General Discussion

Originally posted by dragonace

 

Originally posted by SirBruce

 

Originally posted by dragonace

 

Originally posted by SirBruce

 

Nice try, but you should read down to the comments section.  That's how I knew it was no longer true.

 

Bruce

 

???

 

That link I posted is from YOUR web site.

This quote:

"they don’t include sales from major retailers like Wal-Mart"

is from YOUR web site.

 

What part of that is not true?

 

The part I wrote, which the nice man from NPD corrected me on in the COMMENTS section, which is why I pointed you to that.  Yes, I was wrong, but I learned and corrected my false belief several weeks before your post, which is why I was able to correct you when you made the same mistake.

Bruce

 

LOL!!!

 

Yes... I realize you were corrected in your COMMENTS section.  However... you still have your original INCORRECT statement on the main article of that page... the part that 99% of everyone who visits that page will ONLY read. 

 

Doesn't that seem a bit odd to you?   To expect your visitors to read the COMMENTS section to find out the CORRECT information?   I guess if it were me... I'd want it to be obvious to my visitors what was correct and incorrect information.   Perhaps you have a different standard for presenting information to your visitors though? 

Bruce

Originally posted by dragonace

 

Originally posted by SirBruce

 

Originally posted by dragonace

Originally posted by SirBruce

 

STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL.  This document and the information contained in it are the property of Vivendi Games, Inc.  and may not be used, copied or distributed in any form without its express prior consent.

Bruce

 

Heh.... I'm hoping you got... "express prior consent" from Vivendi before posting that up... otherwise the mods should take it down, as it's illegal.   Wouldn't want you getting in trouble. 

 

It's not a private document; it's a public document from their website that they are required to release per SEC rules.  The disclaimer is just standard boilerplate you slap on everything; it doesn't always apply. :)

Bruce

 

Yes, I realize how publicly traded companies work.

 

 

However, that "standard boilerplate" is there to provide protection for them for exactly what you've done.   It would be fine to link to their site pointing to that document... as I did with Midway's documents.

 

However, to copy it and then re-distribute it as you did... not cool. 

 

 

In this case, there's no way to directly link to a particular page in the PDF document.

But it's entirely cool to copy it and re-distribute it.  The documents in question are effectively public domain, and in any case the "fair use" exception applies.  I could have simply pointed you to the SEC site, but under new regulations the SEC allows companies to now offer such documents on their own sites rather than on EDGAR.

Seriously, you've gotten worked up over nothing. :)

Bruce

Originally posted by SirBruce

 

Originally posted by dragonace

 

Originally posted by SirBruce

 

Originally posted by dragonace

 

Originally posted by SirBruce

 

Nice try, but you should read down to the comments section.  That's how I knew it was no longer true.

 

Bruce

 

???

 

That link I posted is from YOUR web site.

This quote:

"they don’t include sales from major retailers like Wal-Mart"

is from YOUR web site.

 

What part of that is not true?

 

The part I wrote, which the nice man from NPD corrected me on in the COMMENTS section, which is why I pointed you to that.  Yes, I was wrong, but I learned and corrected my false belief several weeks before your post, which is why I was able to correct you when you made the same mistake.

Bruce

 

LOL!!!

 

Yes... I realize you were corrected in your COMMENTS section.  However... you still have your original INCORRECT statement on the main article of that page... the part that 99% of everyone who visits that page will ONLY read. 

 

Doesn't that seem a bit odd to you?   To expect your visitors to read the COMMENTS section to find out the CORRECT information?   I guess if it were me... I'd want it to be obvious to my visitors what was correct and incorrect information.   Perhaps you have a different standard for presenting information to your visitors though? 

Yes, I expect readers who read an post to read the comments as well for any updates or clarifications.  No, some people won't, but I can't help that.  I have a hard enough time just getting people to read my FAQ.

 

Bruce

 

Perhaps you don't see it... but I think others are now realizing that some of the confusion that stems from your site is self-inflicted.   Especially this case which would take just a few seconds to fix. 

When I look at these charts I'm sure to include a grain of salt about the size of Russia.

No offense, but "For entertainment purposes only."  should be put on each Excel graph.

I'm sure you put a lot of work into them, but that doesn't magically make them accurate or valid.

Originally posted by dragonace

 

But why the needless possibility to communicate false information when you could easily edit the article in about 5 seconds?

Perhaps you don't see it... but I think others are now realizing that some of the confusion that stems from your site is self-inflicted.   Especially this case which would take just a few seconds to fix. 

Bruce

Originally posted by SirBruce

 

Originally posted by dragonace

 

But why the needless possibility to communicate false information when you could easily edit the article in about 5 seconds?

Perhaps you don't see it... but I think others are now realizing that some of the confusion that stems from your site is self-inflicted.   Especially this case which would take just a few seconds to fix. 

No, I don't see it.

 

Bruce

 

Even when you admit there is INCORRECT information... and yet you refuse to fix it.   Hmm... yeah, I think that says a lot.

Originally posted by dragonace

 

Originally posted by SirBruce

 

Originally posted by dragonace

 

But why the needless possibility to communicate false information when you could easily edit the article in about 5 seconds?

Perhaps you don't see it... but I think others are now realizing that some of the confusion that stems from your site is self-inflicted.   Especially this case which would take just a few seconds to fix. 

No, I don't see it.

 

Bruce

 

Heh... o.k.

 

Even when you admit there is INCORRECT information... and yet you refuse to fix it.   Hmm... yeah, I think that says a lot.

Gah, I'm almost certain this needs to be closed.

Originally posted by dragonace

 

Originally posted by SirBruce

 

Originally posted by dragonace

 

But why the needless possibility to communicate false information when you could easily edit the article in about 5 seconds?

Perhaps you don't see it... but I think others are now realizing that some of the confusion that stems from your site is self-inflicted.   Especially this case which would take just a few seconds to fix. 

No, I don't see it.

 

Bruce

 

Heh... o.k.

 

Even when you admit there is INCORRECT information... and yet you refuse to fix it.   Hmm... yeah, I think that says a lot.

It's CORRECTED in the comments section for all to see.

Sheesh.

Bruce