The Gaming Den

Centurion13 wrote:Eh, I didn't mean you should have to read it

I'd read it if I were interested in Battletech, but I sorta gave that up fifteen years ago.

But you weren't the one dragging in comments from one of a hundred commenter's blogs. Which is really ridiculous, honestly.

-Crissa

Old BattleTech fan here ( although my interest is waning, since they fucked up the fiction since Stackpole left ), so I'll read it. Oooooh, cool illustration of a Wraith, one of my favourite Inner Sphere Mechs, right on the frontpage. Nice!

BTW, in a post a few pages back from the front page, you said that the new owners will probably keep the whole Jyhad / Devlin Stone story arc going. You still think the same? I can only hope they don't, since the whole thing is such an illogical and stupid storyline... but what do I know, I gave up on the fiction universe when they killed Omi Kurita. <sigh> For me the story stops at Grave Covenant, which was one hell of a book.

Crissa wrote: Good thing he's not a primary source, huh?

Or do we have someone here who believe that Topps et al is involved in forcing bankruptcy proceedings for no reason?

-Crissa

(highlights mine)

Crissa wrote:So, are you saying there isn't a attempt to force bankruptcy proceedings?

-Crissa

By Topps? No.

magnuskn wrote:...you said that the new owners will probably keep the whole Jyhad / Devlin Stone story arc going. You still think the same? ... I gave up on the fiction universe when they killed Omi Kurita.

I don't want to contribute to topic drift so I will keep this brief:

- I think they will jump fifty years and just avoid the whole Peace. Then they will come back later and begin mining it for the endless little releases detailing this or that 'minor' conflict.

- Agreed. Omi Kurita was just about the only persona I was sorry to see go. Without her humanizing influence, the writers just seemed to go off the deep end after that with nearly all the characters. But then, I never really got into the fiction after I read 'End Game'. Bleh.

Cent13

Loren Coleman and Randall Bills really do feel that they "are" Battletech. Randall Bills said that he was the "Messiah of Battletech" and that without his approval, fans of the world and game would abandon it as apostate and the entire franchise would crash and burn. I do not believe this is the case, but I do believe that if, as is very likely, those guys get pried free from Battletech, that he will carry through on his threat and tell everyone that the new Battletech "does not count" and is made by people who have no business doing so. He has something of a cult of personality over on the Battletech side, though I suspect nowhere near as much as he thinks he does.

That being said, I doubt that anyone making new material in 8 months is going to want to touch the direct creations of Randall or Loren except possibly to have them shot in the face by new characters to show how badass they are.

-Username17

FrankTrollman wrote:That being said, I doubt that anyone making new material in 8 months is going to want to touch the direct creations of Randall or Loren except possibly to have them shot in the face by new characters to show how badass they are.

I think this would be the most incredibly hilarious and valid use of this form of retconning ever.

Crissa wrote:You do realize there is more than one document this is all based upon, right? There's the chaper seven initiation (which isn't in this thread), but then again, there's the audit of the LLC (which Frank received from the Colemans), as well as the press releases on dumpshock et al.

So lets get back to your evidence, the. The court documents have already been discussed, and going from "the members" to "the owners" to "the only owners" to "stock swindling" is, lets just say, overreaching.

I have no idea what you mean to show by reference to the audit. How exactly does that demonstrate stock swindling by Loren Coleman?

And what press releases are you talking about? The only entity producing press releases is CGL and I haven't seen a press release that claims, much less suggests, that the Colemans are the sole owners, or that they fraudulently sold ownership shares. In fact. the only relevant information I can find on this is from the original press release about CGL's monetary problems:

The result was that business funds had been co-mingled with the personal funds of one of the owners.

and

The current group of owners was presented with this information on Monday.

(highlights mine)

Taharqa wrote:So lets get back to your evidence,

Boooring.

Let's not and say we did. The court of public opinion is now adjourned for lunch!

Retconning the retconners is simple but accurate justice. However.. they did what they had to in order to try sewing things together, sort of the BT equivalent of the DC Crisis back in the mid-1980s. I think it would wreak havoc on the property itself to simply 'undo' everything after a certain date.

