• Th4tGuyII@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Poor review” is putting it lightly after how dirty they did that card. They probably wanted it back to give to someone to do an actual, fair review of.

    Also, they were told they could keep it for further testing, but not that they could keep it forever or as a gift. That LTT auctioned the prototype that definitely still belonged to Billet Labs was plain irresponsible.

    • cooopsspace@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah that what I mean, GamersNexus would have given it a fair review and not done an absolute ballsup of the process.

      And yeah, if they weren’t intending to test further it should have just been sent back.

      • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exactly. Linus seems to interpret their conversation as though Billet were going to let them keep it forever.

        It seemed to me much more like, “We don’t urgently need this back, so feel free to run more tests if you want”

        Which turned into, “Oh, you shit all over our product and refuse to do more testing? Can we get it back then please?”