federalregister.gov
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Pedestrian Head Protection, Global Technical Regulation No. 9; Incorporation by Reference
NHTSA proposes a new Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) that would ensure passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 4,536 kilograms (kg) (10,000 pounds (lb)) or less a...
![At least this time you’ve chosen to post under your own name. While you appear to have taken several opportunities to attack us from behind the safety of your keyboard and the anonymity of the Internet, it’s interesting to note that when we were all together at a convention last year, you took great pains to sit as far away from us as possible and avoid any and all interaction before running out at the conclusion of the panel. Mysteriously, someone hopped onto the Internet soon afterward, first posing as a person that had talked to us after the panel in order to disseminate fake story points that were falsely attributed to us, and later admitting to being a DW insider--apparently trying to damage our rights to our unpaid-for material by posting supposed script information and also trying to impugn our reputations by spouting more libelous falsehoods. Was it really preferable to do that (or send threatening personal e-mails wishing us “pain and suffering” [Feb. 18, 2005] upon the close of Dreamwave, which you also did--the York Regional Police were very concerned about your statements and behavior, in fact) instead of discussing the matter face-to-face and just honestly comparing facts?
We want to make clear that we bear no ongoing grudge against you despite your many attacks, and we’re both pretty mystified that you continue to do so against us. You claim to get some karmic pleasure out of whatever you perceive our situation to be, but you apparently fail to see the irony in the fact that you have been admittedly burned by the same person twice--a person that you were apparently interested in suing as recently as last year, judging by your involvement in communications regarding a potential lawsuit relating to corporate malfeasance, etc. We’re not certain who or what is goading you to continually make these false statements about us, but we’d like them to end.
Unfortunately, given the fact that you are persisting in this nonsense two years after the fact.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:cinazhyeoo4yvaff2gkizbsl/bafkreichu47xzxdllarb4dsqtibyqm64imotf773rvg5f2tdpir3ma2uzy)
![1) Please stop repeating that we were “fired” from Dreamwave in an attempt to make it appear that our departure from the books was about anything other than the egregious amount of money left unpaid by the company. Whatever personal feelings you may harbor, you and everyone else involved know that the situation was based around the fact that we refused to carry on with “business as usual” until our growing debt and various other breach-of-contract issues were resolved. To give you the benefit of the doubt, we’ll assume for a moment that you may have heard some variations of the truth from Pat or others. Please bear in mind that if you expect anyone to put stock in any such statements, Pat and others at the company had no problem calling you and your behavior “unprofessional, and unnecessary” [July 05, 2004], not to mention asking that you “put a stop on these personal emails” against us and also demanding that you “must operate in a more professional manner” [July 28, 2004] overall--all in response to your continued insistence on making our work within the company more difficult, a goal you admitted in company e-mails that included statements that you’d work to “eliminate you entirely from Dreamwave” [July 28, 2004]. To attempt to portray us as being unprofessional or bad people is really disingenuous and hypocritical considering the entirety of the situation and our extensive documentation of it, upon which we based our uncontested lawsuit for unpaid wages, breached contracts and defamation.
2) The “continuity” points of Volume 1 vs. our work: While you claim to have “called out” this matter, you neglected to mention that you were also the one to explain that things like Red Alert’s appearance were supposedly really art mistakes (for example, Sideswipe had been drawn in two different locations, so instead of redrawing, one was colored as Red Alert) or things just added in to fill out panels because those were the toys that the artist had on his desk at the time. I…](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:cinazhyeoo4yvaff2gkizbsl/bafkreibhkwctjiqawtvhhdse7drhehmp2uyf64kt52qd44iatwfs4fzd5m)
