In other words, the suit would look like this:
Game Corp. + Shareholders v. Renegade Corporate Officer
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Do you not understand the concept of "personal liability"? The corporate officer is being sued personally. I.e., they're going after his own money in his bank account. It's not the corporation that is being sued. In fact, the corporation is the plaintiff here either because the corporation brought the lawsuit or because the shareholders forced the corporation to bring a lawsuit through a derivative action.lolfaqsWell we're not talking about individual agents in the example of the PCGA. We can sit here and wax legally for hours about corporate law, but the facts of the matter is we're talking about a hollistic corporation, which you need some kind of evidence of wrong doing.
[QUOTE="lolfaqs"]And malice has nothing to do with it. The mere fact that he acted without authority means he violated his duties as an officer. VandalvideoAnd thats nice, if you want to bring a suit of negligence against the agent, but as far as the company is involved, unless you can prove that they engaged in any kind of wrongdoing, as an individual company, then you have no cases against them. Saying "Companies act in their best interest" does not equate to "X company lied". But it makes their statements far less trustworthy. You should take it with a grain of salt.
[QUOTE="lolfaqs"]Do you not understand the concept of "personal liability"? The corporate officer is being sued personally. I.e., they're going after his own money in his bank account. It's not the corporation that is being sued. In fact, the corporation is the plaintiff here either because the corporation brought the lawsuit or because the shareholders forced the corporation to bring a lawsuit through a derivative action.VandalvideoWell we're not talking about individual agents in the example of the PCGA. We can sit here and wax legally for hours about corporate law, but the facts of the matter is we're talking about a hollistic corporation, which you need some kind of evidence of wrong doing.
So now you're changing the facts of my hypo? The whole point is that not a single one of those board members of PCGA is going to say anything to hurt their corporation, because if they do, the open themselves up to exactly the same kind of suit I mentioned:
Game Corp. + Shareholders v. Renegade Corporate Officer
Well we're not talking about individual agents in the example of the PCGA. We can sit here and wax legally for hours about corporate law, but the facts of the matter is we're talking about a hollistic corporation, which you need some kind of evidence of wrong doing.[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="lolfaqs"]Do you not understand the concept of "personal liability"? The corporate officer is being sued personally. I.e., they're going after his own money in his bank account. It's not the corporation that is being sued. In fact, the corporation is the plaintiff here either because the corporation brought the lawsuit or because the shareholders forced the corporation to bring a lawsuit through a derivative action.lolfaqs
So now you're changing the facts of my hypo? The whole point is that not a single one of those board members of PCGA is going to say anything to hurt their corporation, because if they do, the open themselves up to exactly the same kind of suit I mentioned:
Game Corp. + Shareholders v. Renegade Corporate Officer
dude, just stop feeding him. he's a troll. he has no idea what he's talking about.And the basic argument by the plaintiffs will go something like this:
Board of Directors instructed the officer to issue Statement A. The officer disregarded those instructions and, without authority, issued Statement B. As a result of Statement B, the corporation was harmed. The corporation and the shareholders now seek damages (aka money) from the officer.
So now you're changing the facts of my hypo? The whole point is that not a single one of those board members of PCGA is going to say anything to hurt their corporation, because if they do, the open themselves up to exactly the same kind of suit I mentionedlolfaqsI'm getting back to the topic that we have been discussing this entire time; the PCGA. The PCGA, as a company, is made up of highly reputable companies.These companies, until you can prove otherwise, are the authoritative sources on the subject of PC Gaming. If they say PC gaming is doing great, I believe them. Give me evidence otherwise or leave.
Cool, and when McDonald's their food is healthy, feel free to believe them. When Microsoft claimed RROD and disc scratching didn't exist, believe them. When tobacco company executives testify under oath that they believe cigarettes aren't addictive, believe them. When asbestos manufacturers claim asbestos didn't cause injuries to anyone, believe them.lolfaqsMcDonalds are not the USDA. If the USDA came forth and said, "McDonalds is healthy", I would believe them. The USDA is a reputable source of information on the health of food. And so, as the PC Gaming Alliance is made up of the most reputable sources in the PC gaming industry, I believe them. Until you can provide me with clear, tangible incentives to not believe them, then I will continue to believe them. Your conspiracy theories do not discredit them.
Let's make a bet. I will flip a coin. If it's heads, I pay you $100. If it's tails, you pay me $100. I will flip the coin here at my house and post what the result is. You can trust me. I'm the authority on the subject, because only I will see side the coin lands on.lolfaqsHow do I know that you're an established authority on the process of flipping coins? Besides, your example, in no way AGAIN, provides evidence that the PCGA is engaging in untrustworthy actions.
