Mah, I take it as just not good at doing business rather than some more sinister intentions unless more issues. But something still doesn't add up / make sense.
The streaming clause makes absolutely no sense. Generally if it's in the contract it is expected no matter if you enforce it or not. When you want people to stream for a 90% of a full time job, don't have a timesheet is NOT a reasonable way of suggesting it is not mandatory. Most job don't actually monitor you work 40 hour a week, but most people still work 35+ hour, and not because they all want to. It is not a good way to get better, which is what people pay you to do there presumably.
Also, NOT telling someone they have to work a full time job while PAYING you before they got here is absolutely ridiculous. Good thing you don't base your house in US or people would sue you back to stone age.
Regarding contract, everyone can agree it was dumb to not have Fuzer (or anyone) sign a contract beforehand. However, coerce / threaten someone someone to sign a contract which other party have problem understanding fully is illegal. It is your responsibility to make contract clear to other parties. You either allow his lawyer to go through it (And no, don't ask the lawyer to email you credential. You are not fit to verify credential, especially from another country. You ask for lawyer's identification and verify it through a registry) or get it translated in his native language and notarized.
Your claim of offer paying Fuzer back doesn't compute either. While it may technically be true, you are fuzzing with timeline here. The evidence seem to suggest you only offered only after he decided to go public, while shown to play dumb regarding money before, and you or anyone else have not refuted. You maybe upset at whatever he did or whatever you thought, but that is borderline fraud and is no way of running a respectable business.
On September 14 2012 01:56 Salazarz wrote: So, if the streaming thing is 'for the benefit of players' and is 'totally negotiable', why do you have a written contract specifically addressing the exact amount of hours each player is required to stream? It's not something Fuzer alone said, other players mentioned it in passing as well.
And why are you saying that 'a refund was offered, which Fuzer refused'? You make it sound like it was a genuine, unconditional offer of a refund - but previous posts already confirmed that you put it forward as another demand - 'either take the cash and shut up, or you aren't getting the money', essentially.
Last but not least, how does it make sense to give the player an ultimatum of either signing a contract that he is unhappy with, or leaving the house into which he had already settled, without giving him the opportunity of having the contract examined by someone more qualified of appraising it?
You try to sound nice and professional here, but all I'm seeing is a lot of really poor damage control and fluffy words that contradict reality. You'd be better off simply saying, 'Yeah, we fucked up with Fuzer. We'll try to do better in future' instead of this. Also, kittens? Seriously?
If fuzer doesn't read the contract, or have a professional look at the contract over the course of a month then he can't negotiate it.
What was the purpose of fuzer's post if not to attack MoW? Upon being attacked they decided that they would offer to unconditionally rectify the reason the attack took place, Fuzer declined. This is what attacks are supposed to do, create some sort of response. Fuzer got a response both out of the community and the MoW. Might not have been the correct response entirely, but it was a positive attempt.
When the person being offered the ultimatum has had over a month to make adjustments to a part of that ultimatum then it makes complete sense.
If you notice, they also didn't say "Yeah, we fucked up with fuzer" they say "We made mistakes handling the fuzer situation and offer our sincere apologies to him as well as the entire community" which is a huge difference. I wonder how many of you would care if we found out that Fuzer was back there next week and all was forgiven. I bet all the esports dollars there would be grudges held over issues that didn't have anything to do with us in the least.
He couldn't have a professional look at the contract over the course of a month because MoW refused to provide a copy of the contract for anyone but himself to look at. How exactly is that his fault?
Also, however critical Fuzer is, he is hardly 'attacking' MoW. He gave his recollection of the events, and provided ample evidence supporting his side of the story. It's not an attack, it's an explanation of the situation from his point of view; the fact that it puts MoW in bad light is hardly his fault if the stuff is actually true. On the other hand, MoW's replies were dodgy at best, some of the stuff they write is downright false; even their initial advertisement of the house offers a lot of promises that aren't being fulfilled despite for the house having been up and running for... was it 3 months now or so?
It's just very hard to take any of their statements seriously.
On September 14 2012 02:23 m0ck wrote: So much uninformed reflexive stupid in this thread. Taking fuzers part is not cheering on david versus goliath. It's urging on a trollish idiot who spends his time 2-raxing on ladder.
Because the builds he chooses to use during ladder play OBVIOUSLY has something to do with the whole thing.
And you talk about stupid...
