Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Nice diorama.

Should not have been sent to Games Day.

Seems like both sides were acting like gakheads.

Eilif wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Eilif wrote:

Frazzled wrote:[So in other words you're now backtracking. Come on, be a man and put your money where your mouth is. Do it.

No backtracking here. I stand entirely by my assessment (as stated in my previous posts) that:

1)the piece was satire and should be considered as such
2)the company was silly -but within their rights- to destroy the piece
3)GW following your suggestion to call the police would have been completely over-reacting and entirely out-of-context

In that case I re-instate my suggestion that you try such as well, and see if its over reaction or not.

We're going to have to agree to disagree then, because I don't see myself working for GW anytime soon.

Wherever you work. You're suggesting its over reacting. Go ahead and see if your current employer agrees with you.

Eilif wrote:There is a rediculous amout of blather about how "out of line" this model was for a professional company, how it didn't fit the requested specifications, could be percieved as a thread, was an insult, etc, etc, blah, blah.

Have we forgotten that:
-This is a company that manufactures burned out buildings of it's own.
-Encourages it's staff and participants to shout WAAGH!
-Makes toys that depict incredible violence.

GW is a company, but viewing the creation and submission of this bit of terrain though the eyes of someone in a financial institution or some other buttoned up corporate entity is just plain silly.

I own two comic book and game stores. I haven't worked for anyone but myself for 25 years. I'm about as 'non-corporate' as you can get.
I sell superheroes and space marines for a living. My eyes are pretty far from a 'buttoned up corporate entitiy'.

That said, I stand by my comments. I'd have fired their asses for doing that.

But I'd have kept the piece of scenery, taken it home, and put it on my gaming table. If you lop off heads, you keep the trophy.

NOw here's the interesting Q. If for store use they have a ruin table, and leave off the bodies, would anyone have a problem with it?

Im not sure what got me the biggest laugh...the piece itself, the other GW people getting so butthurt they stomped it, the reply from GW bashing the creators, or the first reply to the thread being defensive of GW.

Maybe it was all of the above...

JOHIRA wrote:

Polonius wrote:Corporate might look the other way if this peice was tucked into a back table at the shop. But when you send in work to corporate that's essentially a "screw you," what exactly is corporate supposed to do?

I think assuming that this piece was a "screw you" is a pretty huge jump.

Call it thumb their nose, call it whatever. It was a jokey response to a sincere request, which is always risky.

Frazzled wrote:NOw here's the interesting Q. If for store use they have a ruin table, and leave off the bodies, would anyone have a problem with it?

It depends on what they were told to do. If they had perhaps been told to make a ruined building then maybe. To be honest, I think it looked like gak for an official event. Even without the bodies it wouldn't have made the cut.

Frazzled wrote:[Wherever you work. You're suggesting its over reacting. Go ahead and see if your current employer agrees with you.

We're still talking at cross purposes. Your suggestion of a violent drawing would clearly not be acceptable anyhere (except possibly an avant-guard art gallery), whereas the situation I was defending is unique to the GW context.

Any employer taking action against a violent picture in no way contradicts my assessment of the situation posed by the OP.

mikhaila wrote:[I own two comic book and game stores. I haven't worked for anyone but myself for 25 years. I'm about as 'non-corporate' as you can get.
I sell superheroes and space marines for a living. My eyes are pretty far from a 'buttoned up corporate entitiy'.
That said, I stand by my comments. I'd have fired their asses for doing that.
But I'd have kept the piece of scenery, taken it home, and put it on my gaming table. If you lop off heads, you keep the trophy.

Ouch!

Frazzled wrote:NOw here's the interesting Q. If for store use they have a ruin table, and leave off the bodies, would anyone have a problem with it?

This is a good question. I would direct it mikhaila. Would you fire the employees if they built a burned out model of the store without the bodies?

I thought it was a really well done piece with lots of careful details, I think it was an awesome piece of terrain for their store, I don't think they should have sent it out for Games Day, I don't think anyone should have been fired over it, and certainly it shouldn't have been stomped (if, indeed, it was).

A lot of people need to lighten up. Wargaming doesn't have to be Srs Bsnss 24/7.

themocaw wrote:Nice diorama.

Should not have been sent to Games Day.

Seems like both sides were acting like gakheads.

Yeah, because we all know Games Day is srz biznz and it is the last place GW wants to showcase the creativity of the hobby.

BuFFo wrote: it is the last place GW wants to showcase the creativity of the hobby.

But this isn't the "creativity of the hobby", this is a group of employees taking a jab at their employers on the company dollar.

Yes, it's a fun little joke that, keeping it at the store, gets laughs and praise from the locals and regulars. But it's not some sort of "art" that should be presented at a corporate sales event, which is ALL Games Day is. Go to one and tell me it's not them just pimping their product.

It wasn't for their store though.
It was for Games Day. As to lightening up, don't feel very heavy, just of the opinion that it was not what was asked for, and as a showpiece for the intended venue the quality of work was sub-par.
You may disagree with that assessment but frankly if I had produced that for Games Day I would have sacked myself.
That would make me feel heavy!

I thought it was pretty well made and pretty funny. I think that GW would have been better served by taking that piece as being a joke instead of getting pissy, and then using it to show how fun and zany they are. It would have been a better PR move. (I know that someone is going to jump in and tell me it would have been terrible PR for reasons X Y and Z.)
Now, possibly they would have also needed to reprimand the employees for not doing what they were asked, and keep an eye on them to see if they were doing anything else innappropriately. But they could have used that diorama as a nice little piece of "hey look, we're not a souless corporate entity that exists only to convert your enthusiasm into money, we have a sense of humour!". That stuff keeps fans happy and on side.
I'm amazed at the vitriol some of the detractors are throwing at the topic. I think I wouldn't like to work for any of them that much.

