Forums > RWBY

Vic Mignogna

Posts (67)

  • CPY98

    CPY98 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33752993 - 2 weeks ago

    RWBY fans, as you most likely already know, Vic Mignogna was fired because of allegations that actually don't have any truth to them. I am leaving this petition here for you in hopes that you will sign it and do the right thing. In addition, I'd suggest possibly boycotting Rooster Teeth to further make our requests known to them. https://www.change.org/p/rooster-teeth-rehire-vic-mignogna-for-rwby

  • Bumblebee4life

    Bumblebee4life

    #33753270 - 1 week ago

    I’m not boycotting but for me this is strike one

  • enigma85

    enigma85 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold #IStandWithVic

    #33753295 - 1 week ago

    In reply to Bumblebee4life

    I’m not boycotting but for me this is strike one

    Same. I haven't reached the point of totally dropping RT, and I do understand that the initial firing was likely damage control in the face of the initial allegations. However, it's slowly becoming apparent that someone has it out for Vic, and that there is a growing mob mentality in that regard. Several videos are starting to cover this. Due to the continued lack of actual solid evidence, it might be time for RT to admit they fucked up.

    Ball is in their court. I've been a First member since Volume 3. You want it to stay that way? If so, then at the very least, admit you made a bad mistake. If not, that'll be strike two. Past that? I guess time and your actions will see how me and many other fans respond. Trust me when I say that if my First membership goes, the several hundred dollars I typically spend in your shop each year likely isn't going to be very far behind.

  • enigma85

    enigma85 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold #IStandWithVic

    #33753296 - 1 week ago

  • MichaelHalpe

    MichaelHalpe FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33753345 - 1 week ago

    RT doesn't really have a choice here at least not until things cool down, when they do if he is innocent, then they can do something about it, but they are too small a company to take that kind of heat risking it.

  • Bumblebee4life

    Bumblebee4life

    #33753346 - 1 week ago

    I prefer to aim my vitriol at the true enemy... ANN (I’’m not going after that one Tumblr blog since it would be way too unfair a fight). 

  • HokutoYangSoup

    HokutoYangSoup FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33753351 - 1 week ago

    In reply to CPY98


    Yeah, firing Vic just because of some mobs trying to ruin his life and using false evidence is not a good idea. Plus there also VA involved backstabbing him following that incident including those from roosterteeth. 

    https://twitter.com/the_jenbro...

  • MichaelHalpe

    MichaelHalpe FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33753356 - 1 week ago

    In reply to HokutoYangSoup


    Unfortunately you have to consider which is worse, firing someone over false accusations, or not firing someone ober accusations that you believed to be false but weren't? 

  • Velrak

    Velrak

    #33753372 - 1 week ago

    Vic's public apologies (11 mins) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    It seems to me Vic knows he did something wrong. I want to believe him when he says he never had the intention to do harm. The problem is that he still may have behaved in a way that can be considered as harassment (passive, non-wanted harassment I would say but I don't know the real word for this). It has certainly been seen as harassment by many people judging by all the sudden accusations.

    The main issue is what can really be considered as harassment, this means according to the justice. I'm waiting to see wether or not Vic intends to bring this affair to the justice.

    But RT has no choice but to fire him simply because it is too dangerous for the company to keep him as soon as those accusations rise wether they are true or false. That's the problem with the "me too" movement. The image of the company is sacred, that is how it works. This explains RT's quick reaction regardless of how much some RT people really wanted to get rid of Vic. Now I'm very interested to hear other RT members reactions like Miles, Gray and Kerry.


    So in my case, it is a "wait and see" situation for now. But this is clear to me something went wrong with Vic and I'm waiting to know how serious it was.


    But this is a major blow to RWBY for sure... I'm sad for the show. I can't imagine how bad the atmosphere will be for the preparation of V7...

  • WrightKnight

    WrightKnight

    #33753374 - 1 week ago

    Posted this in the season 6 thread, going to post it word for word here.


    Ok, gonna be breaking my silence for this and only this, in large part because I knew that it would be talked about here.


