3 ms·

"If this guy has a booth at Pax east we will cancel it." This isn't how you run a business. Nobody sees a problem with this? This guy is an asshole, yes, but

"If this guy has a booth at Pax east we will cancel it." This isn't how you run a business. Nobody sees a problem with this? This guy is an asshole, yes, but one bad email shouldn't mean your booth gets cancelled at a major video game show. What if I wanted to do the same thing, but for a political opinion? would that be okay?

DavidBishop 15y ago
That is exactly how you run a business. Business isn't just about products. You need people to buy them. If your brand is tarnished because people don't like you, it doesn't matter how good your products are. If you run something like Pax and people don't want to come because you have a reputation for having a bunch of arrogant a-holes, you will not have a viable business model for long. Most people miss the human aspect to business. It's one of the most crucial elements that affects marketing, branding, customer service, sales, etc. If people hate you, no matter how much they like your products, you eventually fail.
- endersshadow 15y ago
  Reminds me of a quote from the Office that I thought was rather poignant: "Business is always personal. It's the most personal thing in the world."
  - shabble 15y ago
    I've just finished reading Altered Carbon[1], and quite enjoyed this quote: 'The personal, as every one's so fucking fond of saying, is political. So if some idiot politician, some power player, tries to execute policies that harm you or those you care about, TAKE IT PERSONALLY. Get angry. The Machinery of Justice will not serve you here — it is slow and cold, and it is theirs, hardware and soft-. Only the little people suffer at the hands of Justice; the creatures of power slide out from under -with a -wink and a grin. If you want justice, you will have to claw it from them. Make it PERSONAL. Do as much damage as you can. GET YOUR MESSAGE ACROSS. That way you stand afar better chance of being taken seriously next time. Of being considered dangerous. And make no mistake about this: being taken seriously, being considered dangerous marks the difference, the ONLY difference in their eyes, between players and little people. Players they will make deals with. Little people they liquidate. And time and again they cream your liquidation, your displacement, your torture and brutal execution with the ultimate insult that it's just business, it's politics, it's the way of the world, it's a tough life and that IT'S NOTHING PERSONAL, mil, fuck them. Make it personal.' QUELLCRIST FALCONER Things I Should Have Learnt by Now Volume II [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altered_Carbon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altered_Carbon
- paulhauggis 15y ago
  "If you run something like Pax and people don't want to come because you have a reputation for having a bunch of arrogant a-holes, you will not have a viable business model for long." So, if I start a restaurant and decide that only Christians can eat here, would that be okay with you? After all, non-Christians may tarnish the quality of the restaurant. If I decide to not hire people with earrings, are ugly (let's say I have a hooters), or I just don't like, I would either get lawsuits for discrimination or from the ACLU. How is this any different? and why shouldn't I also be able to choose whom I do business with?
  - paulhauggis 15y ago
    rolling..rolling.rolling..my free speech is gone.
    - danilocampos 15y ago
      You get what you pay for. Having ill-considered opinions down voted isn't a violation of your right to free speech (which was never guaranteed in a private venue in the first place, by the by). Instead, it's an expression of everyone else's speech. You're allowed to be wrong. Others are allowed to point it out.
  - yardie 15y ago
    First, if you only allow christians into your public[1] restaurant that would be illegal. But no one would come because they found out you were an ass and the government would take you to court for violating the Civil rights act. Second, you are in your rights to do those things. You can't discriminate based on race, age, gender or religion; tats, piercings and ugliness are fair game. If you are in the US, CA or EU you should read up on what the local human rights/civil rights laws entail. Edit: There are exemptions for "members only" places, which is different than public restaurants. but then you would no longer be a restaurant but considered a club. For example, the gym, curves, is members only. One of the membership requirements is being a woman. If they decide to open a coffeeshop on the side they wouldn't be allowed to have it open to the public. It's either fully open or mostly closed, now in between.
