New Atari Console that Ataribox?

[PlaysWithWolves]

 

Does it need 441 pages to point that out ?

 

If you're still asking, then the answer is "yes".

[godslabrat]

Does it need 441 pages to point that out ?

Apparently so.

[PlaysWithWolves]

why all the animosity, If you you don't like it don't buy it... If you like it or want it then buy it.... end of story... wtf?!?!

 

 

 

Why all the animosity? If you don't like our posts, don't read them. If you like them or want more, then read them. End of story. WTF?!?!

[80s_Atari_Guy]

 

If you're still asking, then the answer is "yes".

 

I find it's turned into almost bullying, and often bordering on harassment.

If I was a mod, I would have locked this weeks ago.

 

But hey, what do I know.

 

 

 

If you like them or want more

 

We don't.

Edited July 8, 2018 by 80s_Atari_Guy

[Shamus]

Apparently it's needed 441 pages because people keep coming in here and pushing all the good information down thread with bad/misleading/useless information. How many people are going to see what Curt Vendel posted 20 pages ago (which was really good stuff, BTW)? I would guess, not that many.

 

There's already a cheerleading topic for the Nutari TacoboxVeeSeeEss, maybe you would like it better?

[godslabrat]

How is a company set on taking $3 million under false pretenses subject to "bullying"? If that's the trade off, by all means, bully me. I need a jet-ski.

[JBerel]

Glass houses and all....

 

After the SHITE that was the Retron 1 HD, I think I will stick to the real thing. Awful picture, Awful sound, Awful frame rate. Dreadful machine.

Taken from Youtube comments,

"Hyperkin: cutting corners in every conceivable way."

After all the comments shitting on the Atari machine, it's a bit funny reading comments from idiots buying this shite.

[pacman000]

'How is a company set on taking $3 million under false pretenses subject to "bullying"? If that's the trade off, by all means, bully me. I need a jet-ski.'

 

Not the company; the supporters.

[80s_Atari_Guy]

 

 

Glass houses and all....

 

Wow, I have my own Atariage stalker. Creepy.

 

 

 

How is a company set on taking $3 million under false pretenses subject to "bullying"? If that's the trade off, by all means, bully me. I need a jet-ski.

 

If they've done something illegally, then why don't you all use your laws and report them ?

I mean, IF they've defrauded anyone to the tune of $3 million, then surely U.S. law would deal with them ?

Edited July 8, 2018 by 80s_Atari_Guy

[Flojomojo]

It's not stalking when you post things in the public square.

 

And sometimes people in an angry mob feel the way they do for good reasons.

 

If "Atari" doesn't want to be criticized ("bullied," if you must) for doing foolish things, they should stop being a publicly traded company that takes people's money.

[dj_convoy]

Amazing how much empathy people can feel for a company they have absolutely no stake in.

[x=usr(1536)]

 

Does it need 441 pages to point that out ?

 

We also hate empty database tables. It's really more of a side gig and not something we tend to advertise, but this thread is a convenient way to stone that bird as well.

[MrBeefy]

 

If they've done something illegally, then why don't you all use your laws and report them ?

I mean, IF they've defrauded anyone to the tune of $3 million, then surely U.S. law would deal with them ?

Because they set up flex funding they can cut and run. Backers have zero recourse in getting their money back. Atari doesn't even have to give them an empty shell. That is how Indiegogo is set up.

[PlaysWithWolves]

If they've done something illegally, then why don't you all use your laws and report them ?

I mean, IF they've defrauded anyone to the tune of $3 million, then surely U.S. law would deal with them ?

 

Why get the government involved when one could ignore nostalgic feelings and apply critical thinking? Then one could avoid needing the lawman in the first place, because he or she didn't throw money at a risky venture. Atari said they'd make the VCS with or without crowdfunding dollars. Why not hold them to their word?

