Stardock's $1M Suit Against Former Employee explained

http://kotaku.com/5940401/pc-gaming-studio-said-she-ruined-their-game-but-only-after-she-sued-the-boss-for-sexual-harassment

Elemental: War of Magic was not a rousing success of a game. The August, 2010 strategy title was a buggy, muddled mess at launch that even publisher Stardock felt was a broken game, badly in need of mending.

This August, two years after Elemental's disastrous debut, Stardock filed a lawsuit against former employee Alexandra Miseta, claiming that actions she took immediately before her departure were a major contributing factor to Elemental's failure. However, Stardock vs. Miseta is not the first time Miseta and Stardock CEO Brad Wardell have faced off in court—and the timing of the new lawsuit suggests it could have more to do with the other court case than it does with Elemental.

...

Court records from the lawsuit show several troubling messages from Wardell to Miseta, as well as allegations of problematic in-person behavior. E-mail messages included in the records go back as far as March, 2008, and include a link to a sexually explicit YouTube video, a comment that Miseta was chosen to go to a conference "not just because you're 'hot'," and a 100-question "purity test" that he asked her to take and then send him her score from. The purity test includes questions like, "Have you engaged in group sex?," "Have you engaged in intercourse with an unconscious person, while conscious?," and, "Have you had anal intercourse?"

Basically, Stardock CEO and Elemental publisher/developer Brad Wardell is alleged to have been a class A perv and his current suit against his marketing director (which made headlines a month ago) appears to be an attempt to scare her out of court. His response to her initial requests for him to stop is pretty amazing:

I'm not some manager or coworker of yours. I own the company. It, and your job there, exist to suit my purposes, not vice versa. The company is not an end unto itself, it is a means to an end which is to further the objectives of its shareholders (in this case, me).

The objectives of the company's shareholders now dictate that you tell me if you enjoy the taste of semen (no, really, read the complaint.)

EDIT

Stardock responds! They claim that the lawsuit against Miseta was filed two years ago, immediately following her exit, and is not retaliation for Miseta's sexual harassment suit. (Note: as pointed out in the Kotaku article, Miseta would be legally barred from suing for sexual harassment for at least 180 days while her claim was reviewed by a tribunal.)

http://www.joystiq.com/2012/09/06/stardock-responds-to-sexual-harassment-claims-by-marketing-manag/

That game was going to fail no matter what... Anyways its a damn shame when stuff like this comes out, hope he loses his job if all this is true.

@dudy80 said:

That game was going to fail no matter what... Anyways its a damn shame when stuff like this comes out, hope he loses his job if all this is true.

He is the sole owner of Stardock.

Well... fuck, I got nothing. That's just gross.

@Abdul_Gasazi said:

@dudy80 said:

That game was going to fail no matter what... Anyways its a damn shame when stuff like this comes out, hope he loses his job if all this is true.

He is the sole owner of Stardock.

Guess that sorta ruins the whole lose his job thing but from the sounds of it charges could be brought against him for harassment and it could mean some really bad PR. Really a shame as i like Stardock as a company but this kind of shit puts me off as a customer.

What a cunt. It's amazing how people like that can thrive.

@CornBREDX said:

@mandude: Doesn't sound like he's exactly thriving, but I agree with what you're getting at.

Stardock's main business isn't games but desktop skinning software. The business has been fairly successful for a long time and Wardell is very wealthy.

If you want to fuck a hottie at your whim, hire a whore. Nitwit.

These kinds of workplace powerplays amount pretty much to rape. What the fuck's wrong with you?

If half the stuff she claims is true then that guy is a total scumbag.

If he is the sole share holder of the company he could very much lose his company if She sued him. But it looks like she just wants to forget about it and move on.

What ever happened to "Oh you look nice today, can I buy you a cup of coffee?"

Do we go straight to sending youporn links now and say "how about you and me give this a shot"?

@psylah said:

What ever happened to "Oh you look nice today, can I buy you a cup of coffee?"

Do we go straight to sending youporn links now and say "how about you and me give this a shot"?

Only on your second date.

This sounds like a lot of unsubstantiated back and forth between two people angry at each other.

Kind of early to root for any side in this.

Wait, what's that? Brad Wardell, the noted Tea Party member/sayer of completely insane shit did something slimebag as hell? What a shock! It almost makes me feel bad to support him (but then I remember that I really like Political Machine).

@Dagbiker said:

@psylah said:

What ever happened to "Oh you look nice today, can I buy you a cup of coffee?"

Do we go straight to sending youporn links now and say "how about you and me give this a shot"?

Only on your second date.

How about you and me give this a shot?

@psylah said:

@Dagbiker said:

@psylah said:

What ever happened to "Oh you look nice today, can I buy you a cup of coffee?"

