Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Corjay" data-source="post: 4461760" data-attributes="member: 52839">Speaking of relevancy. That's the second thing you've said that had no relevance, as even you admit in your next statement. The first round was due to acquiring a bunch of employees from TSR. The second round was due to cutting down the staff for the same reason after 3.5 was finished. Is there a third that I don't know about between that one and this one?And corporate is all it is or ever will be. It's called a "business". Businesses are run by people and people are imperfect. Name one corporation that has never made a mistake.It seems your whole argument about WOTC relies solely on the fact that it's a business. Maybe you should take your considerations beyond skin deep and see if you can come up with a real reason to question WOTC's motives. And if you're going to point fingers at WOTC's president, then you're going to need some valid proof that he is the one responsible for whatever it is you use as an example.Yes, I'm taking the apologist's view, but only until some validity is provided to statements regarding WOTC's motives or their president's decisions. I suppose I take that side so often because I have had plenty of unfounded accusations tossed at me in the past so that I question every time someone makes such statements.EDIT: Summary: Your point has been that WOTC can't be trusted to do the GSL right because it's a business. Now I'm saying WOTC was a business when it instituted the OGL, which every 3pp seems to love, so the argument makes no sense. Were they somehow not a business when they decided to institute the OGL? Businesses make mistakes because they are run by people. Businesses choose to do things that involve the bottom line. The lawyers that those businesses hire want to create contracts that favor their employer/client. Put all that into a bowl and stir it up, and what you have is what happened with the first version of the GSL. When the bottom line involves pleasing a community, it complicates the equation. Put those people, business, community, and lawyers into a bowl and stir them up, and what you get is the current wait (heck, even the wait prior to the first version), because they're all pulling in different directions. It's the nature of group endeavors.You say you have no trust that the second GSL will be any better just because WOTC is a business, but I say you should expect something more BECAUSE it's a business. The first result was rejected by all but two (or three?) 3pps and the community at large. This cost WOTC lots of money. You can be sure they have no interest in losing more money. So either they aren't actually going to change the GSL at all, or they're going to make it more palatable, not worse. If they are indeed rethinking the GSL, then they're not doing it to waste their efforts for no change at all. The longer it takes, the better. Because the committee resolving the contract has to ratify each section and subsection in the document until they come to 2/3 majority approval (the amount needed to alter an already ratified document) on each one. If the contract were done in a matter of a week, it wouldn't likely reflect many changes at all.</blockquote>

Verification