|
On July 23 2011 05:44 Grimsong wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 05:42 LegendaryZ wrote:
Just to throw this out there, but creating a scenario where teams are going to feel threatened enough to put all of their players on contracts is not necessarily a good thing either. Look at TSL. Do you think they're magically going to have money to pay their players now that they're signing them to contracts? Of course not. Most likely these players are going to be put in legally binding contracts with the same exact conditions that they are currently in (a room and food with no salary). So how exactly does this do anything to improve the players' situations or further eSports? You've effectively created a situation where teams are going to limit players' rights while adding nothing to the scene to improve the situation for either the teams or the players. Which is exactly why the players need to band together and create a union that protects their rights, before this gets WAY out of hand. If not now, it will happen later (BW, Kespa, need say no more)
The reason this isn't going to happen is because this event was seen as a negative thing and because of that there's a lot of peer pressure to follow suit with the rest of your fellow gamers to do what's needed to protect your team and scene from foreign encroachment. Acting differently would only cause you to be looked down upon by your peers who are willing to give up those rights. Banding together to fight in this case is not as easy as it may seem given the current atmosphere, not that there would even be anything to fight for in this case. It's not like there's money out there to give players more even if they wanted it...
|
On July 23 2011 05:41 Dr.Sin wrote:
Let's boil all of this down:
-It has been well established that EG was within its right to recruit Puma.
-EG publically apologized to Mr. Lee and proposed to call him personally to again apologize.
What's the problem?
Have they actually apologized?
I've been trying to keep up, but I'm unaware of any official statements from EG.
Link to a source?
|
On July 23 2011 05:46 Grimsong wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 05:45 RogueStatus wrote:Collective bargaining is a process of negotiations between employers and the representatives of a unit of employees aimed at reaching agreements that regulate working conditions. Collective agreements usually set out wage scales, working hours, training, health and safety, overtime, grievance mechanisms and rights to participate in workplace or company affairs. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_bargaining Precisely what I was referring to. Thank you =>
Your welcome
|
On July 23 2011 05:52 ore0z wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 05:41 Dr.Sin wrote:
Let's boil all of this down:
-It has been well established that EG was within its right to recruit Puma.
-EG publically apologized to Mr. Lee and proposed to call him personally to again apologize.
What's the problem? Have they actually apologized? I've been trying to keep up, but I'm unaware of any official statements from EG. Link to a source?
It was on Weapon of Choice at the start.
|
On July 23 2011 05:48 nuMi22 wrote:Show nested quote + Do you really believe relations between the Korean and international scene are going to improve because of this, or that Korean teams won't be even more wary of sending their players to international events (especially after the arguments that this is the "Western business model", and Korea better get used to it)?
The relations should never have been an issue because there is NO issue over how EG handled the situation with Puma. Yes the Koreans better get used to it, TSL is contracting their players now so they're already doing it. They wouldn't have done it if the foreign scene wasn't an influence.
No, they wouldn't have put their players on contracts if the foreign scene wasn't an influence and honestly, at this point in the Korean SC2 scene, that would have been a good thing. Contracts in and of themselves don't guarantee players better lives. EG pretty much made things worse for players in the Korean scene by putting the teams on edge.
|
Vancouver14381 Posts
On July 23 2011 05:24 dsousa wrote:
TL gets to have it's cake and eat it too.....
They are a Team, a website, a community, and a news organization depending on the circumstances.
Has TL ever made any mistakes or admitted to doing anything wrong? Does the TL community show favoritism for TL players and events? TL is unbiased... excepts where its in their interest?
All AG did was point out his frustration with having to compete and deal with TL and all its iterations. From his standpoint, it was a bit whiny and he shouldn't expect sympathy, but its understandable how he feels. TL and EG are competitors.
Other than his pointing out TL's tri-polarness, I though Alex Garfield sounded like the most business savvy person I've heard speak in SC2.
Hate him if you like, but EG's going to get a Top 5 terran in the world, and AG's job is to get EG's name at the top of tournaments so sponsors notice.
SC2 business is not a game! When money is on the line, some people play to win. Expect it!
