WotC D&D Historian Ben Riggs says the OGL fiasco was Chris Cocks idea.


log in or register to remove this ad


They "got away with it"? Really? I seem to remember them reversing course because of the negative feedback. I don't see how that is getting away with anything.
I am talking explicitly about Mr Cocks (the 'they' here is CEOs and leaders in general, not WotC), and yes, he absolutely did, there were no consequences for him
 

I am talking explicitly about Mr Cocks (the 'they' here is CEOs and leaders in general, not WotC), and yes, he absolutely did, there were no consequences for him
Just out of curiosity what should the consequences have been?

He's a guy that makes things that we buy voluntarily. He didn’t subjugate a developing nation or distribute blankets with small pox.

Most executives make tons of money even when they get fired. It’s baked into their contract.
 
Last edited:


Just out of curiosity what should the consequences have been?

He's a guy that makes things that we buy voluntarily. He didn’t subjugate a developing nation or distribute blankets with small pox.

Most executives make tons of money even when they get fired. It’s baked into their contract.

He doesn't make anything. He orders people to make things and takes home an extra 9-million-dollar bonus while they can barely afford rent and groceries.

But that's the society we live in.
 

Just out of curiosity what should the consequences have been?

He's a guy that makes things that we buy voluntarily. He didn’t subjugate a developing nation or distribute blankets with small pox.

Most executives make tons of money even when they get fired. It’s baked into their contract.
I'm still surprised no one was willing to buy the torches. Where's the angry mob to storm the castle when you need one?

I don't care for how corporations work on a regular basis, but demanding someone be fired for pushing a dumb idea? When they listened to feedback and backed off and then some? Considering how many CEOs would have just doubled down? Really?
 

Just out of curiosity what should the consequences have been?
I am fine with firing him, I am fine with him not getting any bonus

He's a guy that makes things that we buy voluntarily. Toys really. He didn’t subjugate a developing nation or distribute blankets with small pox.
so what, if you think someone subjugating a developing nation should get away with the same consequences, you are very much mistaken

Most executives make tons of money even when they get fired. It’s baked into their contract.
I know, and that is unfortunate too. Not a reason to not have any consequences however
 

I'm still surprised no one was willing to buy the torches. Where's the angry mob to storm the castle when you need one?

I don't care for how corporations work on a regular basis, but demanding someone be fired for pushing a dumb idea? When they listened to feedback and backed off and then some? Considering how many CEOs would have just doubled down? Really?
The reason he backed off was because of said "angry mob."
And remember, this is someone who laid off 1100 people while taking home millions in pay. I think it's reasonable for people to look askance at the ethics of the situation, even if it's the norm for our hyper corpo society.
 

so what, if you think someone subjugating a developing nation should get away with the same consequences, you are very much mistaken
I was comparing the heinous crime of a poor business decision to crimes against humanity and questioning how to quell the outrage.

With the business decision I can punish him by not buying the things he produces. However with the other thing; I don’t work for The Hague.

Thanks for replying directly. I appreciate the discourse.
 

Remove ads

Top