CGL Speculation #5, It continues Options

[MindandPen]

<Insert Beevis and Butthead giggle>

Sorry, couldn't resist. Of course, I have a lot of respect for the posts you made here and what you've added.

Got tired of typing it out so I resorted to shorthand.

I'm just trying to be a helpful little miscreant. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

-M&P

[nemafow]

Life is usually 30 years, used to calculate parole. Then there is "Life without the possibility of parole" which is "until you're room temperature".

-M&P

Good to know, thanks (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Jaid]

just a thought on those arguing that loren l. coleman should be thrown in jail:

i'll readily agree that my sense of justice follows "you stole something, you should go to jail" as a general rule.

but my sense of justice *also* tells me that the other owners should be repaid the money that was taken from them, the freelancers should be paid the money that was owed them in the first place, and those who have chosen to stay at catalyst don't deserve to lose their jobs.

and quite frankly, if working towards the other owners getting repaid, the freelancers getting the money owed them, and CGL's other employees keeping their jobs requires that loren l. coleman *not* go to jail, well, i would have to say that my sense of justice would actually require that loren l. coleman not go to jail, because it is more important to me that everyone he has harmed get justice than it is that he get punished (which is also justice).

this, of course, presupposes that is isn't actually a mistake (which is technically still possible i suppose, but seems *really* unlikely), and that not pressing charges against loren l. coleman does in fact assist in getting those who have been harmed by his actions the justice (ie restitution) that they deserve.

and on a side note, i rather suspect loren l. coleman wouldn't have just told Jennifer Harding to blatantly falsify the royalty reports. that's not questionably illegal, that's just blatantly illegal, and her response indicated it was borderline not hundreds of miles past the border. on the other hand, just to give an example... here in Canada, at least, there are a number of ways you can handle account for, say, depreciation (lost value on physical properties over time; for example, a car that you bought one year ago is no longer worth what it was before you bought it). the government, for tax purposes, requires that you use one specific method, but for your own purposes (and for shareholder reports) you can use pretty much whatever you want (though naturally, your shareholders will want to know what method you're using). as such, it would be unethical (but not necessarily illegal) to change accounting methods every year to make your company look better in the financial statements for the shareholders... as long as you can make it not appear that you're falsely representing your company, that is.

similarly, it is possible that there was some vague wording (for example, if the contract somewhere defines a sold book as being something which has been given to the customer... which many who pre-ordered SR4A limited edition can attest has not happened with certain products) in the contract allows an accounting sleight of hand, so to speak: it may not technically be *illegal* to (for example) count those books as something other than sales, but it would certainly be of highly questionable ethics, especially if, say, the company decided to hold off on delivering books or deliberately chose the slowest way to deliver books, so that they could use this accounting method to their advantage.

i'm not saying that *is* what happened (this is the speculation thread, of course, so speculation is expected), merely pointing out that what loren l. coleman was trying to present to Topps may not have been illegal, but could have quite possibly been clearly ethically wrong and if intent could be proven, might be considered illegal.

(again, i'd like to stress that all my examples in this post are hypothetical, merely being examples of situations that could describe the situation, not examples of what does describe the situation: i have no post-secondary training in bookkeeping, no formal training whatsoever as any sort of law-related profession, and i am also not a psychic so far as i know...)

[Dread Moores]

I'm late on all this, but Jaid covered my own thoughts well with the first three or four paragraphs.

Also, Ancient History, well done sir.

[Method]

So the general consensus, then, is that everyone is tired of the ass-hatery and we could all stand to be a little more moderate in our speculation? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/question.gif)

Who are you people and what have you done with my Dumpshock? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Cardul]

So the general consensus, then, is that everyone is tired of the ass-hatery and we could all stand to be a little more moderate in our speculation? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/question.gif)

Who are you people and what have you done with my Dumpshock? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Sounds like people are finally starting to make sense? All the intentional Negativity over the Dumpshock forums really is not something
I like seeing. I would rather hang around the Battletech forums, as there it is more like the interactions of friends then here, where sometimes it
seems more like Desolation Angels verses Bug Spirits. And this is the face you guys want to show new players coming here for information?

[Method]

And this is the face you guys want to show new players coming here for information?

Maybe you didn't sense the sarcasm in my comment? I absolutely welcome the civilized tone this thread is taking on thanks to the likes of AH, augmentin and Jaid.

[Fuchs]

These are great questions, but the guy hasn't been convicted of anything. The worse case is that Topps audits CGL and Topps' auditors reach the conclusion that CGL would have problems being a going concern. This would potentially be enough of a red flag for Topps to consider not renewing the license. But corporate relationships do matter. If Coleman can convince Topps that he can fix his sinking ship, then they might renew the license.

If folks are completely against CGL having the licenses going forward, then write to Topps and tell their senior management why the renewal is a bad idea. Letters do matter. Otherwise, I suspect that Topps will renew it based on the relationship that CGL has with Topps, assuming the audit report is not too harsh.