Here's an example of TL making mistakes and there are likely other ones as well.
On July 22 2011 09:58 OrderlyChaos wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 09:55 Zim23 wrote:
I get where AG is coming from. A translation or post from a TL staff member can cause a shit-ton of bad publicity for a team and could easily be completely false, and there's no accountability for that. It's a murky area for sure. TL staff and members have translated rumors from BW that were potentially very damaging (and many ended up being true). The most prominent was when rekrul pretty much broke the match fixing scandal, and then when at least one player was falsely accused. The entire list was translated, and both the korean and foreign communities had to deal with the consequences of the false accusation.
As for the bias claim, this is what can happen if everything must be 'objective'. Also, TL and EG are competitors as progaming teams, not as a community or a news outlet. EG had plenty of time to issue a statement on their own website regarding the Puma contract situation, but they chose to remain silent until WoC. People nowadays are impatient and want information right away, so the delay probably rub a few more people the wrong way.
And I personally have a big issue with your last line since it reminds me of people who are focused on short-term goals rather than long-term ones. Sure, EG is going to do well right now with the addition of a strong player, but they have also estranged themselves to parts of the foreigner community and a large section of the Korean community.
|
On July 23 2011 05:54 LegendaryZ wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 05:48 nuMi22 wrote: Do you really believe relations between the Korean and international scene are going to improve because of this, or that Korean teams won't be even more wary of sending their players to international events (especially after the arguments that this is the "Western business model", and Korea better get used to it)?
The relations should never have been an issue because there is NO issue over how EG handled the situation with Puma. Yes the Koreans better get used to it, TSL is contracting their players now so they're already doing it. They wouldn't have done it if the foreign scene wasn't an influence. No, they wouldn't have put their players on contracts if the foreign scene wasn't an influence and honestly, at this point in the Korean SC2 scene, that would have been a good thing. Contracts in and of themselves don't guarantee players better lives. EG pretty much made things worse for players in the Korean scene by putting the teams on edge.
Source for your basis on that thought?
|
The apology was verbal on WoC. AG apologized at the start of the show and somewhere in the middle.
To my knowledge, EG has not commented in any way in writing on the whole issue. The rationale AG proposed was that this was because they hadn't actually contracted Puma yet and were waiting to wrap that up before going public.
|
On July 23 2011 05:51 LegendaryZ wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 05:44 Grimsong wrote:On July 23 2011 05:42 LegendaryZ wrote:
Just to throw this out there, but creating a scenario where teams are going to feel threatened enough to put all of their players on contracts is not necessarily a good thing either. Look at TSL. Do you think they're magically going to have money to pay their players now that they're signing them to contracts? Of course not. Most likely these players are going to be put in legally binding contracts with the same exact conditions that they are currently in (a room and food with no salary). So how exactly does this do anything to improve the players' situations or further eSports? You've effectively created a situation where teams are going to limit players' rights while adding nothing to the scene to improve the situation for either the teams or the players. Which is exactly why the players need to band together and create a union that protects their rights, before this gets WAY out of hand. If not now, it will happen later (BW, Kespa, need say no more) The reason this isn't going to happen is because this event was seen as a negative thing and because of that there's a lot of peer pressure to follow suit with the rest of your fellow gamers to do what's needed to protect your team and scene from foreign encroachment. Acting differently would only cause you to be looked down upon by your peers who are willing to give up those rights. Banding together to fight in this case is not as easy as it may seem given the current atmosphere, not that there would even be anything to fight for in this case. It's not like there's money out there to give players more even if they wanted it...
All the more reason for players to not sign a single damn thing in Korea because the mindset out there is broken. If they were able to slide from under that pressure and realize they drive that market, not the teams, then they could flip it back on the Korean teams that are trying to give people potato sacks as payment for their professional gaming services. The players NEED to protect themselves until there is some type of mediation between the players, and the teams.
|
On July 23 2011 05:54 LegendaryZ wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 05:48 nuMi22 wrote: Do you really believe relations between the Korean and international scene are going to improve because of this, or that Korean teams won't be even more wary of sending their players to international events (especially after the arguments that this is the "Western business model", and Korea better get used to it)?
