Riot Games has announced that Copenhagen Wolves head coach Karl "Dentist" Krey and caster Martin "Deficio" Lynge are both suspended from the LCS until week four. Dentist is being disciplined on the grounds of misleading his players about information provided by Deficio on SK Gaming and complicit in tampering with players. Deficio is suspended on the grounds of tampering with players by discussing them joining Copenhagen Wolves. The result of SK v Copenhagen Wolves will remain unaffected by the judgement. Deficio will also be barred from casting Copenhagen Wolves matches indefinitely.
SK Gaming vs. Copenhagen Wolves
Having reviewed all the evidence, we found no proof that Deficio shared any in-game strategy with competing teams, or affected the outcome of the game in question - SK Gaming vs. Copenhagen Wolves on Thursday, May 28. Having concluded the investigation, we stand by the result of the match.
Karl “Dentist” Krey
By making false claims (by his own admission) to his team that Deficio was providing information on other teams’ strategy, Dentist knowingly misled his own players and created the expectation that cheating was an acceptable part of team play. Equally, Dentist obstructed the investigation by changing his story and initially denying making these claims to the Copenhagen Wolves team, though he ultimately cooperated after being presented with evidence. Above all, Dentist was complicit in tampering that could compromise the integrity of the LCS. As a result, we will be suspending Dentist from the LCS until Week Four.
Martin “Deficio” Lynge
The evidence of tampering that we uncovered shows that Deficio has not lived up to the high standards of integrity we hold all Rioters to and contravened internal policies and league rules. These standards are higher than those we ask of LCS players, managers, and owners, and represent our trust in the judgment of Rioters. Despite his full cooperation with this investigation, we take this lapse in judgment extremely seriously. As such, we will be suspending Deficio from on-air duties until Week Four and in talking to Martin we’ve mutually decided to withdraw him from the casting desk for all Copenhagen Wolves games on an indefinite basis to help avoid any future conflict of interest. As a Rioter, he will also be subject to internal disciplinary measures which by law are confidential.
Furthermore, we will be restricting Deficio from being approved as a Team Member (player, coach, manager, or owner) for any LCS team for the rest of the 2015 and the entirety of the 2016 season. This does not prevent him from joining an external organization in another capacity, but given the breach of trust we feel that this ruling is important to protect the competitive integrity of the LCS and to demonstrate our intolerance for any tampering or inappropriate influence over any LCS games, teams or organizations.
I like how the suspension specifically prevents him from seeking gainful employment (assuming his skills are no post-secondary) unless he stays with Riot.
I mean it's good news for me(because I like his casting) but it's kinda lol if you think about it.
Hello guys. I want to share a personal statement in light of the recent competitive ruling (http://na.lolesports.com/…/competitive-ruling-martin-%E2%80…). Leading up to the summer split, I have made some poor decisions and not respected the seriousness of the matter. I should have informed Riot about my offer the moment I received it and not discussed the situation with any active LCS players. When two friends talk one thing often leads to another and opinions get shared that should have stayed private. Throughout my career as pro player and shoutcaster, I have always been close with a lot of players and I value these relationships very highly. This will not change but I have had to learn the difference between talking to a player as friends and talking as a Rioter. It is 100% NOT okay to give opinions on career choices and to share your own potential future plans as a Rioter, as it can impact a player´s decision making. While I never intended any harm, I definitely didn’t act in the professional manner that I expect from myself and as Riot expects from me. I want to first and foremost apologize to the fans that support me, to Riot, our broadcast team here in Europe and everyone watching the LCS. I can say that this will never happen again. My focus always has been and will remain on making this the best EU LCS split and to keep improving my shoutcasting. I will prepare and be ready for week 4 to deliver a great show. Thank you for reading my message and thank you to everyone who follows my career and supports it.
Personally of the opinion Deficio did nothing wrong, but holy shit Dentist, you kinda have a lot to answer for.
You know, what's most suffering thing? No Deficio for 20 games at least, can I get stats on muted streams percentage already?
On June 04 2015 04:41 Ansibled wrote: What exactly did Deficio do?
Apparently, almost got poached by CW plus you can't discuss things in private as Rioter. Dentist sucks more in this situation, Deficio is like whatever.
On June 04 2015 04:41 Ansibled wrote: What exactly did Deficio do?
From what I can tell, he chatted with players (and possibly Dentist) as a friend about potential career options/pro scene insider information. Dentist then hung him out to dry by implying to CW that Deficio was feeding him info about the SK game, which led to Rito investigating and uncovering all the other stuff regarding his discussing of information with pros (and I guess possibly him getting a job offer from CW/another org? That part is not clear).
Deficio didn't do anything wrong per se, but him talking about that stuff with pros was unprofessional, especially since he's in a very public position at Riot, which is probably why they're coming down so hard on him. However, he admitted fault, cooperated with the investigation, and posted a very professional apology, so I'm pretty sure he's not in any serious trouble/his job isn't in jeopardy.
I lost a lot of respect for Dentist today though. Especially when he only cooperated with the investigation after being confronted with evidence and basically forced to admit fault.
On June 04 2015 04:51 Slusher wrote: of course his job isn't in jeopardy Riot specifically tailored his punishment to force him to keep casting for them.
Do you really think if he wanted to go work for CW, Riot could stop him?
Pretty sure that punishment wouldn't stand up in an EU court if he wanted to force the issue.
From what I understand - shared with players that he might become the CW manager/owner in the future and "perhaps we could make a new team then? You, the other pro, that up-and-comer..." or somethng like that. This is actually the part I understand, Riot is pretty clear about wanting to maintain the image of a company whose members are proffessional and rule-abiding. What I don't understand is Riot telling Dentist how to coach - I'm not saying whether I like his methods or not, I just hate that Riot says gets to say what's right or wrong and how can you talk to your own players. Also, how the fuck does taking Deficio from broadcast hurt him more than viewers (and Riot itself)?
On June 04 2015 04:51 Slusher wrote: of course his job isn't in jeopardy Riot specifically tailored his punishment to force him to keep casting for them.
Do you really think if he wanted to go work for CW, Riot could stop him?
Pretty sure that punishment wouldn't stand up in an EU court if he wanted to force the issue.
I imagine they could ban CW from the LCS, but that seems pretty unlikely.
Riot banning him for the entirety of 2016, too. Can't get any shadier than this and I might be mistaken but they don't actually say what rules he broke so again they make up stuff as it pleases them.
On June 04 2015 04:54 AlterKot wrote: From what I understand - shared with players that he might become the CW manager/owner in the future and "perhaps we could make a new team then? You, the other pro, that up-and-comer..." or somethng like that. This is actually the part I understand, Riot is pretty clear about wanting to maintain the image of a company whose members are proffessional and rule-abiding. What I don't understand is Riot telling Dentist how to coach - I'm not saying whether I like his methods or not, I just hate that Riot says gets to say what's right or wrong and how can you talk to your own players. Also, how the fuck does taking Deficio from broadcast hurt him more than viewers (and Riot itself)?
Riot isn't telling Dentist how to coach, they're telling him not to cheat and/or encourage cheating. By telling his players "Hey, I'm getting and using inside information about other teams" he's condoning that type of behavior and effectively encouraging his players to cheat. I'm honestly surprised he got off so lightly.
As for Deficio, Riot is thinking long term. In the short term temporarily losing a good caster hurts, but in the long term it's better for them to maintain the integrity of their eSport. Sufficient bad/frequent scandals will destroy their credibility and spectator interest.
On June 04 2015 04:58 AsnSensation wrote: Riot banning him for the entirety of 2016, too. Can't get any shadier than this and I might be mistaken but they don't actually say what rules he broke so again they make up stuff as it pleases them.
Read the reasoning. It's up to their discretion because it's their rules. Here's the key bit for Deficio, because it's clear what Dentist did.
Although it’s not unusual for Rioters to be approached with offers from LCS organizations, it’s important that the organization and Rioter let us know as soon as an offer is made to raise awareness around potential conflicts of interest. In this case, we believe that Deficio showed poor judgment in navigating this conflict of interest. Over the course of our investigation we found evidence indicating that Deficio had begun speaking with several active LCS players - contracted and free agents - about their future and the possibility of working with them on the Copenhagen Wolves. These conversations influenced - or had the potential to influence - player decisions on where they chose to play, and affected the competitive integrity of the LCS.