- paulhauggis 15y ago
  Even better, I'm going to run a software convention and exclude anyone associated with the GNU or how about anyone that is homosexual? I know there have been cases that have come up on HN where people have been legally excluded and because it was against the ideals of the majority of the community, it was "discrimination". I don't like this guy either, but if you allow this sort of behavior, don't complain when there are other groups excluded in the future. and btw, it's not how you run a business. If he was an asshole when he's there, then just kick him out. It's very unprofessional and childish to exclude someone from your show based on feelings and emotions.
  - danilocampos 15y ago
    This isn't "excluding a group." This is excluding an asshole. How do you conflate imposing consequences on one person's bad behavior, over which they have full control, with excluding homosexuals? Seriously. Is this is a thing where you haven't fully woken up yet and you're just typing to type? Because I've done that and it's the only reasonable explanation what you're saying here. One of the great things about running your own business is that you get to decide your values and navigate by them. Deciding one of your values is never to reward people who are assholes to your customers is an entirely reasonable call.
  - wvenable 15y ago
    You don't even know what discrimination is. It is the prejudicial treatment of an individual based on their membership in a certain group or category. In other words, excluding someone associated with GNU or anyone who is a homosexual is discrimination but excluding someone who is an asshole is not discrimination. Please do not use the term incorrectly.
bfioca 15y ago
"This isn't how you run a business." It absolutely is. If I were running an event like PAX, I wouldn't want someone like that ruining the perception of the quality of my event. Event organizers are on the hook to curate the quality of their associated partners.
- donw 15y ago
  Exactly. Penny Arcade knows who their customers are -- the gaming population at large. Those customers not only buy branded merchandise, but are also the reason that PAX is profitable, because those gamers buy tickets to PAX, and then go to the convention and buy gaming-related goods. The vendors are not the customer. They're important, but secondary to the gamers by a wide margin. What Mike has done is to show, in a very concrete way, that he will stand up for his customers, and in any business, that's a solid move.
  - corin_ 15y ago
    > The vendors are not the customer. They're important, but secondary to the gamers by a wide margin. Actually no, unless PAX has a very unusual business model (which I've seen attempted by one event organiser once, and it didn't go well) the vendors are more important than customers. Obviously, both are technically customers, as both pay money and if you lose 100% of either group your event is dead. But generally speaking vendors are considered more valuable - largely because each single vendor is worth X visitors in revenue (where X > 1). This is still a good move by PAX though, because a.) PR, they got to be part of this story, b.) The exhibitor they banned (for all we know they weren't even going to have a booth - PAX might have just banned someone who wouldn't have been giving them any money anyway) was small enough that the lost revenue was small, and I imagine very replaceable with another exhibitor; meanwhile the upside in PR and what consumers think of them is greater, as a small move shows people that they can trust PAX events to only host "good" companies.
bostonpete 15y ago
> Nobody sees a problem with this? I don't see a problem with it -- I assume it's largely a PR move. If it'll produce an overall positive reaction from the public, it's a good move, right? You're not suggesting there's something illegal about canceling their booth, are you? > What if I wanted to do the same thing, but for a political opinion? It depends how unpopular that opinion is. If you choose to exclude someone who's a vocal Nazi, it'd probably be smart move to publicly distance yourself. If it's someone who just disagrees with you on tax policy, it'd probably do you more harm than good to try to exclude them on those grounds.
- paulhauggis 15y ago
  "It depends how unpopular that opinion is. If you choose to exclude someone who's a vocal Nazi, it'd probably be smart move to publicly distance yourself. If it's someone who just disagrees with you on tax policy, it'd probably do you more harm than good to try to exclude them on those grounds." I don't think you could even get away with it. If there were a large enough group of people that were excluded, you would have enough lawsuits in court to put you out of business. Hooters has had lawsuits due to only hiring "attactive people". There as a guy that sued a bunch of night clubs in New York city due to "free drink ladies night"..and he won.
