@buzz_killington said:

This fucking 'sexual harassment' bullshit is getting out of control. Really? The court entertains a lawsuit about a woman claiming a man touched her hair at a pub? It's just his words against hers. And I can't figure out why some guys here are jumping to conclusions and shitting on Stardock as a whole, when nothing is conclusive. Oh wait, this is the fucking Internet, what am I saying.

there's been plenty of evidence of wardell creating a toxic workplace for this woman (not the hair touching thing but the response to it), and no one is blaming stardock as a whole beyond the fact that it is wardell's company

also note that he has not denied making offensive jokes to her so...

All the articles I've read on this seem to ignore most of the evidence presented so far in the case. I read through dozens of pages of documents and this woman's claims seem kind of ridiculous. In it's motion for dismissal the defendent noted numerous reasons why this woman pretty much made the whole thing up. Most damning is the fact that she had found a new job months before quitting, but days before writing that email. She quit one day before the start of her new job which paid a significantly higher salary. She then filed a legal complaint much later, and wrote a list of over 50 complaints, of which she admitted more than half are false. The other major complaints were either entirely refuted by witnesses or taken so out of context that they barely deserve mentioning. The "hair touching" was done at a pub. She was talking about a "fake" coworker who changed his appearences and he touched her hair while noting that she had changed her hair color. Nothing sexual about it. Furthermore the jokes that he made were made to groups of people both male and female, and she has admitted to saying similar jokes during these occasions. Finally her allegation about him insulting her boyfriend again traces back to the pub event where SHE asked how his wife was doing and he asked if her fiancee had found a job yet.

Now obviously the dismissal documents are going to place Wardell in the best of lights, but all of this is proven evidence. Now I'm not saying the guy isn't an asshole because he is. But from what I've read her claims look completely bogus. As for his claims, he argues that she deleted her account taking with it numerous important marketing files. Now these should have been backed up but that doesn't change the fact that material only contained on her computer was deleted which caused a great deal of hardship for the company leading to the launch of Elemental.

Of course everyone should just assume the woman is right in the case.

oh awesome, another thread for the misogynist losers to jump on.

I'm not going to try and say which of the two people in this case is right, because I have no idea, and I don't really care. So long as Stardock doesn't go under, because I bought my copy of galcivII through impulse, and I'm hoping for more awesome games like that.

@damnable_fiend said:

oh awesome, another thread for the misogynist losers to jump on.

I'm not going to try and say which of the two people in this case is right, because I have no idea, and I don't really care. So long as Stardock doesn't go under, because I bought my copy of galcivII through impulse, and I'm hoping for more awesome games like that.

if they go under it's going to because elemental was a super shitty game at launch

@Animasta said:

@buzz_killington said:

This fucking 'sexual harassment' bullshit is getting out of control. Really? The court entertains a lawsuit about a woman claiming a man touched her hair at a pub? It's just his words against hers. And I can't figure out why some guys here are jumping to conclusions and shitting on Stardock as a whole, when nothing is conclusive. Oh wait, this is the fucking Internet, what am I saying.

there's been plenty of evidence of wardell creating a toxic workplace for this woman (not the hair touching thing but the response to it), and no one is blaming stardock as a whole beyond the fact that it is wardell's company

also note that he has not denied making offensive jokes to her so...

Well, 'toxic' according to you. I didn't work there, but to me, it sounds like he wanted a different, casual work environment where people could talk like people talk and make the occasional bad-taste joke, instead of turning into soulless PC corporate robots the moment they entered the office. Some people love such an environment and thrive there (like me), and some don't. To me, it seems like he just ran his company differently. If someone is offended by a stupid online test that gets mass-forwarded around any office, then they should leave. Or people can stop being uptight, and have a laugh at a stupid online test they got forwarded.

@JamieOD said:

Wardell is stuck in a hole. He should stop digging,

Some people are psychologically incapable of walking away from a fight they are losing. It's an egomaniacal trait.

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/paul-christoforo-ocean-marketing-emails

@buzz_killington said:

@Animasta said:

@buzz_killington said:

This fucking 'sexual harassment' bullshit is getting out of control. Really? The court entertains a lawsuit about a woman claiming a man touched her hair at a pub? It's just his words against hers. And I can't figure out why some guys here are jumping to conclusions and shitting on Stardock as a whole, when nothing is conclusive. Oh wait, this is the fucking Internet, what am I saying.

there's been plenty of evidence of wardell creating a toxic workplace for this woman (not the hair touching thing but the response to it), and no one is blaming stardock as a whole beyond the fact that it is wardell's company

also note that he has not denied making offensive jokes to her so...

Well, 'toxic' according to you. I didn't work there, but to me, it sounds like he wanted a different, casual work environment where people could talk like people talk and make the occasional bad-taste joke, instead of turning into soulless PC corporate robots the moment they entered the office. Some people love such an environment and thrive there (like me), and some don't. To me, it seems like he just ran his company differently. If someone is offended by a stupid online test that gets mass-forwarded around any office, then they should leave. Or people can stop being uptight, and have a laugh at a stupid online test they got forwarded.

yeah that email was forwarded to her specifically so don't even go there

also there's a difference between soulless PC corporate robots and fucking harassment, dude. Do you think indie devs are corporate robots? Valve? Harmonix? I can't remember hearing a story this bad in a while, because you know what? most CEO's aren't making inappropriate sexually charged comments to their workers.

Good, I hope he loses and she gets whatever she's going after. Dude is sexist garbage and needs to shut the fuck up.

I hope that justice wins the day, and that we get Galactic Civilizations 3 soon.

@buzz_killington: Thank god that forum goer buzz killington is here to tell all the ladies whats what in terms of being harassed. I'm sure ladies around the world are waiting with bated breath for your words of wisdom.

@CircleNine: COME ON, MAN. Everybody knows that "Fun and Casual" and "Free of sexual harassment" are mutually exclusive. I mean, first you're chilling out, talking about The Wire during lunch, playing a board game. Next thing you know, you're just sniffing a woman and sending sexually explicit emails to your coworkers. All in good fun.

Right? Right? Anybody.

Why won't anybody talk to me?

@Animasta said:

yeah that email was forwarded to her specifically so don't even go there

Looks Like Jeff Bargmann and Emily have a big payday on the way too...

@Kidavenger: oh sick burn you clearly have got me clearly mr. wardell si in the right MRA WHOSE WITH ME YEAAAAAAAAH

after all responding to my actual point would probably be too much huh?

I don't care.

So maybe Stardock will get a million dollars, and maybe a woman will win a charge of sexual harassment. Doesn't sound like Wardell will end up in jail anyway, maybe a restraining order or a fine? Not sure how these things go.

That "I'll be watching at the end" is way more than this case deserves, given the small magnitude that most impacts that seem likely to come out of this can have.

This is sub-par news in my opinion.

@Animasta said:

be too much huh?

Fun? or a waste of my time? I haven't decided yet, I'll get back to you...

@Kidavenger said:

@Animasta said:

be too much huh?

Fun? or a waste of my time? I haven't decided yet, I'll get back to you...

also never said anything about rape in this case I'll have you know, but hey reading's hard

For those of you confused about where the sexual harassment actually took place:

“I'm not some manager or coworker of yours,” he said. “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 End.

@buzz_killington said:

Well, 'toxic' according to you. I didn't work there, but to me, it sounds like he wanted a different, casual work environment where people could talk like people talk and make the occasional bad-taste joke, instead of turning into soulless PC corporate robots the moment they entered the office. Some people love such an environment and thrive there (like me), and some don't. To me, it seems like he just ran his company differently. If someone is offended by a stupid online test that gets mass-forwarded around any office, then they should leave. Or people can stop being uptight, and have a laugh at a stupid online test they got forwarded.

I'm all about casual work environments, but a line has been crossed once you start targeting specific individuals and making them feel uncomfortable at work. There IS a middle ground between anything-goes and "soulless PC corporate robot." Some people just don't want to have to put with with juvenile shit like being forwarded a "purity test" at work. And yeah, she did get offended, and left as soon as she secured another job which seems like it was the best move for all parties involved.

@Snail: I think the story is worthy simply because of of how open the Stardock CEO has been in his message board posts. The guy is in the middle of 2 lawsuits and yet is freely talking about this stuff online, possibly doing damage to his own case in the process. It's just very unusual behavior that is worth highlighting.

Just because her work is important doesn't mean she can't leave if she isn't happy with work conditions, and certainly doesn't give him the right as her boss to blow off her concerns.

If she did maliciously destroy stuff, that's definitely wrong and will be settled in the lawsuit. But his attitude tells me that Stardock... might have been a rather shitty place to work. Nothing good comes from boss treating the company as their own personal playground.

@PattyCakes said:

For those of you confused about where the sexual harassment actually took place:

“I'm not some manager or coworker of yours,” he said. “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 End.

I'm sorry, I don't see the sexual harassment in this part. Maybe just the truth with a hint of megalomania.

I'm usually against going to Kotaku links, buuuuuut I'll make the exception in this case...

*reads the article*

From what I see, and what one Kotaku commentor said, both look like assholes. The dude is just being the big, loud, obnoxious one.

If she did delete the files, she absolutely deserves to be brought to justice for her actions.

And after reading some of the documents on the trial, most of the evidence seemed to debunk hers. I will agree that some of the things said were absolutely stupid on his part (purity quiz, his very blunt apology email), but from some of the pictures she's posted (like the 'twigs n berries'), her comments on other employees' appearances, employee testimonies of her making sexual remarks also, working on UFC marketing at Stardock, and even using a 'beat stick' to assault her boss if he missed a deadline, she's equally as guilty.

Again, both are assholes. He's just louder. Doesn't mean I'll stop purchasing their games, because I'm sure I will.

No amount of marketing material could have saved the stinking cesspool of grubby mess that was Elemental. I actually think she did them a bit of favor for forcing to get down to the bottom of the pared down marketing tropes and save a lot of unwitting players the indignity of having played the game.

Touching someone's hair is not assault. Anyone who says otherwise is a moron.

I would highly suggest to everyone to wait till after the court decisions on these matters. We honestly don't know if this guy is a pervert or if this woman is just seeking lawsuit for her own greed.

Remember. Innocent until proven guilty.

@buzz_killington said:

@Animasta said:

@buzz_killington said:

This fucking 'sexual harassment' bullshit is getting out of control. Really? The court entertains a lawsuit about a woman claiming a man touched her hair at a pub? It's just his words against hers. And I can't figure out why some guys here are jumping to conclusions and shitting on Stardock as a whole, when nothing is conclusive. Oh wait, this is the fucking Internet, what am I saying.

there's been plenty of evidence of wardell creating a toxic workplace for this woman (not the hair touching thing but the response to it), and no one is blaming stardock as a whole beyond the fact that it is wardell's company

also note that he has not denied making offensive jokes to her so...

Well, 'toxic' according to you. I didn't work there, but to me, it sounds like he wanted a different, casual work environment where people could talk like people talk and make the occasional bad-taste joke, instead of turning into soulless PC corporate robots the moment they entered the office. Some people love such an environment and thrive there (like me), and some don't. To me, it seems like he just ran his company differently. If someone is offended by a stupid online test that gets mass-forwarded around any office, then they should leave. Or people can stop being uptight, and have a laugh at a stupid online test they got forwarded.

By way of example and not limitation, Defendant's aforesaid unlawful behavior of a sexual nature included the items set forth in the paragraphs below.

* Touching Plaintiff's body parts without consent.

* Running his hands through Plaintiff's hair without her consent, while telling her that her hair was so gorgeous.

* Asking Plaintiff if she read pornographic books or magazines.

* Asking Plaintiff if she had seen a pornographic movie.

* Responding to Plaintiff's inquiry as to why she had to go on the media tour with him with the statement "because your nipples look better on camera than mine do."

* Coming into Plaintiff's hotel room (which she was sharing with another female employee) on a business trip in only his pajamas, and proceeding to sit on Plaintiff's bed and start working on his lap top computer.

* Asking Plaintiff if she had sexual intercourse with a virgin.

* Asking Plaintiff is she had sexual intercourse during menstruation.

* Asking Plaintiff is she had sexual intercourse three or more times in one night.

* Asking Plaintiff is she had sexual intercourse in three or more positions.

* Asking Plaintiff is she had anal intercourse.

* Talking in negative and critical terms about Plaintiff's private life and her boyfriend.

* Asking Plaintiff if she purchased contraceptives.

* Asking Plaintiff if she had an abortion.

* Making comments to Plaintiff about the size of other female Stardock employees' breasts and nipples.

* Asking Plaintiff if she engaged in cunnilingus.

* Asking Plaintiff if she engaged in fellatio.

* Telling Plaintiff it is not hard, but it is lengthy, in reference to his penis.

* Asking Plaintiff if she had gone 69.

* Asking Plaintiff if she enjoyed tasting semen.

* Telling Plaintiff he was going to pee on her car to stake "his" territory.

* Asking Plaintiff if she masturbated.

* Telling Plaintiff that a Stardock employee was his new downstairs bitch.

* Asking Plaintiff if she simulated intercourse with an inanimate object.

* Making comments to Plaintiff about whether new female applicants were or were not pretty.

* Making comments to Plaintiff about the bodies of female job applicants.

* Telling Plaintiff that one of the reasons she was hired was because she was "hot."

* Telling Plaintiff that men are more intelligent than women, but that women just know how to use their "Ass-ets."

* Making comments that routinely referred to women in obscene and degrading terms.

* Telling Plaintiff that he had dreams about her and him of a sexual nature.

* Telling Plaintiff that he wanted to join her eggs with another Stardock male employees' sperm and make the perfect employee.

* Telling Plaintiff to make sure and wear a white shirt when it's raining outside.

* Telling Plaintiff that her eyes were so beautiful while continuously staring at her eyes and then glancing down at her boobs.

* On June 9, 2010, which was only days after sending his June 6, 2010 email to Plaintiff, Defendant made an inappropriate, sexist, vulgar, and embarrassing comment to Plaintiff about the temperature at the office by stating "don't worry, the nudity policy won't be in place until it gets much hotter."

* On June 11, 2010, Plaintiff told Defendant that his nudity policy comment that he made a couple days earlier was offensive to her, uncalled for and that she would really appreciate it if he would stop making such statements.

* Defendant responded by telling Plaintiff that "if the government wants to take anything away from my company, that's when I shut it down. The way I see it I can walk around naked in my office and if I can't then I won't have one."

@Kidavenger said:

Haha, some lunatic is whining about what I said on Something Awful, I'm E-famous now.

Are you actually psyched that the whole Internet knows you're a misogynistic creep, or are you just so desperate for a tiny bit of attention that you don't care if you get it by being an annoying nitwit?

AAaaand... let the victim blaming begin!

Seriously though, justifying sexual harassment because the victim later deleted some magazine covers is sleaze territory, and demonstrates enough ignorance to make me believe the claims against him.

@benu302000 said:

AAaaand... let the victim blaming begin!

Seriously though, justifying sexual harassment because the victim later deleted some magazine covers is sleaze territory, and demonstrates enough ignorance to make me believe the claims against him.

I don't think this is blaming. He's just claiming that stuff happened.

If it did, then he and the company are owed damages, whether he harassed her or not. And if he harassed her he will see his own punishment. It's that simple.

Ok, this is a little off-topic, but is the Loyd Case referenced in the article the same one who used to write for Tested?

Man. The actions she took in her departure are certainly questionable, and I'm sure that'll get figured out but.... man. The responce Wardell sends in that fist e-mail is nuts.

“I own the company. It, and your job there, exist to suit my purposes, not vice versa." How do you write that, as the owner of a business? "Sorry you're unhappy, but it's my company and I'll do what I want." Is that his message?

He might as well say "I'm not sorry about what I did, but I'm sorry YOU got offended by it."

so if I get this correctly... he touched her hair and she filed a lawsuit?

yes the response of the guy was pretty douchy... but her hair?

How is this video-games related?

Kotaku will write the most shit stories, I hope Giant bomb wont start doing the same.

@myslead said:

so if I get this correctly... he touched her hair and she filed a lawsuit?

yes the response of the guy was pretty douchy... but her hair?

it was a LOT MORE than just touching her hair (read bhlaab's post on the top of the page)

Definitely an ugly case. Interested to see how it shakes out, but the timing of Stardock's lawsuit seems suspect now. And fellas, if you touch a girls hair without asking, and she tells you it made her feel uncomfortable, you apologize and make sure it doesn't happen again. Hiding behind the all encompassing umbrella of "It's just fun and games" doesn't cut it anymore.

It is hilarious that Wardell wants people to believe that deleting marketing materials somehow turned his disaster of a game into what it is. The only poeple dumber then Wardell are the people defending him.

This whole thing looks fishy as hell on Stardocks end.

I mean seriously convenient timing for your "discovery" of a legal statute there guys, might have wanted to "discover" that slightly earlier considering your lawyers had Two years to "discover" it.

Aside from the accusations that Stardock are making, the whole sexual harassment case is looking pretty strong and Stardock are definitely giving the appearance of a company trying to discredit that case with their own lawsuit and cover Wardell's ass. Which Wardell certainly isn't helping by dragging this through public forums even more than it was.

Fact of the matter is the behaviour at that evening was unacceptable but the response to Miseta's complaints from Wardell was unbelievable and completely justifies Miseta feeling that she could no longer work in that workplace. As for the alleged theft and deletion of company assets, that is to be determined. It would be an illegal and inappropriate retaliation if it happened, however does nothing to mitigate the behaviour of Wardell in the slightest.

@Dredlockz said:

How is this video-games related?

Kotaku will write the most shit stories, I hope Giant bomb wont start doing the same.

If you can't see how this is video games related, then I worry for you sir/madam.

I'm not sure if it's been mentioned, but a bunch of the individual complaints all stem from ONE e-mail, specifically a "purity test". It's a pretty classic legal tactic to make your suit look more imposing by splitting one point into multiple points.

Additionally, attributing the questions in the "purity test" directly to Wardell is another classic move. It doesn't matter that everyone on the planet knows that these sorts of "tests" have been floating around the internet for ages, and have been re-circulated and recycled a thousand times -- directly attributing each question to Wardell individually is a genius way to make him look indefensible on paper thus, hopefully, inducing settlement without a trial.

All that being said, forwarding that sort of test to her in the first place was a colossal lapse in judgment. Regardless of the sort of relaxed atmosphere he thought existed at his company, this is NOT the 1950's and he should be acutely aware that the boss has to keep thoughts/jokes/anything of a sexual nature out of their speech/actions/correspondence or risk legal ramifications.

@Dredlockz said:

How is this video-games related?

Kotaku will write the most shit stories, I hope Giant bomb wont start doing the same.

Video games are produced by companies. Companies are staffed with human beings. Some human beings are total garbage and do completely batshit insane things like sexually harass employees. Some video game companies are run by the human equivalent of total garbage.

Do you understand now?

Charming people...

@Hailinel said:

@Dredlockz said:

How is this video-games related?

Kotaku will write the most shit stories, I hope Giant bomb wont start doing the same.

Video games are produced by companies. Companies are staffed with human beings. Some human beings are total garbage and do completely batshit insane things like sexually harass employees. Some video game companies are run by the human equivalent of total garbage.

Do you understand now?

There is an enormous amount of bullshit that goes on in the background of games development, like any other industry. It's an HR and management issue. It has nothing to do with video games. The dude doesn't even fucking develop anything.

@wrecks: Yea. I don't like to judge someone from what the media reports but if Wardell is just going to have evidence of his dickery in plain sight like that...

@wrecks said:

These choice quotes from his response show the kinda man he really is:

#3, however is not acceptable to me. I am an inappropriate, sexist, vulgar and embarrassing person and I'm not inclined to change my behavior. If this is a problem, you need to find another job.

#4, Again, I am not willing to adapt my behavior to suit others. If you find my behavior problematic, I recommend finding another job.

Wardell's behaviour is horrifying and it appears he doesn't feel any shame for what he did. What a scummy motherfucker.

Douche and douchette sue each-other. Let's see who wins.

If half of the claims she says are true, than why is the first thing she mentioned the hair touching?

Then he goes and makes another case, and specifically starts mud slinging at her case? Despicable.

I say both the defendant and plaintiff in this case should undergo lie detector tests, because it seems like they're both lying, backstabbing, and untrustworthy.

Ugh, horrible. They're both horrible.

@Manatassi said:

The fact of the matter is the behaviour at that evening was unacceptable but the response to Miseta's complaints from Wardell was unbelievable and completely justifies Miseta feeling that she could no longer work in that workplace. As for the alleged theft and deletion of company assets, that is to be determined. It would be an illegal and inappropriate retaliation if it happened, however does nothing to mitigate the behaviour of Wardell in the slightest.

^This. the guy was being a sleazebag regardless of whether or not she stole and destroyed those assets. If she did, that was a poor way of handling the situation, and she'll get punished for that. However, hiding behind that isn't going to work. the guy still sexually harrassed her, regardless.

@Vigorousjammer said:

If half of the claims she says are true, than why is the first thing she mentioned the hair touching?

Then he goes and makes another case, and specifically starts mud slinging at her case? Despicable.

I say both the defendant and plaintiff in this case should undergo lie detector tests, because it seems like they're both lying, backstabbing, and untrustworthy.

Ugh, horrible. They're both horrible.

A lot of the instances of sexual harassment actually come from one single forwarded chain mail he sent to her and possibly other employees. It was one of those purity tests of "check off what you've done and get your score" type things. As far as I can tell the only real instance of actual potential physical inappropriateness came from him running his fingers through her hair. In addition to that she makes claims of some poorly received jokes as additional attempts of harassment at the workplace, but a lot of it sounds like very tame jokes that were not directed at her in the way her lawsuit is claiming.