• PenguinTD@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    cause you would then have to dispatch a 3rd party audit to make sure Gabe isn’t reading from a teleprompter that his lawyers prep to answer any questions on the fly. You can prep your script “before” but not during, once you are on the stand you are on your own, subject to the court rules, etc.

      • PenguinTD@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        They will have to face the consequence because then the lawyer will bring up stuff that shows:

        • you know and you are lying
        • you said/did/wrote something and you forget but here is the internal email etc.
        • use that to their advantage when possible.

        Target is to make the case, through Gabe is just a attacking vector.

          • PenguinTD@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Did you followed the Debb vs Heard one? I know it’s kinda special case with lots of video and court recorded footage etc. Gabe isn’t exactly a celebrity that expose their private life, but if internal emails is on the table for discovery then it can also be very different. Cause they will just tell you “you said/wrote make a decision here from this email” then start off that. Like you said who is a better actor? Can you suddenly remember details with which “partial” quote are referenced without context from email 6 months ago for your argument? And then suddenly don’t remember any details making a decision 2~3 weeks ago? From neuroscience, our memory is pretty unreliable as we can fill the gap all we want. But it’s court case just how the judge/jury believed what part they saw/hear.

              • PenguinTD@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                I hope you understand the principle of putting down names and/or title in email for paper trails is a thing, you don’t really think Valve is a “flat” structure as marketed, right? I’ve consider myself lucky that I didn’t run into much political or ethical drama thing for my career, but simply put names down and confirm the decision in writing dodge me quite a couple big bullets.

                  • PenguinTD@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    I didn’t design that system, and I think it is this way because in the past without forensic evidence, the witness role basically put the burden to people who are testifying or on the stand for questions. That’s why nowadays when the suits wants to push shady things they go off record cause they don’t want to keep any evidence. It’s up to the minions to smart up to make sure you cover your own ass.

                    And, sometimes company make or break during trials. I don’t want to see value flop, but I also think 30% is a lot if you don’t even use steam features. (here I mean you only publish on steam, but you don’t use their DRM/Friend/Matchmaking, workshop, lobby, etc. But if a dev do indeed use those backend service I think it’s justified. )