Home The Bridge

About today's disciplinary actions - 2021-02-11

11718192022

Comments

  • I was kind of hoping for a tearful apology video...but this will do instead. :D
  • Commodore PackCommodore Pack ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2021
    Was I super thermonuclear mad for a while?
    Yes, yes I was.

    We’re there some pretty serious failures on TP/WRG’s part?
    Yes, yes there were.

    Do I think that they have perhaps learned a lesson?
    I genuinely do.

    I now feel free to move forward and give them a second chance and learn from their mistakes, especially concerning communication.

    Remember, this is a company- not a single person. There is a pretty big difference there and inertia is part and parcel of a corporation. Sometimes it takes a crisis to get one to do anything.

    And without a little grace and forgiveness we all end up here:

    1f2zsfgxvgbx.jpeg
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    BarnBurner wrote: »
    That would have been sufficient if it wasnt for todays issue.

    Again, we have fine print indicating something is available a limited number of times.

    Again, the “something” is claimable/purchasable more than the indicated limit.

    However, last time people were banned for ignoring the fine print, this time the offer was changed after the button was “exploited”. No lessons were learned throughout the whole ordeal and it has clearly been demonstrated that everyone needs to run far and fast from this company.

    The writing is on the wall with this company. Im out.

    What was messed up today?!?!?

    ⛔🛑👨🕦
    "The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
  • ~peregrine~~peregrine~ ✭✭✭✭✭
    BarnBurner wrote: »
    That would have been sufficient if it wasnt for todays issue.

    Again, we have fine print indicating something is available a limited number of times.

    Again, the “something” is claimable/purchasable more than the indicated limit.

    However, last time people were banned for ignoring the fine print, this time the offer was changed after the button was “exploited”. No lessons were learned throughout the whole ordeal and it has clearly been demonstrated that everyone needs to run far and fast from this company.

    The writing is on the wall with this company. Im out.

    What was messed up today?!?!?

    ⛔🛑👨🕦

    https://forum.disruptorbeam.com/stt/discussion/17779/citation-offer-be-very-careful
    "In the short run, the game defines the players. But in the long run, it's us players who define the game." — Nicky Case, The Evolution of Trust
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    BarnBurner wrote: »
    That would have been sufficient if it wasnt for todays issue.

    Again, we have fine print indicating something is available a limited number of times.

    Again, the “something” is claimable/purchasable more than the indicated limit.

    However, last time people were banned for ignoring the fine print, this time the offer was changed after the button was “exploited”. No lessons were learned throughout the whole ordeal and it has clearly been demonstrated that everyone needs to run far and fast from this company.

    The writing is on the wall with this company. Im out.

    What was messed up today?!?!?

    ⛔🛑👨🕦

    https://forum.disruptorbeam.com/stt/discussion/17779/citation-offer-be-very-careful

    Thanx. I skipped that Offer, so didn't know it was a thing.

    Does Citation pricing count as a Gate? Different Offers, Legendary Cites have been {Offered with other stuff}:

    $4.99
    $25/Cite {4/$$99.99}
    $14.99

    I've not been tempted by the Cite Offers, mainly because they seem as stable as some hyperinflation currency.....







    46szohitqudg.jpeg
    7f3exdlderab.jpg
    xw04s2ieg9a5.jpg
    bamokjivv1wi.jpg
    rco1ta4kxz96.jpg
    "The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
  • “What's a knockout like you doing in a computer-generated gin joint like this?”

    Proud member of Patterns of Force
    Captain Level 99
    Played since January 2017

    TP: Do better!!!
  • (HGH)Apollo(HGH)Apollo ✭✭✭✭✭
    The apology is good but I think many players would want something more concrete on what these mean and how they will be implemented.
    Audit of our escalation processes
    Review and address deficiencies in our playbooks for these situations
    Policy review on banning
    Review and action on our release process and technology
    Let’s fly!
  • *Nomad* {PoF}*Nomad* {PoF} ✭✭✭✭✭
    BarnBurner wrote: »
    That would have been sufficient if it wasnt for todays issue.

    Again, we have fine print indicating something is available a limited number of times.

    Again, the “something” is claimable/purchasable more than the indicated limit.

    However, last time people were banned for ignoring the fine print, this time the offer was changed after the button was “exploited”. No lessons were learned throughout the whole ordeal and it has clearly been demonstrated that everyone needs to run far and fast from this company.

    The writing is on the wall with this company. Im out.

    g70fbyh12gen.jpg

    Damn, beat me to it! :D
    Founding ADM - PoF family of fleets (POF, POF2 & POF3) - Dear TP: Non sequitur. Your facts are uncoordinated.
  • dext74dext74 ✭✭✭✭✭
    IceCat wrote: »
    FYI - for those who may not have seen this. I'm providing this link so people can be informed, not to start another dumpster fire in this thread. Let's please keep any responses civil. 🖖

    https://forum.disruptorbeam.com/stt/discussion/17781/daily-retrieve-issue-follow-up

    I'm getting conflicted answers when I ask in fleet chat... was this message sent out globally in game or just on the forums?

