Beats

dewme said:

Her interview with Verge shows a propensity to glom on to currently popular grievance hashtags that are used to garner attention and trigger emotional reactions in the court of public opinion. The problem with this tactical decision is that facts of the individual case get obscured and convoluted because the individual case is now seen as simply another shameful incident to justify the righteous crusade against an evil oppressor, which in this case is Evil Big Tech Giant Apple.

To put it more simply - this has all of the signs of an attempt to manipulate public opinion against Apple for personal gain. 

It sounds like Apple has all of the processes in place, like the EAP, to handle personnel issues within the organization. These programs are specifically designed to allow individuals to bring issues and concerns to light without having to go through the normal reporting channels, i.e., bypass the chain of command. It sounds like this employee decided that Twitter was a better path to resolving the issues rather than the EAP. This is a huge escalation because it goes from “I have an issue with my employer that needs to be resolved to our mutual benefit.” to “My employer has an issue that needs to be ratted out to the entire world.”

Unfortunately, in the realm of social media and global connectivity the singular to global escalation of grievances only takes a few keystrokes and a couple of minutes to launch. That’s not a lot of time for contemplating the full consequences of one’s actions. Continuing a one-sided attack on other channels like Slack, where the other party is not in a position to defend themselves, or in this case I suspect, point out the fallacies being promoted in a way that would likely offend the person if presented in a public setting, is not any more appropriate. There are simply some things that need to be dealt with in a private setting, not as a way to suppress or cover them up, but because the people involved are still people and you don’t want to humiliate them publicly, even if they seem hellbent on doing it themselves. 

Marvin said:

mr lizard said:

The lesson here is don't invest in any in-app purchases for Nintendo games on iOS. That's a nice tidy profit they made, and now the purchasers are left with no way to enjoy what they've paid for. 

The profit Nintendo makes on mobile is relatively small. Their financial report shows mobile and other IP revenue at 3% ($0.5b) of their total revenue ($15b - from Switch) and mobile revenue is primarily driven by Fire Emblem Heroes and Mario Kart Tour:

https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2021/annual2103e.pdf

Games like Dr Mario aren't nearly as popular:

https://www.pocketgamer.biz/asia/news/71381/dr-mario-worlds-first-month-revenue-is-nintendos-lowest-on-mobile-to-date/

Any consumer investment in low popularity products is risky because there will inevitably come a time when any for-profit business considers it an unjustified maintenance cost.