Though it would certainly give me pleasure to know their mark was removed... and really, who the hell misses the BT equivalent of Bat-Mite?

Cent13

Remember,

IMR existed well before Catalyst Game Labs did. Loren L. Coleman has published works in the Star Trek and Conan the Barbarian series, not to mention all of his BattleTech work.

It's very possible that IMR actually is wholly owned by Loren and Heather Coleman, and was originally conceived to manage the royalties from his published novels.

BattleCorps came out of IMR, and when FanPro tanked CGL came out of IMR.

I do know that I was offered an oppurtunity to "invest" in both BattleCorps and CGL, and if memory serves the buy in was paltry. I think around a thousand dollars. I didn't have any real heartburn with investing because I trusted (and must admit that I still trust) Randall Bills. I just couldn't get permission from my wife to shake loose the sheckles because we'd just had our third child and were moving from California to North Carolina.

Anyway, long story short, I don't think "stock" was ever offered in IMR per-se, but could have been offered in BattleCorps and CGL.

I must add the disclaimer that this is based on some pretty shaky memories of how things happened back then. I had a lot going on in my life, so your mileage may vary.

Clutch

FrankTrollman wrote:...without his approval, fans of the world and game would abandon it as apostate and the entire franchise would crash and burn........if, as is very likely, those guys get pried free from Battletech, that he will carry through on his threat and tell everyone that the new Battletech "does not count" and is made by people who have no business doing so.

I have friends closer to the persons in question and yes, even my friends now recall discomfort as they slowly came to realize the real attitude these fellows had towards the people playing their game.

It was one of contempt for all but a select few. And most of the social interaction around their appearance at other people's events proceeded from attempts by various individuals to become members of a select group of 'made' guys, or what Lewis would describe as the Inner Ring.

In other words, instead of playing the game, they'd butter up or chat up or otherwise familiarize themselves with the 'Messiah'. And while he might have been humble at first, it's plain Mr. Bills has changed.

Cent13

Clutch9800 wrote:I do know that I was offered an oppurtunity to "invest" in both BattleCorps and CGL, and if memory serves the buy in was paltry. I think around a thousand dollars. I didn't have any real heartburn with investing because I trusted (and must admit that I still trust) Randall Bills. I just couldn't get permission from my wife to shake loose the sheckles because we'd just had our third child and were moving from California to North Carolina.

That jibes with my own experience both locally in 2000 and with a shop/club down in California in the mid-1990s.

I still trust the local guys, just not as far as I might once have. Let them run their shop and sell me stuff, but that's about it.

Cent13

Clutch wrote:Anyway, long story short, I don't think "stock" was ever offered in IMR per-se, but could have been offered in BattleCorps and CGL.

That's... not possible. Except as fraud. CGL doesn't exist. It's just a publishing imprint. IMR is the company, CGL is their logo.

As it happens, more than a dozen people did take them up on owning a portion of IMR, and paid amounts of money ranging from a thousand dollars to twenty times that for the privilege. And according to the documents the received in exchange for money, they own part of IMR. The original creators of the company are apparently Loren & Heather Coleman, Randall & Tara Bills, and Phil DeLuca. The other 11 or 12 people bought in later on or took partial ownership in lieu of payment for services rendered.

Now, it has been stated by people involved in business that LLCs don't work like that. That you can't just buy in like it was a public company. I personally don't know. But to an extent I don't care. It's one of those "either lying then or lying now" cases. Either way: Loren and Randall are liars, I don't really need to understand the vagaries of corporate registration law in Washington State to know that.

-Username17

Clutch9800 wrote:Remember,

IMR existed well before Catalyst Game Labs did. Loren L. Coleman has published works in the Star Trek and Conan the Barbarian series, not to mention all of his BattleTech work.

It's very possible that IMR actually is wholly owned by Loren and Heather Coleman, and was originally conceived to manage the royalties from his published novels.

BattleCorps came out of IMR, and when FanPro tanked CGL came out of IMR.

