EPTBasetradeTV and NoRegreT disagreement escalates - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Starting from Page 11 and onward, if anyone talks about how Blizzard, TOs, and sponsors should no longer support BTTV and Rifkin, you will be temp banned. This adds NOTHING productive to the discussion and only makes the community look immature. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/532710-basetradetv-and-noregret-disagreement-escalates?page=11#216 Additionally, this post deserves to be publicly noticed. | ||
|
Pursuit_
United States1330 Posts
| ||
|
Pascal1p
24 Posts
Some people tried to argue, they might not be good, but they do a lot for community. But this is again a controversy in the long list of controversies caused by basetradetv, I wonder if they haven't done more harm than good. User was warned for this post | ||
|
WhiteSPiriT
France19 Posts
On April 06 2018 03:45 palexhur wrote: Sorry but it they dont have any clause in the contract about that equipment, the owner of the things is the one who bought with his money that equipment, it is not like: "ok I put the furniture in anybodys apartment then if we part ways and I leave the apt, then that furniture now belongs to that person , if is not in the contract". Definitely, but we have no clue about if this is the case or not. But if this is like this, you are right. Btw, someone said that Rifkin said in december he would contact a lawyer and stuff, still there isn't any legal action, so yeah, it's not looking like it is that "easy" for him. | ||
|
brickrd
United States4894 Posts
i don't know who's legally in the right here, but the fact that rifkin is willing to threaten to sue a player over this is horrendous optics and proves what many people have long suspected, which is that rifkin has a problem keeping his ego in check. even if, hypothetically, rifkin is 100% legally right, no professional organization or sponsor would handle this situation this way the fact that this is the person who has done so much for the scene is simply sad. it doesn't nullify the good his organization has done, but it makes the scene an ugly and shitty place | ||
|
royalroadweed
United States8301 Posts
| ||
|
Solar424
United States4001 Posts
| ||
|
Pascal1p
24 Posts
It unfair to put all the blame on rifkin alone. | ||
|
brickrd
United States4894 Posts
On April 06 2018 04:31 Solar424 wrote: I think it's a bad idea for anyone that isn't directly involved to form an opinion on this until we find out where the Matcherino money actually went. If the money went to BTTV that's one thing, but if the players in the house got it that's another. i agree that jumping to conclusions about the contract is pointless, but that's only one issue. the other issue is rifkin repeatedly turning the scene into a stage for him to try to assert his personal importance in comparison to foreign players. im not even trying to shit on rifkin or make him look bad, i just think he needs to stop | ||
|
Musicus
Germany23576 Posts
On April 06 2018 04:38 Pascal1p wrote: Lets not only blame rifkin, it is basetrade tv, so it includes the whole organisation and its main team. They all supported or atleast condoned this kind of behaviour and policy. It unfair to put all the blame on rifkin alone. Well ZG hasn't been part of BTTV for a while though, she is only a guest caster now when she is on BTTV, just as Wardi, Maynarde or feardragon when they appear. I agree with you, but I am not sure who is part of BTTV now apart from Rifkin. | ||
|
DSh1
292 Posts
On April 06 2018 03:48 Keeemy wrote: So Rifkin "threatened" NoRegreT with legal action back in december 2017 but still hasn't actually done anything? Surely if the legal options would have been "easy wins" (as Rifkin said) he would have done it already. Or maybe Rifkin truly is a nice guy.  Isn't that how the normal procedure goes? Rarely do you really settle in court. | ||
|
Mun_Su
France2063 Posts
On April 06 2018 04:22 Pascal1p wrote: I always thought both zombiegrub and rifkin were bad, maybe even terrible casters. Some people tried to argue, they might not be good, but they do a lot for community. But this is again a controversy in the long list of controversies caused by basetradetv, I wonder if they haven't done more harm than good. And I and many more like Zombiegrub casting. Taste are taste. And she isn't even in BTTV anymore so stop spreading false informations, things are complicated enough. Also I think BTTV have done a lot of good for the players, lot of tourney etc. Never followed all these "drama" i'm kind of disapointed now. | ||
|
Argonauta
Spain4948 Posts
| ||
|
LongShot27
United States2084 Posts
On April 06 2018 03:46 deacon.frost wrote: Isn't the tax legally a discrimination? As it's based against a certain group of people and not on everybody? Not sure how 'murrica's law works, thanks in advance. No thankfully, we haven't become that level of socialist yet | ||
|
xenonn40
United States282 Posts
On April 06 2018 04:29 brickrd wrote: Jesus Christ i don't know who's legally in the right here, but the fact that rifkin is willing to threaten to sue a player over this is horrendous optics and proves what many people have long suspected, which is that rifkin has a problem keeping his ego in check. even if, hypothetically, rifkin is 100% legally right, no professional organization or sponsor would handle this situation this way the fact that this is the person who has done so much for the scene is simply sad. it doesn't nullify the good his organization has done, but it makes the scene an ugly and shitty place I think ALL professional organizations would sue if someone is not complying with a legally binding contract that they feel is worth pursuing. In fact, I think it would be much more professional to handle this privately, with the help of the law if needed, than to do it in the open on public forums throwing around unsupported accusations. That is what the civil court system is for. EDIT: Also, I think the "tax" is a very unprofessional way of dealing with this. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On April 06 2018 05:46 LongShot27 wrote: No thankfully, we haven't become that level of socialist yet oki, ty! | ||
|
Krugessin
Sweden54 Posts
If we have been at WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THE 12k and I'LL SUE YOU AND YADDA YADDA YADDA nd now we're at "ANYONE IN THE THIEF HOUSE IS 10% LESS WELCOME TO MY TOURNAMENTS UNTIL THIS DEBT IS SETTLED" it actually sounds like a DE-escalation to my ears. Or at least just another shot fired. Sigh. As a fan of everything Starcraft-y I tend to appreciate all players, casters, organizers and sponsors etc, so it is always sad to see them not get along. In THIS case it seems like a series of "You did A so I will do B" and "I did NOT do A but you did B so now I will do C" and soon we run out of alphabet and I have no idea who dotted the i and crossed the t to begin with. That said, someday someone is going to have to explain to me where the extreme vitriol vs BTTV/Rifkin is coming from and how prevalent it is. Most times I catch up on some drama I find reasonable explanations and attempts at fixing things or fairly honest apologies. /intermittent forum and stream lurker | ||
|
blunderfulguy
United States1415 Posts
When I got a message at the end of autumn asking for my input on the new house project, I had begun to believe that all of this was resolved one way or another and I'd never hear about it again. It's unbelievably disappointing to have that tax pointed out. I'm glad someone did, though. I don't know if I have everything straight, let me try to get it all unraveled and pieced together in my head... Wall of text under the spoiler. + Show Spoiler + For this discussion, "BaseTradeTV", "BaseTrade", "BTTV", and "Rifkin" are assumed to be the same entity (as far as I am aware, Rifkin is the sole owner and mouthpiece of the organization BaseTradeTV). BTTV and the community wished to help NoRegreT (and other players such as Scarlett, Neeb, TIME, Kelazhur, the list goes on) pay for a new, bigger house for foreign players to live and train in and allow them to compete in the GSL. BTTV made an investment (apparently at the time in good faith) in the house with the intent to get benefits (return on investment) in the near future, the benefits being specifically raising money through donations to a Matcherino page, an influx of paid subscriptions and further donations to BTTV generated by the initiative to help the greater community see more foreign players practicing and competing in Korea. It was agreed upon by all parties involved that if the Matcherino page met a certain goal, the money would be shared between the parties. The Matcherino page was prematurely closed by the page/event organizer (BTTV), while the page was on track to reach the goal but before it had done so. Some time passes. BTTV publicly assures the general audience that things are progressing, making a point to state that a point is being made to make sure nothing shady is being done with anything related to the Matcherino by him specifically (+ Show Spoiler + something something, sounds like something a synth would say... BTTV demands, out of the blue (privately), that equipment purchased with money sent as "house startup costs" (BTTV's initial investment) was to be suddenly returned or that the money was to be returned, despite having already reaped the expected benefits from the investment and without any discussion about what was to be done with the "house startup costs" after they were paid. There was apparently nothing stated by anyone, anywhere, at any point in time until then that this was "a thing". The other parties make a minor effort to appease BTTV while continuing to manage the house, manage incoming and outgoing players, practice in the house, travel and compete in tournaments, and so on. BTTV grows from being unaccommodating or uncooperative to hostile and unreasonable, their harassment leading multiple parties to cease communication with them, and went so far as to threaten to sue. An anonymous entity (presumed to be BTTV) contacted the host of an internet podcast and gave them private information regarding the somewhat private discussions and unrest between BTTV, NoRegreT, and other members of the previous BTTV House, to be discussed during a live interview with NoRegreT. The issue is left the same as before, some time passes. BTTV's demands are left un-wangled. BTTV imposes a tax on tournament prize money to everyone affiliated with NoRegreT, the BTTV House, and everyone who lives in the new (unrelated and intentionally disconnected from the previous house) Project: Unity house until their demands are successfully wangled. The act of punishing uninvolved parties in this way leads members of the community to share the news, soon thereafter leading NoRegreT to show more information to the information-starved public. Scarlett comments on the matter, giving yet more information. BTTV appears to be expectedly closed-mouthed with regards to information the public wishes to know about the events and about how and why BTTV is unfairly, in the public's eyes, treating a large group of professional players. I shake my head. I read the comments, think about not commenting, write a wall of text. Did I miss anything? Whether one regards fully or entirely disregards all of this "drama", or any drama with BTTV in the recent past, it's fair to say it's completely unacceptable behavior to impose a tax on players like that. How I personally feel about it... I would also say it's grossly disrespectful to players, players traveling to live and train in Korea, other tournament and event organizers, other casters, and to the community (especially those supporting foreign players competing in Korea) to force this fabricated issue to go on for this long and to cause this much stress for anyone. Knowing as much/little as I do about the issue and everyone involved, I feel that if NoRegreT and Scarlett were somehow required to pay back that initial