[80s_Atari_Guy]

 

We also hate empty database tables. It's really more of a side gig and not something we tend to advertise, but this thread is a convenient way to stone that bird as well.

 

What about Atariage being liable for it's user's posts ?

I mean, I know UK law, but I'm not 100% with US Law. But, posting in a pack mentality, with many posts really close to libel. Atariage, would/could be liable for it's user's posts. So, it wouldn't be you getting sued, it could/would be Atariage.

 

I mean, I have zero intention, or interest, in this Atari box. But I also don't need 441 pages to post this, or to vent at the Atari guys. If you don't like whats going on, then move on.

Edited July 8, 2018 by 80s_Atari_Guy

[x=usr(1536)]

If they've done something illegally, then why don't you all use your laws and report them ?

I mean, IF they've defrauded anyone to the tune of $3 million, then surely U.S. law would deal with them ?

 

This suggestion sounds like a remarkable parallel to the situation with the ZX Spectrum Vega+, in which backers are suing for non-delivery of the product over two years after they first paid for it on - drumroll, please - Indiegogo. Amusing that today's update to that particular saga demonstrates that RCL is trading while insolvent, something HMRC is not keen on. It's also something that has happened in Atari SA's past.

 

As Atari SA has stated a Q3 2019 target for delivery of the AtariVCSbollocks, we'll hold them to that. And if they don't deliver, should backers give them another year to not come up with anything (which was paid for in advance, remember) before seeking legal redress?

[x=usr(1536)]

What about Atariage being liable for it's user's posts ?

I mean, I know UK law, but I'm not 100% with US Law. But, posting in a pack mentality, with many posts really close to libel. Atariage, would/could be liable for it's user's posts. So, it wouldn't be you getting sued, it could/would be Atariage.

Please give examples of what you consider to be "really close to libel". Note: opinion does not equal libel.

 

I mean, I have zero intention, or interest, in this Atari box. But I also don't need 441 pages to post this, or to vent at the Atari guys. If you don't like whats going on, then move on.

Then why do you feel the need to continue participating in this thread? If you want to, fine, but it seems as though only winning move for you would be to not play if it actually is that distasteful to you.

 

Of course, if you want to carry on a crusade to end the discussion, by all means feel free. Just don't expect much in the way of sympathy if you're doing it here.

[bojay1997]

 

What about Atariage being liable for it's user's posts ?

I mean, I know UK law, but I'm not 100% with US Law. But, posting in a pack mentality, with many posts really close to libel. Atariage, would/could be liable for it's user's posts. So, it wouldn't be you getting sued, it could/would be Atariage.

 

I mean, I have zero intention, or interest, in this Atari box. But I also don't need 441 pages to post this, or to vent at the Atari guys. If you don't like whats going on, then move on.

I can tell you that AtariAge nor any other forum or platform has liability for the posts of its users under US law with some very specific exceptions, none of which apply here. This has been well established pursuant to Section 230©(1) of the Communications Decency Act. Frankly, I find your attempt to quash free speech to be highly offensive and disgusting. As others have pointed out, nobody is forcing you or anyone else to read or post in this thread. If you disagree with what is posted here, you are free to provide an alternate opinion or better yet, to simply move along to one of the other hundreds of threads here on this forum.

Edited July 8, 2018 by bojay1997

[80s_Atari_Guy]

But, if you are NOT a backer, then what does it matter to you what other people do with THEIR money ?

 

People lose money, every single minute of the day, across the entire world. The world is not unicorns and magic beans, it's often a nasty horrible world with powerful people screwing over poor people, no matter where they come from.

I see betting shops springing up across the UK, and almost every week, there is yet another online betting company starting up. These aren't here to make you and me rich, they're there to take our money. Before our laws were changed, people could lose upto £100 every 10 seconds. Yet, I don't see 450 pages of angry posts against betting companies.

 

 

 

Frankly, I find your attempt to quash free speech to be highly offensive and disgusting.

