[QUOTE=Zeke129;45922125]Stop ruining my fantasy of Phil Fish going to prison
I want all the people who disagree with me to go to prison[/QUOTE]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BbRffBCeYw[/media]
[sp]rip headphones[/sp]
Oh my god I want to see this shit blow up so bad.
That prick better get what's comin to him.
[QUOTE=lapsus_;45922586]There's always Team Meat, Klei Entertainment, that I can name off the top of my head.[/QUOTE]
There's many small time Indie developers as well: Galica Game Studios, Top Hat Game Studios, Flying Squirrel Entertainment, Lordz Game Studio, Traction Wars Team, Wildfire Games, and many more who are focused on making a fun game(s) in their respective genres.
Triumph is a larger studio who are "Indie" (not beholden to major publisher) and have pretty much stayed out of this. Another reason I'm buttmad for them not getting timely coverage of the announcement of their expansion for Age of Wonders 3
Man, gaming has just been getting the shit rocked out of it recently. First gamergate now this.
Awesome.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;45925043]Man, gaming has just been getting the shit rocked out of it recently. First gamergate now this.
Awesome.[/QUOTE]
This is really just a continuation of gamergate.
Escapist put up their article about the recent events and games journalism in general, along with their revised ethical standards:
[url]http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/editorials/12223-The-Escapist-Publisher-Issues-Public-Statement-on-Gamergate[/url]
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;45927605]Escapist put up their article about the recent events and games journalism in general, along with their revised ethical standards:
[url]http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/editorials/12223-The-Escapist-Publisher-Issues-Public-Statement-on-Gamergate[/url][/QUOTE]
That was a really good article.
That was a great piece, well done on the Escapist's part.
Having looked further into this, the case for racketeering is laughable. The awards are decided by a jury panel [i]after[/i] the judging stage. [url=http://igf.com/2012juries.html]None of the 7 people named in this article were on that panel.[/url]
Fez's "+8" bias during the judging stage sounds bad, but there are literally thousands of judges at that stage in the competition.
7 people who invested in Fez being on a panel of hundreds in a different year than when Fez won isn't racketeering. Essentially, we have investors being involved in the nomination of a game for an award.
Since nobody's bothered to answer in the GD thread, can anyone here confirm whether or not the authorities really are planning on looking into this whole thing?
[QUOTE=Xenomoose;45928299]Since nobody's bothered to answer in the GD thread, can anyone here confirm whether or not the authorities really are planning on looking into this whole thing?[/QUOTE]They've been alerted, but an investigative body is not going to release much information, especially not in the early stages. And they're unlikely to give a typical police report of any kind. Basically, they have the information, and no one is likely to know what they are doing until they've decided to tell people or things start happening and people find out that way. It was only a day ago.
[QUOTE=Xenomoose;45928299]Since nobody's bothered to answer in the GD thread, can anyone here confirm whether or not the authorities really are planning on looking into this whole thing?[/QUOTE]
If they are we won't hear about it until the investigation is concluded.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;45928321]They've been alerted, but an investigative body is not going to release much information, especially not in the early stages. And they're unlikely to give a typical police report of any kind. Basically, they have the information, and no one is likely to know what they are doing until they've decided to tell people or things start happening and people find out that way. It was only a day ago.[/QUOTE]
I think I may have been spoiled by police-related shows and games into being impatient about this sort of thing. Also, I'm hoping this does end in convictions just so I can rub it into the faces of everyone still convinced that "Gamergate" is just a bunch of misogynists being shitlords.
I'm a terrible person.
[QUOTE=Xenomoose;45928355]I think I may have been spoiled by police-related shows and games into being impatient about this sort of thing. Also, I'm hoping this does end in convictions just so I can rub it into the faces of everyone still convinced that "Gamergate" is just a bunch of misogynists being shitlords.
I'm a terrible person.[/QUOTE]
Wouldn't wishing for the truth to come out be better than hoping for convictions in a case that, as of now, is nothing but some accusations from a random blog run by a known troll?
