PC1 Banned for no reason!

[Bram Hengeveld]

I am pretty sure this is not true

Read the thread before you make such false defamatory claims.

 

[Graham Byford]

Ian

Just get on with making your game, there's no point in pursuing this, a small handful of people have made some remarks on the Internet about your company, this happens every second of every day across the Internet. What do you propose? a complete lock down and full moderation of the entire Internet.

You would be far better off putting your energy and money into making a ground breaking racing simulation, that's a benchmark in all areas. I don't condone any of the personal attacks, swearing and out right lies I've witnessed, and that goes for each side, both parties are guilty of that.

I do feel somewhat your company has brought some of this on itself though, a lack of transparency concerning your recent titles and a constant hostility towards serious sim racers across WMD isn't helping (even if they are trying to help). At times it reads like you have turned your back on sim racers, which is a shame especially considering your history and early years. There have also been times when members have been banned rather too quickly, despite being wound up and pushed by other members even mods/devs, one such banned member was backed up by Ben Collins shortly after. Some of the WMD representives are not helping things either, some seem hell bent on making money rather than delivering a quality simulation title, where in their eyes everything is perfect

Also your current WIP still has a lot of room for improvement in the driving department, and I think many have run out or are running out of patience. I know there's a great amount of work going on behind the scenes but we have yet to experience anything as convincing as the current or past competition which is rather worrying. Your previous titles such as GT Legends, GTR2 and M3 Challange provide a better representation of car physics/behaviour and driving, and have better FFB with the right tweaks, although I I accept they are a tad slippey and not progressive enough. However the core physics engine is still very good, and still used today in GSC to great effect.

I'm very much hoping PCARS can at least match and exceed these older titles in these areas, even on the consoles, and I eagarly await physics, tyre model and FFB improvements.

Best of luck with the rest of the project,

 

[Klazerman]

Read the thread before you make such false defamatory claims.

what ... do you mean it is true ?!! OMG, call the US!! the axis of evil is once again upon us!

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

what ... do you mean it is true ?!! OMG, call the US!! the axis of evil is once again upon us!

Don't twist my words mister manager. I refer to my quote and what you answer on it. Whatever Farrel's opinion is is up to him.

 

[Klazerman]

Don't twist my words mister manager. I refer to my quote and what you answer on it. Whatever Farrel's opinion is is up to him.

You seem to have a slightly twisted sense of what the words defamatory and true is

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

You know what my sense says Klazerman. That we should have ignored pCARS from the first screenshot and just stick to support developers and games that don't threaten hardworking volunteers with lawsuits.

 

[Bruno Pereira]

It is strange but from what i see, if what Klazerman said is defamatory so should be the one made by the OP.

 

[Xosé Estrada]

You seem to have a slightly twisted sense of what the words defamatory and true is

The fact is we never received any report or request to remove anything in particular. Just threatens about lawsuits.

Period.

 

[Bruno Pereira]

The fact is we never received any report or request to remove anything in particular.

Period.

I think thats the solution, if you received something now would you act accordingly or still keep this thread?

 

[Klazerman]

The fact is we never received any report or request to remove anything in particular.

Period.

I was not talking about that, at all.

 

[Xosé Estrada]

I think thats the solution, if you received something now would you act accordingly or still keep this thread?

Like we said thousands of times, we will evaluate if it really constitutes a violation of rights and in that case remove that particular parts of this thread.

But we won't remove anything just because a company doesn't like it or to defend their commercial interests, as this is a forum with free speech and we will stand for that till the end.

 

[Senad Subasic]

With all the sarcasms and hyperboles I've spewed out around the web over the years, I think I'm looking at twenty-to-life. Premeditated libeling and defamation.

Used G27 for sale. As payment I'm willing to take cigarettes, shower curtains, and offers of protection.

 

[Bruno Pereira]

Like we said thousands of times, we will evaluate if it really constitutes a violation of rights and in that case remove that particular parts of this thread.

But we won't remove anything just because a company doesn't like it or to defend their commercial interests, as this is a forum with free speech and we will stand for that till the end.

It is not because they dont like the comments or want to defend their comercial interests. To be honest if this thread was moderated from the beginning asking for evidence before considering it true this wouldnt be happening.

What the OP said in this thread is a diffamation, for this to be considered an opinion or a judgment there had to be evidences of the ban being made with no reason.

