Fucking hell, he's been with them for close to 20 years, basically half of his working life. He's been there through a lot of shit too, and basically kept The Escapist going through setbacks, cuts, and more.
I would have assumed he'd be largely untouchable there, so to make a decision that led him to resign immediately is absolutely wild.
To be fair, I quite liked Extra Punctuation, and I've always thought he would now be recognisable enough to either go alone, or actually be in front of a screen without animation. This could work out really well for him.
I don't like ZP but EP is quite good imo.
I haven't browsed in years but do I understand correct that Yahtzee does both shows? Is the "actual" punctuation literally him talking slower with pauses and such?
Extra Punctuation was the slower, slightly longer format videos that were more musing about broad industry trends and gaming history. It was great.
Wow, I wish I'd stuck around for those over the years. Thanks.
EP is him doing the same thing, but not as reviews, more generally discussing broad topics regarding games and the industry. I personally prefer it to ZP
Damn.
Props to everyone who quit in solidarity.
Imagine if Dropout picked them up
I love Dropout, but consolidating everything under one roof is just not a good idea. Not only are they different teams with different sensibilities, but it's an unstable industry and if the company with all the "good" content happened to fail, that'd be a disaster.
Is "fired" the right term? Normally someone being "fired" indicates that they are at fault in some way. It's not normal for people to be "fired" in bulk. It sounds more like they were laid off, like the company had to cut costs.
Nick was supposedly fired for failing to meet goals, goals he was apparently never informed that he should be targeting.
Sounds like they were manufacturing a reason to fire him, then.
Yeah...I'm sort of wondering where the guy works. There are some places where there are significant financial and legal differences for companies doing an at-fault and not-at-fault termination.
I mean, I'm not saying that it's impossible to fire "many" at once for legit reasons, but it'd be unexpected, unless you had a bunch of people collectively engaging in some sort of improper behavior.
And the fact that you apparently had other people resign in response to the people being terminated makes it sounds like there are other people who felt that whatever was going on with the terminations wasn't okay.
Depending on employment law in his state, that may be actionable.
Ah yes, sounds like a job.
Fired and laid off are like buy and purchase - perfect synonyms.
"fired" implies "termination with cause". That is, they believe you screwed up and so you were let go without severance, and in a pinch they're willing to go to court on that.
"Laid off" implies they did bulk downsizing and unless the company finds a way to weasel out of it, there's going to be severance and employment insurance payouts and the like.
In the Southern states this is a distinction without a difference because they just shoot you in the face and toss you into the body pit there regardless of the cause of the termination of your employment, but in the rest of the world this distinction is real.
No.
https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/laid-off-vs-fired
Layoff is just a euphemism for firing people. It is meant to make the company sound better when they fire larger numbers of employees.
https://www.monster.com/career-advice/leaving-a-job/losing-a-job/laid-off-vs-fired
https://www.flexjobs.com/blog/post/laid-off-vs-fired/
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/career/being-laid-off-vs-getting-fired/
Be pedantic if you want, either way the person is unemployed.
FWIW you're both right lol.
Well, Nick used that term and he‘s probably in a position to know if it‘s the right one.
"To be laid off", or even better "to be let go", are fucking euphemisms for "fired", "kicked out", etc.
That sort of vocabulary is typically used by HR to sound more benevolent, whereas when it's happening to you, you'll use the more aggressive terms.
According to the guys who left, Management forced unrealistic targets on the Editor in Chief, then used him not meeting those targets as an excuse to fire him. Everybody else quit in response.