Quoted from pinballslave:The main point of my posting what I am is not to say that Phil is evil, but to try at least to get some sort of ballance on what seems like a lot of negativity towrards DP which may not all be justified...
Well then address those specific negative comments towards DP. Defend them against what is actually being said. Made up motives doesn't "Balance" things, it just comes across as juvenile.
Quoted from pinballslave:Yes, what I´m proposing is speculation, but then so is not considering an ulterior motive from Phil´s side...
I just don't understand this. What do motivations have to do with anything? Most people aren't questioning DP's motives, they are talking about their actions, asking questions and expressing their opinion that those questions have been inadequately answered.
Quoted from pinballslave:the overriding un-answered question which supports the possibility that there is something we´re not seeing is: Why would DP refuse to let him go?
I agree with the question, but I can think of no reason why that would justify leaving the funds in Phil's control and suggesting he keep it in his control a month after he publicly quit. If I had to guess a motive, I would give them the benefit of the doubt and jsut say that they were all friends and jsut wanted everything to work out, but that doesn't mean I think it was a wise business move with customer's money. If anything, your theory that Phil mucked everything up makes me think it was an even worse business move not to get it away form him sooner. But my point is that the Why doesn't really matter, we can't judge people's unknowable motivations only their actual actions.
Quoted from pinballslave:I´ve read through Phil´s posts again, and there is a HELL of a lot in there about licencing, which we now know was not an issue... is this not a fact?
Phil said a lot about his view on how they were treating the license restrictions over the course of the entire development cycle. He then stated that he thought that their current actions (taking a game to shows before they reached the appropriate approval state) was jeopardizing the license. EVERYTHING HE SAID about the license can be reasonably assumed to be his honest opinion of where it stood based on his interpretation of the restrictions. Roger Sharpe disagreed with his interpretation of where the license, AND THAT IS FINE. It doesn't mean that he was lying, it most likely means that it was a difference of professional opinion. But fine, go with your theory that he was just out to sabatoge them. Well that didn't work in regards to the license because their replacement of Phil with Roger Sharpe in that department is viewed as an upgrade by virtually everyone. Most people who have been paying attention think the license is being managed now by an excellent professional with a stellar reputation. It's a non issue now, but you keep bringing it up to support your theories of Bad Phil motives.
Quoted from pinballslave:Anyway, personally I´m not too bothered who was responsible for this situation, all I´m bothered about is that TBL gets made... and un-defended allogations that DP are all bad is not helping that goal...
The problem is you aren't addressing any of the problems people actually have with DP. Find someone doing what you are doing, making up wild allegations about DP's motives, and I will be right there with you calling that ridiculous. But if you have specific problems with the issues we are raising about their business practices that we have witnessed during and in response to this crisis, then talk about those. Defend their actions, don't make up bullshit motives to assign blame.