But being pissy is what they do best! Just look at all the cease and desist letters and whinny lawsuits GW files all the time when they themselves borrowed/stole a lot of IP's over the years.

Ouze wrote:I thought it was a really well done piece with lots of careful details, I think it was an awesome piece of terrain for their store, I don't think they should have sent it out for Games Day, I don't think anyone should have been fired over it, and certainly it shouldn't have been stomped (if, indeed, it was).

A lot of people need to lighten up. Wargaming doesn't have to be Srs Bsnss 24/7.

They weren't going to be fired over it. According to Hulksmash and another employee of the same region, that store was well-known for thumbing their nose at corporate and they were slated for termination anyways.

As far as I know, GW has no ban on injokes. This is an april's fools joke, yay, but still a nice pun on their very own merchandise:

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/blogPost.jsp?aId=16100001a

That said, joking about your working conditions in front of your customers is not very professional to begin with... But neither is reacting to a defiant subordinate like a ten year old in a fit of rage.

A shoddy piece of scenery can't damage GW's reputation. The legend of the joking piece of scenery sent to a Games Day by a well-meaning little store, only to be stomped by the Workshop's evil corporate inquisitors who fired all the store's staff afterwards certainly can, and only because a middleman wasn't professional enough to send the offending piece back where it belonged, along with a polite reprimand to the store manager.

Ok.
1) The Diorama, concept and execution is top notch. Kan you criticize the quality of their work? riiiiiight L.O.L ...

2) Is it funny or suited to be used.... Yikes, a joke can always be taken different ways. They can say its an apocalyptic end diorama ,
or people can see it as a joke on GW's business practice. aka treating employee like slaves and wanting GW to be doomed etc etc. Certainly not appropriate.

3) Is stomping it appropriate? No i dont think so, even though they have no use for it, i dunno you tell me kan, do you think GW HQ always destroys pieces they dont need?
or just pieces they dont like? :'D

Its nothing new. There was a 'cities of death' ruined GW in the Watford store, complete with gaming table with epic scale miniatures on it.

The one in Watford wasn't there to make a point. I prefer it for that reason.

Even a caption on its base like "The new Armageddon GW store on Hive Primus was only open for 6 days before Orks attacked!" - something to put it in context - would've been fine.

Eilif wrote:

Instead, it's a humorous diorama meant to be set in the context of other burned out model buildings. Further, this all happened in the environment of a company where there is a long history of creative model-making, dark themed models and humor. The skulls, chains, explosions and death are to be taken as satire because they are all pulled strait from GW imagery and used to make a humorous statement about GW.

+1. I agree completely. Companies have been known to laugh at themselves without spontaneously combusting. In fact, the ability to laugh at yourself can do good things for your image. Actors for example have been known to take part in self mockery. Appearing on a comedy poking fun of yourself, or participating in a celebrity roast shows a depth of character. I don't think anyone can claim an actor's persona is not also a business complete with marketing and PR.

GW Obliterates Hobbyist Building, Millions Dead, More Wounded!

Whatever. They were joking/being insulting, it was bound to happen. If I made a diorama of the National Museum of Tolerance being destroyed by Hitler's 3rd Zombie Reich, I wouldn't be surprised if MY hard work was tossed and/or stomped...

Kanluwen wrote:Putting it bluntly:

It's not that much of a 'great piece of work'.

Very little actual creativity went into it and it really just looks like it's meant to shock people who see it.

+1

It's a nice piece for a private collection, but it was not work-appropriate.

Cryonicleech wrote:

If I made a diorama of the National Museum of Tolerance being destroyed by Hitler's 3rd Zombie Reich, I wouldn't be surprised if MY hard work was tossed and/or stomped...

Apples and oranges.

Apples and oranges.

That is the most obtuse bit of Cockney Rhyming slang I have ever heard.

I like it, it was funny and I thought it had a nice sharp point to it as well...but there is a time and place for these types of things.

My wife and I are a part of a professional dance troupe. If we told our dancers to have a group number ready for an important show and they show up to the show with some half ass piece of crap choreography...you bet we would be pissed and heads would roll. But this leaves me to ask a few things...

Didn't anyone check in on them? Because if I were the person who was responsible for managing the store manager, you bet I would stop in to see what they were doing. My wife and I would never just allow our dancers to show up with something on the day of the show that we feel is crap, we preview it weeks in advance first. So why wasn't there an area manager/district manager/something that checked in on them to see what they were building long before they finished?

Like I said, time and place. It was funny but it was not appropriate for the store to make and send that. They knew it would cause trouble or else they are that dense.

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:

That is the most obtuse bit of Cockney Rhyming slang I have ever heard.

I'm not sure if you're being insulting. I have three Brits in arms length of me at my office. Nobody has any idea what your on about with the Cockney slang bit. "Apples and Oranges" is a very common North American expession used in cases of people making comparisons between unlike things. If you were insulting me, I do have a wicked retort involving meat pies that I'm holding back until you clarify your statement.

The point is, if I send something deliberately insulting to either my place of employment/wherever, the people have their rights to react as negatively as they want.

I agree with you Cryonicleech. GW was fully within their rights to apply the foot of Gork to the piece. I don't think that that point is open to interpretation. That being said, another course of action could have been applied, which may have had a more advantageous outcome.

Was a joke
If you have three Brits one of them may possibly have made the connection to apples and pears

Not a lot rhymes with orange, hence very poor rhyming slang

sorry if my attempt at levity backfired and caused ill feeling.