Microsoft fires tester for speaking out about red rings
by Justin McElroy 
{ Sep 15th 2008 at 1:00PM }
When tester Robert Delaware spoke with VentureBeat about problems with the 360 hardware, he said he did so because he "believes passionately in his work ... and in the Xbox 360 gamer community." Now, Delaware has been rewarded for that passion by being fired by Microsoft. Lest there be any doubt about Delaware's job performance, VB reports that a Microsoft manager told him it was as a direct result of aiding with the article.The twist? Well, we're going to have to side with the giant corporation on this one. If Microsoft was still insisting that nothing was wrong, that would be one thing, but its decision is already hurting it both in the pocketbook and in the reputation department. Plus, Delaware even said he knew this was a possible repercussion of his actions. We hate for anybody to be out of a gig, but our advice to Delaware would be this: There's a reason some sources are anonymous, and it's not just so they can wear cool hats and hang out in dimly lit parking garages.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Ubiqutous Oxymoron @ Sep 15th 2008 1:04PM
fuel for the fire imo,
contractual obligations aside, no one is coming out of this smelling of roses, the whole thing is 'balls-nasty'
Ridgecity @ Sep 15th 2008 1:26PM
"The twist? Well, we're going to have to side with the giant corporation on this one."
So he is, like a BIG FUCKIN ASSHOLE or something? He deserved to be fired for telling the truth? that's real nice Joystiq,sounds like you are making a business decision here also...
aristokrat @ Sep 15th 2008 1:49PM
Well, if by 'big fucking asshole' you mean he blatantly disregarded a contract he had signed, then yes. This thing wreaks of "I want my 15 minutes," because it's not like we didn't know the 360 could red-ring, so he wasn't really doing a public service or anything. He chose not to be anonymous simply because he wanted to be known. Breaking contracts for the public good is one thing, but breaking contracts (no matter what you think of them, since you signed them originally) because you want you're name out there makes you a 'big fucking asshole.' I feel no sympathy for this guy, especially since even he knew it was coming.
aristokrat @ Sep 15th 2008 1:49PM
Well, if by 'big fucking asshole' you mean he blatantly disregarded a contract he had signed, then yes. This thing wreaks of "I want my 15 minutes," because it's not like we didn't know the 360 could red-ring, so he wasn't really doing a public service or anything. He chose not to be anonymous simply because he wanted to be known. Breaking contracts for the public good is one thing, but breaking contracts (no matter what you think of them, since you signed them originally) because you want you're name out there makes you a 'big fucking asshole.' I feel no sympathy for this guy, especially since even he knew it was coming.
Boffo the Sock @ Sep 15th 2008 1:49PM
@Ridgecity
"He deserved to be fired for telling the truth?"
Yes. He's not a big asshole though. He's a big bonehead. He was beholden to an agreement that he violated the terms of resulting in his termination. It's not exactly a conspiracy theory, and Joystiq is not in on it.
aristokrat @ Sep 15th 2008 1:51PM
Damn itchy mouse finger! Though, I am now thoroughly confused how both of them got through (I'd think that the second click would have re-initiated the submit request)?
borland502 (SDF Macross) @ Sep 15th 2008 2:27PM
"He deserved to be fired for telling the truth?"
Yes Virginia, sadly he did deserve to get fired for telling the truth. As Joystiq already commented, while the exact causes are still hidden, the corporation has acknowledged the problem and offered a remedy. I don't like how long it took Microsoft to come to that pass, but part of being entrusted with corporate secrets is to keep them secret.
Any person has a moral right to resist something they believe to be wrong. But here's the second part that a lot of folks miss: Accepting the consequences of defiance. He's legally in the wrong and knew it. He might have counted on reprimand rather than dismissal, but he still knew what he was doing.
It's a bitch, but what would you expect Mirosoft or his company to do? I'd be interested to know if he tried anything within the rules before jumping to the press.
xGeneral DEATHx @ Sep 15th 2008 2:37PM
@ridgecity:
It's called an NDA, and I'm sure Microsoft had him sign one...look it up.
Adam @ Sep 15th 2008 1:06PM
As former tester, you sign a contract saying you will not talk about what you are working on, worked on, or will be working on in any context.
Jack @ Sep 15th 2008 4:13PM
First rule of being a tester is,
YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT BEING A TESTER!!
Red Leader @ Sep 15th 2008 1:08PM
Ouch...
Ayrkain @ Sep 15th 2008 1:09PM
Obviously he violated agreements and earned the firing. And MS is well within their rights to bring civil suit. However, that could generate more news headlines, which I would think runs contrary to their interests.
j.howlett @ Sep 15th 2008 1:10PM
joystiq siding with microsoft? shocking
Shagittarius @ Sep 15th 2008 1:21PM
ooooh...living dangerously...here comes the ban-copter.
fap-fap-fap-fAP-FAP-FAP
deaftly @ Sep 15th 2008 1:24PM
Sony fanboy calling Joystiq biased?!?
SHOCKING.
j.howlett @ Sep 15th 2008 1:28PM
they just applied for a position a few days ago. would you piss off a potential employer by siding with a guy they just fired?
Desi_D @ Sep 15th 2008 1:38PM
"Sony fanboy calling Joystiq biased?!?
SHOCKING."
Deaftly defending 'stiq's bias once again?!
MEGASHOCKING.
Shagittarius @ Sep 15th 2008 2:00PM
FAP-FAP-FAP-FAP-FAP
Morisato @ Sep 15th 2008 2:11PM
Stop fapping... this is a family friendly blog.
Mr Khan @ Sep 15th 2008 2:23PM
It is rather disturbing that the onomatopoeia for a helicopter is the same as the onomatopoeia for jacking off
xGeneral DEATHx @ Sep 15th 2008 2:40PM
I would try to use "Whup-Whup-Whup" instead, but I'm sure something dirty would come of that as well.
Shagittarius @ Sep 15th 2008 3:01PM
I'm taking FAP back.
Jakka(Free Mr.ESC!) @ Sep 15th 2008 3:15PM
Shag, every time you bring out this out this analogy, somebody point this out. Just beat it.
zuburi @ Sep 15th 2008 3:24PM
He IS beating it, what with all the fapping!
Shagittarius @ Sep 15th 2008 3:29PM
Isn't it funny that a helicopter is also actually a sexual act?
j.howlett @ Sep 15th 2008 3:34PM
i always liked whumpa-whumpa-whumpa-whumpa. i forget how it's done in comics though
Levi @ Sep 15th 2008 4:18PM
Jakka(Free Mr.ESC!): "Shag...Just beat it."
LOL!
SoulBlade @ Sep 15th 2008 1:12PM
yea... we all know at this point MS fucked up and didn't really care about reliability when they released the 360. Sure they instituted the warranty program, but they still fucked up and I bet they'd do it again if they felt it would make them #1. I'm sure they didn't count on the Wii's success otherwise the move would have given them some huge bragging rights.
This guy is an idiot - should have been anonymous. He's pretty much screwed at this point - why would you tell MS to bring it on in terms of legal action.. I'm sure he had NDAs to sign - he's done.
J.Goodwin @ Sep 15th 2008 1:49PM
Microsoft jumped the gun because Sony flinched on the starting line. They wanted (needed, remember how much they were losing on every Xbox they sold) to get out of the gate first, and Sony claimed they were on target for a November launch. Unfortunately, Sony didn't say WHICH November.
SneezyPorcupine @ Sep 15th 2008 1:14PM
Yah... I would side with Microsoft on this. All this guy did was point out something that was already in the open. Microsoft has already blew $1B on RROD repairs, which is pretty much an admission that the fault lies within the hardware and not with the consumer.
So all this guy did was show that he isn't a team-player. He is just spewing the same negativity surrounding the console already, as opposed to being there and at least making an attempt at finding solutions.
Besides, companies have non-disclosure agreements that go as far as not discussing anything regarding the certain aspects of a product outside of work. In Microsoft's case, I'm sure it spans out to the 360's hardware and architecture. Even if he was praising the 360 in his interview, but had gone in to detail regarding the 360's innards, that could also be grounds for termination.