The gist is Rioters need to remain separate from the competitive scene, and Deficio didn't do so up to standards.
On June 04 2015 04:54 AlterKot wrote: Also, how the fuck does taking Deficio from broadcast hurt him more than viewers (and Riot itself)?
I think Riot doesn't do that to punish Deficio but to send the message that everyone has to play by the rules and everyone is judged equally. It will also allow the drama to cool off until Deficio returns in front of the camearas.
Because Riot produces the game, sponsors/runs the tournaments, provides production, provides talent, and provides the oversight / regulatory body, they have to be extra strict on everything or else it all falls apart, because if you run everything, there can't be any lack of transparency if you want to still seem like a legitimate organization.
On June 04 2015 05:12 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: I don't get it. Dentist did nothing wrong? Deficio did nothing wrong? Why are they being punished.
Telling your team you are cheating is bad/over the line, even if you're lying about it. It encourages your team to cheat. That's why Dentist got in trouble.
Deficio's situation is simply about conflict of interest.
Dentist basically condoned cheating, so he's actually getting off light.
Deficio... didn't really do anything wrong in terms of day to day human ethics (ie no individual harmed), but it was unprofessional of him to discuss certain things with players as a Rioter. It's just not good image-wise for the legitimacy of a competitive (e-)sport. And you want to hit hard enough the first time to dissuade future instances. Riot's long term goals include legitimizing League as an 'e-sport', as a long term thing, beyond it being 'just another videogame'. Image is crucial here.
On June 04 2015 05:20 Saradin wrote: Dentist basically condoned cheating, so he's actually getting off light.
Deficio... didn't really do anything wrong in terms of day to day human ethics (ie no individual harmed), but it was unprofessional of him to discuss certain things with players as a Rioter. It's just not good image-wise for the legitimacy of a competitive (e-)sport. And you want to hit hard enough the first time to dissuade future instances. Riot's long term goals include legitimizing League as an 'e-sport', as a long term thing, beyond it being 'just another videogame'. Image is crucial here.
On June 04 2015 05:25 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Hacking the game to make your ability cooldown go from 24s to 20s is cheating...
Finding out what strategy your opponents are using isn't cheating, it's called preparationl. (and he didn't even do it to boot)...
There's a crucial distinction here you're missing. Having a general knowledge of the types of strategies the enemy team employs based on their public history is fine because it's in the past and public knowledge. Knowing exactly what the enemy team is going to do beforehand because you gained access to private information is cheating.
It's why the Patriots got nailed for spying on cameras pointed at opposing coaches.
That he didn't actually do it is probably why he got off lightly, but by saying he was doing it he encouraged his team to cheat. As a coach you shouldn't encourage your team to cheat, hence punishment.
On June 04 2015 05:25 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Hacking the game to make your ability cooldown go from 24s to 20s is cheating...
Finding out what strategy your opponents are using isn't cheating, it's called preparationl. (and he didn't even do it to boot)...
There's a crucial distinction here you're missing. Having a general knowledge of the types of strategies the enemy team employs based on their public history is fine because it's in the past and public knowledge. Knowing exactly what the enemy team is going to do beforehand because you gained access to private information is cheating.
It's why the Patriots got nailed for spying on cameras pointed at opposing coaches.
That he didn't actually do it is probably why he got off lightly, but by saying he was doing it he encouraged his team to cheat. As a coach you shouldn't encourage your team to cheat, hence punishment.
spying on someone with cameras and using leaked information is a lot different imo.
On June 04 2015 05:08 Zess wrote: Because Riot produces the game, sponsors/runs the tournaments, provides production, provides talent, and provides the oversight / regulatory body, they have to be extra strict on everything or else it all falls apart, because if you run everything, there can't be any lack of transparency if you want to still seem like a legitimate organization.
That's the goal anyways.
On June 04 2015 06:44 Slayer91 wrote: is it bad i thought exactly the same thing as wei2?
Nah, its just Riot being a bit too controlling for most people, so it leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth. They are kind of this moralistic cartel that is causing a lot of the so called "little guys" to lose out on a lot of economic opportunities.
Honestly, I don't think letting the results stand is acceptable. Unfortunately the only choice is to wait for Riot to develop Neuralyzers to ensure they can keep competition fair if leaks happen.
I don't really understand how not disclosing a job offer, if that's the only thing Deficio did (?), ends up in a 1.5 year ban from being involved in LCS in addition to the other punishment. Why does Deficio even have a 'competitive ruling' when he's not involved in the actual competition?
On June 04 2015 05:25 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Hacking the game to make your ability cooldown go from 24s to 20s is cheating...
Finding out what strategy your opponents are using isn't cheating, it's called preparationl. (and he didn't even do it to boot)...
Condoning the solicitation of leaks is just as bad as leaks themselves, from a competitive integrity point of view.
The fact that he implied there was a Riot employee involved just makes it that much scummier.
Or or or, it adds complexity to the preparation, both in and out of the game, thus differentiating the good teams from the great teams.
It's a very hazy line that Riot is drawing here on what is and isn't acceptable.
It doesn't add complexity to the preparation, it adds a sub-game of who can spy on the other team better. That doesn't add anything to the game, it detracts from it.
There's a reason professional sports have rules against this sort of behavior, and it's not because the people who laid down the rules were philosophy majors.
Doesnt make me think less of Deficio, but that kind of stuff does need to be punished. One and a half years banned from LCS teams is pretty steep, I think just the week 4 ban plus banned til next springs split would've been better
On June 04 2015 06:57 MajorityofOne wrote: Doesnt make me think less of Deficio, but that kind of stuff does need to be punished. One and a half years banned from LCS teams is pretty steep, I think just the week 4 ban plus banned til next springs split would've been better
He got banned from casting for 2 weeks, hello. It's not like he got banned for 1,5 years from casting best team in best league on the planet.
On June 04 2015 06:17 wei2coolman wrote: wtf, this came out of left field. lol.
wat, if i'm reading this correctly. what did deficio do that was so damning, much less anything that warrants any action?
At this point, all riot casters should avoid talking to anyone that isn't strictly a Riot employee. So fucking absurd.
He was offered a manager position at CW after this season, did not inform Riot about it as he was supposed to and talked to players about future career options at CW. So basically he took advantage of his position as Riot caster to engage in poaching for his future team. Although it is not exactly poaching as he was not employed by CW yet.
I dont really get why people have such problems understanding why this is a problem. And then whine at he next opportunity that Riot is not upholding competetive integrity.
If Riot had only banned him from casting for a little like some people want then that would achieve nothing. It would mean that Deficio could still go to CW at the start of next season with the players he poached just like he wanted to. He could not care less about not casting for a while. So the ban simply prevents him from taking advantage of his misconduct.
On June 04 2015 06:53 Ansibled wrote: I don't really understand how not disclosing a job offer, if that's the only thing Deficio did (?), ends up in a 1.5 year ban from being involved in LCS in addition to the other punishment. Why does Deficio even have a 'competitive ruling' when he's not involved in the actual competition?
Honestly you guys are straight up bad at reading. Let me quote the deciding part:
Over the course of our investigation we found evidence indicating that Deficio had begun speaking with several active LCS players - contracted and free agents - about their future and the possibility of working with them on the Copenhagen Wolves.
If he had only gotten a job offer and not disclosed it like you said he would very likely not have been banned for next season.
On June 04 2015 05:12 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: I don't get it. Dentist did nothing wrong? Deficio did nothing wrong? Why are they being punished.
What do you mean Dentist did nothing wrong? He told his players that Deficio was leaking them SK information, which is pretty horrible slander (+ the entire encouraging leaking information thing). I'm surprised he didn't get fired over this.
On June 04 2015 05:25 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Hacking the game to make your ability cooldown go from 24s to 20s is cheating...
Finding out what strategy your opponents are using isn't cheating, it's called preparationl. (and he didn't even do it to boot)...
well, it goes like this: leaking information of teams that implicitly trust you is really bad, so receiving that information and using it endorses and condones really bad behavior. Saying that you are willing to keep taking advantage of someone else's really bad behavior kinda encourages it. Besides being incredibly fucking stupid.
On June 04 2015 07:31 LaNague wrote: lol, now as internal punishment they reduce his wage and he cant get another league job for 2 years from the competetive ruling.
Genius.
I agree. But I guess Riot thinks Deficio has no other career options beside being a caster for LoL. I think that's awfully presumptuous of them.
For one, Deficio could cast other games, bringing his fans to Riot's competitors. Also, Deficio can still work for CW except he can't work as the head coach (which is handled by Dentist anyway) so the ban is more or less meaningless.
All I see is more PR nightmare:
1. There is really no point in releasing what happened to Deficio. All it does is releasing certain disciplinary information regarding an employee, which I feel should be confidential.
2. It fits perfectly in RL's narrative of Riot's tight control (even casters are tightly controlled) - and RL is right on this. I wonder what other perspective employees of Riot will think.
This entire thing is so stupid. I mean, I work in biology research and people are careful in what they tell fellow colleagues, collaborators, and even the same people in the lab because of authorship disputes, getting their ideas poached, and all this other shit so eh. You always have to be careful in what you say to people in the same field when you're working under different employers because stupid shit can happen.
In the case of Deficio, it reminds me of when a grad student wants to leave his/her PI's lab and waits until the last second to tell them, because usually if you tell them beforehand (depending on the PI ofc), there is a high chance they will cut your funding/fire you outright before you start working somewhere else.
The whole Dentist thing is lololol. I'm surprised they are only suspending him to Week 4 given their ruling on Deficio. Whatever, usual Riot inconsistencies.
There's a reason why other fields have tons of paperwork you have to file on Conflicts of Interest. I dunno, I find the whole thing just stupid, unless I'm misunderstanding something in the Riot statement and Deficio's personal post.
On June 04 2015 07:31 LaNague wrote: lol, now as internal punishment they reduce his wage and he cant get another league job for 2 years from the competetive ruling.
Genius.
I agree. But I guess Riot thinks Deficio has no other career options beside being a caster for LoL. I think that's awfully presumptuous of them.
For one, Deficio could cast other games, bringing his fans to Riot's competitors. Also, Deficio can still work for CW except he can't work as the head coach (which is handled by Dentist anyway) so the ban is more or less meaningless.
All I see is more PR nightmare:
1. There is really no point in releasing what happened to Deficio. All it does is releasing certain disciplinary information regarding an employee, which I feel should be confidential.
2. It fits perfectly in RL's narrative of Riot's tight control (even casters are tightly controlled) - and RL is right on this. I wonder what other perspective employees of Riot will think.
If they had done what you suggest in point 1 people would have said "Oh Riot keeps sweeping things under the rug for PR reasons" or even "So CLG is not allowed to poach but Riot employees are, such double standards."
If you want to work at a major tech company in the US you're going to run into mandatory training about workplace ethics and problems with conflicts of interest. Maybe some young, idealistic college grads will fret about how much control Riot has, but the fact is that your average tech company has at least this much control when it comes to anything that relates to your job.
The only difference here is that because this particular incident involved a public-facing employee Riot made some details of the matter, primarily those the public would have noticed and asked about.
On June 04 2015 08:07 Seuss wrote: #2 isn't an issue.
If you want to work at a major tech company in the US you're going to run into mandatory training about workplace ethics and problems with conflicts of interest. Maybe some young, idealistic college grads will fret about how much control Riot has, but the fact is that your average tech company has at least this much control when it comes to anything that relates to your job.
The only difference here is that because this particular incident involved a public-facing employee Riot made some details of the matter, primarily those the public would have noticed and asked about.
Major tech companies don't usually publically flex their muscles like this. What Riot did is reasonable and within their rights - the issue isn't if they could penalize Deficio, it's whether or not they SHOULD.
On June 04 2015 08:07 Seuss wrote: #2 isn't an issue.
If you want to work at a major tech company in the US you're going to run into mandatory training about workplace ethics and problems with conflicts of interest. Maybe some young, idealistic college grads will fret about how much control Riot has, but the fact is that your average tech company has at least this much control when it comes to anything that relates to your job.
The only difference here is that because this particular incident involved a public-facing employee Riot made some details of the matter, primarily those the public would have noticed and asked about.
Major tech companies don't usually publically flex their muscles like this. What Riot did is reasonable and within their rights - the issue isn't if they could penalize Deficio, it's whether or not they SHOULD.
Yes? Having your caster poach players for a possible team he's planning IS a faux pas that should be punished. Wtf?
Despite what Deficio's statement may imply, you don't stumble and mistake your way into planning a team and poaching players without noticing that what you're doing is against the rules.
On June 04 2015 08:07 Seuss wrote: #2 isn't an issue.
If you want to work at a major tech company in the US you're going to run into mandatory training about workplace ethics and problems with conflicts of interest. Maybe some young, idealistic college grads will fret about how much control Riot has, but the fact is that your average tech company has at least this much control when it comes to anything that relates to your job.
The only difference here is that because this particular incident involved a public-facing employee Riot made some details of the matter, primarily those the public would have noticed and asked about.
Major tech companies don't usually publically flex their muscles like this. What Riot did is reasonable and within their rights - the issue isn't if they could penalize Deficio, it's whether or not they SHOULD.
They do when it's someone who acts as a public face of the company. Not always, it varies from company to company, but it this isn't really an exceptional case.
LCS has some of the dumbest rules and enforcement ever. I've honestly never heard athletes getting into the same shit when they obviously talk a shit ton behind the scenes. People talk about "poaching" as if it's like someone beat the shit out of someone.
If we assume the worst possible situation, that he was possibly leaving and was recruiting players under contract, then the punishment makes sense. If we assume he was pondering a job offer, and was talking to people who talk to him regardless, then it does not and is a considerable overreach by Riot, who then appear to be punishing Deficio for having the gall to consider a different line of employment.
The poaching rules do need to be looked at by Riot, in general, because they are very restrictive compared to other sports. Or, if not more restrictive, more vigorously enforced because the players can't all afford to fly to the Bahamas to talk about their future (NBA/NFL) and instead do it over electronic media that leave a paper trail.
On June 04 2015 08:07 Seuss wrote: #2 isn't an issue.
If you want to work at a major tech company in the US you're going to run into mandatory training about workplace ethics and problems with conflicts of interest. Maybe some young, idealistic college grads will fret about how much control Riot has, but the fact is that your average tech company has at least this much control when it comes to anything that relates to your job.
The only difference here is that because this particular incident involved a public-facing employee Riot made some details of the matter, primarily those the public would have noticed and asked about.
Major tech companies don't usually publically flex their muscles like this. What Riot did is reasonable and within their rights - the issue isn't if they could penalize Deficio, it's whether or not they SHOULD.
Yes? Having your caster poach players for a possible team he's planning IS a faux pas that should be punished. Wtf?
Despite what Deficio's statement may imply, you don't stumble and mistake your way into planning a team and poaching players without noticing that what you're doing is against the rules.
It doesn't matter if you think Deficio is a scum or not. The problem is whether or not his punishment should be made public.
And no, "people will eventually figure out" is not an acceptable excuse for publishing these information.
On June 04 2015 06:53 Ansibled wrote: I don't really understand how not disclosing a job offer, if that's the only thing Deficio did (?), ends up in a 1.5 year ban from being involved in LCS in addition to the other punishment. Why does Deficio even have a 'competitive ruling' when he's not involved in the actual competition?
Honestly you guys are straight up bad at reading. Let me quote the deciding part:
Over the course of our investigation we found evidence indicating that Deficio had begun speaking with several active LCS players - contracted and free agents - about their future and the possibility of working with them on the Copenhagen Wolves.
If he had only gotten a job offer and not disclosed it like you said he would very likely not have been banned for next season.
This is pretty vague though, I mean this could just be what is essentially 'Hi I got this CW offer what do you think of them?'
I don't understand the backlash against Riot for the punishment against Deficio. I think the punishment more or less fits the crime. The positions he's banned from holding in an LCS capacity are the Riot-recognized/salaried positions for LCS teams. If he really still wanted to go work for CW, it'd be pretty easy, or even just go work as a coach/manager/whatever and say that he has some other position. The distinction is that if he wants to go work for CW, he wouldn't be given the Riot salary that other coaches get.
Also, what he did is, to me, very potentially malicious and a clear abuse of his position at a company with power over the LCS.
On June 04 2015 08:07 Seuss wrote: #2 isn't an issue.
If you want to work at a major tech company in the US you're going to run into mandatory training about workplace ethics and problems with conflicts of interest. Maybe some young, idealistic college grads will fret about how much control Riot has, but the fact is that your average tech company has at least this much control when it comes to anything that relates to your job.