[QUOTE="lolfaqs"]Cool, and when McDonald's their food is healthy, feel free to believe them. When Microsoft claimed RROD and disc scratching didn't exist, believe them. When tobacco company executives testify under oath that they believe cigarettes aren't addictive, believe them. When asbestos manufacturers claim asbestos didn't cause injuries to anyone, believe them.VandalvideoMcDonalds are not the USDA. If the USDA came forth and said, "McDonalds is healthy", I would believe them. The USDA is a reputable source of information on the health of food. And so, as the PC Gaming Alliance is made up of the most reputable sources in the PC gaming industry, I believe them. Until you can provide me with clear, tangible incentives to not believe them, then I will continue to believe them. Your conspiracy theories do not discredit them. Last I check, USDA was a government department that is separate from corporate responsibilities, unlike PCGA.
How do I know that you're an established authority on the process of flipping coins? Besides, your example, in no way AGAIN, provides evidence that the PCGA is engaging in untrustworthy actions.Vandalvideo
No, no, I'm an established authority on this coin when I flip it thistime. No one else will have seen it at that moment other than me. You can trust me.
[QUOTE="lolfaqs"]Let's make a bet. I will flip a coin. If it's heads, I pay you $100. If it's tails, you pay me $100. I will flip the coin here at my house and post what the result is. You can trust me. I'm the authority on the subject, because only I will see side the coin lands on.VandalvideoHow do I know that you're an established authority on the process of flipping coins? Besides, your example, in no way AGAIN, provides evidence that the PCGA is engaging in untrustworthy actions. Again, if Ford, GM, and Chrysler form the American Car Alliance (ACL) today, and publish a report listing the reasons why American cars are better than foreign cars, are you going to believe every word of that report?
No, no, I'm an established authority on this coin when I flip it thistime. No one else will have seen it at that moment other than me. You can trust me.lolfaqsI have not been referred to you by any other reputable coin flipper. I have never heard of you in the coin flipping circles. I do not know of a lolfaqs in the betting arena. You are not a reputable coin flipper/gambler.
[QUOTE="lolfaqs"]No, no, I'm an established authority on this coin when I flip it thistime. No one else will have seen it at that moment other than me. You can trust me.VandalvideoI have not been referred to you by any other reputable coin flipper. I have never heard of you in the coin flipping circles. I do not know of a lolfaqs in the betting arena. You are not a reputable coin flipper/gambler.
Do you have any evidence that I am not a reputable coin flipper? Are you claiming that I might lie to you? Why would I do that? Oh well, your loss. It landed heads by the way. you can trust me. Too bad you didn't accept though.
Do you have any evidence that I am not a reputable coin flipper? Are you claiming that I might lie to you? Why would I do that? Oh well, your loss. It landed heads by the way. you can trust me. Too bad you didn't accept though.lolfaqsI take the word of REPUTABLE sources of information and services. You have not established yourself as a reputable gambler/coin flipper.
[QUOTE="lolfaqs"]Do you have any evidence that I am not a reputable coin flipper? Are you claiming that I might lie to you? Why would I do that? Oh well, your loss. It landed heads by the way. you can trust me. Too bad you didn't accept though.VandalvideoI take the word of REPUTABLE sources of information and services. You have not established yourself as a reputable gambler/coin flipper. And how are the Companies in PCGA reputable? Just because they are large and influential? Being well-known and profitable does not make you any more honest.
[QUOTE="Compression"] But it makes their statements far less trustworthy. You should take it with a grain of salt. VandalvideoUntil you can prove that the company lied, then you take their word as fact. This approach is a good way to get scammed (ie. the Madoff scam), injured (the Ford Pinto issue), or worse. Bias needs to be evaluated before taking a source's words at face value. There are numerous examples of lies throughout history that have caused monetary damage, physical damage, and even fatal damage.
[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="Compression"] But it makes their statements far less trustworthy. You should take it with a grain of salt. mattbbplUntil you can prove that the company lied, then you take their word as fact. This approach is a good way to get scammed (ie. the Madoff scam), injured (the Ford Pinto issue), or worse. Bias needs to be evaluated before taking a source's words at face value. There are numerous examples of lies throughout history that have caused monetary damage, physical damage, and even fatal damage. You cannot knock a system based on a few extreme outliers. It is a great intellectual approach which tries to focus on facts and reputability, instead of blind fanaticism.
did the PCGA state how they came up with those results? the methods used and such?Zero5000XSeeing as how most DD sources are members of the PCGA, they could've just asked said DD sources for their sales numbers...
