Nothing to really disagree with here, I guess it really boils down to if you agree with using strong arm tactics as a viable means to get the information you want. Not being a backer/supporter I personally don't really care about that, as I don't think it will really change anything anyway, the goal posts always tend to shift in situations like this. Give these types of folks one thing they'll want something else. That's my take on that anyway.
True, but it comes back to a show of good faith. If he released a major news update that showed good progress towards the end goal, folks will be a lot less likely to buy into claims of mismanagement or doom and gloom in the future. CIG has no track record to speak of. This is why such claims are taken so seriously. Fending this first backlash off with a spectacular PR move showing lots of previously unreported progress would go a long ways into turning future claims into nothing more than "the sky is falling" rants.
. Giving him the weekend to relax at home and not worry about all this, no response come Monday or Tuesday starts to seem damning.
It depends, I would say no response is better than another diatribe. His own words did more damage than the sources allegations. If he does respond, I hope he finds someone to proof read, who isn't emotionally involved.
I would hope he would not be foolish enough to simply respond with another rant. The Escapist's explanation of their source verification was very professional. To respond with anything less would be suicidal, professionally speaking.
As I've said before a few times, all he really needs to do is show they have made substantial progress beyond what they've released prior to this incident.
I believe they are planning to do just that at Citizencon - the event they are holding in a few weeks. From their community interaction, it does sound like they want to release the first iteration of Persistent Universe and the first chapter of Squadron 42 by the end of the year.
How they want to do that is beyond me though.
There have been very few significant updates to Arena Commander over the past few months, the FPS has been delayed significantly. In the past, they tended to release stuff as soon as they could. They are either sitting on a relatively huge amount of content, or I don't see how these releases are happening any time soon.
He could probably get away with refraining from any kind of response for a week, if he simply states: "You wanna see progress? Watch us at Citizencon." So maybe that's his plan. I dunno, but I'm eagerly awaiting CR's response.
"Blood and Tears" grab popcorn this movie IGN 10/10 :pleased: iF this game going release i pay 60usd , but i laugh alot to people spent 10.000 usd and defend this "like" have "Profit Shares"
In the interest of being fair there are probalby conspiracy to commit
fraud cases where unrelated employees have been in cahoots.
I'm not going to provide any factual data but I will make the claim that it probably did happen anyways.
I sincerely doubt there is and even if there is one or two the amount of cases where the sources where actually true is overwhelmingly higher.
Funny fact is that there are thousands of cases where the employer conspired against his employees or has a group of employees conspire against an employee or lie for them in court or to journalists.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
It all stinks, Escapist claims that some of the "sources" posted reviews on Glassdoor after talking to Liz, even though the dates clearly don't match that statement. They also say that Derek Smart was not one of their "sources", but they go on to say however, that the "sources" were brought together by a "mutual contact" that they have not named. Also they claim Chris Roberts e-mail, which was a reply to a e-mail they sent, ended up in their spam folder because the pictures attached didn't load, that is not how spam filters work. Also some of their "sources" were never vetted in person only via phone, email, or skype.
Even if the "sources" are legit, in every company I've worked for there's always a handful of people that feel over worked, and under-appreciated. When these people either finally get fired, or they think they are getting fired; they always band together, and start drama. It's nothing new for any industry.
The entire article, and it's "clarification" is a bunch of conjecture at best. It would be a valid point to say even if the "sources" are real employees, they are probably just the exception not the rule. It's not hard to believe that a Leads experience with a company, would be vastly different from the experience of a grunt worker.
I have worked as a CFO in reputable traded top Hi Tech and you wouldn't believe the amount of money laundering /thefts /misappropriation of funds is done by top management.
1) I work for a Global company wherin the top management wastes a lot of company funds on personal expenses from expensive dinners everyday to golf memberships to 1st class tickets every time they travel.
All the expenses are duly accounted for by external audit and tax paid appropriately. These expenses are totally legal but immoral .
When the profits are down I regularly get the job to reduce workforce . Mind you these are public companies which are traded and audited.
2) One of the colleagues reported a fraud by a senior director and the management passed the blame on to a junior stuff and brushed it under the rug.
