World of Warcraft: Classic

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!

Daidraco

Avatar of War Slayer
10,086
10,411
If not much more. I like to say the WoW Fever broke yesterday as it was the first day since Pre-patch that I can remember I didn't login to WoW!
Thats pretty much the beginning of the end, so ya. Im jealous of the fact that you found something you enjoyed logging in religiously for so long.
 

Ossoi

Potato del Grande
<Rickshaw Potatoes>
17,721
8,757
It boggles me how terrible players can still exist in this game.

Hc+ cos, the pally tank was 3500 gs (my bad for not checking first), resto druid was 4k+. Both couldn't dispel themselves. The druid claimed the debuff turned you into a zombie really quickly, when it's a 60s timer. The pally didn't have resurrection trained lol. That's when I kicked him
 
  • 1Hodjing
Reactions: 1 user

BoozeCube

The Wokest
<Prior Amod>
51,590
302,803
because it's called competing against other guilds. After all, you're on the board of a competitive raiding gui.......oh wait, yeah.

First clear was 7-07-2009 for Yogg-0 you just barely missed it.

So Close Snl GIF by Saturday Night Live
 
Last edited:
  • 6Worf
Reactions: 5 users

Big Phoenix

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Gold Donor>
46,413
98,705
Brian Birmingham, who is the lead engineer on WoW Classic, refused to give an employee a low evaluation in order to meet a quota introduced by Blizzard in 2021. The process, called "stack ranking," requires managers to give about 5% of their employees a low performance evaluation to fit on a bell curve of relative performance. According to Activision Blizzard sources who spoke to Bloomberg, a low rating reduces an employee's profit-sharing bonus and "could hamper them from receiving raises or promotions in the near future."

In an email to staff expressing his frustration with the policy, Birmingham wrote that Blizzard executive leadership justified the policy by claiming it will "squeeze the bottom-most performers as a way to make sure everyone continues to grow." He also said that he was asked to keep the policy secret from employees.
Assuming this is somewhat accurate Blizzard really does have some retards running it. Fire poor/underperforming people? Nah let them languish around.
 

Arbitrary

Tranny Chaser
29,062
79,955
If everyone was doing great than giving a couple of people a shitty eval because you have to give one in twenty people a bad eval and cut their bonus is bullshit.
 
  • 6Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 6 users

Masakari

Which way, western man?
<Gold Donor>
12,585
47,460

Assuming this is somewhat accurate Blizzard really does have some retards running it. Fire poor/underperforming people? Nah let them languish around.

In the letter to Blizzard staff, Birmingham wrote that if the policy isn't reversed, the Blizzard Entertainment he wants to work for "doesn't exist anymore."

And what Blizzard would that be?

Post-FurorGate?
 

uniqueuser

Vyemm Raider
1,775
4,995
If everyone was doing great than giving a couple of people a shitty eval because you have to give one in twenty people a bad eval and cut their bonus is bullshit.
I think we can safely assume two things:

1) they have fewer than 20 people on WoW Classic
2) most of them are dumber than even amateur private server staff so definitely worthy of a shitty evaluation
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Arbitrary

Tranny Chaser
29,062
79,955
I think we can safely assume two things:

1) they have fewer than 20 people on WoW Classic
2) most of them are dumber than even amateur private server staff so definitely worthy of a shitty evaluation

This is more likely by far the case than the whole team kicks ass.

Maybe he's got a Jerle on his team and knows the fellow is going to hang themselves in the break room when they're given an F+ eval and lose their bonus.
 

Sylas

<Gold Donor>
3,689
4,221
only have to give 5% a low performance review? rofl.

at my job literally have to give the bottom 60% a low performance review. 20% good, 20% exceptional.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Ossoi

Potato del Grande
<Rickshaw Potatoes>
17,721
8,757
I think we can safely assume two things:

1) they have fewer than 20 people on WoW Classic
2) most of them are dumber than even amateur private server staff so definitely worthy of a shitty evaluation

Vanilla classic was terrible, from the bugs at launch, to artificial lag, LMAO
 

Ortega

Vyemm Raider
1,183
2,670
If everyone was doing great than giving a couple of people a shitty eval because you have to give one in twenty people a bad eval and cut their bonus is bullshit.
Yeah there's no fucking way they all deserved 100% of their bonus. The level of employee/team that is all around Grade A actually builds something amazing like the original WoW team of 50. The classic team of unknown size can barley remake the game that's literally already done. He just sounds like a panzy ass who wants to give straight A's across the board instead of having difficult conversations.
 

Lambourne

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
2,870
6,871
Screw some of your employees out of their bonus so others will work their asses of in fear and muddy up evaluation records so you lose sight of who's doing an acceptable job or not. And people wonder why these companies all end up sucking.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Ortega

Vyemm Raider
1,183
2,670
He was willing to get fired over the policy. That's not very pansy ass.
I don't get the impression he was expecting them to bring the hammer down.

That being said if he truly believes his entire team deserved a perfect review and he stood up for him then that's great, but I would suspect that view is severely misguided, and I doubt he sincerely held the belief that his entire team was great.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Seriously?
Reactions: 1 users

Koushirou

Log Wizard
<Gold Donor>
5,167
13,057
I don’t see anywhere where he was saying his entire team is immaculate, but a policy that forces you to say some arbitrary X amount of people are shit and will get less or no bonus when some portion of that X people were not shit is stupid. Fuck off with that quota bullshit.
 
  • 6Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 6 users

Caeden

Golden Baronet of the Realm
7,583
12,541
We do quotas or distributions as we call it. It’s bullshit at times. But there always have to be some on bottom. We don’t the amount. But I start rebelling when it’s expected to apply to a tiny pop. Bullshit. That isn’t how bell curves work.

anyway. The technical performance of wotlk has been at private server levels. So maybe the bottom just walked out.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Daidraco

Avatar of War Slayer
10,086
10,411
Classic has a ton of bugs. Some of which were around forever, or still are. Have they even attempted to fix the warlock pet hp bug yet?
 

Tholan

Blackwing Lair Raider
828
1,546
If you do individual evaluation, there is no team, just individuals stacked together. If you want a team, you get one evaluation. Proper leadership will weed out the piggyback quickly
 

Leon

<Silver Donator>
5,602
19,057
I don’t see anywhere where he was saying his entire team is immaculate, but a policy that forces you to say some arbitrary X amount of people are shit and will get less or no bonus when some portion of that X people were not shit is stupid. Fuck off with that quota bullshit.
Standard procedure in corp america. Even if your team of 10 is made of the same clone of einsten only a percent of them can be classified above average and the rest has be to be passable. This is nothing new, and it sucks shit.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Sylas

<Gold Donor>
3,689
4,221
Yeah because all of corp america is populated only by Einstein clones and its totally unfair that not everyone gets a participation trophy.

Boohoo cry more faggots.

The only thing wrong with their policy is you only have to dock 5% as "non-rockstars".

At minimum 50% of your workforce are at, or less than average, thats how math works you fucking snow flakes.


Imagine defending the virtues of The blizzard of 2023.