Agent ONE Posted February 4, 2005 Posted February 4, 2005 So let me get this straight. There's a direct correlation between talent and union status? yes. more pay == more effort into work. It always depends on the industry and of course the individual, but I can tell you asside from the minor outlier, union work less effective than non-union. This is how it works: The union protects the workers so they can suck ass and nobody can fire them. Unions = sh!t work. Quote
Knight26 Posted February 4, 2005 Posted February 4, 2005 So let me get this straight. There's a direct correlation between talent and union status? yes. more pay == more effort into work. It always depends on the industry and of course the individual, but I can tell you asside from the minor outlier, union work less effective than non-union. This is how it works: The union protects the workers so they can suck ass and nobody can fire them. Unions = sh!t work. Here here brother. We had a guy here at my work who is completely incompitent and only still has a job because of the union. Luckily he is no longer our problem though, we transferred him off to the Tomahawk group, so if in a couple years you hear about T-Hawks going off course and hitting the wrong target you know who to blame. Quote
Hurin Posted February 4, 2005 Posted February 4, 2005 Bordering on politics here. But I'm a network admin for a university humanities department. A union recently tried to force every technical worker into their organization. Thankfully, we arranged for a vote and the vote turned out to be overwhelmingly against unionization. Though I do consider it screwy that if only 51% of people voted to unionize, I'd suddenly be forced to pay union dues and I would be unable to negotiate my own wages. The way I see it, I have worked hard throughout my life to develop some valued skills. I offer those skills to an employer who then offers to pay me a set amount for them. I am free to work for him or not. If I am unhappy with my job, I take my skills elsewhere. I'm sorry if this hurts people's feelings, but unions are quite simply for those people who do not have highly-valued skills. If all you do is punch numbers into a cash register, and you can be replaced at a moment's notice by just about anybody else with minimal training, then yes. . . you are expendable. In that situation, where the workforce is unskilled and easily replaced, I can see where it would make sense to unionize. The only problem is that unions don't see it this way. They want everyone to be in a union, because it expands the organizations power (more dues, more influence). I quite simply told my boss that the day they unionize my position will be the day I quit. Quote
do not disturb Posted February 4, 2005 Posted February 4, 2005 union workers are slackers, they have absolutely no incentive to work hard casue they get paid regardless of how much work they do...or should i say don't do. Quote
mechaninac Posted February 4, 2005 Posted February 4, 2005 So let me get this straight. There's a direct correlation between talent and union status? yes. more pay == more effort into work. Tell that to the brain dead shufflers at any unionized US automobile plant. diffrent job diffrent skills needed. In answer to your statement all I have to say is that the job may be different, and the skills needed may be totally unrelated, but human nature still applies. Also, according to the following: It always depends on the industry and of course the individual, but I can tell you asside from the minor outlier, union work less effective than non-union.This is how it works: The union protects the workers so they can suck ass and nobody can fire them. Unions = sh!t work. Here here brother. We had a guy here at my work who is completely incompitent and only still has a job because of the union. Luckily he is no longer our problem though, we transferred him off to the Tomahawk group, so if in a couple years you hear about T-Hawks going off course and hitting the wrong target you know who to blame. I'm sorry if this hurts people's feelings, but unions are quite simply for those people who do not have highly-valued skills. If all you do is punch numbers into a cash register, and you can be replaced at a moment's notice by just about anybody else with minimal training, then yes. . . you are expendable. In that situation, where the workforce is unskilled and easily replaced, I can see where it would make sense to unionize.The only problem is that unions don't see it this way. They want everyone to be in a union, because it expands the organizations power (more dues, more influence). I quite simply told my boss that the day they unionize my position will be the day I quit. union workers are slackers, they have absolutely no incentive to work hard casue they get paid regardless of how much work they do...or should i say don't do. The ayes have it. Quote
Myriad Posted February 4, 2005 Posted February 4, 2005 (edited) Speak for yourself management weanies! Edited February 4, 2005 by Myriad Quote
niomosy Posted February 4, 2005 Posted February 4, 2005 So let me get this straight. There's a direct correlation between talent and union status? yes. more pay == more effort into work. Not really. More pay means more pay, nothing else. I've seen plenty of people work harder for less money. If anything, nions encourage laziness. It's difficult to get fired while in a union (and if you get fired in a way that wasn't agreed to in the contract, unions can be pretty brutal) so why put forth any extra effort? Quote
Majestic Posted February 4, 2005 Posted February 4, 2005 /looks up from reading Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle". What's that about unions? Quote
niomosy Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 /looks up from reading Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle".What's that about unions? Now now, that's a bit harsh. Unions severed a good purpose at one point when the U.S. wasn't concerned too much about the workers of the country. Quote
