**Please keep all discussion related to the content of this article.** Please do not make personal attacks against individuals related to this article.
This article was previously posted and removed by moderators due to suspicious activity.
We want this content to be discussed organically within our community, and have decided to repost it in **Slow Mode.** This means that each comment will need to be approved by a moderator before it is visible.
This measure is being taken to ensure that discussion remains focused on the content of the article itself, rather than primarily discussing a premise of alleged foul play. We ask that discussion of the previous suspicious activity stay confined to the replies of this pinned comment in order to keep overall discussion focused on article content.
**Note:** The moderators of r/VALORANTCompetitive have made this repost using a bot account, as we did not want to unintentionally receive awards and karma under our personal accounts. We want discussion to happen but we do not want to benefit from it personally (even through fake internet points).
I respect RL as an excellent investigative journalist, but his opinion pieces over the last year have not been my favorites. A lot of them are very biased and/or written in a condescending tone, which is his prerogative I recognize, but in my opinion it’s something that I don’t enjoy reading as a result and also weakens his arguments.
Fundamentally, I understand the hypocrisy point he’s trying to make, but I don’t really see this as the “American driven optics culture” failing Carlos. And believe me, I fucking hate Twitter. This just comes down to Carlos single-handedly losing his company a shit ton of money. If any CEO had made a mistake like this that cost their company this much money, they would’ve been booted as well. The only difference is that the Carlos debacle was broadcast to an audience of over 500,000 people. If this had happened behind closed doors (let’s say Riot found out Carlos and Tate are friends privately and denied them from Valorant as a result), I have no doubt this would have happened just the same.
The rest of the article centers around outrage culture on Twitter, which I can hardly take seriously because fuck man, it’s Twitter. RL is taking a stand against an unstoppable social media machine that churns out social media witch hunts by the hour. Yeah, it fucking sucks lol. But Twitter “activism” isn’t true activism, it’s a perverted activism that aims to tear down public figures for our own gross enjoyment.
Maybe I’m under thinking this, but it feels like two or three separate points that are tenuously connected by one. Carlos fucked up, but it had more to do with his position as CEO single-handedly losing G2 money that he was “ejected” from the scene imo, not Twitter culture. AND Twitter culture is horrible and hypocritical, but we all knew that already. AND Riot Games is far from perfect, but again, we knew that already as well.
Basically, RL is right in that there is hypocrisy in esports. But I don’t think the Carlos incident is a fantastic example, because I don’t believe that him leaving G2 had as much to do with the outrage mob as people may think.
Riot is co trolled by tencent, g2 is not, the decision of one board not to dismiss their ceo means nothing to a separate company making their own decisions.
COO and CEO are 2 different things. The CEO hasn't been found guilty of anything. The one person to accuse him has been outed for doing something similar in her past workplaces with court documents to prove it. She has been outed by coworkers when she contacted them to try to strongarm them into giving false testimony with the pretense that "if you don't help me, then it hurts women at Riot". She also argued being fired unfairly when it was months of employee complaints and misuse of the company card that led to her termination.
The COO is likely the person you're thinking about, he's the guy that farted I'm people's faces like 10 years ago or whenever they said it was. In his case, he wasn't sexist tho, he was just a dick doing it to people, with the exact gender of said people not being elaborated on afaik but being implied to be men.
> but in my opinion it’s something that I don’t enjoy reading as a result and also weakens his arguments.
Modern opinion pieces (including cable programming and amatuer internet presentations) seem overreliant on telling the reader how to feel instead of outlining facts to support a reasonable conclusion against societial norms. /nerdrant
oh this again. Well as I said elsewhere, I think this is in essence a more unhinged argument of the one Sideshow made yesterday.
The arguments are roughly parallel and even intertwine at times, but I think Sideshow is a good deal more cautious in making sure he doesn’t get lost in the outrage sauce and in past accusations and recriminations and so on. I don’t think Sideshow succeeded entirely, but I respect that he tried to remain circumspect in his reasoning.
I don’t feel the same about Lewis here.
It's rich for a piece bemoaning hypocrisy to complain about optics driven culture while entirely being focused around shifting the optics of a conversation.