Whenever an current or ex employee complains the management puts all their might to show them as culprit.
There is no smoke without fire.
Chris Robert is not accountable on many levels and he can get away with most of fund spending from legal point of view.
1. Hiring your wife or brother is morally wrong not from company legal point of view.
2. His intentions might be good but he has no pressure for accountability.
From when spending $600 to $2000 is okay for video game Its not.
Corruption and Misappropriation of funds amongst top management is more rampant than everyone thinks.
It all stinks, Escapist claims that some of the "sources" posted reviews on Glassdoor after talking to Liz, even though the dates clearly don't match that statement.
Believe it or not, sources are not interviewed, articles written, sent to CIG for comment, and then printed, in the space of an hour. It takes time. Just ignorant.
It all stinks, Escapist claims that some of the "sources" posted reviews on Glassdoor after talking to Liz, even though the dates clearly don't match that statement.
Believe it or not, sources are not interviewed, articles written, sent to CIG for comment, and then printed, in the space of an hour. It takes time. Just ignorant.
Yeah yeah everyone is against SC and CR. In my younger days we would lock people up for talking like that. :-D
I still don't see how you believe that to be so outlandish, that kinda thing isn't unheard of. It just seems you want to completely shutdown the other possible scenario to me.. you want there to be something wrong... and will not see any other possible outcome.
If it is not unheard of please list me a case where seven employees unrelated to each other have conspired against the same ex employer and the accusations where not true.
These people were brought together through a "mutual contact"... unrelated circumstances of termination kinda becomes moot after that.
You expect me too look into every case of employees coming together?
And I feel no need to backtrack, as I made no claim their claims weren't legit, all i did was offer two possibilities, so again no need to backtrack.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
It all stinks, Escapist claims that some of the "sources" posted reviews on Glassdoor after talking to Liz, even though the dates clearly don't match that statement.
Believe it or not, sources are not interviewed, articles written, sent to CIG for comment, and then printed, in the space of an hour. It takes time. Just ignorant.
Actually according to the timeline provided by escapist that's close enough to how it went. Here's the pertinent information.
(Using the source designations from our story, three sources (CS1, CS4, CS5) initially contacted Lizzy via separate phone calls on Sept. 26 with information they wanted to share after seeing the initial story about CIG on The Escapist. They got her number via a mutual contact. No emails were exchanged. The sources and writer agreed to chat in-depth at a later time.
Four other sources (CS2, CS3, CS6, CS7) initially contacted Lizzy via email on or before Sept. 27 The emails, numbering 32 from these four individuals, were forwarded to our EiC and Publisher, who passed that info by our legal department. It was cleared and we pursued individual personal contacts beginning the following day.
The two emails (CS8-CS9) from current employees came into Lockbin on Sept. 27. in the early morning. Lizzy exchanged at least 5-6 emails each with these sources, but they did not disclose their identity.
When it came time for followup, three sources (CS1, CS4, CS5) were contacted via phone by Lizzy on Sept. 26. One call started at 5 p.m. and lasted for an hour and 15 minutes. A second was at 6:45 p.m. and lasted for 45 minutes. The final call was at 9 p.m. for an hour an 8 minutes. All three were contacted via Skype as well to verify visual identity.
Three more sources (CS2, CS6, CS7) were contacted on Sept. 27. One call started at 9 a.m. for 30 minutes and was Skype only. This was the caller who did not give his name, but verified employment with ID and pay stubs. Call #2 was at 2 p.m. for an hour and 52 minutes, while call number 3 was at 5 p.m. for an hour and one minute. Again, all callers were visually verified after the phone call via Skype.
The last call (CS3) was on Sept. 28 at 7 p.m. for 50 minutes, again visually verified on Skype.
All sources via Skype had their pictures compared to their LinkedIn profiles or other images of them on the web to verify identities.