CoryHolmes Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 /looks up from reading Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle".What's that about unions? Now now, that's a bit harsh. Unions severed a good purpose at one point when the U.S. wasn't concerned too much about the workers of the country. At the time, yes, they were a great innovation that promoted the worker's rights in comparison to the company. But that was then, and this is now. Now it's a worker's market where if you don't like your employer or s/he treats you unfairly, get another job. Everyone has some marketable skill that can just as easily serve someone else. Now, most unions are small companies unto themselves, whose eyes are always focused on the bottom right-hand corner of the financial statements and how they can increase it. And the downside to being a part of a union is that you lose direct control over the terms of your employment, benifits and bonuses and the like, because you're bound to the same decisions that affect all; which isn't neccissarily a good thing. Of course, on the flipside, unions CAN provide a unified front to present terms and negotiations to said employers. One person telling you something is a point of view. Several hundred (or thousand) all telling you the same thing is another matter altogether. Quote
jenius Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 yeah... fire bomber really does suck. Just thought i'd see how far off topic this thread would go. Maybe we should do a poll: How bad will the new Robotech be? A) It will be good, it takes largely after Mospeada so it ought to be awesome! B) It'll be insignificant, if it's not vaporware it'll be an amateur attempt from a company with almost no record of originality. C) Pretty bad, it takes largely after Southern Cross so it can't be very good. D) Very bad, with the old voice actors reprising their old roles won't that mean there will be 20 characters with 4 different voices? E) HORRIBLE... we're talking Firebomber bad... on par with Mac7 (if you like Mac7 maybe we should automatically nullify your vote but you can replace it with some other anime you might hate) eh, maybe i'm not very good at starting polls though, that sounds kinda inflammatory. Quote
macplus Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 yeah... fire bomber really does suck. Just thought i'd see how far off topic this thread would go. Maybe we should do a poll:How bad will the new Robotech be? A) It will be good, it takes largely after Mospeada so it ought to be awesome! B) It'll be insignificant, if it's not vaporware it'll be an amateur attempt from a company with almost no record of originality. C) Pretty bad, it takes largely after Southern Cross so it can't be very good. D) Very bad, with the old voice actors reprising their old roles won't that mean there will be 20 characters with 4 different voices? E) HORRIBLE... we're talking Firebomber bad... on par with Mac7 (if you like Mac7 maybe we should automatically nullify your vote but you can replace it with some other anime you might hate) eh, maybe i'm not very good at starting polls though, that sounds kinda inflammatory. E for sure, if HG and Yune is behind these it's gonna suck big time Quote
Keith Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 most of the dialog form robotech comes directly from original dialogue. ::watches Macross, then flashes back on robotech::: Nope, most of the dialogue most certainly does not come from Macross. "Remember one thing Gentlemen, ROBOTECH" "OH Rick" "Protoculture flower blah blah blah" "I will steal your protoculture blah blah blah" "Narrator: Blah blah blah blah blah robotech blah rick blah masters blah" "IT IS MY TIME TO BE A STAAARRR!" Need I go on? Quote
Jemstone Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 most of the dialog form robotech comes directly from original dialogue. ::watches Macross, then flashes back on robotech::: Nope, most of the dialogue most certainly does not come from Macross. "Remember one thing Gentlemen, ROBOTECH" "OH Rick" "Protoculture flower blah blah blah" "I will steal your protoculture blah blah blah" "Narrator: Blah blah blah blah blah robotech blah rick blah masters blah" "IT IS MY TIME TO BE A STAAARRR!" Need I go on? Actually my particular favorite is when they actually DO follow Macross dialogue but it makes no sense. Example: Minmay to Rick: It's called "My Boyfriend is a Pilot Now" (on her new song) We then hear "Stage fright... go away. this is My big day...." Quote
yellowlightman Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 Much of the dialogue awkwardness stems from the fact that Tatsunoko provided in-house script translations and asked that HG follow the original scripts as much as possible, so many of those ridiculous lines are the fault of Tatsunoko, not HG. Quote
EXO Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 Much of the dialogue awkwardness stems from the fact that Tatsunoko provided in-house script translations and asked that HG follow the original scripts as much as possible, so many of those ridiculous lines are the fault of Tatsunoko, not HG. I wouldn't blame on Tatsanuko entirely... a lot of the mismatched dialogue that Jem provided was the "Roboteching" of the script. "Sticking to the script" and the converging of the new story line didnt mesh that well. Macek was obvioulsy given some freedom to mess with the script but did so in akward places. Quote
Keith Posted February 6, 2005 Posted February 6, 2005 Much of the dialogue awkwardness stems from the fact that Tatsunoko provided in-house script translations and asked that HG follow the original scripts as much as possible, so many of those ridiculous lines are the fault of Tatsunoko, not HG. There is that theory, yes. But then you also have Macek who claimed to have a staff of writers watching raw episodes & making up their own dialogue as they went along. While Tatsunoko themselves are guilty for not providing the best translations, anyone who's seen the DYRL dub can attest to that. The level of crap that robotech consisted of can't be blamed on them, as their DYRL translation was far more accurate than anything in robotech. And yes, even with lines like "now watch jet jockey!" Quote