The only difference here is that because this particular incident involved a public-facing employee Riot made some details of the matter, primarily those the public would have noticed and asked about.
Major tech companies don't usually publically flex their muscles like this. What Riot did is reasonable and within their rights - the issue isn't if they could penalize Deficio, it's whether or not they SHOULD.
Yes? Having your caster poach players for a possible team he's planning IS a faux pas that should be punished. Wtf?
Despite what Deficio's statement may imply, you don't stumble and mistake your way into planning a team and poaching players without noticing that what you're doing is against the rules.
It doesn't matter if you think Deficio is a scum or not. The problem is whether or not his punishment should be made public.
And no, "people will eventually figure out" is not an acceptable excuse for publishing these information.
oh, you didn't mean whether they should have punished him, but whether they should have punished him publicly
Why not? Is there anything to be gained by making it remain secret? "people will find out anyway" is definitely a good excuse because it's better for Deficio if it gets clearly published and explained rather than without a Riot statement. That'd leave room for rumors and doubts.
I think if you're in a highly visible role, then you should expect your disciplinary measures to be public. See, e.g., NFL v. Tom Brady, NBC v. Brian Williams, etc. This is particularly true where your discipline is significant for deterrence reasons.
On June 04 2015 08:07 Seuss wrote: #2 isn't an issue.
If you want to work at a major tech company in the US you're going to run into mandatory training about workplace ethics and problems with conflicts of interest. Maybe some young, idealistic college grads will fret about how much control Riot has, but the fact is that your average tech company has at least this much control when it comes to anything that relates to your job.
The only difference here is that because this particular incident involved a public-facing employee Riot made some details of the matter, primarily those the public would have noticed and asked about.
Major tech companies don't usually publically flex their muscles like this. What Riot did is reasonable and within their rights - the issue isn't if they could penalize Deficio, it's whether or not they SHOULD.
Yes? Having your caster poach players for a possible team he's planning IS a faux pas that should be punished. Wtf?
Despite what Deficio's statement may imply, you don't stumble and mistake your way into planning a team and poaching players without noticing that what you're doing is against the rules.
It doesn't matter if you think Deficio is a scum or not. The problem is whether or not his punishment should be made public.
And no, "people will eventually figure out" is not an acceptable excuse for publishing these information.
oh, you didn't mean whether they should have punished him, but whether they should have punished him publicly
Why not? Is there anything to be gained by making it remain secret? "people will find out anyway" is definitely a good excuse because it's better for Deficio if it gets clearly published and explained rather than without a Riot statement. That'd leave room for rumors and doubts.
There isn't much to be gained from Riot's perspective to keep Deficio's disciplinary action secret. In fact, from Riot's perspective, it's simply a balancing act between:
1. Release it: Releasing Deficio's disciplinary action provides a certain level of clarity and provide consistency in their effort in maintaining competitive integrity.
2. Don't release it: Respects Deficio's privacy and understands that such public statement will swing public opinions about Deficio (such as what you just did thinking that Deficio is "scum").
In a nutshell, Riot is choosing between Deficio's privacy and potential damage to the competitive integrity of LCS. Riot chose LCS, not Deficio (note that it's not even super clear if keeping Deficio's parts secret will actually damage LCS). If you are Deficio, how do you feel at this point that now you have to work in a company that doesn't really care about you and bars you from many other employment options?
Additionally, I am not even sure if Deficio needs to follow LCS rules or if LCS punishments are applicable to him. If we look at the scenario organically, then the answer should be yes: since Deficio is a Riot employee and LCS is technically part of Riot Games. But often within an organization there can be pages upon pages of rules and regulations and it's not clear if a single individual (like Deficio) can keep up with everything (especially when LCS rules change like every 4 months).
In any case, I am feeling a bit outraged because I believe Riot's method in handling Deficio's punishment is heavy handed. Maybe they ran through legal already and realized this is perfectly within their rights to do, but if this is how Riot demonstrates to the world as to how they want to treat their employees, then I won't say anything else.
This whole thing seems super shady. From both riots side and from dentist/deficio side. I don't know of a job where your contract says you have to report a potential job offer outside of like "hey I want more money or I'm going here." Kind of thing. I think dentist is a tool, and should just be removed for the cancer he seems to emit.
I don't think we have the whole story here though. Probably not going to either.
What bugs me about the whole thing is the lack of rule citing from Riot. Normally they'll post part of the players contract to specify why and how the player or organization has broken a rule.
On June 04 2015 08:07 Seuss wrote: #2 isn't an issue.
If you want to work at a major tech company in the US you're going to run into mandatory training about workplace ethics and problems with conflicts of interest. Maybe some young, idealistic college grads will fret about how much control Riot has, but the fact is that your average tech company has at least this much control when it comes to anything that relates to your job.
The only difference here is that because this particular incident involved a public-facing employee Riot made some details of the matter, primarily those the public would have noticed and asked about.
Major tech companies don't usually publically flex their muscles like this. What Riot did is reasonable and within their rights - the issue isn't if they could penalize Deficio, it's whether or not they SHOULD.
Yes? Having your caster poach players for a possible team he's planning IS a faux pas that should be punished. Wtf?
Despite what Deficio's statement may imply, you don't stumble and mistake your way into planning a team and poaching players without noticing that what you're doing is against the rules.
It doesn't matter if you think Deficio is a scum or not. The problem is whether or not his punishment should be made public.
And no, "people will eventually figure out" is not an acceptable excuse for publishing these information.
oh, you didn't mean whether they should have punished him, but whether they should have punished him publicly
Why not? Is there anything to be gained by making it remain secret? "people will find out anyway" is definitely a good excuse because it's better for Deficio if it gets clearly published and explained rather than without a Riot statement. That'd leave room for rumors and doubts.
There isn't much to be gained from Riot's perspective to keep Deficio's disciplinary action secret. In fact, from Riot's perspective, it's simply a balancing act between:
1. Release it: Releasing Deficio's disciplinary action provides a certain level of clarity and provide consistency in their effort in maintaining competitive integrity.
2. Don't release it: Respects Deficio's privacy and understands that such public statement will swing public opinions about Deficio (such as what you just did thinking that Deficio is "scum").
In a nutshell, Riot is choosing between Deficio's privacy and potential damage to the competitive integrity of LCS. Riot chose LCS, not Deficio (note that it's not even super clear if keeping Deficio's parts secret will actually damage LCS). If you are Deficio, how do you feel at this point that now you have to work in a company that doesn't really care about you and bars you from many other employment options?
Additionally, I am not even sure if Deficio needs to follow LCS rules or if LCS punishments are applicable to him. If we look at the scenario organically, then the answer should be yes: since Deficio is a Riot employee and LCS is technically part of Riot Games. But often within an organization there can be pages upon pages of rules and regulations and it's not clear if a single individual (like Deficio) can keep up with everything (especially when LCS rules change like every 4 months).
In any case, I am feeling a bit outraged because I believe Riot's method in handling Deficio's punishment is heavy handed. Maybe they ran through legal already and realized this is perfectly within their rights to do, but if this is how Riot demonstrates to the world as to how they want to treat their employees, then I won't say anything else.
I never called Deficio scum and I have no fucking idea where you got that from. As I said, if you're Deficio, it's probably better for Riot to make an official statement so that there can be no rumors or errors.
On June 04 2015 08:50 Cixah wrote: This whole thing seems super shady. From both riots side and from dentist/deficio side. I don't know of a job where your contract says you have to report a potential job offer outside of like "hey I want more money or I'm going here." Kind of thing. I think dentist is a tool, and should just be removed for the cancer he seems to emit.
I don't think we have the whole story here though. Probably not going to either.
I'm not sure if that's the case, but I have a feeling (at least from Deficio's statement) that it was the poaching players part that was the main thing.
In a way I can understand the heavy-handedness. Riot is the new kid on the block as far as their plan to grow the appeal of e-sports as entertainment. Riot has to dot their I's and cross their T's even more so than let's say the NFL, NBA, etc... Like other folks were saying, this is about image. Even small dings to image can have massive consequences. The entertainment world has tons of examples of this. In a way it's like when a contender fights the champ in boxing. The contender can't just win at the cards, he has to prove outright that he won, or the cards are going to side with the champ.