    First and foremost, sexual assault is not a crime that has been taken seriously at any point, and that is the biggest point of the MeToo movement: to FINALLY get it to be taken seriously.  And as a major crime, it damn well should be.  If a police report is filed, it damn well should be followed up on.  If an accusation is made, it should be taken seriously, regardless of any personal beliefs.  That being said, when a claim is made, proof should be provided to back it up.  It has NEVER been the case that the accusation is proof in and of itself, even from a first-hand account of the events.  If all that is offered is an account of events by the accuser, it will eventually become a "he said-she said" situation.  At the same time, cross-analysis of those stories might reveal some hole in one or both of them, which makes the concept of seeking evidence to back up the claim even more important, as well as the right for the accused to defend themselves.  And this is true, no matter how many people stand up and make the accusation.



    That being said, while the goals of the MeToo movement are noble and just, the methods behind them are flawed, and actually create fertile ground for a false accusation.  The thought process is that you should always believe the victim.  While a noble sentiment, this relies on the logical fallacy that, as I stated earlier, that the accusation is proof in and of itself; that the witness testimony is proof on its own.  This is an example of the "misleading vividness" fallacy, or as its more commonly known, anecdotal evidence.  I'm going to provide a link to the wikipedia page on anecdotal evidence for your own reading: Anecdotal Evidence.  One paragraph stands out in particular, under the "Law" sub-entry on that page:



    "Witness testimony is a common form of evidence in law, and law has mechanisms to test witness evidence for reliability or credibility. Legal processes for the taking and assessment of evidence are formalized. Some witness testimony may be described as anecdotal evidence, such as individual stories of harassment as part of a class action lawsuit.  However, witness testimony can be tested and assessed for reliability.  Examples of approaches to testing and assessment include the use of
    questioning to identify possible gaps or inconsistencies, evidence of corroborating witnesses, documents, video and forensic evidence. Where a court lacks suitable means to test and assess testimony of a particular witness, such as the absence of forms of corroboration or substantiation, it may afford that testimony limited or no "weight" when making a decision on the facts."


    Please take note of this line: "Legal processes for the taking and assessment of evidence are formalized. Some witness testimony may be described as anecdotal evidence, such as individual stories of harassment as part of a class action lawsuit."  This is EXACTLY what is going on here: people are sharing individual stories of their own experiences with Vic, and very few, if any, are commenting on the same story, with limits them severely as corroborating evidence.  In addition, the MeToo movement relies heavily on the appeal to emotion, both as an integral part of the anecdotal evidence, but also in pushing back against anyone who either comes in on the side of the accused, or asks (correctly) for proof, emphasizing how hurt the victim is by just coming forward.  In addition, the MeToo movement cites that very few sexual assault accusations are false, citing several studies on the topic, as well as the idea that the accused essentially have nothing to gain and everything to lose by coming forward.  I cannot really comment on the latter, but the former says everything that needs to be said as to why the accusation should be properly investigated for accuracy: that very few sexual assault accusations are false.  That implicitly means that some accusations are false.  The scenario does exist that this accusation, and possibly the one that Pridemore made against Todd Haberkorn, is false.  Now, remember what I said about the methodology actually making it fertile ground for a false accusation?  Here's where it comes in.  Again, the very thought process is that you automatically believe the victims without needing concrete proof.  So what happens if, say, you or I make an accusation against another person, for whatever reasons only known to us?  We would be believed without needing to provide proof, we would be complicit in the tarnishing of the accused's reputation and life.  And while it objectively (and ideally) should not do so, one confirmed false accusation will make any others lose credibility, more so if any of Pridemore's accusations are proven false, ALL of her accusations will lose credibility if either one against Vic or Haberkorn are proven false.  All of this illustrates exactly why the people who are asking for proof beyond the accusations are objectively correct, and why there should be even more vigilance paid towards the idea of a false accusation than ever before.  Again, while I fully agree with the goals of MeToo, the methodology and tactics employed by them have massive potential to backfire on them.  All it takes is one person falsely accused for ANY reason, more so if that false accusation leads to a wrongful conviction.


    Now, and I cannot say this enough: I HAVE NO PERSONAL STAKE IN THIS WHATSOEVER.  I fully support the investigation of any accusation of sexual assault, and if it turns out that Vic Mignogna is guilty, then he should be appropriately punished.  I also think that, despite my own beliefs towards RT, that they did the best thing that they could do in this circumstance.  There really wasn't any "good" choice to make here.  However, I am also prepared for the possibility that this accusation is false, and if it is so, then Vic is well within his rights to counter-sue for slander.

