Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 4019259" data-attributes="member: 18280">Heh.&nbsp; As D&amp;D players, we've been long trained to recongize the old bait-n-switch.&nbsp; If we were in a game, and it was an NPC setting out the Gleemax terms, we'd all know not to accept them.A while back, I had a contract with a security firm.&nbsp; There was a clause about extra costs for moving (and we were considering moving our store), but when we signed on we were told that the clause was just to protect the company, and that if we chose to move they wouldn't charge us.&nbsp; And, foolishly, we forgot our D&amp;D training and didn't get it in writing.The reason that we were moving is because we had problems with our landlord meeting contractual obligations.&nbsp; When we moved, the landlord tried to sue us.&nbsp; The property had been sold; the landlord we might have trusted had sold the building to a landlord we would not have.&nbsp; The case went in our favour because we had everything in writing, and recorded.&nbsp; As the judge said at the time, we were wise not to trust people's motivations, and to trust instead what was on paper.&nbsp; I only wish I had learned that lesson well enough to have applied it to the security firm.I certainly apply it to Gleemax.&nbsp; No matter what you think of the folks in charge of WotC today, someone else may be in charge tomorrow.&nbsp; Or Gleemax might be sold to a third party.&nbsp; All kinds of things might happen, and you don't get to change your mind about things you've already posted there if they do.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 4019259, member: 18280"] Heh. As D&D players, we've been long trained to recongize the old bait-n-switch. If we were in a game, and it was an NPC setting out the Gleemax terms, we'd all know not to accept them. A while back, I had a contract with a security firm. There was a clause about extra costs for moving (and we were considering moving our store), but when we signed on we were told that the clause was just to protect the company, and that if we chose to move they wouldn't charge us. And, foolishly, we forgot our D&D training and didn't get it in writing. The reason that we were moving is because we had problems with our landlord meeting contractual obligations. When we moved, the landlord tried to sue us. The property had been sold; the landlord we might have trusted had sold the building to a landlord we would not have. The case went in our favour because we had everything in writing, and recorded. As the judge said at the time, we were wise not to trust people's [i]motivations[/i], and to trust instead [i]what was on paper[/i]. I only wish I had learned that lesson well enough to have applied it to the security firm. I certainly apply it to Gleemax. No matter what you think of the folks in charge of WotC [i]today[/i], someone else may be in charge [i]tomorrow[/i]. Or Gleemax might be sold to a third party. All kinds of things might happen, and you don't get to change your mind about things you've already posted there if they do. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification