144
Cyberpunk 2077 and The Witcher studio CD Projekt laying off 100 staff
(www.pcgamesn.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
144 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
30573 readers
204 users here now
From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!
Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.
See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Do you think that being laid off is a good thing?
The employees are suffering the negative consequences of the leadership's piss-poor decisionmaking, that was their point. Leadership hasn't seen any turnover or resignations, to my knowledge.
Is it so wrong in your mind to expect a little personal responsibility? Or do you find it just that leadership can fuck up consequence-free and shitcan others for their failures?
If that's how you'd run your company, I'd run the other way as both a worker and a consumer.
I've been laid off. It sucks, but you find a new job, and in the tech world that usually comes with a pay bump.
I'm not saying it's murder, or some other event people don't recover from. We both agree it's a bad thing. And we both agree it's a bad thing happening to the wrong people, based on who fucked up, right?
That's all the person you initially replied to is saying. It's an injustice, even though it's not a crime. It's a minor form of class warfare, where the wealthy fuck up and leave the working class holding the bag.
Well that's the thing, I don't really consider it injustice. I consider it as something that sucks, but things that suck happen. It's just kind of part of life. You get past it. I guess that's my view.
Layoffs aren't the laws of physics, my guy. This isn't a bird randomly shitting on your hand, this is a decision made by people to fire exclusively people who were not at fault for the reasons they needed to do layoffs to begin with.
It's a choice, that's why it's injustice.
If there's no money and no work to be done, the natural outcome are layoffs. What alternative is there? That the company continues to pay all the staff from the management's pockets? That's not exactly a great scenario for the workers either, since there's no prospect for growth, and everyone will still be out of a job once the company inevitably fails. If you see management making bad decisions, start searching, don't wait for the layoffs.
It's exactly that. There's no one person, no group of people, that can control a market. It's a force, an abstract concept at this point. Any thoughts that it can be controlled is hubris or naivety.
I'm not talking about controlling the market, I'm talking about deciding who to fire.
What's your ideal situation? They create make work jobs? Give the development and production teams some brooms and fire the custodial staff instead? Their job is done. Time to find new ones.
My personal ideal? A democratically run workplace with no permanent executive leadership. Rotating leadership duties, with maybe a Roman Republic style emergency power dictatorship, with a simple majority needed to end said emergency powers.
Ideal response to this situation? Fire the leadership who fucked up, or cut their pay at least, before firing anyone else. They make much more than ordinary workers.
You ever seen a camel? It's a horse that's been designed by a committee. Democratically run things don't accomplish shit because you can never get groups of people to agree on anything.
Camels are pretty dang well designed creatures so I'd say the committee did pretty great there. And the alternative is being at the whims of a single person or a small group none of whom have any incentive to care about anything other than the enrichment of their own personal finances. It's a literal autocracy.
Governance structures where the workers own and have a say in the means of production are bound to have their own issues to be sure, but it beats out the current model.
They might be good at being camels, but they're terrible horses. And if you've ever tried to lead a group of more than a handful of people, you'd know they can never agree on shit. Someone has to make the call.
Yeah, that's one way of looking at it. Guess I'd just rather have a voice in a mediocre place than be someone's peon even if I respected their strategy.
Go figure! People with different personal priorities existing! What a world!
No reason to be that way, we were having a nice conversation.
Be which way? I honestly don't know what you mean. I just said why I still have the ideals/preferences that I do despite the problems you pointed out with an ancient cliché.
Y'know, just having different preferences, like I said.
I'm sorry, I took this the wrong way:
Ah, sorry, just trying to be funny
Nice
You ever seen a camel? It's a horse that's been designed by a committee. Democratically run things don't accomplish shit because you can never get groups of people to agree on anything.