[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"] Until you can prove that the company lied, then you take their word as fact.VandalvideoThis approach is a good way to get scammed (ie. the Madoff scam), injured (the Ford Pinto issue), or worse. Bias needs to be evaluated before taking a source's words at face value. There are numerous examples of lies throughout history that have caused monetary damage, physical damage, and even fatal damage. You cannot knock a system based on a few extreme outliers. It is a great intellectual approach which tries to focus on facts and reputability, instead of blind fanaticism. Those aren't the extremes. They're the norm. The US banks were professing health until they asked for the bailout. MS denied RROD for as long as they could. How many lies are flooded into people's junk email folders on a daily basis? How much marketing speak does Sony spew out on a yearly basis? Bias and spin are the norms, whether people choose to see that or not.
No, those are the extreme outliers. Just because they make the news doesn't necessitate that they are the norm. This method has worked for me for quite some time. I've become influential and wealthy employing this method. It has its risks, but the rewards are far greater, and it allows for objectivity.VandalvideoI thought that you were a law student.
Ever written a History Paper before? The first thing you do after reading a primary source is to assess it for bias. Historians do it all the time, even without an obvious reason. Its because bias exists everywhere, even more so in a report published by companies with an interest to do well.
[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"] And this is the major crutch of your argument. It is nothing more than conjecture, supposition, and conspiracy. It is casuistic at best. It is a gigantic appeal to ignorance.lolfaqs
That is where you are mistaken. This is not "my argument." This is me telling you what the Supreme Court, federal and state statutes, and legal precedent have said about how corporate officers must (i.e., it is not optional or discretionary) behave without exception.
But what if the only way you can maintain your corporate obligations is to purjure? Now you're in a conflict of obligations unless the obligation to speak true under oath takes precedence over the corporate obligation. PS. Evidence or not, there is a very good reason medical trials are double-blind and why statistics and findings are best expressed by independent unfunded research. Humans have an inherent self-bias (goes to our self-survival trait, thus the acronym DTA--Don't Trust Anybody).[QUOTE="scoobiesnackarf"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]Sounds to me like vacuous survey done to justify their lack of tracking digital distribution.lolfaqs
This. BTW, with services like Impulse, GOG, Steam D2D, and others increasing in revenue yearly, I would say that the NPD is simply
trying to ignore the fact people are buying more games via download than ever before it will continue to increase. Personally, give me a
digital download any day of the week. When it comes to PC, I will only buy via Steam now. Call me what you like but it is simply to easy
to have all of my games attached to an account that I can simply start up from any computer, 24/7, 365, and redownload unlimited times.
You may say "Well what happens when Valve goes out of business?" They have already promised a patch to release your games. I simply don't
enjoy having boxes and discs lying around. So NPD, do some more research because downloads are the future.
Those services are only relevant if you're a PC gamer. Casuals rule gaming now, like it or not. That's why the top selling PC game is World of Warcraft. That's why the top console is the Wii. That's why the top selling games are games like Wii Fit, Wii Sports, Wii Play, etc.
i've played my fair share of wow, and i can tell you that the average wow player is not at all casual. i could go as far as to say that the average wow player knows more about gaming and where the gaming industry is today then the average console-only player.
[QUOTE="lolfaqs"][QUOTE="scoobiesnackarf"]This. BTW, with services like Impulse, GOG, Steam D2D, and others increasing in revenue yearly, I would say that the NPD is simply
trying to ignore the fact people are buying more games via download than ever before it will continue to increase. Personally, give me a
digital download any day of the week. When it comes to PC, I will only buy via Steam now. Call me what you like but it is simply to easy
to have all of my games attached to an account that I can simply start up from any computer, 24/7, 365, and redownload unlimited times.
You may say "Well what happens when Valve goes out of business?" They have already promised a patch to release your games. I simply don't
enjoy having boxes and discs lying around. So NPD, do some more research because downloads are the future.
Noverech
Those services are only relevant if you're a PC gamer. Casuals rule gaming now, like it or not. That's why the top selling PC game is World of Warcraft. That's why the top console is the Wii. That's why the top selling games are games like Wii Fit, Wii Sports, Wii Play, etc.
i've played my fair share of wow, and i can tell you that the average wow player is not at all casual. i could go as far as to say that the average wow player knows more about gaming and where the gaming industry is today then the average console-only player.
WoW is arguably even less casual than X3: Reunion, which is one of the most ridiculously hardcore single-player games made in the past few years.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment