|
This is a really stupid question but is that particular rule from kickstarter a newer rule or an older one? Is it possible that it is meant to apply to individuals to keep any singular person from putting up multiple pitches at the same time but not for companies that are acting as publishers or mediators for another company? Like, using Queen Games as an example, is Queen Games more or less 1 individual actually trying to create a bunch of different games and running simultaneous pitches or is Queen Games acting as a facilitator for other companies or other people within Queen Games to put up their own individual games and pitches separate from other games and pitches by other people under the same Queen Games umbrella?
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 06:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:46 |
|
|
In other news, Tiny Epic Pirates has blown through all of its stretch goals in the first few days. With twenty days to go it's raised more than any of the other Tiny Epic games save one (Tiny Epic Tactics) and unless funding dries up it's definitely going to bust through that record without even breaking a sweat. Might even brush up against the seven-figure mark.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 07:43
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Yep, it's a listed rule Kickstarter do not take any responsibility regarding the fulfilment of a project; they only curate the projects themselves. If it wasn't for the specific statement that you have to fulfil the project, I'd assume you were misinterpreting the rule.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 08:13
|
|
|
Doctor Zero posted:You know, every year when I have to take my corporate Conflict of Interest training I always think, "this is such basic common sense poo poo, why do we have to do this every year?" but thanks to this thread, now I know why. It's been a lovely week at work, and somehow the thread is still talking about this, so I guess I'm gonna go ahead and make this dumb fuckin' post. There are a lot of people in this thread throwing out the equivalent of "I am not a lawyer, but this is definitely a conflict of interest". Well, I am a lawyer, and a lot of the things posters in this thread are trying to frame as a conflict of interest are not actually conflicts of interest in any real sense. The essence of a conflict of interest is that there is a conflict between a person's own interests and a duty that they owe to some other person. Luke Crane's position at Kickstarter does not mean he owes any special duty to backers of his projects. Kickstarter employees do not owe any special duty to backers. The only duties Crane might owe backers are contractual obligations in respect of delivery of his projects, but in that respect he owes the exact same duties as any other project creator. Crane's position at Kickstarter does mean that he might well have the ability to skirt the rules of Kickstarter, or get away with conduct that other project creators would not. He might, therefore, be better positioned to get away with not meeting contractual obligations to backers. If he took advantage of that ability he would absolutely be abusing his position, and the fact that he could do so means his employment with Kickstarter should be disclosed in his project descriptions. But that isn't a conflict of interest arising from his employment with Kickstarter, because that employment does not give rise to any additional duty to backers. It is pretty clear that Crane does have a conflict of interest as between him and Kickstarter. His business interests absolutely could give rise to a conflict with his duties to perform his employment in accordance with his employment contract. However, it appears that Kickstarter doesn't care about that, and it isn't actually the issue posters in this thread are worried about. No one actually gives a poo poo if Luke Crane hurts Kickstarter. Anyways, Luke Crane is a big dumb dickhead baby who sucks at customer service. And Luke Crane definitely could abuse his position at Kickstarter for personal gain, and he should disclose his employment, but not because he has a conflict of interest with backers. Thanks for reading my dumb post.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 08:58
|
|
|
I'm sort of curious then - is it inaccurate when people describe journalists with connections to a corporation reporting on that corporation as having a conflict of interest? Or does that particular profession carry an extra burden or duty towards the public? Basically, those disclosures are often treated as basic business ethics/avoiding conflicts of interest, but that seems to fall under much the same category? Thanks for the clarification.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 09:02
|
|
|
Joe Slowboat posted:I'm sort of curious then - is it inaccurate when people describe journalists with connections to a corporation reporting on that corporation as having a conflict of interest? Or does that particular profession carry an extra burden or duty towards the public? Basically, those disclosures are often treated as basic business ethics/avoiding conflicts of interest, but that seems to fall under much the same category? Thanks for the clarification. I would argue that it's not really accurate to call it a conflict of interest, but it is accurate to call unethical. Of course, in an informal sense people call it a conflict of interest, and the same logic could be used regarding Crane and backers. Which is the arguable flaw in my previous post. Edit: ultimately the meaning of words is determined by usage and, like the phrase "duty of care", people use conflict of interest in a way that differs from it's original sense all the time. So arguably I was wrong all along. thefakenews fucked around with this message at 09:13 on May 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 09:06
|
|
|
thefakenews posted:Edit: ultimately the meaning of words is determined by usage and, like the phrase "duty of care", people use conflict of interest in a way that differs from it's original sense all the time. So arguably I was wrong all along. well also the assumption that the version you learnt in law school precedes its plain language usage is probably wrong
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 09:24
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:well also the assumption that the version you learnt in law school precedes its plain language usage is probably wrong Given the term “conflict of interest” is an abbreviation of a principle developed by the British Court of Chancery, I think it’s safe to say you are wrong here.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 10:06
|
|
|
George Fan, creator of Plants Vs Zombies has done some guest art for a promo card for Gladius. It's definitely a thing. 
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 10:43
|
|
|
Zurui posted:In other news, Tiny Epic Pirates has blown through all of its stretch goals in the first few days. With twenty days to go it's raised more than any of the other Tiny Epic games save one (Tiny Epic Tactics) and unless funding dries up it's definitely going to bust through that record without even breaking a sweat. Might even brush up against the seven-figure mark. I enjoyed tiny epic galaxies. How are the rest of the games they make?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 10:52
|
|
|
Jarvisi posted:I enjoyed tiny epic galaxies. How are the rest of the games they make? Kingdoms was mediocre, rising to decent with the expansion (but that defeats the point). Defenders was a trash fire. Reputedly the 2nd edition fixes that, but I'm not interested. Western is more fun than people give it credit for, but a little confusing. Quest is basically a proof of concept for Itemeeples, which are the main selling point for the series since. It's OK. Zombies is the best zombie game and does what Defenders should have done. Mechs is my favourite Tiny Epic apart from Galaxies. It reminds me a great deal of Adrenaline. And Tactics I haven't played enough to fully judge it yet, but I definitely like what I've seen. Summary: the series has two really good, two pretty good, three average and one bad. So it's just above 50% overall, and with the exception of Galaxies the most recent ones are the best.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 11:06
|
|
|
thefakenews posted:Given the term “conflict of interest” is an abbreviation of a principle developed by the British Court of Chancery, I think it’s safe to say you are wrong here. Nobody is talking about the legality, though. You're essentially doing the same thing as a drive-by physicist correcting a conversation's usage of mass and weight.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 12:12
|
|
|
moths posted:Nobody is talking about the legality, though. I'm not talking about legality either. There are all kinds of conflicts of interest that aren't illegal. This particular instance doesn't meet the definition of a conflict of interest as framed, and I think it's a good idea not to misidentify it as one. I mean, what's your point here? That it's wrong to say someone is incorrect? That it's not appropriate to talk about what a conflict of interest actually is?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 13:00
|
|
|
theironjef posted:So I backed the IDW Batman: TAS skirmish game, because it was a fuckload of models of my favorite Batman, and if the game was going to be any good, that's gravy. The project wound up just as COVID was coming online, and so they went into social distance work from home mode on design and testing. Not a lot of updates, but comments from the devs and their facebook is active. But the comments are all like this. "Oh, COVID got you guys busy? Well how about you owe us an apology in the form of a bunch of free poo poo?" It's nice to see that the WoW community is metastasizing. Really.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 13:07
|
|
|
theironjef posted:So I backed the IDW Batman: TAS skirmish game, because it was a fuckload of models of my favorite Batman, and if the game was going to be any good, that's gravy. The project wound up just as COVID was coming online, and so they went into social distance work from home mode on design and testing. Not a lot of updates, but comments from the devs and their facebook is active. But the comments are all like this. "Oh, COVID got you guys busy? Well how about you owe us an apology in the form of a bunch of free poo poo?" The only REAL question is where is my Batgirl miniature and can I also get a Spoiler miniature while the plague stalks the land.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 13:25
|
|
|
FirstAidKite posted:This is a really stupid question but is that particular rule from kickstarter a newer rule or an older one? Is it possible that it is meant to apply to individuals to keep any singular person from putting up multiple pitches at the same time but not for companies that are acting as publishers or mediators for another company? Like, using Queen Games as an example, is Queen Games more or less 1 individual actually trying to create a bunch of different games and running simultaneous pitches or is Queen Games acting as a facilitator for other companies or other people within Queen Games to put up their own individual games and pitches separate from other games and pitches by other people under the same Queen Games umbrella? According to their posted terms of use, it's a current and active rule, most recently revised 9 days ago. (I guess 10 now)
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 13:39
|
|
|
thefakenews posted:I mean, what's your point here? That it's wrong to say someone is incorrect? That it's not appropriate to talk about what a conflict of interest actually is? It's technically incorrect from a very specific perspective, and might not fit all definitions of a conflict of interest but GrandpaPants posted:Yes, disclosures are pretty basic professional behavior 101.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 13:50
|
|
|
moths posted:It's technically incorrect from a very specific perspective, and might not fit all definitions of a conflict of interest but Firstly, this is disingenuous horseshit. It isn't technically incorrect from a specific perspective, it's just actually incorrect. It's hardly irrelevant to discuss what a conflict of interest actually is in a thread discussing whether a person has a conflict of interest. Second, I already very clearly stated that Luke Crane should disclose his employment with Kickstarter, and I agree that failing to be transparent about it negatively affects his credibility both in his role at Kickstarter and as a project creator. Should I not post because I only partially disagree with people?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 14:15
|
|
|
You're probably not wrong about the legal side of things, but you're being pedantic so don't expect to get a backpat or anything.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 14:20
|
|
|
If it's the wrong term, what's the correct phrase for an unprofessional non-disclosure of things that should be disclosed? I've always heard conflict of interests in these situations, but I guess "disclosure of bias" would be more correct? Should we just leave it at "shady?"
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 14:24
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:The only REAL question is where is my Batgirl miniature and can I also get a Spoiler miniature while the plague stalks the land. Batgirl is one of the core characters! The license for the game is really weird, it was basically "anything from BTAS, The New Batman Adventures, or those three movies that were part of that Canon, no alternates" and it does that to almost total completion. The only missing named guys from the show's history are Creeper, Kyodai Ken, and Klarion the Witch Boy. theironjef fucked around with this message at 14:41 on May 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 14:38
|
|
|
Haystack posted:You're probably not wrong about the legal side of things, but you're being pedantic so don't expect to get a backpat or anything. I’m not sure I agree that it is pedantic. I don’t think using a term like conflict of interest correctly is a minor thing, though reasonable minds might differ. But I’m not looking for a pat on the back, I’d be quite happy being ignored, I’d just prefer not to effectively be told I’ve done the wrong thing by posting it at all. Like, it’s not a ton of effort to scroll past my one post if you don’t give a poo poo. moths posted:If it's the wrong term, what's the correct phrase for an unprofessional non-disclosure of things that should be disclosed? You could say it’s a lack of transparency, or misleading and deceptive, or unprofessional or unethical. You could definitely call it shady, shonky or dodgy. I mean, you can call it a conflict of interest if you want, I can’t stop you and won’t attempt to any further, but I don’t think it would be accurate. Edit: I guess my thing is, using a term like conflict of interest in a loose and informal manner harms its value as a legal/ethical concept because the vaguer and more broad its meaning becomes the less use it has as a standard by which conduct can actually be analysed. Like, the point of identifying a conflict of interest is that a conflict of interest is necessarily, by its nature, improper. The broader the meaning, the more likely it is to encompass conduct that is not improper per se. thefakenews fucked around with this message at 14:51 on May 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 14:40
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Kingdoms was mediocre, rising to decent with the expansion (but that defeats the point). Defenders was a trash fire. Reputedly the 2nd edition fixes that, but I'm not interested. Western is more fun than people give it credit for, but a little confusing. Quest is basically a proof of concept for Itemeeples, which are the main selling point for the series since. It's OK. Zombies is the best zombie game and does what Defenders should have done. Mechs is my favourite Tiny Epic apart from Galaxies. It reminds me a great deal of Adrenaline. And Tactics I haven't played enough to fully judge it yet, but I definitely like what I've seen. I agree with this overall. Zombies and Tactics are the only ones I've purchased, but I've played the rest at different Gen Cons (and after doing that, Zombies was the only one I bought). They don't get a ton of play time at my home table, but the small form factor means when I go on a trip with my wife or friends, they almost always get tossed in the bag and played.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 14:42
|
|
|
thefakenews posted:Edit: I guess my thing is, using a term like conflict of interest in a loose and informal manner harms its value as a legal/ethical concept because the vaguer and more broad its meaning becomes the less use it has as a standard by which conduct can actually be analysed. I was aiming for (but probably missed) this with the "mass/weight to a physicist" comparison, but as a law-person you're much more primed to these distinctions than the average person. I feel the exact same way about accuracy / precision because my field deals with it, and I apologize if any of this came across as an attempt to provoke you.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 14:54
|
|
|
moths posted:I was aiming for (but probably missed) this with the "mass/weight to a physicist" comparison, but as a law-person you're much more primed to these distinctions than the average person. It was more the "drive-by" part of that comparison that I took as provocative. But whatever, it's cool. No need to apologise. So...Kickstarter though, how good is it?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 15:02
|
|
|
thefakenews posted:You could say it’s a lack of transparency, or misleading and deceptive, or unprofessional or unethical. You could definitely call it shady, shonky or dodgy. or they could use the english language term for this ethical concept, which is "conflict of interest"
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 15:03
|
|
|
Even under the more specific legal definition of conflict of interest, I'd say there's an argument for the situation meeting conflict of interest. Keep in mind the basic duties required in all transactions and business relationships. The backers are dealing with both Kickstarter, which is responsible for its employees acts, and the project creator.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 15:04
|
|
|
theironjef posted:Klarion the Witch Boy. Dang, why bother backing at all then!
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 15:05
|
|
|
Lord_Hambrose posted:Dang, why bother backing at all then! Gotta get that Condiment King based loosely on Bob Hope. 
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 15:18
|
|
|
theironjef posted:Batgirl is one of the core characters! The license for the game is really weird, it was basically "anything from BTAS, The New Batman Adventures, or those three movies that were part of that Canon, no alternates" and it does that to almost total completion. The only missing named guys from the show's history are Creeper, Kyodai Ken, and Klarion the Witch Boy. And seeing they have Orphan now I'm a little disappointed they don't have a late pledge thing.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 16:33
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:And seeing they have Orphan now I'm a little disappointed they don't have a late pledge thing. Completely compatible with a whole previous Kickstarter for TMNT too so you can bring Raph to fight Mad Hatter or do a skirmish between R'as and Shredder.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 17:38
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Defenders was a trash fire. Reputedly the 2nd edition fixes that, but I'm not interested.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 17:45
|
|
|
I didn't back Tiny Epic Zombies because I'm not into zombies as a schtick but if the mechanics are good I may look into it. I do love the ITEMeeples. Out of curiosity, what was such a mess about Tiny Epic Defenders?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 17:59
|
|
|
theironjef posted:Gotta get that Condiment King based loosely on Bob Hope. Wishing I had backed now
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 18:06
|
|
|
Zurui posted:I didn't back Tiny Epic Zombies because I'm not into zombies as a schtick but if the mechanics are good I may look into it. I do love the ITEMeeples. Zombies is pretty good as a co-op; the focus isn't so much on killing zombies as trying to complete three randomly-chosen missions. Just don't use the "Quarantine the Infected" mission and you're good.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 18:21
|
|
|
Well, last I checked, next year will feature a new game in the same system that's Avatar: The Last Airbender stuff, still compatible with everything that came before it, and they tend to sell the all the loot bundles of the previous set during the pledge manager of the new KS, so someday.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 18:25
|
|
|
theironjef posted:Well, last I checked, next year will feature a new game in the same system that's Avatar: The Last Airbender stuff, still compatible with everything that came before it, and they tend to sell the all the loot bundles of the previous set during the pledge manager of the new KS, so someday. Well a Toph miniature can’t exist without me owning it. I don’t write the rules.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 18:41
|
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:It was pretty badly balanced; it was easy to get into a no-win situation through no fault of your own. This, basically, although I think EM is understating the case. There are some bosses that simply can't be beaten except perhaps with a combination of optimal play and ridiculous luck. Also in agreement with his comments on TE Zombies, although it's equally fun as a one-versus-many. It's a lot like what I imagine Dead of Winter was trying to do, except in 45 minutes and with no traitor.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 18:45
|
|
|
I was kind of excited about Tiny Epic Quest but after reading the rules, setting it up and playing it for a bit I just kind of packed it back up with a frown and sold it at a con auction. It's a game mainly about choosing which one of many progress bars to go up on. This won't matter to everyone but: there is not really any element of discovery or exploration in the game. The semirandom map and the movement rules are interesting, I liked how the different travel methods allowed you to move differently, that was neat. To me the game mainly revolved about the itemeeples gimmick. e: vvv yeah there was quite a bit of stuff to track, too. The Eyes Have It fucked around with this message at 20:17 on May 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 18:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:46 |
|
|
Yeah, Tiny Epic Quest also occupies that bizarre board game genre of "single player, even when you're playing with other people." The interaction with other players is so, so minimal. You're really just trying to race down various completion tracks to earn the most points. I really enjoy it single-player, though. It also betrays the "Tiny" portion of the title, as the "board" requires a significant amount of table space.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 20:15
|
|