JoeTheBlow @ Sep 15th 2008 3:49PM
"“If you coordinated the music player with the dashboard, you could get almost every 360 to lock up,” he said in an interview. “I did it first on a combo DVD/audio disk. With NBA 2K6, you would select the music. The screen went black.”"
Thats pretty much the entirity of his comments in the article. HOW THE FUCK does that deserve sacking.
The guy was a tester, it was his job to find things wrong with the console. He found them, reported them, they ignored him.
He comments on it on some website and now hes out of work, along with 25000 other people today, in the worst job market of all time.
How can any fucker say he deserves it, you're all console Nazi's.
"He defied the fuehrer, execute him!"
Exo @ Sep 15th 2008 4:00PM
yea and he also signd a nda contract dipshit, which means he violated his contract, it doesnt matter for what reason
Lone Starr @ Sep 15th 2008 4:26PM
"in the worst job market of all time."
Not at all. You really need to put things into perspective.
SneezyPorcupine @ Sep 15th 2008 4:32PM
@ JoeTheBlow:
Okay, you can argue this all you want and you can moan all about how your sorry the guy got fired... but then he shouldn't have signed a contract if he didn't know what it was.
He signed an NDA and put himself in MS's hands and you expect MS not to exercise their rights? If MS doesn't enforce their policies and make an example of someone every employee will be spewing their crap all over the internets and tabloids.
So all I have to say to you sir, is: You can blow it out your ass.
Courtney @ Sep 15th 2008 5:44PM
Actually, what this guy did was confirm that an RROD could be replicated, on every machine, buy taking one particular action:
"He found a bug that could cause a reproducible crash on every game he tested. ... The NBA 2K6 flaw resulted in the Red Rings of Death."
Maybe I missed this being reported earlier? Had it ever been confirmed before now that an RROD was able to be reproduced?
If this confirmation of reproducibility is new, then it actually is whistle-blower level information, as it always appeared to be a crap-shot about whether or not your machine red-ringed. This helps validate the stories of people having multiple machines RROD on them. If there are multiple errors (which he indicates there are), that can force a red-ring, then it does in fact make it likely that some people will crash multiple consoles. If you have a particular game you like, and it can create one of these errors, it seems likely that you are going to end up RRODing multiple machines because you don't know what the root cause is and you initially assume your repaired machine will be immune from an RROD.
Did MS have the right to fire him? Absolutely. But, gamers curious about the full story behind the RROD mess should be thankful for another piece of the puzzle. If I'm wrong, and the reporting of reproducibility is old news, please vote me down and provide a link.
Tez (PSN: Tezasaurus) @ Sep 15th 2008 1:14PM
There's no side to take. Dude knew he could get fired for it, did it anyway. Microsoft did what was within their rights and fired him. Non-story.
MarMcMarKingofMars @ Sep 15th 2008 1:15PM
"If Microsoft was still insisting that nothing was wrong, that would be one thing, but its decision is already hurting it both in the pocketbook and in the reputation department."
I'm sorry but there's no verisimilitude in this explanation -- how does Microsoft "hurting" justify terminating someone's employment...? If a guy has a mid-life crisis and wallows in pity all day, should his wife have no right to criticize him since he's suffering?
Also, on the guy saying there'd be repercussions... its called rhetoric. Politicians often start speeches, for example, saying something along the lines of "I'm not so good at fancy speeches or smooth talking..." -- that's not an invitation for the audience to boo him off, f.y.i.
SoulBlade @ Sep 15th 2008 2:42PM
How long you been waiting to use the word "verisimilitude" on one of these posts? ;)
SneezyPorcupine @ Sep 15th 2008 1:18PM
Yah... I would side with Microsoft on this. All this guy did was point out something that was already in the open. Microsoft has already blew $1B on RROD repairs, which is pretty much an admission that the fault lies within the hardware and not with the consumer.
So all this guy did was show that he isn't a team-player. He is just spewing the same negativity surrounding the console already, as opposed to being there and at least making an attempt at finding solutions.
Besides, companies have non-disclosure agreements that go as far as not discussing anything regarding the certain aspects of a product outside of work. In Microsoft's case, I'm sure it spans out to the 360's hardware and architecture. Even if he was praising the 360 in his interview, but had gone in to detail regarding the 360's innards, that could also be grounds for termination.
Pointz @ Sep 15th 2008 7:05PM
You'd side with Microsoft even if they'd kicked you in the nuts. Come on, how many of you read the contracts you get from work...thoroughly? Also how many off you read through all of the User/License agreement when you sign up to something? I wouldn't and don't think he did neither
SneezyPorcupine @ Sep 15th 2008 7:34PM
It doesn't matter. He said himself that this will probably get him fired. So he must have had some clue as to wtf was in his contract.
And it still doesn't matter whether he read it or not. Once he signed it, it's a done deal. You can't sign it and then once you get called on some shit that you did, say oh well, I didn't know. If you knew next to anything regarding legality of contracts, you would know that ignorance would get you shit all. It's called taking responsibility for your actions. Maybe you'll learn about it once you get out of mommy's basement, and I'm sure it will be a VERY hard lessons for the likes of you.
Seedee Vee @ Sep 15th 2008 1:25PM
What kind of scumbags work/read at this site?
Fire the guy for telling the truth? NDAs are for protecting trade secrets not for CYAing obvious truths.
You guys are ball-less wonders . . . .
Waqman @ Sep 15th 2008 1:30PM
[I've been banned for being rude.]
Nate @ Sep 15th 2008 1:41PM
You guys don't know what you're talking about. I'm 100% sure that when this guy signed on as a contractor, he signed a CONTRACT that said "You are not allowed to talk to the media about Microsoft's business". It's incredibly standard, and anyone doing anything similar at any other company would also get fired.
You're breaking a contract. He's not a whistleblower, Microsoft hasn't been doing anything illegal nor asked him to do anything illegal. Shipping a shoddy product is not illegal. Therefore Microsoft can fire him all they want.
And this is from a Sony fanboy.
Vcize @ Sep 15th 2008 1:49PM
So who's the true idiot here, the writer believed to be an idiot, or the person who believes they're an idiot and continues to read what they write?
Dracula Jones @ Sep 15th 2008 2:50PM
Nate is right. I'm pretty sure every corporation forbids representing the company to the media without the consent of the company. It's part of the terms of employment. That's what PR staff is for. NDA does not even have to come into play on something like this. If you're not in PR or in upper management, you can't speak about company business to the outside world, period.
Seedee Vee @ Sep 15th 2008 3:11PM
Dracula Jones,
That is not true.
We still have Freedom of Speech in the USA. Companies can not fire you for speaking about the company on your own dime. They may fake some other reason to fire you (non-performance, disclosure of trade secrets, etc) but can not fire you for speaking. The contract employee was not a MS employee (he was employed by an agency)and could not be speaking "for" MS. This is why we have Labor Rights Attorneys. We are not a completely Fascist state, yet.
Justin McElroy @ Sep 15th 2008 3:37PM
God, I soooo didn't want to wade in here, but that last comment was just too ignorant to ignore it.
Freedom of Speech is a right provided to Americans that allows them to say what they want without fearing punishment from the government.
Practically any contract you sign includes clauses about speaking out publicly against the company. And as Delaware was actually employed by a temp agency, he was likely an "at will" employee, meaning he could be fired at anytime for any reason.
Seedee Vee @ Sep 15th 2008 3:51PM
Justin McElroy,
"last comment was just too ignorant to ignore it" - please detail.
Contract? You can write whatever you want into a contract. It does not make it legal or enforceable. Most employees do not have the financial depth to take on an agency or MS in a Labor dispute.
If you are talking 'bout the hard realities of a laborer in BushAmerica (TM), then, anything goes (against the laborer). But, if you are talking about our inalienable rights our Constitution demands, you can't tell me what I can say.
You can lay down like a lamb or speak out for your rights.
Vidikron (FU) @ Sep 15th 2008 4:27PM
@Seedee Vee
You're missing the point. This has nothing to do with the Constitution. Delaware may be free to say what he wants, but he's not free from all repercussions. In this case, he got fired. Do you actually believe you have a legal right to say anything you want about your employer without any repercussions?