On June 04 2015 09:59 lilwisper wrote: In a way I can understand the heavy-handedness. Riot is the new kid on the block as far as their plan to grow the appeal of e-sports as entertainment. Riot has to dot their I's and cross their T's even more so than let's say the NFL, NBA, etc... Like other folks were saying, this is about image. Even small dings to image can have massive consequences. The entertainment world has tons of examples of this. In a way it's like when a contender fights the champ in boxing. The contender can't just win at the cards, he has to prove outright that he won, or the cards are going to side with the champ.
I don't see why they can't say "Dentist and a Riot employee who shall not be named due to privacy laws". That's what I would do.
If Richard Lewis later finds out who it was, then so be it. At least the company didn't say who it was.
On June 04 2015 08:07 Seuss wrote: #2 isn't an issue.
If you want to work at a major tech company in the US you're going to run into mandatory training about workplace ethics and problems with conflicts of interest. Maybe some young, idealistic college grads will fret about how much control Riot has, but the fact is that your average tech company has at least this much control when it comes to anything that relates to your job.
The only difference here is that because this particular incident involved a public-facing employee Riot made some details of the matter, primarily those the public would have noticed and asked about.
Major tech companies don't usually publically flex their muscles like this. What Riot did is reasonable and within their rights - the issue isn't if they could penalize Deficio, it's whether or not they SHOULD.
Yes? Having your caster poach players for a possible team he's planning IS a faux pas that should be punished. Wtf?
Despite what Deficio's statement may imply, you don't stumble and mistake your way into planning a team and poaching players without noticing that what you're doing is against the rules.
It doesn't matter if you think Deficio is a scum or not. The problem is whether or not his punishment should be made public.
And no, "people will eventually figure out" is not an acceptable excuse for publishing these information.
oh, you didn't mean whether they should have punished him, but whether they should have punished him publicly
Why not? Is there anything to be gained by making it remain secret? "people will find out anyway" is definitely a good excuse because it's better for Deficio if it gets clearly published and explained rather than without a Riot statement. That'd leave room for rumors and doubts.
There isn't much to be gained from Riot's perspective to keep Deficio's disciplinary action secret. In fact, from Riot's perspective, it's simply a balancing act between:
1. Release it: Releasing Deficio's disciplinary action provides a certain level of clarity and provide consistency in their effort in maintaining competitive integrity.
2. Don't release it: Respects Deficio's privacy and understands that such public statement will swing public opinions about Deficio (such as what you just did thinking that Deficio is "scum").
In a nutshell, Riot is choosing between Deficio's privacy and potential damage to the competitive integrity of LCS. Riot chose LCS, not Deficio (note that it's not even super clear if keeping Deficio's parts secret will actually damage LCS). If you are Deficio, how do you feel at this point that now you have to work in a company that doesn't really care about you and bars you from many other employment options?
Additionally, I am not even sure if Deficio needs to follow LCS rules or if LCS punishments are applicable to him. If we look at the scenario organically, then the answer should be yes: since Deficio is a Riot employee and LCS is technically part of Riot Games. But often within an organization there can be pages upon pages of rules and regulations and it's not clear if a single individual (like Deficio) can keep up with everything (especially when LCS rules change like every 4 months).
In any case, I am feeling a bit outraged because I believe Riot's method in handling Deficio's punishment is heavy handed. Maybe they ran through legal already and realized this is perfectly within their rights to do, but if this is how Riot demonstrates to the world as to how they want to treat their employees, then I won't say anything else.
I never called Deficio scum and I have no fucking idea where you got that from. As I said, if you're Deficio, it's probably better for Riot to make an official statement so that there can be no rumors or errors.
On June 04 2015 08:50 Cixah wrote: This whole thing seems super shady. From both riots side and from dentist/deficio side. I don't know of a job where your contract says you have to report a potential job offer outside of like "hey I want more money or I'm going here." Kind of thing. I think dentist is a tool, and should just be removed for the cancer he seems to emit.
I don't think we have the whole story here though. Probably not going to either.
I'm not sure if that's the case, but I have a feeling (at least from Deficio's statement) that it was the poaching players part that was the main thing.
I don't think you said Deficio was "scum", but you did form some negative opinions about him.
On June 04 2015 08:07 Seuss wrote: #2 isn't an issue.
If you want to work at a major tech company in the US you're going to run into mandatory training about workplace ethics and problems with conflicts of interest. Maybe some young, idealistic college grads will fret about how much control Riot has, but the fact is that your average tech company has at least this much control when it comes to anything that relates to your job.
The only difference here is that because this particular incident involved a public-facing employee Riot made some details of the matter, primarily those the public would have noticed and asked about.
Major tech companies don't usually publically flex their muscles like this. What Riot did is reasonable and within their rights - the issue isn't if they could penalize Deficio, it's whether or not they SHOULD.
Yes? Having your caster poach players for a possible team he's planning IS a faux pas that should be punished. Wtf?
Despite what Deficio's statement may imply, you don't stumble and mistake your way into planning a team and poaching players without noticing that what you're doing is against the rules.
It doesn't matter if you think Deficio is a scum or not. The problem is whether or not his punishment should be made public.
And no, "people will eventually figure out" is not an acceptable excuse for publishing these information.
oh, you didn't mean whether they should have punished him, but whether they should have punished him publicly
Why not? Is there anything to be gained by making it remain secret? "people will find out anyway" is definitely a good excuse because it's better for Deficio if it gets clearly published and explained rather than without a Riot statement. That'd leave room for rumors and doubts.
There isn't much to be gained from Riot's perspective to keep Deficio's disciplinary action secret. In fact, from Riot's perspective, it's simply a balancing act between:
1. Release it: Releasing Deficio's disciplinary action provides a certain level of clarity and provide consistency in their effort in maintaining competitive integrity.
2. Don't release it: Respects Deficio's privacy and understands that such public statement will swing public opinions about Deficio (such as what you just did thinking that Deficio is "scum").
In a nutshell, Riot is choosing between Deficio's privacy and potential damage to the competitive integrity of LCS. Riot chose LCS, not Deficio (note that it's not even super clear if keeping Deficio's parts secret will actually damage LCS). If you are Deficio, how do you feel at this point that now you have to work in a company that doesn't really care about you and bars you from many other employment options?
Additionally, I am not even sure if Deficio needs to follow LCS rules or if LCS punishments are applicable to him. If we look at the scenario organically, then the answer should be yes: since Deficio is a Riot employee and LCS is technically part of Riot Games. But often within an organization there can be pages upon pages of rules and regulations and it's not clear if a single individual (like Deficio) can keep up with everything (especially when LCS rules change like every 4 months).
In any case, I am feeling a bit outraged because I believe Riot's method in handling Deficio's punishment is heavy handed. Maybe they ran through legal already and realized this is perfectly within their rights to do, but if this is how Riot demonstrates to the world as to how they want to treat their employees, then I won't say anything else.
I never called Deficio scum and I have no fucking idea where you got that from. As I said, if you're Deficio, it's probably better for Riot to make an official statement so that there can be no rumors or errors.
On June 04 2015 08:50 Cixah wrote: This whole thing seems super shady. From both riots side and from dentist/deficio side. I don't know of a job where your contract says you have to report a potential job offer outside of like "hey I want more money or I'm going here." Kind of thing. I think dentist is a tool, and should just be removed for the cancer he seems to emit.
I don't think we have the whole story here though. Probably not going to either.
I'm not sure if that's the case, but I have a feeling (at least from Deficio's statement) that it was the poaching players part that was the main thing.
I don't think you said Deficio was "scum", but you did form some negative opinions about him.
I said (implied) Deficio either knew perfectly well what he was doing or he's an idiot. As a matter of fact I don't consider poaching to be too big of a deal, it's bread and butter of amateur teams and it really only becomes an issue once there are some long term contracts involved and even then it's like nya. Obviously it's bad then but on the scale of badness I don't rate it very high. I say that it's better for Deficio if Riot makes a statement because it's fairly likely that it'd get out anyway through unofficial means and that'd hurt his reputation more. You don't want pro players to have this general idea that you're a shady sort of guy without very accurate info, because it'd threaten to make all his future endeavors illegitimate. Or not, but there's the risk.
On June 04 2015 09:59 lilwisper wrote: In a way I can understand the heavy-handedness. Riot is the new kid on the block as far as their plan to grow the appeal of e-sports as entertainment. Riot has to dot their I's and cross their T's even more so than let's say the NFL, NBA, etc... Like other folks were saying, this is about image. Even small dings to image can have massive consequences. The entertainment world has tons of examples of this. In a way it's like when a contender fights the champ in boxing. The contender can't just win at the cards, he has to prove outright that he won, or the cards are going to side with the champ.
