|
|
On April 08 2018 11:11 BisuDagger wrote:
While it's great that DSK was so generous, I'm surprised the offer was accepted. Regardless of how I'd handle things, I hope everyone including fans can move on.
Yeah, I am honestly surprised that it was accepted. But since the money will go to the community through BSTL and most importantly the Unity Tax has been removed, I really can't complain.
@DSK, you are a hero!
|
On April 08 2018 16:39 blunderfulguy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2018 16:20 KGssv2 wrote:On April 08 2018 16:15 blunderfulguy wrote:On April 08 2018 16:06 Mun_Su wrote:On April 08 2018 16:03 blunderfulguy wrote:
You effectively just paid someone to stop harassing people, rewarding them for it. This isn't what stops situations like this from happening, it justifies that behavior and enables people to keep doing things like this.
This is the easy, sloppy way to try to end things, and it doesn't work for me. People have been threatened by someone for months... Instead of putting your feet down and calling out their bullshit, demanding better from everyone involved, you give into their demands, with no evidence that their demands and actions are justifiable, and try to make everyone sweep it under the rug just because you're tired of the drama?
Sorry, but despite your generosity and your good intentions and your own desire for everyone to cooperate, I cannot genuinely applaud your actions.
This was extortion. As far as I'm concerned, that money they just made is covered in dirt (read: obtained illegally/immorally). You're assuming there is a good and a bad in this shit show. i just saw two wronged sides. And, if both sides are at fault, one was given a giant cake and a party. Is that a good thing? Well...I guess that depends on how you look at it. NoRegret no longer faces potential legal action and the players don't have to endure the 10% tax anymore. Rifkin got what he wants (the $1500) and NoRegret got what he wants (not having to pay Rifkin). Of course, both sides wanted more, namely vindication, but at least the material aspect of the debate is resolved to both side's favour. . Let's get it clear, the threat of legal action against NoRegreT and the abhorrent tax against the other players were (as far as anyone has been able to prove) nothing but harassment and extortion. Now Rifkin has the freedom to feel vindicated and the freedom to sweep that mess under the rug because a third party stepped in to attempt to resolve the dispute. I get that there a lot of perspectives, but there is still some black and white and red amidst the grey. *I'd also like to add that one party was rewarded (for their harassment) with money, and, in your argument, the other parties get the reward of "you won't be punished or threatened anymore". Think about that for a moment if you could, please. **Just for clarity: While the money is going into tournament prize pools and not directly to Rifkin, those tournaments with increased prize pools are still part of his business.
As the person above said, you are assuming there is a good and bad in this shit show.
Im not quite sure you can say the threat of legal action against NoRegret was 'nothing but harassment and extortion'. We simply do not have enough facts or knowledge of oral and written communications between the two to make a judgement on that. It remains possible that either side could have been in the right/wrong and unless the matter proceeds to litigation and undergoes the formal process of production of evidence, discovery (if needed) and the laws of evidence etc. Until then, it is unlikely anyone can determine who is liable. I would be very cautious to make blanket statements like "as far as anyone has been able to prove" since both sides have been withholding information to whatever extent.
By labelling Rifkin's action as harassment, you are relying on the assumption that his claim is meritless or vexatious at worse, which as I have said, we simply do not know. Whilst I think Rifkin’s imposition of 10% on players is deplorable, this has nothing to do with the validity of his claim. Your comment that the only benefit NoRegret gets is not being punished or threatened anymore, is again, premised upon the assumption that NoRegret could not have possibly been in the wrong. If, however, he was in the wrong, his benefits would be a lot more than ‘not being threatened anymore’. You can frame this as a one-sided harassment if you wish, but unless I am the judge sitting at the bench with both parties’ complete pleadings, I will be much more reserved and call it a contractual dispute for now.
Sure, I can accept your logic that this incident of third party intervention may potentially set precedent/encourage future episodes of similar nature or even condone certain types of behaviour. Personally, I do not think a third party paying off the disputed sum condones anyone’s actions but I agree that this is not the most ideal outcome. However, realistically disputes never end in the most ideal form. What matters is that the solution was acceptable to both parties involved, even if the practical benefit is just ‘won’t be punished or threatened anymore’.
Perhaps if you were in the position of NoRegret or Rifkin you might refuse to accept DSK’s generosity. You might prefer the debate to go on so as to deny Rifkin from getting money. You might prefer to go to court to determine who is legally right. I don’t know what you would do in the situation, but it seems NoRegret and Rifkin both prefer to accept the third party intervention and depart on the matter without admitting to fault.
