Petition to Remove Controversial IGDA Board Member Garners Required Signatures
Petition to Remove Controversial IGDA Board Member Garners Required Signatures
August 6, 2009
The Tim Langdell saga continues...
Develop reports that a petition to remove the controversial Langdell from the board of directors of the International Game Developers Association has garnered far beyond the 1,200 signatures required by the organization's by-laws. More than 2,000 IGDA members reportedly signed the petition against Langdell, who is regarded by many as a "trademark troll" - an abuser of the trademark process. The vote should trigger a special meeting at which members could vote to remove Langdell from the IGDA board.
IGDA member Corvus Elrod, who devised the petition, told Develop:
It's true, we've got the signatures we need. But now the hard work really begins, as we convince the board to take it seriously and the entire membership to take a stand and vote.
Meanwhile, The Escapist recounts an e-mail flap involving the ongoing Langdell situation. While new IGDA Executive Director Joshua Caulfield disavowed an e-mail circulated to members this week calling for Langdell's removal, Orbus Gameworks President Darius Kazemi believes the messages are legitimate:
[Kazemi] believes a group of people opposed to Langdell's presence on the Board of Directors simply divided the member list between them and used those contact forms to send the message.
"Nobody obtained email addresses through dubious means," he wrote. "It's like sending a message via Facebook messaging... These messages were not sent in an unethical or illegal way. If anything, the messages are a consequence of the rather poor state of the current IGDA website."
To view the e-mail, click here.
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGIN / REGISTER
Crispy Gamer
GamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 03/18/10 at 09:41pm
ZippyDSMlee: And not taxing the 30-500K bracket so much, sure you make 500K at the end of the year add in life thats minus 200K add in the company you made there's another 200K.
ZippyDSMlee: And not taxing the 30-500K bracket so much, sure you make 500K at the end of the year add in life thats minus 200K add in the company you made there's another 200K.
Posted 03/18/10 at 09:39pm
ZippyDSMlee: Flamespeak: we should be taxing the ultra rich alot more(those that have more than 10 million in wealth),.
ZippyDSMlee: Flamespeak: we should be taxing the ultra rich alot more(those that have more than 10 million in wealth),.
Posted 03/18/10 at 08:04pm
Flamespeak: I never understood why someone should work hard to get a lot of money, just to be punished with more taxes for doing so.
Flamespeak: I never understood why someone should work hard to get a lot of money, just to be punished with more taxes for doing so.
Posted 03/18/10 at 06:44pm
hayabusa75: Isn't the upper class supposed to be footing most of this bill?
hayabusa75: Isn't the upper class supposed to be footing most of this bill?
Posted 03/18/10 at 06:05pm
Austin_Lewis: Of course, that ignores the fact that for the next 4 years, the people will be taxed without 'benefit' from the bill.
Austin_Lewis: Of course, that ignores the fact that for the next 4 years, the people will be taxed without 'benefit' from the bill.
Posted 03/18/10 at 06:04pm
Austin_Lewis: If we go by the CBO's past estimation failures, they're about 300% short on the actual cost.
Austin_Lewis: If we go by the CBO's past estimation failures, they're about 300% short on the actual cost.
Posted 03/18/10 at 05:21pm
ZippyDSMlee: *punt*Roll call, whos on and how are you doing?
ZippyDSMlee: *punt*Roll call, whos on and how are you doing?
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:07pm
JDKJ: No, I did you the favor and said it for you.
JDKJ: No, I did you the favor and said it for you.
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:06pm
Valdearg: What I said was while I may have implied long term accuraccy, and that might have been incorrect, my greater point that the CBO report calculated reduced deficits, expanded coverage, and lower costs is still 100% accurate. :D
Valdearg: What I said was while I may have implied long term accuraccy, and that might have been incorrect, my greater point that the CBO report calculated reduced deficits, expanded coverage, and lower costs is still 100% accurate. :D
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:06pm
Valdearg: Like any good politician, I don't believe I said "I was incorrect." :P
Valdearg: Like any good politician, I don't believe I said "I was incorrect." :P
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:02pm
JDKJ: If you'd said "I was incorrect" 10 shouts ago, I'd have quit twisting your arm to get you see the obvious 10 shouts ago.
JDKJ: If you'd said "I was incorrect" 10 shouts ago, I'd have quit twisting your arm to get you see the obvious 10 shouts ago.
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:00pm
JDKJ: You were they one assuming 100% accuracy. In all caps, no less.
JDKJ: You were they one assuming 100% accuracy. In all caps, no less.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:59am
Valdearg: Yes, my implication that the long term estimates were facts was incorrect, but the short term calculations are absolutely facts, and even the long term estimates are still useful in attempting to determine exactly what will happen with the bill.
Valdearg: Yes, my implication that the long term estimates were facts was incorrect, but the short term calculations are absolutely facts, and even the long term estimates are still useful in attempting to determine exactly what will happen with the bill.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:58am
Valdearg: I do. The Short term costs are actually calculated facts. The long term estimates aren't necessarily 100% accurate, but to assume that they can't possibly be accurate because someone said they might not be 100% accurate is also wrong.
Valdearg: I do. The Short term costs are actually calculated facts. The long term estimates aren't necessarily 100% accurate, but to assume that they can't possibly be accurate because someone said they might not be 100% accurate is also wrong.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:57am
JDKJ: When someone says, "I could be wrong but, as best as I can tell, X," X ain't a fact.
JDKJ: When someone says, "I could be wrong but, as best as I can tell, X," X ain't a fact.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:53am
JDKJ: It's too early in the morning for you to be deaf, blind, and dumb drunk. A "my best guestimate" can't be a fact. Don't you understand the difference between the two?
JDKJ: It's too early in the morning for you to be deaf, blind, and dumb drunk. A "my best guestimate" can't be a fact. Don't you understand the difference between the two?
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:41am
Valdearg: By how much depends on variables that can't necessarily be predicted at this point in time. And yes, those Facts are accurate only so far into the future, but those estimates can certainly be used to support this measure.
Valdearg: By how much depends on variables that can't necessarily be predicted at this point in time. And yes, those Facts are accurate only so far into the future, but those estimates can certainly be used to support this measure.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:40am
Valdearg: And I'm saying, as far as the CBO report goes, the facts that it does put forward are deficit reduction, reducing costs, and expanding costs. Those ARE facts.
Valdearg: And I'm saying, as far as the CBO report goes, the facts that it does put forward are deficit reduction, reducing costs, and expanding costs. Those ARE facts.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:30am
JDKJ: You were the one championing a qualified estimate as an indisputable fact. I'm merely pointing out that it's far from indisputable. So says the estimator.
JDKJ: You were the one championing a qualified estimate as an indisputable fact. I'm merely pointing out that it's far from indisputable. So says the estimator.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:27am
Valdearg: Or are you only breaking that argument out because the CBO says that this bill is a good thing for our deficit?
Valdearg: Or are you only breaking that argument out because the CBO says that this bill is a good thing for our deficit?
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
How the hell can you trademark the word "Edge" how the hell those that hold up...
I might as well trademark the work "Phone" and sue everyone compagny \ book \ game \ reference that contains that word for 1000$ per use...
crazy ppl... [shaking my head in dispair]
I guess he has a hard-on for DICE's Mirror's Edge.
Common words may be trademarked to keep others in the same industry from using it. You cannot start a computer company with the word "Apple" if it has the same ambitious focus. But Apple Computers and Apple Vacations can coexist because their industries are not related and therefore not in competition.
GameSnooper
Amazingly, he hasn't actually issued a single letter to EA/DICE about Mirror's Edge. Instead he made some website about a game with a similar name hoping they would sue him instead.
Of course, because if they do and win, that sets a precedent that he can use to exploit at any time he sees fit. In fact he could even turn it around and nail them on the use of "Edge" in "Mirrors Edge" after the fact.
When corperate rules the order of the day anything can be protected for the sake of profit.
Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/
Get this sumbitch outta there! I wanna publish and release my new game, The Edgy Edge-ventures of Edgeson Edgy Edgingtonsworth: The Edgy Edge at the Edge of Edgington Edge! by year's end!
But I can't do it unless this jackass is GONE! Damn you, Tim Langdell, you bastardious troll bastard!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Game on, brothers and sisters.
The worst is the board and the ED defending Langdell and discrediting the membership...
But I believe that it is because Langdell is threatening to sue them for breach of contact (if they fire Langdell from the board) and libel (if they officially support the anti-langdell people).
