• 0 Posts
  • 17 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle
  • No I decide.

    Keep telling yourselve that, my friend.

    I’m minimum 12 weeks a year.

    It was 4-8 weeks when I asked you, now it’s 12 weeks minimum. Good for you.

    Have no interest in hiring you.

    Obviously I have no interest in a company as you work at, that’s my entire point…

    Look how you’re arguing about something you have no knowledge about.

    I’m telling you that this concept of “unlimited vacation days” sounds like, in my personal view, a shitty deal… As I told you, if you are happy with the deal, that’s great, no need to get so fucking defensive…

    Also pretty funny that you tell me about my work ethic despite not knowing me at all while complaining that I’m “arguing about something I have no knowledge about” 😂


  • If I don’t have my deliverables in then I would get terminated for performance.

    Right, so you don’t decide shit, your company decides.

    It allows me to take off as much as I want.

    Clearly it doesn’t, that’s the point…

    How much more time does someone need?

    In my opinion? At least 5-6 weeks a year, but guaranteed and enforced by law. More is a matter of negotiation. No paying it out (unless you resign), no saving it up for next year (apart from a few days), not counting holydays, illness and paternity.

    We also have 9 months of paternity leave as well.

    I don’t get why you keep writing as if you want to hire me… You don’t need to justfy your working conditions to me, if you are happy, good for you… I’m simply telling you that if it was me, I wouldn’t trust shit like “unlimited vacation days”…


  • aski3252@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlI hate the rich
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I decide.

    Oh please, then you could just “decide” to take every other month off and nobody would care, you would get paid the same,etc , you can’t tell me that’s the case…

    If you had read my comment, you’d see we are forced to take a eeek in July, two weeks for the end of the year

    Right, so 3 weeks vacation and you can’t even decide when to take them. Sounds like a pretty shitty deal to me…

    I take very little time off.

    It seems that way, yes, so what good does “unlimited vacation” do?

    I feel like I’m already off most the time.

    Are you a hiring agent or something? What’s next, are you going to tell me that your company is like “a family”?


  • Wait, so you get “unlimited” paid vacation days? That sounds like complete corporate bullshit to me… Who decideds when/if “work is done” or not? Even if your work isn’t done (there is always more to do), you still deserve vacation/days off.

    How many paid vacation days do people take on average a year? How many did you take this year/last year? What happens if your company decides that you have taken too many vacation days this year, will they mention it you want to discuss wages? What happens if someone doesn’t take a minimum number of vacation days a year, will they be forced to take them or will they get praise for being a “hard worker”?


  • Or just oligarch or power addict. In the eyes of most people, wealth is about luxury, material goods and fancy toys. Of course that’s part of it, but at a certain point, wealth is no longer about luxury and toys, it’s about power and having control over resources everyone else depends on.


  • they only moved back because refunds started happening,

    Kind of, but refunds only started happening because steam allowed it. And steam only allowed it because there was enough of a shitstom.

    Negative reviews by themselves don’t do much, you are right about that, but they do kinda show a community’s mood (especially to other gamers in the community).

    they had made their money already

    Helldivers is a game that has a lot more monetizing potential than just the initial sales.


  • aski3252@lemmy.worldtoHelldivers 2@lemmy.caIt's afraid. It's afraid!
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    If all people would immediately reward them with a positive review after backpedaling, then their learned lesson would be “just try it out, worst case we can backpedal”. By leaving up a negative review, they might realize that they should not even try it if they want to keep the goodwill.

    They are always going to have this mindset, companies will never “learn it”, they will always try to push anti-consumer bullshit onto consumers if they think it benefits them and if they think they can get away with it.

    They don’t care about goodwill, they care about numbers. It’s a business.

    I will leave my negative review standing, although I also have other points of criticism.

    And that’s perfectly fine, people can leave whatever review they want to leave. But I think for the people who specifically changed their review or left a negative review specifically to protest this specific issue, it makes sense that they change it back to an actual review of the game to signal that their actions have an impact.


  • aski3252@lemmy.worldtoHelldivers 2@lemmy.caIt's afraid. It's afraid!
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    It’s not about trust, of course they don’t deserve trust. It’s about showing them that players have influence when it comes to their bottom line and that they can’t just get away with anything they want to do without it hurting their main objective.

    In other words, be nice to the community and they are going to be nice to you. Be shitty to the community and they are going to be so shitty towards you that it hurts your profits. That’s the only motivation that makes them go back on something that they want to do.

    If they think that people are going to behave negatively towards them and review bomb their games regardless of how they act, they will just keep acting however they want.


  • I think it shows that people yearn for power and control over others just look at all the karens, the reddit mods (you know which kind), the trolls, supporters of certain parties and so on.

    I think that’s way too generalized. “The internet” paints a very distorted picture picture. First, the absolut vast majority of people online are lurkers, so you don’t see what they think or do at all. “Nuanced takes” barely exist because people just blast whatever is on their mind right now into the void that is then interpreted by millions of differently biased people.

    The mods, trolls, etc. are the fringe of the fringe, often the types of people who have no real life, who cannot really fit into society and who have to find other ways to get attention/validation.

    Mods aren’t some kind of villanous power hungry monsters, they are socially untalented nerds who want to do something that feels important, but who often feel unthanked, underappreciated and feel as if everything they do is wrong no matter what they do and who have to deal with the worst of the worst on the internet constantly. And then they are expected to have a discussion about every second decision they make because somebody feels that their comment was not interpreted the way it was intended and cries censurship if the discussion is blocked.

    Given that it is somehow expected that moderation often happens without compensation (even though it is essential to a community), I’m suprised it even works as well as it does. If people in general were as powerhungry as you seem to make it out to be, people would kill for the chance to become a mod. In reality, the absolute vast majority of people doesn’t even think about it, which means the job is left those who probably having human interactions in the first place.

    I guess they imagine that extremist regimes will provide them with that power

    Most don’t think too much about that stuff (or anything really) in the first place. Many “right wingers” aren’t like the disturbed “true believers” you see at rallys or stuff like that, for many it’s just the community aspect they crave and the rest is no mostly larping.







  • Spreading Nazi propaganda is illegal in some countries… The amount of moderation necessary would be unsustainable. And Nazis tend to propagate violence anyway, which is illegal in most places.

    And why is it so important to allow Nazis to “share their views” on your platform anyway? What possible benefit could this bring to a platform?


  • Why would we want to do that instead of just dealing with them one by one when needed or just individually blocking communities/users?

    Who would be “dealing with them one by one”? People seem to keep forgetting that lemmy, both the code and the infraatructure, is developed and maintained by hobbyists, not by a company.

    I’m extremely uncomfortable with an authority deciding for me what I may see in my feed and what not.

    You should really think about this, in my opinion, entiteled attitude… You are not the one paying for the server, you are not the one running the server you are certainly not the one who will have to deal with potential legal actions if illegal shit is going on on your instance…

    You are not entiteled to any of this… You don’t have to pay in any way for any of it and lemmy admins don’t earn any money from you…

    Imagine not only getting into trouble for a hobby, but have random people complain about “authority” because you don’t want to/can’t deal with potentially illegal shit on your server…

    If you are so concerned about “authority” and about “what you see on your feed”, start your own server and federate with whoever you want, or start a server that is collectively owned and controlled by it’s users or something like that… You can very very easily do that…