The Shadowrun Situation

[Crissa]

One of the good things about bankruptcy court is that it can out and out tear open the books and send summons and search warrants if the judge wants.

So we could find out how much IMR owes its license owners are actually owed by finding out how many books were printed, and how many books they have on hand. Any missing are due royalties.

An internal audit should have a sheet of paper with several notations 'ordered X books, Y were unfit for publication or lost in transit, Z are remaining. X - ( Y + Z ) * royalty in license page blah is due. This much has been paid. The end.

If that page isn't there, the judge is going to be rather unhappy.

-Crissa

[Username17]

You've also not addressed the unsubtle suggestion that Stansel-Garner has been your primary source of insider information for the last few months. That's probably worth a line or two, don't you think?

Fair enough:

I have received information indirectly from David Stansel-Garner several times. Though I'm sure he knows about it now, he was not aware that I was going to be a recipient of such when he gave it to a third party. David Stansel-Garner's statements were among the statements I used to piece together my interpretation of events for the original "probably the end" post. But they were not given to me by him for the purpose of me making such a post, nor did David Stansel-Garner, Jenifer Harding, Stephen McQuillan, or either of the Knudson's ever ask me to post anything or give me any documents with the understanding that I would post or paraphrase any of them.

Since the situation has developed, I have sent and received information requests from David Stansel-Garner's father in reference to the proceedings of the court case. But I did not contact Paul Stansel until the court case began. I contacted him as an investigator, nothing more.

All of that information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, and I would hold to it in a court of law without fear of perjuring myself.

-Username17

[Asbestos Underwear]

One side hasn't co-mingled money, hasn't a history of not paying freelancers, hasn't actually given any cause to distrust them.

The other side on the other hand has all that.

You can speculate about their motives, but the facts don't look well for IRM.

David Stansel-Garner was the operations manager for IMR and presumably had knowledge that freelancers weren't being paid. His hands, while not soaked in blood like LLC's, certainly aren't clean. He was apparently ok with folks going unpaid for a couple years before deciding he had ethical issues and walking out. I know you prefer to see the world in black and white world, but it's really shades of grey.

[Taharqa]

But most importantly, because none of those people did anything to Loren's Financial Records, because he never let anyone see them. And of course, there's the minor fact that none of those people created the financial shenanigans in the first place.
-Username17

Those are red herrings, Frank. I am certainly not buying into a conspiracy theory, and I am quite sure in any case that Loren's actions were the catalyst (heh) of all of this. But try this plausible speculation, stripped of the mythical overtones of LaughingMan:

[speculation]
It becomes clear to the people managing the daily business (DSG and Jen Harding, for example) that something is off at IMR/CGL. Digging further, they discover the fucking mess that Loren has created with the finances. At first, on the suggestion of Randall, they try working with Loren to fix the mess but for reasons that we are not privy, they eventually say "fuck this" and decide to leave. Now, who knows the timing here. Maybe, they decided "fuck this, we can do better on our own" and left with the plan to form their own company or maybe they just said "fuck this" and the idea of forming a different company only evolved later.

What better target for this new company than the very license that these folks had been working with already? After all, they already had all the connections (like Ancient History, as you point out) and know-how. And the license was clearly vulnerable, due to "shenanigans." So why not put together a bid and try to steal the license, which in their mind might only seem like justice. So, you start working your connections, freelancers and other employees over at CGL, trying to lure them away (remember how I said human capital poaching was a lot messier in real life than in theory?). You talk Steve McQ into coming over, you get some freelancers (who are pissed about the situation) over on your team and now you have some critical mass.

But why not hedge your bets? Two additional strategies might work here. First, sullying CGL's reputation might grease the wheels a bit, so lets feed some information to the one man who is up for the task (Frank Trollman). Second, start a bankruptcy suit. Asbestos Underwear's query here is spot on. The only visible connection between two of the claimants is David Stansel-Garner. Who was in a position to link together the necessary three creditors that the suit required?
[/speculation]

Let me be clear this is speculative, but I am just trying to offer a version of the story previously presented here which has no conspiracy elements, and, from a certain point of view, is perfectly justifiable.