Chris Roberts' response to me was at 9:10 a.m. almost three hours before publication time. Unfortunately, the response ended up in my spam folder, as it came in unformated and the pictures did not load. Since Roberts did not copy Lizzy or the Editor-in-Chief, who were on my original email to CIG PR head David Swofford, they did not get them and there was no back up to ensure someone saw it. Swofford emailed me at 12:40 - after I had sent him a link to the story - asking if I had received Roberts' response. It was then that I checked my spam folder, found the response and forwarded it to Lizzy to integrate into our story, minus any personal attacks on the sources. I called Swofford at 1:02 p.m. to personally apologize for the oversight and let him know how we would be using the response in the story. Roberts' entire response on the official site showed up roughly 10-15 minutes before we updated our story on the site.
To be clear on further allegations: None of our sources were Derek Smart and we did not get our information from Glassdoor. However, we do know that a couple sources did post on Glassdoor after talking to Lizzy.)
Again, the burden of proof is on the Escapist, all they have is a, he said, she said story. No proof.
So basically we have a internet blog "verifying sources" by looking at their face on skype and checking their twitter/linkdin for the same face, that's hardly credible identification. They also have 2 sources which were never identified at all (CS8,CS9).
In the interest of being fair there are probalby conspiracy to commit
fraud cases where unrelated employees have been in cahoots.
I'm not going to provide any factual data but I will make the claim that it probably did happen anyways.
I sincerely doubt there is and even if there is one or two the amount of cases where the sources where actually true is overwhelmingly higher.
Funny fact is that there are thousands of cases where the employer conspired against his employees or has a group of employees conspire against an employee or lie for them in court or to journalists.
I agree with you. I was just typing what he really meant. Even though he had nothing he made the claim anyways and is sticking to it. Nothing more nothing less.
It all stinks, Escapist claims that some of the "sources" posted reviews on Glassdoor after talking to Liz, even though the dates clearly don't match that statement.
Believe it or not, sources are not interviewed, articles written, sent to CIG for comment, and then printed, in the space of an hour. It takes time. Just ignorant.
Yeah yeah everyone is against SC and CR. In my younger days we would lock people up for talking like that. :-D
I am against the absence of a legal framework to protect crowd-funders. The only crap I give about SC, is that, if (IF) these allegations are shown to be true and CIG fails, then the legal framework is likely to be far more draconian then any of us would want to see. And it will all be due to one man's mismanagement.
It all stinks, Escapist claims that some of the "sources" posted reviews on Glassdoor after talking to Liz, even though the dates clearly don't match that statement.
Believe it or not, sources are not interviewed, articles written, sent to CIG for comment, and then printed, in the space of an hour. It takes time. Just ignorant.
Actually according to the timeline provided by escapist that's close enough to how it went. Here's the pertinent information.
(Using the source designations from our story, three sources (CS1, CS4, CS5) initially contacted Lizzy via separate phone calls on Sept. 26 with information they wanted to share after seeing the initial story about CIG on The Escapist. They got her number via a mutual contact. No emails were exchanged. The sources and writer agreed to chat in-depth at a later time.
Four other sources (CS2, CS3, CS6, CS7) initially contacted Lizzy via email on or before Sept. 27 The emails, numbering 32 from these four individuals, were forwarded to our EiC and Publisher, who passed that info by our legal department. It was cleared and we pursued individual personal contacts beginning the following day.
The two emails (CS8-CS9) from current employees came into Lockbin on Sept. 27. in the early morning. Lizzy exchanged at least 5-6 emails each with these sources, but they did not disclose their identity.
When it came time for followup, three sources (CS1, CS4, CS5) were contacted via phone by Lizzy on Sept. 26. One call started at 5 p.m. and lasted for an hour and 15 minutes. A second was at 6:45 p.m. and lasted for 45 minutes. The final call was at 9 p.m. for an hour an 8 minutes. All three were contacted via Skype as well to verify visual identity.
Three more sources (CS2, CS6, CS7) were contacted on Sept. 27. One call started at 9 a.m. for 30 minutes and was Skype only. This was the caller who did not give his name, but verified employment with ID and pay stubs. Call #2 was at 2 p.m. for an hour and 52 minutes, while call number 3 was at 5 p.m. for an hour and one minute. Again, all callers were visually verified after the phone call via Skype.
The last call (CS3) was on Sept. 28 at 7 p.m. for 50 minutes, again visually verified on Skype.
All sources via Skype had their pictures compared to their LinkedIn profiles or other images of them on the web to verify identities.
