Absolute nonsense. Jason make the news by having the EMAIL cdpr employees provided to proof a mandatory crunch.
Yes, your post is mostly nonsense.
I agree.
As I've said before, you've decided to take Badowski's word for it when he apologized to employees. Why aren't you taking his word when the says the vast majority of developers agreed with the decision to enforce crunch?
Jason is now suggesting Badowski isn't telling the truth. Jason says he's now contacted "
a couple" of people specifically about whether or not developers preferred to crunch over delaying the game for the third time. Could it be, gosh, not all 400 people were personally asked by Badowski?
What a thought.
Jason did not provide any evidence of the alleged 12 exchanges he had with CDPR employees and around which he based his articles. Neither did GI. Deal with it.
The email he showed means he got access to it. Doesn't prove he had 12 exchanges with devs,
I have no doubt that
some developers are unhappy. Again, from a principled perspective it's immaterial whether 1% or 100% are ok with crunch, because as head of Warsaw studio Badowski has the right to look out for the best interests of the company and of the Warsaw studio and that certainly includes organizing production so that a third delay does not happen and schedules are met.
If developers are unhappy about it, they can try to persuade him, they can go on strike, or they can quit.
They can, as you should, deal with it.
Then another interview withe studio head himself making those claims, then another EMAIL of apology letter from the head for mandatory crunch.
If I remember correctly, that letter predates mandatory crunch. The letter is from June. Mandatory crunch stared late September/early October.
When this was revealed, cdpr were not able to refute his claims at all.
CDPR is under no obligation to go out of their way and refute Jason's claims. The fact they didn't issue a statement is not evidence a statement couldn't have been issued.
Read my lips: It's immaterial to me. The people in charge and with the legitimacy to make decisions decided. You don't like it. Go work somewhere else.
What does GI provide, simply their own claim that they have interviewed some cdpr people, without any paper trail or evidence,
Just like Jason. I haven't seen any evidence. Again, I have no problem believing Jason did interview 12 people out of more than 400, less than 3% of all the employees working on CP2077, just like I have no problem believing GI emailed X number of employees. It would be a miracle if in such a large company like CDPR developers didn't have different takes on how the company is managed.
What I don't do is believe Badowski when it suits my narrative and dismiss him when it doesn't, without the evidence in the two situations being any different.
all their own words.
GI claim that cdpr employees were asked whether they preferred crunch or delay and said a majority preferred crunch... based on what??
Don't be obtuse. Based on the exchanges they had with CDPR employees.
Evidently, Jason is the only person on the planet that is able to send and receive emails, the only person on planet Earth with access to CDPR employees.
The probable reason why neither Jason not GI aren't presenting evidence is because that would compromise the anonymity of their sources, a no no in journalism.
I don't have a problem believing both Jason and GI contacted CDPR developers. It just so happens those developers have different opinions. Big deal.
Furthermore, two CDPR developers
publicly disavowed Jason's take. They cannot be discarded by people looking for the truth.
Jason then around to look for proof on whether there was a poll or question that asked them of this preference, but there was none, and GI were not able to provide any evidence of that too.
Yes, Jason claims that his sources told him so. Yes, GI claims that their sources told them so.
All you had was their words and only their words.
The prejudice that you have against this particular journalist is so obvious even in the face of evidence provided.
Again, don't be obtuse.
I have already told you I don't have a problem believing all the 12 devs he contacted are upset with crunch. I grant him all that.
My position remains completely unchanged after granting him that, because my position does not hinge on whether the decision to enforce crunch is popular or not.
Journalists report facts, full stop. Activists want to further a political cause, such as so-called labour rights, unionization, etc. Both endeavours are legitimate but they are not compatible with each other.
In this case Jason can act as a trade unionist if he wants to. If and when he does so, he's not being a journalist, though.