companies want nothing to do with it. 

 

This also why most moderately sized and bigger companies have anonymous reporting lines where the messages left get sent directly to the board of directors or an outside 3rd party firm

[0catt]

1 minute ago, DakotaCx said:

Allegedly. 

If it falls within her job description I'm unsure if that fits the mark - especially when you consider their OF account was not NSFW, but parody. It would be another thing if the content of their account was NSFW, but seeing something inadvertently here or there.. I'm not sure that would meet the threshold. It would certainly be an interesting argument. I can all but guarantee she received the same on Twitter knowing that crowd, but made no mention of that there? Again, all of this falls within the reality of working social media, the job she accepted. 

The "little longer" part I take to be a reference to what they were playing up at the time as a bit until it concluded, and she seemingly agreed to that by continuing the role. 

Seems like a stretch to go from there to SA, but I genuinely don't know how that would play out. 

Just as a note to your argument,

She explicitly says she was receiving pictures of other people with full nudity

the problem is that in OF you attract people like that think that is ok

[HolographicOne]

2 minutes ago, HesCalledTheStig said:

Do the previous posts she made still exist?

Shortly after her leaving LTT she made a Twitter thread. It was deleted within a week. Sometime later she made a similar thread but also deleted it (or she had revived a draft or something, I have no idea), but it also disappeared. I'm still searching for any screen caps or quotes of the originals.

[Kisai]

9 minutes ago, Middcore said:

 

How would any of this constitute proof?

 

She could say "(Employee X) grabbed me on (date) in (area of the office) and I told (Manager Y) about it but nothing was done"

 

Employee X and Manager Y would then just go "That's not true" (if they responded at all).

 

If she named names and God forbid it was any of the parasocial fanboys' on-camera favorites she'd just get even more hate than I'm sure she's getting now, and the same people would be decrying lack of evidence.

 

 

 

Oh, geez. I think some people have absolutely NO IDEA what constitutes harassment.

 

It can be anything from asking someone about their day, to someone physically assaulting someone on a break.

 

A hostile work environment is one where you can't even banter to someone about your day, their day without someone with a stick up their ass giving you grief for wasting company time.

 

Meanwhile a toxic work environment is where everyone acts as friends, but YOU are the stranger, you are the one rocking the boat, you're the one who refuses to even tell the group about that new cat you got.

 

Sometimes people get too comfortable and treating people like friends, that it turns into a situation where boundaries get crossed. When that happens you tell them to stop. You take it to HR when that person doesn't let up. If you don't give someone a chance to change themselves, they are going hold a grudge, and now what YOU claimed was harassment, instead turns into passive aggressive hostility, and everyone you hurt (the ego of) wants you gone.

 

That was the entire problem with the #metoo movement. Many people, generally men, got too comfortable in the position they were in, and felt things were just normal, when people they work with, or work under them felt that was abusing a position of power to have them do things they didn't want to be involved in.

 

You know what's a good acid-test for if you're a bad fit for your job? Are you invited to the Christmas party? Who comes to the Christmas party? Did you skip the Christmas party? Because when a company has a Christmas party, and people "feel like they are required to be there" and don't enjoy it. That means the company is hostile. If you aren't invited to the Christmas party, that means YOU are the problem. If you skip the Christmas party, that ALSO means YOU aren't interested in having a career with the company. And Your company is toxic when you invite everyone and your most recent hires refuse to join, or the women won't join, or maybe the people who aren't white don't join.

 

You can tell how bad the company you work for is by the Christmas party. Always. And just to push this narrative further, one year the company I worked for had a real Christmas party, the year before they left the country, they bought pizza... night shift always wound up with pizza or pastries because the company cafeteria was always closed during their shift. Therefore the Christmas party was no different than coming to work.

 

A very common pattern, and I'm not defending LMG here, is that complaints are often disregarded because "yeah that is X, he/she/they always do that, we just roll with it" but nobody actually asks if X needs help. This just how things have evolved.

 

Like I remember that first video with Madison and it felt like that could be very entertaining, because Madison could hold her own with Linus. But then we didn't get any more. But that one time I saw Madison in another video, she clearly wasn't happy.

 

But realistically, I think the expectations were too high for someone who didn't have much experience in anything. So her complaints might be legit, or maybe they embellished from what the situation actually was. I'm willing to believe either. 

[cloneman]

19 minutes ago, 0catt said:

Sure
You can name-call someone without make it clear is about their sex or sexuality.

It's still sexual harassment, being grabbed or called a bitch or to "calm your tities" is not only name calling 

If she was dating someone on the team, then suddenly what can be interpreted as "sexual harassment" becomes very he-said she-said. We can't take anything someone says at face value when those types of relationships happen.

