heh, I'm not going to drop my name into this mess

but in any position where you're expected to handle sensitive information, be it medical, legal, government etc, the employer will run a background check - basically identity and address verification, credit and bankruptcy checks, criminal and court proceedings, corporate listings, and in the last few years, media and internet hits. Stuff like what your Facebook or Twitter postings say - for example, if your Facebook page has a series of racist diatribes, you're unlikely to be welcomed at the INS. If you put on your application that you're a non-smoker, and your latest tweet says you just got back from having a smoke; well, that reflects on your overall integrity.

for most people, that doesn't matter - you can do whatever you want in your downtime. But in positions where you do have access to sensitive information or materials (prescription medication for instance), it *may* be taken into account.

Ok, so zero.

Though it was kind of obvious when you linked "racial diatribes on a very popular social network" to "tabletop gaming whistle blowing on a very niche web forum".

post script: What you're trying to describe and talk about is my bread and butter.

post post script: Holy crap this forum is buggy as hell. What's with the constant authorization and refusal to post my replies? I know PHP is dense, but this is silly.

Maybe your security settings are a bit too high, or you have an add-on or two that's affecting it. It works just fine for me.

And yes, I seriously doubt any kind of background check is going to hunt down posts you make on a gaming forum with an alias. I don't know if FrankTrollman is his real name (why people would use their real name on the Internet is beyond me anyway), but if it is, that might pop up on a ridiculously thorough background check if he was running for President or something and people were looking for anything and everything they could to write an article about. But really. Come on. The guy just effectively re-posted a forum post. The horror.

It is his real name. Oddly fitting and he probably used it exactly for that reason.
Also, JQMcBishop, HM Hardy etc.

Frank Trollman is his real name, which the only reason I posted what I did. If he'd used an internet alias, it wouldn't matter.

@krainboltgreene: Fair enough. I'm not expecting anyone to put great faith in what I say especially whilst remaining anonymous The post was aimed at one person. Whether or not he chooses to take heed is up to him.

A place where people can talk about pretty much everything and insult pretty much everyone (although everybody has no name and it is always called anonimous) and troll about anything, right, I've never read 4chan. Mind you, sometimes you can find good ideas in there, but most of the time is just "lulz" and (child-)pornography.
I don't see child-pornography here, and I think I never will, but people posting for the "lulz", yeah...



So you are saying that when doing a background check of Trollman, this stuff will come up? Talk about a good data search.

Correction: just putting frank trollman on Google I got back here by the second page and all I did was put 'frank trollman'

Re: Right and Wrong

It's also wrong to call fraud stealing. That's why there are two separate words for it. And: stealing from a corp and one owner having trouble separating his private account from his business account are two vastly seperate things, too. Also, it is wrong to be selfrighteous for all the wrong reasons.

Re: Legal and Illegal.

Not everything that is legal is also right. Not everything illegal is necessarily wrong. Giving away private letters of another may not be illegal, it's still wrong. I didn't do anything wrong in he whole affair (oh, I forgot: I was silent. Yeah. Shoot me). Nevertheless, you violated my privacy, too, as said letter was between the author and the recipients, i.e.: me.

Re: Breach of contract

All valid. The difference being that CGL says it will pay up. You claiming it won't doesn't make your statement right. And BTW if every breach of contract, that is: every payment missed would be reason enough to become victim of an internet-based witchhunt, A LOT of people still owing some corp money/payment of debts would be in SERIOUS trouble.

And yes, I know that you, Frank, are not a supporter of these witchhunts and that you don't distribute rumors (knowingly), but you cannot overlook the fact that every bit of truth YOU share WILL become a snowball of lies and rumors in the end. You may not have intended this, but you certainly have your share of responsibility for it.

Re: Western Society wants information to be free

And where on this planet may we find that Western Society you speak of? The CIA and NSA would both like to have a word with it


For the record, again: I don't know Frank. Neither personal nor impersonal. Never heard of the man before, uh, March 17th it was I think. What I hate – in Frank and oh-so-many-others – is the notion that they have any "right" to act like pr... to act like destiny itself gave them the right to do the things they do.

If (or when) CGL collapses and if (when) I get the message then that (insert name of CGL guy here) knew beforehand that every attempt to correct the situation was futile slash they just needed the time to rescue their own investments THEN i will get really angry and scream bloody murder.

Western Society, however, wants a man with a knife in his hand, standing behind his wife to FIRST stab, THEN be arrested. If you shoot him before the deed, you are bound to get into trouble.