ilconsigliere 15y ago
I think it's entirely appropriate to determine that you do not want to have a _terrible_ business person occupying an official booth, as long as that determination is based on decisions and actions that person made in a business setting. Particularly a business setting that is in your industry or very close to home. It's not "one bad email," it is a series of emails demonstrating a pattern of ridiculous and entirely unacceptable behavior. Behavior that is unbecoming of any businessperson, and not someone I personally would associate myself with if possible.
- paulhauggis 15y ago
  "I think it's entirely appropriate to determine that you do not want to have a _terrible_ business person occupying an official booth, as long as that determination is based on decisions and actions that person made in a business setting." I believe there was an article awhile back about employers looking at Facebook profiles when hiring. I find this perfectly acceptable. However, many people here in the HN community felt it was a "violation" (even though Facebook is a public place). "It's not "one bad email," it is a series of emails demonstrating a pattern of ridiculous and entirely unacceptable behavior. Behavior that is unbecoming of any businessperson, and not someone I personally would associate myself with if possible." My problem is that if you did this in any other sort of setting, there would be lawsuits about discrimination.
  - Klinky 15y ago
    My problem is that if you did this in any other sort of setting, there would be lawsuits about discrimination. Really? Penny Arcade is kicking him out for being an asshat, not because he's black, gay or Muslim. Don't businesses have the right to refuse service? If Penny Arcade is breaking a contract then a suit over breach of contract is fine, but I doubt that occurred & Penny Arcade can revoke vendors from PAX as they please per contract/TOS. As far as your Facebook example, if an employer was to contact a person who looked drunk on their Facebook & said "This doesn't seem to be a very professional image you're putting out for yourself." and the person replied back saying "Fuck you asshole cunt faces, suck my balls". I think the business has every right to not hire that person.
elliottcarlson 15y ago
When PG mentioned that SOPA supporters were no longer invited to YC demo days did you bring up the same argument?
- paulhauggis 15y ago
  I'm actually going to bring it up now.
mrgoldenbrown 15y ago
PAX is already known (and generally praised for) for being opinionated on the quality of booths. For example, they make a point to ban "booth babes". Kicking out companies that act like jerks to customers sounds like a good business plan to me.
jsavimbi 15y ago
Huh? Have you forgotten the GoDaddy shit-stirring that dominated the front page for a week with everyone under the Sun vowing to switch domains? So long ago, I know, but when the internet nerds focus their rage on a particular person or brand, one would be remiss not to pile on. On the other hand, Mr. Christoforo and by extent Mr. Krahulik have set up what could be the best even at the next PAX East: Paul Christoforo as a dunk-tank clown. Not only would nerds be able to have a go at a real, live villain, but it would also serve to provide the required kiss and make up portion of any public blowout.
- paulhauggis 15y ago
  "Huh? Have you forgotten the GoDaddy shit-stirring that dominated the front page for a week with everyone under the Sun vowing to switch domains?" Yes, I remember the Godaddy witch hunt, the people jumping to conclusions, and the list of businesses that "support sopa". It was only supported because you were on the side against sopa. If there was a witch hunt for something you didn't support, you would be against it. I just wish more people would do the right thing, even if it is against their ideals.
  - generalk 15y ago
    Nonsense. > Yes, I remember the Godaddy witch hunt I get the feeling you don't know what "witch hunt" means. Usually there's no consideration for the guilt or innocence of the subject. In GoDaddy's case they stated their support for SOPA, and received backlash from SOPA's detractors. > I just wish more people would do the right thing, even if > it is against their ideals. What's wrong with standing up for ideals you believe in? I claim that it is not wrong for a person to publicly announce that they will not do business with a person or company they find distasteful.

