Cara Dune

Prev134
TheRealNickEZ
542 posts Member
edited February 11
Are there any plans to delete Cara Dune from the game with the latest news?
Post edited by Kyno on

Replies

  • Larx
    235 posts Member
    ?
  • If she did get removed from the game, 2 things are certain:

    1) CG would be commanded to do it by EA/Disney.

    2) the forums would fail to understand 1).
  • Cancel culture is the worst

    C'mon, let's not go there.

    On the other point, I agree that Cara is not responsible for any actor's statements and therefore the character shouldn't be removed.
  • Shaddess wrote: »
    Who cares. Seriously why would they delete a character because she got fired???? Cancel culture is the worst

    Yes it's almost the worst,
    The worst thing is forgetting that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, seems like people have forgotten what that actually means
  • MasterSeedy
    2874 posts Member
    edited February 11
    The worst thing is forgetting that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, seems like people have forgotten what that actually means

    Yep. it's almost like people think that bosses & owners have to work with people they don't like and don't want to pay because the government is not allowed to put you in jail or force you to pay a fine without first convicting you in a court of law.

    Weird people keep thinking that I have to keep liking you until I prove that ... something? Yeah. I hope that someday soon people remember what the presumption of innocence embedded into the US constitution actually means.
  • Nauros
    3986 posts Member
    In fact, maybe it's time to get Cara to R7?
    Revive the stores, the game needs it.
  • Can we please move this to OT? People sometimes...
  • What happened with her?
  • No one is saying it’s illegal.

    No, they're not saying it's illegal. They're just saying that it violates the presumption of innocence, which, y'know, is illegal. Logic, how does it work?
    The point is that there used to be a time where you could work alongside someone you disagreed with. Now we are all enemies.

    Then how do literally tens of millions of people work alongside each other every single day? I hate it when people start complaining about cancel culture because they inevitably think that they have the right to not buy a ticket to a concert they don't want to attend or not buy a ticket to a movie they don't want to attend and they don't have to give **anyone** a reason. It's their money & they can spend it how they want. But if someone says that they think the anti-cancel-culture warrior's favorite musician is a **** and doesn't want to give them money by buying their music or concert tickets, suddenly the freedom of the universe is at stake. It's ridiculous and ill considered.

    I think people are exaggerating and misrepresenting things to the point of actually hurting the conversation. If I own a company and I don't want to pay you a paycheck because I think you're a ****, well, **even if I'm wrong about who the **** actually is**, it's my money and I should be able to decide that I don't want to pay you anymore. Bye bye!

    That's not a bad thing. That's freedom. (And, by the way, it's also the law in nearly every US state. It's called "at will employment".) People who shout about how bad cancel culture is haven't stopped to think, "What's the alternative?" The alternative that's being effectively advocated (in absence of any serious counter proposal) is having random people on the internet tell me who my employees are going to be and when I can fire them. Again, that's ridiculous.

    If people have a serious argument, they're going to have to make the argument, not use buzzwords that are far more anti-freedom than bosses deciding they don't want to work with you or audience members who decide they don't want to buy tickets to your event.
  • @Darth_Tomsteros2707
    What happened with her?

    Apparently Gina Carano wrote some social media posts last fall that made some people at LucasFilm mad. They gave her a warning to knock off ... whatever... (I don't know exactly what they found objectionable, I don't work for LucasFilm). This week, she wrote some more things that made LucasFilm mad so they fired her & they're not going to include her character, Cara Dune, in future episodes of Mandalorian (or anything else, I guess).

  • No one is saying it’s illegal.

    No, they're not saying it's illegal. They're just saying that it violates the presumption of innocence, which, y'know, is illegal. Logic, how does it work?
    The point is that there used to be a time where you could work alongside someone you disagreed with. Now we are all enemies.

    Then how do literally tens of millions of people work alongside each other every single day? I hate it when people start complaining about cancel culture because they inevitably think that they have the right to not buy a ticket to a concert they don't want to attend or not buy a ticket to a movie they don't want to attend and they don't have to give **anyone** a reason. It's their money & they can spend it how they want. But if someone says that they think the anti-cancel-culture warrior's favorite musician is a **** and doesn't want to give them money by buying their music or concert tickets, suddenly the freedom of the universe is at stake. It's ridiculous and ill considered.

    I think people are exaggerating and misrepresenting things to the point of actually hurting the conversation. If I own a company and I don't want to pay you a paycheck because I think you're a ****, well, **even if I'm wrong about who the **** actually is**, it's my money and I should be able to decide that I don't want to pay you anymore. Bye bye!