Chris Roberts' response to me was at 9:10 a.m. almost three hours before publication time. Unfortunately, the response ended up in my spam folder, as it came in unformated and the pictures did not load. Since Roberts did not copy Lizzy or the Editor-in-Chief, who were on my original email to CIG PR head David Swofford, they did not get them and there was no back up to ensure someone saw it. Swofford emailed me at 12:40 - after I had sent him a link to the story - asking if I had received Roberts' response. It was then that I checked my spam folder, found the response and forwarded it to Lizzy to integrate into our story, minus any personal attacks on the sources. I called Swofford at 1:02 p.m. to personally apologize for the oversight and let him know how we would be using the response in the story. Roberts' entire response on the official site showed up roughly 10-15 minutes before we updated our story on the site.
To be clear on further allegations: None of our sources were Derek Smart and we did not get our information from Glassdoor. However, we do know that a couple sources did post on Glassdoor after talking to Lizzy.)
Again, the burden of proof is on the Escapist, all they have is a, he said, she said story. No proof.
Yet its a multitude times over more detailed information than anything Chris Roberts has offered. Speaking of he said, she said, you've obviously not read (or so conveniently choose to ignore) the diatribe dribble Chris Roberts offered in the form of a response. Now that's the text book definition of a, he said, she said, story with no proof of anything whatsoever.
In the interest of being fair there are probalby conspiracy to commit
fraud cases where unrelated employees have been in cahoots.
I'm not going to provide any factual data but I will make the claim that it probably did happen anyways.
I sincerely doubt there is and even if there is one or two the amount of cases where the sources where actually true is overwhelmingly higher.
Funny fact is that there are thousands of cases where the employer conspired against his employees or has a group of employees conspire against an employee or lie for them in court or to journalists.
I agree with you. I was just typing what he really meant. Even though he had nothing he made the claim anyways and is sticking to it. Nothing more nothing less.
No it was not a claim, my original post said either these people are legit and something is amiss, or they're pissed and seeking some type of payback. I still stand by that. As that seems to be the only two possible scenarios here.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Yet its a multitude times over more detailed information than anything Chris Roberts has offered. Speaking of he said, she said, you've obviously not read the diatribe dribble Chris Roberts offered in the form of a response. Now that's the text book definition of he said, she said story with no proof.
Of course I've read it, he clearly states what he thinks of the article, he calls it what it is. A hit piece designed to create traffic for the escapist, which has been on the downhill since gamergate. Most of it's decent writers have left in the past year or been fired.
Liz had been pressuring previous employees of CIG on twitter, digging for whatever she could find. She was grasping for a story she could get clicks from. So a "mutual contact" put her in with some people who would give it to her. Simple as that really.
Yet its a multitude times over more detailed information than anything Chris Roberts has offered. Speaking of he said, she said, you've obviously not read the diatribe dribble Chris Roberts offered in the form of a response. Now that's the text book definition of he said, she said story with no proof.
Of course I've read it, he clearly states what he thinks of the article, he calls it what it is. A hit piece designed to create traffic for the escapist, which has been on the downhill since gamergate. Most of it's decent writers have left in the past year or been fired.
Liz had been pressuring previous employees of CIG on twitter, digging for whatever she could find. She was grasping for a story she could get clicks from. So a "mutual contact" put her in with some people who would give it to her. Simple as that really.
Don't journalists dig to uncover truths that may be covered up.....nah...thats just crazy talk.../rollseyes
Yet its a multitude times over more detailed information than anything Chris Roberts has offered. Speaking of he said, she said, you've obviously not read the diatribe dribble Chris Roberts offered in the form of a response. Now that's the text book definition of he said, she said story with no proof.
Of course I've read it, he clearly states what he thinks of the article, he calls it what it is. A hit piece designed to create traffic for the escapist, which has been on the downhill since gamergate. Most of it's decent writers have left in the past year or been fired.
Liz had been pressuring previous employees of CIG on twitter, digging for whatever she could find. She was grasping for a story she could get clicks from. So a "mutual contact" put her in with some people who would give it to her. Simple as that really.