EDIT: just to be clear, because I know people will jump all over this, the version I have outlined above is almost certainly incorrect in at least some (perhaps most) of the particulars. That is the nature of speculation: given the plausible number of explanations for a thing, whichever story you pick is likely to be the wrong one. The point of the story is to demonstrate precisely that lots of plausible stories could be cooked up for explaining the Fucking Mess, and thus caution is warranted.

[Surgo]

Man, this thread moved really fast before I could reply to this.

Also, Shadowrun bringing in a million a year is completely laughable. If you're going to make shit up, at least make it up so it's believable.

That part is sort of almost true in a way. IMR in total has either $1.8 million or $1.1 million in yearly sales depending on whether you believe Loren Coleman to his company or Loren Coleman to the bankruptcy court. But that's gross, not net. It's really not an apples to apples comparison. You're talking about a company with huge expenses that deals in licensed products that they owe royalties on with more than a dozen owners. One man's share of that isn't a million dollars or anything particularly close.

Yeah, that's perfectly fair, and if he just said "the company has 1.1 million in sales" or whatever I'd be fine. But I think it's both disingenuous and lying to throw out the 1.1 million figure, which is unrelated to actual profit, and then say "but this guy offered him 50k for it" as if it's an insult -- because, well, that has nothing to do with profit.

So in conclusion, LaughingMan can go fuck himself.

[Asbestos Underwear]

You've also not addressed the unsubtle suggestion that Stansel-Garner has been your primary source of insider information for the last few months. That's probably worth a line or two, don't you think?

Fair enough:

I have received information indirectly from David Stansel-Garner several times. Though I'm sure he knows about it now, he was not aware that I was going to be a recipient of such when he gave it to a third party. David Stansel-Garner's statements were among the statements I used to piece together my interpretation of events for the original "probably the end" post. But they were not given to me by him for the purpose of me making such a post, nor did David Stansel-Garner, Jenifer Harding, Stephen McQuillan, or either of the Knudson's ever ask me to post anything or give me any documents with the understanding that I would post or paraphrase any of them.

Since the situation has developed, I have sent and received information requests from David Stansel-Garner's father in reference to the proceedings of the court case. But I did not contact Paul Stansel until the court case began. I contacted him as an investigator, nothing more.

All of that information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, and I would hold to it in a court of law without fear of perjuring myself.

-Username17

Unlike some, I think you're an honest guy and appreciate the forthright answer. Have your discussions with the Sr. Stansel clarified his link to Wilfire? At first blush, it seems unlikely that a small WA based gaming firm independently discovered an MA resident creditor of IMR's. The inference that David Stansel-Garner was somehow involved, either by telling Wildfire about his dad or vice versa, isn't unreasonable. May be wrong, but it's an easy explanation and those often have merit.

I guess my real question is whether Wildfire is being used as a cat's paw or if they initiated the bankruptcy action without any third party instigation. Petitioning parties lose in involuntary proceedings more often than not and frequently end up footing costs and eating damages. It's a bold, high risk move. Obviously who ends up holding the licenses will determine IMR's potential for solvency, but if Wildfire's petition is ultimately denied it will probably destroy them. From an outsider's perspective, it makes no tactical sense. Just waiting for the license to be denied and lining up for leftovers in a straight bankruptcy with everyone else is much safer.

[Edited once to expand, once for typos. I fail internet.]

[Username17]

One side hasn't co-mingled money, hasn't a history of not paying freelancers, hasn't actually given any cause to distrust them.

The other side on the other hand has all that.

You can speculate about their motives, but the facts don't look well for IRM.

David Stansel-Garner was the operations manager for IMR and presumably had knowledge that freelancers weren't being paid. His hands, while not soaked in blood like LLC's, certainly aren't clean. He was apparently ok with folks going unpaid for a couple years before deciding he had ethical issues and walking out. I know you prefer to see the world in black and white world, but it's really shades of grey.

This is all true. David Stansel-Garner was raising a stink about possible financial irregularities back in 2008 at least, and maybe before that. He got some explanations from Loren, some of which I am aware of and some of which I am not. And whether he accepted the explanations or not, he certainly didn't fight for financial transparency as hard as he could have.

Similarly though, more than one Dev has argued for a freelancer to get their damn paycheck only to get the brush off by Loren Coleman. Hell, Devs have stood there and watched Loren sign a check, only to have that check sit around unmailed for weeks or even get scrapped entirely (to be either rewritten later or not).

Bottom line: I have no particular reason to be happy with David Stansel-Garner, but I have no reason to point any specific finger at him either. I do not have any evidence of David Stansel-Garner having done anything wrong. I do have evidence of Loren Coleman and Randall Bills having done things that are wrong.

If I was going to condemn everyone who bought Loren's shit for more than a few months, I'd be demanding that pretty much everyone get kicked off of Shadowrun. Getting conned is not a crime.

-Username17

[Korwin]

So why not put together a bid and try to steal the license, which in their mind might only seem like justice.

Stopped reading here. They cant steal the License from CGL, because CGL doesnt own it...

[cthulhu]

But most importantly, because none of those people did anything to Loren's Financial Records, because he never let anyone see them. And of course, there's the minor fact that none of those people created the financial shenanigans in the first place.
-Username17

Those are red herrings, Frank. I am certainly not buying into a conspiracy theory, and I am quite sure in any case that Loren's actions were the catalyst (heh) of all of this. But try this plausible speculation, stripped of the mythical overtones of LaughingMan:

[speculation]
It becomes clear to the people managing the daily business (DSG and Jen Harding, for example) that something is off at IMR/CGL. Digging further, they discover the fucking mess that Loren has created with the finances. At first, on the suggestion of Randall, they try working with Loren to fix the mess but for reasons that we are not privy, they eventually say "fuck this" and decide to leave. Now, who knows the timing here. Maybe, they decided "fuck this, we can do better on our own" and left with the plan to form their own company or maybe they just said "fuck this" and the idea of forming a different company only evolved later.

What better target for this new company than the very license that these folks had been working with already? After all, they already had all the connections (like Ancient History, as you point out) and know-how. And the license was clearly vulnerable, due to "shenanigans." So why not put together a bid and try to steal the license, which in their mind might only seem like justice. So, you start working your connections, freelancers and other employees over at CGL, trying to lure them away (remember how I said human capital poaching was a lot messier in real life than in theory?). You talk Steve McQ into coming over, you get some freelancers (who are pissed about the situation) over on your team and now you have some critical mass.

But why not hedge your bets? Two additional strategies might work here. First, sullying CGL's reputation might grease the wheels a bit, so lets feed some information to the one man who is up for the task (Frank Trollman). Second, start a bankruptcy suit. Asbestos Underwear's query here is spot on. The only visible connection between two of the claimants is David Stansel-Garner. Who was in a position to link together the necessary three creditors that the suit required?
[/speculation]

Let me be clear this is speculative, but I am just trying to offer a version of the story previously presented here which has no conspiracy elements, and, from a certain point of view, is perfectly justifiable.

This happens in professional firms every 5 seconds - what make your post retarded is this

One of these two things is true

A) Loren Coleman is a fraudster, thus they did (atleast in part), as claimed, quit for ethical reasons. Setting up a new company is reasonable, this is what they do for a living. The license is vulnerable, but you don't smear the brand in public, that won't move the license. You'd just go direct to Topps with everything you know, like 'these guys have defrauded you out of $XXX in royalties - and we know this as we managed for them, protested the actions then resigned over them. Give us the license, we promise not to defraud you, honest.'

B) Loren Coleman is not a fraudster, thus these guys run their spoiler campaign, and when Topps checks the claims and discovers they are 100% full of shit, they then burn every chance of topps given them the license because topps is having shit thrown at the brand by a bunch of idiots. So their 'scheme' would be comedy retarded.

So why would they quit the company for no reason?

Basically if you agree with your line of reasoning that this is some consipracy to strip IMR of the license, Coleman has to be a fraudster. The only reason to quit and found your own company and try and contest the license is if you want to stay in the RPG business, but you don't want to work for a known fraudster.

As it seems unreasonable to expect people to work for a fraudster, and it seems reasonable to want to stay in your industry, hey if it is a conspiracy good fucking luck to them.

If he isn't a fraudster, there is no risk to the license, so the 'plan' would be fucking stupid.

[Taharqa]

So why not put together a bid and try to steal the license, which in their mind might only seem like justice.

