TrogdarRobusto Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 Al may be able to create an employee category, I have no idea actually. Al and I are the most active on the board and we self-identify as Atari employees ... and I know Ben from Plaion has made it clear he works for Plaion when he posts. Al is in a better position to answer these questions, but AtariAge has always (to my knowledge) been a for-profit company. The ownership of the site changed, not the nature of the business. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 (edited) 56 minutes ago, TrogdarRobusto said: Al may be able to create an employee category, I have no idea actually. Al and I are the most active on the board and we self-identify as Atari employees ... and I know Ben from Plaion has made it clear he works for Plaion when he posts. Al is in a better position to answer these questions, but AtariAge has always (to my knowledge) been a for-profit company. The ownership of the site changed, not the nature of the business. Thanks for answering, I appreciate you engaging. Couple open points. Are the moderators Atari employees now or not? And are all my posts, private messages and personal info at the disposal of Atari now? (I assume yes unless I hear otherwise) Wrt self identification it’s not consistent, the post just above doesn’t carry in any place the fact you are speaking in official capacity, I have to have known beforehand. Say tomorrow you were to change company, there would be no way to distinguish further posts if any. Also even without change of company how do I know which posts may be “your opinion”, for now I assume your posts are always official in nature and as such preapproved by Atari. I am not trying to being pedantic but once corporations are involved (and Atari has quite a complex structure) clarity is paramount, vs the old AA owned and operated by Albert and moderated by a handful of volunteers (I actually do not know if some moderators were employees of AA, always assumed they were not and just did it out of personal passion). Edited June 3 by phoenixdownita 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted June 3 Author Share Posted June 3 4 minutes ago, phoenixdownita said: Are the moderators Atari employees now or not? No, they are all volunteers. 4 minutes ago, phoenixdownita said: And are all my posts, private messages and info at the disposal of Atari now? (I assume yes unless I hear otherwise) No, Atari is not going through anyone's private messages, nor do they have direct access to them. Even I do not have direct access to PMs without jumping through some hoops, and I only ever look at PMs if someone reports a PM conversation or someone gives me permission to review them. As for posts, I'm not sure what you mean, they live here on the forum and that is where they will stay, Atari isn't going to do anything with them. 7 minutes ago, phoenixdownita said: I am not trying to being pedantic but once corporations are involved (and Atari has quite a complex structure) clarity is paramount, vs the old AA owned and operated by Albert and moderated by a handful of volunteers (I actually do not know if some moderators were employees of AA, always assumed they were not and just did it out of personal passion). Nothing has changed with the operating structure of AtariAge, I am still maintaining and running the forum, and there continue to be many volunteers who graciously help moderate the forums. You can assume that anything David says is the official voice of Atari unless he states otherwise, and that's safe to assume for any Atari and Plaion employees. Regarding income from AtariAge going to Atari, well, yes, technically that is the case. However, Atari has been a "for profit" company for some time now, so that didn't change with the acquisition of AtariAge by Atari. AtariAge isn't some big money making operation, so revenue from AtariAge is still important to help cover the expenses AtariAge incurs. This includes the hosting and software costs of AtariAge, store-related expenses (which are probably the most significant costs), my salary, and so forth. So the forum subscriptions are still an important (although not large) revenue source for AtariAge, and the benefits of the subscriptions haven't changed. Keep in mind that there are no ads on AtariAge, and we don't intend to change that, nor do we ever plan on forcing people to pay for a subscription to access AtariAge. ..Al 5 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Albert said: No, they are all volunteers. No, Atari is not going through anyone's private messages, nor do they have direct access to them. Even I do not have direct access to PMs without jumping through some hoops, and I only ever look at PMs if someone reports a PM conversation or someone gives me permission to review them. As for posts, I'm not sure what you mean, they live here on the forum and that is where they will stay, Atari isn't going to do anything with them. Nothing has changed with the operating structure of AtariAge, I am still maintaining and running the forum, and there continue to be many volunteers who graciously help moderate the forums. You can assume that anything David says is the official voice of Atari unless he states otherwise, and that's safe to assume for any Atari and Plaion employees. Regarding income from AtariAge going to Atari, well, yes, technically that is the case. However, Atari has been a "for profit" company for some time now, so that didn't change with the acquisition of AtariAge by Atari. AtariAge isn't some big money making operation, so revenue from AtariAge is still important to help cover the expenses AtariAge incurs. This includes the hosting and software costs of AtariAge, store-related expenses (which are probably the most significant costs), my salary, and so forth. So the forum subscriptions are still an important (although not large) revenue source for AtariAge, and the benefits of the subscriptions haven't changed. Keep in mind that there are no ads on AtariAge, and we don't intend to change that, nor do we ever plan on forcing people to pay for a subscription to access AtariAge. ..Al Thank you Al for the explanation. But: “Keep in mind that there are no ads on AtariAge, and we don't intend to change that, nor do we ever plan on forcing people to pay for a subscription to access AtariAge. ” Given the new ownership I believe it is no longer your decision alone, legally speaking if tomorrow Atari decides to put ads (their own products for example or anything legal really) or start charging mandatory subscription there’s nothing in place to block that. Unless you did put it on the sale agreement and it’s enforceable. I do believe