|
|
Sorry, but "taxing" players that have absolutely nothing to do with the past house is absolutely bordering on anti-social behavior. It takes a very negative and vindictive person to do something like that.
Basetrade needs to settle with the people that directly "owe" them, and no one else.
I hope other players boycott BTTV tournaments, this is unacceptable for the scene.
Just as they have strikes for unethical player behavior. This constitutes unethical tournament organizer behavior.
|
On April 05 2018 20:48 Keeemy wrote: Rifkin is so shit at handling all the drama revolving around him it's insane. Rifkin annoys me as a caster to no end that I haven't been able to watch BTTV for a long time, but I think he is handling this situation well.
|
I hope this gets resolved quickly and amicably - BTTV have been great for the SC2 scene. I really appreciate their efforts and have the utmost respect for both Rifkin and ZG. May both sides of the dispute behave respectfully and with compassion.
|
This seems like a good lesson for writing out clearer contracts and discussing a contract's implications.
|
On April 06 2018 08:56 KGssv2 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2018 01:05 Shinryus wrote:On April 05 2018 23:15 KGssv2 wrote: For all the people saying 'the players were never notified'...thats not exactly how contract law works. The online tournaments have rules and the 10% penalty/tax (whatever you want to call it) was part of the terms and conditions. By competing in the tournament, they are taken to have read the rules and agreed. It does not matter that the players elected not to read the rules or assumed the rules would not change. Save for any vitiating factors, if you sign a contract without reading it, you are bound. You could, however, argue that since the 10% penalty clause could be regarded as an 'unusual' contract term, more should have been done to bring them to the affected players' attention.
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. 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.
I hadn't looked at it that way, tbh. To be fair, it does make a lot more sense the way you just put it.
It's just like I already said... very unprofessional. Even if it is legally fine for BTTV to change their rules just like that, it would've been fair to notify the players living in the house that there has been a change which affects them. Or just notify NoRegreT and put the reponsibility of informing the other players on him or something. Then again, we do not know if there have actually been any "tax cuts" or however you want to call it. Maybe the rule was made for some sort of safety for BTTV but so far players might have still received the full prize money. We do not know.
|
Sounds like a really positive relationship and situation went a bit sour, and perhaps the contract in place didn't clearly articulate the obligations of the parties involved when the house was wound down. Fully get BTTV wanting to be reimbursed if gear they funded was being used in the new house - but without seeing the contract we won't know if it's as cut and dried as Rifkin is saying, or a bit iffy as seems to be NoRegrets position.
Getting into the personal stuff (on both sides) is doing no one any favours. Hopefully it gets sorted in a reasonable manner, but BBTV is alienating some pretty significant players, and NoRegrets comments about not wanting to resolve it due to other history and not liking Rifkin anymore isn't great.
If the tax and the rationale was clearly communicated, and agreed too by players participating, then there doesn't seem anything illegal about it. But whether it's ethical is another matter.
Doesn't really seem like anyone is covering themselves in glory. Hope it gets sorted asap and everyone involved can move on.
|
Well so far Rifkin seems to be making a much better showing than NoRegret & Friends tbh. I know the default reaction is to hate on the guy because of the previous incidents but yea....
|
Wow! I knew Rifkin was a money grubber from his exceptionally refined Twitch whoring, but this is truly arrogant.
On the other hand, if there was a contract...
User was warned for this post
|
On April 06 2018 17:28 JD.Cursed wrote: Wow! I knew Rifkin was a money grubber from his exceptionally refined Twitch whoring, but this is truly arrogant.
