|
On September 14 2012 02:33 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +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!
Finally someone with alive brain cells.
If you want to kick the guy out of the house because he is a prick, always remember it is a business, and YOU took the risk bringing him to the house withouth signing anything. Do the right thing, pay the guy, say him goodbye, wish him the best of lucks, and GG. Noone can ever say some shit about you because you are on the right.
|
On September 14 2012 02:35 saksy2 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 02:27 Salazarz wrote:On September 14 2012 02:00 Noobity wrote: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.
Food problem is verified by MoW and other players. Did he exagerate? Probably. But it still an issue.
The 10 year can't create own house thing was confirmed by others.
150 hour stream was also confirmed by multiple players.
Just because MoW said they didn't enforce it (that's a bunch of BS, you don't put it in contract just for shits and giggles) doesn't mean it was not in the contract and was expected.
|
On September 14 2012 02:12 syriuszonito wrote:
Try to steal someones money -> shit gots revealed -> post kittens
Seriously?
Yes, seriously.. The staff always seemed quite cold and not carrying in the videos. And now you know why. The whole MoW is there for the money and nothing more.
|
You guys at MoW still need to understand that after you accepted the payment you have to deliver the services. He payed for the month let him live to the end and then kick him out, NOT BEFORE THAT. There was no stupid contract signed where a stupid clause like
If MoW decides to kick the player out before his stay expires, the player is not entitled for a refund on the remaining days
could be inserted. So pretty fucking please give him the damn money.
|
Your kittens are great, your reimbursement policies are not however.
|
Samuli expressed his interest in joining the Ministry of Win. In order to meet his expectations we decided to invite him in and let him experience the house-life first hand, so that he could make a more educated decision with regards to the contract. A monthly fee of 2 500 PLN has been established, paid up front each month, which has been delivered in cash by Samuli on arrival to the house.
So until he signs the contract you established he would pay 2500 PLN per month. Then when both of you are working out the details of the contract you tell him to sign until 22:00 or leave the house?
It was the 8th of the month for which he already payed you, so what was your reason to throw him out so early? Especially because fuzers native language is not english and he wanted to let a lawyer check the contract, which is completely reasonable.
Did you ask fuzer to send some qualifications of his lawyer?
At least you admit that you did not handle the situation correctly, but you don't really go into detail to make me understand why you acted the way you did.
Also I think adding kittens in this situation is not appropriate.
|
On September 14 2012 02:28 pallad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 02:25 MiQ wrote: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..
I wish I could understand a word of your gibberish but I honestly can't. You're not even trying to be understood. Not that there is anything to understand, just saying your posts look like shit.
|
On September 14 2012 02:39 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 02:35 saksy2 wrote:On September 14 2012 02:27 Salazarz wrote:On September 14 2012 02:00 Noobity wrote: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. Food problem is verified by MoW and other players. Did he exagerate? Probably. But it still an issue. The 10 year can't create own house thing was confirmed by others. 150 hour stream was also confirmed by multiple players. Just because MoW said they didn't enforce it (that's a bunch of BS, you don't put it in contract just for shits and giggles) doesn't mean it was not in the contract and was expected.
Fuzer claimed you couldn't join another gaming house, which is pretty different from creating one. Other players also confirmed streaming hours were negotiable and not at all "forced to stream 150 hours"
|
On September 14 2012 01:28 ROOTT1 wrote:lol felines are so noobie, theyre too unloyal this is where its at ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VxvGY.jpg)
You've owned the wrong felines then.
