My Official Statement

[sayhello]

OK, I'm just going to throw this out there. Several years ago, because a close personal friend of mine was sexually abused, I did a LOT of research and personal therapy on how to deal with and help a person who was a victim of SA.

I totally get that Dustin has asked, in fact as had been said, has pleaded that people not blame his other coworkers, and just blame Pete. I do not know Dustin. However, there is a possibility that Dustin is dealing with a HUGE sense of guilt that the fact that he chose to share and expose the horrific events that happened to him is going to quite possibly very adversely affect those around him who were not involved in the actual abuse. I believe Dustin. But I also believe that his pleading *could* be because he wants to limit the fallout from what he and Sean started. He didn't tell anyone. Nobody knew. But that doesn't preclude the fact that people may have seen what was going on, and come to their own conclusions. There's a difference between not knowing because you weren't told and not knowing at all. And there might be consequences that come out of being aware of what might be going on, and not saying anything.

Again, this is 100% speculation on my part. Dustin may not have any feelings of guilt. Nobody who worked around Dustin and Pete may have noticed a thing. But it's possible they did. I'm just not sure that "Dustin has pleaded with us not to blame the others" actually means there may not be blame out there for them.

That said, accusations from the members of this message board at this point really don't do any good. There's a limited number of people who are actually in a position to make those accusations, and most of us aren't them.

 

[WebmasterKathy]

The level of hubris is astonishing:

View attachment 782635

FWIW, John did not add that. It’s from the days of Tag Fairies, when posters would find that admins would randomly add tags under users’ profiles.

 

[doconeill]

FWIW, John did not add that. It’s from the days of Tag Fairies, when posters would find that admins would randomly add tags under users’ profiles.

And he was called "Genius" on the podcast by others all the time, which is where it came from.

 

[nfreeman]

PW was the type of fellow who would brag about everything, and much of it felt quite exaggerated. His grand talk never really made sense in relationship to the realities. The studio in the house always looked quite homespun, and the way he would talk about things was so over the top - like the $5,000 drink being made up as content and repeatedly stating that he hadn't drank any of it. I just didn't find it really that believable the way he would talk about his "wealth".

I don't think he's alone in this. I've watched several of these content creators do "tours" of rooms, suites, etc. and they often look like maybe they slipped a nice tip to a steward or hotel staff member to let them in for the purpose of the tour, or maybe coordinated with the company in exchange for more "authentic" publicity. The "glamorous life" is a huge part of the influencer persona after all...

I kind of put those comments about his deep connections to Disney leadership in the same bucket. Oh I'm sure as a person with a travel agency, and apparently (until recently) a relatively successful one, he was invited to events, and these people would say hello, and maybe even have a secretary offer them a few notes about things to remember about Pete, but at the end of the day he was at best as important as a food critic is to a restaurant or a movie critic is to a movie studio.

I'm interested to know what Pete's "divesture" actually means. We may never know. I'm hopeful that it means that the proceeds will be taken to settle his debt with Amex, and any other debtors. It's safe to say that Amex is not his only debtor - Monera and Disney both come to mind as likely people who are owed more money. Based on what I have read, other employees or people at the firm might be owed money, and the company may be owed money beyond this $800,000+ that is owed. I hope the divesture is speedy, but I suspect we will never know when this divesture is completed or any details around the purchase. This is a very closely held private "company". I put company in quotes because there's so much we don't know about how Pete ran this operation. Were other people employees or just independent contractors? Was this really a company or more of a sole proprietorship etc. etc. Much of this isn't really anyone's business when you think you are dealing with an ethical company, but I think many feel that trust has been broken, and people want to feel good about where they are spending their Disney online time and travel dollars.

I have no idea what the worth of a company like DISboards is, or how you even calculate it. Dreams seems a bit more manageable to find a fair valuation.

We will never know, but I'd be interested to know how the World of DVC purchase of DVC Fan was engineered. I hope it was handled appropriately and professionally. I also hope that Amy and Paul were able to get some ownership interest there, as they seem to really be the ones driving the content, and they seem like relatively nice people who have worked to create some independence from themselves while being adjacent to the PW empire.

It is clear to me, based on Pete's early mispronunciation of Paul's name in early DVC Show episodes (before he appeared on-air regularly), that if there is some distance between PW and the Kriegers it can be found. I honestly think, for their sake, they should issue some kind of statement on a future episode or in writing on the DVC Fan website, which, from what I can tell, does not mention that it is now owned by the World of DVC company.

I have a feeling the “divesture” probably started long before we knew. It was all hidden from us & Pete was taken off the show under the guise that he no longer wanted to do it because he was tired of the parks.

We will probably Never know anything about anything that really went on behind the curtain.

 

[WRLeGrand]

I remember vividly on a recent DVC Fan show, Craig was the acting producer. He said that he could never enjoy owning DVC as a local and going to the resorts because "...he had Pete Werner as a boss" and that carried expectations related to his job and performance. Hearing all of these allegations, my mind went straight back to how serious he was in making that statement and how difficult that has to be.

But my mind also goes to the fact that, clearly, Corey and Craig are really good friends. It is really difficult for me to believe that Craig never expressed this to Corey. Was a blind eye turned? Or was everything just ok from John/Corey while the money was rolling in?

But by all means, let's make it an attack on people who question this, while also effectively promoting this people in power at the same time. I am sorry, that just seems way off to me...

 

[WebmasterMaryJo]

The level of hubris is astonishing:

View attachment 782635

The above is a good example of assuming something and attacking based on an unfounded assumption.

I concur with WMKathy's comment below. John had nothing to do with this, and he was tagged at a time when the admins were having fun with the posters and tagging them. The comment was made by someone else, it was thought funny, and he was tagged with it. To attack for a silly comment made by someone else is really unfair.

FWIW, John did not add that. It’s from the days of Tag Fairies, when posters would find that admins would randomly add tags under users’ profiles.

 

[DonMacGregor]

The above is a good example of assuming something and attacking based on an unfounded assumption.

I concur with WMKathy's comment below. John had nothing to do with this, and he was tagged at a time when the admins were having fun with the posters and tagging them. The comment was made by someone else, it was thought funny, and he was tagged with it. To attack for a silly comment made by someone else is really unfair.

Reasonably certain I made no reference or assumption as to it's origin. But does it really matter how it got there initially? If someone changed mine to something like that, I'd change it right back. Regardless of whether you do it yourself, or someone else does it, it's still there and under your control, and as a leader it just looks bad. Regardless, I'll move on because it's just going to devolve into pedantry at this point.

Hardly an attack, particularly in light of the harsh criticisms in many other posts in this and other threads. But, feel free to delete the comment and any reference to it, you have my blessing. Zero desire to get dinged for being argumentative, and at its core it doesn't really add to the dialog.

 

[doconeill]

@WebmasterKathy or @WebmasterMaryJo , correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe in the previous version of the boards, the Tag Fairy tags were not editable by the user? My tag was given by the Tag Fairy and was independent of the user-editable tag (and a different color)...I know they are editable now though.

Regardless, the fact that he never changed what was a fun reference to his nickname on the podcast hardly constitutes hubris.

 

[Lumpy1106]

To the webmasters and everyone else who feel like the remaining Dis crew is being unfairly criticized;
You may not volunteer for your kids soccer team, or BSA, or GSA, or little league, or your local church or parochial school, etc, etc, etc. You may not work for a big employer - but I do, as do I would say a lot of the posters here. We all go through HOURS of safe haven training, workplace harassment training, we are subject to background checks, and now even finger printing. Not only that, but I volunteer for AYSO, BSA, GSA and the church, and you have to do all of that for EACH organization - it's not shared between the groups. All of that is BECAUSE of well documented, and well publicized harassment that has occurred. You think you are being unfairly criticized? Not by ALL of the training I have done. If you know of, or are made aware of any harassment, YOU, and YOUR EMPLOYER or THE YOUTH ORGANIZATION you are volunteering for are REQUIRED to take action. If you don't then you are held responsible when the harassment continues (and it will), and your youth organization or business CAN, and most likely WILL BE SHUT DOWN! Shall we talk to teachers? Any hint that one of their students has been abused has to be documented and reported.

You think you are being unfairly held to some different standard? Nope, sorry, but that is the standard in 2023. You want us to believe you did not see it coming? Then why did so many of us that have been in the periphery, getting banned from this very site because we were critical of what we were seeing (not so much the SA but certainly the overly-controlling behavior that is so common with abusers) and had the guts to say so - how did many of us see this coming? No kidding, this was no surprise to me whatsoever.

I know that the group that is left holding this particularly ****ty bag have a very big task ahead, and I do wish them the best of luck. Sorry for all the criticism, but you had to know it was going to come with the territory when so many of us are aware of just what is right and wrong.

<spelled out filtered word>

 

[rmoxgt]

john magi, we were hoping you were shocked and horrified by the allegations like the rest of us.

that’s all. that’s why we’re still upset.

 

[khertz]

Reasonably certain I made no reference or assumption as to it's origin. But does it really matter how it got there initially? If someone changed mine to something like that, I'd change it right back. Regardless of whether you do it yourself, or someone else does it, it's still there and under your control, and as a leader it just looks bad. Regardless, I'll move on because it's just going to devolve into pedantry at this point.

Hardly an attack, particularly in light of the harsh criticisms in many other posts in this and other threads. But, feel free to delete the comment and any reference to it, you have my blessing. Zero desire to get dinged for being argumentative, and at its core it doesn't really add to the dialog.

Yes it matters how it got there originally. As you have learned, it was added as a joke and probably NOT by John. Just because YOU would have changed it doesn’t mean it is “hubris” for John to have left it there for himself. Don’t hurt yourself backpedaling.

 

[DonMacGregor]

Yes it matters how it got there originally. As you have learned, it was added as a joke and probably NOT by John. Just because YOU would have changed it doesn’t mean it is “hubris” for John to have left it there for himself. Don’t hurt yourself backpedaling.

Trust me, I'm not. I'm just not interested in debating it any further. If you want to make an exhaustive defense of a profile tag, then knock yourself out. That's your right. Everyone's looking for small victories, I suppose.

 

[khertz]

Trust me, I'm not. I'm just not interested in debating it any further. If you want to make an exhaustive defense of a profile tag, then knock yourself out. That's your right. Everyone's looking for small victories, I suppose.

I have made one response, don’t know how that is exhaustive. “Small victories” seems to be what you were going for by pointing it out in the first place.

 

[DonMacGregor]

I have made one response, don’t know how that is exhaustive. “Small victories” seems to be what you were going for by pointing it out in the first place.

It was the third, identical response to my single post. How about "repetitive"?

 

[khertz]

It was the third, identical response to my single post. How about "repetitive"?

Again, not repetitive. I was responding to something you addressed in your follow up

I’m done.

 

[Cfabar1]

I have found, generally, in the larger the organization I am a part of, the more established and documented procedures are.

The smaller the organization, the less there are established procedures in place, and the more there are conflicts of interest, unfair advantages, abuses of power, etc. etc. I have seen this time and time again. On the other hand, small employers sometimes are more willing to go above and beyond for key employees and step up in a way a larger employer isn't.

I am not condoning the behavior one bit, I am just saying, having worked in both of those settings, I see how these lines become more easily crossed in the closely held "company" (that for all we know isn't even incorporated as such, and may or may not have any actual employees classified as such) of the DIS run by Pete Werner.

I'd like to say that things will be different under new leadership, and maybe they will be, but this statement given makes no assurances that new leadership is coming, or that any changes are happening. I also find it odd that John would speak for DIS, which is a separate company from DUT allegedly. My point is, all of this is extremely closely held, and the only transparency that will be shared is what the owner(s) choose to share and/or what is revealed through court filings or other public records (i.e. sale of house, sale of DVC points, etc.)

 

[DanielleC]

Just as no one here knows the identity of anyone else involved, you equally do not know that this is about Pete Werner and him alone. It is just as wrong to speculate about him being the sole wrongdoer as it is to speculate about others being involved. We just don't know. People here should refrain from proclaiming that there were many other conspirators involved. And people here should refrain from proclaiming that there are no other people involved. We don't know. But more is sure to come. I continue to use Harvey Weinstein as the closest example. He and he alone raped women on his casting couch. But would it be impossible to believe that there were others in his company who were on the other side of the door hearing the screams? Others who booked the appointments knowing what Harvey's intentions were? Others to whom he bragged about his conquests? I don't know any of that. But just because he is the only one who had physical contact with the women doesn't mean that he is the only person who knew what was going on. I would never say that his situation was about him and him alone. Nor would I say that his entire company knew. I just don't know. Same is true here.

She Said is a movie about Weinstein and what he did from the perspective of the two NY Times reporters who were writing about him. It is pretty amazing to hear about how few people "knew" a little bit, but no one knew much at all. All the victims signed NDA's and Weinstein made sure they all knew he would destroy their lives if anything came out. Even some of their husbands never knew.

 

[aymiewilson]

I've read through this entire thread now, and it sounds to me like there are a lot of people on here who think they know a lot about toxic work environments or working with/under a narcissistic abuser just because they've read about it secondhand. Everybody likes to think "if I was in that situation then I would have done the right thing! I would have spoken up and spoken out." I'm here to tell you, as a person CURRENTLY in a small company where there is one toxic, narcissistic leader who is making everyone's life hellish, that it is REALLY HARD TO SPEAK UP or stand up for other people when you know FROM EXPERIENCE that then all the **** will rain down on you. We are not dealing with SA or anything on that level of awful, so I can only imagine HOW MUCH WORSE it would be if we WERE.

I say all of this to hopefully gently point out to people on these boards that EVERYONE who works under a narcissistic abuser gets beaten down, gaslit and abused. Even if you are not the direct target of SA or verbal abuse, you are still swimming in that **** soup. I think that EVERYONE on the DIS team, especially people like Craig, Ryno, Erica, etc. who are just Millennials like me, trying to make a living, support themselves/their families, is a victim to some degree in this scenario. And I think that ALL of them deserve compassion.

You can hate what Pete did, what he perpetrated on undeserving people like Sean and Dustin, and you can still NOT let that hate spread onto other members of the DIS team. You can think "why didn't anyone say/do anything about this earlier?!?!?" and STILL recognize that they were dealing with a toxic environment that YOU have not experienced and GIVE THEM SOME GRACE. And for the people on here who will come back at me with "oh no but I HAVE experienced this," then I will just say to you: if you know what it's like to walk a mile in these people's shoes, how hard and scary and stressful it was, then you should be the FIRST PERSON to give them grace, to wish them peace, safety and healing.

 

[DanielleC]

I have found, generally, in the larger the organization I am a part of, the more established and documented procedures are.

The smaller the organization, the less there are established procedures in place, and the more there are conflicts of interest, unfair advantages, abuses of power, etc. etc. I have seen this time and time again. On the other hand, small employers sometimes are more willing to go above and beyond for key employees and step up in a way a larger employer isn't.

I am not condoning the behavior one bit, I am just saying, having worked in both of those settings, I see how these lines become more easily crossed in the closely held "company" (that for all we know isn't even incorporated as such, and may or may not have any actual employees classified as such) of the DIS run by Pete Werner.

I'd like to say that things will be different under new leadership, and maybe they will be, but this statement given makes no assurances that new leadership is coming, or that any changes are happening. I also find it odd that John would speak for DIS, which is a separate company from DUT allegedly. My point is, all of this is extremely closely held, and the only transparency that will be shared is what the owner(s) choose to share and/or what is revealed through court filings or other public records (i.e. sale of house, sale of DVC points, etc.)

Most of the laws that require the training start with 50 or more employees on payroll. I once worked for a guy who wouldn't hire more than 42 people because as he said it "I don't want to listen to or hear any of that crap. It's your problem, not mine." I left there after 2 months, it isn't even in my resume.

 

[Dallas_Lady]

I know Disney/Iger is in no way comparable to DUT/Magi, but I keep thinking how Pete would have ranted if Bob Iger would have made that kind of "I'm the victim" statement when Disney ousted Chapek.

Oh my Goodness, imagine the rampage Pete would have gone on if something like this happened in the Walt Disney Corporation. He would have held a special "Pete's Solo Show" to rant about it if there were allegations of SA, intimidation, hostile workplace, etc. at Disney or Universal.