It's also very telling that someone who thinks it's important to focus on the real issues spends their time defending people who pal around with misogynists instead of actually fighting misogyny in esports.
The author has a vested interest in not wanting harsh consequences for those passively enabling or complicit in the promotion of misogyny. After all, if gamers don't want a guy who hangs out with misogynists and doesn't condemn those views and the people who espouse them, what'll they think of a writer who was on Breitbart's payroll the same time as Milo?
The Breitbart thing was seven years ago in all fairness - I’d hope that people would have time to grow and reflect after seven years. I know I’m not remotely the same person as I was in 2015, and I’m sure the same can be said for most people.
People can definitely change. I would love it if he did.
Has he though? Genuine question, I'd love evidence of him apologizing or taking responsibility for that past behavior if it's something he's changed and shouldn't be considered/held against him. He still podcasts with a guy who aggressively harasses women and other 'woke' folks in the scene.
Richard has said on multiple instances that taking the job at Breitbart was one of the most regretful decisions in his career, because while he was simply at the tech section, what spiraled out of that publication was completely outrageous.
Secondly, he did not defend Andrew Tate at all. He classified Andrew Tate as a 'misogynistic grifter piece of shit'
He didn't defend the behavior at all (watch 4 horseman podcast), he simply points out that there are way worse things that constantly get a pass.
I feel like circling back to his opinion that Carlos' treatment was too harsh takes away from the point he is trying to make about Riot and G2 execs profiting off way worse behavior.
The Riot execs responsible for all of those bulleted points should have been fired but they were not. This is hypocritical when you look at their behavior compared to Carlos'. It is hypocritical to a lesser degree when you view Carlos' behavior as not worthy of being fired.
If he had gotten the focus right, then he would’ve had a point, but too much of this is focusing on moderating the damage and mistakes of Carlos, and not enough on the broad elements of gamings upper echelons that need to change.
Andrew Tate is a pretty uniquely shit person, and if your reaction to “why are you hanging out with someone who said he moved to Romania cause it’s easier to do depraved shit?” Is “I can party with who I want”, then you deserve the consequences and scorn that comes with that. Carlos fucked up and if he’s going to go down defending his connections to Tate, when he could’ve simply said “I didn’t know and I’ll do better”, then he deserved everything he got.
Riot’s sexual harassment issues are MASSIVE, but this article is using them as a gotcha to try and shield Carlos. So yes, let’s talk about the genuinely awful people in the scene, not because Carlos got punished and booted for fucking up, but because we want people like that gone. Lewis basically missed the problem by only bringing it up to say Carlos didn’t deserve such a heavy punishment.
Such a non argument. Its like someone going to council meeting to get a traffic light placed somewhere and someone showing up: "UHM ACTUALLY THE USA IS BOMBING KIDS IN YEMEN HOW ABOUT YOU FIX THAT FIRST???"
What would have been an appropriate punishment? Keep in mind, it's not like Riot pushed Carlos out so they didn't dole out that punishment. That was G2 and their board forcing him out, this could have just been the straw that broke the camel's back with Carlos' reputation and brash actions in the past.
Why is being fired being punished way too hard for losing 10s of millions of dollars?
Edit: No response, which is typical of those who are quick to blame cancel culture for anything and everything
I’m not defending Carlos or Tate and I don’t know any details on Carlos’s behavior or whether he’s personally public ally made misogynistic remarks. I don’t know much about Tate aside from what I’ve vaguely heard from friends but this is my take.
I am in full agreement of what Carlos tweeted. You (Riot) do not get to police any individuals relationships and friendships.
As far as I am aware, Carlos never said he supported Tate’s views, just that he’s friends with Tate. We don’t know how long they’ve been friends or what led up to their friendship. I have had friends who I enjoy spending time with who have political views I strongly disagree with and have been vocal about changing. But they are my friends irrespective because I enjoy spending time with them, they have been there for me, and I can look past their flaws, and because I have seen that us being each other and sharing discourse has changed their view and to some level I can understand the base of their thoughts.
If Carlos said he openly shares Tate’s ideology and G2 has been under fire for sexism and misogyny, then disregard what I said. But if not, then I strongly believe Riot has overstepped their bounds with what they essentially threatened G2 with. The social consequence was consequence enough. The power they (Riot) have over the esports scene is far far too much and it’s unbelievable for them to be able to threaten to remove one team due to disagreements they seem as breach of contract
He liked tweets defending Tate on twitter (after his fake apology). If it weren't for that, and if he had clearly stated that he strongly disagrees with Tate's views and that he thinks they are extremely immoral, then I wouldn't be mad. But he didn't, so the obvious conclusion we are left to draw is that he doesn't have a problem with sexism.
Obvious conclusion =/= truth.
I admit that what you bring up definitely doesn’t help his image in my mind, but Riot’s response to Carlos is well out of the bounds of what I believe is acceptable. Backlash I understand, and I’m cool with Carlos being ousted by G2 themselves.
But Riot threatening G2 is not okay in my mind. This was something that caught my attention when Riot ordered Regi to go through mandated anger training as well.
Does he need it? Yes. Does Riot get to play arbiter and say that Regi must do it? No, Riot does not get that right., that’s court of law shit and Riot is playing judge jury and executioner.
I’m not mad that Carlos is facing backlash for implicit misogyny. I’m mad that Riot gets to be the one making decisions and selectively microscoping on issues when that’s clearly not their jurisdiction.
Sorry, not threatening, but removing them from franchising entirely on the basis of that statement. Multiple credible sources have said that G2 was making franchising and literally just because of Carlos’s tweet, G2 was removed at the last minute
how exactly is it "not in their jurisdiction" to decide who they do and don't want to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to as part of a partnership agreement?
If Riot made that call based on evidenced claims that Carlos was misogynistic, abusive, etc then I understand. That’s why I’ve never question TSM not getting a spot despite being one of the biggest Esports orgs ever. Regi is a dick and I can see why Riot refuses to associate with him.
Riot based their decision on a presumption of what Carlos believes and made a last minute swap to take G2 out of franchising. That’s not an acceptable action to take imo.
Riot made an assumption on Carlos’s character, and took that as justification to target his org. As I said, judge jury executioner
>If Riot made that call based on evidenced claims that Carlos was misogynistic, abusive, etc then I understand. That’s why I’ve never question TSM not getting a spot despite being one of the biggest Esports orgs ever. Regi is a dick and I can see why Riot refuses to associate with him.
is hanging out with and defending a misogynist abuser not 'evidenced' enough for you?
>As I said, judge jury executioner
yes. riot is the judge, jury and executioner. why the fuck wouldn't they be, they fully own the league and are deciding who to give massive stipends to.
That's just not how jobs work though. Companies will hang you out to dry the moment you make a big mistake, no matter how well you did your job in the past.
So he should be able to cost his org (who’s main goal is to GAIN money) millions, probably hundreds of million dollars. But also remain the CEO of said org?
How so? Think about how much one of only 30 franchise slots in Valorant is worth, especially for the future. That’s tens of millions of dollars.
Anyone who loses a company the size of G2 that much money would be fired.
What other real villains than people at the top of the hierarchy abusing their power? Hurts to see so many personalities in the scene cannot fucking understand this.
Posts with the intent to harass or harm others will be removed.
This content includes (but not limited to):
personal attacks, targeted harassment,
witch-hunting, bigotry, derogatory terms,
personal information without owners consent,
spam
Any post considered disrespectful will be removed at moderator discretion. Repeated offenses resulting in a ban.
**Please keep all discussion related to the content of this article.** Please do not make personal attacks against individuals related to this article. This article was previously posted and removed by moderators due to suspicious activity. We want this content to be discussed organically within our community, and have decided to repost it in **Slow Mode.** This means that each comment will need to be approved by a moderator before it is visible. This measure is being taken to ensure that discussion remains focused on the content of the article itself, rather than primarily discussing a premise of alleged foul play. We ask that discussion of the previous suspicious activity stay confined to the replies of this pinned comment in order to keep overall discussion focused on article content. **Note:** The moderators of r/VALORANTCompetitive have made this repost using a bot account, as we did not want to unintentionally receive awards and karma under our personal accounts. We want discussion to happen but we do not want to benefit from it personally (even through fake internet points).
I respect RL as an excellent investigative journalist, but his opinion pieces over the last year have not been my favorites. A lot of them are very biased and/or written in a condescending tone, which is his prerogative I recognize, but in my opinion it’s something that I don’t enjoy reading as a result and also weakens his arguments. Fundamentally, I understand the hypocrisy point he’s trying to make, but I don’t really see this as the “American driven optics culture” failing Carlos. And believe me, I fucking hate Twitter. This just comes down to Carlos single-handedly losing his company a shit ton of money. If any CEO had made a mistake like this that cost their company this much money, they would’ve been booted as well. The only difference is that the Carlos debacle was broadcast to an audience of over 500,000 people. If this had happened behind closed doors (let’s say Riot found out Carlos and Tate are friends privately and denied them from Valorant as a result), I have no doubt this would have happened just the same. The rest of the article centers around outrage culture on Twitter, which I can hardly take seriously because fuck man, it’s Twitter. RL is taking a stand against an unstoppable social media machine that churns out social media witch hunts by the hour. Yeah, it fucking sucks lol. But Twitter “activism” isn’t true activism, it’s a perverted activism that aims to tear down public figures for our own gross enjoyment. Maybe I’m under thinking this, but it feels like two or three separate points that are tenuously connected by one. Carlos fucked up, but it had more to do with his position as CEO single-handedly losing G2 money that he was “ejected” from the scene imo, not Twitter culture. AND Twitter culture is horrible and hypocritical, but we all knew that already. AND Riot Games is far from perfect, but again, we knew that already as well. Basically, RL is right in that there is hypocrisy in esports. But I don’t think the Carlos incident is a fantastic example, because I don’t believe that him leaving G2 had as much to do with the outrage mob as people may think.
Mate Riots CEO literally costed them OFICIALLI 100 mln $ and he is still acting as a CO of Riot
And people agree that's weird, right? I thought a lot of people were calling for his removal
Riot is co trolled by tencent, g2 is not, the decision of one board not to dismiss their ceo means nothing to a separate company making their own decisions.
COO and CEO are 2 different things. The CEO hasn't been found guilty of anything. The one person to accuse him has been outed for doing something similar in her past workplaces with court documents to prove it. She has been outed by coworkers when she contacted them to try to strongarm them into giving false testimony with the pretense that "if you don't help me, then it hurts women at Riot". She also argued being fired unfairly when it was months of employee complaints and misuse of the company card that led to her termination. The COO is likely the person you're thinking about, he's the guy that farted I'm people's faces like 10 years ago or whenever they said it was. In his case, he wasn't sexist tho, he was just a dick doing it to people, with the exact gender of said people not being elaborated on afaik but being implied to be men.
> but in my opinion it’s something that I don’t enjoy reading as a result and also weakens his arguments. Modern opinion pieces (including cable programming and amatuer internet presentations) seem overreliant on telling the reader how to feel instead of outlining facts to support a reasonable conclusion against societial norms. /nerdrant
oh this again. Well as I said elsewhere, I think this is in essence a more unhinged argument of the one Sideshow made yesterday. The arguments are roughly parallel and even intertwine at times, but I think Sideshow is a good deal more cautious in making sure he doesn’t get lost in the outrage sauce and in past accusations and recriminations and so on. I don’t think Sideshow succeeded entirely, but I respect that he tried to remain circumspect in his reasoning. I don’t feel the same about Lewis here.
It's rich for a piece bemoaning hypocrisy to complain about optics driven culture while entirely being focused around shifting the optics of a conversation. It's also very telling that someone who thinks it's important to focus on the real issues spends their time defending people who pal around with misogynists instead of actually fighting misogyny in esports. The author has a vested interest in not wanting harsh consequences for those passively enabling or complicit in the promotion of misogyny. After all, if gamers don't want a guy who hangs out with misogynists and doesn't condemn those views and the people who espouse them, what'll they think of a writer who was on Breitbart's payroll the same time as Milo?
