That sounds like you're someone who's very easily manipulated by psy-ops done by the companies themselves, then.
You’re alleging Unity fabricated these death threats?
Sure? It’s still a death threat.
Sending employees home has a real cost. The existence of death threats, moreover, is unlikely to change developers’ hearts and minds. The nuttier ones will write it off as a conspiracy theory. Most will see it as irrelevant to their interests.
People who make death threats don’t need to underwrite their insanity. Their incoherence doesn’t make them less dangerous.
If, hypothetically, a company just managed to piss off, I don't know...everyone, one strategy to garner some cheap sympathy and have an excuse to cancel public gatherings might be to highlight some of those they were getting all the time anyway.
Citation needed. I’ve never worked at a firm that received a death threat. If we did, I would expect it to be taken very seriously by senior management and law enforcement.
You expect it would be? IOW, you wouldn't automatically be told about a death threat, so you wouldn't know if the company received a death threat.
I've worked for at least two companies that received "death threats"; I've also worked with folks who were individually stalked, unrelated to their job.
Most "death threats" are vague and unsubstantiated: some (pseudo) anonymous e-mail threatening general violence. They're so common that most companies (and the police) ignore them.
A _specific_ threat will usually get reported to and acted upon by the police, but that often requires naming an individual person and something else, like a specific place or a weapon or such.
As a general statement, I would agree with the person who wrote above, "that every company over a certain size gets a certain number of death threats."
I would, in the last ten years.
> Most "death threats" are vague and unsubstantiated: some (pseudo) anonymous e-mail threatening general violence
These (e.g. “I hope you all die*) aren’t typically referred to as death threats. Any one of naming a target, specifying a method or stating personal intent (versus generally hoping harm befalls one) qualifies as a death threat.
"I hope" is not a threat. I specifically said "threatening general violence".
Someone (pseudo) anonymously e-mailing "I'm going to kill you all," is generally considered a threat in the US, though it's usually ignored because it's vague and unsubstantiated.
Without knowing what "threat" Unity received, it could have been anything.
In the past ten years, has your company (companies?) received general threats of violence? Not "I hope", but "I will"?
Sure. Add any one of a weapon, day or time, location or person and it becomes a specified threat.
> Without knowing what "threat" Unity received, it could have been anything
I agree. But again, it’s a video game company. The cost of deferral is low. Even if it were an “I’m going to kill you all” threat, deferring until investigated is prudent. And if a company takes a threat seriously, law enforcement will, too.
> In the past ten years, has your company (companies?) received general threats of violence? Not "I hope", but "I will"?
No.
That never happens. Self interest trumps notions of decency. (Particularly in the context of just a threat, regardless of how credible.)
Is the timing convenient for management? Sure. Never let a crisis go to waste. Does that make their actions imprudent? Of course not. They’re a video game company. These aren’t stakes worth gambling against lives.