×
  • remind me tomorrow
  • remind me next week
  • never remind me
Subscribe to the ANN Newsletter • Wake up every Sunday to a curated list of ANN's most interesting posts of the week. read more

Forum - View topic
INTEREST: Dub Voice Actor Vic Mignogna Issues Statement: 'Taking Time to Recommit to God, Seeking He


Goto page Previous  

Note: this is the discussion thread for this article

Anime News Network Forum Index -> Site-related -> Talkback
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
KarateCowboy



Joined: 12 Feb 2019
Posts: 35
PostPosted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 1:55 pm Reply with quote
GhostStalkerSA wrote:

Usher has been judged by the Wikipedia Reliable Sources noticeboard to be be not a reliable source, ever since the GG thing. Part of it is the obvious bias in his reporting, and also because of his style of reporting, which also runs afoul of Wikipedia’s rules on Biographies of Living Persons, which are supposed to be held to a higher standard.

The line from the admin that responded to me was “One Angry Gamer is not a reliable source for anything involving living people, and questionable on anything else.” That’s pretty definitive.


This is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Wikipedia is a poor source for political issues. Journalists such as Dennis Prager have been barred from correcting factual errors about themselves. It's rather shocking.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GhostStalkerSA



Joined: 17 May 2015
Posts: 425
Location: NYC
PostPosted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 2:29 pm Reply with quote
KarateCowboy wrote:


This is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Wikipedia is a poor source for political issues. Journalists such as Dennis Prager have been barred from correcting factual errors about themselves. It's rather shocking.

I’m aware of Wikipedia’s deficit regarding political issues, and it’s why it tends to be one of the most contentious parts of the site, with restrictions on editing everywhere; not a minefield you want to enter unprepared. It’s why I mostly stick to articles that don’t deal much with that subject area for trivia.

Wrt Prager, who I only know through the stuff regarding PragerU, I have yet to read up on the issues regarding him, but being barred from correcting factual errors about yourself seems correct, as editing your own Wikipedia page seems like it’d run afoul of Conflict of Interest rules (as in, what’s to prevent one from removing all criticism about yourself from your article and just inserting glowing reviews, sourced to no one?).

Wikipedia’s policies on Biographies of Living People apply more stringent sourcing requirements on controversial information being added (or removed, if the info is sourced and judged to be relevant and not of an undue weight) to an article, and you’re not supposed to take a subject’s word on their own views and such due to preference for Reliable Third Party Sources over Primary ones, at least for controversial stuff. Uncontroversial info should be fine though.

Again, I’m unfamiliar with the drama wrt his article, having left the Wikipedia Talk pages for close to a decade and a half once the GG drama started blowing over. So don’t quote me as an authoritative figure on Wikipedia policy, I’m just running on half remembered policies that I haven’t had to interact with or think about for over 3 years.

Also, this is trending horribly off topic, and I don’t want the mods to come down on this thread like a ton of bricks once again. I apologize for bringing it up in the first place.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lynx Raven Raide



Joined: 01 Nov 2017
Posts: 412
Location: Central Coast, AU
PostPosted: Sat Feb 23, 2019 3:17 pm Reply with quote
ranran-001 wrote:
AmpersandsUnited wrote:
To be fair, nobody should be using Wikipedia as a reference for anything. Every teacher or professor should have instilled that into you during your school years. I would dismiss anyone who cites it as a source for their argument on a subject.

beyondashadow wrote:
For starters, they could've instructed their employees to *not* go off on social media while their internal investigation was still ongoing.


It's a coin toss if people are held accountable for their social media behavior. It depends on the values of their employers as well as any kind of public blowback they get from it. Some companies are okay with their employees making violent threats or racist remarks, it turns out. Some will fire their employees for simply being rude. Tweet at your own discretion. But that is just for employment. I don't think these Funimation employees should be saying certain incriminating things on social media when they could be on the cusp of being taken to court. It just seems unwise.


Incriminating things to whom? If its Vic, then yes. Vic sexually harassed Monica Rial, and dozens of other women. As far as a court case is concerned, I don't see how Vic is going to be suing Funimation for anything beyond a severance check.
That is based on the assumption he is suing and not just lawyering up for his own defence, since given we are only hearing portions on social media there could be more being held back because they are planning legal action.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sethimothy



Joined: 13 Sep 2005
Posts: 121
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:12 am Reply with quote
Lynx Raven Raide wrote:
That is based on the assumption he is suing and not just lawyering up for his own defence, since given we are only hearing portions on social media there could be more being held back because they are planning legal action.


Well, the lawyer in question who has been retained (and who set up the GoFundMe incidentally) has been active on his YouTube channel discussing ways those critical of Vic could potentially be sued, and encouraging viewers to post further suggestions. Based on that alone it is fair to say there is an expectation for an offense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Redbeard 101
Oscar the Grouch
Forums Superstar


Joined: 14 Aug 2006
Posts: 16935
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:27 am Reply with quote
Sethimothy wrote:


Well, the lawyer in question who has been retained (and who set up the GoFundMe incidentally) has been active on his YouTube channel discussing ways those critical of Vic could potentially be sued, and encouraging viewers to post further suggestions. Based on that alone it is fair to say there is an expectation for an offense.


There has not been any official word this guy was retained by Vic. He started this gofundme on his own claiming to have Vic's blessing. Yes Vic has acknowledged the fundraiser, but he has not specifically said he is suing anyone. He even clearly said he had no part in this fundraiser itself. Retaining legal council, which again is not even this guy, could mean many things. People simply hear "lawyer" and jump to conclusions and make assumptions. Just as they hear some person on youtube claiming this and that and assume it's entirely accurate and legitimate. People are also only going by the assurances of this individual that the money will even go to any sort of legal fees Vic will have. I would not personally trust the professionalism or competency of a lawyer who goes off on tangents on youtube.

I have a lawyer currently due to a car accident last fall. One of the 3 rules (strong suggestions) they had was stay off social media. Don't talk about the accident on it. Things said on social media can be used against you. So the fact this guy seems to be running things via social media just screams a lack of credibility. But hey, people are going to believe whatever they want.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime My Manga
Lynx Raven Raide



Joined: 01 Nov 2017
Posts: 412
Location: Central Coast, AU
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:51 am Reply with quote
Psycho 101 wrote:
Sethimothy wrote:


Well, the lawyer in question who has been retained (and who set up the GoFundMe incidentally) has been active on his YouTube channel discussing ways those critical of Vic could potentially be sued, and encouraging viewers to post further suggestions. Based on that alone it is fair to say there is an expectation for an offense.


There has not been any official word this guy was retained by Vic. He started this gofundme on his own claiming to have Vic's blessing. Yes Vic has acknowledged the fundraiser, but he has not specifically said he is suing anyone. He even clearly said he had no part in this fundraiser itself. Retaining legal council, which again is not even this guy, could mean many things. People simply hear "lawyer" and jump to conclusions and make assumptions. Just as they hear some person on youtube claiming this and that and assume it's entirely accurate and legitimate. People are also only going by the assurances of this individual that the money will even go to any sort of legal fees Vic will have. I would not personally trust the professionalism or competency of a lawyer who goes off on tangents on youtube.

I have a lawyer currently due to a car accident last fall. One of the 3 rules (strong suggestions) they had was stay off social media. Don't talk about the accident on it. Things said on social media can be used against you. So the fact this guy seems to be running things via social media just screams a lack of credibility. But hey, people are going to believe whatever they want.
I actually agree with this. Discussing potential cases on a YouTube channel is highly unprofessional and could hurt Vic's case more than help it.

Also I doubt that this guy is his actual legal counsel since everyone has noted the written apology on twitter seems very lawyered so he would already have one. Hell, most professionals, or their management, would have retained the services of a lawyer regardless
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GracieLizzy



Joined: 26 Sep 2006
Posts: 551
Location: Sunderland, England, UK
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:06 am Reply with quote
ranran-001 wrote:
As far as a court case is concerned, I don't see how Vic is going to be suing Funimation for anything beyond a severance check.


Would he even be eligible for that given, as people keep pointing out, he's an independent contractor not an employee? So he couldn't sue for unfair dismissal? In theory there might be a breach of contract for his role in The Morose Mononokean as it is ongoing but I don't know if these contracts are done on a series by series or episode by episode basis.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dessa



Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 4438
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:05 pm Reply with quote
GracieLizzy wrote:
In theory there might be a breach of contract for his role in The Morose Mononokean as it is ongoing but I don't know if these contracts are done on a series by series or episode by episode basis.


I don't know how these things work myself, but I would guess that anything with a main role would be done as a whole, or at least season-by-season (if it's season-by-season, that would affect RWBY as well).

From what I understand, Mononokean was a recurring role, so that may have been done in an episode-by-episode basis, since they wouldn't know until the episodes become available to them if the character is in them or not (I don't know what the source material is for Mononokean, but even if they could see where the character shows up there, it's not necessarily indicative if the character would be in the anime as well).


Regardless, I'm sure that FUNi and Rooster Teeth both have lawyers who have instructed them on the whens and wheres and hows and whys, so even if he had ongoing contracts for RWBY and Mononokean, they'd be safe.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime
Ashabel



Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Posts: 350
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:14 pm Reply with quote
GracieLizzy wrote:
Would he even be eligible for that given, as people keep pointing out, he's an independent contractor not an employee? So he couldn't sue for unfair dismissal? In theory there might be a breach of contract for his role in The Morose Mononokean as it is ongoing but I don't know if these contracts are done on a series by series or episode by episode basis.


There wouldn't be a breach in contract because legally The Morose Mononokean is actually two different animated series. The first and the second seasons ran three years apart, were handled by different committees and have different directors. For all intents and purposes, contracts for them were and will continue to be handled separately for each other.

This, of course, means that just because someone was signed up for the first season doesn't mean they're secure in their ability to obtain a role in the second season. It's much like voicing Ivy Valentine in the original Soulcalibur didn't save Yumi Touma from getting replaced by Miyuki Sawashiro in Soulcalibur V and VI.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ranran-001



Joined: 25 Oct 2018
Posts: 537
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 3:07 pm Reply with quote
GracieLizzy wrote:
ranran-001 wrote:
As far as a court case is concerned, I don't see how Vic is going to be suing Funimation for anything beyond a severance check.


Would he even be eligible for that given, as people keep pointing out, he's an independent contractor not an employee? So he couldn't sue for unfair dismissal? In theory there might be a breach of contract for his role in The Morose Mononokean as it is ongoing but I don't know if these contracts are done on a series by series or episode by episode basis.


Even if he had a contract with Funimation, he sexually harassed two employees there, any contract he might have had would easily have been terminated due to misconduct.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Anime News Network Forum Index -> Site-related -> Talkback All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  
Page 23 of 23

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group