You sound like an insider repeating CIG talking points (which would not be surprising at all). That response was shameful and indefensible. The fact that you are trying to defend it is telling in and of itself.
Regarding Liz. She is a journalist. That's what journalist do. So, on the one hand, you CR worshipers chastise her for not doing due diligence and releasing a story having done limited research, but when she does, by doing what you readily admit she did above, she is then "pressuring previous employees of CIG digging whatever she could find."
In the interest of being fair there are probalby conspiracy to commit
fraud cases where unrelated employees have been in cahoots.
I'm not going to provide any factual data but I will make the claim that it probably did happen anyways.
I sincerely doubt there is and even if there is one or two the amount of cases where the sources where actually true is overwhelmingly higher.
Funny fact is that there are thousands of cases where the employer conspired against his employees or has a group of employees conspire against an employee or lie for them in court or to journalists.
I agree with you. I was just typing what he really meant. Even though he had nothing he made the claim anyways and is sticking to it. Nothing more nothing less.
No it was not a claim, my original post said either these people are legit and something is amiss, or they're pissed and seeking some type of payback. I still stand by that. As that seems to be the only two possible scenarios here.
And there folks is the backpedaling. Let's look at what you wrote again....yeah sounds like a claim to me.
I still don't see how you believe that to be so outlandish, that kinda thing isn't unheard of. It just seems you want to completely shutdown the other possible scenario to me.. you want there to be something wrong... and will not see any other possible outcome.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
In the interest of being fair there are probalby conspiracy to commit
fraud cases where unrelated employees have been in cahoots.
I'm not going to provide any factual data but I will make the claim that it probably did happen anyways.
I sincerely doubt there is and even if there is one or two the amount of cases where the sources where actually true is overwhelmingly higher.
Funny fact is that there are thousands of cases where the employer conspired against his employees or has a group of employees conspire against an employee or lie for them in court or to journalists.
I agree with you. I was just typing what he really meant. Even though he had nothing he made the claim anyways and is sticking to it. Nothing more nothing less.
No it was not a claim, my original post said either these people are legit and something is amiss, or they're pissed and seeking some type of payback. I still stand by that. As that seems to be the only two possible scenarios here.
I still don't see how you believe that to be so outlandish, that kinda thing isn't unheard of. It just seems you want to completely shutdown the other possible scenario to me.. you want there to be something wrong... and will not see any other possible outcome.
You will notice a common theme among many SC defenders. They claim they are not backers and have no dog in the fight, yet these same people are all over these forums defending SC 24/7 like pit bulls on a rampage. For the life of me I can't understand the flip-flopping. If you are defending SC and Chris Roberts, admit it and stand by your convictions. A constant disclaimer that you are not a backer/supporter is not necessary. Folks can see right through it.
Yet its a multitude times over more detailed information than anything Chris Roberts has offered. Speaking of he said, she said, you've obviously not read the diatribe dribble Chris Roberts offered in the form of a response. Now that's the text book definition of he said, she said story with no proof.
Of course I've read it, he clearly states what he thinks of the article, he calls it what it is. A hit piece designed to create traffic for the escapist, which has been on the downhill since gamergate. Most of it's decent writers have left in the past year or been fired.
Liz had been pressuring previous employees of CIG on twitter, digging for whatever she could find. She was grasping for a story she could get clicks from. So a "mutual contact" put her in with some people who would give it to her. Simple as that really.
You sound like an insider repeating CIG talking points. That response was shameful and indefensible. The fact that you are trying to defend it is telling in and of itself.
Regarding Liz. She is a journalist. That's what journalist do. So, on the one hand, you CR worshipers chastise her for not doing due diligence and releasing a story having done limited research, but when she does, by doing what you readily admit she did above, she is then "pressuring previous employees of CIG digging whatever she could find."
Make up your minds. Which one is it?
See that's you putting words in my mouth again for the second post. The response wasn't shameful, it was Roberts saying he's not giving in to any of the Derek Smart arguments. Which is exactly where this article stems from, it came from Liz wanting to ride the coat tails of Dereks Clickbait, and the people who fall for it. People who've been around the industry like Roberts, know full well what gators like Smart, bring to the table. After all, he was able to take over Alganon online by doing much less.
