EPTDeficio and Dentist suspended - Page 7
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
| ||
|
Sonnington
United States1107 Posts
On June 06 2015 06:26 Seuss wrote: We don't know who told Riot or whether or not they confronted Dentist first. Regardless, going straight to Riot seems fair if whoever it was had reason to fear reprisal. Reprisal? Is Dentist going to cut off a switch and learn his players good for back talking? Alright, lets go over the situation here. Dentist originally lied and conveyed to Riot he never told his team he had inside information. When confronted with evidence, Dentist changed his story. Meaning the evidence overwhelmed his word. In my mind this rules out someone casually overhearing him say something. So this leave a few situations: A. Riot is monitoring the rooms. B. A party outside of the team was present in the room. C. Dentist told his team this information in an open area where multiple people were able to overhear him. D. A player on the team told a third party that Dentist had inside info. E. A player on the team snitched. I find both A, B, and C rather unlikely. In the case of D, a team member would have to confirm the story of the third party, which seems unlikely. It seems unlikely players would be conferring casually with third parties that their coach has insider info. Or E Snitches get stitches. If you thought the back talking reprisal was something to fear, you ain't seen nothin' yet. | ||
|
Saradin
456 Posts
On June 04 2015 14:15 cLutZ wrote: Well its also telling potential future employees (and those with contracts upcoming) that they should demand significantly higher salaries from Riot than from comparable corps. Its somewhat short-sighted, because right now many of their employees are basically LOL-only personalities, but this could be a reason not many respected people are flowing into the dev side of the company, and it may be why Monte is so reluctant to become an LCS caster and Joe/Deman preferred migrating to other games with far less exposure. It will be very interesting to see if Riot is a 1-hit wonder developer or if they can expand. Because many of their moves do seem to assume that their brand is built on being an elite company with ingenious ideas, instead of a few, somewhat lucky things they did in 2008, 09, 10 plus institutional momentum If a prospective future employee can successfully demand a higher salary, more power to them. You're 'worth' what you can command, anyway. My interpretation of Riot's moves is that they've basically put all their eggs in one basket, League of Legends. At most, they may make more products using the IP, but I don't see them branching out beyond this franchise. Here I wrote a bit about my personal guess of Riot's intention, although it's messy. Basically the lack of other games in the past 5+ years combined with the resources poured into the competitive environment tells me that Riot isn't necessarily following conventional videogame industry goals. I think that there's a bigger picture ambition here that I'm surprised at how few people discuss. | ||
|
Sonnington
United States1107 Posts
On June 06 2015 07:19 Saradin wrote: The guy who reported is the one who did the right thing to do, ethics-wise. If a prospective future employee can successfully demand a higher salary, more power to them. You're 'worth' what you can command, anyway. My interpretation of Riot's moves is that they've basically put all their eggs in one basket, League of Legends. At most, they may make more products using the IP, but I don't see them branching out beyond this franchise. Here I wrote a bit about my personal guess of Riot's intention, although it's messy. Basically the lack of other games in the past 5+ years combined with the resources poured into the competitive environment tells me that Riot isn't necessarily following conventional videogame industry goals. I think that there's a bigger picture ambition here that I'm surprised at how few people discuss. To you and everyone else defending the snitch. I hope someday something you say, that's rather outrageous, gets taken out of context and you get reported to HR or have the cops called on you. Thus tarnishing your reputation. Then you can tell me how ethical it is to take your issues to extremes by reporting people like a pussy rather than dealing with your own problems like a man. In any event, I agree that Riot is going for the long haul with LoL as a sport. I think a lot of us take that fact for granted. There was a snippet of something on Riot's corporate website from an e-sports director or manager stating their plan for LoL to stay a viable e-sport for decades to come. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19573 Posts
| ||
|
Saradin
456 Posts
| ||
|
Shiznick
United States2200 Posts