|
On September 14 2012 02:41 saksy2 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 02:39 ragz_gt wrote:On September 14 2012 02:35 saksy2 wrote:On September 14 2012 02:27 Salazarz wrote:On September 14 2012 02:00 Noobity wrote: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. Food problem is verified by MoW and other players. Did he exagerate? Probably. But it still an issue. The 10 year can't create own house thing was confirmed by others. 150 hour stream was also confirmed by multiple players. Just because MoW said they didn't enforce it (that's a bunch of BS, you don't put it in contract just for shits and giggles) doesn't mean it was not in the contract and was expected. Fuzer claimed you couldn't join another gaming house, which is pretty different from creating one. Other players also confirmed streaming hours were negotiable and not at all "forced to stream 150 hours"
His claim was that he couldn't understand that part well (not native speaker) thus said what he thought it meant. It is a valid point and why he want his lawyer to look at it. If people give you a contract that says "150 hour streaming" how do you know it is negotiable and why does that make a difference anyway?
|
on the bright side of the story.. the players might get healthy food now..
|
|
|
The worst part is the ultimatum to leave the house before 22.00. Nice way to throw a guy out in the night in the foreign country.
|
On September 14 2012 02:30 TheHansBecker wrote:
"Sorry, you caught us forcing players to agree to an unconscionable contract.... We sincerely apologize."
More like, sorry you got caught and exposed...
Except the contract was negotiated with the original guests after they specifically set aside time to do so, and it was agreeable to those players. Surprise surprise, a pitchfork wielder hurled accusations of malicious intent despite not being informed. LOL this particular drama episode is especially pathetic. I hopeyou realize its people like you that Tasteless was shitting on when he said it's embarrassing to go on community sites and see the drama threads. As with him I truly feel embarrassed for the community right now.
|
Germany25657 Posts
Ugh, now we have 2 threads where people can shittalk 
Can't you (Fuzer and MoW) deal with this privately instead of making statements blaming the other?
MoW will never win this argument anyway, fuzer (obviously) posted his accusations first and people had about 3 hours (60 pages) of time to make up their minds that Mow is the bad guy.
Anything that is posted is of course a lie, misinformation and what not -.-
|
Fuck you guys, You can't just add some bs pictures and expect everything to be hunky dory - Don't insult our intelligence.
|
On September 14 2012 02:45 Cheerio wrote:
The worst part is the ultimatum to leave the house before 22.00. Nice way to through a guy out in the night in the foreign country.
Hey, it's before 22:00 not at 22:00 sharp. So he could just catch direct flight to Helsinki at 19:45 
|
obvious pr is obvious, lol
|
On September 14 2012 02:44 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 02:41 saksy2 wrote:On September 14 2012 02:39 ragz_gt wrote:On September 14 2012 02:35 saksy2 wrote:On September 14 2012 02:27 Salazarz wrote:On September 14 2012 02:00 Noobity wrote: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. Food problem is verified by MoW and other players. Did he exagerate? Probably. But it still an issue. The 10 year can't create own house thing was confirmed by others. 150 hour stream was also confirmed by multiple players. Just because MoW said they didn't enforce it (that's a bunch of BS, you don't put it in contract just for shits and giggles) doesn't mean it was not in the contract and was expected. Fuzer claimed you couldn't join another gaming house, which is pretty different from creating one. Other players also confirmed streaming hours were negotiable and not at all "forced to stream 150 hours" His claim was that he couldn't understand that part well (not native speaker) thus said what he thought it meant. It is a valid point and why he want his lawyer to look at it. If people give you a contract that says "150 hour streaming" how do you know it is negotiable and why does that make a difference anyway?
Read the OP:
2. Ministry of Win does not enforce on players the amount of hours they have to stream. It is a part of a business contract and both parties negotiate an agreement.
It obviously makes a difference as probably 20 pages of the last thread was devoted to complain how unhumane and counter-productive being forced to stream 150 hours a month is.
|
On September 14 2012 02:47 KadaverBB wrote:Ugh, now we have 2 threads where people can shittalk Can't you (Fuzer and MoW) deal with this privately instead of making statements blaming the other? MoW will never win this argument anyway, fuzer (obviously) posted his accusations first and people had about 3 hours (60 pages) of time to make up their minds that Mow is the bad guy. Anything that is posted is of course a lie, misinformation and what not -.-
Problem is MoW did not refute any of Fuzer's claims. They posted a alternative point of view of the same claim but with no detail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