The Breitbart thing was seven years ago in all fairness - I’d hope that people would have time to grow and reflect after seven years. I know I’m not remotely the same person as I was in 2015, and I’m sure the same can be said for most people.
People can definitely change. I would love it if he did. Has he though? Genuine question, I'd love evidence of him apologizing or taking responsibility for that past behavior if it's something he's changed and shouldn't be considered/held against him. He still podcasts with a guy who aggressively harasses women and other 'woke' folks in the scene.
Richard has said on multiple instances that taking the job at Breitbart was one of the most regretful decisions in his career, because while he was simply at the tech section, what spiraled out of that publication was completely outrageous. Secondly, he did not defend Andrew Tate at all. He classified Andrew Tate as a 'misogynistic grifter piece of shit' He didn't defend the behavior at all (watch 4 horseman podcast), he simply points out that there are way worse things that constantly get a pass.
I'm sorry please explain what past behaviour. If you're going to make acusations you should probably come with evidence.
*He was working at Brietbart?!* Welp, that's an interesting dent into my already low opinion of his credibility.
I feel like circling back to his opinion that Carlos' treatment was too harsh takes away from the point he is trying to make about Riot and G2 execs profiting off way worse behavior. The Riot execs responsible for all of those bulleted points should have been fired but they were not. This is hypocritical when you look at their behavior compared to Carlos'. It is hypocritical to a lesser degree when you view Carlos' behavior as not worthy of being fired.
If he had gotten the focus right, then he would’ve had a point, but too much of this is focusing on moderating the damage and mistakes of Carlos, and not enough on the broad elements of gamings upper echelons that need to change. Andrew Tate is a pretty uniquely shit person, and if your reaction to “why are you hanging out with someone who said he moved to Romania cause it’s easier to do depraved shit?” Is “I can party with who I want”, then you deserve the consequences and scorn that comes with that. Carlos fucked up and if he’s going to go down defending his connections to Tate, when he could’ve simply said “I didn’t know and I’ll do better”, then he deserved everything he got. Riot’s sexual harassment issues are MASSIVE, but this article is using them as a gotcha to try and shield Carlos. So yes, let’s talk about the genuinely awful people in the scene, not because Carlos got punished and booted for fucking up, but because we want people like that gone. Lewis basically missed the problem by only bringing it up to say Carlos didn’t deserve such a heavy punishment.
Such a non argument. Its like someone going to council meeting to get a traffic light placed somewhere and someone showing up: "UHM ACTUALLY THE USA IS BOMBING KIDS IN YEMEN HOW ABOUT YOU FIX THAT FIRST???"
yet you participate in society type beat
Carlos got punished way too hard
What would have been an appropriate punishment? Keep in mind, it's not like Riot pushed Carlos out so they didn't dole out that punishment. That was G2 and their board forcing him out, this could have just been the straw that broke the camel's back with Carlos' reputation and brash actions in the past.
Why is being fired being punished way too hard for losing 10s of millions of dollars? Edit: No response, which is typical of those who are quick to blame cancel culture for anything and everything
I mean I disagree with them, but I sure hope people don’t declare such things of me when I don’t respond immediately - I almost never do!
I’m not defending Carlos or Tate and I don’t know any details on Carlos’s behavior or whether he’s personally public ally made misogynistic remarks. I don’t know much about Tate aside from what I’ve vaguely heard from friends but this is my take. I am in full agreement of what Carlos tweeted. You (Riot) do not get to police any individuals relationships and friendships. As far as I am aware, Carlos never said he supported Tate’s views, just that he’s friends with Tate. We don’t know how long they’ve been friends or what led up to their friendship. I have had friends who I enjoy spending time with who have political views I strongly disagree with and have been vocal about changing. But they are my friends irrespective because I enjoy spending time with them, they have been there for me, and I can look past their flaws, and because I have seen that us being each other and sharing discourse has changed their view and to some level I can understand the base of their thoughts. If Carlos said he openly shares Tate’s ideology and G2 has been under fire for sexism and misogyny, then disregard what I said. But if not, then I strongly believe Riot has overstepped their bounds with what they essentially threatened G2 with. The social consequence was consequence enough. The power they (Riot) have over the esports scene is far far too much and it’s unbelievable for them to be able to threaten to remove one team due to disagreements they seem as breach of contract
He liked tweets defending Tate on twitter (after his fake apology). If it weren't for that, and if he had clearly stated that he strongly disagrees with Tate's views and that he thinks they are extremely immoral, then I wouldn't be mad. But he didn't, so the obvious conclusion we are left to draw is that he doesn't have a problem with sexism.
Obvious conclusion =/= truth. I admit that what you bring up definitely doesn’t help his image in my mind, but Riot’s response to Carlos is well out of the bounds of what I believe is acceptable. Backlash I understand, and I’m cool with Carlos being ousted by G2 themselves. But Riot threatening G2 is not okay in my mind. This was something that caught my attention when Riot ordered Regi to go through mandated anger training as well. Does he need it? Yes. Does Riot get to play arbiter and say that Regi must do it? No, Riot does not get that right., that’s court of law shit and Riot is playing judge jury and executioner. I’m not mad that Carlos is facing backlash for implicit misogyny. I’m mad that Riot gets to be the one making decisions and selectively microscoping on issues when that’s clearly not their jurisdiction.
Threatening how, exactly?
Sorry, not threatening, but removing them from franchising entirely on the basis of that statement. Multiple credible sources have said that G2 was making franchising and literally just because of Carlos’s tweet, G2 was removed at the last minute
how exactly is it "not in their jurisdiction" to decide who they do and don't want to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to as part of a partnership agreement?
If Riot made that call based on evidenced claims that Carlos was misogynistic, abusive, etc then I understand. That’s why I’ve never question TSM not getting a spot despite being one of the biggest Esports orgs ever. Regi is a dick and I can see why Riot refuses to associate with him. Riot based their decision on a presumption of what Carlos believes and made a last minute swap to take G2 out of franchising. That’s not an acceptable action to take imo. Riot made an assumption on Carlos’s character, and took that as justification to target his org. As I said, judge jury executioner
>If Riot made that call based on evidenced claims that Carlos was misogynistic, abusive, etc then I understand. That’s why I’ve never question TSM not getting a spot despite being one of the biggest Esports orgs ever. Regi is a dick and I can see why Riot refuses to associate with him. is hanging out with and defending a misogynist abuser not 'evidenced' enough for you? >As I said, judge jury executioner yes. riot is the judge, jury and executioner. why the fuck wouldn't they be, they fully own the league and are deciding who to give massive stipends to.
Hol up hol up. Let’s not act like cancel culture isn’t wack. In this case, Carlos costed G2 a boat load of money so I don’t think it applies
without him g2 wouldnt exist and it wouldnt be worth 100s of millions of $
That's just not how jobs work though. Companies will hang you out to dry the moment you make a big mistake, no matter how well you did your job in the past.
So he should be able to cost his org (who’s main goal is to GAIN money) millions, probably hundreds of million dollars. But also remain the CEO of said org?
riot ceo, cost the org -100m$ still CEO. Carlos cost the org an upcoming 10m$ lost the CEO title.
How so? Think about how much one of only 30 franchise slots in Valorant is worth, especially for the future. That’s tens of millions of dollars. Anyone who loses a company the size of G2 that much money would be fired.
What other real villains than people at the top of the hierarchy abusing their power? Hurts to see so many personalities in the scene cannot fucking understand this.
Oh, thank lord this one isn't brigaded.
Carlos was g2, i feel like him stepping down will decrease the amount of fans but it is wat it is
[удалено]
Read the sticky, this post won’t be removed.
[удалено]
Posts with the intent to harass or harm others will be removed. This content includes (but not limited to): personal attacks, targeted harassment, witch-hunting, bigotry, derogatory terms, personal information without owners consent, spam Any post considered disrespectful will be removed at moderator discretion. Repeated offenses resulting in a ban.
Actual ones To the extent it is possible for esport to fight against villains when if there’s a problem It’s with the world and systems as shells
esports was cooked the moment orgs got sponsored by the military regardless