DavidBishop 15y ago

That is exactly how you run a business. Business isn't just about products. You need people to buy them. If your brand is tarnished because people don't like you, it doesn't matter how good your products are. If you run something like Pax and people don't want to come because you have a reputation for having a bunch of arrogant a-holes, you will not have a viable business model for long. Most people miss the human aspect to business. It's one of the most crucial elements that affects marketing, branding, customer service, sales, etc. If people hate you, no matter how much they like your products, you eventually fail.

endersshadow 15y ago
Reminds me of a quote from the Office that I thought was rather poignant: "Business is always personal. It's the most personal thing in the world."
- shabble 15y ago
  I've just finished reading Altered Carbon[1], and quite enjoyed this quote: 'The personal, as every one's so fucking fond of saying, is political. So if some idiot politician, some power player, tries to execute policies that harm you or those you care about, TAKE IT PERSONALLY. Get angry. The Machinery of Justice will not serve you here — it is slow and cold, and it is theirs, hardware and soft-. Only the little people suffer at the hands of Justice; the creatures of power slide out from under -with a -wink and a grin. If you want justice, you will have to claw it from them. Make it PERSONAL. Do as much damage as you can. GET YOUR MESSAGE ACROSS. That way you stand afar better chance of being taken seriously next time. Of being considered dangerous. And make no mistake about this: being taken seriously, being considered dangerous marks the difference, the ONLY difference in their eyes, between players and little people. Players they will make deals with. Little people they liquidate. And time and again they cream your liquidation, your displacement, your torture and brutal execution with the ultimate insult that it's just business, it's politics, it's the way of the world, it's a tough life and that IT'S NOTHING PERSONAL, mil, fuck them. Make it personal.' QUELLCRIST FALCONER Things I Should Have Learnt by Now Volume II [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altered_Carbon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altered_Carbon
paulhauggis 15y ago
"If you run something like Pax and people don't want to come because you have a reputation for having a bunch of arrogant a-holes, you will not have a viable business model for long." So, if I start a restaurant and decide that only Christians can eat here, would that be okay with you? After all, non-Christians may tarnish the quality of the restaurant. If I decide to not hire people with earrings, are ugly (let's say I have a hooters), or I just don't like, I would either get lawsuits for discrimination or from the ACLU. How is this any different? and why shouldn't I also be able to choose whom I do business with?
- paulhauggis 15y ago
  rolling..rolling.rolling..my free speech is gone.
  - danilocampos 15y ago
    You get what you pay for. Having ill-considered opinions down voted isn't a violation of your right to free speech (which was never guaranteed in a private venue in the first place, by the by). Instead, it's an expression of everyone else's speech. You're allowed to be wrong. Others are allowed to point it out.
- yardie 15y ago
  First, if you only allow christians into your public[1] restaurant that would be illegal. But no one would come because they found out you were an ass and the government would take you to court for violating the Civil rights act. Second, you are in your rights to do those things. You can't discriminate based on race, age, gender or religion; tats, piercings and ugliness are fair game. If you are in the US, CA or EU you should read up on what the local human rights/civil rights laws entail. Edit: There are exemptions for "members only" places, which is different than public restaurants. but then you would no longer be a restaurant but considered a club. For example, the gym, curves, is members only. One of the membership requirements is being a woman. If they decide to open a coffeeshop on the side they wouldn't be allowed to have it open to the public. It's either fully open or mostly closed, now in between.
paulhauggis 15y ago
Even better, I'm going to run a software convention and exclude anyone associated with the GNU or how about anyone that is homosexual? I know there have been cases that have come up on HN where people have been legally excluded and because it was against the ideals of the majority of the community, it was "discrimination". I don't like this guy either, but if you allow this sort of behavior, don't complain when there are other groups excluded in the future. and btw, it's not how you run a business. If he was an asshole when he's there, then just kick him out. It's very unprofessional and childish to exclude someone from your show based on feelings and emotions.
- danilocampos 15y ago
  This isn't "excluding a group." This is excluding an asshole. How do you conflate imposing consequences on one person's bad behavior, over which they have full control, with excluding homosexuals? Seriously. Is this is a thing where you haven't fully woken up yet and you're just typing to type? Because I've done that and it's the only reasonable explanation what you're saying here. One of the great things about running your own business is that you get to decide your values and navigate by them. Deciding one of your values is never to reward people who are assholes to your customers is an entirely reasonable call.
- wvenable 15y ago
  You don't even know what discrimination is. It is the prejudicial treatment of an individual based on their membership in a certain group or category. In other words, excluding someone associated with GNU or anyone who is a homosexual is discrimination but excluding someone who is an asshole is not discrimination. Please do not use the term incorrectly.

bfioca 15y ago

"This isn't how you run a business." It absolutely is. If I were running an event like PAX, I wouldn't want someone like that ruining the perception of the quality of my event. Event organizers are on the hook to curate the quality of their associated partners.

donw 15y ago
Exactly. Penny Arcade knows who their customers are -- the gaming population at large. Those customers not only buy branded merchandise, but are also the reason that PAX is profitable, because those gamers buy tickets to PAX, and then go to the convention and buy gaming-related goods. The vendors are not the customer. They're important, but secondary to the gamers by a wide margin. What Mike has done is to show, in a very concrete way, that he will stand up for his customers, and in any business, that's a solid move.
- corin_ 15y ago
  > The vendors are not the customer. They're important, but secondary to the gamers by a wide margin. Actually no, unless PAX has a very unusual business model (which I've seen attempted by one event organiser once, and it didn't go well) the vendors are more important than customers. Obviously, both are technically customers, as both pay money and if you lose 100% of either group your event is dead. But generally speaking vendors are considered more valuable - largely because each single vendor is worth X visitors in revenue (where X > 1). This is still a good move by PAX though, because a.) PR, they got to be part of this story, b.) The exhibitor they banned (for all we know they weren't even going to have a booth - PAX might have just banned someone who wouldn't have been giving them any money anyway) was small enough that the lost revenue was small, and I imagine very replaceable with another exhibitor; meanwhile the upside in PR and what consumers think of them is greater, as a small move shows people that they can trust PAX events to only host "good" companies.