Your perspective is not invalid. It has been a longstanding criticism within the jurisprudence of Alternate Dispute Resolution practices that parties often end up accepting practical benefits (or to frame it differently, the position of not having to suffer a detriment) despite that outcome not necessarily being the most just or right by law. The alternate view is that if the parties themselves elect to accept a particular outcome knowing it is not 100% of what they want, then perhaps that is the best achievable solution.
|
On April 08 2018 16:03 blunderfulguy wrote:
You effectively just paid someone to stop harassing people, rewarding them for it. This isn't what stops situations like this from happening, it justifies that behavior and enables people to keep doing things like this.
This is the easy, sloppy way to try to end things, and it doesn't work for me. People have been threatened by someone for months... Instead of putting your feet down and calling out their bullshit, demanding better from everyone involved, you give into their demands, with no evidence that their demands and actions are justifiable, and try to make everyone sweep it under the rug just because you're tired of the drama?
Sorry, but despite your generosity and your good intentions and your own desire for everyone to cooperate, I cannot genuinely applaud your actions.
This was extortion. As far as I'm concerned, that money they just made is covered in dirt (read: obtained illegally/immorally).
you assume way too much - for example DSK did not have more information about it than what is publicly know, which is basically only what 2 sides claimed without any actual evidence.
also you don't know what extortion is, otherwise you wouldn't claim such a scandalous thing...but looking edgy and cool is important to you I guess.
|
On April 08 2018 12:20 NoRegreT_ wrote:
Honestly the communities generosity amazes me, But the reason I'm not paying the $1500 isn't because I can't afford it. It's because it isn't supposed to go back to him. I really hope this money is going back to the community in some way. Honestly the tactics he went through to get this money is crazy, The "anonymous" tip, The law suit, The Tax. It's a shame he got his way in the end.
then why TF did you agree to this?if you have such a strong feelings about this why step back, agree to this and then continue to sh*t around?
you accepted, so stop BS around and move on like an adult person would.
just thank whoever paid for you
|
On April 08 2018 21:06 killerm12 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2018 12:20 NoRegreT_ wrote:
Honestly the communities generosity amazes me, But the reason I'm not paying the $1500 isn't because I can't afford it. It's because it isn't supposed to go back to him. I really hope this money is going back to the community in some way. Honestly the tactics he went through to get this money is crazy, The "anonymous" tip, The law suit, The Tax. It's a shame he got his way in the end. then why TF did you agree to this?if you have such a strong feelings about this why step back, agree to this and then continue to sh*t around? you accepted, so stop BS around and move on like an adult person would. just thank whoever paid for you
Yeah, I really don't understand the point of his post as well. It only makes DSK look like an idiot for settling this issue.
|
On April 05 2018 22:53 JackONeill wrote:
Well at some point progamers and community personalities will understand that dealing with Basetrade TV always ends up in drama. And when i mean BTTV, i mean Rifkin.
Not taking sides referring to the multiple instances of drama/BS related to BTTV in the last years, which don't really interest me. I'm just baffled that anyone would get involved with him at this point.
Weird, I see it in another manner:
- probably due to the fact that rifkin put this money on their team house which he is not part of anymore, he has to ask his investments back.
- as the NoRegret did not want to pay, he blocked rifkin.
- he justifies that as rifkin still holds money from matcherino which he believes to have claims on (which he probably has not).
What then happened:
- As Rifkin was not getting his money back, he wanted to try to get his investment back via payouts of tournaments that he hosts with that kind of tax.
- As NoRegret owes Rifkin the money now, NoRegret would then owe this money the players (not rifkin).
- As the players benefit from the investments of Rifkin into that house, it would either be equalized then or NoRegret would owe the players then, which has to be decided between NoRegret and the players.
Rifkin did nothing wrong but one thing. Instead of coming up with anything like that tax to get his investments back, he should have instantly filed suit.
|
This whole thing didnt need to happen, i agree that if he did owe him money though Rif should have filed a suit real quick like, instead of having the dirty laundry aired out online and having players literally pay the price.
|
On April 08 2018 21:41 OkStyX wrote:
This whole thing didnt need to happen, i agree that if he did owe him money though Rif should have filed a suit real quick like, instead of having the dirty laundry aired out online and having players literally pay the price.
Filing a suit is creating dirty laundry even more.
Trying the tax thing on players can actually only be seen as a Rifkin try to exactly avoid dirty laundry and bad exposure for both sides while still satisfying his probably rightful claims.
|
On April 07 2018 03:14 ihatevideogames wrote:
All this drama for 1500$?
Doesn't rifkin realise he'll lose way more in the future because of all the bad publicity of shit like this?
This is what NoRegret hopes/hoped for when blocking contact with a person he owes $1500.
Also part of that is the story with the players:
- In order to distract from the Rifkin vs NoRegret matter, observers try to be deceived that it is a Rifkin vs. the players matter.