I can show you this easily using this example:

Lingens v Austria (1986) 8 EHRR 407 was a 1986 European Court of Human Rights case that placed restrictions on libel laws because of the freedom of expression provisions of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Context

Lingens was fined for publishing in a Vienna magazine comments about the behavior of the Austrian Chancellor, such as 'basest opportunism', 'immoral' and 'undignified'. Under the Austrian criminal code the only defense was proof of the truth of these statements. Lingens could not prove the truth of these value judgments.

The European Court of Human Rights stated that a careful distinction needed to be made between facts and value judgments/opinions. The existence of facts can be demonstrated, whereas the truth of value judgments is not susceptible of proof. The facts on which Lingens founded his value judgments were not disputed; nor was his good faith. Since it was impossible to prove the truth of value judgments, the requirement of the relevant provisions of the Austrian criminal code was impossible of fulfilment and infringed article 10 of the Convention.

Source: Wikipedia

 

[Klazerman]

You know what my sense says Klazerman. That we should have ignored pCARS from the first screenshot and just stick to support developers and games that don't threaten hardworking volunteers with lawsuits.

The only thing you guys are working hard on is continuing to not see the elephant in the room. That and complaning about someone taking offence when you guys don't do your jobs.

 

[Bram Hengeveld]

Yeah the two admins of this forum are deliberately steering up the community and therefore this thread. Gimme a break please.

Like a great and wise philosopher once said in the 1980s: "i didn't draw first blood"

 

[Tom]

I can show you this easily using this example:

Lingens v Austria (1986) 8 EHRR 407 was a 1986 European Court of Human Rights case that placed restrictions on libel laws because of the freedom of expression provisions of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Context

Lingens was fined for publishing in a Vienna magazine comments about the behavior of the Austrian Chancellor, such as 'basest opportunism', 'immoral' and 'undignified'. Under the Austrian criminal code the only defense was proof of the truth of these statements. Lingens could not prove the truth of these value judgments.

The European Court of Human Rights stated that a careful distinction needed to be made between facts and value judgments/opinions. The existence of facts can be demonstrated, whereas the truth of value judgments is not susceptible of proof. The facts on which Lingens founded his value judgments were not disputed; nor was his good faith. Since it was impossible to prove the truth of value judgments, the requirement of the relevant provisions of the Austrian criminal code was impossible of fulfilment and infringed article 10 of the Convention.

Source: Wikipedia

I am not a lawyer plus RD is not based in Austria but anyway, I believe that there's a fine line between a person and companies as well.

It's difficult to find an existing judgement that really fits the particular case we're talking about, I guess.

 

[Klazerman]

Yeah the two admins of this forum are deliberately steering up the community and therefore this thread. Gimme a break please.

Like a great and wise philosopher once said in the 1980s: "i didn't draw first blood"

to quote two monkeys I heard of, dont know the exact date of it tho... "See no evil, Hear no evil."

There was three monkeys but I cant remember what the third one was talking about .. go figure

 

[Bruno Pereira]

@ Klazer you are not helping at all in this..

Thats based on the european convention human rights and its five protocols, article 10. The case was taken in Austria tho it can be applied around Europe.
The difference exists indeed between a person and a company but the rights in the end are similar and we are dealing with a accusation without any facts or evidences of it happening as it was told and can be considered a malice act.

Since the OP was the starter of this it is considered to be defamation until proven contrary.

And if i recall RD it is based in the Netherlands right ?

 

[Adrian Britton]

I get the feeling that they would rather have everyones defamatory opinions stopped untill they release the final product.
Then when the sales figures come through, they wouldnt mind anyone saying anything.

(Just my opinion)
But I think releasing the pre beta (alpha) program to the general public was a bad marketing mistake.
They should of allowed bedroom modders, graphic designers, programmers and builders to buy in to the pre beta stage only.
Then they could work out and iron out all the bad things first, then released a pre-purchase beta/demo.

From what I can see and read on the net, it looks to me that they need to employ a media trained communicator to calm everything down, as this is the first time I have ever seen a manager come onto the shop floor and start arguing/debating in public.

Things can get said in the heat of the moment that we all read back and regret saying.

I just hope that somewhere along the line there is a pleasant equilibrium from all of this, and we can ALL look back and laugh at this one day.

 

[TherealWalkman]

what ... do you mean it is true ?!! OMG, call the US!! the axis of evil is once again upon us!

I think both of you talk past each other. Purely imho...