# Jamison Stone & Satine Phoenix's Apotheosis Studio To Wind Down [UPDATED]



## Sacrosanct (Jul 7, 2022)

Awfully convenient to say "some" complaints were true, but "most" were not.  That way, when an individual who came forward calls him out and says they weren't lying, he can say, "Oh, THEY were valid, but most of the others were not."  Keeping it vague intentionally.

Also, I don't believe him.


----------



## Mort (Jul 7, 2022)

We have investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing, rings a bit hollow!


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 7, 2022)

"If you accused him of murdering 12 children and a dog, he would produce a living dog and call you a liar."


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Jul 7, 2022)

Sounds a whole lot like Blizzard's own recent "internal investigation."



Mort said:


> We have investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing, rings a bit hollow!




We'll see what 90% done translates to as far as fulfilling their Kickstarter. They're already half a year overdue. People have been clamoring for refunds since the news broke.


----------



## Mort (Jul 7, 2022)

I wonder if his (continuing) ridiculously aggressive and combative tone is just who he is or if it's a specific tactic to draw all the heat on him and away from Phoenix and possibly the company?

There WAS some internal communication (previously) showing that his intent was to draw all the heat.


----------



## Maxperson (Jul 7, 2022)

Mort said:


> We have investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing, rings a bit hollow!



To be fair it's, "We investigated ourselves and found a little bit of wrongdoing, but we fixed that by paying them finally."


----------



## overgeeked (Jul 7, 2022)

No one who investigates themselves will ever find wrong doing.


----------



## Mort (Jul 7, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> To be fair it's, "We investigated ourselves and found a little bit of wrongdoing, but we fixed that by paying them finally."




Kind of, it's too vague to even say that. It's SO vague as to be near meaningless as far as an explanation.


----------



## Jer (Jul 7, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> To be fair it's, "We investigated ourselves and found a little bit of wrongdoing, but we fixed that by paying them finally."



They're doing the bare minimum to acknowledge that some of the claims were accurate and they had actually done something wrong to those folks while claiming that the 'vast majority' were 'factually inaccurate'.  No explanation of which ones they're going to take responsibility for and which ones are damn lies that were told just to smear the reputations of two individuals who are mostly innocent of most of the accusations that were leveled at them. 

Left as an exercise for the reader is any indication of which accusations they admit were correct and how they're going to make it right with those folks.  Because then people would be able to figure out which ones they think are in the 'vast majority' of 'factually inaccurate' claims and they'd be leaving themselves open to people bringing receipts.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jul 7, 2022)

It seems they are using the same PR people as Ernie Gygax used last year...


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Jul 7, 2022)

My suggestion is the IPs being acquired or licenced by Disney to produce a fantasy musical animation.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 7, 2022)

> "the vast majority of the allegations to date levelled against Jameson and others on our team have been proven to be factually inaccurate."




What does that mean?  If I say "he abused me at GenCon", but he in fact abused me at GaryCon, does that make my accusation factually inaccurate?  If they really meant to say "Stone didn't do it", then "factually inaccurate" is a really weak way of phrasing it.

Looking at the Jamison Stone that was revealed in the conversations posted by that Tattoo artist, i would 100% believe that he's the kind of guy that would say an accusation is "factually inaccurate" if some details were incorrect, even if the accusation described an actual thing he did.


----------



## dragoner (Jul 7, 2022)

They'll be back, that is the feeling I get out of all this.


----------



## Gradine (Jul 7, 2022)

Ah yes, I see they've chosen the "swallow the red pill and take the easy road back to relevance" path. The Louis C.K. Method, if you will.


----------



## mythago (Jul 7, 2022)

Who exactly conducted this investigation, given that it officially consists of J&S and a friend of theirs (and now he's claiming that some of them are contractors)? At least Blizzard went through the motions of hiring outside professionals.

The dueling lawsuits are still ongoing, so presumably this is the tactic of issuing a bland statement and hoping everybody forgets who they are in a few months.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jul 7, 2022)

I don't believe they investigated anything.


----------



## Jer (Jul 7, 2022)

jdrakeh said:


> I don't believe they investigated anything.



You don't ever need to investigate yourself - you know what you did.

A statement like this is to be able to say that your accusers are liars without actually saying anything actionable that would impact an ongoing lawsuit or potential lawsuit.  

I actually don't know what PR value folks think statements like this have. To me it just feels like the ego of the person demands that they say "something" to defend themselves from the accusations but their lawyers know that any strong statement of innocence they make will only make things worse for them legally, so they end up saying "something" that doesn't really say anything at all.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jul 7, 2022)

Jer said:


> You don't ever need to investigate yourself - you know what you did.
> 
> A statement like this is to be able to say that your accusers are liars without actually saying anything actionable that would impact an ongoing lawsuit or potential lawsuit.
> 
> I actually don't know what PR value folks think statements like this have. To me it just feels like the ego of the person demands that they say "something" to defend themselves from the accusations but their lawyers know that any strong statement of innocence they make will only make things worse for them legally, so they end up saying "something" that doesn't really say anything at all.




Yeah. This. All of this. I hate these horrible people.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jul 7, 2022)

Jer said:


> I actually don't know what PR value folks think statements like this have. To me it just feels like the ego of the person demands that they say "something" to defend themselves from the accusations but their lawyers know that any strong statement of innocence they make will only make things worse for them legally, so they end up saying "something" that doesn't really say anything at all.




It's a means to control the story in the long term, even if people are incredulous now. 

5 years from now when someone says "Hey aren't you that guy that shortchanged a bunch of freelancers?", Jamison will look them in the eye and say "No, that was a misunderstanding with one tattoo artist that got blown out of proportion. You can read the full story on my website." He will hide behind his version of history, while the stories of others are lost in the sea of social media.


----------



## Jer (Jul 7, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> 5 years from now when someone says "Hey aren't you that guy that shortchanged a bunch of freelancers?", Jamison will look them in the eye and say "No, that was a misunderstanding with one tattoo artist that got blown out of proportion. You can read the full story on my website." He will hide behind his version of history, while the stories of others are lost in the sea of social media.



I was going to hit the "Like" button on this to show that I agree with you, but there's nothing to like about this at all.  You're exactly right and the worst part about it is that it's likely to work.


----------



## eyeheartawk (Jul 7, 2022)

I can't say much about this development either way. 

The only thing I do know is that I met Satine twice and each time she went on endlessly about herself despite my clear disinterest. 

So, I can't say I'm _not _happy.


----------



## Inchoroi (Jul 7, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> Awfully convenient to say "some" complaints were true, but "most" were not.  That way, when an individual who came forward calls him out and says they weren't lying, he can say, "Oh, THEY were valid, but most of the others were not."  Keeping it vague intentionally.
> 
> Also, I don't believe him.



Yeah...

My first thought was, "that sounds an awful lot like nothing, doesn't it?"


----------



## Malmuria (Jul 7, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> It's a means to control the story in the long term, even if people are incredulous now.
> 
> 5 years from now when someone says "Hey aren't you that guy that shortchanged a bunch of freelancers?", Jamison will look them in the eye and say "No, that was a misunderstanding with one tattoo artist that got blown out of proportion. You can read the full story on my website." He will hide behind his version of history, while the stories of others are lost in the sea of social media.



And maybe start suing people for defamation like their old friend!


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Jul 7, 2022)

_Mistakes were made ...._


----------



## Retreater (Jul 7, 2022)

It's up to cynics like me with long memories to make sure jerks like Stone don't get to live it down. When his next business venture materializes, I'll be there to post about his jerk moves and his jerk business practices and his Caribbean jerk wings. 
I hope that the cancelled appearances and the temporary harm done to their brand is at least enough to inconvenience these two for a time.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jul 7, 2022)

Retreater said:


> It's up to cynics like me with long memories to make sure jerks like Stone don't get to live it down. When his next business venture materializes, I'll be there to post about his jerk moves and his jerk business practices and his Caribbean jerk wings.
> I hope that the cancelled appearances and the temporary harm done to their brand is at least enough to inconvenience these two for a time.



In my experience, narcissistic grifters can't help but try to put themselves back in the limelight.  Ken Whitman just released a video trying to get back into the front.  I guess he wasn't happy with LaNasa taking the mantle of the biggest grifter in the industry away from him...


----------



## vecna00 (Jul 8, 2022)

This sounds like the first step to becoming NuTSR. Whelp.


----------



## Smackpixi (Jul 8, 2022)

This says everything was paid, even the overages.  Is there anyone still saying they haven’t been paid?  I haven’t been a big student of this, but there were a few complaining, but not all.  If they paid everything “properly submitted” in March, they just paid late.  Not great but not weird.  Yet there’s a lot of dog piling for being crap to creators when it just seems they were late to all and d-bags to some.  Were the some those trying to get paid on the huge overages?  not trying to defend bad people with a history of shafting creators but…unless they’re lying and no one got paid before the s-storm, this issue maybe is overblown?


----------



## jdrakeh (Jul 8, 2022)

Smackpixi said:


> This says everything was paid, even the overages.  Is there anyone still saying they haven’t been paid?  I haven’t been a big student of this, but there were a few complaining, but not all.  If they paid everything “properly submitted” in March, they just paid late.  Not great but not weird.  Yet there’s a lot of dog piling for being crap to creators when it just seems they were late to all and d-bags to some.  Were the some those trying to get paid on the huge overages?  not trying to defend bad people with a history of shafting creators but…unless they’re lying and no one got paid before the s-storm, this issue maybe is overblown?




Some people on Twitter are still saying they haven't been paid. And it's not _just_ about payment. Several people came forward with clear evidence (e.g. correspondence) of verbal and emotional abuse.


----------



## TwiceBorn2 (Jul 8, 2022)

I always thought the name, and especially the logo for their "Sirens" project, looked like a cheap imitation of Norwegian metal band Sirenia's logo: Records – Sirenia

I doubt it's a coincidence.

For the record, Sirenia has been around since 2001.


----------



## mythago (Jul 8, 2022)

Smackpixi said:


> This says everything was paid, even the overages.  Is there anyone still saying they haven’t been paid?  I haven’t been a big student of this, but there were a few complaining, but not all.  If they paid everything “properly submitted” in March, they just paid late.  Not great but not weird.  Yet there’s a lot of dog piling for being crap to creators when it just seems they were late to all and d-bags to some.  Were the some those trying to get paid on the huge overages?  not trying to defend bad people with a history of shafting creators but…unless they’re lying and no one got paid before the s-storm, this issue maybe is overblown?




Why do you think this issue is overblown, and why are you deciding that they are now telling the full truth?


----------



## Malmuria (Jul 8, 2022)

Smackpixi said:


> This says everything was paid, even the overages.  Is there anyone still saying they haven’t been paid?  I haven’t been a big student of this, but there were a few complaining, but not all.  If they paid everything “properly submitted” in March, they just paid late.  Not great but not weird.  Yet there’s a lot of dog piling for being crap to creators when it just seems they were late to all and d-bags to some.  Were the some those trying to get paid on the huge overages?  not trying to defend bad people with a history of shafting creators but…unless they’re lying and no one got paid before the s-storm, this issue maybe is overblown?




Another aspect of this is that the freelancers didn't speak out because they were afraid of being blocklisted and denied career opportunities.  That is, SP and JS used their high profile and position of influence to underpay, delay payment, and otherwise bully the freelancers they hired.  So it's not just the case that they should pay up and everything will be ok, because they've shown that they use their relative power in such a way.


----------



## Shatargat (Jul 8, 2022)

Fake resignation and no mention about Satine, sounds like a great job for protecting her "name"


----------



## darjr (Jul 8, 2022)

All they gotta do now is attack Tenkar. Oh and call all of here names.


----------



## Longspeak (Jul 8, 2022)

Jer said:


> I was going to hit the "Like" button on this to show that I agree with you, but there's nothing to like about this at all.  You're exactly right and the worst part about it is that it's likely to work.



Yes. Many times I have wished for a button or emoji to say "I agree with you but I'm not happy about it."


----------



## darjr (Jul 8, 2022)

Longspeak said:


> Yes. Many times I have wished for a button or emoji to say "I agree with you but I'm not happy about it."



I often use the shock button.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Jul 9, 2022)

jdrakeh said:


> Some people on Twitter are still saying they haven't been paid. And it's not _just_ about payment. Several people came forward with clear evidence (e.g. correspondence) of verbal and emotional abuse.




I thought civil claims court was the venue for pay disputes, not Twitter.

So a boss talked ugly to a subordinate? What is the world coming to? What a terrible thing!

I recall, so long ago, one of my bosses saying "JD, what the (bleep) is wrong with you? Did your mother have any kids weren't (bleep)? Give Patrick his pants back, and knock the (bleed) (bleep-Bleep) off!" Back then, we called that Monday.

But to the issue at hand, if these people were such Dickensians to work with, the problem should swiftly sort itself out, shouldn't it? Freelancers will turn to other employers, who will treat them with the kindness, love, and emotional support they want and desire. Seems like a self-adjusting issue.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jul 9, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> But to the issue at hand, if these people were such Dickensians to work with, the problem should swiftly sort itself out, shouldn't it?




The social media backlash you're seeing is what the problem "sorting itself out" looks like in practice.


----------



## Retreater (Jul 9, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> I thought civil claims court was the venue for pay disputes, not Twitter.
> 
> So a boss talked ugly to a subordinate? What is the world coming to? What a terrible thing!
> 
> ...



I'm a departmental manager at my job. If I treated workers like your example or Stone/Phoenix, I'd get fired. 
The point of spreading the message is that the only accountability the owners can face is educating other freelancers who don't want to be treated that way won't work for them - and customers who don't want to support them won't buy future products. 
Just because something worked like that "back in your day" doesn't mean that it should continue that way forever.


----------



## Morrus (Jul 9, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> But to the issue at hand, if these people were such Dickensians to work with, the problem should swiftly sort itself out, shouldn't it? Freelancers will turn to other employers, who will treat them with the kindness, love, and emotional support they want and desire. Seems like a self-adjusting issue.



This is exactly what you're watching happening. Only it's not 1970, it's 2022 and there's an internet now, so it's a lot more visible.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Jul 9, 2022)

Retreater said:


> I'm a departmental manager at my job. If I treated workers like your example or Stone/Phoenix, I'd get fired.
> The point of spreading the message is that the only accountability the owners can face is educating other freelancers who don't want to be treated that way won't work for them - and customers who don't want to support them won't buy future products.
> Just because something worked like that "back in your day" doesn't mean that it should continue that way forever.