A board member (sorry, I cannot say who), told me that at least he personally is totally in favour of removing langdell, but as official organization they can't.
And this really bothers me.. To me they should kick langdell out and face the lawsuit and ask membership help, crush langdell on his own territory (well... he has so much lawsuits, including a restraint order: http://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?topic=6456.msg240845#msg240845 that he must live inside a courtroom).
criadordejogos.wordpress.com
That is not the issue. The issue is that the board itself cannot remove another member. That has to come from the membership. The membership has to file the petition and organize the drive. That is how the board gets appointed and that is how they get removed.
I wouldn't doubt there are other board members that want him out.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
Well, we actually tried that, and I think that it is working, but we had issues like a official e-mail critizing it, and even someone asked surveymonkey to close the survey because we were evil hackers (and in fact surveymonkey did closed it... happily someone from the board asked surveymonkey to open it again).
Also the problem is with a assimetry on the board election process... To remove a member we need to 10% of the membership call the vote, then 50% of the membership must approve the vote, while to elect someone, it is needed 0 votes, since altough there are a quorum, when it is not reached the board can appoint people until the board is filled.
criadordejogos.wordpress.com
I signed the petition. This is something that has to happen. 50% is going quite difficult to achieve but I think the creative membership of the IGDA can get it done. Game Developers are creative so I'm confident that this will be achieved.
My question is how will the IGDA as an organization act if he is removed? Will they speak out against what he is doing or will they ignore it? The IGDA doesn't seem to be in the place I expected it to be in. I know a board member and while I'm not planning on interupting them with an e-mail I'm sure I'll see them in September so I'll ask then. This is quite unfortunate but I have a feeling there will be some backlash against Langdell, the "pioneer".
I hope to him have ALL backlash...
He is pioneer in not paying people (ask the authros of the C64 games that he plan to re-publish for Wii...) also he is pioneer in creating clone organizations (a british version of AIAS seemly... that he claim to be founder of AIAS instead, like wanting to distort the truth in his favour), also he is pioneer in sueing a established game developer because a game has "edge" embedded on it (he sued Nanco over Souledge, making the series get enamed to Soulcalibur and he losing the lawsuit), also he has a restraining order against him for harassing an actress, and this pioneered the change on BAFTA bylaws that say that anyone with a restraining order will get expelled (and he was expelled this way), and also he is pioneer in bothering a TV series author to make a game (http://twitter.com/carltonholder).
Any backslash against him, is weak... He is a person that everyone that I know that had dealings with him, regret it, thus if noone want for ever talk with him, this will be a great good to all humanity.
criadordejogos.wordpress.com
Whether or not Langdell gets removed from the IGDA or not, a few things are pretty clear to me...
1.) The IGDA is largely worthless. Somebody please explain to me what - as a trade body - they actually contribute, that matters to the lives of game makers in any way? Better yet, point me to at least five ways in which they make a difference to anybody working in the industry. Can't be done because they're worthless.
This all sort of makes that plain and clear. They've got a viper sitting on their head and they're incapable of reacting.
2.) Regardless of what happens to Langdell's IGDA position, does anyone see him having much success with his games, company, or career going forward? What gaming mag, web site, or editor WON'T mention his scumbag behavior alongside reviewing any games he may eventually publish or be associated with? Anyone see him even getting preview coverage at all? Perhaps only to point and laugh and let everybody know that something they shouldn't buy is on its way. Does anybody give two shits about the now IN"famous BOBBY BEARING", for example??
Point is, no matter what, Langdell is toast. There are now thousands upon thousands of industry people -THAT MATTER- that couldn't be bothered to spit on the so-called man, let alone do business with him.
So, in reality, this is all he's got left.
Tim, I know you're reading this, so let me be plain and clear. You have no integrity, no honesty, no merit, no creative value, your company is a joke, your games are a scam, your legacy is malice and lies, and frankly I'd rather toss Bobby Kotick's salad than even shake your hand. Way to be.
Known fact: KISS's Gene Simmons is a trademark troll. He owns "OJ" used as orange juice.
The IGDA certainly is dragging ass. Perhaps they just hope it will blow over? Not only are they responding extremely slow to this issue but when they make announcements, such as today's e-mail, it sounds as if it isn't very high on their radar.