 

Free speech does NOT give you the right to trash other people, or post crap about other companies. I find YOU and other here all jumping on the Atari hate bandwagon, disgusting. You are COWARDS.

Edited July 8, 2018 by 80s_Atari_Guy

[JBerel]

It's hardly libel when it's simply pointing out fraud, inconsistency and lies. It's not like a product for sale has been called shite, awful or dreadful. The product doesn't exist to be mocked like the Retron. The mocking is for the bumbling fools who continue to profess they have something they don't or that people said things they didn't, or that they are capable of something they are not. And again, if one is capable and inclined to read an annual report or financial statement, one can easily see lies, exaggeration, incompetence and manipulation run amok with this campaign.

 

I will never understand the mentality that infers the murderer is guilty of nothing before the knife goes in. The thief is apparently also innocent until he makes off with your money. Even if one is partial to that naive viewpoint, in my view, the thief has already taken the money. Just because they offer a claim to have some magic beans, and the marks handed the money over voluntarily doesn't make it any less despicable. Honestly, if other people want to be clueless, easy marks that's their business and it leaves more on the table for the rest of us. None of this makes me angry, but if some fool keeps waving their scam in my direction with their fingers crossed behind their back, I reserve the right to tell them where they can take it. The same goes for any enabling bystanders that keep telling others to leave the fool be.

[x=usr(1536)]

But, if you are NOT a backer, then what does it matter to you what other people do with THEIR money ?

Did you miss this statement from a page back in relation to that exact point? I think you may have.

 

You're an adult, and as such can spend your money however you like. It's not my (or anyone else's) job to save you from yourself in that regard.

 

But that doesn't prevent anyone from pointing out what a colossal shitshow Atari SA has put on while taking your (and others') money.

There you go. Clarification.

 

People lose money, every single minute of the day, across the entire world. The world is not unicorns and magic beans, it's often a nasty horrible world with powerful people screwing over poor people, no matter where they come from.

I see betting shops springing up across the UK, and almost every week, there is yet another online betting company starting up. These aren't here to make you and me rich, they're there to take our money. Before our laws were changed, people could lose upto £100 every 10 seconds. Yet, I don't see 450 pages of angry posts against betting companies.

 

Both gambling and backing the AtariVCSbollocks are spending decisions that people have made of their own free will.

 

I personally despise fruit machines. Should they be banned because people lose money to them? No; if you're dumb enough to keep feeding the things money, you deserve what you get. Mainly I'd like them to go away because I dislike hearing them in pubs, but I'm not likely to get my wish anytime soon.

 

Either way, someone chose to make a poor spending decision. It's not up to me, you, the government, or anyone else to save them from themselves in that regard. Stopping predatory behaviour? Absolutely. But if someone decides to set fire to a pile of money then regrets their decision after it burns, tough. I see no reason to feel obliged to protect them from the folly of their own actions.

 

Free speech does NOT give you the right to trash other people, or post crap about other companies. I find YOU and other here all jumping on the Atari hate bandwagon, disgusting. You are COWARDS.

When you understand the differences between 'free speech', 'protected speech', and 'limited protection from the consequences of your speech', you may come back and reiterate your point.

 

Until then, you're just another increasingly-incensed coward behind a keyboard of his own, hurling insults from his safe space.

[Flojomojo]

What about Atariage being liable for it's user's posts ?

I mean, I know UK law, but I'm not 100% with US Law. But, posting in a pack mentality, with many posts really close to libel. Atariage, would/could be liable for it's user's posts. So, it wouldn't be you getting sued, it could/would be Atariage.

On what grounds could Atari possibly sue this site for the words posted by its members?

 

Is it ...