bostonpete 15y ago

> Nobody sees a problem with this? I don't see a problem with it -- I assume it's largely a PR move. If it'll produce an overall positive reaction from the public, it's a good move, right? You're not suggesting there's something illegal about canceling their booth, are you? > What if I wanted to do the same thing, but for a political opinion? It depends how unpopular that opinion is. If you choose to exclude someone who's a vocal Nazi, it'd probably be smart move to publicly distance yourself. If it's someone who just disagrees with you on tax policy, it'd probably do you more harm than good to try to exclude them on those grounds.

paulhauggis 15y ago
"It depends how unpopular that opinion is. If you choose to exclude someone who's a vocal Nazi, it'd probably be smart move to publicly distance yourself. If it's someone who just disagrees with you on tax policy, it'd probably do you more harm than good to try to exclude them on those grounds." I don't think you could even get away with it. If there were a large enough group of people that were excluded, you would have enough lawsuits in court to put you out of business. Hooters has had lawsuits due to only hiring "attactive people". There as a guy that sued a bunch of night clubs in New York city due to "free drink ladies night"..and he won.

ilconsigliere 15y ago

I think it's entirely appropriate to determine that you do not want to have a _terrible_ business person occupying an official booth, as long as that determination is based on decisions and actions that person made in a business setting. Particularly a business setting that is in your industry or very close to home. It's not "one bad email," it is a series of emails demonstrating a pattern of ridiculous and entirely unacceptable behavior. Behavior that is unbecoming of any businessperson, and not someone I personally would associate myself with if possible.

paulhauggis 15y ago
"I think it's entirely appropriate to determine that you do not want to have a _terrible_ business person occupying an official booth, as long as that determination is based on decisions and actions that person made in a business setting." I believe there was an article awhile back about employers looking at Facebook profiles when hiring. I find this perfectly acceptable. However, many people here in the HN community felt it was a "violation" (even though Facebook is a public place). "It's not "one bad email," it is a series of emails demonstrating a pattern of ridiculous and entirely unacceptable behavior. Behavior that is unbecoming of any businessperson, and not someone I personally would associate myself with if possible." My problem is that if you did this in any other sort of setting, there would be lawsuits about discrimination.
- Klinky 15y ago
  My problem is that if you did this in any other sort of setting, there would be lawsuits about discrimination. Really? Penny Arcade is kicking him out for being an asshat, not because he's black, gay or Muslim. Don't businesses have the right to refuse service? If Penny Arcade is breaking a contract then a suit over breach of contract is fine, but I doubt that occurred & Penny Arcade can revoke vendors from PAX as they please per contract/TOS. As far as your Facebook example, if an employer was to contact a person who looked drunk on their Facebook & said "This doesn't seem to be a very professional image you're putting out for yourself." and the person replied back saying "Fuck you asshole cunt faces, suck my balls". I think the business has every right to not hire that person.

elliottcarlson 15y ago

When PG mentioned that SOPA supporters were no longer invited to YC demo days did you bring up the same argument?

paulhauggis 15y ago
I'm actually going to bring it up now.

mrgoldenbrown 15y ago

PAX is already known (and generally praised for) for being opinionated on the quality of booths. For example, they make a point to ban "booth babes". Kicking out companies that act like jerks to customers sounds like a good business plan to me.

jsavimbi 15y ago

Huh? Have you forgotten the GoDaddy shit-stirring that dominated the front page for a week with everyone under the Sun vowing to switch domains? So long ago, I know, but when the internet nerds focus their rage on a particular person or brand, one would be remiss not to pile on. On the other hand, Mr. Christoforo and by extent Mr. Krahulik have set up what could be the best even at the next PAX East: Paul Christoforo as a dunk-tank clown. Not only would nerds be able to have a go at a real, live villain, but it would also serve to provide the required kiss and make up portion of any public blowout.

paulhauggis 15y ago
"Huh? Have you forgotten the GoDaddy shit-stirring that dominated the front page for a week with everyone under the Sun vowing to switch domains?" Yes, I remember the Godaddy witch hunt, the people jumping to conclusions, and the list of businesses that "support sopa". It was only supported because you were on the side against sopa. If there was a witch hunt for something you didn't support, you would be against it. I just wish more people would do the right thing, even if it is against their ideals.
- generalk 15y ago
  Nonsense. > Yes, I remember the Godaddy witch hunt I get the feeling you don't know what "witch hunt" means. Usually there's no consideration for the guilt or innocence of the subject. In GoDaddy's case they stated their support for SOPA, and received backlash from SOPA's detractors. > I just wish more people would do the right thing, even if > it is against their ideals. What's wrong with standing up for ideals you believe in? I claim that it is not wrong for a person to publicly announce that they will not do business with a person or company they find distasteful.