  • Velrak

    Velrak

    #33753406 - 1 week ago

    In reply to WrightKnight

    Excellent post.

  • BakedBrain

    BakedBrain FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33753407 - 1 week ago

    In reply to WrightKnight

    By definition it is extremely difficult to determine the ratio between false and true accusations in cases in which only the testimonies of the accuser and the accused are available.

    To conclude from cases where physical evidence is available to cases where this is not the case is not viable because the absence of physical evidence is a strong indicator for innocence as in all other criminal cases.


    And it is also important to keep up proportions. Touching areas covered by average people when they visit a beach is sexual harassment (red zone). Adjacent parts of the body may comprise something like a yellow zone.

    But just hugging or cheek kisses?

    In the region where I live this is commonplace and I value my personal space. So I stand out for actually not hugging.

  • WrightKnight

    WrightKnight

    #33753408 - 1 week ago

    In reply to BakedBrain

    Actually, the absence of evidence is no indicator of innocence.  The accused may very well have been guilty, there just isn't any evidence to prove guilt.

    Actually, it never mattered if it's something that is commonplace where you are from, because the average person is NOT going to know that, or possibly even care about it.  To be well on the safe side, Vic should be asking permission, and the other person should not be pressured into it.  Consent matters, no matter where you want to touch.

    I also don't care if the ratio can be determined or not.  The fact of the matter is that the procedure be followed to ensure the accuracy of the claim made, as there is ALWAYS the possibility that any given accusation is false, no matter how much people howl and scream that it can't happen.  The excerpt I posted explicitly stated that you can cross-reference the testimonies of both sides in order to find holes in the stories told.

  • neonrainbowlion

    neonrainbowlion FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33753413 - 1 week ago

    In reply to HokutoYangSoup 

    Jen Brown owes Vic nothing. It's not backstabbing. Same with RT. People calling it a betrayal are just surprised that none of these parties practice blind loyalty.

  • Leonthekillr

    Leonthekillr

    #33753414 - 1 week ago

    I’ll just say this to anyone who thinks others, especially other VA’s, don’t have anything to gain from lying...it makes them safer from the possibility of being attacked by the same crazed mob group. If they were to defend Vic, then they’d likely get harassed just because of that, and if didn’t say anything then they’d just get harassed, by less people, to state their view on things which could in turn lead to the two other possibilities depending on what they say. 


    I don’t believe man, I don’t believe woman, I believe facts and evidence, god himself, if he exists, could come down state someone did this or that and I wouldn’t believe a word they say without evidence especially these days in which false accusations are happening more often. I will continue to stand with Vic until actual evidence comes out that proves he’s done what he’s accused of, until then the amount of accusations means absolutely nothing without such evidence. 

  • Bumblebee4life

    Bumblebee4life

    #33753422 - 1 week ago

    The post announcing the firing was at 148 upvotes now its at 63

  • CPY98

    CPY98 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33753424 - 1 week ago

    I just made a comment on the Vic Mignogna post. I'd appreciate if you all could upvote it to help show that we mean business for this matter.

  • WrightKnight

    WrightKnight

    #33753437 - 1 week ago

    In reply to CPY98

    I will not up-vote just because someone asks me to.  Remember, I come from a position of neutrality and observation, as I have always been during my time here.

    One's goals will determine if I stand against you.  One's motives and methods will determine if I stand with you.  On the topic of Vic Mignogna, I do not stand against the MeToo movement because their goals are just and noble, but it is their scorched-earth methods that prompt me to not stand with them.

  • LordBeefDip

    LordBeefDip FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33753465 - 1 week ago

    In reply to WrightKnight

    Posted this in the season 6 thread, going to post it word for word here.



    Ok, gonna be breaking my silence for this and only this, in large part because I knew that it would be talked about here.

    First and foremost, sexual assault is not a crime that has been taken seriously at any point, and that is the biggest point of the MeToo movement: to FINALLY get it to be taken seriously.  And as a major crime, it damn well should be.  If a police report is filed, it damn well should be followed up on.  If an accusation is made, it should be taken seriously, regardless of any personal beliefs.  That being said, when a claim is made, proof should be provided to back it up.  It has NEVER been the case that the accusation is proof in and of itself, even from a first-hand account of the events.  If all that is offered is an account of events by the accuser, it will eventually become a "he said-she said" situation.  At the same time, cross-analysis of those stories might reveal some hole in one or both of them, which makes the concept of seeking evidence to back up the claim even more important, as well as the right for the accused to defend themselves.  And this is true, no matter how many people stand up and make the accusation.