I do know that I was offered an oppurtunity to "invest" in both BattleCorps and CGL, and if memory serves the buy in was paltry. I think around a thousand dollars. I didn't have any real heartburn with investing because I trusted (and must admit that I still trust) Randall Bills. I just couldn't get permission from my wife to shake loose the sheckles because we'd just had our third child and were moving from California to North Carolina.

Anyway, long story short, I don't think "stock" was ever offered in IMR per-se, but could have been offered in BattleCorps and CGL.

I must add the disclaimer that this is based on some pretty shaky memories of how things happened back then. I had a lot going on in my life, so your mileage may vary.

Clutch

Thanks for the information. I have wondered about this distinction between IMR and CGL, and whether that is the source of the confusion about ownership, and possibly misunderstandings between people about what actually was being sold (if they exist).

I believe that IMR was actually founded by five people: the Colemans, the Bills, and Philip DeLuca, but it was basically the creation of Loren Coleman and Randall Bills, initially to do BattleCorps.

This whole thing is like an onion...peel a layer and wind up crying at more greed and silliness. Cent, what you're saying jibes with the people I knew. I never met Randall or Loren...but I have met others..and yes, for the record folks, the Jihad left me cold.

As for Omi, I kinda wanted it to end with Victor retiring, taking Omi to some planet in the Davion outback along with the Comstar folks that had followed him and sliding into happy obscurity. The Jihad just smacks too much of 40K to be honest.

Panzerfaust 150 wrote:...As for Omi, I kinda wanted it to end with Victor retiring, taking Omi to some planet in the Davion outback along with the Comstar folks that had followed him and sliding into happy obscurity. The Jihad just smacks too much of 40K to be honest.

You hit the nail on the head. I was hoping for a happy ending. Some happy ending. The hero gets his reward and it's one most of us share a desire for - a nice wife, a happy family, someone who calls me 'Dad'. Everything else is a sowing of the ocean and a tilling of the sand unless it comes to something like that.

And that death pretty much rendered all the rest meaningless, at least for the hero and (through him) for me.

Yeah, I agree. As I pointed out to my son about seven years ago, there are no 'good guys' in WH40K. Every race is despicable, surviving for the sake of survival and nothing else. I chose to play Imperial Guard because, as I explained my son, 'they are the only ones I can see laying their arms down at the end of the day and going out for a beer".

But even they are wretched - and that's considered a good thing? Play without me.

FrankTrollman wrote:

Clutch wrote:Anyway, long story short, I don't think "stock" was ever offered in IMR per-se, but could have been offered in BattleCorps and CGL.

Either way: Loren and Randall are liars, I don't really need to understand the vagaries of corporate registration law in Washington State to know that.

-Username17

Thats one possibility. Its a remote one, considering that neither Randall nor Loren have made any public statements denying the ownership of others, and thus not clear what lie you are talking about. Aside from that, there are in fact an infinite number of explanations for the way the investment transaction might have been structured that would not constitute a "lie." Some of these alternate explanations may involve incompetence and/or bad business practice. Some of them may not.

1/Infinity = ?

Jumping from the slim evidence and gossip that exists on the issue to a claim of malfeasance is a leap of faith.

Taharqa wrote:Jumping from the slim evidence and gossip that exists on the issue to a claim of malfeasance is a leap of faith.

And surprisingly effective. Lookit all the little gribblies scurrying around now that that scurrilous Frank with his mean ol' axe turned their rock over!

And entertaining. Lookit all the sputtering going on, everything from 'He didn't say exactly that' to 'you haven't defined your terms, sir!' to 'smear him, smear him quick!'.

You wanna know why I don't give you any credibility, Tarq? It's because of one of the tricks you tried to pull a few pages back. 'When all else fails, discredit the source of the bad news'. Rather than find something solid that could counter Frank's statements (and it's hard - there is little to deny after you strip away his personal opinions), you impugned his reputation, his judgement and his motivation.

In other words, you were aiming a kick at Frank's goodies

That smacks of scoundrelism, and that, sir, is why I suspect you are in bed with - if not actually one of - the 'involved parties'.