I don't see why they can't say "Dentist and a Riot employee who shall not be named due to privacy laws". That's what I would do.
If Richard Lewis later finds out who it was, then so be it. At least the company didn't say who it was.
It's still the image thing that comes into play I think. Outside of things forbidden by laws, Riot usually sides on transparency when it comes to rulings. Rulings that have to deal with Riot employees get an even higher dose of transparency. They have done it in the past when misconduct is in play (PsyonicHero).
As far announcing it publicly, it was a good idea to do so from Riot imo. It allows them to come out in front of the issue, it answers a lot of community questions as to why Deficio wasn't casting. The ruling was a bit harsh, especially when a lot of information and "ifs" are usually shared among friends.
On June 04 2015 11:40 wei2coolman wrote: As far announcing it publicly, it was a good idea to do so from Riot imo. It allows them to come out in front of the issue, it answers a lot of community questions as to why Deficio wasn't casting. The ruling was a bit harsh, especially when a lot of information and "ifs" are usually shared among friends.
I don't see why Deficio can't cast. The conflict of interest only has to do with him and CW. Just let him skip the CW games.
On June 04 2015 11:40 wei2coolman wrote: As far announcing it publicly, it was a good idea to do so from Riot imo. It allows them to come out in front of the issue, it answers a lot of community questions as to why Deficio wasn't casting. The ruling was a bit harsh, especially when a lot of information and "ifs" are usually shared among friends.
I don't see why Deficio can't cast. The conflict of interest only has to do with him and CW. Just let him skip the CW games.
I don't see why they should even have him skip the CW games to be honest... lol.
Real punishment would be that he'd be required to cast all the bottom 3 teams of EU LCS's games with Quickshot. hehehhehe.
On June 04 2015 11:40 wei2coolman wrote: As far announcing it publicly, it was a good idea to do so from Riot imo. It allows them to come out in front of the issue, it answers a lot of community questions as to why Deficio wasn't casting. The ruling was a bit harsh, especially when a lot of information and "ifs" are usually shared among friends.
I don't see why Deficio can't cast. The conflict of interest only has to do with him and CW. Just let him skip the CW games.
I don't see why they should even have him skip the CW games to be honest... lol.
Real punishment would be that he'd be required to cast all the bottom 3 teams of EU LCS's games with Quickshot. hehehhehe.
The problem seems to have to do with conflict of interest. Deficio was getting too cozy with CW and it's arguable that his cast of CW games will be biased toward CW. So bar him from CW games - that's really easy to do. The other games should be fine.
On June 04 2015 11:40 wei2coolman wrote: As far announcing it publicly, it was a good idea to do so from Riot imo. It allows them to come out in front of the issue, it answers a lot of community questions as to why Deficio wasn't casting. The ruling was a bit harsh, especially when a lot of information and "ifs" are usually shared among friends.
I don't see why Deficio can't cast. The conflict of interest only has to do with him and CW. Just let him skip the CW games.
I don't see why they should even have him skip the CW games to be honest... lol.
Real punishment would be that he'd be required to cast all the bottom 3 teams of EU LCS's games with Quickshot. hehehhehe.
The problem seems to have to do with conflict of interest. Deficio was getting too cozy with CW and it's arguable that his cast of CW games will be biased toward CW. So bar him from CW games - that's really easy to do. The other games should be fine.
If Quickshot is allowed to cast Elements, there is no way Deficio should be banned from casting CW just because "he might be biased", lol.
It's just exponential flogging pretty much, Riot need to show that they're serious about everything and even more serious when their own workers are drawn into it.
On June 04 2015 11:40 wei2coolman wrote: As far announcing it publicly, it was a good idea to do so from Riot imo. It allows them to come out in front of the issue, it answers a lot of community questions as to why Deficio wasn't casting. The ruling was a bit harsh, especially when a lot of information and "ifs" are usually shared among friends.
I don't see why Deficio can't cast. The conflict of interest only has to do with him and CW. Just let him skip the CW games.
I don't see why they should even have him skip the CW games to be honest... lol.
Real punishment would be that he'd be required to cast all the bottom 3 teams of EU LCS's games with Quickshot. hehehhehe.
The problem seems to have to do with conflict of interest. Deficio was getting too cozy with CW and it's arguable that his cast of CW games will be biased toward CW. So bar him from CW games - that's really easy to do. The other games should be fine.
Or maybe, just maybe, rito didn't exactly disclose all of the information that was actually in the case, and deficio was involved in something more sinister than we've been told.
On June 04 2015 12:23 thejuju wrote: Or maybe, just maybe, rito didn't exactly disclose all of the information that was actually in the case, and deficio was involved in something more sinister than we've been told.
That's certainly a possibility. But in that case why not just hide everything instead just hiding part of it?
Besides, by making Deficio not cast until W4, he basically doesn't have anything to do for 3 weeks. That's one punishment we already know.
On June 04 2015 12:24 cLutZ wrote: I actually really like DOA's take. Its basically 100% my take, based on available information. http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1smgreq
DOA makes a fair point about how it's unreasonable to expect employees to report all job offers they receive, but I don't think that point is relevant in this case. To quote the ruling,
"Although it’s not unusual for Rioters to be approached with offers from LCS organizations, it’s important that the organization and Rioter let us know as soon as an offer is made to raise awareness around potential conflicts of interest."
Riot's being pretty specific about expecting employees to let them know if they receive job offers from LCS teams, because that raises potential conflicts of interest. That's a completely reasonable policy, as far as I'm concerned.
Barring Deficio from only CW games isn't really much of a punishment. Not appearing for a mandatory 1/5 of the games is practically not all that different from the break he'd get rotating out like normal. It'd essentially be a slap on the wrist.
On June 04 2015 13:29 Saradin wrote: Barring Deficio from only CW games isn't really much of a punishment. Not appearing for a mandatory 1/5 of the games is practically not all that different from the break he'd get rotating out like normal. It'd essentially be a slap on the wrist.
Deficio does NOT even need any form of public punishment. He broke his company's rules due to conflict of interests. He can take a formal warning, a pay cut, or both - privately. No need to shame him publicly.
What are the conflicts of interest between Riot and LCS teams? They are minimal more or less, unless the Rioter uses his position to extract information from competing organizations before leaving, which should just be an individually punishable offense in the contract.
Considering LCS teams/orgs is a significant pool of potential employers for Riot employees, I'd say the #1 "conflict" is that he could receive a competitive offer from them. Feel free to provide others, but they aren't even competitors, and it doesn't seem like they even have negotiations about prize money, etc. Its just a take-it-or-leave-it situation out of Riot.
On June 04 2015 13:29 Saradin wrote: Barring Deficio from only CW games isn't really much of a punishment. Not appearing for a mandatory 1/5 of the games is practically not all that different from the break he'd get rotating out like normal. It'd essentially be a slap on the wrist.
Deficio does NOT even need any form of public punishment. He broke his company's rules due to conflict of interests. He can take a formal warning, a pay cut, or both - privately. No need to shame him publicly.
I take it then that you disagree with the idea that a punitive measure needs to be both impactful and known to serve as a deterrent down the road.
If Riot is gunna do a public formal announcement, I would love to see that part in his contract he violated... Right now it just seems like a really vague arbitrary line that they're drawing.
I mean, all the other previous competitive rulings came with quoted agreed upon rules/contract....
On June 04 2015 13:29 Saradin wrote: Barring Deficio from only CW games isn't really much of a punishment. Not appearing for a mandatory 1/5 of the games is practically not all that different from the break he'd get rotating out like normal. It'd essentially be a slap on the wrist.
Deficio does NOT even need any form of public punishment. He broke his company's rules due to conflict of interests. He can take a formal warning, a pay cut, or both - privately. No need to shame him publicly.
I take it then that you disagree with the idea that a punitive measure needs to be both impactful and known to serve as a deterrent down the road.
Deficio is an adult. You don't need to shame him in public in order to deter him.
On June 04 2015 13:29 Saradin wrote: Barring Deficio from only CW games isn't really much of a punishment. Not appearing for a mandatory 1/5 of the games is practically not all that different from the break he'd get rotating out like normal. It'd essentially be a slap on the wrist.
Deficio does NOT even need any form of public punishment. He broke his company's rules due to conflict of interests. He can take a formal warning, a pay cut, or both - privately. No need to shame him publicly.
I take it then that you disagree with the idea that a punitive measure needs to be both impactful and known to serve as a deterrent down the road.
Employees fuck up a ton, some even costing companies thousands, if not millions of dollars worth of damage, they don't get a public flogging over it. I still think it's a smart PR move from Riot, and good for Deficio as well, if this was leaked it could have damaged Deficio's reputation more than just this ruling.
By 'retarded', do you mean that it is a tactic that will prove to be ineffective in reducing future incidences (which in turn would hamper Riot's long term goal of legitimacy as a sport)?
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees.
Managing a company via scaring tactics is retarded.
I don't think you understand that if you're in a public position you need to have public statements to cover PR.
What is Riot going to do? just have him not cast for 3 weeks and pretend nothing happened? no they need to explain the public part of the punishment and then some 'additional disciplinary actions'. They parts they can keep private are private. The parts which need to be made public are public.
The reasons are spelled out for transparency, which is again, the proper PR move considering their position as owner, operator, governing body, etc. Need to have people trust your decisions.
That being said, I agree with DoA about the job offers stuff - thing is, you'd always tread carefully when switching jobs. Any other job at any other company, you never let your boss know until that job offer is inked. This is a case of Dentist et al. being really dumb and 'unprofessional' which is all too common in esports.
Riot just being dodgy. What's new. Punishing Deficio for trying to poach players by using his casting status is perfectly fine. Punishing him for no telling them about a job offer by banning him for ever taking job offers in the next 2 years in that sector is absolutely pathetic. That's how a mobster operates.
On June 04 2015 13:29 Saradin wrote: Barring Deficio from only CW games isn't really much of a punishment. Not appearing for a mandatory 1/5 of the games is practically not all that different from the break he'd get rotating out like normal. It'd essentially be a slap on the wrist.
Deficio does NOT even need any form of public punishment. He broke his company's rules due to conflict of interests. He can take a formal warning, a pay cut, or both - privately. No need to shame him publicly.
But they aren't revealing his real punishment. The stuff they revealed is only being revealed IMO because people would ask where he went if they kept that private. They said he was being disciplined internally, and they wouldn't reveal how.
Saradin is right, the "public" punishment isn't a punishment at all.
On June 04 2015 13:29 Saradin wrote: Barring Deficio from only CW games isn't really much of a punishment. Not appearing for a mandatory 1/5 of the games is practically not all that different from the break he'd get rotating out like normal. It'd essentially be a slap on the wrist.
Deficio does NOT even need any form of public punishment. He broke his company's rules due to conflict of interests. He can take a formal warning, a pay cut, or both - privately. No need to shame him publicly.
But they aren't revealing his real punishment. The stuff they revealed is only being revealed IMO because people would ask where he went if they kept that private. They said he was being disciplined internally, and they wouldn't reveal how.
Saradin is right, the "public" punishment isn't a punishment at all.
Come on. Deficio's name was spelt out and he was implicated in a plot in which he had a conflict of interest. Then he couldn't cast (or basically work) for 3 weeks. All of this is published. I don't see how much more public ir can get.
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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
Yes, this is exactly the problem I see. LCS's reputation was possibly retained, but I see this as a damaging move to Riot as a whole due to how Deficio was treated. Riot needs to understand that Deficio is a freaking employee of Riot and not some random person.
I take Gnarsie's videos with a grain of salt, but it's pretty interesting to watch:
Can Riot become the next RIM? No one knows. But sometimes the way their management works is a bit head scratching.
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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
Yes, this is exactly the problem I see. LCS's reputation was possibly retained, but I see this as a damaging move to Riot as a whole due to how Deficio was treated. Riot needs to understand that Deficio is a freaking employee of Riot and not some random person.
You're vastly overestimating how much damage Riot as a company sustains from this.
Yea this doesn't really hurt them at all. Riot has out right lied to their playerbase, completely screwed over Korea and yet people just forget about it pretty quickly. Riot could murder a horde of kittens and the internet would forget about it the next week.
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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
Yes, this is exactly the problem I see. LCS's reputation was possibly retained, but I see this as a damaging move to Riot as a whole due to how Deficio was treated. Riot needs to understand that Deficio is a freaking employee of Riot and not some random person.
You're vastly overestimating how much damage Riot as a company sustains from this.
So much so that Riot had to issue a clarification on the matter at 7pm.
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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
Yes, this is exactly the problem I see. LCS's reputation was possibly retained, but I see this as a damaging move to Riot as a whole due to how Deficio was treated. Riot needs to understand that Deficio is a freaking employee of Riot and not some random person.
You're vastly overestimating how much damage Riot as a company sustains from this.
So much so that Riot had to issue a clarification on the matter at 7pm.
Let me clarify then. You were vastly overestimating how much damage Riot as a company would have sustained before or after the clarification. Before it was next to none, now it's none at all.
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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
Yes, this is exactly the problem I see. LCS's reputation was possibly retained, but I see this as a damaging move to Riot as a whole due to how Deficio was treated. Riot needs to understand that Deficio is a freaking employee of Riot and not some random person.
You're vastly overestimating how much damage Riot as a company sustains from this.
So much so that Riot had to issue a clarification on the matter at 7pm.
Let me clarify then. You were vastly overestimating how much damage Riot as a company would have sustained before or after the clarification. Before it was next to none, now it's none at all.
Of course, the actual ruling has little effect. Its the culture implicit in the ruling that has already significantly affected Riot.
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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
Yes, this is exactly the problem I see. LCS's reputation was possibly retained, but I see this as a damaging move to Riot as a whole due to how Deficio was treated. Riot needs to understand that Deficio is a freaking employee of Riot and not some random person.
You're vastly overestimating how much damage Riot as a company sustains from this.
So much so that Riot had to issue a clarification on the matter at 7pm.
Let me clarify then. You were vastly overestimating how much damage Riot as a company would have sustained before or after the clarification. Before it was next to none, now it's none at all.
Of course, the actual ruling has little effect. Its the culture implicit in the ruling that has already significantly affected Riot.
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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
Yes, this is exactly the problem I see. LCS's reputation was possibly retained, but I see this as a damaging move to Riot as a whole due to how Deficio was treated. Riot needs to understand that Deficio is a freaking employee of Riot and not some random person.
I take Gnarsie's videos with a grain of salt, but it's pretty interesting to watch:
Why should I care what a random youtuber who only wants to stir drama says in accordance to rito policies in the workplace?
I'm assuming that Riot had a perfectly legitimate reason, and they may have screwed up a little with the punishment. I highly doubt that this was a malicious corporate atmosphere designed to choke up the competition.
Riot's employees tend to be satisfied with Riot. I'm too lazy to find sources, but Riot appears on multiple lists as one of the best companies to work for.
It boggles me that we're trying to accuse of riot doing things when there were potentially huge conflicts of interests that rito decided not to release, and their clarification kind of settles things. I wouldn't have handled it in that way, but it surely doesn't seem that Deficio or anyone actually in the industry are necessarily complaining.
On June 04 2015 12:24 cLutZ wrote: I actually really like DOA's take. Its basically 100% my take, based on available information. http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1smgreq
DOA makes a fair point about how it's unreasonable to expect employees to report all job offers they receive, but I don't think that point is relevant in this case. To quote the ruling,
"Although it’s not unusual for Rioters to be approached with offers from LCS organizations, it’s important that the organization and Rioter let us know as soon as an offer is made to raise awareness around potential conflicts of interest."
Riot's being pretty specific about expecting employees to let them know if they receive job offers from LCS teams, because that raises potential conflicts of interest. That's a completely reasonable policy, as far as I'm concerned.
There are no conflicts of interest in this instance because the information that deficio receives is expected to be public and because "a more favorable cast" isn't worth anything. What Riot is doing is almost definitely against US and European labor law with regards to anti-competitive behavior.
The punishment of "not taking job offers" is 100% illegal anti-competitive behavior. Non-competes MUST be based around taking trade secrets with you or they are illegal. (IANAL: but pretty damned sure on this one)
On June 04 2015 09:04 wei2coolman wrote: What bugs me about the whole thing is the lack of rule citing from Riot. Normally they'll post part of the players contract to specify why and how the player or organization has broken a rule.
None for dentist nor deficio's employee contract
They probably don't have to for dentist. His actions were defamatory/slander and so would fall under any boilerplate "don't do anything illegal" portion of a contract.
On June 05 2015 07:16 Goumindong wrote:Non-competes MUST be based around taking trade secrets with you or they are illegal. (IANAL: but pretty damned sure on this one)
My non-compete straight up says I cannot work for X companies after I leave this one for Y period of time after leaving.
On June 05 2015 07:16 Goumindong wrote:Non-competes MUST be based around taking trade secrets with you or they are illegal. (IANAL: but pretty damned sure on this one)
My non-compete straight up says I cannot work for X companies after I leave this one for Y period of time after leaving.
Then that is almost assuredly either
A) Illegal
or
B) covered by a trade secrets(or other such) exemption which will not exist here because LCS casting is not a trade secret and information given to casters is expected to be made public.
edit: In any case the new non-compete with deficio would be voided by any court since he gains no consideration for its exercise
On June 05 2015 07:16 Goumindong wrote:Non-competes MUST be based around taking trade secrets with you or they are illegal. (IANAL: but pretty damned sure on this one)
My non-compete straight up says I cannot work for X companies after I leave this one for Y period of time after leaving.
Then that is almost assuredly either
A) Illegal
or
B) covered by a trade secrets(or other such) exemption which will not exist here because LCS casting is not a trade secret and information given to casters is expected to be made public.
edit: In any case the new non-compete with deficio would be voided by any court since he gains no consideration for its exercise
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.
On June 04 2015 12:24 cLutZ wrote: I actually really like DOA's take. Its basically 100% my take, based on available information. http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1smgreq
DOA makes a fair point about how it's unreasonable to expect employees to report all job offers they receive, but I don't think that point is relevant in this case. To quote the ruling,
"Although it’s not unusual for Rioters to be approached with offers from LCS organizations, it’s important that the organization and Rioter let us know as soon as an offer is made to raise awareness around potential conflicts of interest."
Riot's being pretty specific about expecting employees to let them know if they receive job offers from LCS teams, because that raises potential conflicts of interest. That's a completely reasonable policy, as far as I'm concerned.
There are no conflicts of interest in this instance because the information that deficio receives is expected to be public and because "a more favorable cast" isn't worth anything. What Riot is doing is almost definitely against US and European labor law with regards to anti-competitive behavior.
The punishment of "not taking job offers" is 100% illegal anti-competitive behavior. Non-competes MUST be based around taking trade secrets with you or they are illegal. (IANAL: but pretty damned sure on this one)
On June 04 2015 09:04 wei2coolman wrote: What bugs me about the whole thing is the lack of rule citing from Riot. Normally they'll post part of the players contract to specify why and how the player or organization has broken a rule.
None for dentist nor deficio's employee contract
They probably don't have to for dentist. His actions were defamatory/slander and so would fall under any boilerplate "don't do anything illegal" portion of a contract.
Then they should have cited that contract, they've done the same for other players and organizations, and in those rulings as well.
Relevant Rules 8.2.4 Discrimination and Denigration Team Members may not offend the dignity or integrity of a country, private person, or group of people through contemptuous, discriminatory, or denigrating words or actions on account of race, skin color, ethnic, national or social origin, gender, language, religion, political opinion or any other opinion, financial status, birth or any other status, sexual orientation or any other reason.
8.2.2 Harassment Harassment is forbidden. Harassment is defined as systematic, hostile, and repeated acts taking place over a considerable period of time, which are intended to isolate or ostracize a person and/or affect the dignity of the person.
8.2.7 Player Behavior Investigation If Riot determines that a Team Member has violated the Summoner’s Code, the LoL Terms of Service, or other rules of LoL, Riot officials may assign penalties at their sole discretion.
In addition, each OPL organisation signs an agreement with Riot which includes an immediate right of termination if “the Team Owner fails to manage its Team Members or Team Managers effectively and such failure causes, or would reasonably be expected to cause, harm to the League or other OPL teams or players, including harm that follows as a consequence of the Team Members or Team Managers repeatedly failing or refusing to obey the Rules or the written instructions of the League issued pursuant to the Rules” or if “a Team Member or Team Manager commits any act or becomes involved in any situation or occurrence which the League believes, in its sole judgment, brings the Team, Team Member or Team Manager into public disrepute, scandal or ridicule, or shocks or offends the community, or derogates from her/his/its public image or reflects unfavorably upon the LoL Game, the League or any League Entity.”
This situation really gave me a good chuckle. I don't think anyone deserves any punishment, but I understand why Riot's doing this. If I was Dentist I would be super pissed at the team. It was obviously someone on the team that told Riot. In my book snitches get stitches.
So, the real villain here is the pussy player on the Wolves that snitched on Dentist.
On June 05 2015 09:05 Sonnington wrote: This situation really gave me a good chuckle. I don't think anyone deserves any punishment, but I understand why Riot's doing this. If I was Dentist I would be super pissed at the team. It was obviously someone on the team that told Riot. In my book snitches get stitches.
So, the real villain here is the pussy player on the Wolves that snitched on Dentist.
On June 05 2015 09:05 Sonnington wrote: This situation really gave me a good chuckle. I don't think anyone deserves any punishment, but I understand why Riot's doing this. If I was Dentist I would be super pissed at the team. It was obviously someone on the team that told Riot. In my book snitches get stitches.
So, the real villain here is the pussy player on the Wolves that snitched on Dentist.
The villain is the guy who can't respect the sanctity of competition. No respect for Dentist.
Holy shit. I can't believe how many of you are condoning snitching. The SS, KGB, and thought police from 1984 would -love- you guys. How about this for a novel idea, if you don't like what your coach is doing you confront him yourself -like fucking a man- rather than snitching on him to Riot?
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.
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.
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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.
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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.
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.
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.
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.
On June 06 2015 07:19 Saradin wrote: The guy who reported is the one who did the right thing to do, ethics-wise.
On June 04 2015 14:15 cLutZ wrote:
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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.
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.
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').
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.
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').
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.
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').
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.
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').
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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').
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'.
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.
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.
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.
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 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').
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'.
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.
On June 05 2015 07:16 Goumindong wrote:Non-competes MUST be based around taking trade secrets with you or they are illegal. (IANAL: but pretty damned sure on this one)
My non-compete straight up says I cannot work for X companies after I leave this one for Y period of time after leaving.
Then that is almost assuredly either
A) Illegal
or
B) covered by a trade secrets(or other such) exemption which will not exist here because LCS casting is not a trade secret and information given to casters is expected to be made public.
edit: In any case the new non-compete with deficio would be voided by any court since he gains no consideration for its exercise
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]
Can you spell out the important bits for those who can't watch the video?
Sk are not happy with what happened, they had the impressions that their strat had being leaked to CW and felt betrayed and are not satified with the punishement despite them accepting the fact that Riot investigation uncovered no proof of leaking info from Deficio's side. Nothing more.
On June 06 2015 07:19 Saradin wrote: The guy who reported is the one who did the right thing to do, ethics-wise.
On June 04 2015 14:15 cLutZ wrote:
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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.
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.
My God, you need to take it down a notch. I get your stance, but you're abrasive needlessly.
On June 06 2015 07:19 Saradin wrote: The guy who reported is the one who did the right thing to do, ethics-wise.
On June 04 2015 14:15 cLutZ wrote:
On June 04 2015 13:58 Saradin wrote: 'down the road' is not just Deficio. It's a warning shot for the rest of your current, and future, employees. A nip it in the bud sort of mentality.
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.
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.
that's an intensely false equivalence. saying something off color and potentially offensive is not the same as undermining the integrity of a company. which they did. whether it was intentional or not is debatable for sure, and the punishment should reflect that (not that I think it did. way too heavy handed.)
but a corporation can't let their employees risk the integrity of the corporation. going to HR in this scenario is absolutely the right move. in my own personal opinion that was clearly not the intention here, and that's super relevant for sure. but good intentions don't change the gravity of the risk.
EPT
Karl "Dentist" Krey and caster 
Martin "Deficio" Lynge are both suspended from the LCS until week four. Dentist is being disciplined on the grounds of misleading his players about information provided by Deficio on SK Gaming and complicit in tampering with players. Deficio is suspended on the grounds of tampering with players by discussing them joining Copenhagen Wolves. The result of SK v Copenhagen Wolves will remain unaffected by the judgement. Deficio will also be barred from casting Copenhagen Wolves matches indefinitely.
