Community

Dec 13, 2012 -- 7:07AM, Hipster_Cat wrote:

What does context have to do with him not being honest about it being awesome and supplementing the existing tools? It didn't supplement, it replaced with an inferior product.

Because that statement was a joke and not to be taken seriously.  Which is apparent because it was written as a verbatim statement of what someone else light-heartedly suggested Paolo would have to write to make him excited, because it was followed bya  smiley, because it was then followed by a sentence starting witht he word "Seriously" (thus indicating that what preceded was not "serious"), because later he said that he is "also known to make jokes", and because he said he did think it would be awesome but that he isn't allowed to discuss anything else about the unreleased tools, which means that any contrary statements he may have appeared to have made are unreliable.

here's what happened:
Preston_R: In order to get me excited, you have to say "X"
Paolo: "X".  {smiley} Seriously, it will be awesome.
Others: People take his statement about "X" seriously.
Others: Promise backlash if "X" is untrue.
Paolo: I'm also know to make jokes.  But in this case, I didn't say anything untrue. It is going to be awesome and we're not yet ready to tell you more about it.

Four days later, when it's released, people believe that "X" is untrue. 

lokiare: Paolo said it would be "X" and also that he "didn't lie".  Therefore he lied!

Anybody who understands context: No.  All he meant was that he thought it would be awesome and he couldn't say anything else about it.  Also, "X" is a matter of opinion.

And to be clear, the "X" here is "it supplements existing tools".  What happened was that the Character Builder was turned into a web-based tool.  Does the online Character Builder supplement existing tools like the Compendium?  Arguably.  Did it also replace the off-line CB?  Yes.  

More importantly, does the narrative of "Paolo lied" make any sense?  Why would Paolo lie about a product that is going to be released in only four days?!  Doesn't it make more sense to think that Paolo didn't think he was lying?  That he thought he was engaged in light-hearted banter with people, who, generally, were appreciative of his attempts to communicate with the fanbase?  What would it gain Paolo or Wizards to lie about the product four days before its release?  Do you think they bamboozled lot sof people into buying subscriptions in those four days?  Or to not drop their subscriptions in those four days?

The story of "Paolo" makes no sense and in context, it doesn't hold any water unless you squint sideways really hard, and assume completely incomprehensible motives on their part. 

Dec 13, 2012 -- 7:28AM, Uskglass wrote:

Dec 13, 2012 -- 7:23AM, Polaris wrote:

Given the context of the thread in question and given that we were waiting at the time for updates to our (then) off-line character builders with no idea they were going to be yanked (or more accuratedly not supported any longer), the statements were at least deliberately misleading....to the point where I would consider them dishonest at least.

-Polaris

 
I woud consider them to be underdelivering and failing to meet and manage expectations. I would question their skills, not their honesty.

Except look at the DTG of the posts.  At that time Paulo had to know what the new application was and what it could (and could not do) as lead developer.   Given that and given his posts as Wotc's representative, I have plenty of reason to question their honesty in this at least.

-Polaris

Edit PS:  I do agree with you about their competance as well fwiw.