Yeah, some places are boring.

'Back in my day' was last Thursday; I stopped by after court to check in, and overheard a similar dialogue through an open office door.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Jul 9, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> The social media backlash you're seeing is what the problem "sorting itself out" looks like in practice.



Well, then all is right with the world.


----------



## Michael Linke (Jul 9, 2022)

Smackpixi said:


> This says everything was paid, even the overages.  Is there anyone still saying they haven’t been paid?  I haven’t been a big student of this, but there were a few complaining, but not all.  If they paid everything “properly submitted” in March, they just paid late.  Not great but not weird.  Yet there’s a lot of dog piling for being crap to creators when it just seems they were late to all and d-bags to some.  Were the some those trying to get paid on the huge overages?  not trying to defend bad people with a history of shafting creators but…unless they’re lying and no one got paid before the s-storm, this issue maybe is overblown?



It says that freelancers who invoiced correctly were paid.  The problem with some of the complaints was that pay was late, and they were not allowed to invoice until well after their work was delivered.  It also qualifies that only the freelancers who invoiced _correctly_ were paid, so anyone still complaining is to blame for not invoicing _correctly_.


----------



## Morrus (Jul 9, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> It says that freelancers who invoiced correctly were paid.  The problem with some of the complaints was that pay was late, and they were not allowed to invoice until well after their work was delivered.  It also qualifies that only the freelancers who invoiced _correctly_ were paid, so anyone still complaining is to blame for not invoicing _correctly_.



Yeah, unless the contract states otherwise specifically, an invoice is an invoice is an invoice. You pay it.

Also, payment on acceptance, and that shouldn't take longer than a month (allowing for monthly pay cycles and unfortunate timing). It doesn't take long to look at a manuscript and determine whether it's acceptable or not.


----------



## dragoner (Jul 9, 2022)

As a consultant, BCA, eng.; all my invoices are payable on receipt, and I still have lost out, such as not getting paid $6,000 after I had paid other subs. It is a common saying that getting paid is the hardest part of the job. S&S are lowlifes, but that's capitalism, this is what other countries get bombed out of existence for.


----------



## Dioltach (Jul 9, 2022)

Not sure we need to make this about global politics.


----------



## bedir than (Jul 9, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> It also qualifies that only the freelancers who invoiced _correctly_ were paid, so anyone still complaining is to blame



I was once told my invoice was incorrect. It was the same format as the most common freelance sports invoice in use, and they'd already paid me for dozens of other pieces using the same invoice.

The new manager just didn't want to pay mez inventing a reason. 

I suspect Jamison and Satine are doing the same thing. Their invented red tape is an excuse to not pay.


----------



## Wicht (Jul 9, 2022)

I have not done any RPG freelance work where I had to submit an invoice. That just seems... weird. We're not talking major corporations here; we're talking Mom and Pop size operations. You get the gig, sign a contract, do the work, submit the work and then, hopefully, the money gets sent your way according to the dictates of the contract. I've done a few gigs where the pay never materialized, but then you just don't do work for those same again. But none of them ever asked for an invoice.


----------



## Morrus (Jul 9, 2022)

Wicht said:


> I have not done any RPG freelance work where I had to submit an invoice. That just seems... weird. We're not talking major corporations here; we're talking Mom and Pop size operations. You get the gig, sign a contract, do the work, submit the work and then, hopefully, the money gets sent your way according to the dictates of the contract. I've done a few gigs where the pay never materialized, but then you just don't do work for those same again. But none of them ever asked for an invoice.



The tax man likes to see the invoices. Doesn't matter most of the time, but the time it does matter it _really_ matters.


----------



## Wicht (Jul 9, 2022)

Morrus said:


> The tax man likes to see the invoices. Doesn't matter most of the time, but the time it does matter it _really_ matters.



Gotcha.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Jul 10, 2022)

Morrus said:


> The tax man likes to see the invoices. Doesn't matter most of the time, but the time it does matter it _really_ matters.



True in any nation.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jul 10, 2022)

Wicht said:


> I have not done any RPG freelance work where I had to submit an invoice. That just seems... weird. We're not talking major corporations here; we're talking Mom and Pop size operations. You get the gig, sign a contract, do the work, submit the work and then, hopefully, the money gets sent your way according to the dictates of the contract. I've done a few gigs where the pay never materialized, but then you just don't do work for those same again. But none of them ever asked for an invoice.



Of the hundred or so freelancers I've hired over the years, I'd say about a quarter of them sent me invoices.


----------



## Eltab (Jul 10, 2022)

Michael Linke said:


> It says that freelancers who invoiced correctly were paid.  The problem with some of the complaints was that pay was late, and they were not allowed to invoice until well after their work was delivered.  It also qualifies that only the freelancers who invoiced _correctly_ were paid, so anyone still complaining is to blame for not invoicing _correctly_.



I'm going to have to send in another Invoice for the fee to take the course on what you consider a _correct_ Invoice.  Plus you still owe me for the older Invoice you are attempting to dispute with the phrase "correctly".  And you may be getting an updated corrected Invoice for previously-delivered but still-unpaid product.

Or you could just pay me what you owe and save yourself a bunch of hassle and money.

- Shortened version of my employer's Accounts Receivable department "you owe us money" boilerplate, adapted to the current situation.


----------



## Gradine (Jul 10, 2022)

There are always going to be people more concerned with the finding out than they are about the frakking around, and they almost always turn out to be the kind that frak around a bit themselves


----------



## Oncewasbenji (Jul 11, 2022)

To be honest it's not the accusations about pay that troubled me. It was the one about him driving a defenceless woman out into the woods with no way back under the pretence if business then propositioning her for s*x in a place she couldn't escape. So saying 'most are baseless but not saying which ones, that's the one they need to clarify independently before I'd ever choose to value their output again.


----------



## Grendel_Khan (Jul 11, 2022)

Oncewasbenji said:


> To be honest it's not the accusations about pay that troubled me. It was the one about him driving a defenceless woman out into the woods with no way back under the pretence if business then propositioning her for s*x in a place she couldn't escape. So saying 'most are baseless but not saying which ones, that's the one they need to clarify independently before I'd ever choose to value their output again.



Yeah, not sure how this accusation keeps getting ignored or lumped in with the usual, surly “Kids these days…Bosses are _supposed_ to be horrendous monsters. It’s good for you!” takes.


----------



## John R Davis (Jul 11, 2022)

Invoices never occurred to me until I got one sent! Mostly seem to get them from Graphic Design folk I hired. Maybe should do this for all things in the future.


----------



## mythago (Jul 12, 2022)

Grendel_Khan said:


> Yeah, not sure how this accusation keeps getting ignored or lumped in with the usual, surly “Kids these days…Bosses are _supposed_ to be horrendous monsters. It’s good for you!” takes.




You were under the mistaken impression that the TTRPG hobby as a whole takes that sort of thing seriously.


----------



## MGibster (Jul 12, 2022)

mythago said:


> You were under the mistaken impression that the TTRPG hobby as a whole takes that sort of thing seriously.



Or that they pay attention in the first place.  I'm thinking most people in the hobby don't really take a keen interest in how the sausage is made.  Those of us who post messages on En World or RPG.net are outliers, but I suspect if you went into Barnes & Noble and asked someone who was buying a D&D book what they thought of Zak S., Orion Black, or Satine Phoenix you'd get a blank stare in return.  And not just because some stranger person was asking them questions, but because there's a good chance they would have no idea who those people were.


----------



## mythago (Jul 12, 2022)

MGibster said:


> Or that they pay attention in the first place.  I'm thinking most people in the hobby don't really take a keen interest in how the sausage is made.




Sure, but those folks won't be focusing on 'freelancers claimed they didn't get paid' while ignoring 'freelancer claims she was lured to an isolated area and then propositioned', which was @Oncewasbenji 's point.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Jul 12, 2022)

Oncewasbenji said:


> To be honest it's not the accusations about pay that troubled me. It was the one about him driving a defenceless woman out into the woods with no way back under the pretence if business then propositioning her for s*x in a place she couldn't escape. So saying 'most are baseless but not saying which ones, that's the one they need to clarify independently before I'd ever choose to value their output again.



That accusation is the reddest of red flags to me.

The rest is just noise in the background in comparison.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Jul 12, 2022)

One thing I want to point out is that the listed deadline for product fulfillment was December 2021. If their writing deadline was the end of the October, there was never any way they were going to make that date.



Morrus said:


> The Sirens writing Deadline was Oct 31. Approval passes started in November. Unfortunately, the approval passes took longer than expected which pushed out approval for the contractors to bill by 3-4 months. Billing authorization was issued in March of 2022 and we promptly paid all invoices properly submitted to our accountant.


----------



## darjr (Jul 29, 2022)

Red Opera and Sirens RPG writer Rick Heinz discusses the tribulations of working at Apotheosis.
					

Author and Apotheosis writer Rick Heinz describes his fraughtexperience working with Jamison Stone's Apotheosis Studio




					www.dicebreaker.com


----------



## darjr (Jul 29, 2022)




----------



## Umbran (Jul 29, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> I thought civil claims court was the venue for pay disputes, not Twitter.




Wage theft amounts to about $8 billion annually in the US.  The courts, clearly, are not handling the issue.



Jd Smith1 said:


> So a boss talked ugly to a subordinate? What is the world coming to? What a terrible thing!
> 
> I recall, so long ago, one of my bosses saying "JD, what the (bleep) is wrong with you? Did your mother have any kids weren't (bleep)? Give Patrick his pants back, and knock the (bleed) (bleep-Bleep) off!" Back then, we called that Monday.




That you accept abuse is not a reason for anyone else to do so.



Jd Smith1 said:


> But to the issue at hand, if these people were such Dickensians to work with, the problem should swiftly sort itself out, shouldn't it?




Only if there is widespread communication about them, such that others know to avoid them in the future.  You are witnessing that process as you read this thread.  Basically, you are pooh-poohing the very thing you say should happen.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Jul 29, 2022)

I find it ironic that for all his threats of "You're done in the industry. I'm gonna cancel you. You're out," it is likely that Stone is the one getting drummed out of the industry.



darjr said:


> Red Opera and Sirens RPG writer Rick Heinz discusses the tribulations of working at Apotheosis.
> 
> 
> Author and Apotheosis writer Rick Heinz describes his fraughtexperience working with Jamison Stone's Apotheosis Studio
> ...




When I think about the bosses that I learned the most from, and the bosses that were toughest, I guarantee the circles of that Venn Diagram barely touch, if at all.



Umbran said:


> That you accept abuse is not a reason for anyone else to do so.


----------



## dragoner (Jul 29, 2022)

I think there is a divide between products that make money and those that do not, where for a lot of this, it is the expectation that the product will make money.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jul 29, 2022)

Ralif Redhammer said:


> When I think about the bosses that I learned the most from, and the bosses that were toughest, I guarantee the circles of that Venn Diagram barely touch, if at all.



Indeed.  There was a phrase I heard years ago: People don't quit their jobs.  They quit their bosses.

I think there is a lot of truth there.  As someone who has been in leadership positions for nearly 30 years now in various manifestations (coaching, teaching, military NCO, corporate supervisor/manager), you absolutely cannot mistreat your staff unless you want a disaster.  Even if you somehow manage to avoid an HR nightmare, people won't want to work for you if they don't respect you or feel respected by you.  Sure, some people will work because they need the job, and will do well in spite of you because of their own career goals, but you'll never maximize your team if you aren't a fair leader.


Lead by example (never ask someone to do something you aren't willing to do yourself)
Be present for them
Recognize everyone is an individual with individual motivations (tailor your leadership style to each person, rather than take blanket approaches)
Stand up for them and fight for them
Do what you can to set them up for success and their future.  This is a big one I see leaders fail at the most often.  Too many leaders I see want to keep high performers on their team for their own stats.  That builds resentment.  If I have high performers, I want to know what their goals are and the best way I can support them because they are the kind of people you want higher up.
Make sure everyone has the tools and information to the best of your ability to provide it to do their jobs.
Do your best to remove hurdles to their success (recognizing how everyone may have different hurdles).
Recognize the diversity/strengths/weakness of your team and use that to build cohesion and strong partnerships.

That's just a start.  You can go a long way by being nice, being informative, and being honest.


----------



## dragoner (Jul 29, 2022)

I think I got as about the same respect washing dishes at steak and shake as I did being lead engineer retrofitting an elevator into a structure in a mud slide, earthquake, and fire zone in California. Often about the best was getting put with the other engineers from China or India in the international teams.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Jul 30, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Wage theft amounts to about $8 billion annually in the US.  The courts, clearly, are not handling the issue.



The courts deal with the cases presented to them. That's how the system works in the USA. 


Umbran said:


> That you accept abuse is not a reason for anyone else to do so.



That you claim abuse doesn't make it abuse. In the USA, only courts can apply that standard.


Umbran said:


> Only if there is widespread communication about them, such that others know to avoid them in the future.  You are witnessing that process as you read this thread.  Basically, you are pooh-poohing the very thing you say should happen.



A single topic in a Net forum devoted to a niche hobby is not widespread communication. And if you were telling the truth about it being an $8 billion a year issue, nothing is working.


----------



## MGibster (Jul 30, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Wage theft amounts to about $8 billion annually in the US. The courts, clearly, are not handling the issue.



One of the big problems with wage theft is that it's usually a civil rather than a criminal matter.  And I bet it's more complicated in this situation because I don't think we're dealing with employer/employee relationships.  If that's the case, it's not wage theft as defined in the United States because there's no employer/employee relationship with a contractor.  An employee can contact a state or federal agency for assistance, but a contractor is pretty much on their own to get a laywer and go for any compensation owed.  


Umbran said:


> Only if there is widespread communication about them, such that others know to avoid them in the future. You are witnessing that process as you read this thread. Basically, you are pooh-poohing the very thing you say should happen.



Being a close knit industry, I would imagine it's fairly ripe for abuse.  Do I complain because I haven't gotten paid and gain a reputation for being "difficult" to work with?  Or do I just suck it up in the hopes of continuing to work at doing something I genuinely love?