    (If you answer yes, can you include whether you had been banned or not? My working theory is it was sent only to the impacted players.)
  • robownagerobownage ✭✭✭✭✭
    dext74 wrote: »
    IceCat wrote: »
    FYI - for those who may not have seen this. I'm providing this link so people can be informed, not to start another dumpster fire in this thread. Let's please keep any responses civil. 🖖

    https://forum.disruptorbeam.com/stt/discussion/17781/daily-retrieve-issue-follow-up

    I'm getting conflicted answers when I ask in fleet chat... was this message sent out globally in game or just on the forums?

    (If you answer yes, can you include whether you had been banned or not? My working theory is it was sent only to the impacted players.)

    I was banned and received it as an in-game message.
  • Commodore PackCommodore Pack ✭✭✭✭✭
    dext74 wrote: »
    IceCat wrote: »
    FYI - for those who may not have seen this. I'm providing this link so people can be informed, not to start another dumpster fire in this thread. Let's please keep any responses civil. 🖖

    https://forum.disruptorbeam.com/stt/discussion/17781/daily-retrieve-issue-follow-up

    I'm getting conflicted answers when I ask in fleet chat... was this message sent out globally in game or just on the forums?

    (If you answer yes, can you include whether you had been banned or not? My working theory is it was sent only to the impacted players.)

    I was banned and received it as an in-game message.

    Same here, banned and in-game message. 👍
  • IceCatIceCat ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2021
    dext74 wrote: »
    IceCat wrote: »
    FYI - for those who may not have seen this. I'm providing this link so people can be informed, not to start another dumpster fire in this thread. Let's please keep any responses civil. 🖖

    https://forum.disruptorbeam.com/stt/discussion/17781/daily-retrieve-issue-follow-up

    I'm getting conflicted answers when I ask in fleet chat... was this message sent out globally in game or just on the forums?

    (If you answer yes, can you include whether you had been banned or not? My working theory is it was sent only to the impacted players.)

    I could be wrong, but I believe forum only. I think I actually stumbled upon it accidentally, in an area I don't usual go.

    So, if that's the case, then communication still needs improvement. However, to echo other's thoughts above, it's progress at least.

    EDITED TO ADD: I was not one of the banned.
  • MicrohopperMicrohopper ✭✭✭✭
    Wasn't banned. Didn't get in game message. So looks like just in-game for those banned, and this Forum for the rest of us. Makes sense from a certain damage control sense, I suppose, if some casual players are still unaware of the issue, why stir up the nest? And those that were aware, either got in game, or are here, or have fleet-mates updating them, probably.
  • dext74dext74 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Makes sense from a certain damage control sense, I suppose, if some casual players are still unaware of the issue, why stir up the nest?

    Except that's not transparency.
  • DScottHewittDScottHewitt ✭✭✭✭✭
    dext74 wrote: »
    IceCat wrote: »
    FYI - for those who may not have seen this. I'm providing this link so people can be informed, not to start another dumpster fire in this thread. Let's please keep any responses civil. 🖖

    https://forum.disruptorbeam.com/stt/discussion/17781/daily-retrieve-issue-follow-up

    I'm getting conflicted answers when I ask in fleet chat... was this message sent out globally in game or just on the forums?

    (If you answer yes, can you include whether you had been banned or not? My working theory is it was sent only to the impacted players.)

    I was banned and received it as an in-game message.

    I was not banned. Did not get an ingame message. So, that appears to be the variable.
    What would you guys have liked better about yesterday's offer hickup? Another round of bans despite the apology for overreacting the last time?

    No matter if 2 or 3 purchase options were intended initially, they did the one right thing to fix it, an noone got hurt.

    I would've like a hint of mea culpa in the response. "Correct purchase limit is 3" doesn't tell me anything. Give me some sort of "There was a typo" or "It was coded incorrectly," something that acknowledges a mistake was made. No one needs to be banned, no one needs to have things they've spent money on taken away, and I don't need anyone to get free stuff. I just need TP to own their ish.

    Could it be that we are about to make a mountain out of every molehill now? How would you feel in a working environment where every slightest oversight had to lead to "taking the blame", "owing the issue" and "having to apologize"?

    Imo this was really NOTHING.

    If anything I would point out the bad wording regarding the use of the items as the sentence does not mention the purpose of the legendary citation in contrary to the superrare ones. That makes the actual content a bit unclear if you tend not to trust TP.

    tkckc8z69u0r.jpeg

    Anyway, a few weeks ago noone would have blinked about this whole offer. After their - overdue - apology, can we please go back to that?

    Well, would be more of a "nothing" if the immediate previous very similar {verging on identical} mistake had not had them remove items from players' inventory, including items that they had preceding the mistake, followed by banning those players for WRG's coding mistake. I wasn't robbed and banned, and I am having trouble building a snowman ☃️⛄☃️⛄☃️

    IIRC, you were one of the ones mistreated? If you can forgive them, I guess we all should take that cue. I'm not happy with how they treated friends I have not had the honor to meet. If those friends can move on, we all probably should!!!

    ⛔🛑👨🕦
    "The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself."
Sign In or Register to comment.