bsu legato Posted February 6, 2005 Posted February 6, 2005 Much of the dialogue awkwardness stems from the fact that Tatsunoko provided in-house script translations and asked that HG follow the original scripts as much as possible, so many of those ridiculous lines are the fault of Tatsunoko, not HG. There is that theory, yes. But then you also have Macek who claimed to have a staff of writers watching raw episodes & making up their own dialogue as they went along. I remember him saying that too. However that can easily be disproven by the fact that so much of the mundane, "non-important" dialog seems to be lifted directly from not only Macross, but Mospeada too. I think we can just chalk that up to yet another Macek-ism. You can't really take anything he says (past, present or future) at face value. Quote
1st Border Red Devil Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 Much of the dialogue awkwardness stems from the fact that Tatsunoko provided in-house script translations and asked that HG follow the original scripts as much as possible, so many of those ridiculous lines are the fault of Tatsunoko, not HG. There is also the cultural aspects to consider. Some things from the originals are simply non-Western...and Im not referring to ethnic animation gestures. Few of them survived into Robotech and I can only think of one offhand. Much of Robotech was NOT written by Macek. Alot came from Greg Snegoff (also Voice for Khyron, Col. Fredericks and Scott), Ardwight Chamberlain (voice of Zor Prime and later of B-5 Kosh fame), Greg Finley (Admiral Gloval and Supreme Commander Leonard) and Steve Kramer (voice of Angelo Dante as well as the Script Editor). Macek's job on Robotech was the Story Editor and Producer. He did NOT direct the series, despite what people think but likely had to be consulted for script approval. There are, of course, numerous instances where the original scripts bleed through in their entirety. Alot of the problems that later arose with Robotech making no sense are in fact items that are not part of the original series. Alot of it came from the abortion called Robotech II: The Sentinels with a healthy dose added by the novels and comics. Quote
Keith Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 I wonder what will happen to HG after this new video release bombs....how much do you think they've sank into it? Quote
1st Border Red Devil Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 I wonder what will happen to HG after this new video release bombs....how much do you think they've sank into it? I'm not certain it would bomb. However, if I had to guess their financial involvement....maybe $10-$20 million. Quote
lt.actionjackson Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 Maybe we should be worried that it might succeed? I know some of us here found Macross because of our initial exposure through Robotech. And with the resurgence of 80s brands and licenses, I wonder what even a moderate sucess would mean? Maybe HG would ease their stranglehold on Macross if they actually succeeded with their Mospeada based venture? They'd have a cash-cow with no licensing disuptes to milk that they owned free and clear. What do you guys think? *ducks incoming fire* Quote
Feyd-Rautha Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 (edited) i wish they would just let studio ARTMIC take over the project as a mospeada sequel! Edited February 7, 2005 by Feyd-Rautha Quote
Black Valkyrie Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 Wasn`t Tatsunoku doing the character design and animation ? Quote
1st Border Red Devil Posted February 8, 2005 Posted February 8, 2005 (edited) i wish they would just let studio ARTMIC take over the project as a mospeada sequel! Does the name Kenji Terada ring a bell at all? Wasn`t Tatsunoku doing the character design and animation? There is the rumour that Aramaki is involved, though that can't be confirmed. Edited February 8, 2005 by 1st Border Red Devil Quote
Myriad Posted February 8, 2005 Posted February 8, 2005 Bah! Leave Mospeada out of this! Leave SDC SC out of this too! Let it just be ROBOTECH Quote
Jemstone Posted February 8, 2005 Posted February 8, 2005 Bah!Leave Mospeada out of this! Leave SDC SC out of this too! Let it just be ROBOTECH Did I tell you that I always liked you? Quote
Agent ONE Posted February 8, 2005 Posted February 8, 2005 Bah!Leave Mospeada out of this! Leave SDC SC out of this too! Let it just be ROBOTECH .... Well if you leave out those 2 then it will just be Macross and we already have that. Quote
grss1982 Posted April 26, 2005 Posted April 26, 2005 Talking about the new RT series, anybody got an idea on what they wil be using for their mechas? I mean how will they ne animated CGI (ala Macross Zero) or just cell animation. I also red some somewhere that DR Movie, the same animation team that brought as macross plus has a hand in this new RT series, any truth to that? BTW do have an account over at RT.com, but i rarely go there. Quote
Wes Posted April 26, 2005 Posted April 26, 2005 Talking about the new RT series, anybody got an idea on what they wil be using for their mechas? I mean how will they ne animated CGI (ala Macross Zero) or just cell animation. I also red some somewhere that DR Movie, the same animation team that brought as macross plus has a hand in this new RT series, any truth to that?BTW do have an account over at RT.com, but i rarely go there. So you want us to fill you in just because you're too lazy to go to RT.com?!? Kids today... Yes, it's Dr. Movie cel-shaded. Search for Robotech threads and there was a big discussion about this a couple of weeks ago. Quote
areaseven Posted April 26, 2005 Posted April 26, 2005 I just saw the PSA for the UN a couple of days ago. It definitely is not Macross Zero material. As far as animation quality goes, it's a cross between the Korean animated film Armageddon and the Korean series BASToF Syndrome. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.