Evil Genius Games bleeding personnel?

[Retreater]

(Note for those following along: I used to post here under the name "Mouseferatu," but I appear to have lost my log-in info, and the system isn't sending me the reset link.)

Welcome back. I remember you from the Necromancer Games boards back in the day, too.

 

[kenmarable]

But you choose to go other places with your comments before getting to this. The implications about positions on ethics and the one-sided, selective references to employee documents are not fine. I'm not going to belabor the point, but you should not be surprised to get pushback on those.

Honestly, please feel free to belabor this point! As someone who has regularly taught and studied business ethics, publicly divulging what was included in an employee's letter of resignation but then stating that former employees shouldn't post any details because that would be too "one-sided" is, in my professional opinion, a pretty shocking double standard.

(At best, it utterly fails to recognize the power imbalances and different risks involved between a CEO doing damage control and individuals now out of work - one of which even mentioned not wanting to say more out of fear of being sued.)

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I think that the one thing I would note is that the Ethical Code posted by Evil Games was posted yesterday, February 6, 2024.

After the resignations.

It is obviously difficult to say absent more information about what, exactly, led to the resignations. However, given that there were references to ethics in the resignations, and that this blog post is referred to as a Technology Code of Ethics, and the curious timing, I have to admit that I am inferring a causal relationship.

 

[FrogReaver]

This implies the people quit because of the AI and Blockchain policies. Is this what you are trying to say?

Jim Lowder

But you choose to go other places with your comments before getting to this. The implications about positions on ethics and the one-sided, selective references to employee documents are not fine. I'm not going to belabor the point, but you should not be surprised to get pushback on those.

I also find it unethical to ask the guy a question and then fault him for answering it.

 

[FrogReaver]

I think that the one thing I would note is that the Ethical Code posted by Evil Games was posted yesterday, February 6, 2024.

After the resignations.

It is obviously difficult to say absent more information about what, exactly, led to the resignations. However, given that there were references to ethics in the resignations, and that this blog post is referred to as a Technology Code of Ethics, and the curious timing, I have to admit that I am inferring a causal relationship.

This does seem to be the most likely timeline given the information we have.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I think that the one thing I would note is that the Ethical Code posted by Evil Games was posted yesterday, February 6, 2024.

After the resignations.

It is obviously difficult to say absent more information about what, exactly, led to the resignations. However, given that there were references to ethics in the resignations, and that this blog post is referred to as a Technology Code of Ethics, and the curious timing, I have to admit that I am inferring a causal relationship.

Indeed. As you say, it's all inference, so this isn't proof of anything, but it's enough coincidence to raise questions. In timeline order:

Folks quit citing conflict of personal ethics
Anonymous sources forward links showing how Blockchain Investors helped fund EGG
Mr. Scott updates Code of Ethics

It seems they are all linked, but that's just assumptions and may not be factual.

Edit For clarity, I really don't care about why these folks quit or were laid off. Not because I'm uncaring, but because it's none of my business. The only reason this would be of any note to anyone not directly involved is if in fact EGG uses AI and blockchain and consumers should probably be aware of that due to the moral questions of those. Mr. Scott says he won't use AI or blockchain regardless of investors, so unless it's proven EGG does, I guess it answers that.

 

[FrogReaver]

Honestly, please feel free to belabor this point! As someone who has regularly taught and studied business ethics, publicly divulging what was included in an employee's letter of resignation but then stating that former employees shouldn't post any details because that would be too "one-sided" is, in my professional opinion, a pretty shocking double standard.

Maybe but there are some fundamental differences between that and this. An ethical professor should recognize those differences IMO.

1. Confidentiality had already been pierced by the former employees that were vagueposting about ethical issues at their former company.

2. It seems both reasonable and ethical to make a public statement about those accusations.

3. Further, when asked about whether these were the issues the former employees had issue with - one of the least one sided responses possible was given, summarizing the employees own words, instead of claiming to know what they thought without mentioning any corroborating evidence. (I mean anything he says is one sided - right?)

4. Why not want them to post full resignation letters? it’s extremely likely there’s even more confidential info in them. That accusations made in them are completely one sided. Which most likely leads to indirectly disparaging the employees by at a minimum publicly denying their accounts.

With all stakeholders considered I think he’s managed to walk the ethical line about as well as is humanely possible - at least regarding the communications.

 

[Morrus]

I am gathering information, so I hope to be able to shed some light on all this soon. Busy day!

 

[aco175]

I can see varied scales of 'ethical' issues. these range from not letting me have whatever holiday off, to taking my ideas and not giving me credit, to not doing certain XXX behavior. I do not see anything here to go jump on some company blacklist yet, so I'll just go back to my popcorn.

 

[jgsugden]

I played D&D with Dave Scott for a few years in multiple campaigns. I consider us friends. We've argued, laughed, argued some more, and covered the entire spectrum of interactions that come with years of role playing. Despite not seeing each other face to face in a few years, I consider Dave a friend and a person that I understand reasonably well.

I have not been privy to any inside information at Evil Genius Games. Dave stopped playing D&D in the groups with me to focus on EGG and we have only chit chatted here and there since then.

That being said: If I wanted to work in the RPG space (I do not), I would not have any concerns working for Evil Genius Games and Dave Scott. I actually did do a tiny bit of unpaid editing / suggestions for the core rule book for Everyday Heroes. Based upon our RPG table experience, I would expect that I'd disagree with some decisions he might make ... but I would expect those disagreements to be over strategy, not ethics . I trust Dave and know he wouldn't do something if he thought it was wrong.

We're getting partial stories from people that were in a frustrating work situation with a lot on the line: for the company and for the individuals as well. As I said, I do not know what happened, but I have faith in Dave to set an ethical path for Evil Genius and encourage people to keep an open mind.