 

It's probably a lot more complicated, and people will jump to the conclusions. I suspect the problems were not at all related to sexual harassment at first. And then someone who didn't like her like made derogatory comments. Could be been avoided if management would have resolved the conflict early.

As far as grabbing goes... that's a big accusation. If there was no "grey area" (i.e. dating someone on the team, or her initiating playful grabs on other occasions), then that's a serious problem at LTT.

 

Actually the person above me made some excellent points.

3 minutes ago, Kisai said:

 

Sometimes people get too comfortable and treating people like friends, that it turns into a situation where boundaries get crossed. When that happens you tell them to stop. You take it to HR when that person doesn't let up. If you don't give someone a chance to change themselves, they are going hold a grudge, and now what YOU claimed was harassment, instead turns into passive aggressive hostility, and everyone you hurt (the ego of) wants you gone.

 

 

 

[Middcore]

7 minutes ago, djksm said:

probably everyone here will shit on linus if he publicly comes out stating that madison was sexually harrased

 

If Linus ran a company where these things were allowed to happen, then he deserves a level of blame for that. 

 

However, if he came out and said "We have reason to believe that some or all of what Madison alleges did in fact occur, I as former CEO/(whatever his title is now) apologize to her for my role in allowing it to happen, and we are thoroughly investigating so that the direct perpetrators can be held accountable with appropriate measures up to and including termination if warranted" then I would applaud it.

 

I simply can't imagine that happening based on LMG's track record with previous screwups/controversies, though, at least not until some time after they made an initial response that just made things worse. 

[iHateCoilWhine]

its just incredible how much brain gymnastics people will go through to make this look like a random woman being histerical for no reason. should be blindly believe madison 100%? no, but its clear a lot of people here simply hate women in general, and think SA is a little goof between coworkers

[DakotaCx]

1 minute ago, W33DKILL3R said:

Yes it is illegal but companies still do it, hence why there are court cases and tribunals.

 

You are looking at high profile companies with high profile people who leave with a golden parachute as their position becomes untenable. But what do you think happens in all those millions of smaller companies where no one in the media cares?

I obviously can't speak to every circumstance. But I can do a quick Google search by year of the SA cases reported in my state and see plenty of low-profile cases in the news media. There are always exceptions, always will be. No system is perfect, but it's hard to argue things have not changed dramatically post #metoo with regard to the handling of these things. At least from where I sit. 

[coopa]

11 minutes ago, HolographicOne said:

But this is not true, she's posted threads like this with different details of events in 2022, two different times. She's since deleted them, but there are remnants on these forums, and Reddit of some of the unfolding. The first time it unfolded very similarly. I'm finding it difficult to cite due to all the recent media clogging the search results. 
Part of the drama

If I find more, I'll report, but it's like deja vu but with some different commentary and a few changed stories.

I can't find any evidence that Madison tweeted in 2022 using a google search filter to remove results not in that year. What I can find is that Max posted this tiktok in regards to Madison and allegedy, Madison did a duet with it on TikTok (original videos now deleted). 

The references to twitter posts in your link seem to point out "vague twitter posts" which other sources are indicating are vague posts from other parties about Madison, not from her.

In her latest twitter thread from within the past 12 hours, Madison said they were mistaken when they believed they were subject to a non-disclosure agreement, and that's one of the reasons why they didn't speak up earlier:

If you can find evidence that Madison made public accusations via Twitter or elsewhere against LMG in 2022 and somehow changed details on the story, that would be worth discussing. But I can't find any evidence of that whatsoever.

[Middcore]

2 minutes ago, the_real_ch3 said:

This also why most moderately sized and bigger companies have anonymous reporting lines where the messages left get sent directly to the board of directors or an outside 3rd party firm

 

The board of directors is Linus and Yvonne, and Linus was at the time this was allegedly happening also the CEO, and it's pretty clear that LMG is a ~100 employee multimillion dollar company which is still being run like it's 5-6 guys in a house. 

[Nouweland]

3 minutes ago, DakotaCx said:

I think this is a very fair take that some will cast off as "victim blaming" when in reality it highlights the nuances in claims like this. Sexual harassment is harassment when it's unwelcome. If you're taking part in that alleged culture, making those jokes, it blurs that line. Communication, then documentation is everything if she really had an issue. 

This is a big reason I am hesitant to take everything she claims at face value. 

She also seems to suffer from "never met your heroes" syndrome, she talks a lot about wanting to work for on-camera Linus, but when it came time to actually work with CEO Linus and the team, and do a real job things got drastically different. 