The relations should never have been an issue because there is NO issue over how EG handled the situation with Puma. Yes the Koreans better get used to it, TSL is contracting their players now so they're already doing it. They wouldn't have done it if the foreign scene wasn't an influence. No, they wouldn't have put their players on contracts if the foreign scene wasn't an influence and honestly, at this point in the Korean SC2 scene, that would have been a good thing. Contracts in and of themselves don't guarantee players better lives. EG pretty much made things worse for players in the Korean scene by putting the teams on edge.
I explained why there needs to be contracts in my initial post a few pages back. You can't expect Esports to take off without them, it's just not possible.
|
On July 23 2011 05:30 CosmicSpiral wrote:
And please do not talk to me about this being "progress" in the world of E-Sports. If anything this is a detriment because of the very real reactions that are underway in Korea. Do you honestly think this business model promotes the cultivation of talent outside of Korea? Do you really think organizations like EG will bother with coaches, strict training, and scouting to acquire/train good players if they can simply buy them from Korean teams? Do you really believe relations between the Korean and international scene are going to improve because of this, or that Korean teams won't be even more wary of sending their players to international events (especially after the arguments that this is the "Western business model", and Korea better get used to it)?
This paragraph is worthy of a metal. Thank you sir.
|
On July 23 2011 05:57 Dr.Sin wrote:
The apology was verbal on WoC. AG apologized at the start of the show and somewhere in the middle.
To my knowledge, EG has not commented in any way in writing on the whole issue. The rationale AG proposed was that this was because they hadn't actually contracted Puma yet and were waiting to wrap that up before going public.
This is what I like to call "buying time." They know they fucked up. Expect a statement to be released after everything blows over.
|
5003 Posts
On July 23 2011 05:42 Longshank wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 04:37 DueSs wrote:On July 23 2011 04:27 CeriseCherries wrote:On July 23 2011 04:19 DueSs wrote:On July 23 2011 04:15 SeigO wrote:
No ones talking about the translation. Milkis interactions throughout the whole thing ie: his posts in the thread and his tweets made me think he was a TSL affiliate or someone personally involved rather than someone relaying a message.
Why does someone who gives HIMSELF the responsibility of translating a language from Korean to English have to be mum on the topic he translated? Who gave him this title of journalist besides Alex? Why can't Milkies interact with a word to word translation he had the skill to translate? Why can't Milkies interact and take a side? Milkies isn't nothing more than a translator. He works for no one. He holds responsibility to NO ONE BUT HIMSELF. The problem is that there is a duality here for Milkis. I agree, he is just a translator- but by tweeting provactively, he is taking a side and defending an interest; his own interest, but one that happens to side with one of the two parties in his neutrally translated article. So what happened as a result of his tweets is that by proxy, his article feels charged. The problem is that Milkis cannot represent simultaneously himself and a neutral party, and that is what may be getting people up in arms. If he wants to remain neutral, he must carefully word his statements. Otherwise, people will see bias in everything he writes- its just perception. So yes, in a perfect world Milkis should be able to report neutrally and tweet his opinons, but in this one, having these opinons based off his own worldview distorts in some minds the credibillity of reporting. Literally baffled at this. STILL you portray Milkies as a journalist that has to be held accountable to someone besides himself. You say: "Milkies should be able to report neutrally"..... omg, he. is. a. translator. How can he neutrally translate things?"having these opinons based off his own worldview distorts in some minds the credibillity of reporting."... omg, he. is. a. translator. How can he neutrally translate things?You can't have an IQ above that of a toaster and not know that you CAN'T BIAS A TRANSLATION. omg. While I completely support Milkis in this, you're terribly wrong. You can bias a translation a great deal. Due to his heavy pro-kespa stance I've taken what he's been reporting from the Blizzard vs Kespa affair with a grain of salt. With a selective use of words you can spinn the message quite a bit without directly be lying or making stuff up.
