|
|
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.
This sounds like a suggestion from a 15 year old, who has had no real life experience doing business, or getting into any kind of contract thinking Teal Liquid is some godlike altruistic entity cable of dispensing justice for all.
User was warned for this post
|
Canada13389 Posts
On April 07 2018 03:24 feardragon wrote:
Everybody seems to have an extremely strong opinion on an issue where they don't know even 50% of the details on situation.
I think its easy to agree that the contract clearly left some ambiguity or this wouldn't really be an issue.
|
If the contract doesn't directly state the 10% or return of items. The players are clearly in the right. If the contract does state this then Rifkin / BTTV is clearly in the right. The only thing that matters in a situations like this is what is written in the contract. If it's not in there then it's a big mistake on BTTV side, and you can bet in court it wouldn't stand up.
No offense to anyone, but this honestly isn't the first time Rifkin has ran into issues with players. It seem like several months ago issue came up where he threaten to not pay some of the prize pool to players from a certain team. I'm not sure how that conflict resulted, but I remember reading about it and statements from both sides. When I read some of it back then. It seem Rifkin's anger caused it to escalate quickly, and it made the issue much more difficult to resolve or agree upon. However, I do understand this is a completely different type of issue.
Only the parties involved in the contract know who is in the right or wrong. All they have to do is read the contract. until then what everyone says is basically opinion based.
|
On April 07 2018 08:10 -StrifeX- wrote:
No offense to anyone, but this honestly isn't the first time Rifkin has ran into issues with players. It seem like several months ago issue came up where he threaten to not pay some of the prize pool to players from a certain team.
competitive event promoters often get into conflicts with the competitors. Rifkin/BTTV isn't very special in that respect.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm just baffled. What does this even purportedly prove? I guess now I believe that Riffkin paid NoRegret some money at some point for some reason. Was this being disputed? And why is it any of my business?
|
From a common sense standpoint, the person who buys chairs and tables is the person who owns them, not some random players who used them while living in a house funded by the owner of the chairs and tables.
|
While I really appreciate BBTV's contribution to SC2, I really dislike that sort of behaviour from Rifkin. His approach to resolving issues jumps all over the show in terms of maturity levels, and getting personal, even if the other parties are doing it, rarely ever pays off. Take the high road if you are confident you've played fair and within the terms of the contract.
|
Good lord. I had lent someone 2k at one point, and while I appreciate her paying me back as quickly as she could (we worked together and I knew exactly what she was making in tips each night, so I was often paid back in cash at the end of our shift), she still owes me $500 to this day. We've both since left that particular job, and three years after the fact, I've done everything I could to try and contact her again to no avail. Does it piss me off? Sure. Could I really use that 500 at this point in my life? Yeah, definitely. Was I ever this petty about it? Don't think I could be even if I tried. Honestly, Rifkin is being a serious Regina George right now. I stand by what I said before: I don't hate the guy, that would be far too strong a word. But it would not surprise me in the slightest if he had a Burn Book of his very own. This is so spiteful.
|
On April 07 2018 11:28 neutralrobot wrote:I'm just baffled. What does this even purportedly prove? I guess now I believe that Riffkin paid NoRegret some money at some point for some reason. Was this being disputed? And why is it any of my business?
I don't know, both sides have been handling this really unprofessionally, to be honest. Rifkin should cut his losses before this negative publicity ruins BTTV. The chance of him recovering money from this event is close to zero. The amount is so little that he will likely spend more on legal fees than what he will get back.
|
On April 07 2018 11:46 HotDOSBuns wrote:Good lord. I had lent someone 2k at one point, and while I appreciate her paying me back as quickly as she could (we worked together and I knew exactly what she was making in tips each night, so I was often paid back in cash at the end of our shift), she still owes me $500 to this day. We've both since left that particular job, and three years after the fact, I've done everything I could to try and contact her again to no avail. Does it piss me off? Sure. Could I really use that 500 at this point in my life? Yeah, definitely. Was I ever this petty about it? Don't think I could be even if I tried. Honestly, Rifkin is being a serious Regina George right now. I stand by what I said before: I don't hate the guy, that would be far too strong a word. But it would not surprise me in the slightest if he had a Burn Book of his very own. This is so spiteful.
He actually already did. I wouldn't be surprised if he has another one already. I think the difficult thing is that since the scene is so small, grievances between people will be ever present. It's not like you can just avoid them.
|
On April 07 2018 11:57 phodacbiet wrote:Show nested quote +On April 07 2018 11:28 neutralrobot wrote:I'm just baffled. What does this even purportedly prove? I guess now I believe that Riffkin paid NoRegret some money at some point for some reason. Was this being disputed? And why is it any of my business? I don't know, both sides have been handling this really unprofessionally, to be honest. Rifkin should cut his losses before this negative publicity ruins BTTV. The chance of him recovering money from this event is close to zero. The amount is so little that he will likely spend more on legal fees than what he will get back.
$1500 dollars is still a lot of money, especially for someone who is self-employed.
|
Just to clarify what he showed "multiple payments" was him covering my rent to run the house, If he didn't cover my rent I'd be spending money to work for him. So basically I worked for free for an entire year. Also, he just stopped paying this at some point so I was spending my own money to cover the "BaseTradeTV" house rent.
|
On April 07 2018 12:26 NoRegreT_ wrote:
Just to clarify what he showed "multiple payments" was him covering my rent to run the house, If he didn't cover my rent I'd be spending money to work for him. So basically I worked for free for an entire year. Also, he just stopped paying this at some point so I was spending my own money to cover the "BaseTradeTV" house rent.
So much for BTTV not breaking his 'non-disclosure agreement'. Now nobody has that going for them anymore lol.
|
This is so incredibly unprofessional. The issue is between these two people.
Trying to drag the community pull into your favor by doing things like this is something a high schooler would do.
These sorts of actions are not a rarity from him, and I really worry about what goes on in his mind when he thinks doing something like this on stream.
+ Show Spoiler +Just as an aside, I really wonder if this is even allowed. Disclosing Transaction ID's are the only things you need to provide to companies or paypal when calling.... so... it's actually quite an issue you can see them clear as day...As an example, I called Netflix and provided netflix with a paypal transaction ID and they were able to find all of my personal information and then subsequently change my subscription type and personal info after I called telling them my account had been hacked in Japan. super aside, but this is what leads directly to things like social hacking and how it is achieved -_-;;
|
So all that is evidence that BTTV was sponsoring the Korean house, but where's the evidence that the specific $1500 would be refunded?
Also, did Bbtv seriously expect that the Korean house was going to ship everything they bought with the sponsor money back to NA? That sounds ludicrous.
The reason why no one's taking Bttvs side. Rifking does have a history with having people disagree with him, then he goes way overboard to try to discredit and turn the community against that person. We haven't forgotten the Syf gaming incident, the Sort of incident. This stuff starts to add up.
|
i remember one time this rifkin fellow was talking trash on choya and siding with some other shady person against choya
so gonna assume this rifkin fellow is again in the wrong. he can do a kickstarter to recover the money if he wants, if people in community actually cared or believed in him, it'd be easy for him to recover the investment. but im guessing based on all the bad history he has, no one will support or believe him
|
Funny, noregret shames rifkin, rifkin shames noregret...
Lets be "full disclosure" clear, who "benefits" is the only question.
i'd say overall no one benefits, but lets dig a bit more.
What else is a kid suppose to do in front of a bully?
The whole thing (like so many things) is quite "standard".
This community has all the power it needs to deal with it:
ignore it
take steps
add to it
and asking for it is a right!
Lets dwell into the situation:
Did noregret abuse rifkin? probably !!!
Did rifkin abuse all of the bttv "guests", .. probably more, no?!
... mmm here i'd like to add the following relevant words: "contract" "kickstarter" "roi" and maths.
contract means more than what you kids think, some people actually get their life ruined from signing a contract
(said contract can be abusive without being illegal and only a trial will say if it is)
roi means shit if you got f cked in the previously specified contract, but it is the quintessential point of the whole affair (again, who gained more out of the outcome of the affair, rifkin or noregret?)
maths: simply put,
noregret (or whoever) exposed this to the community so that rifkin might/would "lose" more than he was prepared to lose by engaging in this "endeavor", by the mere fact that his "character exposed" would make him lose his lively hodd (viewers) made quite a lot of noise no?