Couple this with the logistics and challenges of a very young person moving to a new country, after losing a close family member, and the other struggles that obviously by her own admission led to a spiral of mental health issues including self-harm --- all of which will severely alter your perception of yourself, your work, and the statements others make to/about/around you. 

It's not an unfair assessment that there may be more than meets the eye here. She may genuinely believe a lot of it, but I can't help but believe so much of this probably went down differently than described, but was perceived this way by her. 

Yup, I felt the same as you but I don't have any proof of this. But we do about how she behaved to others (it's in multiple videos)...

[0catt]

1 minute ago, cloneman said:

If she was dating someone on the team, then suddenly what can be interpreted as "sexual harassment" becomes very he-said she-said. We can't take anything someone says at face value when those types of relationships happen.

 

It's probably a lot more complicated, and people will jump to the conclusions. I suspect the problems were not at all related to sexual harassment at first. And then someone who didn't like her like made derogatory comments. Could be been avoided if management would have resolved the conflict early.

As far as grabbing goes... that's a big accusation. If there was no "grey area" (i.e. dating someone on the team, or her initiating playful grabs on other occasions), then that's a serious problem at LTT.

 

I don't think it would make sense for her to make those statements if it was from someone she was dating.

Also, we don't know that... you are assuming that maybe that was it, but she was very clear on her threads
lets not "make" allegations because the dating thing makes no sense if she didn't even mention it

[DakotaCx]

1 minute ago, Kisai said:

 

Oh, geez. I think some people have absolutely NO IDEA what constitutes harassment.

 

It can be anything from asking someone about their day, to someone physically assaulting someone on a break.

 

A hostile work environment is one where you can't even banter to someone about your day, their day without someone with a stick up their ass giving you grief for wasting company time.

 

Meanwhile a toxic work environment is where everyone acts as friends, but YOU are the stranger, you are the one rocking the boat, you're the one who refuses to even tell the group about that new cat you got.

 

Sometimes people get too comfortable and treating people like friends, that it turns into a situation where boundaries get crossed. When that happens you tell them to stop. You take it to HR when that person doesn't let up. If you don't give someone a chance to change themselves, they are going hold a grudge, and now what YOU claimed was harassment, instead turns into passive aggressive hostility, and everyone you hurt (the ego of) wants you gone.

 

That was the entire problem with the #metoo movement. Many people, generally men, got too comfortable in the position they were in, and felt things were just normal, when people they work with, or work under them felt that was abusing a position of power to have them do things they didn't want to be involved in.

 

You know what's a good acid-test for if you're a bad fit for your job? Are you invited to the Christmas party? Who comes to the Christmas party? Did you skip the Christmas party? Because when a company has a Christmas party, and people "feel like they are required to be there" and don't enjoy it. That means the company is hostile. If you aren't invited to the Christmas party, that means YOU are the problem. If you skip the Christmas party, that ALSO means YOU aren't interested in having a career with the company. And Your company is toxic when you invite everyone and your most recent hires refuse to join, or the women won't join, or maybe the people who aren't white don't join.

 

You can tell how bad the company you work for is by the Christmas party. Always. And just to push this narrative further, one year the company I worked for had a real Christmas party, the year before they left the country, they bought pizza... night shift always wound up with pizza or pastries because the company cafeteria was always closed during their shift. Therefore the Christmas party was no different than coming to work.

 

A very common pattern, and I'm not defending LMG here, is that complaints are often disregarded because "yeah that is X, he/she/they always do that, we just roll with it" but nobody actually asks if X needs help. This just how things have evolved.

 

Like I remember that first video with Madison and it felt like that could be very entertaining, because Madison could hold her own with Linus. But then we didn't get any more. But that one time I saw Madison in another video, she clearly wasn't happy.

 

But realistically, I think the expectations were too high for someone who didn't have much experience in anything. So her complaints might be legit, or maybe they embellished from what the situation actually was. I'm willing to believe either. 

I don't go to Christmas parties because 1) I have social anxiety in group situations and 2) the ones who tend to go (in my environment) are not the ones I prefer to spend my time with at work (day shift clicks, administration, team leads, etc). That's not to say the company is bad, it's just not people I find enjoyable outside of a work environment. I prefer breakfasts after work with people I enjoy spending time with, so I'm not sure about this test.  

[BaidDSB]

LMG is DELETING comments mentioning madison in the fake apology video

 

Here's PROOF: https://old.reddit.com/r/LinusTechTips/comments/15su54s/deleted_madison_comments_on_the_youtube_apology/

 

Seems admission of guilt. why else would they delete these?

[0catt]

2 minutes ago, codemak said:

By your name I wouldn't eat any food you served me.

I don't think anyone would eat you either XD

dw