Also, how does pressuring former employees on twitter count as due diligence? She couldn't get them to talk, so she had to go with "mutual contact sources" read friends of a friend. All of whom don't want to come out in the public, and lack any real evidence other than talk. Well talk is cheap, if they have a recording or receipts showing fraud, maybe I'll pay attention to that evidence. What they have in their article however, is not credible.
You will notice a common theme among many SC defenders. They claim they are not backers and have no dog in the fight, yet these same people are all over these forums defending SC 24/7 like pit bulls on a rampage. For the life of me I can't understand the flip-flopping. If you are defending SC and Chris Roberts, admit it and stand by your convictions. A constant disclaimer that you are not a backer/supporter is not necessary. Folks can see right through it.
I noticed a common theme among SC defenders. They all sound like cult members and schizophrenic maniacs.
For example, they hate Derek Smart because he invades the private life of Chris and his wife, slanders CIG, spreads rumors and eats babies. I totally agree with them, that is shitty behavior and not really professional.
But then when Chris Roberts writes a response that is full off slander, accusations, attacking the journalist instead of disproving the facts, talking the whole time about how shitty Derek Smart (he mentions him 20 times) is and that he could never make a good game they cheer and dance like maniac cult members around the corpse of a sacrificed virgin.
I am really considering taking my $30 day one pledge and leaving this cult. The members are clearly maniacs and i don't feel like i belong there.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling." - Michael Bitton Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about." - SEANMCAD
In the interest of being fair there are probalby conspiracy to commit
fraud cases where unrelated employees have been in cahoots.
I'm not going to provide any factual data but I will make the claim that it probably did happen anyways.
I sincerely doubt there is and even if there is one or two the amount of cases where the sources where actually true is overwhelmingly higher.
Funny fact is that there are thousands of cases where the employer conspired against his employees or has a group of employees conspire against an employee or lie for them in court or to journalists.
I agree with you. I was just typing what he really meant. Even though he had nothing he made the claim anyways and is sticking to it. Nothing more nothing less.
No it was not a claim, my original post said either these people are legit and something is amiss, or they're pissed and seeking some type of payback. I still stand by that. As that seems to be the only two possible scenarios here.
And there folks is the backpedaling. Let's look at what you wrote again....yeah sounds like a claim to me.
I still don't see how you believe that to be so outlandish, that kinda thing isn't unheard of. It just seems you want to completely shutdown the other possible scenario to me.. you want there to be something wrong... and will not see any other possible outcome.
A claim would be me saying that is the case, not that it's a possibility. So again no back peddling. On the other hand you seem to feel there are no other possible scenarios, that's fine, just stop picking fights because that's not how everyone sees it.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
You will notice a common theme among many SC defenders. They claim they are not backers and have no dog in the fight, yet these same people are all over these forums defending SC 24/7 like pit bulls on a rampage. For the life of me I can't understand the flip-flopping. If you are defending SC and Chris Roberts, admit it and stand by your convictions. A constant disclaimer that you are not a backer/supporter is not necessary. Folks can see right through it.
How is saying something is possibly amiss or possibly not, defending SC? You folks need to gain perspective, I'm here because it's an interesting conversation. Stop acting like there are only two sides to everything and placing people to which side you feel they belong. It's adolescent.
There is no flip flopping when you don't know what is true, it is not flip flopping when you acknowledge possibilities, it's a simple matter of waiting for the facts as they stand to come to light. I have no feeling one way or the other on what is going on, so there's no position to take.
How hard is that to understand?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Because I'm a longtime gamer who has seen what DS has done over the years. I'm not fond of the way he pressures legal action into competing companies, then dismantles them in order to promote his own failed projects.
All of whom don't want to come out in the public, and lack any real evidence other than talk. Well talk is cheap, if they have a recording or receipts showing fraud, maybe I'll pay attention to that evidence. What they have in their article however, is not credible.
Considering CR's rambling rampage of rage in response to an obscure article on a single game site making personal attacks on individuals , demands of the employees names so he can fire them, and little or no effort to calm the F down. I don't find it surprising at all they wished to remain anonymous. That dude comes across as unhinged. If he's anything like that in real life a weapons check every time he enters the building wouldn't be over the top.
