The CGL situation p3 Options

[tristanh]

It pales compared to the amusement about people trying to paint "libel" and "rumor" on a leak that even the company itself could not deny.

If directed at me, my comments are about Frank's post, not the letter. Frank himself admits those points are rumor.

Nice job taking Frank to task over his Truth & Lies section... except you apparently missed where he disclaimed that section as rumor and hearsay because he was UNABLE TO PROVE THE VERACITY of those claims.

Being up front and honest isn't a bad thing except to those who would rather hide and obfuscate.

Sure, it's like me saying bad things about you, then saying "well, at least I didn't bring up your marital infidelity or the rumors of your spousal abuse. I admit, I can't verify that, but I heard it from your ex-wife, but she was really angry at the time".

If it was rumor and hearsay, he should have kept that part to himself. The letter? While I don't think he should have posted it, that's from Randall himself. Stories from other people that may or may not be true? Not so much.

This post has been edited by tristanh: Mar 29 2010, 06:01 PM

[crizh]

It'd be nice if they'd at least given us a heads up that our financial situation with CGL was about to become public knowledge.

Given the treatment AH received after posting on the private freelancers forum I can't see why the whistleblower would be inclined to reveal his/her identity on that forum.

It has already been demonstrated that somebody there can't be trusted.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

If directed at me, my comments are about Frank's post, not the letter. Frank himself admits those points are rumor.

A rumor that got a non-denial denial with the first press release, steady backing by details and now, a leaked letter. Thus, amusement.

[knasser]

There's no point, Knasser – the proper term for "poking fun at you" is "trolling".

I know, but I just can't believe people get pleasure from that.

K.

[tristanh]

A rumor that got a non-denial denial with the first press release, steady backing by details and now, a leaked letter. Thus, amusement.

I'm sorry, which points that Frank stated that he couldn't verify, and heard from people who were angry, such as Randall "getting a cut of the money" if he backs Loren, fit any of those letters or press releases above?

They don't. That's Frank trying to stir the pot. Amusing to you or not, someone could think such an accusation would be defaming. It also doesn't help his cause of being the "righteous person" in this whole thing.

[Dread Moores]

So far as I can see, your sole presence on these boards is to have registered to take part in this thread and self-admittedly post purely to mock people for caring about Shadowrun.

But you wouldn't know much about "round here". I've never seen any questions from you about Shadowrun, never any discussion about your game or sharing what you've done with it. Your purpose in being here seems to be derive self-satisfaction from patronizing, insulting and dismissing people. That's not a very good purpose, is it?

I know that you and your quoted poster have delved off into personal issues here. But do keep in mind, some of us have registered simply because we've been lurking for a long while (on this incarnation of DS/DR). This is a topic bound to bring lurkers out. We do in fact, care about Shadowrun (and BT/CT/EP in my case). But I also don't feel that relationship between fan community and company is as reciprocal (beyond transfer of money and product) as you do. It doesn't make either opinion wrong. I just want to be clear that simply cautioning for levelheadedness or trying to present opinions on why some of us may want CGL to continue with the license does not equate to trolling. It might be an unpopular opinion here (I honestly can't tell) and it may have been handled badly by some posters (myself included) at various points. I'll grant that on all sides of the discussion.

[Octopiii]

I'm sorry, which points that Frank stated that he couldn't verify, and heard from people who were angry, such as Randall "getting a cut of the money" if he backs Loren, fit any of those letters or press releases above?

They don't. That's Frank trying to stir the pot. Amusing to you or not, someone could think such an accusation would be defaming. It also doesn't help his cause of being the "righteous person" in this whole thing.

I tend to view the assertions of people who have registered on the boards merely to throw mud at frank with some skepticism.

He's a prick, and some of his assertions that he makes are awful and do not follow from the facts presented, but there's nothing that he has presented as FACT that has been contradicted.

[Dread Moores]

I tend to view the assertions of people who have registered on the boards merely to throw mud at frank with some skepticism.

He's a prick, and some of his assertions that he makes are awful and do not follow from the facts presented, but there's nothing that he has presented as FACT that has been contradicted.

This isn't meant as an insult, but an honest question. Do you really feel CGL should be presenting an official response to opinions or facts, beyond the press releases? I guess what I'm asking is, does that seem like a constructive use of time for company employees to be debating this out on message boards, considering the current circumstances?

[JM Hardy]

This isn't meant as an insult, but an honest question. Do you really feel CGL should be presenting an official response to opinions or facts, beyond the press releases? I guess what I'm asking is, does that seem like a constructive use of time for company employees to be debating this out on message boards, considering the current circumstances?

No it doesn't

Oh wait, you probably weren't asking me.

Jason H.

[Octopiii]

This isn't meant as an insult, but an honest question. Do you really feel CGL should be presenting an official response to opinions or facts, beyond the press releases? I guess what I'm asking is, does that seem like a constructive use of time for company employees to be debating this out on message boards, considering the current circumstances?

Constructive? Yes. The structure of RPG games is one that relies on a core group of dedicated hobbyists to make multiple purchases. As such, it needs to keep the dedicated fans happy; think of it as the 20/80 rule used in grocery stores (20% of products drive 80% of traffic) applied to people. People naturally want to know what's happening with the company that produces the product it purchases. Shadowrun, in particular, has been passed around like a live frag grenade through various companies over the course of its 20 years, so we have less loyalty to a company than the product the company produces - if Catalyst wants to keep our goodwill, they would be wise to put the minimal effort into quenching the fires. Considering that an official denial of anything stated would be simple and non-resource intensive, the silence we are hearing is deafening.

[Rotbart van Dain...]

No-no – he was just asking nicely if you consider some posters being sockpuppets.

[tristanh]

I tend to view the assertions of people who have registered on the boards merely to throw mud at frank with some skepticism.

He's a prick, and some of his assertions that he makes are awful and do not follow from the facts presented, but there's nothing that he has presented as FACT that has been contradicted.

I've been lurking for a while, following with interest. If I had just wanted to "throw mud at Frank" I'd have probably chimed in some time ago. Posting those things he admits he can't verify was wrong. I have no where argued against what is verified fact. My number of posts on this message board is irrelevant to that. It's the internet, disregard what I have to say by whatever subjective method you want. It doesn't change that Frank shouldn't have posted the bullet pointed items under "Truth & Lies" that he himself admits aren't verified and are rumor.

[Dread Moores]

No it doesn't

Oh wait, you probably weren't asking me.

Jason H.

No, I wasn't. But it's a pretty telling answer. I also happen to agree with it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I guess the part I struggle with is what gets accepted as fact versus supposition or leap of logic. There's really only one side of the story being presented here. We're not seeing (and rightfully so, I feel) Jen Harding rushing out to support Frank's posts. We're not seeing still remaining CGL employees rushing out to present counter-arguments on a wide scale. What we are seeing is a number of freelancers (who have legitimate payment complaints/issues) who are relatively unhappy with the company (for various reasons and at various levels). In some cases former, and in some cases current freelancers, that is. That's not to imply that they're mistaken or wrong or anything of the sort. It's simply trying to point out that some of the community may feel a bit differently about posts similar to Frank's, because we're only seeing his side. Additionally, some of us don't have the history with Frank that community seems to here, as there seems to be some amount of personal leeway given due to past interactions between the more prolific posters here. Though that's obviously to be expected on a board of this size and duration.

I guess it just feels like some of the folks who've taken the "let's wait and see what happens" attitude are being lumped into some kind of unnecessary pro/anti-CGL debate.

[Octopiii]

No it doesn't

Oh wait, you probably weren't asking me.

Jason H.

The minimal time it takes to release an official rebuttal to the facts (not allegations) Frank has asserted is not worth your time only if you don't care about quenching the ongoing flames of speculation going across the internet.

Considering how simple it is to say "No, it's all B.S. and Frank has it wrong" makes Frank's statements that much more credible.

[knasser]

I know that you and your quoted poster have delved off into personal issues here. But do keep in mind, some of us have registered simply because we've been lurking for a long while (on this incarnation of DS/DR). This is a topic bound to bring lurkers out. We do in fact, care about Shadowrun (and BT/CT/EP in my case). But I also don't feel that relationship between fan community and company is as reciprocal (beyond transfer of money and product) as you do. It doesn't make either opinion wrong. I just want to be clear that simply cautioning for levelheadedness or trying to present opinions on why some of us may want CGL to continue with the license does not equate to trolling. It might be an unpopular opinion here (I honestly can't tell) and it may have been handled badly by some posters (myself included) at various points. I'll grant that on all sides of the discussion.

There is all the world of difference between your polite and reasoned post and the other stuff. Aside from the logic and the friendly tone, you're making a very different point. You're saying people should be level-headed and that there are reasons why one might want CGL to continue with the licence. I don't dispute either. The other post was basically shut up and quit caring so much. I have no problem with reasonable discussion.

Now we'd better be careful. 'Levelheadedness' is five syllables and you also used 'reciprocal' which sounds dangerously 'college-educated' to me. Best hope he doesn't notice. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Peace,

Khadim.

[Dread Moores]

Constructive? Yes. The structure of RPG games is one that relies on a core group of dedicated hobbyists to make multiple purchases. As such, it needs to keep the dedicated fans happy; think of it as the 20/80 rule used in grocery stores (20% of products drive 80% of traffic) applied to people. People naturally want to know what's happening with the company that produces the product it purchases. Shadowrun, in particular, has been passed around like a live frag grenade through various companies over the course of its 20 years, so we have less loyalty to a company than the product the company produces - if Catalyst wants to keep our goodwill, they would be wise to put the minimal effort into quenching the fires. Considering that an official denial of anything stated would be simple and non-resource intensive, the silence we are hearing is deafening.

I might not agree with all of that, but thanks for that. It's nice to see things debated or answered, well...nicely. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I wonder if the silence wouldn't be so deafening if the plan had been put into place fully before details were released. I can't always say on the SR side things have worked that way, but I know on the BT side, we've seen a lot of communication in the past regarding things like the name change, Wizkids to Topps move. Some of the silence feels like it could be caution after the release of so much inside information. Right or wrong, I'll leave that up to theorists to debate. I'm just not so sure that if this whole situation hadn't been revealed earlier that the only other result would be "Sweep it all under the carpet!".

[JM Hardy]

The minimal time it takes to release an official rebuttal to the facts (not allegations) Frank has asserted is not worth your time only if you don't care about quenching the ongoing flames of speculation going across the internet.

Considering how simple it is to say "No, it's all B.S. and Frank has it wrong" makes Frank's statements that much more credible.

Really? You think if I just say "Frank has it wrong" people will say "Okay, well, good to know."

Let's test: Frank has it wrong.

Now, is that going to settle anything? Or is it going to bring along requests for a flood of follow-up details, specific points to debate, etc., etc.? I have a guess--do you?

Jason H.

[knasser]

Let's test: Frank has it wrong.

Is that an actual statement from you, or just a test?

K.

[Crank]

Is that an actual statement from you, or just a test?

K.

I think you just proved his point and in only 4 minutes.

[knasser]

I think you just proved his point.

And unless he answers, he's proved Octopiii's. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

K.

[Octopiii]

I think my paraphrasing of any official statement and your literal take on it is not exactly what people had in mind, no. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Rotbart van Dain...]

Considering how simple it is to say "No, it's all B.S. and Frank has it wrong" makes Frank's statements that much more credible.

You think if I just say "Frank has it wrong" people will say "Okay, well, good to know."

That's not what he said.

[JM Hardy]

I think my paraphrasing of any official statement and your literal take on it is not exactly what people had in mind, no. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Then do people want me to respond to Frank's stuff line by line? Here's at least three problems. 1) It gives rumors a weight I do not believe they should have; 1) It starts to get into things that I still firmly believe should be private; the fact that someone else does not share that belief doesn't change my opinion on that matter; 3) It takes a lot of time.

For the record, #s 1 and 2 are the truly important ones.

Jason H.

[tristanh]

Then do people want me to respond to Frank's stuff line by line? Here's at least three problems. 1) It gives rumors a weight I do not believe they should have; 1) It starts to get into things that I still firmly believe should be private; the fact that someone else does not share that belief doesn't change my opinion on that matter; 3) It takes a lot of time.

For the record, #s 1 and 2 are the truly important ones.

Jason H.

Point numbers 1) and 1) you mean? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

[JM Hardy]

Point numbers 1) and 1) you mean? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

Right. They're so important, they're co-#1s!

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Jason H.