On June 06 2015 08:34 Sonnington wrote: To you and everyone else defending the snitch. I hope someday something you say, that's rather outrageous, gets taken out of context and you get reported to HR or have the cops called on you. Thus tarnishing your reputation. Then you can tell me how ethical it is to take your issues to extremes by reporting people like a pussy rather than dealing with your own problems like a man. In any event, I agree that Riot is going for the long haul with LoL as a sport. I think a lot of us take that fact for granted. There was a snippet of something on Riot's corporate website from an e-sports director or manager stating their plan for LoL to stay a viable e-sport for decades to come. man you are insane, who buys into this "fix your own problems be a man" shit this much. If what dentist was claiming to be true (a Riot employee from a supposed neutral position explicitly aiding a team), it's just as much Riot's problem as it is CW's. | ||
|
Saradin
456 Posts
On June 06 2015 08:45 cLutZ wrote: I don't see that. Were it true I'd think they would have invested more in the client, replays, etc. IMO the people at the head of Riot are treating it like a get rich scheme that they intend to ( and have, in part) cash out on and milk till its dry. I interpret such resource allocation as the desire to start ingraining League as a 'sport' sooner than later, as opposed to focusing more on fixing up League as a 'game' (ie, 'that game stuff? Meh, we can do that later'). | ||
|
Sonnington
United States1107 Posts
On June 06 2015 08:49 Saradin wrote: On the other side of the fence, the 'snitches get stitches' mentality leads to things like gang territory hellholes and the thin blue line. I believe that in the grand scheme of things, light is better than the absence of, in terms of the greater good. Not necessarily for any one individual's welfare, but that's a group vs the individual topic. If taken to the extreme, sure. The opposite is Nazi Germany, the USSR, or George Orwell's 1984 if taken to extremes. You deal with your own issues first, like a man. If it's too much for you to handle then you ask for outside help. You don't just run to poppa Riot the first chance you get because someone did something you don't like. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19573 Posts
On June 06 2015 08:57 Saradin wrote: I interpret such resource allocation as the desire to start ingraining League as a 'sport' sooner than later, as opposed to focusing more on fixing up League as a 'game' (ie, 'that game stuff? Meh, we can do that later'). Well, their vanity project is investing in improving "toxic" behavior, aka, making it less of a sport, so I don't follow here either. Plus, replays is the #1 thing they would invest in if they were interested in that. There were a couple of 1v1s and 2v2s offscreen that happened the other night in LCK that never were shown on stream, but could be great youtube videos (maybe). That's like the NFL not showing how wide open Dez Bryant was on the right side of the field as Romo looks to the left and gets sacked. | ||
|
Sonnington
United States1107 Posts
On June 06 2015 09:00 cLutZ wrote: Well, their vanity project is investing in improving "toxic" behavior, aka, making it less of a sport, so I don't follow here either. Plus, replays is the #1 thing they would invest in if they were interested in that. There were a couple of 1v1s and 2v2s offscreen that happened the other night in LCK that never were shown on stream, but could be great youtube videos (maybe). That's like the NFL not showing how wide open Dez Bryant was on the right side of the field as Romo looks to the left and gets sacked. I disagree. Only a minority of hardcore individuals care about replays and are able to obtain them from third parties. Also, as much as I hate it, being able to view the stream without a replay or player cams creates a 'shared experience' just like in sports. There's a reason LCS games aren't featured games on the client. It's so everyone has to watch the same thing so people are able to talk to each other about it as a shared experience. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19573 Posts
On June 06 2015 09:03 Sonnington wrote: I disagree. Only a minority of hardcore individuals care about replays and are able to obtain them from third parties. Also, as much as I hate it, being able to view the stream without a replay or player cams creates a 'shared experience' just like in sports. There's a reason LCS games aren't featured games on the client. It's so everyone has to watch the same thing so people are able to talk to each other about it as a shared experience. Thats not what I'm talking about. Releasing replays after the official stream is over so people can create "sick play the obs missed" vids the next day, plus of course that film study is a foundation of modern sports. | ||
|
Ansibled
United Kingdom9872 Posts
| ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On June 06 2015 08:57 Sonnington wrote: If taken to the extreme, sure. The opposite is Nazi Germany, the USSR, or George Orwell's 1984 if taken to extremes. You deal with your own issues first, like a man. If it's too much for you to handle then you ask for outside help. You don't just run to poppa Riot the first chance you get because someone did something you don't like. Emphasis mine. Sometimes you know it's too much for you to handle without confronting the person. Moreover, there's a fundamental difference between someone reporting someone else for unethical behavior, and someone reporting someone else for being a political opponent/outcast class/etc. Don't conflate the two. | ||
|
Saradin
456 Posts
On June 06 2015 08:57 Sonnington wrote: If taken to the extreme, sure. The opposite is Nazi Germany, the USSR, or George Orwell's 1984 if taken to extremes. You deal with your own issues first, like a man. If it's too much for you to handle then you ask for outside help. You don't just run to poppa Riot the first chance you get because someone did something you don't like. Actually, on the subject of 'your own issues'... As Shiznick says, in the case of Dentist claiming to his team that a Rioter is aiding them with opposing team strategies for a Riot-sanctioned event, then this would be Riot's issue too, as their product is affected by this. Riot isn't an outsider to this. On June 06 2015 09:00 cLutZ wrote: Well, their vanity project is investing in improving "toxic" behavior, aka, making it less of a sport, so I don't follow here either. Plus, replays is the #1 thing they would invest in if they were interested in that. There were a couple of 1v1s and 2v2s offscreen that happened the other night in LCK that never were shown on stream, but could be great youtube videos (maybe). That's like the NFL not showing how wide open Dez Bryant was on the right side of the field as Romo looks to the left and gets sacked. As far as I'm aware, that toxicity project is about cleaning up the angry kid stuff. I don't see how it detracts from the sport objective? It's like being a referee, no? As for that sort of replays; probably still lower on the priority list than 'continue to get more people to develop awareness of and accept this as a competitive thing (via the LCS)'. I feel like the 'sick plays' sort of thing is bonus material after something's already become accepted as a 'sport'. | ||
|
Sonnington
United States1107 Posts
On June 06 2015 09:32 Seuss wrote: Emphasis mine. Sometimes you know it's too much for you to handle without confronting the person. Moreover, there's a fundamental difference between someone reporting someone else for unethical behavior, and someone reporting someone else for being a political opponent/outcast class/etc. Don't conflate the two. We're not talking about a child molester we're talking about someone making an offhand comment about having insider info. This could've been easily handled if the player confronted Dentist with his moral objections rather than being a pussy and reporting his problem to the higher ups. Maybe the player is a pussy and can't stand up for his own convictions. Maybe he's just not a man. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19573 Posts
On June 06 2015 09:32 Saradin wrote: Actually, on the subject of 'your own issues'... As Shiznick says, in the case of Dentist claiming to his team that a Rioter is aiding them with opposing team strategies for a Riot-sanctioned event, then this would be Riot's issue too, as their product is affected by this. Riot isn't an outsider to this. As far as I'm aware, that toxicity project is about cleaning up the angry kid stuff. I don't see how it detracts from the sport objective? It's like being a referee, no? As for that sort of replays; probably still lower on the priority list than 'continue to get more people to develop awareness of and accept this as a competitive thing (via the LCS)'. I feel like the 'sick plays' sort of thing is bonus material after something's already become accepted as a 'sport'. Film study is the basis of modern sporting tactics? Also, its not like being the referee. Its like being a kindergarden teacher enforcing her classroom's language rules on the field of an NFL game. | ||
|
Majax
France816 Posts
SK addressed their point our view in their "press conference" : | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On June 07 2015 01:37 Majax wrote: So this was about the SK-CW game, and this explained why the mact was delayed. SK addressed their point our view in their "press conference" : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VivP5jBziT4 Can you spell out the important bits for those who can't watch the video?  | ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
On June 05 2015 08:23 Sufficiency wrote: Nope. Restrictive covenant clauses are extremely common. Whether or not they can hold up in court is subject to debate, but good luck suing a big company. They have to sue you for breach if you take the job. You do not have to sue them. One of the reasons that restrictive covenants are usually bullshit is because 1) there are a lot of statutory restrictions on them. (For instance in California and Ireland [Riot's Headquarters and european headquarters respectively] they are strictly illegal with only intellectual property exemptions: Cali by statue, Ireland by common and constitutional right to work) 2) It has to be worth the companies time to sue. (its usually not) 3) It has to be explicitly delineated in the original work contract else there is no consideration for the non-compete [this one is pretty universal, contracts have to have consideration or are otherwise unenforceable] | ||
| ||
