|
On June 29 2011 10:23 jmbthirteen wrote: I find it funny that people think they deserve full transparency in situations where they aren't involved in at all.
I think thats what they said about wikileaks, hmmmm.
|
On June 29 2011 10:23 jmbthirteen wrote: I find it funny that people think they deserve full transparency in situations where they aren't involved in at all. This, so much.
|
This is so lame. That's all I can say about this situation.
|
I do not understand why people are so up in arms about this.
It is like people look for this drama.
Incontrol has limited time. He makes decisions on where he can spend that time. Yeah, he might make some of those decisions based off of who pays him, but don't all of us?
It's not some grand move by anyone to screw over any one else. It's just that it's a hard decision on how Incontrol could spend his time and some people aren't going to be happy with that. Incontrol himself is probably not happy that time limitations make it so he can only do some of the things he wishes he could do.
Back off and cut everyone some slack.
|
On June 29 2011 10:25 LeLeech wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2011 10:23 jmbthirteen wrote: I find it funny that people think they deserve full transparency in situations where they aren't involved in at all. I think thats what they said about wikileaks, hmmmm.
Wait, so knowing why my government and my tax dollars are going to is the same as me knowing why a pro sc2 player leaves a show? Oh wait, I have a personal investment in the whole wikileaks shit and don't with incontrol leaving sotg.
|
It's about people asking "so is it about EG sponsorship issues?" and sirscoots and djwheat going "LOL NO YOU GUYS ARE STUPID CONSPIRACY THEORISTS" and then it turns out to be complete horse caca.
But the conflicts were resolved long before Geoff left the show. He left over the time issues and the idea that there might be an unforeseen sponsor conflict at some point in the future.
|
As an addendum -
it would be fascinating to hear JP's side of this.
|
Is this show about sc2? I'm confused. Drama is boring
|
On June 29 2011 10:28 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +It's about people asking "so is it about EG sponsorship issues?" and sirscoots and djwheat going "LOL NO YOU GUYS ARE STUPID CONSPIRACY THEORISTS" and then it turns out to be complete horse caca. But the conflicts were resolved long before Geoff left the show. He left over the time issues and the idea that there might be an unforeseen sponsor conflict at some point in the future.
That is literally what the guy you just quoted said it was about.
|
2300 viewers, I think that says it all.
|
I really don't like the answer I was given by the EG Alex guy. I don't think it's a polarizing as 5 page thread or obscure the truth. If they wanted to let us know they could have found a way.
|
Man this guy really needs to go back to college and focus his degree on the profession he's in. Sounds like a poli sci major.
|
On June 29 2011 10:31 SimDawg wrote: I really don't like the answer I was given by the EG Alex guy. I don't think it's a polarizing as 5 page thread or obscure the truth. If they wanted to let us know they could have found a way. It wasn't EG's place to say the whole sponsorship thing with SotG. That was up to JP and COL.
|
Canada13389 Posts
Here's my take:
Shit's happening, EG tries to deal with it the best way they can, more shit happens, decisions are made and in retrospect might seem "bad" BUT at the time made sense.
You cant have EG and one of its members being sponsored by a competing company/sponsor. Thats just bad for the sponsors and then one of THEM might pull out instead so everyone chill out theres a business here so let it be a business :/
|
On June 29 2011 10:30 Nimic wrote: 2300 viewers, I think that says it all.
2300 cause its lagging like shit
|
is there any reason that they decided to make the two shows on the same day right before each other?
|
On June 29 2011 10:31 SimDawg wrote: I really don't like the answer I was given by the EG Alex guy. I don't think it's a polarizing as 5 page thread or obscure the truth. If they wanted to let us know they could have found a way. Here's what you say.
"We were uncomfortable about potential issues our sponsors might have and Geoff expressed desires to spend more time practicing. As such, Geoff is leaving SotG. It is deeply regettable and we wish SotG and it's host JP the best of luck in future."
That first part can be anything and yet completely understandable. It's being transparent without actually being transparent.
|
The amount of handholding we forum-goers require is more than slightly disconcerting.
Unless the voices of reason prevail, I can't help but feel that this whole affair is on track to a place where people are forced to pick sides. As much as EG has disappointed me again, that's something I'd rather not do.
What an unfortunate series of events for all of us with an excessive sense of self-entitlement.
|
On June 29 2011 10:35 FatkiddsLag wrote: is there any reason that they decided to make the two shows on the same day right before each other?
wheat has said that it was what idra/painuser/incontrol could work with with their scheduling.
|
On June 29 2011 10:29 Nimic wrote: That is literally what the guy you just quoted said it was about.
An unforeseen future sponsor conflict is not a current sponsor conflict, which is what Scoots denied it was about.
|
|
|
|