Syndie DOND on back burner

[Robert Hutchinson]

Ah. That does change my reaction, yes.

Mods: can I insult someone who might, theoretically, be a member of this forum, since they are anonymous? Hint: I don't want to call this person an egghead.

[Jimmy Owen]

I suppose there's also an embargo on revealing the identity of the host, too.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'142965\' date=\'Jan 11 2007, 06:40 PM\']
OK, I can say it like this.  This person didn't even bother to ask me to be aware there's still a chance.  He went to the people above me and bitched to them.  This is the 2nd time this has happened and I've had enough.
[/quote]
How is John, anyhow?

[dzinkin]

[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'142965\' date=\'Jan 11 2007, 09:40 PM\']
OK, I can say it like this.  This person didn't even bother to ask me to be aware there's still a chance.  He went to the people above me and bitched to them.  This is the 2nd time this has happened and I've had enough.
[/quote]
Let me see if I understand this... John Ricci (Chris is right; you may be under orders not to give the name, but the rest of us don't have to pretend) went to the people above you, and instead of asking that he be allowed to give his own account of the situation -- something that would have been perfectly legitimate -- he demanded that you be ordered to remove a report from a legitimate news source because he didn't want people to hear about it?

As much as I agree with Matt that we generally like to see one of our own succeed, my respect for John, which already had dropped dramatically when he deleted his posts from the thread and left in a huff rather than apologize for his stunts, is now close to zero.  And I'm disappointed that any of your superiors would give in to such dishonesty.  (EDIT: Reworded to make clear that I don't know for certain which one it was.)

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'142971\' date=\'Jan 11 2007, 10:18 PM\']
Mods: can I insult someone who might, theoretically, be a member of this forum, since they are anonymous? Hint: I don't want to call this person an egghead.
[/quote]
The non-egghead in question is, indeed, still a member of this forum and continues to visit us regularly. As Matt stated earlier, you can be assured that every time Combination Lock is mentioned here, John reads every word.

[tvwxman]

[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'142965\' date=\'Jan 11 2007, 09:40 PM\']
OK, I can say it like this.  This person didn't even bother to ask me to be aware there's still a chance.  He went to the people above me and bitched to them.  This is the 2nd time this has happened and I've had enough.
[/quote]
Curious about one thing that I don't understand...

Who are the people above you? I thought it was your site and yours alone?

That said, I'm going to play Devil's advocate for a second and hope, HOPE I said, that JR is being extra irritable because his 'baby' is on the verge of NOT making it into syndication. And I can honestly say that if the situation were happening to me, I'd be extra irritable too.

I've said before that because I have friends working high up on the show, I want it to succeed. But I gotta think that if this is the way JR runs a business, he's going to burn every bridge on the 405 quickly.

[dzinkin]

[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'143002\' date=\'Jan 12 2007, 12:57 AM\']
[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'142965\' date=\'Jan 11 2007, 09:40 PM\']
OK, I can say it like this.  This person didn't even bother to ask me to be aware there's still a chance.  He went to the people above me and bitched to them.  This is the 2nd time this has happened and I've had enough.
[/quote]
Curious about one thing that I don't understand...

Who are the people above you? I thought it was your site and yours alone?
[/quote]
At least for now, BuzzerBlog is part of FlashGames2, the Chris Colbourne-Dan Berger enterprise.  Alex is still listed as the owner, so I assume that he could take it somewhere else if he wanted to.

[cmjb13]

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'142974\' date=\'Jan 11 2007, 10:30 PM\']
I suppose there's also an embargo on revealing the identity of the host, too.
[/quote]
I just wanted to comment on this situation since it was my post a few months ago that got quite out of hand (The thread was closed before I had a chance to respond and I made a small blurb about it on my signature that I'm sure few people saw)

When I was at Wheel and saw the CL clips, I spoke to John after the show. I asked him if he would mind if I posted information about the clips. He said it was OK but wished I didn't reveal too much information. He never came to me asking me to keep quiet. One could say I had no obligation to ask. And you would be correct. But it was done out of courtesy. I'm reminded of an incident a few years ago...

