Dr Disrespect Banned From Twitch

[Substance Abuse]

Roughly six months ago the moderation here was quite offhanded with such 'War Room topics' infecting this non-political subforum. Its reached a tipping point recently that users have grown tired of this usual perpetrator. So much so that their hypocrisy is actively being called out on a daily basis here.

Only after this started happening did the moderation team actively begin enforcing this being a non-political subforum. While the moderation aspect may not be true. It does come across as protecting one individual feelings who caused this from the beginning and continues to instigate it here across all non-War Room subforums.

As moderators we are a team, but we cannot see everything. We rely on you, the users, to utilize reports to help us help you. If no one is using the tools provided to them, how are we to know?

With that in mind, I am only addressing this single instance, nothing more, nothing less. I'm not protecting anyone's feelings. I simply saw reports, read the posts, and saw things weren't going well. If this has been a long standing issue, report it. Digital paper trails help.

Random edit: I take back all my posts about Starfield from last year - without mod tools, it's boring as shit.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

 

[KaNesDeath]

Looks like Turtle Beach just cut ties with Dr Disrespect.

 

[KaNesDeath]

As moderators we are a team, but we cannot see everything. We rely on you, the users, to utilize reports to help us help you. If no one is using the tools provided to them, how are we to know?

Its not my place to really comment further for i enjoy just being a poster.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

 

[GearSolidMetal]

We rely on you, the users, to utilize reports to help us help you.

 

[deadshot138]

You think Midnight Society and his other sponsors are dumping him based on false accusations? Seems like they could get sued for that.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

You think Midnight Society and his other sponsors are dumping him based on false accusations? Seems like they could get sued for that.

You may be right.
But that begs the question - What have they seen that we haven't?
And until we have seen what they have, which somehow is being spread around specifically to MS & other sponsors behind closed doors, I'm not automatically jumping to the conclusion he's guilty.

As for 'could get sued for that' there's numerous examples of situations that could result in civil lawsuits, but don't, because they can be very expensive & take years and you can still lose or the settlements don't make up for the losses in lawyers fees.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

And another question no one is asking - Why Now?

Its been 4 years since he's been banned from Twitch. If his firing from MS & sponsors leaving is related to the reasoning behind that ban... why has it taken 4 years for this evidence to...not come to light because it hasn't... but whomever has held onto this evidence for 4 years has held onto it while Dr.Disrespect may have been praying on more underage girls AND Amazon/Twitch had to pay out his full contract which is millions of dollars.

So... anyone have any theories as to why its been 4 years? Why not IMMEDIATELY?

 

[Madmick]

You think Midnight Society and his other sponsors are dumping him based on false accusations? Seems like they could get sued for that.

How? California is an at-will state. What would be the grounds for the lawsuit? Dismissing him doesn't entail asserting or confirming any allegations against him.

 

[deadshot138]

How? California is an at-will state. What would be the grounds for the lawsuit? Dismissing him doesn't entail asserting or confirming any allegations against him.

Never heard of wrongful termination or breach of contract? Are you saying anyone can lie about someone and get them canned without recourse?

 

[Madmick]

Never heard of wrongful termination or breach of contract? Are you saying anyone can lie about someone and get them canned without recourse?

This is what I just addressed. They don't have to issue any statement regarding his release. They don't have to accuse him of anything.

 

[SaiWa]

This is what I just addressed. They don't have to issue any statement regarding his release. They don't have to accuse him of anything.

At-will employment is without a contract, like waiters/waitresses working at restaurants typically speaking. If you have a contract then it is no longer at- will employment.

I do not think Dr. Disrespect would join a gaming company (or be sponsored by Turtle Beach) without a contract.

 

[method115]

At-will employment is without a contract, like waiters/waitresses working at restaurants typically speaking. If you have a contract then it is no longer at- will employment.

I do not think Dr. Disrespect would join a gaming company (or be sponsored by Turtle Beach) without a contract.

There's no way a contract wasn't in place in both situations. With that said the contract could have stated something along the lines that he could be released just based on bringing bad reputation to the brand and not necessarily because he did something wrong.

The fact that midnight society made note of saying they investigated it and decided to release him looks really bad IMO. I'm not sure what's going on here but his reaction to all this isn't helping.

 

[Madmick]

At-will employment is without a contract, like waiters/waitresses working at restaurants typically speaking. If you have a contract then it is no longer at- will employment.

I do not think Dr. Disrespect would join a gaming company (or be sponsored by Turtle Beach) without a contract.

Yes, but in that case, we wouldn't know the terms of the contract. Either way, the company isn't bound to issue any declarations to the public.

 

[SaiWa]

Yes, but in that case, we wouldn't know the terms of the contract. Either way, the company isn't bound to issue any declarations to the public.

No but he would have to be notified of his termination privately - either to him directly or his rep/agent (via email/letter/phone call/ whatever). It depends on how the contract is written. Unless the contract is shoddily written there would be termination clauses that need to be triggered for the company to lawfully terminate the contract. If not the good Dr can easily sue.

The point is these companies cannot willy nilley terminate a contract without the Dr. breaching something in the contract (bad representation of the product for example). If these alleged accusations turn out to be false the good Dr can sue the shit out of these companies (assuming the firing is related).

 

[Madmick]

No but he would have to be notified of his termination privately - either to him directly or his rep/agent (via email/letter/phone call/ whatever). It depends on how the contract is written. Unless the contract is shoddily written there would be termination clauses that need to be triggered for the company to lawfully terminate the contract. If not the good Dr can easily sue.

The point is these companies cannot willy nilley terminate a contract without the Dr. breaching something in the contract (bad representation of the product for example). If these alleged accusations turn out to be false the good Dr can sue the shit out of these companies (assuming the firing is related).

We have no idea what the terms of the contract are, or what stakes or onuses there are for them to dismiss it. You are presuming to infer too much confidence from what little you know. That was just explained to you (by a lawyer, I believe).

I believe in these cases the sole preoccupying concern of the companies is optics. They don't care about guilt or even wrongdoing. All they care about is potential backlash from optics.

 

[SaiWa]

We have no idea what the terms of the contract are, or what stakes or onuses there are for them to dismiss it. You are presuming to infer too much confidence from what little you know. That was just explained to you (by a lawyer, I believe).

I believe in these cases the sole preoccupying concern of the companies is optics. They don't care about guilt or even wrongdoing. All they care about is potential backlash from optics.

Yes none of us know.

These companies would not fire someone that high profile without a justifiable cause from a contractual standpoint.

But the main point out is that this is not an at-will case which you incorrectly stated - either because you didn't know at-will was employment without a contract or simply because it's occurring in California (which would be silly).

It is also worth to note that stated 49 out of 50 US States are at-will states.

 

[Madmick]

These companies would not fire someone that high profile without a justifiable cause from a contractual standpoint.

As was already pointed out to you by a lawyer, this means nothing of substance. And that, in fact, was the main point. The company firing him entails neither an accusation, confirmation, nor even an indication of guilt.

Until we learn more, we know nothing.

 

[Law Talkin’ Guy]

There's nothing baring him from saying it even if he was guilty, so there's no point in saying it at all.

As of now its pretty obvious he's in 'legal-defense mode' meaning he's doing exactly what his lawyers tell him to do, which probably is the whole reason why he's not streaming for now.

@Law Talkin’ Guy You're a lawyer, any commend on this situation? Your input would be valuable.

I haven’t been following the recent developments over the past few days beyond watching like a three minute video on YouTube from Asmongold. There’s a lot of posts in this thread to go through before I can weigh in. I’ll try to find some time to read through the rest of the thread sometime today and will do my best to give some professional insight given I am literally a labour and employment lawyer so this stuff is pretty much my bread and butter.