As simply put, rifkin played the same game first by implying "other streamers/players" in his endeavor, thinking that his "btttv tax" would be a strong move, an "a move" that made "someone" expose this here (on "forums") and that now brings us to this situation....
Who will get more out of those?
While i don't care about the outcome right now, i will care later.. i want to underline both of the
"tactics" used!
rifkin not wanting to lose versus noregret (whatever the loss is defined as) made other streamers pay for it to shame noregret
noregret (or whoever) has no other way to react than to shame rifkin back
..
and now here we are, forum without a move?
i'd say we do have a move, a clear and swift move 
to each his or her own
my pov: + Show Spoiler +noregret assumed rifkin would be a supporter enough to build a new house, and rifkin did his rifkin thing ..
if you study the roi and the maths it is clear that both contract signers are both satisfied,
so when rifkin tells you that all he got from this "contract/endeavor" was not good enough (you could argue he clearly lost since now he has nothing out of it) then side with him and keep watching his channel / continue to grant him his livelihood
or
imagine a situation where the roi is clearly in favor of rifkin and imagine that he wants more and that noregret doing the maths makes a power play, yes a kid power play versus a bully, but he does it and the bully calls out the bluff
then u got to call for pitchforks versus lawyers
Only things i get out of this:
glad the foreign house is not bttv property
glad some people think standing up to bullies is worth losing a lot
(someone should do a kickstarter: "reimburse the bully for me" is my advice).
Real funny how you kids still need to take lawyer/law lessons
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On April 07 2018 17:18 fluidrone wrote:Funny, noregret shames rifkin, rifkin shames noregret... Lets be "full disclosure" clear, who "benefits" is the only question. i'd say overall no one benefits, but lets dig a bit more. What else is a kid suppose to do in front of a bully? The whole thing (like so many things) is quite "standard". This community has all the power it needs to deal with it: ignore it take steps add to it and asking for it is a right! Lets dwell into the situation: Did noregret abuse rifkin? probably !!! Did rifkin abuse all of the bttv "guests", .. probably more, no?! ... mmm here i'd like to add the following relevant words: "contract" "kickstarter" "roi" and maths. contract means more than what you kids think, some people actually get their life ruined from signing a contract (said contract can be abusive without being illegal and only a trial will say if it is) roi means shit if you got f cked in the previously specified contract, but it is the quintessential point of the whole affair (again, who gained more out of the outcome of the affair, rifkin or noregret?) maths: simply put, noregret (or whoever) exposed this to the community so that rifkin might/would "lose" more than he was prepared to lose by engaging in this "endeavor", by the mere fact that his "character exposed" would make him lose his lively hodd (viewers) As simply put, rifkin plays the same game by implying "other streamers/players" in his endeavor, thinking that his "btttv tax" will be a strong move, a move that made "someone" expose this here (on "forums"). Who will get more out of those? While i don't care about the outcome right now, i will care later.. i want to underline both of the "tactics" used! rifkin not wanting to lose versus noregret (whatever the loss is defined as) made other streamers pay for it to shame noregret noregret (or whoever) has no other way to react than to shame rifkin back .. and now here we are, forum without a move? i'd say we do have a move, a clear and swift move to each his or her own my pov: + Show Spoiler +noregret assumed rifkin would be a supporter enough to build a new house, and rifkin did his rifkin thing ..
if you study the roi and the maths it is clear that both contract signers are both satisfied,
so when rifkin tells you that all he got from this "contract/endeavor" was not good enough (you could argue he clearly lost since now he has nothing out of it) then side with him and keep watching his channel / continue to grant him his livelihood
or
imagine a situation where the roi is clearly in favor of rifkin and imagine that he wants more and that noregret doing the maths makes a power play, yes a kid power play versus a bully, but he does it and the bully calls out the bluff
then u got to call for pitchforks versus lawyers
Only things i get out of this:
glad the foreign house is not bttv property
glad some people think standing up to bullies is worth losing a lot
(someone should do a kickstarter: "reimburse the bully for me" is my advice).
Real funny how you kids still need to take lawyer/law lessons
No who benefits is not the only question. You are being incredibly condescending and arrogant in your tone throughout your post. It does not help that you call others bullys/children and remark how people need lessons in law. Especially not when what you have scribbled above is barely coherent and far from correct.
Please mind your tone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