Comments
I would hope he would not be foolish enough to simply respond with another rant. The Escapist's explanation of their source verification was very professional. To respond with anything less would be suicidal, professionally speaking.
He could probably get away with refraining from any kind of response for a week, if he simply states: "You wanna see progress? Watch us at Citizencon." So maybe that's his plan. I dunno, but I'm eagerly awaiting CR's response.
iF this game going release i pay 60usd , but i laugh alot to people spent 10.000 usd and defend this "like" have "Profit Shares"
I realy keep laugh
Funny fact is that there are thousands of cases where the employer conspired against his employees or has a group of employees conspire against an employee or lie for them in court or to journalists.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Even if the "sources" are legit, in every company I've worked for there's always a handful of people that feel over worked, and under-appreciated. When these people either finally get fired, or they think they are getting fired; they always band together, and start drama. It's nothing new for any industry.
The entire article, and it's "clarification" is a bunch of conjecture at best. It would be a valid point to say even if the "sources" are real employees, they are probably just the exception not the rule. It's not hard to believe that a Leads experience with a company, would be vastly different from the experience of a grunt worker.
I have worked as a CFO in reputable traded top Hi Tech and you wouldn't believe the amount of money laundering /thefts /misappropriation of funds is done by top management.
1) I work for a Global company wherin the top management wastes a lot of company funds on personal expenses from expensive dinners everyday to golf memberships to 1st class tickets every time they travel.
All the expenses are duly accounted for by external audit and tax paid appropriately. These expenses are totally legal but immoral .
When the profits are down I regularly get the job to reduce workforce . Mind you these are public companies which are traded and audited.
2) One of the colleagues reported a fraud by a senior director and the management passed the blame on to a junior stuff and brushed it under the rug.
Whenever an current or ex employee complains the management puts all their might to show them as culprit.
There is no smoke without fire.
Chris Robert is not accountable on many levels and he can get away with most of fund spending from legal point of view.
1. Hiring your wife or brother is morally wrong not from company legal point of view.
2. His intentions might be good but he has no pressure for accountability.
From when spending $600 to $2000 is okay for video game Its not.
Corruption and Misappropriation of funds amongst top management is more rampant than everyone thinks.
Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event
4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/
Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!
You expect me too look into every case of employees coming together?
And I feel no need to backtrack, as I made no claim their claims weren't legit, all i did was offer two possibilities, so again no need to backtrack.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
(Using the source designations from our story, three sources (CS1, CS4, CS5) initially contacted Lizzy via separate phone calls on Sept. 26 with information they wanted to share after seeing the initial story about CIG on The Escapist. They got her number via a mutual contact. No emails were exchanged. The sources and writer agreed to chat in-depth at a later time.
Four other sources (CS2, CS3, CS6, CS7) initially contacted Lizzy via email on or before Sept. 27 The emails, numbering 32 from these four individuals, were forwarded to our EiC and Publisher, who passed that info by our legal department. It was cleared and we pursued individual personal contacts beginning the following day.
The two emails (CS8-CS9) from current employees came into Lockbin on Sept. 27. in the early morning. Lizzy exchanged at least 5-6 emails each with these sources, but they did not disclose their identity.
When it came time for followup, three sources (CS1, CS4, CS5) were contacted via phone by Lizzy on Sept. 26. One call started at 5 p.m. and lasted for an hour and 15 minutes. A second was at 6:45 p.m. and lasted for 45 minutes. The final call was at 9 p.m. for an hour an 8 minutes. All three were contacted via Skype as well to verify visual identity.
Three more sources (CS2, CS6, CS7) were contacted on Sept. 27. One call started at 9 a.m. for 30 minutes and was Skype only. This was the caller who did not give his name, but verified employment with ID and pay stubs. Call #2 was at 2 p.m. for an hour and 52 minutes, while call number 3 was at 5 p.m. for an hour and one minute. Again, all callers were visually verified after the phone call via Skype.
The last call (CS3) was on Sept. 28 at 7 p.m. for 50 minutes, again visually verified on Skype.
All sources via Skype had their pictures compared to their LinkedIn profiles or other images of them on the web to verify identities.
Chris Roberts' response to me was at 9:10 a.m. almost three hours before publication time. Unfortunately, the response ended up in my spam folder, as it came in unformated and the pictures did not load. Since Roberts did not copy Lizzy or the Editor-in-Chief, who were on my original email to CIG PR head David Swofford, they did not get them and there was no back up to ensure someone saw it. Swofford emailed me at 12:40 - after I had sent him a link to the story - asking if I had received Roberts' response. It was then that I checked my spam folder, found the response and forwarded it to Lizzy to integrate into our story, minus any personal attacks on the sources. I called Swofford at 1:02 p.m. to personally apologize for the oversight and let him know how we would be using the response in the story. Roberts' entire response on the official site showed up roughly 10-15 minutes before we updated our story on the site.
To be clear on further allegations: None of our sources were Derek Smart and we did not get our information from Glassdoor. However, we do know that a couple sources did post on Glassdoor after talking to Lizzy.)
Again, the burden of proof is on the Escapist, all they have is a, he said, she said story. No proof.
I agree with you. I was just typing what he really meant. Even though he had nothing he made the claim anyways and is sticking to it. Nothing more nothing less.
Yet its a multitude times over more detailed information than anything Chris Roberts has offered. Speaking of he said, she said, you've obviously not read (or so conveniently choose to ignore) the diatribe dribble Chris Roberts offered in the form of a response. Now that's the text book definition of a, he said, she said, story with no proof of anything whatsoever.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Liz had been pressuring previous employees of CIG on twitter, digging for whatever she could find. She was grasping for a story she could get clicks from. So a "mutual contact" put her in with some people who would give it to her. Simple as that really.
You sound like an insider repeating CIG talking points (which would not be surprising at all). That response was shameful and indefensible. The fact that you are trying to defend it is telling in and of itself.
Regarding Liz. She is a journalist. That's what journalist do. So, on the one hand, you CR worshipers chastise her for not doing due diligence and releasing a story having done limited research, but when she does, by doing what you readily admit she did above, she is then "pressuring previous employees of CIG digging whatever she could find."
Make up your minds. Which one is it?
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
You will notice a common theme among many SC defenders. They claim they are not backers and have no dog in the fight, yet these same people are all over these forums defending SC 24/7 like pit bulls on a rampage. For the life of me I can't understand the flip-flopping. If you are defending SC and Chris Roberts, admit it and stand by your convictions. A constant disclaimer that you are not a backer/supporter is not necessary. Folks can see right through it.
Also, how does pressuring former employees on twitter count as due diligence? She couldn't get them to talk, so she had to go with "mutual contact sources" read friends of a friend. All of whom don't want to come out in the public, and lack any real evidence other than talk. Well talk is cheap, if they have a recording or receipts showing fraud, maybe I'll pay attention to that evidence. What they have in their article however, is not credible.
For example, they hate Derek Smart because he invades the private life of Chris and his wife, slanders CIG, spreads rumors and eats babies. I totally agree with them, that is shitty behavior and not really professional.
But then when Chris Roberts writes a response that is full off slander, accusations, attacking the journalist instead of disproving the facts, talking the whole time about how shitty Derek Smart (he mentions him 20 times) is and that he could never make a good game they cheer and dance like maniac cult members around the corpse of a sacrificed virgin.
I am really considering taking my $30 day one pledge and leaving this cult. The members are clearly maniacs and i don't feel like i belong there.
"It's pretty simple, really. If your only intention in posting about a particular game or topic is to be negative, then yes, you should probably move on. Voicing a negative opinion is fine, continually doing so on the same game is basically just trolling."
- Michael Bitton
Community Manager, MMORPG.com
"As an online discussion about Star Citizen grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Derek Smart approaches 1" - MrSnuffles's law
"I am jumping in here a bit without knowing exactly what you all or talking about."
- SEANMCAD
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
There is no flip flopping when you don't know what is true, it is not flip flopping when you acknowledge possibilities, it's a simple matter of waiting for the facts as they stand to come to light. I have no feeling one way or the other on what is going on, so there's no position to take.
How hard is that to understand?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson