Forbes Article about leaked PDFS

[Voss]

We gamers are a paranoid lot.

Still doesn't explain the buy.com hiccup though.

Thats easily explained, though. The cost of the fines will be more than covered by the purchases by people who switched (or just added) their orders to buy.com in the last few days.

Its why costco and stores like it routinely break street dates for major novels. The early, extra sales beat the cost of the fines. Its a pure business decision.

 

[malraux]

It might still be a happy accident. Who knows. . .?

I don't think anyone at WotC is happy about the pdfs.

 

[Mark]

Tolena Thorburn would make a good chaarcter name.

 

[Westwind]

It doesn't seem all that logical that WotC would leak the .pdf to generate buzz with a group that is already so abuzz about their upcoming product they have created countless websites speculating about said product's content.

 

[Scribble]

BTW, have I mentioned there is a guy named Scott Rouse at my workplace and whenever I walk past his office I do a double-take at the name by the door.

I think the most logical explanation is that you actually work for Wizards and didn't notice.

 

[Riley]

[OT]

Wizards spokesperson Tolena Thorburn confirmed that the leaked online editions are real.

Tolena Thorburn... a name destined for greatness in D&D.
[/OT]

EDIT: Ninja'd. And my connection to ENWorld is really dragging today.

 

[Verys Arkon]

Hmm, I didn't read it that way at all. It seemed that the reference to Verys was more to illustrate 4e fandom. I didn't really see the author as implying this was related to the piracy issue at all.

I sincerely hope people don't see our efforts on the PrRC as being equal to the .pdf thefts. I would be sad if WotC thought of me/us as pirates, and not enthusiastic fans and supporters of their work, eager to spread what we've learned from them about 4e. If Scott The Rouse or anyone from WotC, or ENworld moderators, had said 'ahem' at any time over the last 3 months, I would have stopped at once, out of respect for their work. I'd like to think we helped, not hindered, 4e's launch.

The article only mentions ~40 people, but when I wrote the author I said that number didn't include all the others hundreds and hundreds of other people that contributed to the threads from which the content came from. I wish the article had kept that part in, instead of the estimated number of "hours of my life" I spent on it!

 

[el-remmen]

I don't think anyone at WotC is happy about the pdfs.

Just to be clear, I meant, that it already being done, by whatever means or intent it cannot be undone, but perhaps something good might still come of it for WotC.

Though now that I think of it, that is uncharacteristically optimistic of me.

 

[Ander00]

You may be right, that's just the way it came across to me.

To me as well. That would've made more sense under the slipups passage.


cheers

 

[-Avalon-]

Now that the documents are out though, it is too late to get em back or reverse time (unfortunately), so we should know that wizards has their very own spin doctors and such analyzing every tiny detail and possible approach to turning this into a good thing for them...