layoffs?

[justanobody]

*Its a well designed product, but its not what I want from D&D.

I don't think I disagree with a single thing you said in that post.

EDIT: Except the PR part about Solice the Forum Manager that had to clean up after Gamer_zer0, and got fired for cleaning up his mess.

 

[xechnao]

Re Chicago School:

Read the article, and you'll find this quote: "The University of Chicago department, widely considered one of the world’s foremost economics departments, has fielded more Nobel Prize winners and John Bates Clark medalists in economics than any other university."

They're neoclassical- meaning generally they favor a hands off approach to economic policy. IOW, not truly politicized. That kind of theoretical approach would also not impact the empirical sales data that pops up in the majority of RW studies.

Nobel prizes in economics are more political (read propaganda) than any other prize of the scientific fields. The awards have less to do with the development of universally practical and applied endeavours and sometimes a lot about theoric structures that are totaly irrelevant with the real effects of economy. This is because while nowadays economy is the driving and guiding force behind scientific development, it is not a science by itself (even if it is proclaimed to be) because in economy you do not have a rigorous goal but rather a policy of adjustment dictated by ecologic AND SOCIAL dynamics.

 

[Maggan]

It was both bad marketing and PR.

Interestingly enough most of those points would not have been under the control of the marketing department.

Marketing works with what they are given as much as any other department. If they are given lemons, they'll try to make lemonade, but they sure ain't gonna start handing out delicious cake and champagne.

I think WotC could have done a lot better for the marketing for D&D, but I'm not so sure that marketing people themselves are the chief suspects here.

Admittedly, being in marketing myself I must admit some bias.

/M

 

[joethelawyer]

Nobel prizes in economics are more political (read propaganda) than any other prize of the scientific fields. The awards have less to do with the development of universally practical and applied endeavours and sometimes a lot about theoric structures that are totaly irrelevant with the real effects of economy. This is because while nowadays economy is the driving and guiding force behind scientific development, it is not a science by itself (even if it is proclaimed to be) because in economy you do not have a rigorous goal but rather a policy of adjustment dictated by ecologic AND SOCIAL dynamics.

if i can i will give xp for that. nicely put.

 

[Delta]

They're neoclassical- meaning generally they favor a hands off approach to economic policy. IOW, not truly politicized. That kind of theoretical approach would also not impact the empirical sales data that pops up in the majority of RW studies...

This makes me laugh- historically, Chilean, Iraqi and Russian economic practices have virtually ZERO to do with free market capitalism in the Chicago School style.

I'm sure you have your opinions, but what you're saying doesn't line up with what I read anywhere else.

Chicago School categorized as Neoliberal -- Chicago school of economics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
Chicago School involved in Washington Concensus -- Washington Consensus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Chicago Boys, 25 Chilean ministers trained under Milton Friedman -- Chicago Boys - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[TheGM]

if i can i will give xp for that. nicely put.

If he had applied it to all Nobel prizes and not just economics, I would too. Sadly some still think the Nobel prize has the authority it did in the days when Solzhenitsyn won one, and that just isn't true.

Don.

 

[Plane Sailing]

It seems this has devolved into politics rather than the initial response to the layoffs, even after Rel's warning, so I'm closing this down.

Clunk.