Looks like everyone know that Fuzer is BM/chesser and cant be taking seriously , but only you no.. Did you watch Fuzer strem just once.. ? What he was doing on stream.. ? I think no..
On September 14 2012 02:23 m0ck wrote: So much uninformed reflexive stupid in this thread. Taking fuzers part is not cheering on david versus goliath. It's urging on a trollish idiot who spends his time 2-raxing on ladder.
Because the builds he chooses to use during ladder play OBVIOUSLY has something to do with the whole thing.
And you talk about stupid...
Looks like everyone know that Fuzer is BM/chesser and cant be taking seriously , but only you no.. Did you watch Fuzer strem just once.. ? What he was doing on stream.. ? I think no..
What the hell? Please stop posting if you have nothing relevant to post.
On September 14 2012 02:23 m0ck wrote: So much uninformed reflexive stupid in this thread. Taking fuzers part is not cheering on david versus goliath. It's urging on a trollish idiot who spends his time 2-raxing on ladder.
Because the builds he chooses to use during ladder play OBVIOUSLY has something to do with the whole thing.
And you talk about stupid...
Looks like everyone know that Fuzer is BM/chesser and cant be taking seriously , but only you no.. Did you watch Fuzer strem just once.. ? What he was doing on stream.. ? I think no..
What he does on stream has nothing to do with this topic. This is very simple to understand.
On September 14 2012 02:25 s00s wrote: nobody wonders why Fuzer didn't provide his lawer licence. i think he should claryfie this issue. maybe there was no lawer? about money they "owned| to Fuzer. peopel who travel a lot now how it works, when you say you will stay somwhere for one month you have to pay for one month, nobody cares if you leave earlier. owner has to pay for cleaning service, food (even if it's not the best one) and so one. this is totaly understandable. what more, Fuzer, accused MoW for stealing wich is quite serious and started threating and teasing on his facebook account first. take it into considiraton. i'm not saying MoW was the good guys over here, nor Fuzer was the bad one, but amout of shitstorm is simply minblowing and some balance should be made.
True, Fuzer does seem a little douche in all this, it's understandable how - even if you're a new business - you could get annoyed with the kid if he's breaking rules and not signing the contract etc and say some regrettable shit to him on skype. At least MoW have said that they shouldn't have let him in the house without signing the contract and hopefully they have learned that they can't push lesser known players around anymore and hopefully they'll fix some of their "rules".
On September 14 2012 01:14 MinistryOfWin wrote: Upon announcing that he chose the latter, a refund for the remaining days has been offered and turned down.
[/center]
That's a lie. We saw skype logs showing that you refused the refund. You asked for account number, and offered the refund, 2 hour after Fuzers Facebook post;
"Back in finland, time to start writing a story how MoW house stealed my money "
So to sum up: -You didn't want to refund his money -He posted that he will tell the community about it (on Facebook) -You wanna do the refund to prevent the drama -He turns the proposition down (as he should!) -He posts, drama begins -You do the statement and LIE in it.
On September 14 2012 02:23 m0ck wrote: So much uninformed reflexive stupid in this thread. Taking fuzers part is not cheering on david versus goliath. It's urging on a trollish idiot who spends his time 2-raxing on ladder.
Because the builds he chooses to use during ladder play OBVIOUSLY has something to do with the whole thing.
And you talk about stupid...
Looks like everyone know that Fuzer is BM/chesser and cant be taking seriously , but only you no.. Did you watch Fuzer strem just once.. ? What he was doing on stream.. ? I think no..
What the hell? Please stop posting if you have nothing relevant to post.
Why because you say so.. ? There are threads where i hel people , try to answer questions , thread worth my time and effort , but this one is just troll fest..and i hate trolls. Why all stupid and bulshit post here come from users that have 1-30 posts.. ? People write think just to write.. they dont even know what they write abouth.. and who is Fuzer..
On September 14 2012 02:23 m0ck wrote: So much uninformed reflexive stupid in this thread. Taking fuzers part is not cheering on david versus goliath. It's urging on a trollish idiot who spends his time 2-raxing on ladder.
Because the builds he chooses to use during ladder play OBVIOUSLY has something to do with the whole thing.
And you talk about stupid...
Looks like everyone know that Fuzer is BM/chesser and cant be taking seriously , but only you no.. Did you watch Fuzer strem just once.. ? What he was doing on stream.. ? I think no..
What he does on stream has nothing to do with this topic. This is very simple to understand.
And you are kind wrong sir. He always tried to attract attention , and now he got what he want. Be famous one way or another...
On September 14 2012 02:25 s00s wrote: nobody wonders why Fuzer didn't provide his lawer licence. i think he should claryfie this issue. maybe there was no lawer? about money they "owned| to Fuzer. peopel who travel a lot now how it works, when you say you will stay somwhere for one month you have to pay for one month, nobody cares if you leave earlier. owner has to pay for cleaning service, food (even if it's not the best one) and so one. this is totaly understandable. what more, Fuzer, accused MoW for stealing wich is quite serious and started threating and teasing on his facebook account first. take it into considiraton. i'm not saying MoW was the good guys over here, nor Fuzer was the bad one, but amout of shitstorm is simply minblowing and some balance should be made.
True, Fuzer does seem a little douche in all this, it's understandable how - even if you're a new business - you could get annoyed with the kid if he's breaking rules and not signing the contract etc and say some regrettable shit to him on skype. At least MoW have said that they shouldn't have let him in the house without signing the contract and hopefully they have learned that they can't push lesser known players around anymore and hopefully they'll fix some of their "rules".
MoW asked for lawyer's credential the same day they asked the deadline from what I can gather. That's a little short notice for his lawyer to get everything ready to send to someone from another country. Also, it is a HIGHLY unusual practice. You don't ask for credential of someone from another country. Just how could you tell if it is real or not? You ask for the identity and verify it through a directory / registry.
3. The fee of 2 500 PLN (circa €600 or $785) is charged up front for full months of all inclusive stay in the house. This is the first consideration the players are presented with before coming to the house. Please note that the Ministry of Win is not a hotel thus all operations, including guest departures and arrivals, food and supply purchases, etc..., are planned and partially executed at least a month ahead with accordance to the players stay roster.
Why is it even here if later you are saying: "a refund for the remaining days has been offered and turned down"? Did you forget to say it was offered after he mentioned uncovering the whole thing and it was rather not a refund but an attempt to buy his silence? And since the whole thing got leaked now you need a reason not to pay him back? Ok now that quote DOES make sense.
On September 14 2012 02:25 s00s wrote: nobody wonders why Fuzer didn't provide his lawer licence. i think he should claryfie this issue. maybe there was no lawer?
Considering there had already been revisions made to the contract that would heavily lean toward there being a lawyer involved, but we don't know that. Fuzer could have proposed revisions himself, and then wanted to get a look-see by his lawyer after he got the final version on September 8th.
As noted above, trying to get any documentation from a lawyer in such an aggressive time frame is quite difficult. But let's just assume that MoW got tired of Fuzer stonewalling them and kicked him out of the house out of frustration; the correct way of doing so is to refund the money. Hell, there may have been a "if you're an asshole we can kick you out and keep your deposit" clause in the contract but Fuzer hadn't signed it!
On September 14 2012 01:14 MinistryOfWin wrote: Upon announcing that he chose the latter, a refund for the remaining days has been offered and turned down.
That's a lie. We saw skype logs showing that you refused the refund. You asked for account number, and offered the refund, 2 hour after Fuzers Facebook post;
"Back in finland, time to start writing a story how MoW house stealed my money "
So to sum up: -You didn't want to refund his money -He posted that he will tell the community about it (on Facebook) -You wanna do the refund to prevent the drama -He turns the proposition down (as he should!) -He posts, drama begins -You do the statement and LIE in it.
Nice move!
[/center]
This isnt the first time Boss have been in scam´s on esports COD4 LAN SCAM (polish) so everyone whos saying he should get another change, this is his third one your giving to him
On September 14 2012 01:56 Salazarz wrote: So, if the streaming thing is 'for the benefit of players' and is 'totally negotiable', why do you have a written contract specifically addressing the exact amount of hours each player is required to stream? It's not something Fuzer alone said, other players mentioned it in passing as well.
And why are you saying that 'a refund was offered, which Fuzer refused'? You make it sound like it was a genuine, unconditional offer of a refund - but previous posts already confirmed that you put it forward as another demand - 'either take the cash and shut up, or you aren't getting the money', essentially.
Last but not least, how does it make sense to give the player an ultimatum of either signing a contract that he is unhappy with, or leaving the house into which he had already settled, without giving him the opportunity of having the contract examined by someone more qualified of appraising it?
You try to sound nice and professional here, but all I'm seeing is a lot of really poor damage control and fluffy words that contradict reality. You'd be better off simply saying, 'Yeah, we fucked up with Fuzer. We'll try to do better in future' instead of this. Also, kittens? Seriously?
If fuzer doesn't read the contract, or have a professional look at the contract over the course of a month then he can't negotiate it.
What was the purpose of fuzer's post if not to attack MoW? Upon being attacked they decided that they would offer to unconditionally rectify the reason the attack took place, Fuzer declined. This is what attacks are supposed to do, create some sort of response. Fuzer got a response both out of the community and the MoW. Might not have been the correct response entirely, but it was a positive attempt.
When the person being offered the ultimatum has had over a month to make adjustments to a part of that ultimatum then it makes complete sense.
If you notice, they also didn't say "Yeah, we fucked up with fuzer" they say "We made mistakes handling the fuzer situation and offer our sincere apologies to him as well as the entire community" which is a huge difference. I wonder how many of you would care if we found out that Fuzer was back there next week and all was forgiven. I bet all the esports dollars there would be grudges held over issues that didn't have anything to do with us in the least.
He couldn't have a professional look at the contract over the course of a month because MoW refused to provide a copy of the contract for anyone but himself to look at. How exactly is that his fault?
Also, however critical Fuzer is, he is hardly 'attacking' MoW. He gave his recollection of the events, and provided ample evidence supporting his side of the story. It's not an attack, it's an explanation of the situation from his point of view; the fact that it puts MoW in bad light is hardly his fault if the stuff is actually true. It's just very hard to take any of their statements seriously.
But several of his main arguments: (starving, not being part of another team house for 10 years, everyone having to stream 150 hours a month) were simply not true at all.
Oh people of the internet, you've got yourself quite a feast. Enjoy throwing around judgements based on little parts of conversations, while nobody can punch you in the face. Amusing thread, thanks guys
On September 14 2012 02:35 MenaceWarrior wrote: This isnt the first time Boss have been in scam´s on esports COD4 LAN SCAM (polish) so everyone whos saying he should get another change, this is his third one your giving to him
Tell me... do you really think that Fuzer was misinformed about paying for the whole month up front? MoW got in trouble because they did not sign anything beforehand. Implying that this was intended to be a scam or a theft is an overkill.
On September 14 2012 02:25 s00s wrote: nobody wonders why Fuzer didn't provide his lawer licence. i think he should claryfie this issue. maybe there was no lawer? about money they "owned| to Fuzer. peopel who travel a lot now how it works, when you say you will stay somwhere for one month you have to pay for one month, nobody cares if you leave earlier. owner has to pay for cleaning service, food (even if it's not the best one) and so one. this is totaly understandable. what more, Fuzer, accused MoW for stealing wich is quite serious and started threating and teasing on his facebook account first. take it into considiraton. i'm not saying MoW was the good guys over here, nor Fuzer was the bad one, but amout of shitstorm is simply minblowing and some balance should be made.
That's not the issue here as he didn't leave on his own terms but was asked to leave, therefore MoW was the party denying him what he had already paid for, therefore the "upfront" nature of the payment is void because that would simply amount to fraud in any court room. An agreement that trades one thing for another does not allow one party to withhold their part while still receiving the other party's. Fuzer went wild in his choice of words but you can't blame him after the time frame we see here. It's not at all Fuzer's concern whether they have to pay for shit in advance and then kick him out.
Seriously MoW, 8th to 11th? To get a lawyer's license faxed to you which can basically only happen on monday then? It's far from any normal business practice to require that in the first place.
Samuli refused to sign the agreed contract containing his amendments and requested another consultation period. This has been received as a stalling tactics
So you hand him some contract you negotiated with him and then when he gets the final version which he might actually consider you throw him out after 3 days of not signing it because you're apparently becoming impatient because you can't enforce all the other shit in it? You can let people sign partial agreements, you know. He has every right to not immediately sign this and show it to a lawyer. I wouldn't show an unfinished contract to my lawyer either because these guys don't exactly work for free (you can easily calculate 200€ per working hour and a 15 page contract should take at least that long).
Upon announcing that he chose the latter, a refund for the remaining days has been offered and turned down.
Spin much? Given the posted chatlogs this just seems like a blatant lie. You had to fear for you reputation and public backlash first it seems.
EPT
"