Do we go straight to sending youporn links now and say "how about you and me give this a shot"?

Only on your second date.

How about you and me give this a shot?

Uh...

@psylah said:

What ever happened to "Oh you look nice today, can I buy you a cup of coffee?"

Do we go straight to sending youporn links now and say "how about you and me give this a shot"?

How revealing.

OK, so if you guys want to laff it up go to this thread, where Brad Wardell is actively posting his version of the story.

@Abdul_Gasazi said:

OK, so if you guys want to laff it up go to this thread, where Brad Wardell is actively posting his version of the story.

@Seppli said:

If you want to fuck a hottie at your whim, hire a whore. Nitwit.

These kinds of workplace powerplays amount pretty much to rape. What the fuck's wrong with you?

But if they just started hiring high class ladies, who is going to give hot girls cushy jobs in marketing?

I'm sure as hell not one to defend someone who was actually convicted or proven guilty. But do we really know the context of all of this as of now? Because some people here are reacting as if he forced her to bend over his office desk and then went on to do some very nasty things with her.

Youtube in general is fairly tame. So how offensive exactly can a video from youtube be? I personally send and receive quite a few youtube links every both by female and male friends and I'm fairly sure American law would allow me to sue some of them for sexual harassment even while it isn't.

As for the survey. I've got send some of those several times. Once by an ex girlfriend. I never really felt offended by something like that but to each their own. The question here should be did he actively single her out and only send this stuff to her or did he generally send this stuff around. If it's the first case then yes this could very well ammount to sexual harassment. If it's the second then the question is was he sexually harassing all of the people who received it if no, why not?

As for the whole "not because you are hot", this could've been very will critique on her performance during said conference. It would be ill worded and not the best way to go about it. But does this really ammount to sexual harassment?

In all honesty I don't like frogboy from what I've seen from him on the old stardock impulse chat. I don't know the name of Miletta so I can't say anything about her. And I couldn't care less if he's guilty or not as it is the courts job to find out if he is and undertake appropriate steps. But I think it is kind of worrisome how fast some people are to judge even when we don't really know the context and what really happened and mostly take her side just because she is reasonable attractive.

I've seen the consequences of something like this in real life where the guy turned out to be not guilty. Even after that nobody really cared and most still acted as if he was guilty. That it wasn't very pleasent to him would've been a massive understatement.

What a dick.

@Deleth said:

I'm sure as hell not one to defend someone who was actually convicted or proven guilty. But do we really know the context of all of this as of now? Because some people here are reacting as if he forced her to bend over his office desk and then went on to do some very nasty things with her.

Youtube in general is fairly tame. So how offensive exactly can a video from youtube be? I personally send and receive quite a few youtube links every both by female and male friends and I'm fairly sure American law would allow me to sue some of them for sexual harassment even while it isn't.

As for the survey. I've got send some of those several times. Once by an ex girlfriend. I never really felt offended by something like that but to each their own. The question here should be did he actively single her out and only send this stuff to her or did he generally send this stuff around. If it's the first case then yes this could very well ammount to sexual harassment. If it's the second then the question is was he sexually harassing all of the people who received it if no, why not?

As for the whole "not because you are hot", this could've been very will critique on her performance during said conference. It would be ill worded and not the best way to go about it. But does this really ammount to sexual harassment?

In all honesty I don't like frogboy from what I've seen from him on the old stardock impulse chat. I don't know the name of Miletta so I can't say anything about her. And I couldn't care less if he's guilty or not as it is the courts job to find out if he is and undertake appropriate steps. But I think it is kind of worrisome how fast some people are to judge even when we don't really know the context and what really happened and mostly take her side just because she is reasonable attractive.

I've seen the consequences of something like this in real life where the guy turned out to be not guilty. Even after that nobody really cared and most still acted as if he was guilty. That it wasn't very pleasent to him would've been a massive understatement.

She asked him to stop, he continued to send her emails stating he will not change his ways.

@Deleth: The guy isn't really denying any of the stuff she accused him of on the forum that was posted by @Abdul_Gasazi, which is both hilarious and a frustrating reminder that even smart, successful people can be completely clueless jerks.

What really baffles me is the fact the Wardell can't even understand that he's done something wrong.

What a cunt. It's amazing how people like that can thrive.

@Ramone said:

What really baffles me is the fact the Wardell can't even understand that he's done something wrong.

and the fact that his further comments are only hurting him

@StarvingGamer said:

@mandude

What a cunt. It's amazing how people like that can thrive.

I'm assuming otherwise, but in a US context that word makes it sound like you're criticizing the woman, not the man.

Nah, I'm from Ireland. It's probably more common to hear it used on men, rather than women over here.