----------



## darjr (Jul 30, 2022)

MGibster said:


> One of the big problems with wage theft is that it's usually a civil rather than a criminal matter.  And I bet it's more complicated in this situation because I don't think we're dealing with employer/employee relationships.  If that's the case, it's not wage theft as defined in the United States because there's no employer/employee relationship with a contractor.  An employee can contact a state or federal agency for assistance, but a contractor is pretty much on their own to get a laywer and go for any compensation owed.
> 
> Being a close knit industry, I would imagine it's fairly ripe for abuse.  Do I complain because I haven't gotten paid and gain a reputation for being "difficult" to work with?  Or do I just suck it up in the hopes of continuing to work at doing something I genuinely love?



I think the big problem with wage theft is that it isn't a criminal matter every time.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Jul 30, 2022)

MGibster said:


> One of the big problems with wage theft is that it's usually a civil rather than a criminal matter.  And I bet it's more complicated in this situation because I don't think we're dealing with employer/employee relationships.  If that's the case, it's not wage theft as defined in the United States because there's no employer/employee relationship with a contractor.  An employee can contact a state or federal agency for assistance, but a contractor is pretty much on their own to get a laywer and go for any compensation owed.



Yup. In addition to the excellent point you make, you can add sloppy common practice. 

A big issue with contract payment is that unless it is set out in writing, it is not usually enforceable. And far too often, what is written down is not done in a legal format with contingencies represented, so it is indefensible in court. 

The burden for payment is on the contractor. If they set things up via E-mail, without legal boilerplate, for example, they're putting themselves at the mercy of the contracting party.


----------



## aramis erak (Jul 30, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> A single topic in a Net forum devoted to a niche hobby is not widespread communication. And if you were telling the truth about it being an $8 billion a year issue, nothing is working.



It's not on just a single forum; I know for sure similar depth on both RPGG and Reddit. Twitter's thrown a few tweets about it at me, too.


----------



## bedir than (Jul 31, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> The burden for payment is on the contractor.



This is absurd, and not true.

The purchaser is responsible for paying. Stone and Phoenix didn't pay for work. That's theft. They admitted it took them months upon months to actually pay their workers. That's theft.

Plus, your continued defense of them includes defending a CEO taking a contract worker out into a forest together to proposition them. Why support these people?
Why support people whose response to "I should be paid for the work I did for you." is "you'll never work in this industry again" while they contact their former coworkers at Wizards to make that happen?


----------



## darjr (Jul 31, 2022)

bedir than said:


> This is absurd, and not true.
> 
> The purchaser is responsible for paying. Stone and Phoenix didn't pay for work. That's theft. They admitted it took them months upon months to actually pay their workers. That's theft.
> 
> ...



I did feel bad for Satines distress in her video. I think it was very real while at the same time showing that she didn’t understand.

I have my own reasons to be angry with them. They absolutely took advantage of folks.


----------



## bedir than (Jul 31, 2022)

darjr said:


> I did feel bad for Satines distress in her video. I think it was very real while at the same time showing that she didn’t understand.



Several parties backed up Liisa's history between the two of them, and then you watch the livestream they were both on and it really opens up eyes.


----------



## darjr (Jul 31, 2022)

bedir than said:


> Several parties backed up Liisa's history between the two of them, and then you watch the livestream they were both on and it really opens up eyes.



Satine was bad. No doubt. Satine doesn’t understand that.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jul 31, 2022)

bedir than said:


> Several parties backed up Liisa's history between the two of them, and then you watch the livestream they were both on and it really opens up eyes.



which livestream was that?


----------



## bedir than (Jul 31, 2022)

Sacrosanct said:


> which livestream was that?



IIRC it was DnD live. Liisa played a bartender/waitress unrelated to the party at all. Satine treated her like crap, blaming "the last time we saw each other" In character they'd never met.


----------



## Teo Twawki (Jul 31, 2022)

As a friend of mine says, _I don't have a dog in this hunt_. They also say: _How you do Anything is how you do Everything_. Which I personally argue against but believe to be true.

Of the several dozen rpgs I have played or run, none of them have been any variation of D&D. I first heard of Stone & Satine a couple months ago when a tattoo artist we know pointed out the twitter thread from nerdytattooer. I admit, I went on a internet binge for an hour or so, reading about Stone's condescension and ultimately, his false-apology/blame-everything-but-himself facebook post.

Stone's casual excuse that his (alleged) CPTSD for his outbursts is an additional offense to his many intentional public faults. He sounds like a drunk driver facing court for his injurious accident and saying, "It wasn't me, you honor, it was my alcoholism!" Or South Park's version of Alec Baldwin saying he's not a racist, but his thumbs are when he gets on twitter.

I completely grok that everybody has a different level of what constitutes trauma and stress disorders for them. Some people claim stress from seeing a word about something unpleasant. Other people experience the worst humanity has to offer and get on with their lives without using that experience as absolution from personal responsibility. Both can be traumatic, but they certainly different in _why_ they are traumatic. And it is easy to see without looking too far that far less people actually have traumatic disabilities than the amount who publicly claim to have them. And those who genuinely do are, in my years of experience with such matters, usually *not* the ones who try to use trauma as a proverbial Get Out Of Jail Free card when they are called to account for their actions.

Stone Jamison comes off in his public statement as a privileged, whiney little <insert appropriate malignancy here> who got caught being a repeated and detestable sluice puddle of excrement who uses his own actions as the inflicted trauma on his otherwise soft and easy life. And now he's upset because that methodology worked well for him for years. Until recently.

Will Stone and Satine learn from this? Maybe. We can hope so. But this isn't suddenly-acquired behavior. It's well-assimilated into their daily interactions and personalities. So I wouldn't wager even the value of an internet opinion* on them learning a damn thing from it. Except how to hide it better when they try it again.

My *two pennies, anyway. Might be worth that at some exchange rate.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Jul 31, 2022)

bedir than said:


> This is absurd, and not true.



It is in most states in the USA. Civil law.


bedir than said:


> The purchaser is responsible for paying. Stone and Phoenix didn't pay for work. That's theft. They admitted it took them months upon months to actually pay their workers. That's theft.



Not in any state in the USA that I can find, It's a civil matter, not criminal.


bedir than said:


> Plus, your continued defense of them includes defending a CEO taking a contract worker out into a forest together to proposition them. Why support these people?
> Why support people whose response to "I should be paid for the work I did for you." is "you'll never work in this industry again" while they contact their former coworkers at Wizards to make that happen?



Not really defending; just not impressed with the issue.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Jul 31, 2022)

aramis erak said:


> It's not on just a single forum; I know for sure similar depth on both RPGG and Reddit. Twitter's thrown a few tweets about it at me, too.



Well, I was responding to a claim that I was witnessing the problem being sorted out. If it is $8 billion a year (hard to believe, really), then it isn't being sorted out.


----------



## MGibster (Jul 31, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> Well, I was responding to a claim that I was witnessing the problem being sorted out. If it is $8 billion a year (hard to believe, really), then it isn't being sorted out.



Wage theft mostly affects low-wage workers, some of whom are undocument workers or are otherwise being paid under the table.  Many of these workesr aren't well educated regarding their rights or employment law, and some of them are afraid to report their employers for fear of retaliation, or, in the case of undocumented workers, attracting the attention of ICE.  Wage theft typically happens by asking an employee to work off the clock, through paid breaks/lunch, or having them work overtime without proper compensation for it.  With so many employers and so many employees in the United States, these numbers can add up fairly quickly and a few billion a year isn't unreasonable.  Some economist predict it costs the United States a lot more per year, but they tend to look at the overall cost rather than just the amount stolen. 

But, again, the situation with the Stones' isn't wage theft since there is no employer/employee relationship.  If they're a contractor, it only becomes a wage theft issue if the company misclassified an employee as a contractor.  And you're right, it's a civil not a criminal manner.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Jul 31, 2022)

MGibster said:


> Wage theft mostly affects low-wage workers, some of whom are undocument workers or are otherwise being paid under the table.  Many of these workesr aren't well educated regarding their rights or employment law, and some of them are afraid to report their employers for fear of retaliation, or, in the case of undocumented workers, attracting the attention of ICE.  Wage theft typically happens by asking an employee to work off the clock, through paid breaks/lunch, or having them work overtime without proper compensation for it.  With so many employers and so many employees in the United States, these numbers can add up fairly quickly and a few billion a year isn't unreasonable.  Some economist predict it costs the United States a lot more per year, but they tend to look at the overall cost rather than just the amount stolen.
> 
> But, again, the situation with the Stones' isn't wage theft since there is no employer/employee relationship.  If they're a contractor, it only becomes a wage theft issue if the company misclassified an employee as a contractor.  And you're right, it's a civil not a criminal manner.



Yeah, I'm familiar with the issue; I worked (and was trained in) human trafficking cases, but those aren't really the issue here, as you've noted.

This thread appears to be nothing more than contract workers who failed to use proper contractual procedures to ensure a legal footing for payment. Or who are too concerned about their industrial reputation to take the issue to civil court.


----------



## aramis erak (Jul 31, 2022)

MGibster said:


> But, again, the situation with the Stones' isn't wage theft since there is no employer/employee relationship.  If they're a contractor, it only becomes a wage theft issue if the company misclassified an employee as a contractor.  And you're right, it's a civil not a criminal manner.



Most states have a fraud statute.
Alaska has two specific ones (chosen because I've read them before)
AS 11.46.600. Scheme to Defraud. >5 persons, >$10k (Class B)
AS 11.46.730. Defrauding Creditors. >$500. (Class C; @ $25k, becomes class B)

Most states have similar laws to those, but the specific amounts and numbers vary

( Alaska Statutes: AS 11.46.600. Scheme to Defraud. )
( Alaska Statutes: AS 11.46.730. Defrauding Creditors. )


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Jul 31, 2022)

aramis erak said:


> Most states have a fraud statute.
> Alaska has two specific ones (chosen because I've read them before)
> AS 11.46.600. Scheme to Defraud. >5 persons, >$10k (Class B)
> AS 11.46.730. Defrauding Creditors. >$500. (Class C; @ $25k, becomes class B)
> ...



Yeah, but this situation doesn't meet the elements of an intent to defraud.

The key  in these matters there is a contractual agreement between two parties which leads to a disagreement about compensation.

The problem in the cases I can find, is that a writer or artist agrees to create a creative piece for the hiring party, and after the point of delivery, a dispute arises over compensation. Generally, the matter has been set forth in e-mail or phone conversations, not a legal contract, and nearly always lacks costs-plus documentation. Frequently the creative process includes discussion back and forth regarding amendments or changes. 

And then comes the disagreement. One side claims it did not get what it requested, or to sufficient quality, or states that it only promised X funds, and the other side disagrees. Lacking a detailed, binding, and above all comprehensive contract, it boils down to a small claims court deciding who is owed what, if it even goes that far.

This is also complicated by the volume of prospective contractors (very large pool) compared to the volume of available work (much smaller).

And further complicated by those who would simply be happy to get their name attached to a project.


----------



## MGibster (Jul 31, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> This thread appears to be nothing more than contract workers who failed to use proper contractual procedures to ensure a legal footing for payment. Or who are too concerned about their industrial reputation to take the issue to civil court.



Being "too concerned about their reputation" is what protected the likes of Harvey Weinstein.  In a small industry like RPGs, having a publisher put the word out that you're difficult to work with or don't deliver as promised can damage your reputation to the point where getting work is hard.  And then there's the fact that going through the proper channels, civil court, is both expensive and time consuming.  I think I have a little more empathy in this matter than you do.

Edited for clarity.


----------



## MGibster (Jul 31, 2022)

aramis erak said:


> Most states have a fraud statute.
> Alaska has two specific ones (chosen because I've read them before)



Sure, but this is where I have to take a step back because I don't know if the circumstances warrant a fraud charge.  Maybe they do, but I don't know.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Jul 31, 2022)

MGibster said:


> Being "too concerned about their reputation" is what protected the likes of Harvey Weinstein.  In a small industry like RPGs, having a publisher put the word out that you're difficult to work with or don't deliver as promised can damage your reputation to the point where getting work is hard.  And then there's the fact that going through the proper channels, civil court, is both expensive and time consuming.  I think I have a little more empathy in this matter than you do.



While I am, I must modestly admit, a paragon of Human virtue, empathy is not my strongest quality.

Actually, unless the amount involved is in the five figures range, civil court is much cheaper than you would expect in most states. For example, in Texas a case involving less than $10,000 requires a $35 filing fee, and does not require a lawyer. Nor is it particularly time consuming.

The problem is, as I've noted, unless the contractor took the time and effort to get a formal, and detailed, contract signed, the outcome will not likely be satisfying. Lacking a clear and binding paper trail, the ruling will likely be a 'split the difference' at best.

The solution is for freelancers to pay a lawyer a couple hundred bucks to draft a standard contract for their type of services, and then to use that contract in their dealings with persons wanting their services. With a legally binding contract, the chances of being ripped off is low to none.


----------



## mythago (Aug 1, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> With a legally binding contract, the chances of being ripped off is low to none.




Is this elaborate trolling?


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Aug 1, 2022)

mythago said:


> Is this elaborate trolling?



No, it is a statement of fact and the only viable solution to the problem under discussion. Legally binding contracts have been doing their job since 1791.


----------



## mythago (Aug 2, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> No, it is a statement of fact and the only viable solution to the problem under discussion. Legally binding contracts have been doing their job since 1791.




Legally binding contracts are a deterrent to being ripped off, and help to enforce an agreement if one party is ripping off the other. The claim that having a legally binding contract makes the chances of being ripped off "low to none" is so unrealistic that I have to wonder if it's trolling.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Aug 2, 2022)

mythago said:


> Legally binding contracts are a deterrent to being ripped off, and help to enforce an agreement if one party is ripping off the other. The claim that having a legally binding contract makes the chances of being ripped off "low to none" is so unrealistic that I have to wonder if it's trolling.



And I have to wonder if you're just trying to up your post count under the guise of nit-picking. Like using legally binding contracts, there is a simple solution to that issue, as well.


----------



## MGibster (Aug 2, 2022)

I deal with contracts between my company and independent contractors, and I don't think a single one describes penalties for non-payment or delivery of services.  We have that kind of language for contracts with vendors (staffing agencies for example), but nothing of the kind for independent contractors.


----------



## Teo Twawki (Aug 2, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> I worked (and was trained in) human trafficking cases





Jd Smith1 said:


> empathy is not my strongest quality.