It's also wrong. (He was just pondering the possibilities. And that's not illgal. Yet).

AAS

No more than calling a square a rectangle. One is a subset of the other.

Uhm… no. Not complying to drop said knife immediately when asked to will get you shot legally.

If by "verify" you mean ban, blacklist and sue them…

So Frank is not likely going to be hired by hospitals hushing up medical errors as SoP.

They are different things in law nevertheless.
Thinking a square to be the same as a rectangle and never see the difference may botch your chance to leave kindergarten. Ever.



Even then you should be a cop. Or do I have to close the shutters on the windows before helping my wife cutting vegetables in the kitchen?

I think your confusion is that most of the members of society do not consider the CIA, nor the NSA the measures of that society.

Allow me to introduce you to the legal concept of Imminent Danger.

You don't need to be.

Not helping.

Geeignet? Check, he's not going to stab his wife with his brain painted over the next wall
Erforderlich? Check, if you have good reason to assume that he might harm his wife (if he didn't, tough luck. You were acting out of fear or confusion, no problem for you)
Verhältnismäßig? Check, lethal force vs. potentially lethal threat.


German laws on self defence are really simple: If you are defending yourself or another person from an imminent, illegal attack, you are acting legally. If you overstep those boundaries but are acting out of fear or confusion (and in practice the persecutor would have to prove you didn't, good luck with that), your actions are not legal but justified.

Note, the poster in question has his location set to Germany. The laws of Germany / Europe are just a tad different than those of the States in the US.

We are allowed (fully legal at that) to act in defense of another in the event of imminent danger / threat of severe bodily injury / death.

Europe by and large doesn't like the citizenry to have the means to defend itself. Take a look at their weapons laws. In the US, citizenry having arms is the means by which government tyranny is kept in check. You can thank an overbearing British government for making the Founders of the United States take up arms against tyranny.

The scary part is that there are those who would rather the bad events befall them than be defended by someone with a weapon.

Eh, we didn't come up with stuff like a duty to retreat from an attacker. AFAIK not even in France

However, Western Society prefers it above all that the man just drop the knife without anyone getting hurt. Likewise, it'd be better if the money got back instead of into lawyers' pockets.






I could imagine a hospital wondering if he'd spill the beans about hospital clients he doesn't like, too. I'm not saying he would, but the hospital might wonder.

It's not that cut & dry and there were cases were the defender had to pay compensation to the attacker and was punished. Of course, corpses don't need compensation and having a good lawyer helps, too.

There's not much difference between german and stateside law on self defence. There is, however, a very different law in regards to gun ownership and concealed carry / open carry law. The latter is higly regulated over here (=Germany). In Germany, the defender is not even required to evade an attack and can fully stand his ground, which, I was told, is the case in some US states.

While educational and interesting, please stay on topic.

And there were also cases towards the other extreme.
The important thing to bear in mind when discussing German vs. US law is that German judges decide individually and not based on precedent.

For example (to drag this slightly back on topic) if the court in Hamburg had to deal with Frank's case they'd go medival on his ass, just like they always do in copyright questions. Most other judges would throw the case right out of the window.

Will do, Sir.


Basically, two things make me wonder.

1. From my POV, it's been the freelancers that provided good products while FASA, Fanpro US and now maybe CGL were born and went belly-up. Now, a lot of those freelancers leave, but people put all their hope in the company. Why is that?

2. Were Mr Trollmann a journalist, all he did would be professional behaviour. Getting information from an informant, verify, publish. And he seems to be spot on with his critique. And because they can't argue about the facts he laid before us, people go after his personal ethics. As if the situation would look any better after this.

Hahahaha...wow. Sorry, but do you know how many times I've heard that from Catalyst, FanPro, and FASA before this current situation ever came up? The only difference, this time around, is that the freelancers have CGL's balls in a bit of a vice this time by withholding copyright and terminating contracts. And honestly, even with that, I'm not convinced that CGL will pay everyone that it is supposed to pay. They'll probably cherry-pick the freelancers they need to pay and postpone payments to more forgiving freelancers. Or maybe they'll find they just don't have the money to pay because of all this Coleman-related stuff, in which case, I certainly don't envy Jason's position.

Re: The closed case of the cop and that soon-to-be-shot veggie-cutting husband

For the files: I'll never help my wife in the kitchen again. In fact, whenever she asks me to, I just hand her a printout of this thread

The hypothetical and ill-conceived example aside, it's still in the spirit of the law (apart from immanent danger maybe) that you can or should not treat someone like a criminal before he has committed a crime. And no, I don't mean Coleman here, but CGL. Who have not paid yet, yes, but who are not sitting on a plane headed for the Caimans, too. They MAY pay up. And while it is totally OK to have doubts, I think it's not OK to ... aw heck why do Ibother.

@Arclight:

Re: 1 - because not all freelancers left, because not even the majority of freelancers left, and because people do not have a real and profound understanding of just how bad the situation is, since no one knows what will be. Plus: Because no one knows if a new corp will continue SR, or continue it in a way that they would like it to be continued. So even if they think losing the frelancers that left is a real shame -- which it is! -- they still do not know if one should give up on a shaken and hurt SR, with the possibility that there won't be any afterwards at all.

Re: 2 - the point lies in the question what kind of journalist he is. "People have a right to know" has been the rallying cry for good journalists and sleazebags alike. And while I would NEVER call FT a sleazebag, any journalist is not above morale, even though most lof them THINK that the end justifies ANY means. And that they ARE above morale.

One thing I keep seeing repeatedly is people here claiming that Bills made the decision all by himself with no influence from others to forgive the Colemans. If the Bills' information in the letter is accurate, this is patently untrue.

Here are the relevant portions:



Of note here is information saying that yes, he believes the company will heal faster with Loren still there. But not only that, so do various members of the industry.



Meaning Topps is aware of the situation and thus far has not balked at the problem. So that's one more group behind Loren, thus far.


Emphasis mine. Randall Bills didn't make the call despite everyone. He made the call because he had the backing of a significant portion of members of Catalyst Game Labs, including its investors. You know, the guys who get paid when the company does well. He does go on to state that some have left because they don't like the final decision, which we already know.

The point of all this is to remember that Bills isn't doing this on his own and saying F You to everyone else. He's got the backing of employees, managers, investors and the industry on this.

Are there people who disagree? Yep. Are there people who are understandably pissed off? Absolutely. Regardless, the company is moving forward with the apparent support of a huge network of people, and even some of the fans.

I'm all for lambasting someone for poor decisions, but for pete's sake, at least make sure you're lambasting the whole group responsible.

The key word here is "apparent".

Personally, I'm not entirely certain that said network is huge by any means.

Think you might be surprised at the number of people who just want things stabilized so that the game can live on. Happy with the direction Shadowrun has been going and wistfully wishing this would all just go away and leave their game alone! Overly simplified I understand but there are people who care more about the line then any money problems.

The person Coleman took the money from is Bills. So Bills going to him and saying, "you're still a friend but you have to pay the money back" is wrong? That makes him a bad person?

"Lies are wrong, truth is right. It's that simple."

And when you sign a contract with an NDA and then break it, you've lied. So by your reasoning, that's wrong too.



Wow. No.

The freelancers had contracts in place. Publishing material that has not been paid for would be breaking those contracts. While payments have not been made, Catalyst has shown some degree of good faith by pulling sales of material in which certain freelancers were not paid. They have further contacted all freelancers to provide some degree of explanation and assert their intent to live up to existing contracts. None of it is illegal. And it's definitely not 'unconstitutional'.

"We fought a war about it, look it up."

Again, no. Taxation without representation. Not 'England screwed us out of our freelance pay'.



Aside from your assertion about sales at conventions, if the finances involved were on the books, which it sounds like they were, then taxes would have already been paid. The LLC reported profits are factored into the personal owners' taxes, as the LLC is the personal property of the owners. With partners, there's a particular form to use to avoid 'double taxation' (paying taxes as the LLC and as the owner). As partners, Randall and Loren joint-own Catalyst, so it all belongs to either of them. If one took more than he was supposed to, he was taking it from his partner.



Since there are no criminal activities, the only counter would be "I didn't get paid so there's no contract". That's it. They'd still potentially be facing civil lawsuits from Catalyst for damages, but that seems really unlikely due to Catalyst not having the funds to pursue such a measure, and Randall not seeming like the sort to pursue such a matter.



I'm not sure how Catalyst responding to unpaid freelancers--who were understandably upset that material they had not been paid for was published--by pulling those publications from sale until payments are made can be seen as 'taking that money and putting it in their pants and dancing around'.



That's actually not what he said at all. He said that Jennifer Harding quit and that she was the Office Manager and Bookkeeper. It's reasonable to guess that she would be involved in getting the money returned, but he did not 'straight up admit' what you claim. Are you basing this conclusion on additional information that you have?



Well done, sir.



So, were either of those people Jennifer Harding or Dave Stansel? It's a pretty easy conclusion to make. Keep in mind that by your standards, keeping quiet about the truth is super wrong, as is lying. We await your answer.



So would you say that you made this decision based on deeply-held personal beliefs and a desire to do the right thing by your friends?

My humble opinion would be that while freelancers create the scenario, they must eat, buy stuff, whatever, which means someone must pay for their service. If a freelancer decides to post all his ideas for free, after long hours of brainstorming and writing and editing, well, his/her choice, but I hope at least he has alternate ways to pay his/her bills.

Besides, if CGL sinks, we have no garantee, that:

A- another company will pick Shadowrun back in a short period of time.
B- if said another company will keep the rules as it is (as it was the case of FanPro-CGL)
C- said company won't trash Shadowrun.

In the end, the best case scenario would be that CGL pay up who they owe and get themselves back on their horses.

Oh, I'm certainly never surprised by wishfull thinking. Hope dies last, after all.

Given that it worked out two times already, it's pretty likely.

It's more of an "ok case scenario" right now.

Classy !
@Frank: For someone that will be using Hippocratic Oath, you should learn that the internet is also a tool for the employer. Just remember, employers can go far to get info on you. IE: They can hire someone to watch your facebook, forums you troll and other info you leak over the web.

and I'm away.

You might be surprised to learn it's optional.

As someone who has done this sort of work, yeah, it's findable, especially if he used his real name. Keep in mind that it's now been posted to two forums, mentioned on others, and a number of blogs as well. It's more than just the forum post you mention. Look up the first post that started these series of threads, or look up his posting history. They wouldn't really look at a single post out of context, they'd look at as much of a history or trend as they could.

Not saying that with any sort of personal judgement in mind, just illustrating how, in my experience, that sort of thing gets handled.



Welcome to Google, it is a background checker's dream come true.

I would like to remind you that CGL has more owners than simply the Colemans and Randall Bills, and that one could make the very real argument that Loren essentially took the money from the freelancers, because he took the money that was supposed to pay the freelancers.


I know it's too much for you to go back and read through the entire threads), but I'd like to reiterate that many of the freelancers are not under NDA.


While I can't speak for Mr. Stansel, I would (again) like to point out that Jennifer Harding has made it very clear she's had no direct contact with Frank before this thread. I would really appreciate if you would at least research your accusations a bit.

If I had to pick the second-best outcome to please as many as possible, it seems like Catalyst giving up Shadowrun to keep making Battletech would probably be it. Let the fans who are unhappy with CGL be possibly happy or unhappy with another company and those who are happy with Battletech under CGL continue to be so.

Earthdawn and Shadowrun are at two different companies, and they were conceived of as being related while at FASA, unlike Battletech and Shadowrun.

Heh. You really don't know some of the old-school theories then.

While one may have lead to the other, it does not mean they are directly connected. It is still Coleman took money from CGL partners and CGL has not paid freelancers. If any freelancers were to sue they would be suing Catalyst, not Coleman. They would have no direct legal recourse against Coleman, unlike the co-owners of CGL. Even then, it is money that the freelancers are owed on publication. On the other hand, what Coleman took would have been money actually in Catalyst's (and Coleman's) account. We actually don't know if the money he took would have paid all of the freelancers, though it probably would have, or CGL wouldn't be remotely profitable.



My impression by their own posts is that neither are responsible for such leaks they quit and took a higher road and I hope they do well for themselves. My point is that Frank's posts seem to implicate them, or else a current employee who likely would be breaking some sort of NDA. If they are really that angry, they should be following Stansel's or Harding's example and quit, not quietly stab at their own employer, trying to bring them down, while continuing to milk a paycheck for as long as possible.

I don't. I'd like to hear them.

Obviously, not in this thread though.

If this were a legal court, we'd be talking about evidence. As this is not, let's stick to discussing the accusations and statements we have. While I really don't want to add fuel to the fire, my own understanding of the situation is that Coleman's "financial mismanagement" in part directly involved monies set aside for freelancers, hence my own considerable agitation about the matter. I would like to re-emphasize that is something I have understood from my conversations with others, and not something I have any proof of.


I'm guessing your assumption as to how many actual employees that Catalyst has is probably very much larger than reality.

Edit: Off topic and unnecessary

My assumption is based on three having quit and Frank asserting that his source is 'angry Catalyst employees'. So Catalyst must have at least more than the three who quit, at least two according to what Frank said. I'm assuming that he is not equating employees with freelancers, but that may be wrong.