Stopped reading here. They cant steal the License from CGL, because CGL doesnt own it...

Stop being pedantic. I was just pointing out that from a certain point of view it might seem like ironic justice.

[violence in the media]

[speculation]
It becomes clear to the people managing the daily business (DSG and Jen Harding, for example) that something is off at IMR/CGL. Digging further, they discover the fucking mess that Loren has created with the finances. At first, on the suggestion of Randall, they try working with Loren to fix the mess but for reasons that we are not privy, they eventually say "fuck this" and decide to leave. Now, who knows the timing here. Maybe, they decided "fuck this, we can do better on our own" and left with the plan to form their own company or maybe they just said "fuck this" and the idea of forming a different company only evolved later.

What better target for this new company than the very license that these folks had been working with already? After all, they already had all the connections (like Ancient History, as you point out) and know-how. And the license was clearly vulnerable, due to "shenanigans." So why not put together a bid and try to steal the license, which in their mind might only seem like justice. So, you start working your connections, freelancers and other employees over at CGL, trying to lure them away (remember how I said human capital poaching was a lot messier in real life than in theory?). You talk Steve McQ into coming over, you get some freelancers (who are pissed about the situation) over on your team and now you have some critical mass.

But why not hedge your bets? Two additional strategies might work here. First, sullying CGL's reputation might grease the wheels a bit, so lets feed some information to the one man who is up for the task (Frank Trollman). Second, start a bankruptcy suit. Asbestos Underwear's query here is spot on. The only visible connection between two of the claimants is David Stansel-Garner. Who was in a position to link together the necessary three creditors that the suit required?
[/speculation]

Echoing cthulhu's sentiment: So what?

If Loren Coleman is engaged in actual wrongdoing, why should anyone care that the people attempting to take him to task for it are doing so largely for their own benefit? If they're not framing him, explain to me why bankrupting that company and/or getting Coleman set to federal pound-you-in-the-ass prison is a bad thing?

[Clutch9800]

Guy's!

Spilt milk.

[Korwin]

So why not put together a bid and try to steal the license, which in their mind might only seem like justice.

Stopped reading here. They cant steal the License from CGL, because CGL doesnt own it...

Stop being pedantic. I was just pointing out that from a certain point of view it might seem like ironic justice.

For someone who said, whatever the fuck you said, dont want to reread the last five pages... You turn around fast as soon as someone other is to be smeared.

Thats what I find ironic in your post.

[cthulhu]

If they're not framing him, the company is already insolvent. Trading while insolvent is an actual crime in australia, no idea about the US.

That's the point. If the license is actually up for grabs, Coleman is a fraudster and IMR LLC is DEAD. It might still be twitching, and people may be hammering at the horse, but if the allegations are true, the company is fucked. Again, if it was Australia there could be actual criminal charges (unlikely against a small company, but it's not a joking offense). The veil would certainly be pieced and owners would have their personal possessions forfeited in the bankruptcy proceedings.

Which means that the 'conspiracy' (ho ho) is people made unemployed by their employer becoming bankrupt and going to jail! I'm a management consultant by trade - if the company I currently work for went bust, I would certainly get the team back together and pitch at our core clients. We'd probably get the work too. But that would hardly be a conspiracy.

[Username17]

Unlike some, I think you're an honest guy and appreciate the forthright answer. Have your discussions with the Sr. Stansel clarified the Wilfire link? At first blush, it seems unlikely that a small WA based gaming firm to independently discovered an MA resident creditor of IMR's and the suggestion that David Stansel-Garner was somehow involved, either by telling Wildfire about his dad or vice versa, strikes me as fair. The real question is whether Wildfire is being used as a cat's paw, or if they initiated the bankruptcy action without third party instigation.

From my discussions with Paul Stansel, it seems that as an investor he knows lots of the creditors of IMR. It is also clear from those conversations that he does not know all of them. Several creditors are apparently on the fence as to whether it is best to join the lawsuit or not, and because IMR owes money to more than 12 entities, the lawsuit requires 3 creditors to sign on.

I think WildFire signed on because they really need the money. Their website was straight down for a while today because their own payments were late. According to WildFire (and I believe them in this), IMR owes them about thirty seven thousand dollars. That's actually a lot of money for a company that small.

