dj_convoy Posted December 23, 2016 Share Posted December 23, 2016 The Wiki part pertaining to Kennedy should therefore say that the molds ultimately ended up with the owner of AtariAge. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andromeda Stardust Posted December 23, 2016 Share Posted December 23, 2016 One of the things I hate is that MK is mentioned in the wikipedia Atari Jag page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_Jaguar as the last purchaser of the molds, I'd rather have it edited and decouple the RVGS/CC fiasco from the Jag own misfortunes. I don't think it matters for any other console who owns the molds anyway. Albert has the molds. I think Jag homebrew has a clear shell option now. So far he has done nothing with the console shells that I know of. Unfortunately in this case, Archive.org has a backup copy of the RetroVGS website with a reference to obtaining those molds. Without a reference, the entire paragraph on Wikipedia could be challenged as unverified and thus get deleted, but I suppose since there is a reference, it must remain. Perhaps Wikipedia can be amended with that after the Coleco Chameleon failure, the molds now are owned by Albert of AtariAge, IIRC? At least it would make the Jaguar article end in a major key. The two links on "See also" however are entirely invalid. The Contiki operating system is not exclusive to the Jaguar and actually originally was developed for 6502 based systems (then ported to various embedded devices) and the RetroVGS only had the form factor in common with the Jaguar. Wikipedia has way too many revert and delete police nowadays. Most anonymous edits get reverted immediately even if you cite a source. It's good for preventing vandalism, bad for people who have something generally important to say but haven't registered. The Wiki part pertaining to Kennedy should therefore say that the molds ultimately ended up with the owner of AtariAge. Yes. I wonder if online forum posts are acceptable as a source for Wikipedia articles??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flojomojo Posted December 23, 2016 Share Posted December 23, 2016 Sure they are. Anything Albert posts on AtariAge is infinitely more reputable than anything on an archived RetroVGS page full of lies. But who remembers where in this gargantuan thread was it mentioned that Albert now has the molds? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godslabrat Posted December 23, 2016 Share Posted December 23, 2016 Sure they are. Anything Albert posts on AtariAge is infinitely more reputable than anything on an archived RetroVGS page full of lies. But who remembers where in this gargantuan thread was it mentioned that Albert now has the molds? That's an easy one. It's the day after Mike came back to "clear his good name". 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toiletunes Posted December 23, 2016 Share Posted December 23, 2016 which time? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlsson Posted December 23, 2016 Share Posted December 23, 2016 (edited) I believe this would be the canonical reference: http://atariage.com/forums/topic/247145-coleco-chameleon-hardware-speculations/page-318?do=findComment&comment=3484385 By the way, 7 of the 20 most liked messages ever on AtariAge stem from this single thread! It is almost like if there was one single thread that defines the AtariAge community, it is this one! Edited December 23, 2016 by carlsson 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flojomojo Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 Awesome. I trimmed the self-serving ego crap about MK being the Kickstarter of a magazine and founder of an auction site, but left in the bit about how buying the molds were the thing that made the RetroVGS possible (as if), and added that they were purchased by Albert. I'll source it with the link to the relevant forum posts unless someone else beats me to it. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godslabrat Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 Actually, buying the molds was what made the RVGS possible. If Mike never got those, I doubt he would have ever embarked on the venture in the first place. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted December 24, 2016 Author Share Posted December 24, 2016 Awesome. I trimmed the self-serving ego crap about MK being the Kickstarter of a magazine and founder of an auction site, but left in the bit about how buying the molds were the thing that made the RetroVGS possible (as if), and added that they were purchased by Albert. I'll source it with the link to the relevant forum posts unless someone else beats me to it.Like it a lot I did. The force powerful is on Flojo Actually, buying the molds was what made the RVGS possible. If Mike never got those, I doubt he would have ever embarked on the venture in the first place.Naahhhh, he would have waited for someone telling him that he could have used cardboards for the case prototype using the Google VR as an example .... wait ... nevermind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted December 24, 2016 Author Share Posted December 24, 2016 [note to self: "use the multiquote, Luke"] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toiletunes Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 I think we all can debate what crowdfunding really means, but in a way, essentially, in essence, is patreon Really crowdfunding? That was not my intention, and we all should agree that is stronger than ever. As to the naysayers, I humbly ask you to give it a check, err, chance. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godslabrat Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 (edited) I have nothing against Patreon specifically. Lord knows there have been plenty of unworthy kickstarters, and indiegogo is so scary I won't even touch it. Crowdfunding attracts scammers, but that doesn't by itself make crowdfunding a bad thing. No need to single Patreon out excuse it's been misused in the past-- they all have. I think what we're observing is that it's the only tool that Mike Kennedy knows how to use. Mike is looking for the get-rich-quick scheme, and loves the validation that comes from crowdfunding. Not having to risk his own neck is certainly a nice bonus. Growing his own business over a long time and making it sustainable just doesn't seem to occur to him. Edited December 24, 2016 by godslabrat 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawnphase Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 skip to 2:40. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andromeda Stardust Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 I only use Patreon to send my $3 contribution per month to help pay server fees as a NintendoAge subscriber. Screw sending $$$ to random people on the Internet begging for beer money. That's just lame. I don't get a ton of views on my videos but none of my YT content is monetized. And if millions of people watched my videos instead of hundreds, I still wouldn't monetize my crap. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawnphase Posted December 25, 2016 Share Posted December 25, 2016 you are literally paying someone else to pay someone else when you use patreon tho. when you use patreon, you ARE sending $$$ to random people on the internet begging for beer money. http://www.aux.tv/2014/12/sob-story-from-band-that-lost-11000-was-actually-a-marketing-stunt/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+GoldLeader Posted December 25, 2016 Share Posted December 25, 2016 Myself I've only ever supported 2 things via crowdfunding (KS and Indiegogo)... And they were: An Edladdin ColecoVision Joystick, and a LTD Edition Blue cart of (a new game) Justice Beaver for SNES... Still glad I supported both and no worries! I will admit though, it is like a spin on the roulette wheel...You put your money on and kiss it goodbye, but then there's the chance you'll win... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+GoldLeader Posted December 25, 2016 Share Posted December 25, 2016 BTW I still think of this thread as the gift that keeps on giving... Merry Christmas!! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keatah Posted December 25, 2016 Share Posted December 25, 2016 Someone come shoot me if I ever say I funded a kickstarter or sent money to patreon. Rich millionaires crying for the loss of pocket change. Boohoo. bunch pompousalamasses.. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaybird3rd Posted December 26, 2016 Share Posted December 26, 2016 The original Get Rich Slow scheme. I think he might have peaked. I think so, too. He was at 77 patrons and $416 three days ago; he's now at 82 patrons and $448. At this rate, he should be reaching his $9500 goal in about 2.25 years. That's also about how long it usually takes him to put out a single issue, so if he starts working on it right now, he can have it ready "right on time." 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flojomojo Posted December 26, 2016 Share Posted December 26, 2016 Simple as that. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+FujiSkunk Posted December 26, 2016 Share Posted December 26, 2016 you are literally paying someone else to pay someone else when you use patreon tho. when you use patreon, you ARE sending $$$ to random people on the internet begging for beer money. http://www.aux.tv/2014/12/sob-story-from-band-that-lost-11000-was-actually-a-marketing-stunt/ That's... interesting. Still, I won't fault the guy for being a good businessman and putting his profits into a labor of love.. a good-quality labor of love at that. I don't think it's quite the conspiracy to shill or shameless "marketing stunt" that this article's author is making it out to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andromeda Stardust Posted December 26, 2016 Share Posted December 26, 2016 That's... interesting. Still, I won't fault the guy for being a good businessman and putting his profits into a labor of love.. a good-quality labor of love at that. I don't think it's quite the conspiracy to shill or shameless "marketing stunt" that this article's author is making it out to be. Yeah but they're still technically lying by saying they're broke to get funding. If they started off by stating that their tour "lost money but we do it because we want to, and while our band is primarily funded by other entrepreneurial endeavors, if you like us, feel free to contribute to the cause..." Pay careful attention to the strikeout part. Telling partial truths can be considered lying in certain circumstances. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawnphase Posted December 26, 2016 Share Posted December 26, 2016 exactly, the people who run it seem very, very scummy and they're not at all suave about it. fuck if i want to be a part of putting money into their pockets, theres other ways for people to support anyones endeavors that dont revolve around that platform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+FujiSkunk Posted December 26, 2016 Share Posted December 26, 2016 Yeah but they're still technically lying by saying they're broke to get funding. If they started off by stating that their tour "lost money but we do it because we want to, and while our band is primarily funded by other entrepreneurial endeavors, if you like us, feel free to contribute to the cause..." Pay careful attention to the strikeout part. Telling partial truths can be considered lying in certain circumstances. I won't disagree. At best it's a little disingenuous and at worst it's exactly as you describe. I'm willing to give him at least a little benefit of the doubt since Pomplamoose isn't just him and I'm sure as an "arteest" he likes to think of the band and the business venture as separate entities. Still, you're right. He's not exactly starving. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+GoldLeader Posted December 26, 2016 Share Posted December 26, 2016 That article, while interesting, is to me, an almost textbook example of internet journalism... There's way too many unanswered questions for it to be taken at face value... For example: The comments suggest that the band's fans already knew all about the Patreon connection and that the artist as a CEO was taking no money from that position...I have no idea if that is true or not. It simply raises more questions. And there's even a comment suggesting all this fuss is over a cover band...No idea of it's true because I'm not familiar with the band, and maybe it's only a side note, but one worth mentioning...And if he is a CEO, why would he not be getting a salary from it? I'm not forming an opinion here because I definitely don't have all the facts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts