Todd Parr wrote:
Scott Martucci wrote:They seem to have been reasonable enough to wait until after the event then release a video explaining to their audience in their space that they do not endorse Wheaton Labs.
I understand the point you are trying to make, and they absolutely have the right to endorse, or not, anyone they see fit. Were their actions actually reasonable? Having not been there, I don't feel qualified to have an opinion on the specifics, but if the conditions were as horrific, unsanitary, and unsafe as they say, was it wise to stay, with their children no less? Personally, if I went to a class, a camp, a getaway, of any kind, and I was feeling emotionally abused and in danger, I would hop my happy ass in my car and leave. If it was a paid event, I would pursue getting my money back after leaving and getting my family to safety. The fact that they say how horrid the conditions were, but stayed, makes me think they may be exaggerating the situation just a tad.
Tyler Ludens wrote:
Scott Martucci wrote: the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
Though in general I agree with that sentiment, in this case I don't. Paul goes to a lot of trouble to repeat, over and over in different ways, that his goal is to do things his way at his place. Not to meet people halfway between their way and his way. He has said, over and over for literally years, if you don't like things done his way at his place, don't go there. Period. So if people don't like what he does at his place, it is 100% on them. Unlike out in the rest of the world, he is not obligated to meet anyone half way.
In my opinion.