[QUOTE=Zeke129;45928396]Wouldn't wishing for the truth to come out be better than hoping for convictions in a case that, as of now, is nothing but some accusations from a random blog run by a [B]known troll?[/B][/QUOTE]
[citation needed]
[QUOTE=Xenomoose;45928299]Since nobody's bothered to answer in the GD thread, can anyone here confirm whether or not the authorities really are planning on looking into this whole thing?[/QUOTE]
The feds will not bother with this because the alleged racketeering fails to fit the guidelines for allowing it to be federally prosecuted. OCGS would laugh you out the door for trying to get approval for federally prosecuting this.
[QUOTE][B]Not every case that meets the requirements of a RICO violation will be authorized for prosecution.[/B] For example, a RICO count should not be added to a routine mail or wire fraud indictment unless there is sufficient reason for doing so. [B]RICO should be invoked only in those cases where it meets a need or serves a special purpose that would not be met by a non-RICO prosecution on the underlying charges.[/B] Prosecutors should use discretion in requesting RICO authorization and should seek to include a RICO violation in an indictment only if one or more of the following factors is present:
1. RICO is necessary to ensure that the indictment adequately reflects the nature and extent of the criminal conduct involved in a way that a prosecution limited to the underlying charges would not;
2. a RICO prosecution would provide the basis for an appropriate sentence under all of the circumstances of the case;
3. a RICO charge could combine related offenses which would otherwise be prosecuted separately in different jurisdictions;
4. RICO is necessary for a successful prosecution of the Government’s case against the defendant or a co-defendant;
5. use of RICO would provide a reasonable expectation of forfeiture that is not grossly disproportionate to the underlying criminal conduct;
6. the case consists of violations of state law, but local law enforcement officials are unlikely or unable to successfully prosecute the case in which the federal government has a significant interest; or
7. the case consists of violations of state law but involves prosecution of significant political or government individuals, which may pose special problems for the local prosecutor.[/QUOTE]
Working from the top: 1. is false because the extent and nature of the allegations are covered wholly by California law, rendering RICO unnecessary. 2. is false because the alleged racketeers are of not on some rampage that would justify federal sentencing. 3. is almost certainly false barring some unstated oddity of how IndieCade operates. 4. is false because the Feds are not currently seeking to prosecute anyone else involved in this and a California prosecution would have the same odds of success. 5. is false for the same reason 2. is. 6. is false because the feds have no distinct interest in this which California lacks. 7. is false because there is no local challenge in prosecuting anyone involved.
No federal prosecutor is going to take a break from going after literal hitmen and slave traffickers so they can go after Phil fucking Fish.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;45928696]The feds will not bother with this because the alleged racketeering fails to fit the guidelines for allowing it to be federally prosecuted. OCGS would laugh you out the door for trying to get approval for federally prosecuting this.
Working from the top: 1. is false because the extent and nature of the allegations are covered wholly by California law, rendering RICO unnecessary. 2. is false because the alleged racketeers are of not on some rampage that would justify federal sentencing. 3. is almost certainly false barring some unstated oddity of how IndieCade operates. 4. is false because the Feds are not currently seeking to prosecute anyone else involved in this and a California prosecution would have the same odds of success. 5. is false for the same reason 2. is. 6. is false because the feds have no distinct interest in this which California lacks. 7. is false because there is no local challenge in prosecuting anyone involved.
No federal prosecutor is going to take a break from going after literal hitmen and slave traffickers so they can go after Phil fucking Fish.[/QUOTE]
it's weird that people just don't care about this corruption.
not speaking of courts either, i'm speaking of the attitude that because it's gaming, who gives a rat fuck who says what in any situation. Just because it's gaming doesn't make it less serious.
Gaming is a 100 billion dollar industry. "Just games" is something I don't get.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;45928696]The feds will not bother with this because the alleged racketeering fails to fit the guidelines for allowing it to be federally prosecuted. OCGS would laugh you out the door for trying to get approval for federally prosecuting this.