A few years ago, I made a post about some TPIR news.  All I said was "Card Game has a new look." At the studio the next day, I was asked if I could keep quiet about any set changes or games that had yet to air. To this day, I don't know who saw the post (ie: staffer or squealer) or what the big deal was. But if they wanted me quiet, so be it.

Anyone who knows my posting history knows I posted a lot of spoilers over the years (not so much because people think I got my jollies disappointing people's surprises, but for those I thought enjoyed them as I did). I'm not defending anybody or insulting anybody. Just stating the facts. I just chalk it up to a change in the times.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'cmjb13\' post=\'143025\' date=\'Jan 12 2007, 06:32 AM\']
I just wanted to comment on this situation since it was my post a few months ago that got quite out of hand (The thread was closed before I had a chance to respond and I made a small blurb about it on my signature that I'm sure few people saw)
[/quote]
What you did was the least of it, man. You might have started it (and even then, not really), but there is no question that John fanned the flames into a raging inferno through his behavior (where, I will point out, your "friend" made not one effort to clarify the issue, an action which almost certainly would have defused the entire situation).

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'143002\' date=\'Jan 12 2007, 12:57 AM\']
Curious about one thing that I don't understand...
Who are the people above you? I thought it was your site and yours alone?[/quote]
Yeah, there's a lot about this that doesn't make a whole heap of sense, and way up on that list is the idea that there's a pecking order and "people above" you who are stifling your efforts because the presumptive subject of one of your stories demanded it.

And again I note that for someone so quick to disparage the online fan community, this individual certainly continues to appear obsessed with it.

I do note that your site has gone back to calling the project "basically dead."  Does this mean that saner heads have prevailed over there?

[itiparanoid13]

No, I just decided that after I heard some more about this situation to say screw it and say that it's "basically dead".  I left Rumor on there, and I admit I should have from the start.  It's not official, and I know better than not to put rumor on stuff that's not 100% true.  

I'm going to be honest here, and I might hear some stuff about this, but it's right now just coddling the ego of friends right now in my mind.  I have good friends at GSN and Embassy Row.  I have openly said on the GSN boards, GSNN, Buzzer, and here (all of which GSN reads, I can 100% confirm) that Chain Reaction is a pretty bad revival.  It could improve, but it's bad in it's current state.  They have not said a single word to me about it.  They come to me asking about CR things, asking me to write things for them, and I keep a terrific and friendly relationship with all of them.  Saner heads haven't told me to do anything.  At this point (I have no idea how you are on censorship here so I'll just put a symbol), I just said f*ck it and changed it back.  This is at least the 2nd (possibly third) time I've been pushed around like this by him, and I've had enough.  I probably shouldn't have given into him before, but we were new and I didn't want to jeopardize any possible partnership with a production company at that time.  

He needs to grow a pair, period.  He came after me because I'm the easiest target he has and he knows that he can get his way at places.  I initially made a comment on the post "I think he needs to go to Variety and B&C and tell them to retract the article too", but I deleted it for some reason.  I'm just done with him, that's all.

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'143043\' date=\'Jan 12 2007, 12:24 PM\'] Saner heads haven't told me to do anything.  [/quote]
Alex, based on the rest of what you said, I would argue that a saner head did, in fact, prevail.  Yours.

[MrGameShow]

Figure that I should chime in here, only cause my name was thrown into the mix.

I don't consider myself as Alex's "boss" by any means, but I do try and keep an eye on his stuff once in a while, just to make sure he doesn't fly TOO far off the handle.

As for this situation, most of it transpired before I was much aware of it.

Alex is in 99.5% control of his site.. I just try and give him friendly advice once in a while. The major thing is that since (FLASHGames) name is attached to the site, I just try and keep on top of things going on.

If the show happens, it happens. We've all heard news about various shows that one day it's on the move, then it's dead again.. (re: DOND Syndie).. it's a new show on the market, and maybe it'll fly, maybe it won't.  

I'm sorry that this whole thing flew out of control, but what's there to do. We're just fans waiting for new shows.