1. Where people opine on the empty nature of their scammy sales pitch? For a "flexible funding" campaign on a site that has hosted a lot of shady things?
2. Or the fact that Atari's marquee title is has been available for years on existing platforms for less than ten dollars?
3. Perhaps they'd take issue with how someone pointed out that Llamasoft had no knowledge of Tempest 4000 going onto the AtariBox, despite Atari claiming that it would be there at launch?
4. Or the way the person posting on Atari's behalf attacked the integrity of the reporter from TheRegister.uk, only to be throughly humiliated when he posted an audio recording of the full interaction?
5. Or the fact that the person in charge of the campaign can't answer the most basic of questions about the function of their device?
6. Or the way the person answering questions on the IndieGogo page refused to answer questions from paying backers about the way the controllers would work, and provided factually inaccurate information from past Atari products, implying that maybe the new ones could have added functionality as well?
7. Or maybe it's the way people have been critical of the capabilities of Atari the brand-holding company, pointing out that they don't have any engineers in house?
8. Or the fact that Frontier Developments claims that Atari SA owes them a significant amount of unpaid debt?
9. Maybe it's when the public takes issue with Atari's statement that "crowdfunding is to build a crowd, Atari VCS is coming no matter what" despite all evidence to the contrary?
10. Or maybe it's when AtariBox is "not competing with Microsoft or Sony, but doing their own thing" without providing a coherent rationale as to what that might be?
11. Or is it when Atari posts things that say "for illustrative purposes only" as a way to explain not having real hardware or software working as implied?
12. Perhaps Atari has an issue with people who don't like their $99+ Speaker Hats because they find them ugly to look at, and stupid in concept?
13. Perhaps they don't like it when folks point to Atari's own financial documents that plainly state how little they have in the way of assets and capabilities?
14. Or repeating Atari's words that state they prefer low-risk ventures, mainly carried by partners?
15. And that AtariBox was to be crowdfunded to reduce financial risk to the company, and to be licensed to a third party for production?
16. Or how Atari has repeatedly delayed the release of Tempest 4000 for Xbone/PS4/PC, despite the PC/PS4 version being finished for months, and even accidentally released on the PSN store?
17. Or maybe it's the way the non-existent AtariBox is playing psychological games with its backers, offering early special editions that have no clear advantage over the later offerings, and using terms like "sold out" which obviously mean nothing?
18. Or the way AtariBox.com encouraged people joining their mailing list to tweet out "sounds great #atari, can't wait to play!"
19. Maybe they don't like the notion that people suspect this was just a ploy to get attention, possibly to make the company more attractive to being acquired?
20. Or making fun of their non-performing penny stock and their bankruptcy?
21. Or pointing out the myriad ways the brand-holding company don't anything but a legal claim to use the Atari name, because they haven't done right by the name in years.

 

If you don't like whats going on, then move on.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[MrBeefy]

You are COWARDS.

So are you saying that by us not backing we do not want to deal with the unpleasantness of what Atari is going to put the backers through? In that case I guess I am a coward and you might be closer to taco land than you think if you are suggesting that its going to be unpleasant. Lol

 

But on a more like serious note. Check out what Intellivision is doing with their new system vs this one. There are striking differences. If Atari went the same route as them we would have had this big of thread.

[BiffsGamingVideos]

 

What about Atariage being liable for it's user's posts ?

I mean, I know UK law, but I'm not 100% with US Law. But, posting in a pack mentality, with many posts really close to libel. Atariage, would/could be liable for it's user's posts. So, it wouldn't be you getting sued, it could/would be Atariage.

 

I mean, I have zero intention, or interest, in this Atari box. But I also don't need 441 pages to post this, or to vent at the Atari guys. If you don't like whats going on, then move on.

 

Actually under US law in social media (OK, I didn't say MEDIUM), they can not be held liable for people's messages. However posting copyrighted things like ROMS and instructions scans the site can be. The owners of AA can go to jail for that.

Edited July 8, 2018 by BiffsGamingVideos

[AtariLeaf]

Not to mention bringing politics into it is a great way to get someone a permanent vacation from the forums