I would like you to name one case where I "selectively used words" to spin the message. Please. Go through all of my Blizzard vs KeSPA translations and go through them and find one time I did this
|
On July 23 2011 05:56 SafeAsCheese wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 05:54 LegendaryZ wrote:On July 23 2011 05:48 nuMi22 wrote: Do you really believe relations between the Korean and international scene are going to improve because of this, or that Korean teams won't be even more wary of sending their players to international events (especially after the arguments that this is the "Western business model", and Korea better get used to it)?
The relations should never have been an issue because there is NO issue over how EG handled the situation with Puma. Yes the Koreans better get used to it, TSL is contracting their players now so they're already doing it. They wouldn't have done it if the foreign scene wasn't an influence. No, they wouldn't have put their players on contracts if the foreign scene wasn't an influence and honestly, at this point in the Korean SC2 scene, that would have been a good thing. Contracts in and of themselves don't guarantee players better lives. EG pretty much made things worse for players in the Korean scene by putting the teams on edge. Source for your basis on that thought?
TSL is currently putting all of their players on contracts. Do you think those contracts suddenly all involve salaries or benefits? Where would TSL get the resources for that when they haven't had it before? Players are probably just going to be put on contracts under the same conditions they were in before. But where they would at least have had the freedom to come and go as they chose before, now the team will have much more control over those decisions. That's not a positive thing at all.
If EG did all of this openly, it probably wouldn't have sparked the kind of reaction they did by saying "There's nothing wrong with what we did. This is how it works. Deal with it." They are dealing with it now, probably to the detriment of the players.
|
On July 23 2011 05:56 SafeAsCheese wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 05:54 LegendaryZ wrote:On July 23 2011 05:48 nuMi22 wrote: Do you really believe relations between the Korean and international scene are going to improve because of this, or that Korean teams won't be even more wary of sending their players to international events (especially after the arguments that this is the "Western business model", and Korea better get used to it)?
The relations should never have been an issue because there is NO issue over how EG handled the situation with Puma. Yes the Koreans better get used to it, TSL is contracting their players now so they're already doing it. They wouldn't have done it if the foreign scene wasn't an influence. No, they wouldn't have put their players on contracts if the foreign scene wasn't an influence and honestly, at this point in the Korean SC2 scene, that would have been a good thing. Contracts in and of themselves don't guarantee players better lives. EG pretty much made things worse for players in the Korean scene by putting the teams on edge. Source for your basis on that thought?
Signing contracts for long-term cooperation might make teams less likely to take chances on unknown players. If they're forced to keep the player a certain amount of time regardless of the player's results, such a situation may be considered too risky to take on. Yes, there were cases of poaching players previously in SC2, but it was rare enough that apparently, contracts weren't necessary to ensure player loyalty.
Not to mention that the new state of affairs for TSL is a direct cause of the foreign SC2 scene. How do you think the Koreans feel about the situation when they hear a North American team is trying to poach their players? We want to integrate the foreign scene with the Korean scene, or at least I want to, and this is definitely not the right way to go about it.
|
On July 23 2011 06:00 Milkis wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 05:42 Longshank wrote:On July 23 2011 04:37 DueSs wrote:On July 23 2011 04:27 CeriseCherries wrote:On July 23 2011 04:19 DueSs wrote:On July 23 2011 04:15 SeigO wrote:
No ones talking about the translation. Milkis interactions throughout the whole thing ie: his posts in the thread and his tweets made me think he was a TSL affiliate or someone personally involved rather than someone relaying a message.
Why does someone who gives HIMSELF the responsibility of translating a language from Korean to English have to be mum on the topic he translated? Who gave him this title of journalist besides Alex? Why can't Milkies interact with a word to word translation he had the skill to translate? Why can't Milkies interact and take a side? Milkies isn't nothing more than a translator. He works for no one. He holds responsibility to NO ONE BUT HIMSELF. The problem is that there is a duality here for Milkis. I agree, he is just a translator- but by tweeting provactively, he is taking a side and defending an interest; his own interest, but one that happens to side with one of the two parties in his neutrally translated article. So what happened as a result of his tweets is that by proxy, his article feels charged. The problem is that Milkis cannot represent simultaneously himself and a neutral party, and that is what may be getting people up in arms. If he wants to remain neutral, he must carefully word his statements. Otherwise, people will see bias in everything he writes- its just perception. So yes, in a perfect world Milkis should be able to report neutrally and tweet his opinons, but in this one, having these opinons based off his own worldview distorts in some minds the credibillity of reporting. Literally baffled at this. STILL you portray Milkies as a journalist that has to be held accountable to someone besides himself. You say: "Milkies should be able to report neutrally"..... omg, he. is. a. translator. How can he neutrally translate things?"having these opinons based off his own worldview distorts in some minds the credibillity of reporting."... omg, he. is. a. translator. How can he neutrally translate things?You can't have an IQ above that of a toaster and not know that you CAN'T BIAS A TRANSLATION. omg. While I completely support Milkis in this, you're terribly wrong. You can bias a translation a great deal. Due to his heavy pro-kespa stance I've taken what he's been reporting from the Blizzard vs Kespa affair with a grain of salt. With a selective use of words you can spinn the message quite a bit without directly be lying or making stuff up. I would like you to name one case where I "selectively used words" to spin the message. Please. Go through all of my Blizzard vs KeSPA translations and go through them and find one time I did this
This. Actually, if you completely support Milkis, why even attempt to destroy his credibility by referring to something WAY more controversial?
|
Just another checkmark on my 'why I really, really dislike EG' list. Nothing more.
Everyone is talking about players right to leave wherever they want, but very few think about the expenses teams have to make to help these players train and succeed as players, providing them with free food and place to live, and what do they get in return? Nothing.
|
On July 23 2011 05:57 Dr.Sin wrote:
The apology was verbal on WoC. AG apologized at the start of the show and somewhere in the middle.
To my knowledge, EG has not commented in any way in writing on the whole issue. The rationale AG proposed was that this was because they hadn't actually contracted Puma yet and were waiting to wrap that up before going public.
My guess is EG has some of their best writers drafting a statement to win back some fans.
To me, it's too late already. I feel like based on the comments laid out on DJWheat's show, if they come out to apologize, they don't really mean it. We no they don't feel like they have done wrong. It's their "successful business model" and how they succeed as a company.
|
On July 22 2011 19:41 Rekrul wrote:
Coach Lee is a hypocrite and a liar. The way he stole Fruitdealer and Tester from OGS in the past was far worse in terms of deceit, lack of business ethics, and backstabbing.
It's not my place to go into details, but all I can say is: Karma is a bitch.
Very good point.
|
United States15275 Posts
On July 23 2011 05:48 nuMi22 wrote:Show nested quote + Do you really believe relations between the Korean and international scene are going to improve because of this, or that Korean teams won't be even more wary of sending their players to international events (especially after the arguments that this is the "Western business model", and Korea better get used to it)?
The relations should never have been an issue because there is NO issue over how EG handled the situation with Puma. Yes the Koreans better get used to it, TSL is contracting their players now so they're already doing it. They wouldn't have done it if the foreign scene wasn't an influence.
But now it is an issue, despite the offer and departure being perfectly legal and within the player-organization boundaries. Getting contracts is not necessarily a good thing when it's not being done for the sake of the players, and it is not being done so that Nestea and MC can have options. The Korean teams and their sponsors want to protect their investments from the "Western model of business" instead of creating a free market where the players get significant power to choose their own teams. It's very likely that the contracts will restrict player opportunities more than help them.
Furthermore, Alex's rant may leave a black spot on every international SC2 organization interested in picking up Korean players. Without a personal representative or intimate knowledge of the foreign team's workings, Korean teams may believe all foreign teams will operate like EG in the future. And is there any reason for them not to do so? On the whole they are far more wealthy and can offer more lucrative deals. Combined with the general lack of money distribution guys like Sage and Puzzle may see a brighter future on Dignitas or mouz.sports than HoSeo.
And like I mentioned before, this only reinforces the "Korean > world" mentality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