I haven't stated a number anywhere, other than the ones I just gave, and as I've said before the number of people who could have given him the information he claims must be a 'very short list'.

Exactly.

It links IP to ID, so if your source IP changes it wants to reauthorize. That was an "feature" added in the last upgrade.

I doubt CGL was that organized. I think it was more a case of everyone reaching into the same bucket to pay suppliers, freelancers, purchase orders, and employees (including the Colemans) - that was probably the whole reason CGL took on a bookkeeper, and she was a freelancer as well before that. Not to disparage Adam or Jennifer, but CGL made the mistake of getting fans/contributors to be business people (even Dave and Troy were at heart fans). That's why I doubt there was any malicious intent on the Colemans' part - it was a case of a small business suddenly becoming a bigger business, and people not making the transition.

if I've not said before, I have no issue with SR freelancers withholding copyright - that's their prerogative. My issue is the fact that all CGL freelancers have been lumped in the same boat by people who have not had the decency to identify themselves to those people they've affected personally. And I'm not asking for them to publicly identify themselves; do it on the private forums, the Catlab Basecamp, the mailing lists - whatever. 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.

Because just as I mentioned before about having a web presence, if I put down on my resume "former freelancer for CGL", and the first thing a potential employer sees when researching CGL is "disgruntled freelancers leak info", its not a good look. I have a lot of respect for the guys that have had their issues with CGL and kept them private. I know exactly where you're coming from guys. I have a lot less respect for those that have taken it upon themselves to put it in the open, and anonymously at that. I don't even bear Frank any ill-will - I honestly think he's motivated in his mind by the right reasons. But until the names of his "sources" are known - *all* the CGL freelancers are tainted with the same "whistle-blower" brush.

that's my agitation about the matter. That my *hobby* will start affecting my professional life, through no action of mine.

I believe this is what he's basing his information on:


And

Emphasis mine. The process of getting stuff fixed was overseen by 4 people. 2 of those 4, Jennifer Harding (Office Manager and Bookkeeper), Dave Stansel (Operation Manager), have quit, and have not yet been replaced (to our knowledge). Thus, no one is overseeing the process except those directly responsible for it.

It's a perfectly valid leap of logic without contradicting information.

Anyone else amused by the conjecture and potentially libelous statements made there? Character damning things, with no proof outside of what two angry people told him. Under the heading of Truth and Lies.




Sort of like Frank's statements above?




Except the problem is, there is a leap. The letter says they were both involved and worked on the plan to get the money back, then left. It makes no reference at all as to who is -currently- overseeing that plan. You are making an assumption that it's currently Loren Coleman by himself. The letter doesn't state one way or the other.

That leap basically says that they are running with not a single person doing any part of the office manager & bookkeeper's work. No one? They're going around meeting with license holders, presenting their plan for fixing their problem, and keeping said license (which pretty much holds the fate of the company), with those duties just flopping around, and no one pitching in?

Randall couldn't have meant that they're looking to find, but haven't yet found someone to permanently replace those positions, and not that there wasn't anyone doing it temporarily? Sure, he could have said that, but probably didn't think anyone would need it that spelled out?

Unless you get more information from the people -currently- running Catalyst, you're making assumptions. Now, after this leak, I would guess the odds of that are diminished.

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.

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.

My interpretation of the events (based on information released to date) is basically Loren Coleman took a bunch of money over a 3 year period that was NOT his by mere **accident** or a **mistake**.

Seriously?!? Really? I'm supposed to buy that lame ass excuse? My kids could come up with a better lie (and more convincing) than that.

On top of that, they are keeping the person who was the culprit in the taking? I know I'd question my employer's integrity and ethical leanings if someone was caught embezzelling and then kept on as an employee.

At this point, I just want my pre-order LE SR4A to come in (push the ship faster please?) and then go play my game and ignore the rest of the world.

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. That and to ,ironically, explode in anger when someone mocked something you care about (and to a considerably lighter degree than you've been doing to us). I'll say it again, it's not for you to tell people how much they should care about something and not caring doesn't make you superior like you seem to think it does.

As to "assuming everyone around me has a college education" and "sounding stuffy and a leeetle pompous". Well you hardly need to have a college education to use words like "condescending" and "sanctimonious". And you've seriously misjudged your audience here if you think those words sound in any way elitest on Dumpshock. Maybe someone sounds elitist to you for using them, but round here we're okay with that. Do you imagine many people in this thread are reading posts and saying "heh - he called someone out for using more than four syllables, clever!"

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?

K.

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