- players themselves might have been deceived about that in fact.
- players might have no choice other than siding with NoRegret when they live with him in his "teamhouse".
These are just the obvious things to me. Ofc alot more has happened behind the curtains and we do not know about these details. But it is as well of no importance who has been nice and who has not, or if other things went bad e. g. working for free in the teamhouse or what happened with matcherino money - if 1500 has to be discounted or if it already is the ~ discounted sum, etc.
|
Mighty props to DSK for saving eSports!!
I'm also amazed at bluderfulguy's white-hot hatred of Rifkin.. did he run over your cat??
|
On April 08 2018 21:53 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2018 03:14 ihatevideogames wrote:
All this drama for 1500$?
Doesn't rifkin realise he'll lose way more in the future because of all the bad publicity of shit like this? This is what NoRegret hopes/hoped for
Again, heck knows who's right.. Rif said he won't comment (much) due to contractual confidentiality (isn't a contract just a worthless piece of paper unless it's considered binding/trusted/enforceable). If, as I assume, all of this would have to be filed/settled in Korea, likely only the translation of legal documents would cost that much, let alone stress, time and opportunity costs of lawyering up, plus even more dirty laundry&bad publicity which certainly would make people shy away from either side, so everybody loses.
Unless there's a saviour! Tried to make a Robin Hood pun, but I couldn't make it work...
|
It's amazing that DSK offered his own money to resolve the situation, but this was about the principal of the matter rather than the money. I think blunderfulguy expresses a similar opinion as myself so there's no need to repeat it
|
Holy shit DSK, you're a great person.
Wouldn't say that BTTV/Rifkin deserves the money, but it's still a nice and extremely generous gesture.
|
Can this be locked now? Surely with it being settled thanks to DSK there's no need any more for this continual sniping of those involved
|
On April 08 2018 23:42 Ibanez.beau wrote:
It's amazing that DSK offered his own money to resolve the situation, but this was about the principal of the matter rather than the money. I think blunderfulguy expresses a similar opinion as myself so there's no need to repeat it
So you also want to see one of the parties crucified rather than this settling down and dieing out. I'm convinced some people in 1914 would agree with you.
NoRegret also bathing himself in glory to retaliate after it should have been closed.
|
DSK I honestly think what you did is very generous, but I honestly view it as Rifkin being greedy to accept a fan or person outside of the contract for pay for this. This in the end shows me his true colors. If he cared about the fans, then why would you let a fan or someone outside settle something like this? I would have taken a loss if I cared more about fans before having them pay for someone else debt. This only proves, in my opinion of course, that Rifkin is more worried about the money than the fans watching. This to me betrays the brand he supposedly brought up through out the years as BTTV
|
I agree mostly with blunderfulguy and ibanez.beau.
DSK really did a great and generous thing, the important part of it is that the players in the teamhouse no longer get "punished" with this 10% tax.
This was however a dispute where one person felt entitled to a sum of money without being able to back that up and the person supposedly in "debt" denying it refusing to pay based on principles.
That Rifkin took the money proves one big point, he has not filed any legal action, otherwise he would not have accepted that DSK payed the debt, which in turn proves he did not have any proof that he was owed money. I just really hope the money goes back to the community.
|
This whole thing reads like a Mafia game. So much accusations and half facts thrown around, and us lowly townships trying to find the bad guy. I hope we lynch the right person...
Anyways,
##Vote DSK for Mayor
|
On April 09 2018 00:27 -StrifeX- wrote:
DSK I honestly think what you did is very generous, but I honestly view it as Rifkin being greedy to accept a fan or person outside of the contract for pay for this. This in the end shows me his true colors. If he cared about the fans, then why would you let a fan or someone outside settle something like this? I would have taken a loss if I cared more about fans before having them pay for someone else debt. This only proves, in my opinion of course, that Rifkin is more worried about the money than the fans watching. This to me betrays the brand he supposedly brought up through out the years as BTTV
On the contrary, refusing is impossible. I seriously don't get some people. DSK is saying, he paid for NoRegret. There is no reason for Rifkin to refuse. (i.e. he gifted NoRegret 1.5k with the purpose bound to paying BTTV and thus NoRegret paid Rifkin; if the 1.5k was really owed is another issue of course) Refusing would be the childish thing. Also ideally the whole situation should not have happened.
|
On April 09 2018 00:25 DSh1 wrote:
So you also want to see one of the parties crucified rather than this settling down and dieing out. I'm convinced some people in 1914 would agree with you.
I believe it's important to reveal who is at fault for those who wish to work with either in the future. After all, it was the players who were being punished for the disagreement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