    That's not a bad thing. That's freedom. (And, by the way, it's also the law in nearly every US state. It's called "at will employment".) People who shout about how bad cancel culture is haven't stopped to think, "What's the alternative?" The alternative that's being effectively advocated (in absence of any serious counter proposal) is having random people on the internet tell me who my employees are going to be and when I can fire them. Again, that's ridiculous.

    If people have a serious argument, they're going to have to make the argument, not use buzzwords that are far more anti-freedom than bosses deciding they don't want to work with you or audience members who decide they don't want to buy tickets to your event.

    Is any of this related to swgoh and toons?
  • Is any of this related to swgoh and toons?

    Nope. But I didn't bring up the topic.

    Is there any reason why you object to my comment being off-topic but not the comments of the people who actually introduced cancel culture as a topic? Or the presumption of innocence, which is even farther afield?

    I certainly wouldn't have brought up cancel culture. In fact, I'm the one who said, "C'mon, let's not go there." But other people brought it up again, so I explained my feelings & thoughts on the matter.

    Is there some reason that you're willing to tolerate off-topic comments from the people who actually lead a thread off-topic, but not willing to tolerate off-topic comments from me? Am I doing something more wrong than the people who led us off topic in the first place?
  • Is any of this related to swgoh and toons?

    Nope. But I didn't bring up the topic.

    Is there any reason why you object to my comment being off-topic but not the comments of the people who actually introduced cancel culture as a topic? Or the presumption of innocence, which is even farther afield?

    I certainly wouldn't have brought up cancel culture. In fact, I'm the one who said, "C'mon, let's not go there." But other people brought it up again, so I explained my feelings & thoughts on the matter.

    Is there some reason that you're willing to tolerate off-topic comments from the people who actually lead a thread off-topic, but not willing to tolerate off-topic comments from me? Am I doing something more wrong than the people who led us off topic in the first place?

    I don't like any of it, not specifically yours. You were the one that lead it to a larger territory in the previous posts too, thus I responded. I'm not against this to be discussed in OT, but bringing it up in the way op did and taking that seriously is a ridicilous hyberbole for me. I bet everyone knows this is not possible in the least. Cara Dune is a fictional character that's intellectual property of some corporate entity. She is not an irl person.
  • Costino1
    66 posts Member
    edited February 11
    Not here to start a debate over what she did or didn’t do. Cara Dune (Gina Carano) has been fired from Lucas. Do you think CG will go as far as removing her from the game?

    Again. Not trolling. Don’t want to start a poli debate.
    Post edited by Kyno on
  • They won’t delete her from the mandalorian seasons... so why would they delete her from the game...
  • Someone already made a thread, so you’re not starting it.
  • KorAgaz
    67 posts Member
    edited February 11
    Delete, no. Change the model's skin, maybe.
  • I guess it'll depend on whether they re-cast the role, and/or whether they are bound by any pre-existing contract with Gina
  • Devian
    330 posts Member
    edited February 11
    Costino1 wrote: »
    Not here to start a debate over what she did or didn’t do. Cara Dune (Gina Carano) has been fired from Lucas. Do you think CG will go as far as removing her from the game?

    Again. Not trolling. Don’t want to start a poli debate.

    It would be a more stupid decision, then firing actual actress because you do not agree with her thoughts / because she's different then media's policy
  • So were firing Gina Carano over social media posts but Krystina Arielle is cool?

    Guess I'll go buy some skins in smite instead of on star wars merch. Sigh.
  • ugh I hate cancel culture and this proves my point
  • If I own a company and I don't want to pay you a paycheck because I think you're a ****, well, **even if I'm wrong about who the **** actually is**, it's my money and I should be able to decide that I don't want to pay you anymore. Bye bye!

    That's not a bad thing. That's freedom.

    If people have a serious argument, they're going to have to make the argument

    @MasterSeedy

    Challenge accepted ! I was waiting for the "off topic" move to have a healthy debate about that ;)

    For the record, I'm european. Worst, I'm French, so basically a commie for some americans ;) We usually have a different view on the limits of freedom and are probably more likely to accept to lose some freedom if it's for the common good that our american friends (hence higher taxes for better public services for instance).

    I understand your argument: Freedom. Hard to disagree with that. I'l try anyway ^^ I have 2 arguments against "it's my money and I should be able to decide that I don't want to pay you anymore".

    1) Freedom abuse. If you give employers total freedom on how you can dispose of a employee, you make it easy to abuse your dominant position. You don't want to work an extra half an hour without getting paid ? Bye bye. In a tight job market, I'll find someone else. You don't want to give me a kiss ? Bye bye, I'll find someone willing who needs the paycheck more than you. Those behaviours could be difficult to prove if you go to court. Making difficult to fire someone without a good reason that you may have to prove in court (giving the burden of proof to the employer) is a way to protect employees from abuse.

    2) Moral entrepreneur. If you're able to fire someone pretexting non-prohibited use of freedom of speech, you give the boss the power to decide what is right and what is not. So, if jobs are scarce, those who employ could decide the moral principles of the society. However, I find it understandable that a brand wants to be associated to particular moral standards and that if you don't live with these standards, you're not welcome in the company. So I found these issues very, very complicated and tbh, I don't have a definite opinion about it.
  • Starslayer wrote: »
    If I own a company and I don't want to pay you a paycheck because I think you're a ****, well, **even if I'm wrong about who the **** actually is**, it's my money and I should be able to decide that I don't want to pay you anymore. Bye bye!

    That's not a bad thing. That's freedom.

    If people have a serious argument, they're going to have to make the argument

    @MasterSeedy

    Challenge accepted ! I was waiting for the "off topic" move to have a healthy debate about that ;)

    For the record, I'm european. Worst, I'm French, so basically a commie for some americans ;) We usually have a different view on the limits of freedom and are probably more likely to accept to lose some freedom if it's for the common good that our american friends (hence higher taxes for better public services for instance).

    I understand your argument: Freedom. Hard to disagree with that. I'l try anyway ^^ I have 2 arguments against "it's my money and I should be able to decide that I don't want to pay you anymore".

    1) Freedom abuse. If you give employers total freedom on how you can dispose of a employee, you make it easy to abuse your dominant position. You don't want to work an extra half an hour without getting paid ? Bye bye. In a tight job market, I'll find someone else. You don't want to give me a kiss ? Bye bye, I'll find someone willing who needs the paycheck more than you. Those behaviours could be difficult to prove if you go to court. Making difficult to fire someone without a good reason that you may have to prove in court (giving the burden of proof to the employer) is a way to protect employees from abuse.

    2) Moral entrepreneur. If you're able to fire someone pretexting non-prohibited use of freedom of speech, you give the boss the power to decide what is right and what is not. So, if jobs are scarce, those who employ could decide the moral principles of the society. However, I find it understandable that a brand wants to be associated to particular moral standards and that if you don't live with these standards, you're not welcome in the company. So I found these issues very, very complicated and tbh, I don't have a definite opinion about it.
    Starslayer wrote: »
    If I own a company and I don't want to pay you a paycheck because I think you're a ****, well, **even if I'm wrong about who the **** actually is**, it's my money and I should be able to decide that I don't want to pay you anymore. Bye bye!

    That's not a bad thing. That's freedom.

    If people have a serious argument, they're going to have to make the argument

    @MasterSeedy

    Challenge accepted ! I was waiting for the "off topic" move to have a healthy debate about that ;)

    For the record, I'm european. Worst, I'm French, so basically a commie for some americans ;) We usually have a different view on the limits of freedom and are probably more likely to accept to lose some freedom if it's for the common good that our american friends (hence higher taxes for better public services for instance).

    I understand your argument: Freedom. Hard to disagree with that. I'l try anyway ^^ I have 2 arguments against "it's my money and I should be able to decide that I don't want to pay you anymore".

    1) Freedom abuse. If you give employers total freedom on how you can dispose of a employee, you make it easy to abuse your dominant position. You don't want to work an extra half an hour without getting paid ? Bye bye. In a tight job market, I'll find someone else. You don't want to give me a kiss ? Bye bye, I'll find someone willing who needs the paycheck more than you. Those behaviours could be difficult to prove if you go to court. Making difficult to fire someone without a good reason that you may have to prove in court (giving the burden of proof to the employer) is a way to protect employees from abuse.

    2) Moral entrepreneur. If you're able to fire someone pretexting non-prohibited use of freedom of speech, you give the boss the power to decide what is right and what is not. So, if jobs are scarce, those who employ could decide the moral principles of the society. However, I find it understandable that a brand wants to be associated to particular moral standards and that if you don't live with these standards, you're not welcome in the company. So I found these issues very, very complicated and tbh, I don't have a definite opinion about it.

    this exactly we can't give people complete freedom or else they will be able to use it but I do believe in freedom of speech so to protect this we need to stop people who are hurting people because they say something we don't agree with
This discussion has been closed.