Having worked with--after having been one--refugees of genocide who are often targets of human trafficking, I have to say that these two claims are severely antithetical to each other. And, in my experience, non-existent in combination. Perhaps you failed in your training.

Regardless, you definitely sound like you're defensively trolling here.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 2, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> This thread appears to be nothing more than contract workers who failed to use proper contractual procedures to ensure a legal footing for payment. Or who are too concerned about their industrial reputation to take the issue to civil court.




I mean, if you really want to blame the victims, you can say that, sure.

But, if you do that, I don't think you're going to be persuasive.  So, you might want to think about that.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 2, 2022)

Teo Twawki said:


> Regardless, you definitely sound like you're defensively trolling here.




*Mod Note:*
Please do not make this personal.


----------



## bedir than (Aug 2, 2022)

It should be noted that not even Stone and Phoenix claim that the contract workers weren't under contract.


----------



## Mort (Aug 2, 2022)

bedir than said:


> It should be noted that not even Stone and Phoenix claim that the contract workers weren't under contract.




The main reason, IMO, Stone and Phoenix's actions are SO contemptible is that their entire schtick was based on punching down. They would exploit those that they knew/sensed had the least ability to fight/contest their deplorable behavior.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 2, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> And I have to wonder if you're just trying to up your post count under the guise of nit-picking.




*Mod Note:*
You know, I just asked someone else to not make it personal against you.

The least (really, the very least) you could do is follow suit.  If you aren't up to that, maybe you should leave the discussion now.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Aug 2, 2022)

MGibster said:


> I deal with contracts between my company and independent contractors, and I don't think a single one describes penalties for non-payment or delivery of services.  We have that kind of language for contracts with vendors (staffing agencies for example), but nothing of the kind for independent contractors.



Have you had to go to court with a contractor yet?

Most contracts I've seen with individuals don't lay out penalties, but do clearly state when and how much will be paid for specific services rendered.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Aug 2, 2022)

Umbran said:


> I mean, if you really want to blame the victims, you can say that, sure.
> 
> But, if you do that, I don't think you're going to be persuasive.  So, you might want to think about that.



If the 'victim' in question failed to take the usual and accepted precautions involved in commercial transactions, they're not a victim.

If the facts of the matter don't persuade, than the problem isn't with the presenter.


----------



## Sabathius42 (Aug 2, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> If the 'victim' in question failed to take the usual and accepted precautions involved in commercial transactions, they're not a victim.
> 
> If the facts of the matter don't persuade, than the problem isn't with the presenter.



What's your angle for even posting on this thread? Clearly you have said multiple times it's a non issue for you.  Is it just to continually crap on some poor folks who maybe were taken advantage of?

Your assertion that you can't be a victim if you don't follow "the rules" is utterly ridiculous.  Is my elderly mom who doesn't understand standard online safety practices not a victim of a scam?


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Aug 2, 2022)

Sabathius42 said:


> What's your angle for even posting on this thread? Clearly you have said multiple times it's a non issue for you.  Is it just to continually crap on some poor folks who maybe were taken advantage of?



I'm pointing out how these things can be prevented: use a contract. This is, as I have pointed out, the only real solution. 

Lots of causes I support with money and time are non-issues for me. Just because you know that the subject of a situation was stupid for getting into said situation doesn't mean you don't try to help.


----------



## Dioltach (Aug 2, 2022)

Legally binding contracts are wonderful, but they don't offer any guarantees. This is where the concept of "breach of contract" comes up. And sure, you can sue for breach of contract, but it takes time, effort and money, and you're still not guaranteed a favourable outcome.

As an aside, I once took a defaulting client to court. I won. They paid my bills, plus interest, and the court fees. It cost them about 30% more than it would have if they'd just paid. Not long after that they went of out of business, for mismanagement (they hadn't remitted their employees' social security and pension contributions, for a start).


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Aug 2, 2022)

.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 2, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> If the 'victim' in question failed to take the usual and accepted precautions involved in commercial transactions, they're not a victim.




"You didn't preemptively defend yourself hard enough, so you are not a victim"?  Is that what you mean?

And people who do not take the simple precaution of wearing bullet-proof vests are not victims if they get shot?  

Whether you are a victim is not generally based on how many extra protections you take - it is based on whether the other party did something wrong.  J&P violated agreements (verbal or written is immaterial - while one is harder to prove, they are both binding).  They wronged their contractors.  Ergo, those contractors are their victims.  This holds in both the legal and moral/ethical senses.  



Jd Smith1 said:


> If the facts of the matter don't persuade, than the problem isn't with the presenter.




As noted above, those "facts" don't hold up to scrutiny.  Please try different "facts".



Jd Smith1 said:


> Just because you know that the subject of a situation was stupid for getting into said situation doesn't mean you don't try to help.




Being insulting about it doesn't actually make your case stronger.  

You are asserting they were stupid, but have apparently neglected the possibility that they were simply ignorant (these are artists, not business people, after all), or under pressures that you, not being in their position, do not understand.  

You might want to reconsider the armchair moralizing aspect of your presentation.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Aug 2, 2022)

While I am not entirely sure what all the response are to, here (although I have a sneaking suspicion that it's the "Servers in America don't deserve to be tipped" guy), I can glean enough to make it worthwhile to do a quick reminder on a few of these issues:

1. Contracts do not have to be written. At all. That's Law School 101 (or even the Paper Chase, for those who are really old). The vast majority of contracts, ones that we enter into all the time without thinking, are oral contracts. Other than a very few and limited exceptions (such as for the sale of land) there is never a requirement that a contract be in writing. Written contracts do have advantages- they can be more complicated (with more terms), they are easier in terms of evidence (there is a separate writing), etc. But it's not required. If you think oral contracts, partially written ("napkin deals") contracts, or even contract that are never reduced to writing can't be a big deal, look up the Texaco / Pennzoil case sometime. 

2. A contract is never a guarantee that you won't be ripped off. Contracts are just agreements. Enforcing agreements costs money- a lot of money. Which means that contracts often just memorialize power differentials; the party with more power can demand the more favorable terms, and the party with more money can choose to litigate it or breach it. In some industries (such as real estate development) it is frustratingly common for developers to agree to a contract, and then simply refuse to pay the contracted-amount knowing that the cost of litigation will be too high for the people they have screwed. 

3. The mislabeling of employees as independent contracts is a frustratingly common way of engaging in wage theft in the United States. The rise of the "gig economy" has also allowed a lot of businesses to incorrectly label their employees as independent contractors in order to save money on wages, benefits, and overtime- not to mention shifting the tax and regulatory burden on their employees. 

4. All that said, many artists and creatives who do work for multiple entities are, in fact, independent contractors. It is entirely proper for a business to not pay when, for example, there is a failure to deliver. However, many independent contractors find that businesses will use their power (money) to leverage further concessions- either by delaying payment, or demanding a decrease in payment, simply because they know that the IC has no leverage and will not litigate. This is morally and ethically wrong.


Finally, to sum up (especially with regard to 4)- people exist in a community. The way you know that other people are unethical, slimy, or have dubious business practices is by telling each other about them. If a business is stiffing their ICs, let other people know- that way, they will know better that to deal with that business (and/or the business will be forced to start paying "up front" since they cannot be trusted).

In the end, act ethically and morally; treat others as you would have wanted to be treated. That tends to work out well.


----------



## mythago (Aug 2, 2022)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Enforcing agreements costs money- a lot of money. Which means that contracts often just memorialize power differentials; the party with more power can demand the more favorable terms, and the party with more money can choose to litigate it or breach it.




It also means that bad actors take "what are the odds the other person would try to enforce this, and would win if they did?" into account when entering into contracts, and in their business practices generally.

Because sure, anybody can, in theory, file a small-claims court complaint for the price of a moderately expensive lunch. But the cost of filing an initial complaint (even in small claims court) is the easiest hurdle in trying to enforce a contract - especially if we're crossing state lines, and if we take into account the opportunity cost of preparing and continuing with a lawsuit without a lawyer (as you do in small claims court), or of hiring a lawyer and proceeding with litigation (as you do otherwise). And nothing prevents the bad actor from filing their own lawsuit, frivolous or otherwise, as a counterclaim or a separate proceeding.

TL;DR - defensive attribution is no way to discuss business disputes.


----------



## Voadam (Aug 2, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> If it is $8 billion a year (hard to believe, really), then it isn't being sorted out.



Doing a quick search the top hits I get on "how much wage theft is there in the US"

Estimates vary.

Social Justice Resource Center "Nationally it is estimated that workers are not paid at least *$19 billion* every year in overtime and that *$40 billion* to *$60 billion* is not paid due to all forms of wage theft. This compares to national annual losses of *$340 million* due to robbery, *$4 billion* due to burglary, *$5 billion* due to larceny, and *$3 billion* due to auto theft."

EPI "Wage theft is a nationwide epidemic that costs American workers as much as $50 billion a year, a new Economic Policy Institute report finds. In *An Epidemic of Wage Theft Is Costing Workers Hundreds of Millions of Dollars a Year*, EPI Vice President Ross Eisenbrey and EPI intern Brady Meixell examine incidences of wage theft—employers’ failure to pay workers money they are legally entitled to—across the country. The total amount of money _recovered_ for the victims of wage theft who retained private lawyers or complained to federal or state agencies was at least $933 million in 2012, almost three times greater than all the money stolen in robberies that year. However, since most victims never report wage theft and never sue, the real cost of wage theft to workers is much greater, and could be closer to $50 billion a year." also "The authors also conducted a study of workers in low-wage industries in New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles and found that in any given week, two-thirds experienced at least one pay-related violation.  They estimate that the average loss per worker over the course of a year was $2,634, out of total earnings of $17,616. The total annual wage theft from front-line workers in low-wage industries in the three cities approached $3 billion. If these findings are generalizable to the rest of the U.S. low-wage workforce of 30 million, wage theft is costing workers more than *$50 billion a year.*"

Golan Law - Employee Rights Law Firm "When you consider the most common form of theft, you may think of a whole range of activities, from grand theft auto to home invasions and burglaries. You may also think of different types of financial crime, such as a small business being victimized by theft.
It is certainly true that these things happen, but none of them are the biggest type of theft in the United States. That “honor” goes to wage theft, which outpaces all of these other issues significantly. The financial impact on workers in the U.S. cannot be understated. Some estimates put it around $15 billion annually. "

Here is the Wikipedia Wage Theft article.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Aug 2, 2022)

Voadam said:


> Doing a quick search the top hits I get on "how much wage theft is there in the US"
> 
> Estimates vary.




Good sourcing. The trouble is that we know it is _massive _but also that it is_ difficult to estimate_. I think it is instructive that the amount recovered in 2012 by private attorneys as approximately $1 billion; now, think of all the wage theft that doesn't get to the point of litigation (or is even known about). That's what makes it so hard to estimate ... although I think that if you combine all the various type of wage theft, you'd end up at the highest end of those ranges (40-60 billion). 

Primary forms of wage theft include, but are not limited to:
1. Failure to pay overtime at all, or incorrectly.
2. Classification of employees as "exempt" (salaried) when they should be paid hourly.
3. Classification of employees as independent contractors.
4. Tip theft (this takes all sorts of forms- but usually involves sharing part, or all, of the tip with the employer).
5. Forcing employees to pay for things that the employer is not legally allowed to.
6. Forcing employees to do work "off the clock."
7. Failure to abide by minimum wage laws.

And, again, this doesn't include independent contractors getting ripped off (as appears to be the case here, until public outcry changed things).


----------



## Umbran (Aug 2, 2022)

Voadam said:


> Doing a quick search the top hits I get on "how much wage theft is there in the US"
> 
> Estimates vary.




Yeah, I did a similar search and took a lower-end estimate just for sake of being cautious on a topic I'm not an expert in.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Aug 2, 2022)

Umbran said:


> "You didn't preemptively defend yourself hard enough, so you are not a victim"?  Is that what you mean?



That's not what I said, so no, its not what I mean.


Umbran said:


> As noted above, those "facts" don't hold up to scrutiny.  Please try different "facts".



I haven't seen any evidence that using contracts is not a solution. Nor any other solution offered that did not boil down to casual talk on social media. 

I'm offering a real life, viable solution to the problem. Why is anyone against this?


Umbran said:


> You are asserting they were stupid, but have apparently neglected the possibility that they were simply ignorant (these are artists, not business people, after all), or under pressures that you, not being in their position, do not understand.



There is, in US courts, a simple rule: ignorance of the law is not a defense.

If they're setting out on the track to be a contractor, they really ought to devote a little time to actually finding out what contracting means. Especially if they need the money. Even a casual examination of a state's civil law, available free on line for all 50 states, will establish the fact that contractors operate by different rules than employees.

The simple fact remains that unless a contractor uses a valid contract format, they will be vulnerable to the type of financial loss described in the thread. This is a valid practice, and good advice.


----------



## Gradine (Aug 2, 2022)

The question then becomes:
If the payer in question realizes that their contractors are unaware of their legal rights and uses that knowledge to take advantage of their contractors, is the payer acting morally or ethically?


----------



## MGibster (Aug 2, 2022)

Dioltach said:


> Legally binding contracts are wonderful, but they don't offer any guarantees. This is where the concept of "breach of contract" comes up. And sure, you can sue for breach of contract, but it takes time, effort and money, and you're still not guaranteed a favourable outcome.



I think you'll find that the entire point of a contract is that they offer guarantees.  "Evil Game Company will pay contractor X amount for work delivered by Y date."  You have a breach of contract when one of those guarantees isn't met.  I realize where you're coming from, just because you have a contract doesn't necessarily mean the terms will be honored, but they still offer guarantees.


----------



## Dioltach (Aug 2, 2022)

Pretty sure that a contract creates rights and obligations, not necessarily guarantees. As in, there is no guarantee that the obligations will be fulfilled. If an obligation goes unfulfilled there is no guarantee that you can enforce your rights. Claimants in an insolvency rarely recover the full amount of their claim, for example.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Aug 2, 2022)

Gradine said:


> The question then becomes:
> If the payer in question realizes that their contractors are unaware of their legal rights and uses that knowledge to take advantage of their contractors, is the payer acting morally or ethically?




I think that the world would be much improved if people would stop focusing on, "What can I get away with," and instead focus on, "What is the right thing to do."


----------



## Umbran (Aug 2, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> That's not what I said, so no, its not what I mean.




That is what it amounted to - by your own writing, if they failed to use a contract they _aren't victims_.  You seem to be blaming those who were treated badly for not having protected themselves better.

If that's not what you intend... well, maybe you need to step back a bit and think on your approach to the discussion.



Jd Smith1 said:


> I haven't seen any evidence that using contracts is not a solution.




Several have noted that defending a contract takes _resources_ - they won't be a solution for anyone who hasn't got the resources to take it to court.  Do you deny seeing these, or do you deny that they constitute "evidence"?

And, you haven't seen evidence?  Earlier this morning (about 6:45 AM), you yourself wrote about how out-of-state contractors could be particularly vulnerable.  You have deleted that since, but it amounts to recognition that contracts aren't all that reliable as a solution.  That rather belies this statement, so maybe you'd like to retract it?



Jd Smith1 said:


> Nor any other solution offered that did not boil down to casual talk on social media.




This thread isn't, "Solutions for contractors who get screwed," so folks didn't think that was a requirement.



Jd Smith1 said:


> I'm offering a real life, viable solution to the problem. Why is anyone against this?




They aren't against normalizing the industry to have better contracts.

They are against you 1) speaking of contracts as if they were a silver bullet, when they are not, and 2) insulting people who you've never met, and whose situation you know in only the barest of sketches.

To be clear - sure, normalizing better contracts in the industry _would be a good idea_.  But as a practical matter, contractors can only demand them when they are unified, and in a position with a bit of power.  We, the consumers, can be part of that power.  But that requires we know the situation too - that "casual conversation" you refer to is part of the process.


----------



## Staffan (Aug 2, 2022)

Dioltach said:


> Pretty sure that a contract creates rights and obligations, not necessarily guarantees. As in, there is no guarantee that the obligations will be fulfilled. If an obligation goes unfulfilled there is no guarantee that you can enforce your rights. Claimants in an insolvency rarely recover the full amount of their claim, for example.



I think there's a difference in how people use the word "guarantee". To me, a guarantee is a promise. "If you let him go, I guarantee that you will leave this place unharmed." It has as much weight as the trust I put in the guarantor. The main difference between a guarantee and a promise is, I think, that there is a nuance of a guarantee coming with an obligation to see it come true despite the efforts of third parties. E.g. if I guarantee that a person will leave unharmed, I am obliged to protect them from any hostile third parties.

What you are talking about is *certainty*. Certainty never exists in a contract, only promises, obligations, and guarantees that are as good as the word of the person giving them.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Aug 2, 2022)

Gradine said:


> The question then becomes:
> If the payer in question realizes that their contractors are unaware of their legal rights and uses that knowledge to take advantage of their contractors, is the payer acting morally or ethically?



Definitely not. But it helps keep overhead down.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Aug 2, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Several have noted that defending a contract takes _resources_ - they won't be a solution for anyone who hasn't got the resources to take it to court.  Do you deny seeing these, or do you deny that they constitute "evidence"?



It takes a couple hundred dollars to get a 'fill in the blanks' contract drawn up by a lawyer, suitable for repeated use. If you can't afford something as basic as that, contracting is not a wise choice . So yes, that's not evidence. If you can't afford a life vest, don't go boating.


Umbran said:


> And, you haven't seen evidence?  Earlier this morning (about 6:45 AM), you yourself wrote about how out-of-state contractors could be particularly vulnerable.  You have deleted that since, but it amounts to recognition that contracts aren't all that reliable as a solution.  That rather belies this statement, so maybe you'd like to retract it?



I deleted that because I discovered that there are statues in place that closed many of the cross-state issue. My civil law is a tad rusty.


Umbran said:


> This thread isn't, "Solutions for contractors who get screwed," so folks didn't think that was a requirement.



Because providing a solution is a bad thing?


Umbran said:


> They aren't against normalizing the industry to have better contracts.
> 
> They are against you 1) speaking of contracts as if they were a silver bullet, when they are not, and 2) insulting people who you've never met, and whose situation you know in only the barest of sketches.



Sounds very much like they are 1) embarrassed because they came up with nothing to help and 2) looking for a argument.


Umbran said:


> To be clear - sure, normalizing better contracts in the industry _would be a good idea_.  But as a practical matter, contractors can only demand them when they are unified, and in a position with a bit of power.  We, the consumers, can be part of that power.  But that requires we know the situation too - that "casual conversation" you refer to is part of the process.



That's just an excuse used to do literally nothing, while claiming to 'fight the good fight'.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Aug 2, 2022)

Dioltach said:


> Pretty sure that a contract creates rights and obligations, not necessarily guarantees. As in, there is no guarantee that the obligations will be fulfilled. If an obligation goes unfulfilled there is no guarantee that you can enforce your rights. Claimants in an insolvency rarely recover the full amount of their claim, for example.



The biggest thing about a contract in this sort of situation is that it will give an unethical hirer pause.


----------



## John Lloyd1 (Aug 2, 2022)

Just to clarify, do we know if there wasn't a valid contract in place?


----------



## Gradine (Aug 3, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> Definitely not. But it helps keep overhead down.



Is it justified, then?


----------



## Sabathius42 (Aug 3, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> Because providing a solution is a bad thing?



Earlier you implied that empathy may be a dump stat for yourself, so I'm saying this to help you out, not be condescending or rude.

There are times where a person mentions a problem to you....and they are looking for you to help with a solution.

There are times where a person mentions a problem to you....and they are looking for you to commiserate with them.

Since, to my knowledge, none of the involved parties in this fiasco are actually in this thread, then offering advice to the uninvolved is perhaps less appropriate than commiserating along side of them.


----------



## Jd Smith1 (Aug 3, 2022)

Gradine said:


> Is it justified, then?



I would say definitely not. Aside from the ethical and moral issues (which are IMO plenty reason enough), I would think that it would be a bad long-term business practice.

But I'm not a businessman by training or inclination.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 3, 2022)

Jd Smith1 said:


> Sounds very much like they are 1) embarrassed .




*Mod Note:*
Okay, you were warned to not get personal.  You've chosen to ignore that, right to the face of the person who warned you. 

So, enough is enough, and you're done in this discussion.


----------



## JediSoth (Aug 21, 2022)

Queen of D&D Satine Phoenix and Jamison Stone have deigned to update their Kickstarter backers.

TL;DR: They are working on it alone, but aren't starting until Dec. Their estimated completion is at least year after that. None of the backer questions regarding funds, refunds, the self-insert art, or removing of backers' names from the book have been addressed.

‐---------------------------

Dear Backers,

Satine Phoenix and Jamison Stone here. Thank you for your patience. This has been a very challenging time. We are excited to update you about this project in a transparent way and relay the path forward to finishing Sirens: Battle of the Bards.

The following are the major items that still need to be completed for our campaign and setting book. Our main chapters and side quests need to resume their first round of playtesting and then go through their second round. Once these two rounds are completed, they will undergo another series of re-writes, mechanic tweaks, and developmental editing. After those are completed, proofreading for these sections can commence. That will then be followed by layout, where we combine our text, art, and music and place them into our chapter templates.

Due to the size of this book and the amount of editing and re-writes which still need to be done, this will not be a quick process. Additionally, our estimated timeline has been extended because we (Satine and Jamison) are now finishing this project by ourselves on weekends with minimal external help.

Estimated Timeline
Playtesting: 2-3 months.
Re-writes, mechanic tweaks, and developmental editing: 3-4 months.
Proofreading: TBD, 1-3 months estimated.
Layout: 3 months.
PDF version estimated completion in 12 to 13 months.
Printing and shipping timelines will then be based on external partners.

Due to the profound changes our lives have undergone, this work will be started in December 2022. This means we are looking at a rough date for our Draft PDF to be released in December 2023. We know this is not what people wish to hear, but this is a realistic timeline for what two people can accomplish on their days off work for a 300,000-word book. Starting December 2022, we (Satine and Jamison) will re-commence monthly updates that include relevant info such as merchandise, playtesting, art, music, layout samples, timeline updates, etc.

Based on recent Kickstarter comments and personal messages, we wish to reiterate the Kickstarter Community guidelines, which can be found here Community Guidelines — Kickstarter.

Although this timeline is sad for us, we are very excited to have a viable path forward to finishing this beautiful book and getting it and our awesome Sirens: Battle of the Bards merchandise into everyone’s hands.

Satine and Jamison


----------



## Smackpixi (Aug 22, 2022)

I wonder what their day jobs are now?  Also, play testing is a laugh.


----------



## jdrakeh (Aug 22, 2022)

As I mentioned on Twitter, this is a long-winded, weird, way of saying "Our product is late because people no longer want to work with us on account of the fact that we're credibly accused abusers who don't pay our contractors"


----------



## Dire Bare (Aug 22, 2022)

JediSoth said:


> Queen of D&D Satine Phoenix and Jamison Stone have deigned to update their Kickstarter backers.
> 
> TL;DR: They are working on it alone, but aren't starting until Dec. Their estimated completion is at least year after that. None of the backer questions regarding funds, refunds, the self-insert art, or removing of backers' names from the book have been addressed.
> 
> ...



I don't know if the snark is necessary here. Regardless of how one feels about Stone and Jamison, they are pretty much on their own on this now, and it is going to take them time. I wouldn't have been surprised if the project had folded completely (or does in the future), so the news they still plan to finish is good. Although, I'm not as excited about it as I once was, as like many I'm tired of these two. I'm a backer, and I'm not going to put a lot of mental energy or worry into this until I get the message to download my digital copy. And then, maybe I'll actually read it, we'll see in over a year I suppose.


----------



## JediSoth (Aug 22, 2022)

I'll stop snarking when they stop lying. I invested close to $150 in this Kickstarter. Previous updates indicated they were 90% done. Now they're taking time off until Dec., going to work only on weekends, and it's another TWO YEARS? Please.

Someone has been lying about how much work is actually completed. Now they're going through and reporting backer comments, many of which aren't being abusive, they're just calling out Satine & Jamison's hypocrisy.


----------



## Teo Twawki (Aug 22, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> Regardless of how one feels about Stone and Jamison, they are pretty much on their own on this now



Hm. I wonder why that is?


----------



## jerryrice4949 (Aug 22, 2022)

JediSoth said:


> I'll stop snarking when they stop lying. I invested close to $150 in this Kickstarter. Previous updates indicated they were 90% done. Now they're taking time off until Dec., going to work only on weekends, and it's another TWO YEARS? Please.
> 
> Someone has been lying about how much work is actually completed. Now they're going through and reporting backer comments, many of which aren't being abusive, they're just calling out Satine & Jamison's hypocrisy.



Totally agree.  The whole kickstarter has been a lie.  By the sounds of their new estimate little to no work has been done on the Kickstarter to date.  Maybe they couldn’t use the material they had because they never paid for it.  I don’t know but it is quite clear they are con men/women whether that be ripping of their contracted workers or kickstarter backers.


----------



## ReshiIRE (Aug 22, 2022)

Kickstarter needs to get involved and force a refund. They do not want this PR nightmare as well considering other issues they have been facing. It's such an easy slam dunk as well considering nobody wants to work with these two abusers either.


----------



## jerryrice4949 (Aug 22, 2022)

ReshiIRE said:


> Kickstarter needs to get involved and force a refund. They do not want this PR nightmare as well considering other issues they have been facing. It's such an easy slam dunk as well considering nobody wants to work with these two abusers either.



I don’t think that will happen.  I am sure a large part of the funds are already spent.


----------



## JediSoth (Aug 22, 2022)

ReshiIRE said:


> Kickstarter needs to get involved and force a refund. They do not want this PR nightmare as well considering other issues they have been facing. It's such an easy slam dunk as well considering nobody wants to work with these two abusers either.




IIRC, Kickstarter has an official policy of "no refunds." Any project that has issue refunds has done so because the project creators have integrity. So, I'll keep asking for a refund knowing it'll never happen because they don't have integrity, and until they block me, I will keep reminding S&J that I think they have no integrity and that they're crooks.


----------



## ReshiIRE (Aug 22, 2022)

JediSoth said:


> IIRC, Kickstarter has an official policy of "no refunds." Any project that has issue refunds has done so because the project creators have integrity. So, I'll keep asking for a refund knowing it'll never happen because they don't have integrity, and until they block me, I will keep reminding S&J that I think they have no integrity and that they're crooks.



Yeah; they need to really reconsider that one, especially in cases like this.


----------



## Mort (Aug 22, 2022)

ReshiIRE said:


> Kickstarter needs to get involved and force a refund. They do not want this PR nightmare as well considering other issues they have been facing. It's such an easy slam dunk as well considering nobody wants to work with these two abusers either.




Has kickstarter EVER stepped in and forced a refund on a funded campaign?

As bad as this is, there have been MUCH worse kickstarter failures over much longer periods of time. Heck, I'm not even sure they'd classify this as a failure yet.


----------



## Teo Twawki (Aug 22, 2022)

Smackpixi said:


> I wonder what their day jobs are now?





jerryrice4949 said:


> I am sure a large part of the funds are already spent.



Wouldn't be surprised that spending money _not_ on a funded project has been their day job for a while now.



Mort said:


> As bad as this is, there have been MUCH worse kickstarter failures over much longer periods of time.



Even the worst of the funded-but-failed KS campaigns pale in comparison to the really epic KS failures like Skarp razor ($4m) or Ouya game console ($8.6m), etc.


----------



## Maxperson (Aug 22, 2022)

At this point have any of the contractors not been paid?


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Aug 22, 2022)

Got that update myself and I was aghast at how tone deaf it was. Talking about how much re-writing they have to do when that was one of their excuses for shorting their freelancers has a very "Let them eat cake" vibe to it.

Not to mention taking a project that was due in late 2021 and pushing delivery until 2024. Backers are not having it, understandably, and the comments are filled with a whole lot of this:





Also the distance from "Jamison Stone is stepping down as CEO" to "Jamison is still running the company" to "Jamison is one-half the remaining production team" was very short.



JediSoth said:


> Queen of D&D Satine Phoenix and Jamison Stone have deigned to update their Kickstarter backers.
> 
> TL;DR: They are working on it alone, but aren't starting until Dec. Their estimated completion is at least year after that. None of the backer questions regarding funds, refunds, the self-insert art, or removing of backers' names from the book have been addressed.
> 
> ...


----------



## ReshiIRE (Aug 22, 2022)

Mort said:


> Has kickstarter EVER stepped in and forced a refund on a funded campaign?
> 
> As bad as this is, there have been MUCH worse kickstarter failures over much longer periods of time. Heck, I'm not even sure they'd classify this as a failure yet.



TBF, I feel this is less of a standard failure (some peopel are mentioning the Ouya, which came out and was delivered to backers, so I feel that's not what I would classify as a failure _during the Kickstarter process_), and more so a complete lalck of transparency and lies. It's not like there was some genuine difficulty that was unforseen; this has been entirely caused by Phoenix and Stone and they're now lying that they can complete their project. They took money on good faith and are bullshitting.

Maybe Kickstarter won't do anything (and there's a small chance that maybe they shouldn't), but it's complete naughty word Phoenix and Stone might get away with keeping the money. if so, I really hope they are absolutely never allowed back into the community.


----------



## Malmuria (Aug 22, 2022)

Mort said:


> Has kickstarter EVER stepped in and forced a refund on a funded campaign?
> 
> As bad as this is, there have been MUCH worse kickstarter failures over much longer periods of time. Heck, I'm not even sure they'd classify this as a failure yet.



#regulatekickstarter


----------



## ReshiIRE (Aug 22, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> #regulatekickstarter



Unsure if you are being unironic or not, but I do think this may become necessary, or indeed has been necessary all along and Kickstarter has mostly gotten away with it; I do think there should be consequences for those acting in clear bad faith and, while full refunds may not be appropriate or possible in all cases, Kickstarter should do something to perhaps ease things with backers who took risk on something that they were mislead by or were lied about or did not receive because the creators did not act in good faith.

I recognise however that sometimes the lines can be blurry between some kickstarters that failed for legitimate reasons and some that did not.


----------



## Morrus (Aug 22, 2022)

ReshiIRE said:


> Kickstarter needs to get involved and force a refund. They do not want this PR nightmare as well considering other issues they have been facing. It's such an easy slam dunk as well considering nobody wants to work with these two abusers either.



Kickstarter doesn’t do that. That’s not a precedent they’d want to set. Also, they don’t have any power to force a refund.


----------



## Retreater (Aug 22, 2022)

I've been burned (to the tune of a couple hundred dollars) by a few Kickstarters that haven't fulfilled - all by the same company. (Which you can read about here: Blacklist Miniatures Fantasy Set 1 - Failed $1M Kickstarter)
That's on me. I will be more selective about projects in the future - backing companies I trust or not going in so expensive.
The best thing we can do is to educate ourselves (and others) about problematic creators and poor business decisions.


----------



## Teo Twawki (Aug 22, 2022)

Morrus said:


> they don’t have any power to force a refund



They do have the power to prohibit future projects by delinquent creators. Of course, such creators can always find ways around it, but let's be honest: Kickstarter doesn't care so long as they get their cut.

Banks do have the power to reverse funds _if they want to_. And that would be notable if it were an organized attempt by enough backers _en masse_. Not likely to work, but it also isn't unheard of to accomplish.


----------



## jerryrice4949 (Aug 22, 2022)

Ralif Redhammer said:


> Got that update myself and I was aghast at how tone deaf it was. Talking about how much re-writing they have to do when that was one of their excuses for shorting their freelancers has a very "Let them eat cake" vibe to it.
> 
> Not to mention taking a project that was due in late 2021 and pushing delivery until 2024. Backers are not having it, understandably, and the comments are filled with a whole lot of this:
> 
> ...



Not surprised it was tone deaf.  Both Jamison and Phoenix seem to have little self-awareness.  But yeah everyone has a right to be furious.  They obviously fraudulently claimed this product was much further along then it ever has been, and done so at multiple points.   A product that was supposed to be released in late 2021 should have had all the writing and editing done.


----------



## jerryrice4949 (Aug 22, 2022)

Teo Twawki said:


> They do have the power to prohibit future projects by delinquent creators. Of course, such creators can always find ways around it, but let's be honest: Kickstarter doesn't care so long as they get their cut.
> 
> Banks do have the power to reverse funds _if they want to_. And that would be notable if it were an organized attempt by enough backers _en masse_. Not likely to work, but it also isn't unheard of to accomplish.



Most banks only do transaction reversals within a couple months.  This is far beyond the timeframe any bank could/would act.


----------



## Morrus (Aug 22, 2022)

Teo Twawki said:


> They do have the power to prohibit future projects by delinquent creators. Of course, such creators can always find ways around it, but let's be honest: Kickstarter doesn't care so long as they get their cut.
> 
> Banks do have the power to reverse funds _if they want to_. And that would be notable if it were an organized attempt by enough backers _en masse_. Not likely to work, but it also isn't unheard of to accomplish.



Nothing you just said contradicts what I said. I don’t know if was supposed to.

(Banks don’t just randomly reverse transactions because they want to, either, and would have no basis to in this case. The TOS are clear.)

I get the desire for powerful external agencies to step in and wave a magic wand to make things right, but they can’t do that. And we don’t want those institutions to have that sort of power.


----------



## Emrico (Aug 22, 2022)

This kind of bs is why I waited a LONG time to back any Kickstarter and still will only back one that is done by a company that has a proven record of fulfillment on prior kickstarters.

If it gets to the point where the bad acting grifters/scammers are allowed to keep ripping people off then KS will either go under or the government(s) will step in and regulate them with consumer protections.


----------



## jerryrice4949 (Aug 22, 2022)

Honestly I would be pretty surprised if we see anything from this Kickstarter.  Jamison and Phoenix don’t have much to lose at this point by just keeping whatever funds have not already been spent.  It is difficult to imagine anyone backing a future KS of theirs or another company hiring them in this industry at least for the foreseeable future.


----------



## jdrakeh (Aug 23, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> At this point have any of the contractors not been paid?




_None_ of the contractors who said they hadn't been paid when this whole thing broke have stepped up to say that they _have_ since been paid.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Aug 23, 2022)

Every time I read about KS being delayed and the creators being duplicitous, it burns my hide a little.  Then I get comments like this from a few days ago on my own KS and I'm glad I can build trust with my own customers.  I hate to see people burned and turned off by KS, because for us publishers, it's a great tool.


----------



## vecna00 (Aug 23, 2022)

Teo Twawki said:


> Wouldn't be surprised that spending money _not_ on a funded project has been their day job for a while now.
> 
> 
> Even the worst of the funded-but-failed KS campaigns pale in comparison to the really epic KS failures like Skarp razor ($4m) or Ouya game console ($8.6m), etc.



I mean, at least I still have an Ouya!


----------



## aramis erak (Aug 23, 2022)

Morrus said:


> Kickstarter doesn’t do that. That’s not a precedent they’d want to set. Also, they don’t have any power to force a refund.



Technically, they do have the _power_, at least before releasing funds; what they lack is the _authority _(neither by contract nor by law) and _willingness_.


----------



## humble minion (Aug 23, 2022)

Teo Twawki said:


> They do have the power to prohibit future projects by delinquent creators. Of course, such creators can always find ways around it, but let's be honest: Kickstarter doesn't care so long as they get their cut.
> 
> Banks do have the power to reverse funds _if they want to_. And that would be notable if it were an organized attempt by enough backers _en masse_. Not likely to work, but it also isn't unheard of to accomplish.



Kickstarter would fight tooth and nail to AVOID having that sort of power.  Because power brings responsibility, and if kickstarter CAN force refunds or blackball creators then on day one they're going to be deluged by a million takedown/refund requests - many of which are valid, many of which will just be vendetta-driven or lowlifes trying to game the system for some sort of political reason, and many of which will be ambiguous or disputed.  And kickstarter will have to adjudicate, and investigate, and evaluate evidence etc for every single one of those cases, and that sort of thing is time-consuming and expensive and nobody ends up happy, and kickstarter probably has no legal power to force refunds over international borders anyway.  What are they going to do, sue delinquent creators in court in the creator's native country?

 It's basically the facebook/google 'publisher vs platform' argument in miniature.


----------



## Deset Gled (Aug 23, 2022)

humble minion said:


> Because power brings responsibility, and if kickstarter CAN force refunds or blackball creators then on day one they're going to be deluged by a million takedown/refund requests - many of which are valid, many of which will just be vendetta-driven or lowlifes trying to gain the system for some sort of political reason, and many of which will be ambiguous or disputed.




It feels weirdly on topic to say it, but I really loved my Ouya and used it for a few years before eventually upgrading away from it.


----------



## Malmuria (Aug 23, 2022)

ReshiIRE said:


> Unsure if you are being unironic or not, but I do think this may become necessary, or indeed has been necessary all along and Kickstarter has mostly gotten away with it; I do think there should be consequences for those acting in clear bad faith and, while full refunds may not be appropriate or possible in all cases, Kickstarter should do something to perhaps ease things with backers who took risk on something that they were mislead by or were lied about or did not receive because the creators did not act in good faith.
> 
> I recognise however that sometimes the lines can be blurry between some kickstarters that failed for legitimate reasons and some that did not.



not being ironic!  Crowdfunding platforms should have increased regulation.  They are ambiguously between investment platforms and web stores except you can buy something and it might just never arrive. Kickstarter won’t do anything in its own without at least the threat of consumer regulation 




Retreater said:


> I've been burned (to the tune of a couple hundred dollars) by a few Kickstarters that haven't fulfilled - all by the same company. (Which you can read about here: Blacklist Miniatures Fantasy Set 1 - Failed $1M Kickstarter)
> That's on me. I will be more selective about projects in the future - backing companies I trust or not going in so expensive.
> The best thing we can do is to educate ourselves (and others) about problematic creators and poor business decisions.




In kickstarter, you are being asked to invest in a company or project yet are nit provided with any information to assess your risks. Kickstarters now have a boilerplate-ish “risks” section that is just the company’s word that they’ll try their best.  Most of the page is a very long advertisement with images of pledge tiers and stretch goals.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 23, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> not being ironic!  Crowdfunding platforms should have increased regulation.  They are ambiguously between investment platforms and web stores except you can buy something and it might just never arrive. Kickstarter won’t do anything in its own without at least the threat of consumer regulation




Three's nothing really ambiguous about it - Kickstarter makes very clear that they give no guarantees that projects will complete and deliver what was promised.  If they say, "no guarantees from us" and you say, "Yeah, but I wanna do it anyway," that should not become Kickstarter's responsibility.  You are an adult, and get to make your own choices about risk.  

The platform exists to allow risky projects to at least try.  Since they are risky, they may well fail.  If you aren't into that risk, you shouldn't buy from Kickstarter.

Expecting (or forcing) Kickstarter to take responsibility (which in commerce means financial burden) would lead to them having to vet projects before they are listed, and control project execution.  That would kill the platform.

If there's a form of redress, it may be in an class-action lawsuit against J&P to force refunds.  But again, the clear and direct statement of risk likely protects them as well.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Aug 23, 2022)

Part of it is, I suspect, more hubris on their part. "Well, you're all ditching us, so we're going to prove how little we need you by redoing it all ourselves." Either that or they have been misleading backers from the start about the progress - it's been clear for months that it wasn't going to be anywhere near making the original delivery date, even before the public relations catastrophe.




jerryrice4949 said:


> Not surprised it was tone deaf.  Both Jamison and Phoenix seem to have little self-awareness.  But yeah everyone has a right to be furious.  They obviously fraudulently claimed this product was much further along then it ever has been, and done so at multiple points.   A product that was supposed to be released in late 2021 should have had all the writing and editing done.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 23, 2022)

jerryrice4949 said:


> They obviously fraudulently claimed this product was much further along then it ever has been, and done so at multiple points.




Unless they did it _before the kickstarter closed_ it probably isn't fraudulent.

Fraud is misleading intended to result in financial gain.  After the kickstarter closed, lying to you about the project's status doesn't get them any more money.


----------



## jerryrice4949 (Aug 23, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Unless they did it _before the kickstarter closed_ it probably isn't fraudulent.
> 
> Fraud is misleading intended to result in financial gain.  After the kickstarter closed, lying to you about the project's status doesn't get them any more money.



From Websters:
Definition of fraudulent​: characterized by, based on, or done by fraud : DECEITFUL


----------



## billd91 (Aug 23, 2022)

Fraudulent by common vocabulary, but probably not fraudulent by legal vocabulary.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 23, 2022)

jerryrice4949 said:


> From Websters:
> Definition of fraudulent​: characterized by, based on, or done by fraud : DECEITFUL




Did you not click through to your own cited definition of "fraud"?  

The first definition there?  "Intentional perversion of truth _in order to induce another to part with something of value_ or to surrender a legal right."  So, kind of supporting my point there.

And, in a discussion of regulation or getting compensation, the legal definition is far more relevant as well.


----------



## Morrus (Aug 23, 2022)

I always say that once a conversation has devolved to the point where people are posting definitions of words from the dictionary, it’s pretty much over. There should be one of those internet laws named after that!


----------



## jerryrice4949 (Aug 23, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Did you not click through to your own cited definition of "fraud"?
> 
> The first definition there?  "Intentional perversion of truth _in order to induce another to part with something of value_ or to surrender a legal right."  So, kind of supporting my point there.
> 
> And, in a discussion of regulation or getting compensation, the legal definition is far more relevant as well.



We will obviously have to agree to disagree.  You know what I meant and how the word is used in common culture.  Let’s not hijack the thread.


----------



## J.Quondam (Aug 23, 2022)

Morrus said:


> I always say that once a conversation has devolved to the point where people are posting definitions of words from the dictionary, it’s pretty much over. There should be one of those internet laws named after that!




Layne's Law, see sub-definition C:


> *Layne's law -  *_Coined by software developer Layne Thomas, Layne's law of debate states that: _​_A) every debate is over the definition of a word, _​_B) every debate eventually degenerates into debating the definition of a word, or _​_C) once a debate degenerates into debating the definition of a word, the debate is debatably over. A notable example of this law may be the arguments over the definition of "assault weapon" in the gun control debate.[7]_​



_source_
.


----------



## Teo Twawki (Aug 23, 2022)

jerryrice4949 said:


> Most banks only do transaction reversals within a couple months. This is far beyond the timeframe any bank could/would act.



Claims of fraudulent transactions don't expire after a couple months. Just depends on the bank. e.g. personal experience: Well's Fargo won't block recent fraudulent transactions, but ING and PNC have both helped out with problematic charges more than a year after the fact.



Morrus said:


> Nothing you just said contradicts what I said. I don’t know if was supposed to.



No, it wasn't. Just expounding, not contradicting.



Morrus said:


> we don't want those institutions to have that sort of power.



Ample evidence to suggest they already do.


----------



## MGibster (Aug 23, 2022)

Admittedly, I tend to use Kickstarter as a pre-ordering system.  If I put money into it, I expect a product to be delivered.  I understand that this isn't always promised given that they have reams of warnings before you send in your money.  I think eventually the Federal Trade Commission will have to step in if Kickstarter and similar websites continue to grow.


----------



## Malmuria (Aug 23, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Three's nothing really ambiguous about it - Kickstarter makes very clear that they give no guarantees that projects will complete and deliver what was promised.  If they say, "no guarantees from us" and you say, "Yeah, but I wanna do it anyway," that should not become Kickstarter's responsibility.  You are an adult, and get to make your own choices about risk.
> 
> The platform exists to allow risky projects to at least try.  Since they are risky, they may well fail.  If you aren't into that risk, you shouldn't buy from Kickstarter.
> 
> ...




I'll have to research more into this, but I think there are likely common sense ways that crowdfunding platforms can and should be regulated.  Kickstarter may ostensibly be an investment platform but companies seem to use it as a preorder store; certainly the consumer-facing portion of a given kickstarter looks more like a webstore giving a false sense of security when people decide to back.

I see kickstarters that are in trouble often provide financial information to backers to explain their situation.  Why can't something like this be required upfront, to the extent that is feasible?  Instead of the boilerplate text at the bottom of a kickstarter that says "well we can't control shipping delays due to covid" etc, there could be more detailed information about whether the kickstarter has found a printer, how they plan to deal with distribution, if they have back up plans, etc.  Basically, if when you back a kickstarter you are _investing_ in a company or project, perhaps you should have access to all the information you would want to have if you were buying a share in that company.

Again, I'm just thinking out loud here; I haven't researched regulations that actually exist and I'm not a publisher myself.  I just get the feeling that the platform is becoming increasingly anti-consumer.


----------



## jerryrice4949 (Aug 23, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> I'll have to research more into this, but I think there are likely common sense ways that crowdfunding platforms can and should be regulated.  Kickstarter may ostensibly be an investment platform but companies seem to use it as a preorder store; certainly the consumer-facing portion of a given kickstarter looks more like a webstore giving a false sense of security when people decide to back.
> 
> I see kickstarters that are in trouble often provide financial information to backers to explain their situation.  Why can't something like this be required upfront, to the extent that is feasible?  Instead of the boilerplate text at the bottom of a kickstarter that says "well we can't control shipping delays due to covid" etc, there could be more detailed information about whether the kickstarter has found a printer, how they plan to deal with distribution, if they have back up plans, etc.  Basically, if when you back a kickstarter you are _investing_ in a company or project, perhaps you should have access to all the information you would want to have if you were buying a share in that company.
> 
> Again, I'm just thinking out loud here; I haven't researched regulations that actually exist and I'm not a publisher myself.  I just get the feeling that the platform is becoming increasingly anti-consumer.



While that would not have helped in this particular case.  It would be fantastic if KS required financial information about the product to be disclosed at launch.


----------



## Grendel_Khan (Aug 23, 2022)

This has been mentioned already, but I think it bears repeating that the scale at which Kickstarter operates makes it _completely_ impossible for them to chase down individual campaign creators for refunds, or more likely to sue all of them. To do so would kill any profits on their part, choke the courts in countries all over the world, and make it extremely unappealing for campaign creators, since that kind of enforcement mechanism would lure ungodly amounts of bad faith complaints.

So really if you're looking for Kickstarter to be somehow forced to become a global litigation machine in order to avoid the occasional loss of your $50 to some unsavory character, you're basically just saying KS shouldn't exist. And whatever issues there are with KS, I think the hobby is immensely better for it existing.


----------



## Staffan (Aug 23, 2022)

jerryrice4949 said:


> While that would not have helped in this particular case.  It would be fantastic if KS required financial information about the product to be disclosed at launch.



If nothing else, that would require creators to actually think about these things beforehand instead of going "What do you mean I have to pay taxes?"


----------



## Morrus (Aug 23, 2022)

jerryrice4949 said:


> While that would not have helped in this particular case.  It would be fantastic if KS required financial information about the product to be disclosed at launch.



What financial information? I don’t understand this comment.


----------



## Malmuria (Aug 23, 2022)

Grendel_Khan said:


> This has been mentioned already, but I think it bears repeating that the scale at which Kickstarter operates makes it _completely_ impossible for them to chase down individual campaign creators for refunds, or more likely to sue all of them. To do so would kill any profits on their part, choke the courts in countries all over the world, and make it extremely unappealing for campaign creators, since that kind of enforcement mechanism would lure ungodly amounts of bad faith complaints.
> 
> So really if you're looking for Kickstarter to be somehow forced to become a global litigation machine in order to avoid the occasional loss of your $50 to some unsavory character, you're basically just saying KS shouldn't exist. And whatever issues there are with KS, I think the hobby is immensely better for it existing.




I'm not sure; what you are saying here bears a family resemblance to the argument that regulation kills business.  I don't think that's the case, and I think there are regulations that can be imposed on investment transactions, crowdfunding included, that would make business more secure (and more ethical) without making it impossible.  Simple things can include enumerating a more robust set of information requirements for projects, and displaying them more prominently on the page.  These requirements could even be tiered on the front end or back end: projects that are asking for more money, and/or involve more stretch goals, and/or raise more money get more scrutiny (i.e., the $2500 kickstarter for a zine is less of a concern than the $1M for miniatures).  Governments regulate commerce at this level all the time, but are just slow to adapt to new technologies.  Like I said, maybe there are regulations in place, I haven't researched the issue fully


----------



## Malmuria (Aug 23, 2022)

Morrus said:


> What financial information? I don’t understand this comment.



Perhaps something like what the Blacklist Miniature project recently offered, but as a projection.  This way, potential backers could know what the plan for expenditures was going to be









						Blacklist Miniatures Fantasy Set 1 - Failed $1M Kickstarter
					

I thought this might be relevant to post here, not to slam on the company or to complain about my experience. It's more of a lesson learned for me, and I know some of you on this board like talking about the hobby industry. I love collecting and painting miniatures - even if I don't get to have...




					www.enworld.org


----------



## billd91 (Aug 23, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> I'm not sure; what you are saying here bears a family resemblance to the argument that regulation kills business.  I don't think that's the case, and I think there are regulations that can be imposed on investment transactions, crowdfunding included, that would make business more secure (and more ethical) without making it impossible.  Simple things can include enumerating a more robust set of information requirements for projects, and displaying them more prominently on the page.  These requirements could even be tiered on the front end or back end: projects that are asking for more money, and/or involve more stretch goals, and/or raise more money get more scrutiny (i.e., the $2500 kickstarter for a zine is less of a concern than the $1M for miniatures).  Governments regulate commerce at this level all the time, but are just slow to adapt to new technologies.  Like I said, maybe there are regulations in place, I haven't researched the issue fully



Complex issue. All business regulations are, in some way, burdensome - they're supposed to be in the sense that they require the business to undertake efforts that they otherwise would ignore as too costly. We just accept them based on how important they are to us as customers or members of society. For example, most of us consider product safety regulations an important bulwark for safe food and drugs rather than being stuck buying milk laced with formaldehyde or seeing more soldiers killed by their tainted food than by enemy bullets.

It's when the stakes are relatively small compared to the burden that I think the argument that regulations may not be the answer can be strong. And, in this case, the stakes are pretty small, all things considered. That doesn't mean Kickstarter couldn't take on the burden of some kind of greater scrutiny of campaigns on their platform, particularly when certain thresholds are reached, complaints reach a certain level, the fulfillment goes on and on and on... With enough high-profile failures or controversy, it might be in Kickstarter's best interest as a consumer protection move. But I think it would be really hard for a government to well-tailor a decent set of regulations for any possible configuration of crowdfunding platform.


----------



## Morrus (Aug 23, 2022)

billd91 said:


> That doesn't mean Kickstarter couldn't take on the burden of some kind of greater scrutiny of campaigns on their platform, particularly when certain thresholds are reached, complaints reach a certain level, the fulfillment goes on and on and on...




Kickstarter process pledges funds in 2 weeks. After that, what could they possibly do? Sue creators on backers' behalf using international courts to claim back funds? That turns them into an entirely different business.

They could refuse to work with certain creators again. That's pretty much all they can do once they've paid out the funds after two weeks.


----------



## billd91 (Aug 23, 2022)

Morrus said:


> They could refuse to work with certain creators again. That's pretty much all they can do once they've paid out the funds after two weeks.



Doing so might have kept people from being victims of Ken Whitman's Kickstarter campaign shenanigans. So, yeah, I'm for that and for having some guidelines for when they start considering putting people on that blacklist and evaluating problematic campaigns with that in mind.


----------



## Morrus (Aug 23, 2022)

billd91 said:


> Doing so might have kept people from being victims of Ken Whitman's Kickstarter campaign shenanigans. So, yeah, I'm for that and for having some guidelines for when they start considering putting people on that blacklist and evaluating problematic campaigns with that in mind.



They have some strict rules about approving new campaigns based on past fufillment. Even I've had trouble sometimes, and I'm Mr Instant Fulfillment. If you don't fulfill campaigns they won't approve new ones. I don't see what else they could really do.


----------



## Grendel_Khan (Aug 23, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> I'm not sure; what you are saying here bears a family resemblance to the argument that regulation kills business.  I don't think that's the case, and I think there are regulations that can be imposed on investment transactions, crowdfunding included, that would make business more secure (and more ethical) without making it impossible.  Simple things can include enumerating a more robust set of information requirements for projects, and displaying them more prominently on the page.  These requirements could even be tiered on the front end or back end: projects that are asking for more money, and/or involve more stretch goals, and/or raise more money get more scrutiny (i.e., the $2500 kickstarter for a zine is less of a concern than the $1M for miniatures).  Governments regulate commerce at this level all the time, but are just slow to adapt to new technologies.  Like I said, maybe there are regulations in place, I haven't researched the issue fully




I'm certainly not against regulating businesses. But there are such immensely more damaging and rapacious industries and companies out there in need of regulations, ones actively destroying lives and our climate, that by the time Kickstarter would make sense to target we'll all be fighting for water outside the Thunderdome. I don't support lumping this discussion in with a general regulation debate. The stakes are so incredibly low here, by comparison. Just not even in the same conversation, imo.

So if we can agree not to talk in generalities, then let's get into specifics. How do you go about determining if the government should spend resources regulating KS? And not just one government, but essentially all of them, since creators can hail from just about anywhere? Given that, as @Umbran pointed out, KS heaps on the disclaimers about the site not being a store and projects not being guaranteed—including making you click a box saying you understand that specific point—by what authority can any federal agency act? And what sort of damages to the public would warrant that? And if a worldwide task force were to be formed, what sort of legislation would be required?

But really, I think the main question is, is any of that colossal effort and use of resources worth it? What is the scale of the damages being incurred by non-delivery of KS rewards? You don't buy cars on KS, or boats. RPG Kickstarters have backer counts in the thousands. Meanwhile, agencies are struggling to regulate businesses with customers in the millions.

Seemingly fraudulent (though good luck proving that in court) TTRPG Kickstarters suck, but it doesn't get more small-fries. It's a teensy tiny industry. Regulators will, or should, always have bigger things to worry about.


----------



## Malmuria (Aug 23, 2022)

Looking into it a little bit, it seems like there have been a few instances of the FTC prosecuting crowdfunded projects, though mostly sticking to cases where they can prove fraud:









						Federal regulators go after crowdfunding scams on Kickstarter and GoFundMe
					

WASHINGTON — Federal regulators are going after people who raise money online through crowdfunding sites like Kickstarter and GoFundMe but don't follow through on their promises.




					www.pbs.org
				












						Perpetrators of Crowdfunding Fraud Can't Hide From The Law Forever
					

For years, crowdfunding has been a bit like the Wild West of finance. But as the industry continues to grow, state and federal authorities are catching up to abusers of the system.




					www.entrepreneur.com
				












						The government says this backpack is a fraud, but the creator says he’s just a failure
					

This smart backpack was Doug Monahan’s dumbest idea.




					www.theverge.com
				




From that Verge article:



> As much as aggrieved backers don’t like the reality that they might never receive a product, the FTC has mostly avoided interfering with crowdfunding. The agency only once previously investigated a creator, Erik Chevalier, who raised more than $122,000 for a board game and later sold backers’ data to outside firms. The game never shipped. The FTC settled with Chevalier for close to $112,000 and ordered him to stop disclosing or benefitting from customers’ personal information.
> 
> Critically, the FTC said at the time that it accepted the core idea of crowdfunding and the risks involved, but it wanted to ensure backers’ money actually went toward a product — and that creators didn’t run off with it.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Aug 23, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> From that Verge article:



Ah, that crook moved here to Portland.  We don't want you, dude lol.  Seriously, though, that is a clear violation of KS to share any information of backers to anyone else.  In fact, before you can even launch a project, you have to explicitly agree that the backer report will only be used to fulfill rewards.  After a year, you can't even get access to the backer report any longer from KS.

*also, they settled for $112K, but he never had to pay it.  It was "indefinitely suspended due to lack of ability to pay."


----------



## Retreater (Aug 23, 2022)

Malmuria said:


> Perhaps something like what the Blacklist Miniature project recently offered, but as a projection. This way, potential backers could know what the plan for expenditures was going to be



So that was the one I got burned on. On paper, before the project began, Blacklist should've been ok to deliver. It was the stretch goals, mismanagement, and unexpected expenses related to the pandemic (though I think the first two reasons had the largest effect.) That's stuff that can't be put in an investor prospectus - which seems to be what you're wanting on Kickstarter.
And on paper, Stone & Phoenix's project would've looked ok. Both were recognized names who have produced content before. A decent work ethic, good business practices, and professional behavior - and this project could've been done by now. I've seen people with far fewer resources make better products in a quicker turnaround.
For your prospectus, before investing in a project, take a look at what's been released before. Look at ENPublishing. Look at Izegrim Creations. These folks are making good products.


----------



## aramis erak (Aug 23, 2022)

Morrus said:


> They have some strict rules about approving new campaigns based on past fufillment. Even I've had trouble sometimes, and I'm Mr Instant Fulfillment. If you don't fulfill campaigns they won't approve new ones. I don't see what else they could really do.



And yet, Kenneth "Whit" Whitman has failed 5 KS's... They might not like you, but they sure like scammers like Ken... who'd driven two companies into the ground before KS even existed. 2 video projects (both of which delivered a trailer for a movie which never materialized), 3 clear moneygrabs...

This makes your claim seem not credible.


----------



## Morrus (Aug 23, 2022)

aramis erak said:


> And yet, Kenneth "Whit" Whitman has failed 5 KS's... They might not like you, but they sure like scammers like Ken... who'd driven two companies into the ground before KS even existed. 2 video projects (both of which delivered a trailer for a movie which never materialized), 3 clear moneygrabs...
> 
> This makes your claim seem not credible.



The new rules came in a few months ago. You are welcome to not believe me. I don’t have time to make things up on the internet.


----------



## aramis erak (Aug 24, 2022)

Morrus said:


> The new rules came in a few months ago. You are welcome to not believe me. I don’t have time to make things up on the internet.



That detail makes a HUGE difference in credibility; you should have lead with that.


----------



## Eltab (Aug 24, 2022)

Kickstarter does not have to invent the wheel from scratch.  How does eBay check the folks who offer items for auction?  And how does eBay compile their ratings score for sellers?  What record-keeping do banks prepare for business loans?  KS can adapt those processes to its unique function(s).

KS can review their own records and create a suitable scoring system to alert would-be backers if a project sponsor has a good / bad record for quality and timeliness.  And some way to indicate "problems from outside sources" vs "internal problems" vs "overcame problems and delivered".
For the Kickstarter in question here, "internal problems" would cover the matter from KS's point of view; they don't need to explain the whole sorry tale.


----------



## Malmuria (Aug 24, 2022)

Eltab said:


> Kickstarter does not have to invent the wheel from scratch.  How does eBay check the folks who offer items for auction?  And how does eBay compile their ratings score for sellers?  What record-keeping do banks prepare for business loans?  KS can adapt those processes to its unique function(s).
> 
> KS can review their own records and create a suitable scoring system to alert would-be backers if a project sponsor has a good / bad record for quality and timeliness.  And some way to indicate "problems from outside sources" vs "internal problems" vs "overcame problems and delivered".
> For the Kickstarter in question here, "internal problems" would cover the matter from KS's point of view; they don't need to explain the whole sorry tale.



A simple rating and review system would be a great addition.  Right now you have to search through the comments section to see how fulfillment is going for backers.


----------



## Myrdin Potter (Aug 24, 2022)

About the best that KS could do is to hold shipping funds until the project is ready to ship. So many no longer collect that via KS these days.

Otherwise the people raising the money need it and once KS gives it to them they have little ability to do anything to get it back. They can ban people from their platform but that does not help the backers for the bad project.


----------



## aramis erak (Aug 24, 2022)

Myrdin Potter said:


> About the best that KS could do is to hold shipping funds until the project is ready to ship. So many no longer collect that via KS these days.
> 
> Otherwise the people raising the money need it and once KS gives it to them they have little ability to do anything to get it back. They can ban people from their platform but that does not help the backers for the bad project.



They could, if they chose, function as an escrow house. That carries a bit of liability, and a good bit of work, so it's unlikely to be chosen.
Basically, an escrow is an account which holds money for some purpose, and is released when some condition is met.

The most common uses in the US are in house purchase, home rennovations, and in setting aside rents when a  landlord refuses to do needed repairs...


----------



## Smackpixi (Aug 24, 2022)

I feel like there’s so much hyperbolic hate towards thes people from members of the community they’ve never impacted.  I get adding your voice to condemnation in support of the aggrieved is helpful, but it also seems, I dunno, embarrassing for you.


----------



## billd91 (Aug 24, 2022)

Smackpixi said:


> I feel like there’s so much hyperbolic hate towards thes people from members of the community they’ve never impacted.  I get adding your voice to condemnation in support of the aggrieved is helpful, but it also seems, I dunno, embarrassing for you.



Why would it be embarrassing?


----------



## Malmuria (Aug 24, 2022)

Smackpixi said:


> I feel like there’s so much *hyperbolic hate* towards thes people from members of the *community* they’ve never impacted.  I get adding your voice to condemnation in support of the aggrieved is helpful, but it also seems, I dunno, embarrassing for you.



The strongest reactions I've seen were on twitter from other freelancers and streamers.  So what SP and JS were doing impacts their work environments.  The other people reacting strongly are people who backed the kickstarter, who may be upset because they aren't getting a product and/or the freelancer creators of the product were bullied and delayed payment.

So where are you seeing this hate?  Or by hate do you just mean criticism?  And is the ttrpg hobby a community, because if so, people in a community look out for each other.


----------



## jdrakeh (Aug 24, 2022)

Morrus said:


> If you don't fulfill campaigns they won't approve new ones.




Ostensibly. They let Ken Whitman run six Kickstarters in very rapid succession (some simultaneously, I believe) without delivering on a single one. Mistakes were made.


----------



## MNblockhead (Aug 24, 2022)

Teo Twawki said:


> They do have the power to prohibit future projects by delinquent creators. Of course, such creators can always find ways around it, but let's be honest: Kickstarter doesn't care so long as they get their cut.
> 
> Banks do have the power to reverse funds _if they want to_. And that would be notable if it were an organized attempt by enough backers _en masse_. Not likely to work, but it also isn't unheard of to accomplish.



I successfully reversed charges for a Kickstarter project once. But that was not because someone hadn't delivered, but claimed to have delivered but I could never get my code for the software.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 24, 2022)

aramis erak said:


> This makes your claim seem not credible.




Ken Whitman was an issue in 2015.  It is now 2022.

Think about it for a moment.  Who is credible - the guy who runs a bunch of kickstarters today, or someone citing an example from seven years ago?


----------



## aramis erak (Aug 24, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Ken Whitman was an issue in 2015.  It is now 2022.
> 
> Think about it for a moment.  Who is credible - the guy who runs a bunch of kickstarters today, or someone citing an example from seven years ago?



He launched another one a few months ago. It got pulled down... after complaints.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Aug 24, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Ken Whitman was an issue in 2015.  It is now 2022.
> 
> Think about it for a moment.  Who is credible - the guy who runs a bunch of kickstarters today, or someone citing an example from seven years ago?



FWIW, the ToS I've agreed to using Kickstarter this month is significantly different than my first one years ago.  So it looks like they are trying at some level to mitigate these issues without being overly heavy handed that _could _result in more harm to creators than help.


----------



## jerryrice4949 (Aug 25, 2022)

Smackpixi said:


> I feel like there’s so much hyperbolic hate towards thes people from members of the community they’ve never impacted.  I get adding your voice to condemnation in support of the aggrieved is helpful, but it also seems, I dunno, embarrassing for you.



I haven’t seen hate but well earned criticism and anger which is fair considering they are both very public figures and have not behaved well or been honest.  I also believe in second chances but first someone has to genuinely have remorse and not just because it suits them.


----------



## aramis erak (Aug 25, 2022)

jerryrice4949 said:


> I haven’t seen hate but well earned criticism and anger which is fair considering they are both very public figures and have not behaved well or been honest.  I also believe in second chances but first someone has to genuinely have remorse and not just because it suits them.



I could hardly care less whether their remorse is genuine or self-interest, or for that matter, present at all, *provided the inappropriate behaviors end* and backers and freelancers get their due.

*Only time will tell*.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Aug 25, 2022)

How they move forward, change, and rectify the hurt they've caused will be the proof of whether they're being genuine or not, ultimately.



aramis erak said:


> I could hardly care less whether their remorse is genuine or self-interest, or for that matter, present at all, *provided the inappropriate behaviors end* and backers and freelancers get their due.
> 
> *Only time will tell*.


----------



## aramis erak (Aug 26, 2022)

Ralif Redhammer said:


> How they move forward, change, and rectify the hurt they've caused will be the proof of whether they're being genuine or not, ultimately.



Not of need; economic hardship/penalty can change behavior without changing hearts and minds... As can fear of hardship. Lack of change, however, would indeed prove both lack of remorse and lack of fear of reprisals civil, social, and/or criminal...


----------



## JediSoth (Aug 29, 2022)

jerryrice4949 said:


> I haven’t seen hate but well earned criticism and anger which is fair considering they are both very public figures and have not behaved well or been honest.  I also believe in second chances but first someone has to genuinely have remorse and not just because it suits them.




In this case, this WAS Satine's second, or even third chance, depending on who you talk to.

I hope, and I mean this in all sincerity, that she's DONE in this industry. Jamison, too, after some of the stories a couple of the freelancers told.


----------



## bedir than (Oct 4, 2022)

Satine announced her comeback on Instagram earlier this week. She continues to present herself as a broken victim and not the person that actively harmed people (beyond just not paying them for their work).

Here's a collection of stories. They aren't all about pay. They aren't just Jamison.









						Studly Stone
					

A collection of stories involving Satine Phoenix, Jamison Stone, Apotheosis Studios




					www.studlystone.com


----------



## Deset Gled (Oct 4, 2022)

bedir than said:


> Satine announced her comeback on Instagram earlier this week. She continues to present herself as a broken victim and not the person that actively harmed people (beyond just not paying them for their work).
> 
> Here's a collection of stories. They aren't all about pay. They aren't just Jamison.




Can it really be called a comeback after only being gone a couple months? More like a summer vacation. 

At first glance, it seems she's not putting any effort into separating herself from Jamison Stone. He's still all over her Instagram, her websites still feature the StonePhoenix branding, and she links to Apotheosis Studios in multiple places. It looks like she's moved into the "We're going to pretend this never happened" phase.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Oct 4, 2022)

I think the Slovenly Trulls sum it up succinctly:







bedir than said:


> Satine announced her comeback on Instagram earlier this week. She continues to present herself as a broken victim and not the person that actively harmed people (beyond just not paying them for their work).
> 
> Here's a collection of stories. They aren't all about pay. They aren't just Jamison.
> 
> ...


----------



## vecna00 (Oct 4, 2022)

bedir than said:


> Satine announced her comeback on Instagram earlier this week. She continues to present herself as a broken victim and not the person that actively harmed people (beyond just not paying them for their work).
> 
> Here's a collection of stories. They aren't all about pay. They aren't just Jamison.
> 
> ...



I saw this yesterday and was going to add it to the thread, but it was locked 

May have been another thread for it though!


----------



## jdrakeh (Oct 4, 2022)

bedir than said:


> Satine announced her comeback on Instagram earlier this week. She continues to present herself as a broken victim and not the person that actively harmed people (beyond just not paying them for their work).
> 
> Here's a collection of stories. They aren't all about pay. They aren't just Jamison.
> 
> ...




To be clear, they (i.e. Satine/Jamison) still owe people money, as well. They haven't made amends. They're just trying to sneak back in by doing the bare minimum (making an Instagram post). Disgusting.


----------



## Teo Twawki (Oct 5, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> Can it really be called a comeback after only being gone a couple months? More like a summer vacation.



A summer vacation paid for by the work of others?


----------



## DarkCrisis (Oct 5, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> Can it really be called a comeback after only being gone a couple months? More like a summer vacation.
> 
> At first glance, it seems she's not putting any effort into separating herself from Jamison Stone. He's still all over her Instagram, her websites still feature the StonePhoenix branding, and she links to Apotheosis Studios in multiple places. It looks like she's moved into the "We're going to pretend this never happened" phase.



They are married (I believe), so I don’t think there will be much “distancing”.


----------



## Gradine (Nov 22, 2022)

Satine's first Twitter activity in nearly half a year is to the Like the post where Elon Musk talks about reinstating Donald Trump, if you were wondering how things are going


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Nov 22, 2022)

Ugh. 

On Instagram she's been gaslighting people.



Gradine said:


> Satine's first Twitter activity in nearly half a year is to the Like the post where Elon Musk talks about reinstating Donald Trump, if you were wondering how things are going


----------



## Teo Twawki (Nov 22, 2022)

Gradine said:


> to the Like the post where Elon Musk talks about reinstating Donald Trump





Ralif Redhammer said:


> she's been gaslighting people



How we do anything is how we do everything.


----------



## CleverNickName (Nov 22, 2022)

Gradine said:


> Satine's first Twitter activity in nearly half a year is to the Like the post where Elon Musk talks about reinstating Donald Trump, if you were wondering how things are going


----------



## vecna00 (Nov 23, 2022)

Oh boy.


----------



## Staffan (Nov 23, 2022)

Gradine said:


> Satine's first Twitter activity in nearly half a year is to the Like the post where Elon Musk talks about reinstating Donald Trump, if you were wondering how things are going



Hmm. Might indicate that she's trying to pivot more toward the clientele that hangs out at the RPG Site. I wonder how that'll work out for her.


----------



## aramis erak (Nov 23, 2022)

bedir than said:


> Satine announced her comeback on Instagram earlier this week. She continues to present herself as a broken victim and not the person that actively harmed people (beyond just not paying them for their work).



Sadly, she's probably genuinely both. She is a victim.  By some standards, she was being victimized by her prior field of employment, by her "romantic" involvement with  Zac, quite possibly with her current. Most abusive types have experience as a victim. So she almost certainly qualifies as a victim.
It's quite possible to be abuser and abusee, as well as abused... it's normative for abuse in general.


----------



## bedir than (Nov 23, 2022)

aramis erak said:


> Sadly, she's probably genuinely both. She is a victim.  By some standards, she was being victimized by her prior field of employment, by her "romantic" involvement with  Zac, quite possibly with her current. Most abusive types have experience as a victim. So she almost certainly qualifies as a victim.
> It's quite possible to be abuser and abusee, as well as abused... it's normative for abuse in general.



She's presented herself as the victim of unjust cancel culture. She is not saying that her past is what caused her to treat people poorly. She insists she didn't do that.


----------



## Cordwainer Fish (Nov 23, 2022)

When someone tells you who they are, believe them.


----------



## Aldarc (Nov 23, 2022)

Cordwainer Fish said:


> When someone tells you who they are, believe them.



I am the son of a deposed king of Nigeria in need of your financial assistance...


----------



## Haiku Elvis (Nov 24, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> I am the son of a deposed king of Nigeria in need of your financial assistance...



Poor you. Must be tough. But you seem like an honest sort.
If only there was a large sum of money held in an account that only needed a few thousand pounds of solicitors fees to access.
 I could lend you the money for the solicitors and we could split the money between us.


----------