Working from the top: 1. is false because the extent and nature of the allegations are covered wholly by California law, rendering RICO unnecessary. 2. is false because the alleged racketeers are of not on some rampage that would justify federal sentencing. 3. is almost certainly false barring some unstated oddity of how IndieCade operates. 4. is false because the Feds are not currently seeking to prosecute anyone else involved in this and a California prosecution would have the same odds of success. 5. is false for the same reason 2. is. 6. is false because the feds have no distinct interest in this which California lacks. 7. is false because there is no local challenge in prosecuting anyone involved.
No federal prosecutor is going to take a break from going after literal hitmen and slave traffickers so they can go after Phil fucking Fish.[/QUOTE]
hi! you only need one of them.
considering the IGF is incorporated in california, but the judges may not all live in california, that would mean separate prosecutions, thus triggering number 3
Jurisdiction is not based on where you live, bro.
It's based on where the crime happened. If collusion was on the internet and through phones it would be cross state.
And if Phil Fish was personally smuggling weaponry to Cambodia through the Indie Fund he could be prosecuted under RICO as well. That does not mean the DoJ cares to ponder hypothetical offenses committed by some nerds you don't like.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;45928746]it's weird that people just don't care about this corruption.[/QUOTE]
To wrap this up, because this entire conversation is bugfuck crazy: There's a difference between not caring and thinking other people care too much. This entire thread is full of posters hoping these people be prosecuted the same way as people who [I]sell child pornography.[/I] That should set off a bunch of alarms in the part of your brain that handles not overreacting to shit like a lunatic.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;45928746]it's weird that people just don't care about this corruption.
not speaking of courts either, i'm speaking of the attitude that because it's gaming, who gives a rat fuck who says what in any situation. Just because it's gaming doesn't make it less serious.
Gaming is a 100 billion dollar industry. "Just games" is something I don't get.[/QUOTE]
Relatively obscure indie game festivals are not a 100 billion dollar industry though.
[QUOTE=xxncxx;45928436][citation needed][/QUOTE]
Read about lordkat and spoony. Lordkat's a shit-raker.
[editline]8th September 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;45929110]
To wrap this up, because this entire conversation is bugfuck crazy: There's a difference between not caring and thinking other people care too much. This entire thread is full of posters hoping these people be prosecuted the same way as people who [I]sell child pornography.[/I] That should set off a bunch of alarms in the part of your brain that handles not overreacting to shit like a lunatic.[/QUOTE]
Maybe tomorrow a random blogger will accuse Phil Fish of treason and all of Facepunch will call for his immediate arrest and transportation to Guantanamo.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;45929191]Read about lordkat and spoony. Lordkat's a shit-raker.
[editline]8th September 2014[/editline]
Maybe tomorrow a random blogger will accuse Phil Fish of treason and all of Facepunch will call for his immediate arrest and transportation to Guantanamo.[/QUOTE]
Sadly, hes Canadian, and French-Canadian at that.
[B]Call the mounties.[/B]
so this racketeering thing turned out to be shit and now the movement looks even more like a bunch of conspiracy theorists?
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;45929186]Relatively obscure indie game festivals are not a 100 billion dollar industry though.[/QUOTE]
oh, I forgot because the word indie is attached there, that it is not a part of the industry at all, thanks for clarifying that.
[QUOTE=JesterUK;45929301]so this racketeering thing turned out to be shit and now the movement looks even more like a bunch of conspiracy theorists?[/QUOTE]
if the allegations are true then afaik it is still illegal
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;45929110]And if Phil Fish was personally smuggling weaponry to Cambodia through the Indie Fund he could be prosecuted under RICO as well. That does not mean the DoJ cares to ponder hypothetical offenses committed by some nerds you don't like.
To wrap this up, because this entire conversation is bugfuck crazy: There's a difference between not caring and thinking other people care too much. This entire thread is full of posters hoping these people be prosecuted the same way as people who [I]sell child pornography.[/I] That should set off a bunch of alarms in the part of your brain that handles not overreacting to shit like a lunatic.[/QUOTE]
wire fraud??
fbi handles wire fraud???
jeez i'm not even a lawyer or a law enforcement person, but i can read and understand things?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