He has not been convicted of anything, but CGL admitted there had been financial irregularities. Co-mingling of money is the least negative possibility there.

There's the audit report, but there's also the question of whether, at this point, any employe of another firm can afford to trust Coleman until those accusations have been resolved.

Would you be happy with your banker if he trusted your retirement funds to a firm headed by a guy who his former employees claim he cheated his firm and his partners? "Innocent untîl proven otherwise" counts in a penal court, but not in business. Not when you're accountable for your actions to your investors.

[Fuchs]

Sounds like people are finally starting to make sense? All the intentional Negativity over the Dumpshock forums really is not something
I like seeing. I would rather hang around the Battletech forums, as there it is more like the interactions of friends then here, where sometimes it
seems more like Desolation Angels verses Bug Spirits. And this is the face you guys want to show new players coming here for information?

For information? Yes. I'd rather trust information coming from a forum with heated discussion, than something I have to suspect is heavily censored, or only frequented by people of one opinion.

[wusselpompf]

We have that silliness in the US too. Maybe it originates in British Common Law perhaps?

same in Germany, life sentence is 25 years, earliest parole after 15 years.
That pretty much rules out common law as a reason. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[actually in Germany it's based on a ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court, which says that in accordance with the constitution, especially the human right of so called "human dignity", people have a right to get a chance to reintegrate into society. There are very few cases where a life sentence can be and is extended to the actual death of a convict.]

[Method]

nsame in Germany, life sentence is 25 years, earliest parole after 15 years.
That pretty much rules out common law as a reason.

The German constitution was rewritten by the Allies (inc Britain and the US) in 1949. Probably changed since then, but you can't rule out the influence of Common Law there either. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Dread Moores]

For information? Yes. I'd rather trust information coming from a forum with heated discussion, than something I have to suspect is heavily censored, or only frequented by people of one opinion.

I wouldn't say it's heavily censored, but that's a probably a matter of personal taste. But it's most definitely a place with heated discussion, and you will rarely run the risk of people all being of the same opinion. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[augmentin]

Maybe you didn't sense the sarcasm in my comment? I absolutely welcome the civilized tone this thread is taking on thanks to the likes of AH, augmentin and Jaid.

And here I thought when the charts came out we wouldn't reach the end of the page without further permabans and thread #6.

Of course, the new kindler, gentler thread is due mostly to AH who took the leadership in being the first to apologize. And a real apology, too. Not the ubiquitous "I'm sorry, but..."

[Warlordtheft]

For information? Yes. I'd rather trust information coming from a forum with heated discussion, than something I have to suspect is heavily censored, or only frequented by people of one opinion.

You also don't know the motivations of people spreading the information. In other words take everything posted on the internet with the proverbial mountain of salt.

(I include all news organizations as well, b/c alot of their stories are provided to them by interested parties.)

[Fuchs]

You also don't know the motivations of people spreading the information. In other words take everything posted on the internet with the proverbial mountain of salt.

(I include all news organizations as well, b/c alot of their stories are provided to them by interested parties.)

You know the motivation (and limits) of corporate spokespersons pretty well.

[wusselpompf]

The German constitution was rewritten by the Allies (inc Britain and the US) in 1949. Probably changed since then, but you can't rule out the influence of Common Law there either. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

not really. it was written by german law professionals and - what is more important - they worte the constitution in tradition of german law language and systematics.*
and this means, that de jure there is no such thing as prejudices in German law, although practially low ranking courts often take the rulings of higher courts into consideration - but this is informal. afaik this could be considered as the major difference between common law and continental european law.

* but of course, the initiative for the draft of the constituion was made by the west allies but then they didn't interfere much with the actual development process.

[wusselpompf]

weird double post

[Sengir]

and this means, that de jure there is no such thing as prejudices in German law, although practially low ranking courts often take the rulings of higher courts into consideration - but this is informal. afaik this could be considered as the major difference between common law and continental european law.

Precedent, prejudice is what determines whether killing your ex-wife is called "family tragedy" or "honour killing" (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[knasser]

So the general consensus, then, is that everyone is tired of the ass-hatery and we could all stand to be a little more moderate in our speculation? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/question.gif)

Who are you people and what have you done with my Dumpshock? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Non-consensus voices were banned, remember? Agreement does not take precedence over being right for some of us.

K.

[Redjack]

Non-consensus voices were banned, remember?

How quickly the memory does fail it seems.

[Dread Moores]

Non-consensus voices were banned, remember? Agreement does not take precedence over being right for some of us.

K.

Really? I'm seeing a whole lot of disagreement in all these threads. Those not with the consensus (whatever consensus that may be, because one sure doesn't seem to exist here) seem to be posting just fine. One voice was banned, that's true. Was more than one banned, to imply the plural voices there? If so, I missed it.

[Redjack]

One voice was banned, that's true. Was more than one banned, to imply the plural voices there? If so, I missed it.

You are correct. Only one voice was banned and that one voice was banned for continual and repeated failure to abide by the simple rules of the community.. Not due to any failure to be in consensus with anyone for any other reason.

[D2F]

wasn't gonna quote the whole thing, even if it deserves it.

You weren't I am, for I believe it cannot be stressed enough:

Shadowkids, and those BattleTechies that have joined us recently, heed my words for a moment.

Nothing we do or say on this or any other thread, on this or any other forum, is going to change how the folks at InMediaRes Productions LLC do business. At this point, there is nothing to be gained by sniping at one another, except to increase the overall level of hostility. Yes, I know that's a bit hypocritical coming from the guy that argues whenever Jason Hardy has tapped his keyboard lately, but please bear with me.

This entire situation boils down to only two things as far as fans are concerned: trust and entitlement.

Fans, freelancers, and most of the employees have no say in the management of Catalyst, and are not entitled to information about Catalyst's inner workings or financial information. None of us need to know it to get along with our lives or work, and it is private information about the running of the company. As much as we may feel that Shadowrun (or BattleTech for those just tuning in) is our game, the reality is that Catalyst does not have any responsibility to us beyond business relationships. It is thus inappropriate for us, as fans or freelancers, to expect or demand private information, or to make demands that change the management of the company.

The most essential element of the relationships within Catalyst, between its management and employees, between the employees and the freelancers, between the fans and the company, is trust. Freelancers and employees trust the management for open and honest communication, and that contracts will be honored and fulfilled by both sides. Fans trust that the company will continue to make great products for the game they love, and the company trusts that if they make great products then the fans will buy them and the company will prosper. What these threads should make clear, from the very first post, is that there has been a tremendous breakdown in trust at Catalyst.

None of us here, except perhaps Jennifer Harding or Randall Bills if he ever deigns to step in, have a sufficiently clear picture of Catalyst's financial situation. For myself, for some other freelancers and fans and employees, there has been a terminal breakdown of trust between us and Loren L. Coleman, and those that support him like Randall Bills. Whether or not you believe Catalyst will continue, or that what Coleman did is illegal, I believe everyone here can understand that a large portion of Catalyst's goodwill has been lost by these revelations, along with talented individuals like Adam Jury. Shadowrun, from all accounts, has been hit harder than BattleTech by the loss or withholding of copyright on behalf of freelancers. This I believe is because the majority of SR freelancers have closer relationships to Adam Jury and Jennifer Harding; I know that I personally have more trust and faith in them and their words than Jason Hardy.

...and let me say one word about that. I've been a dick to Jason lately. I don't need to admit it, it's been quite apparent to anyone that's read our last few exchanges. I have my private reasons for that, but I want to make this much clear: Jason believes he is doing what he feels is right. He is continuing to pursue his job as Shadowrun Line Developer, and as far as that goes is making an effort to fulfill his obligations. I can respect that, even if I do not agree with that. I can't speak for anyone else, but I've been burned by people before. People that have lied to me and stolen from me. For me, and only for me, I cannot continue a relationship with such a person. I cannot continue to work with those that continue to support and trust such a person. Maybe Randall Bills is a bigger person than I am, maybe Jason Hardy's loyalty to the game or the responsibilities of his position are greater than the broken promises written out in his unfulfilled contracts. For myself, I believe the accusations against Loren, and I cannot continue to work for him or those that support him. That does not mean that anyone here should continue to hurl vitriol at Jason for his statements. He is restricted in what he can say, and has little recourse but to repeat the same sentiments until something on his end changes.

In short, Jason doesn't have the answers, stop beating him up for it.

Those were nicely put words, AH. I completely and wholeheartedly agree with you on this issue and I wish everyone would take your advice to heart.
There is so much animosity and even outright hatred in this (and these) thread(s) that it is no longer even remotely rational.
You have average comsumers thinking they are entitled to hammer Jason Hardy for a crime he did not commit and they are not affected by, while all jason Hardy does is trying to do the "right thing" ™.

You can agree or disagree with JMH, AH, Jennifer Harding or anyone else here, but you don't have the right to spew forth flames. Freddom of speech carries with it the responsibility to wield it without infringing on the rights of others and the right to remain unharmed in body as in mind counts here just as much.
"Freedom of Speech" does not equal "you can say anything you want" and everyone that thinks that should have it revoked until they are ethically fit to use it.

[DireRadiant]

You can agree or disagree with JMH, AH, Jennifer Harding or anyone else here, but you don't have the right to spew forth flames. Freddom of speech carries with it the responsibility to wield it without infringing on the rights of others and the right to remain unharmed in body as in mind counts here just as much.
"Freedom of Speech" does not equal "you can say anything you want" and everyone that thinks that should have it revoked until they are ethically fit to use it.

With great power comes great responsibility!

[Stahlseele]

Freedom of Speech and any other Freedom stops right where it impedes on anybodye elses Freedon in any kind or way.