    That being said, while the goals of the MeToo movement are noble and just, the methods behind them are flawed, and actually create fertile ground for a false accusation.  The thought process is that you should always believe the victim.  While a noble sentiment, this relies on the logical fallacy that, as I stated earlier, that the accusation is proof in and of itself; that the witness testimony is proof on its own.  This is an example of the "misleading vividness" fallacy, or as its more commonly known, anecdotal evidence.  I'm going to provide a link to the wikipedia page on anecdotal evidence for your own reading: Anecdotal Evidence.  One paragraph stands out in particular, under the "Law" sub-entry on that page:


    "Witness testimony is a common form of evidence in law, and law has mechanisms to test witness evidence for reliability or credibility. Legal processes for the taking and assessment of evidence are formalized. Some witness testimony may be described as anecdotal evidence, such as individual stories of harassment as part of a class action lawsuit.  However, witness testimony can be tested and assessed for reliability.  Examples of approaches to testing and assessment include the use of
    questioning to identify possible gaps or inconsistencies, evidence of corroborating witnesses, documents, video and forensic evidence. Where a court lacks suitable means to test and assess testimony of a particular witness, such as the absence of forms of corroboration or substantiation, it may afford that testimony limited or no "weight" when making a decision on the facts."



    Please take note of this line: "Legal processes for the taking and assessment of evidence are formalized. Some witness testimony may be described as anecdotal evidence, such as individual stories of harassment as part of a class action lawsuit."  This is EXACTLY what is going on here: people are sharing individual stories of their own experiences with Vic, and very few, if any, are commenting on the same story, with limits them severely as corroborating evidence.  In addition, the MeToo movement relies heavily on the appeal to emotion, both as an integral part of the anecdotal evidence, but also in pushing back against anyone who either comes in on the side of the accused, or asks (correctly) for proof, emphasizing how hurt the victim is by just coming forward.  In addition, the MeToo movement cites that very few sexual assault accusations are false, citing several studies on the topic, as well as the idea that the accused essentially have nothing to gain and everything to lose by coming forward.  I cannot really comment on the latter, but the former says everything that needs to be said as to why the accusation should be properly investigated for accuracy: that very few sexual assault accusations are false.  That implicitly means that some accusations are false.  The scenario does exist that this accusation, and possibly the one that Pridemore made against Todd Haberkorn, is false.  Now, remember what I said about the methodology actually making it fertile ground for a false accusation?  Here's where it comes in.  Again, the very thought process is that you automatically believe the victims without needing concrete proof.  So what happens if, say, you or I make an accusation against another person, for whatever reasons only known to us?  We would be believed without needing to provide proof, we would be complicit in the tarnishing of the accused's reputation and life.  And while it objectively (and ideally) should not do so, one confirmed false accusation will make any others lose credibility, more so if any of Pridemore's accusations are proven false, ALL of her accusations will lose credibility if either one against Vic or Haberkorn are proven false.  All of this illustrates exactly why the people who are asking for proof beyond the accusations are objectively correct, and why there should be even more vigilance paid towards the idea of a false accusation than ever before.  Again, while I fully agree with the goals of MeToo, the methodology and tactics employed by them have massive potential to backfire on them.  All it takes is one person falsely accused for ANY reason, more so if that false accusation leads to a wrongful conviction.



    Now, and I cannot say this enough: I HAVE NO PERSONAL STAKE IN THIS WHATSOEVER.  I fully support the investigation of any accusation of sexual assault, and if it turns out that Vic Mignogna is guilty, then he should be appropriately punished.  I also think that, despite my own beliefs towards RT, that they did the best thing that they could do in this circumstance.  There really wasn't any "good" choice to make here.  However, I am also prepared for the possibility that this accusation is false, and if it is so, then Vic is well within his rights to counter-sue for slander.




    Huh. Some of your posts that I've seen I've massively disagreed with,  but you hit the nail on the head with this one. 


    RT was in between a rock and a hard place. Either terminate Vic and enrage a large chunk of the fandom to protect their image as well as fans at their conventions,  or stick by him to the bitter end only to find they have merit. As bad as this was them going all in defending him and the chance of him being guilty would have been significantly more damaging long term.


    Personally I have not seen enough to convince me he has crossed any legal lines,  but I can say that from what I've seen he could definitely come across as a bit of a creep. I don't think his intentions were bad, but from what I can see he had years to moderate his overly affectionate behavior and didn't do so despite some complaints and a few Cons banning him for periods of time. 


    Again,  I don't think he meant anything nefarious,  but if he knew his behavior was causing problems he should have reigned in the excess physical contact.  And he had over ten years to at least realize that much,  but likely his fame and desire to be touchy and friendly got the better of.


    I hope we get to the bottom of this one way or another.  If he is innocent and the charges all fake, I hope he is vindicated and manages to sue those responsible for libel and/slander. Conversely if he is guilty,  depending on how bad, I hope that justice is served.

  • CarryOn88

    CarryOn88

    #33753466 - 1 week ago

    Well as a matter of fact RT in my opinion screwed up badly. they terminated a contract based on allegations which is nothing more than following the guilty until proven otherwise rule and bending to SJW crowd lynching.

    Vic may be guilty but he may also be innocent since I head that the allegations were flying for over 10 year yet not ONE case was put in motion.

    How bout I come out and let's say Miles or Kerry molested me? should RT kick them out too based on my allegations?

    We're coming to the world where you cannot even defend yourself and you suffer for things that you might not be guilty off. Annnnnnnd like it's usually with SJW drama if that's turns out to be a hoax they will just move on and leave one guy with all that trauma and stress from it like nothing ever happend.

  • WrightKnight

    WrightKnight

    #33753467 - 1 week ago

    And as usual, I kept my own subjectivity out of my assessments.  Thing is, the subjectivity I CAN bring to the table on this only reinforces the idea that investigation, but not blind belief, is required.  I also have met Vic on one occasion, at his Star Trek Continues panel at Otakon two years ago.  However, that is ALSO anecdotal evidence.  If I'm going to insist on scrutinizing the negative personal accounts, then I must also scrutinize the positive ones.

    From what I've heard, Vic is preparing for a legal battle.  The fact is, accusations of this magnitude will almost certainly move the arena from the social network to the courtroom, where "innocent until proven guilty" ABSOLUTELY applies.  The people who are advocating to "always believe the victims" are going to find that, in the courtroom, all claims are put under the microscope.  The fact is, if/when this gets to the courts, their claims WILL be questioned for proof.  Monica Rial may be asked to take the stand as a major witness.  And Vic will be allowed to present his side of this.

    To BOTH parties: get your fucking ducks in a row.  You WILL be tested for the truth.  All it will take is one claim to be confirmed, either true or false, to lay weight on the others.

  • RyujinX

    RyujinX

    #33753479 - 1 week ago

    So it's really that bad, huh?

    Well, with all the information I've gathered by watching and reading people much more infested in RT affairs than me, I've came to the conclusion that we just have to wait and see.


    Right now there's not much evidence for any side of this "conflict" and any petition or boycotting won't make it better, as a matter of fact, it probably won't matter in the end result. I do not know Vic or any accusators to the point where I can choose sides, I'd rather see this "mess" being taken to the court and get checked by professionals. 


    Any attempt of fans to try and "solve" this whole situation will only divide the community even more than it already is, it's not much different from trying putting out the fire with oil, and I think we all know how that ends.


    So until any proof is brought to the table, I rather watch it from the sidelines and see what develops.

  • CPY98

    CPY98 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33753480 - 1 week ago

    All that we know for sure is that Vic is taking legal action, but unfortunately Monica "Liar" Rial is planning to sue Vic.

  • Bumblebee4life

    Bumblebee4life

    #33753494 - 1 week ago

    Oh apparently certain people the #kickvic crowd has been calling Vic’s supporters Nazis and trying to get them kicked off twitter. This makes me doubt the claims even more


    Their seem to be 3 types in the #kickvic crowd


    1. Those with malicious intent


    2. Those that go along with it to avoid backlash


    3. Well meaning People who genuine think Vic is guilty

  • MichaelHalpe

    MichaelHalpe FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    #33753508 - 1 week ago

    In reply to Bumblebee4life


    as always there are extremes everywhere I personally have no opinion on the matter, other than that RT chose the least bad option