0

G2, Sinatraa, and Riot being a shitty company

Comments:
Threaded Linear
#1
SAMPV6

Riot games is a bit over their heads.

Yes, Andrew Tate is an asshole and an alleged criminal, and Carlos partying with him is stupid to say the least.
Yes, what Sinatraa did was scummy as fuck and the police was involved to investigate the abuse allegations.

No, Andrew Tate and Sinatraa haven't been convicted for any felonies. So, as much as they are complete assholes, I don't see why "Riot Games" should be the judge here.

Removing G2 from Franchising cost many people their jobs, and like it or not, Carlos is a fucking millionaire and is the least affected in this decision. So who does this decision really punish? Staff and players. Also, should Riot really be policing the a CEO's twitter account? No matter how stupid Carlos is for that, it shouldn't have resulted in this decision.

Removing Sinatraa from pro play could've really halted Sentinels after having a good run in NA, luckily Tenz was a good addition (at least back then), but it really could've messed things up for the team and staff.

Riot shouldn't be the moral judge of anyone here, they really don't consider the consequences of their actions. I don't see how it's fair.

Yes, I know the G2 thing is a "rumor", but boy does it sound convincing.

RIP XSET and OpTic, fuck Riot for killing so many people's careers with franchising prematurely, don't buy the new bundles.

#2
DELUSIONAL_POTTER_FAN
7
Frags
+

^_^ perfect copypasta

#3
ChubbyChoob
0
Frags
+

Agree with G2, but not Sinatraa. But ''G2 got denied because of Tate-Carlos incident'' still rumor right ?

#16
vasswood
1
Frags
+

no its basically confirmed

#4
number1_ScreaM_fan
0
Frags
+

agree with dont buy the new bundle bit. kinda mid ngl

#5
Perma
-1
Frags
+

🤔

#6
SourceAvocado
0
Frags
+

Don’t Care 🤷‍♂️

#7
Trapyy_
0
Frags
+

Riot games is a bit over their heads.

Yes, Andrew Tate is an asshole and an alleged criminal, and Carlos partying with him is stupid to say the least.
Yes, what Sinatraa did was scummy as fuck and the police was involved to investigate the abuse allegations.

No, Andrew Tate and Sinatraa haven't been convicted for any felonies. So, as much as they are complete assholes, I don't see why "Riot Games" should be the judge here.

Removing G2 from Franchising cost many people their jobs, and like it or not, Carlos is a fucking millionaire and is the least affected in this decision. So who does this decision really punish? Staff and players. Also, should Riot really be policing the a CEO's twitter account? No matter how stupid Carlos is for that, it shouldn't have resulted in this decision.

Removing Sinatraa from pro play could've really halted Sentinels after having a good run in NA, luckily Tenz was a good addition (at least back then), but it really could've messed things up for the team and staff.

Riot shouldn't be the moral judge of anyone here, they really don't consider the consequences of their actions. I don't see how it's fair.

Yes, I know the G2 thing is a "rumor", but boy does it sound convincing.

RIP XSET and OpTic, fuck Riot for killing so many people's careers with franchising prematurely, don't buy the new bundles.

#8
SAMPV6
0
Frags
+

nice

#9
charizard_123
5
Frags
+

Removing G2 from Franchising cost many people their jobs

would then, removing EG or whatever org took their place, not cost just as many jobs? It's an org for another org, unless you believe that G2 would've signed more people than them, it doesn't make a difference what people have jobs, as long as someone does, right?

Also, sinatraa isn't removed from pro play, he was allowed to play and even posted a tweet announcing he was coming back. It just happens that no org wanted the brand risk and it looks like he didn't want to play in an orgless team either. I have yet too see anybody that thinks that the sinatraa's suspension for not corroborating with the investigation wasn't justified

#10
alice_
3
Frags
+

riot games already had problems with women harassment in their company, they dont want to be related to any of these again. its that simple.

#11
Noodle
3
Frags
+

Regarding the sinatraa decision, I think it’s fine for Riot to say “you can’t play until the police investigation has been concluded and your court case has been settled,” because at that point he was still potentially guilty (and might still be guilty but it doesn’t matter now because officially it’s probably over). What happens after the investigation has concluded is more important, and as far as I know the only thing preventing sinatraa from playing now is his public image

#13
SiYK
-4
Frags
+

we playing guilty unless proved innocent now huh ??

#15
Noodle
1
Frags
+

I’m not saying that. I’m saying that court cases can take a long time, and if someone were charged with murder or something you wouldn’t want to keep them around for months or years until they get sent to prison. If the allegations turn out to be true, then your company looks really bad for having supported that person during that time, but if you cut ties and the charges are dropped then you can always reopen that relationship and everything is relatively ok.

#18
spookmeister
0
Frags
+

No, hes just saying riot is being cautious. They want him to actually get proven innocent, cause imagine the shitstorm if they let him back in and a police investigation says he wasnt innocent.
It's not unreasonable to not allow an alleged sex offender to compete until they are proven innocent

#12
Tyzehhxo
2
Frags
+

Riot has allowed Sinatraa to come back to competitive play so I don't quite understand why you're blaming them? After the allegations came out I think Riot acted in a way any E-Sports division would, you suspend the player until you complete an investigation? Riot is a company at the end of the day dude any company would literally act in the same way...

In terms of the G2 stuff, I'm pretty sure that was purely a PR move by Riot, again, They're a business and do you think it would be good idea to partner a business who's currently in the spotlight with their CEO/Owner being suspended for 8 weeks no pay? No it looks like a horrible PR move...

XSET missing out on Franchising was a puzzling one to me, didn't really make much sense but im sure Riot has their reasons. As to OPTIC, like i've said to others, OPTIC doesn't have good track record in franchised leagues and with all the behind the scenes drama going on with OPTIC, plus the fact that OPTIC has never done anything for Valorant apart from having a roster due to the Envy merger it would just be stupid to go with them. Riot stated they wanted to partner with teams who were dedicated to the scene and who were willing to give back to the scene and build it with them. OPTIC hasn't done anything like that so far.

#14
turkey
2
Frags
+

riot is their own company and have a right to build their brand and make their own decisions to be anti-sexual harassment and anti-misogyny

#17
firo
0
Frags
+

agree to an extent about g2. ultimately its a business decision and what carlos did was a pr nightmare and brand risk, and also super recent. its not that theyre policing his twitter, it’s because it became a big issue since the public even g2 fans called him out on it, and became an even bigger issue because he doubled down. he’s a public figure and the face of g2, public perception is important. tho yea i would have preferred that only carlos gets punished and not the whole org.

them removing sinatraa from pro play when allegations came out was the right move imo. they needed time to investigate so.

  • Preview
  • Edit
› check that that your post follows the forum rules and guidelines or get formatting help
Sign up or log in to post a comment