However, I genuinely don't think it matters whether WildFire contacted Paul Stansel or Paul Stansel contacted WildFire. I literally never asked. There are a number of creditors who are in touch with one another, and a number of others who don't know each other or what is going on. I was able to ascertain that Paul Stansel would like to contact other creditors he hasn't yet, if nothing else than to compare stories. It seems very few people got the same story about anything from Loren Coleman. Like how KC claimed that he hadn't received tax documents, and other "owners" claimed that they had.

The whole "cat's paw" question in short is misleading. You can't launch a petition for debt relief against IMR until you get three of the creditors to agree to launch it. Now that it has been launched, other creditors can sign on. My personal reading is that I think they should, since I think the more creditors join the petition the faster the case will be resolved and the faster they can get paid.

-Username17

[Taharqa]

Echoing cthulhu's sentiment: So what?

If Loren Coleman is engaged in actual wrongdoing, why should anyone care that the people attempting to take him to task for it are doing so largely for their own benefit? If they're not framing him, explain to me why bankrupting that company and/or getting Coleman set to federal pound-you-in-the-ass prison is a bad thing?

I realize that from your simplistic worldview, if I am not with you then I am against you, but that is not in fact the case. I am not, nor have I ever, defended Loren Coleman. In fact, I tried to pitch that speculation in a way that was fairly sympathetic to folks like DSG and Jen Harding. I don't know DSG, but I have heard from numerous sources that he is a real stand-up guy, and I have no reason to not believe that. Given what we know, it certainly seems fair for a lot of people (DSG, Jen, freelancers, etc.) to be rightfully pissed at IMR/CGL, if for no other reason than many of them haven't been getting paid. Nobody disputes that a Colossal Fuck Up took place. But we basically at this point have two sides. CGL/IMR says "we fucked up, we are sorry, and we are trying to make things right and move forward." A variety of other people (Frank being the most notable) are saying "No, they fucked up and they haven't changed a bit, and justice dictates that they go down and the licenses be handed over to someone else." Deciding between those two stories is really what is up for grabs in the "court of public opinion." My own personal position is that I am suspicious of everyone's claims, if for no other reason than a shitstorm like this generates lots of bad feelings, and when bad blood is involved hyperbole and exaggeration become the order of the day. But, I also think it is perfectly reasonable to wonder whether personal self-interest is involved here as well.

[Fuchs]

After someone did stuff like Coleman did for three years it takes more than a "I am sorry, I'll not do it again" for me to trust him. Especially if it sounds like "I am sorry I'll got caught, I'll not do it again".

[violence in the media]

If there's no disagreement that IMR/CGL fucked up, why should they retain the license, regardless of whatever else happens?

Let's face it, this isn't exactly the Manhattan Project and no one involved is indispensible to the respective settings--let someone else, not in the process of "fucking up" have a go at it.

[BishopMcQ]

Alright boys and girls, I’ve had a lot of long talks with a lot of people. Yes, there are arguments on both sides and to put it bluntly--both sides are acting like jackasses. That said, let’s take it from the top.

I have been writing for CGL since the launch of the SRM 02 Missions campaign, after being recruited by John Dunn. I wrote several Missions and jumped in as a pinch hitter several times when project slipped. That experience is what brought me into the full freelancer team in the summer of 2006. I worked on several projects, with small sections and lurked in the freelancer forums. There were a lot of problems with payment--both in the Missions team with getting comp copies sent out in a timely fashion and as a freelancer. (To give you an example, I was paid in February of this year for a contract that was due in 2008.)

Many of the freelancers talk with each other frequently, and that builds friendships. We see each other at conventions and hang out, which strengthens those bonds. I visited friends in Seattle in late December of 2009 and January 2010 as I was in the process of moving up to Seattle. During those visits, several very loud discussions happened in front of me. Heather and Loren Coleman met with David Stansel-Garner, and the three of them had a knockdown-dragout fight in front of me over the financial irregularities. After it was clear that none of them had any intention of asking me to leave while they aired their dirty laundry, I excused myself. Three rooms away through closed doors, I could still hear them. (I brought these concerns up to Jason Hardy in an email on January 6th.)

Around this same time, after hearing that several of the authors on projects that I had worked on were pulling copyright to get paid, I stood in solidarity with them and withheld my copyright.

It became clear to me that for IMR/CGL to continue to thrive, they needed to completely restructure their business. Jennifer Harding had come in and was laying down the groundwork for a financial reset. I was in the market for a job, so I wrote a job description and sold myself to the Director’s team--Randall Bills, Brent Evans, Loren Coleman, and David Stansel-Garner. To stay afloat, they were going to need to have someone who stepped away from the creative process which they were entangled in and managed the calendar and timelines.

After David and Jennifer left, I stayed on because I had a job to do. That week, Loren, Randall, and Brent sat down with me and asked straight out if I was able to stay on with them or if my personal relationships would get in the way. When I am at work, I am working--at home, I am relaxing. The two spheres should never interact. Throughout my professional career, I have had colleagues and professional acquaintances that worked for competitors in the industry.

To be crystal clear--CGL knew that I was an author and acknowledged my right to pull copyright, without it impacting my professional integrity. CGL knew that I had friendships with people that had chosen to leave the company, without it impacting my professional integrity. When I left CGL, I had been offered a project management job--the career I had before coming to CGL. When I left CGL, I continued to assist the director team with items for their internal systems for 30 days afterwards and gave a complete passdown of all projects, verbally and in writing to all of the necessary officers.

To call me a spy is degrading. I have kept my peace and not shared all of the information that I have--not because of an NDA (as I do not have one) but because of my own choice to not drag the professional part of my life into the personal (my time on the forums). Please do not imagine to understand my choices or my actions.

[LaughingMan2070]

Which means that "laughingman" is exactly what he appears to be: a cowardly sock puppet here to spread vicious lies for the explicit and whole purpose of casting aspersions on people who are trying to get what is legally owed them for work they have already performed. He is in short: a very bad person who has no honor or integrity.

-Username17

Awww Frankie no love for me? A bright guy like you must have seen he wasn't in some noble quest but in the middle of a power struggle. Come on you are pointing at Tito to pave the way for Milosevic to be the savior.

You can't really be that simple minded that you think there are just two sides to all this? You don't really think that WW2 had just two sides do you?

You might notice that the three Sandstorm folks are all paid up. Everyone else? Not so much. Though good to see Jen finally come out in the open about her employer.

[BishopMcQ]

LaughingMan--To be clear, CGL is not current on their payments to me.

[Fuchs]

Though good to see Jen finally come out in the open about her employer.

Giving your name would be good too, if you rant about others "coming out in the open".

[martian_bob]

You might notice that the three Sandstorm folks are all paid up.

The inference here is that since they're paid up, their only reason for continuing to bring whatever force they have to bear on IMR is for this apparent power struggle, yes? Otherwise, if this were just about money, they'd be done kvetching?

I don't buy that for a second. People don't get into the games industry for money (aside from Loren, apparently), they get in to it because they love it. If I saw something I loved going down in flames because of poor management, and I had the wherewithal to do so, I'd start my own company and take whoever wanted to come with too.

The power struggle story, to my mind, sounds like an unnecessary multiplication of entities. I'd be willing to believe that DSG came to Loren at one point and said "Yo! You're driving this company into the ground, it's going to crash and burn, I'll give you $50k to take off so those of us who aren't thieves can try to put this train back on the track," but that doesn't sound like a power struggle as much as it sounds like someone trying some damage control.

[Crissa]

Yes, there are arguments on both sides and to put it bluntly--both sides are acting like jackasses.

This is a bullshit argument. Equivalency does not work here. Republicans are more corrupt than Democrats, IMR is corrupt and there's no such evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of DSG or it's employees before they were employed by them.

-Crissa

[BishopMcQ]

Crissa--That both sides are acting that way isn't an argument, it's a perspective. I personally feel that there have been mistakes made on both sides in the handling of this problem since it became public. I'm not commenting on the actions they've taken in private, but the forum posts and press releases have made both sides look bad. If one side is looking worse than the other, that depends on which side you believe and it isn't my place to tell you what to believe.

Each side has their own arguments about what actions one or the other may have taken--Truth is a three-edged sword though.