JR Honeycutt Banned From BGG.CON 2019

I think what Jason is saying is that the court of public opinion is both uncaring and fickle and may very well turn against Ms. Mann.

His example is not farfetched, either. A very large number of people think that "cheaters" deserve abuse or that they are complete liars who just want to "wreck homes" and ruin the lives of happy families. The court of public opinion is more than happy to wish them sexual abuse or to harm them to protect their own preconcieved notions. Or just attack them because they are offended someone else "gets he spotlight".

If you think about it, you can probably recall plenty of examples of the public opinion taking a hard turn down the line. After all, this turn of events itself was an open secret for a very long time. Apparently, many designers and publishers already knew about the allegations and it's only now when they are acting out. Quelle suprise.

--

Regardless of guilt, I also agree with Jason in that there's no benefits to engaging in controversy, not even to defend yourself. Ignoring the controversy yields better results.

A bit late to this party, as I was out at Tabletop Network (which I thought was even better this year), but a few notes:

First off, I was shocked and sickened when I heard about this. JR actually sent an email to myself and Tim Fowers (TTN organizers) formally withdrawing from the conference (he was supposed to be a speaker) and bgg.con as soon as this broke, which was before I had read Victoria's piece. (FWIW this was before BGG announced they were withdrawing his badge).

Also, I had asked him to be one of the mentors for my New Voices In Gaming scholarship at TTN. Hopefully there wouldn't have been an issue, as all NVIG events were group events, but I am shaken that I could have put someone that we're trying to encourage to get into the industry into a vulnerable position. We did have a code of conduct for all, and I told everyone to come to me or my daughter if there were any issues at all, but still...

It's fortunate this came out when it did - a few more days later and JR would already have been at TTN/BGG.con, and removing him from the event could have been way more problematic.

Also, one of the speakers at TTN talked about contracts and IP. He said that most new contracts are now including a clause that allows for the designer to be removed from having credit for a game, name on a box, and possible receiving royalties, if it would bring 'ill repute' on the publisher. He called it "the JR Honeycutt clause".

Geoff

engelstein wrote: He said that most new contracts are now including a clause that allows for the designer to be removed from having credit for a game, name on a box, and possible receiving royalties, if it would bring 'ill repute' on the publisher. He called it "the JR Honeycutt clause".

That's an abusive contracts under the guise of protection. These kind of clauses are downright anti-labor and have repeatedly been used to silence, abuse and cheat creatives out of their work.

After all, not giving someone credit or payment for the work they've done does not help their victims. Not giving credit is not a proper form of justice, all it does is cover the back of game companies.

What is going to happen is that companies are will abuse those clauses to silence down criticism and punish workers for stepping out of line. They allow, for example, to deny people credit and royalties for leaving the company (Eg. Hideo Kojima, XSEED) or to threat the workers you abuse with financial ruin if they tell others. After all, if you are abused by a publisher and you come out you are bringing "ill repute" to the company.

This is not speculation, either, this is what has happened over and over again. We live in a world where non-disclosure contracts are used to silence sexual abuse through similar means. I mean, if your editors abuses you, what are you supposed to do? Report it and lose your livehood and career? And I'm not a movie buff, but I know some on these forum are and they probably know lots of examples of "you won't work here anymore if you report abuse".

This kind of "ill repute" clauses also have a long track record of being used to abuse and stifle the rights of workers to express themselves. When Blizzard took away all the prize money and banned a Hearthstone player for supporting the Hong Kong protests, they did it using a "ill repute" clause. Book publishers have gone after authors for not living up the child-friendly behaviour they want, or for being a gay activist or being too lefty or having casual sex or being in a polyamorous relationship. Or being a communist, like in Hollywood in the 50s.

I mean, who determines what constitutes "ill repute"? Not the game designer, but the game company. And in other fields, such as book writing, unions and guilds oppose morality clauses. The fact that companies push for these kind of clauses and their unionized workers reject them should give anyone pause.

An article I just read this morning had this to say:

"Publishers can’t be expected to be arbiters of justice when their motivations are complicated by profits."

Can't say it any better than it.

I dont really get the "strip his name off everything" ideology. The game still had his input. It doesn't play any differently now than it did a week ago. There are TONS of problematic artists in the world and it is impossible to be consistent with "cancelling" one but still supporting dozens of others.

Stop the guy going forward, I get that. Trying to erase their past though, doesn't make any sense.

And an "I'll repute" contract clause should TERRIFY any creative with the way the entire board gaming industry is falling under just a few umbrellas. All it takes is China or some ideologue to drop relative chump change into one of these wide reaching groups to suddenly be able to dictate almost everything about it, from game themes and content to what creators can say without being stripped out and removed from their work.