On the other hand, if there was a contract... There was certainly a contract. It's just a matter of what was in it.
|
People lose their minds for a 10% tax over players related to noregret on the tournament hosted by bttv? Regardless of what happened, this is not a big deal. But as usual, they are too many drama queens in this community. :/ This thread should be closed, go on reddit, that's a better place for you.
|
Dont think anyone here has the full picture, best to leave them to it. A 10% reduction in prizes for Basetrade tournaments for people in the korean house is not a big deal and Rifkin can set whatever rules he likes for his own tournaments.
|
On April 06 2018 18:19 Zaros wrote: Dont think anyone here has the full picture, best to leave them to it. A 10% reduction in prizes for Basetrade tournaments for people in the korean house is not a big deal and Rifkin can set whatever rules he likes for his own tournaments. And the community can agree or disagree with those rules and talk about it publicly. 10% might not be much money, but people can still say that it's bullshit and why.
|
On April 06 2018 18:19 Zaros wrote: Dont think anyone here has the full picture, best to leave them to it. A 10% reduction in prizes for Basetrade tournaments for people in the korean house is not a big deal and Rifkin can set whatever rules he likes for his own tournaments. It's not a big deal in and of itself but how vindicative and morally wrong it is is a big deal, at least for me and obviously for a great deal other people.
In regards to the contract, Noregret said the contract was separate and has nothing to do with this and seeing as Rifkin wrote to Noregret that "there is a paper trail and good faith negotiations" as support for demanding returns it strongly indicates the contract says nothing about it. If the contract said anything about it I'm sure Rifkin would point that out, but he doesn't.
I will also mention that Rifkin(obviously) tipped the interviewer off on this topic(anonymously) so that he could corner noregret. The reason for doing this becomes apparent from the fact that Rifkin choose to be anonymous(even though its obviously him) and then later posts; "There's a reason there hasn't been a public statement made, and why I won't be making a statement about this: Jake and I both signed a contract that includes a confidentiality clause in it. While he may not be willing to honour a contract, I am.".
The whole debacle on dankshrine seems to indicate Rifkin wanted Noregret to talk about stuff he was under legal obligation not to talk about while Rifkin stayed anonymous and thus followed the contract. Its very underhanded..
|
Hmm. Bummer, I like each and everyone of these people except No Regret. He seems like a douche... observation,
User was warned for this post
|
1. Let Teamliquid be a mediator between Rifkin and NoRegret as a StarCraft community organisation. 2. Resolve issues.
Done. No need for threads and pages of comments from people like us who don't know the whole story.
|
I think you are overvaluing TL as a mediator, which is either a mere website or esports team, than as per the standard procedures and court of law. In any case it seems increasingly obvious that there is no legal backing to the claims and it wouldn't be settled.
|
On April 06 2018 20:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote: I think you are overvaluing TL as a mediator, which is either a mere website or esports team, than as per the standard procedures and court of law. In any case it seems increasingly obvious that there is no legal backing to the claims and it wouldn't be settled.
No, Teamliquid doesn't have any legal power. It has enough influence to be a mediator in this case. It's also good PR for Teamliquid to do it. It's a matter of willingness.
|
On April 06 2018 20:44 sc-darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2018 20:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote: I think you are overvaluing TL as a mediator, which is either a mere website or esports team, than as per the standard procedures and court of law. In any case it seems increasingly obvious that there is no legal backing to the claims and it wouldn't be settled. No, Teamliquid doesn't have any legal power. It has enough influence to be a mediator in this case. It's also good PR for Teamliquid to do it. It's a matter of willingness. How is influence required to be a mediator and what kind of influence are you saying TL has enough of?
What there is to say has already been said here it seems like, Noregret says he owes Rifkin nothing and Rifkin says he owes him and that he has the legal right to follow it up. How is a mediator supposed to help in this situation, only the court can actually settle this and at the moment it seems that is not happening.
|
Canada13379 Posts
Honestly, without seeing a contract, its hard to say.
But in the end, if the contract didn't describe what costs were to be reimbursed upon completion of the contract then theres nothing to do.
Look.
Money was spent in sponsorship. I don't know what you expect back. Its sponsorship, you spend the money and if the ROI is too low, in someone's opinion, then it doesn't matter.
Write a better contract next time. Honestly.
|
On April 06 2018 19:11 sc-darkness wrote: 1. Let Teamliquid be a mediator between Rifkin and NoRegret as a StarCraft community organisation. 2. Resolve issues.
Done. No need for threads and pages of comments from people like us who don't know the whole story.
you aren't serious
|
|
|
|