investment (that was used to buy beds to sleep on and chairs to sit in), they would have done so months ago one way or another. I could be wrong, it could be even more complicated than I think it is so far, they could be lying, but the new and old information with all the context I have just doesn't point me in that direction. As far as I can tell, there's nothing in any contract that has anything to do with that money needing to be paid back. If somehow there is, I suggest that the capable party point out where in the contract, exactly, it is explicitly written that the "house startup costs" need to be refunded/paid back/reimbursed under any circumstance to make it easier for the issue to come to a reasonable resolution. It seems like this bullshit really just needs to be thrown aside and left to dry up and scatter in the wind instead of being rubbed in anyone else's face. That probably should have been done months ago, but there's no changing that now. I hope it ends and everyone can learn something useful, take a deep breath, and move on. | ||
|
Agh
United States975 Posts
Both parties thinking that they are freed from or entitled to anything else because of x/y/z is asinine and naive. (In this case NoRegret for whatever matcherino thing he is referring to; Rifkin for thinking about previous contracts.) If there is a legitimate cut and dry case then simply file and serve. Your Skype logs will just be laughed at or dismissed unless they possess anything that directly explicitly incriminates one of the parties. Also you'll need to obtain genuine ones from Microsoft if you plan on using them. Time to grow up a little kids. | ||
|
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
The invested money were used to buy equipment, that does not make the equipment owned by the person that invested the money. The equipment is in that case owned by the house, when the house disbands or reforms the owners of the house decides what to do with it. IF BTTV said: "I will send you money to buy X and Y for me, that equipment will be mine but you may borrow them for the time being" in that case The unity project still has no obligation to send him his items back. The items that belong to BTTV would then be entirely up to Rifkin himself to retrieve/sell or do whatever he want with. Generally in this situation the BTTV house would inform BTTV "we are disbanding the team house and reforming as unity project, you have XX amount of days to pickup your equipment or otherwise organise their retrieval". If not retrieved they would be discarded. Nothing here makes sense, if the investment was indeed money that were supposed to be repaid then BTTV would say give me my money back but he's not. He's saying give me the equipment you used my sponsorship money to buy to me because I think I own it. It sounds a lot like he is grasping at straws and the whole debacle how he is taking it out on the players are just pathetic. Of course the claim holds no legal ground and then the only way of getting money back(no matter who from) is to take from the players in his tournament. | ||
|
KGssv2
21 Posts
On April 06 2018 01:05 Shinryus wrote: Don't agree with that. I mean, yes, ofc BTTV is allowed to update/change their rules now and then. Preeeeetty sure they need to inform their players that there has been a change made though. They don't need to state what has been changed, it's up to the players to reread the rules, yes. But if they had never been notified about any kind of change at all (that's how I understand it happened), then you can't just expect the players to read your rules all over again every single time before they play in any tournament. Facebook also informs you every time they update e.g. their data protection regulations or something. If you don't read them, yes, it's your fault if there's something you don't like. But they can't just do whatever they want without letting you know that there have been changes. And if so, that's unbelievably unprofessional. I am not from Canada but I am assuming that US and Canadian laws in this area still reflect the tenets established from English common law. Simply put, so long as the terms to be incorporated by notice are visibly available, immediately accessible and sufficiently clear at the time of the creation of the contract, there is no need to give further notification that terms exist. Facebook is not really a relevant analogy in this case since it is an entirely different type of contract. Facebook is a long continuous course of dealing during which time the terms may be changed. BTTV tournaments on the other hand, are not long continuous courses of dealing. Think of it like this, every new online tournament you enter into is a new contract to which you agree with the terms and conditions. At the beginning of every new contract (even if it is on the same subject matter as the previous contract i.e. tournament conditions), it is upon the players to read the terms and conditions. The fact that the sign up page is prefaced with 'By entering into this tournament, you agree to the following Rules and Regulations' is sufficient for legal purposes. As with any commercial dealing, it would be very risky to sign a contract in a course of dealing with the assumption that nothing has changed/was updated from the last contract. I agree that for a business like BTTV it is very unprofessional, not to mention, a severe lack of basic courtesy to not notify players of the specific change, but that does not equate to a legal requirement generally speaking. However, as I did mention, you could argue that where a contract term is considered unusual for its class, the standard of the 'sufficient notice' test will be much higher, such that reasonable effort should be made to direct the unusual term to the affected players' attention. I think its fair to say that a 10% penalty imposed on a specific class of individuals is very unusual. Then again, I cant say I am that well attuned to Canadian law so I stand to be corrected. | ||
| ||
