NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9667213" data-attributes="member: 6799660">Dear Joseph Goodman/Goodman Games,I sit here in my attic office, not going into the office because no one will be around right before Memorial Day. I do so while reading this truly execrable post from the younger Bledsew fellow, wrapping himself and his positions up in the flag those soldiers we are to remember on Memorial Day fought and died for. I do so knowing that many, probably most, of those soldiers would be sickened to know that this individual believes he represents their social, moral, and political positions, and/or the ideals for which that flag stands.I do so also within grasping distance of a number of IP products that mean or meant a lot to me. Novels by Orson Scott Card, albums by Michael Jackson, three copies of Bill Cosby's To Russell, My Brother, Whom I Slept With --two of which are basically unusable because I listened them so many times that I scratched or wore out the vinyl (but which I couldn't make myself throw away). These creators have revealed themselves to be, stand for, or have done things which make me unwilling to provide them (or in Jackson's case his peer-age family heirs who were adults at the time of his behavior, yet enabled it rather than stopped it) with further revenue. That does not retroactively make their work not have been amazing, nor a huge influence on my life.I say this to make clear one thing to you. It is okay to like things by people with horrible behavior. It is definitely okay to like things made by people whose heirs that now own their IP have horrible behavior. However, it is also okay (admirable, and in my opinion advisable) to not promote or provide revenue to people with horrible behavior. Especially when there is no specific urgency. It is not make-or-break for the City State of the Invincible Overlord. You are not saving this thing from your past that you love. A few more years of languishing in obscurity might convince Bledsew II that it requires removing him from the equation for it to once again be a viable product. Regardless, it is not your responsibility, and you should not feel the need to shoulder it with the poison pill with which it comes.And the poison is very real. Now, we have every reason not to trust Bledsew II. However, in this most recent tantrum (and that's what it was), he made statements which directly contradicted your public pronouncements. These indicated more cooperation between your organizations and more direct benefit to them than you indicated in your public statements -- you know, the only communication you are providing to your actual loyal customers and fanbase. Whether true or not, these statements suggest that you are lying to your customers to benefit someone they detest and falsely minimize your association with said detestable individual. This is the kind of thing that ends up being a point of inflection, sea change, or watershed moment. It is where people move, in the eyes of others, from ignoring or excusing the transgressions of others to enabling or cooperating with them. Allowing Bledsew II's statement (if false) to stand, or continuing with such cooperation and obfuscation (if they are true) will have the effect of tarring you with the same brush as them and Judges Guild.This is your moment to make a choice. This is your opportunity to say, 'I'm sorry everyone, I wanted this too much, and I let it get in the way of my better judgement.' I think most people will understand that, and you can mostly return to the way things were (publicly) a few months ago. Otherwise, it can be your moment to say, 'I am publicly taking a stance that I consider my goals regarding CSIO as too important to me for me to care about the concerns others have with regards to Judges Guild, Bledsew II, and what they stand for. Make your decisions accordingly.' This is also your moment to say, 'He's lying/telling the truth,' with regards to Bledsew II's divergent position on the level of cooperation your two organizations, and the revenue you will be sending their way. At this point, even despite Bledsew II's known tendency towards falsehood, I think there will be considerable burden on you to back up claims that he is being false here.What it is not time for (and that time has clearly passed) is any form of silence, non-transparency, non-decision, or hoping to have it both ways on this. You are not going to get to work with Judges Guild but not suffer the massive reputation hit that entails. You are not going to be able to frame this CSIO project as harmless for those who wish it not the benefit JG. These are not dictates on my part, I have no influence over the situation. It is simply my appraisal of the reality of your situation.I hope you make the right decision. Best wishes on your current and future endeavors that align with that right decision, and best wishes in life in general.</blockquote>

Verification