you on the current intentions, but business is business and Atari needs any and all revenues it can to succeed as a business so ultimately it’s the corporate decision to make of what direction AA should go, sure with your input should they chose to gather it. I also have to assume they can fire you at will (all my corporate contracts since I moved to the US always have that clause “immediate termination with or without reason” but some may have a 2 weeks notice) and if that were to happen you’d have no further claim over AA. Is my understanding wrong here? —————— Wrt forum posts, if Atari owns them they are free to take them and reproduce them on their other properties as endorsement for example (they can do it in aggregate like “90% of AA users agrees game X is da bomb” or in specific like the “developer superstar known as CyranoJ on AA said that game Y is the second coming of the profets”) … that is what I mean, use them outside the thread context they were in. Wrt private info, can Atari now start to send ads on my registered email or not? How about flyers to my home address that AA has on file? [I have the utmost admiration and respect for Lawrence, I just used his alias as an example, no ill intentions] Edited June 3 by phoenixdownita 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrogdarRobusto Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 @phoenixdownita A lot of these questions were answered in the days following the acquisition in this thread. I think Atari has done its best to state our intentions with AtariAge, which is to support the site and the forum so that the community remains active and the site remains a resource for fans and developers. We acquired MobyGames with similar goals. Both sites are valuable to the retro community and we felt we were in a good position to support the sites' missions (not change them). As I've said a few times, ultimately we will be judged by what we do vs. what we say we will do. So we can only prove that we mean what we say over time. So far, with both sites, we have added the site's day-to-day director to our team (Al at AtariAge and Jeremiah at MobyGames) and then supported them as best we can, including investment in the tech behind the platforms. From my perspective there are a million questions anyone can ask about how things will turn out, the only way to know for sure is to stick around and find out. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 (edited) @TrogdarRobusto fair enough. But why shouldn’t the moderators also be retributed via a part time salary/collaboration contract for example? When they speak now if I am not mistaken they cannot represent the views of Atari, which is a weird situation imho as anything they say and do is on a personal basis but on an Atari property. And we still dance around the issue of content. So I stick to my assumption that anything I post here is owned by Atari and could be used for marketing or other purpose, the same applies to all older presale content (aka the sale transferred all content retroactively). This is about fact finding not opinions or statements of good intentions, I don’t think anything Atari has done so far with AA is wrong in the least but the road to hell is paved with good intentions and I think I should be told if I need to opt out from Atari Hotels based advertisements (is that still a thing?) or other entities affiliated to AA parent company, before the sale this was never a concern. You said you explained everything but these details were all brushed under the “AA will operate under Albert as it did before” which has no legal value whatsoever afaik. Edited June 3 by phoenixdownita 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrogdarRobusto Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 9 minutes ago, phoenixdownita said: I stick to my assumption that anything I post here is owned by Atari and could be used for marketing or other purpose, the same applies to all older presale content (aka the sale transferred all content retroactively). As I have posted before, Atari makes no claims of ownership over the content in this forum. We also ask for permission when citing someone in marketing communications, no matter the source of that content (excluding a repost in Twitter for example, where the expectation on the platform is that people will repost items). But yes, if I had a choice between answering a lot of granular "what if" questions or saying "AA will operate under Albert as it did before" I'll pick the latter because it remains an accurate statement. If you have been content to be a member of the community for the last decade, odds are you will be equally content for the next decade. And hopefully more so. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+MrZarniwoop Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 21 minutes ago, phoenixdownita said: You said you explained everything but these details were all brushed under the “AA will operate under Albert as it did before” which has no legal value whatsoever afaik. If I understand your root concern, you trusted Al when he owned AtariAge. But, you don't trust Atari since they've become the owner of AtariAge. If that's the case, I can't imagine there exists any reasonable assurance that will make you trust Atari. In time, they may earn that trust, or they may not. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 (edited) 25 minutes ago, TrogdarRobusto said: As I have posted before, Atari makes no claims of ownership over the content in this forum. We also ask for permission when citing someone in marketing communications, no matter the source of that content (excluding a repost in Twitter for example, where the expectation on the platform is that people will repost items). But yes, if I had a choice between answering a lot of granular "what if" questions or saying "AA will operate under Albert as it did before" I'll pick the latter because it remains an accurate statement. If you have been content to be a member of the community for the last decade, odds are you will be equally content for the next decade. And hopefully more so. By Atari owning AA what does “makes no claims” mean? I have been content with AA for the past decade, that’s fact. Edited June 3 by phoenixdownita 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrogdarRobusto Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 there is no gotcha moment at the end of the thread you are pulling ... I think @MrZarniwoop summed it up well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 9 minutes ago, MrZarniwoop said: If I understand your root concern, you trusted Al when he owned AtariAge. But, you don't trust Atari since they've become the owner of AtariAge. Pretty much. I learnt the hard way that unless these things are in a contract, corporations would change direction on a dime vs personal projects born out of love and passion. And it’s not about Atari, I didn’t particularly trust the corporations I was working for, not on the basis of evil or morals but simply on the fact that the only thing that stays true is that they were always maximizing profits while attempting to pay me the least they could get away with sometime down to not reimbursing a trip, or a job related parking fee or replacing a piece of hw that broke with the cheapest alternative (some companies were better than others at this, for sure). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 8 minutes ago, TrogdarRobusto said: there is no gotcha moment at the end of the thread you are pulling ... I think @MrZarniwoop summed it up well. You may be right, there’s no gotcha. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 3 minutes ago, phoenixdownita said: And it’s not about Atari, I didn’t particularly trust the corporations I was working for, not on the basis of evil or morals but simply on the fact that the only thing that stays true is that they were always maximizing profits All companies which are listed at the stock exchange must operate like this. Else their stakeholders can sue the CEOs if they forgo any potential profit. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 Just now, Thomas Jentzsch said: All companies which are listed at the stock exchange must operate like this. Else their stakeholders can sue the CEOs if they forgo any potential profit. Exactly my point, so what happens to good intentions? AA before was not on the stock exchange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 1 minute ago, phoenixdownita said: Exactly my point, so what happens to good intentions? They are fine as long as they do not harm the profit. Else: gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 1 minute ago, Thomas Jentzsch said: They are fine as long as they do not harm the profit. Else: gone. Wait, not harming vs foregoing any potential profits (your own words) are not one and the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 2 minutes ago, phoenixdownita said: Wait, not harming vs foregoing any potential profits (your own words) are not one and the same. Where's the difference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Thomas Jentzsch said: Where's the difference? Foregoing includes not pursuing, aka in specific with AA the introduction of ads to Atari products seems fair game (which of all things if done right I wouldn’t object to, the Intellivision new shirts are slick and the katakana Atari shirts too). Not harming can be limited to not incurring losses. Edited June 3 by phoenixdownita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 5 minutes ago, phoenixdownita said: Foregoing includes not pursuing, aka in specific with AA the introduction of ads to Atari products seems fair game (which of all things if done right I wouldn’t object to, the Intellivision new shirts are slick). Not harming can be limited to not incurring losses. Ok, then it is the former. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 3 minutes ago, Thomas Jentzsch said: Ok, then it is the former. Exactly, so unless in the sale contract it states no ads, then all other things being equal ads may come if or when Atari says so (not doing so is foregoing legitimate profits). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 1 minute ago, phoenixdownita said: Exactly, so unless in the sale contract it states no ads, then all other things being equal ads may come if or when Atari says so (not doing so is foregoing legitimate profits). Yes, but only if someone could claim they are overall profitable. Ads might drive away people from AA, which seems so be an important platform for AA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 Note that corporations do have avenues to perform more alternative projects, not tied to their main commercial mission, and that is via establishing foundations etc… which have specific structure etc… I venture the current Atari is not big enough for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenixdownita Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 Just now, Thomas Jentzsch said: Yes, but only if someone could claim they are overall profitable. Ads might drive away people from AA, which seems so be an important platform for AA. Only paying members being driven away can currently impact the AA bottom line, and unless you try it’s all speculation (Facebook didn’t become less profitable since adding ads, and that’s a company I dislike). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+MrZarniwoop Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 26 minutes ago, phoenixdownita said: And it’s not about Atari, I didn’t particularly trust the corporations I was working for, not on the basis of evil or morals but simply on the fact that the only thing that stays true is that they were always maximizing profits while attempting to pay me the least they could get away with sometime down to not reimbursing a trip, or a job related parking fee or replacing a piece of hw that broke with the cheapest alternative (some companies were better than others at this, for sure). My experience, for what it's worth: doing things with a great contract can't protect you from bad people. And the contract doesn't matter much when doing things with great people. For those reasons, after many bad experiences, I now only work with people I trust and don't worry nearly as much about contract details like I used to. As long as Al runs AtariAge, I still trust it. Someday, when that influence wanes or changes, I may re-assess. The value here is largely in the community, but I cannot imagine it being nearly as much fun without the site's leadership providing a little collaborative direction and guidance. Fingers crossed the fun remains for a long time! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 (edited) 6 minutes ago, phoenixdownita said: Only paying members being driven away can currently impact the AA bottom line, and unless you try it’s all speculation (Facebook didn’t become less profitable since adding ads, and that’s a company I dislike). I think the paying members are pretty irrelevant to Atari. AA is an important platform to e.g. spread news, check reactions and research and create demands. IMO, the moment we see ads at AtariAge, I would start worrying about Atari as a whole (again). Edited June 3 by Thomas Jentzsch 1 Quote 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
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.