Especially since you seem to think Internet Infidels-style discourse - arguing about arguing, for Pete's sake! - has any bearing on what's happening in this thread. That's the way the 'involved parties' think, too. Distract the rubes and while they're all watching the fight, we can do what we please

Wait and see.


Cent13

Centurion13 wrote: You wanna know why I don't give you any credibility, Tarq? It's because of one of the tricks you tried to pull a few pages back. 'When all else fails, discredit the source of the bad news'. Rather than find something solid that could counter Frank's statements (and it's hard - there is little to deny after you strip away his personal opinions), you impugned his reputation, his judgement and his motivation.

I am not saying Frank's claims are wrong. Several of his claims have actually turned out to be true. I just consider them as the point of view of someone who has an agenda, and therefore I need to take that into consideration in making my own judgements. Call it "thinking for yourself," if you like.

That smacks of scoundrelism, and that, sir, is why I suspect you are in bed with - if not actually one of - the 'involved parties'.

I am not in bed with Loren Coleman, nor Randall Bills, which I am sure their wives appreciate. Of course, I appreciate it too. Come to think of it, I can't think of anyone at CGL I would want to be in bed with, which should not be taken as an insult. As to your suspicion of me being one of the 'involved parties,' I really would like to hear more about that theory. Which one, do you think? Do you think I just stole Taharqa's identity from the battletech boards/his blog, or do you think I have been cultivating that identity for years now, as a sort of a backup plan so I could go flame some haters on the internet from a position of anonymity?

Especially since you seem to think Internet Infidels-style discourse - arguing about arguing, for Pete's sake! - has any bearing on what's happening in this thread. That's the way the 'involved parties' think, too. Distract the rubes and while they're all watching the fight, we can do what we please

Why do you keep bringing up the Internet Infidels? I mean aside from indirectly indicating your religious affiliation. I mean your incessant references to the "Inner Ring" are bad enough.

Tarq, you've said repeatedly that there are multiple owners.

It's also been said that the company is not registered to the state that way.

You've avoided this and other questions repeatedly to be pedantic about little errors (like Bill vs Bull, Wildfire vs Topps).

Why?

-Crissa

Taharqa wrote:Why do you keep bringing up the Internet Infidels? I mean aside from indirectly indicating your religious affiliation. I mean your incessant references to the "Inner Ring" are bad enough.

Don't leave the heavy lifting for me, Tarq. Go look at the site for yourself. It's stale. Boring. Flame wars breaking out all over the place over as swollen egos collide - and no one outside the fifteen regulars cares.

The language they use is exactly like yours. The style of argument, of argument about argument, about straw men, ad nauseum, it's not particular to that site, but doggoned if they don't personify it.

The more outraged they are, the bigger the words get. And you know, it has nothing whatever to do with religious affiliation. A while back in another universe you - or someone like you - was accusing me of following the Cult of Frank. I don't even like Frank, but I listen to what he says. Am I his devoted follower? Don't be a silly git.

You think I have a problem with II because I am Christian? Hmmm... no. And there you go again, sliding in for a shot at a man's goolies. After all, if you can ascribe my point of view to something besides sweet reason (for example, being a religious nut), that undermines everything I have said or will say. Calls my motivation into question. After all, if I were pursuing the truth pure and simple - you know, like you - I could not help but come to the same conclusions as you.

Since I don't, something else must be at work. Right? And that simply tarnishes, taints every point I make. "Of course he would say that - he's got religion and we all know how irrational that bunch is".

Save it.

Cent13

Crissa wrote:Tarq, you've said repeatedly that there are multiple owners.

It's also been said that the company is not registered to the state that way.

You've avoided this and other questions repeatedly to be pedantic about little errors (like Bill vs Bull, Wildfire vs Topps).

Why?

-Crissa

Geez, Crissa, I finally got around to answering the questions you kept bugging me to answer and all you got is more. Is my work never done?

Is this what you are referring to? Do you see the mention of the either the word "owner" or "member" there?

Edit: I should note that even if it were to list owners, it wouldn't resolve any issues. It is simply speculation that investment in CGL returned an ownership stake. There could be any number of terms governing people's investments in CGL that would not make them owners that would in no way indicate fraud.

Centurion13 wrote: The language they use is exactly like yours. The style of argument, of argument about argument, about straw men, ad nauseum, it's not particular to that site, but doggoned if they don't personify it.
Cent13

I don't know how to break it to you, but I am simply not capable of filling the shoes of all the people that you are pissed off about, whether they be Loren Coleman or the Internet Infidels. Find some other applicant, please.

Taharqa wrote:

Centurion13 wrote: The language they use is exactly like yours. The style of argument, of argument about argument, about straw men, ad nauseum, it's not particular to that site, but doggoned if they don't personify it.
Cent13

I don't know how to break it to you, but I am simply not capable of filling the shoes of all the people that you are pissed off about, whether they be Loren Coleman or the Internet Infidels. Find some other applicant, please.

Sure you know how to break it to me. You just did. This is a perfect example of making with the passive-aggressive weasel words.

And another shot at the goolies.

Rather than accept my words at face value and rebut them - or accept them and move on, you boldly suggest I am 'pissed off' at someone. And of course, having established that I am angry, my reason is compromised.

I mean, if it wasn't, I would agree with you, right? Since I don't, I must be 'pissed off' at someone. It couldn't be you're wrong, not even a little bit.

What's next, Tarq? You gonna tell me I'm 'not listening'? Every time you try this, it not only makes you look sillier, it discredits you.

Quit while you are ahead.

Cent13

Centurion13 wrote: Rather than accept my words at face value and rebut them - or accept them and move on, you boldly suggest I am 'pissed off' at someone. And of course, having established that I am angry, my reason is compromised.

Yeah, pretty much. I mean to be fair, you haven't provided much in the way to accept or rebut, besides saying you don't believe me (which ignores the fact that I have actually not been making any statements requiring belief or disbelief) and talking a lot about things like Inner Rings, Internet Infidels, and goolies (what are those anyway, or do I want to know?). Maybe goolies should be capitalized, I don't know, but its not really the point. The point is that you have aptly demonstrated in a compromised ability to reason. I will avoid delving into the more ridiculous things you have said on your blog, because I don't want to bring in outside arguments, but one only has to scroll back up to your various rants right on this thread to see that you are practically frothing at the mouth.

FrankTrollman wrote:Loren Coleman and Randall Bills really do feel that they "are" Battletech. Randall Bills said that he was the "Messiah of Battletech" and that without his approval, fans of the world and game would abandon it as apostate and the entire franchise would crash and burn. I do not believe this is the case, but I do believe that if, as is very likely, those guys get pried free from Battletech, that he will carry through on his threat and tell everyone that the new Battletech "does not count" and is made by people who have no business doing so. He has something of a cult of personality over on the Battletech side, though I suspect nowhere near as much as he thinks he does.

That being said, I doubt that anyone making new material in 8 months is going to want to touch the direct creations of Randall or Loren except possibly to have them shot in the face by new characters to show how badass they are.

The best thing they could do is reset the timeline back to Grave Covenant and do the whole thing after that RIGHT.

Also, nobody in Germany ( at least in the north, where the mayority of the German MechForce members are ) gives a shit or knows much of anything about Randall Bills.

Panzerfaust 150 wrote:As for Omi, I kinda wanted it to end with Victor retiring, taking Omi to some planet in the Davion outback along with the Comstar folks that had followed him and sliding into happy obscurity. The Jihad just smacks too much of 40K to be honest.

Victor and Omi retiring would have been a very nice finish for their stories.

And the fucking Jihad is the second most idiotic plot development in BattleTech fiction, after Victors other sister handing over the Davion half of the FedCom to Katherine, because there were "bad polls".

Where the hell did Word of Blake get fleets upon fleets of Warships from? Where did the get tons of regiments of Mechs from? Were all the intelligence assets of the different factions putting their thumbs in their asses for several years?