A conviction arising from the ZX Vega+ debacle

[PeteProdge]

I don't like to be the kind of person who writes "admin please delete this if not allowed" and I hope this is the only time where I have to sincerely state that line, because the ZX Vega story really is so highly controversial that it's wise not wade in with strong opinions on either side of it.

I only bring this up to raise a factual observation. Somebody has been sent to jail for abusing a key figure behind the hand-held 'ZX Spectrum' device.

The victim, Suzanne Martin, has tweeted today and has got to tell her story in today's edition of The Times newspaper (link goes to a paywall'd article sadly, I have not read it in full).





I know the ZX Vega stuff is well in the past and regarded as a dismal state of affairs, and here on the day the ZX Spectrum hits another birthday, probably not best to bring up, but I find this news quite a jaw dropper and very much a cautionary tale that should act as a valid correction to some of the nastiest smears and a warning that such behaviour comes with consequences.

[PeterJ]

Thanks for checking @PeteProdge. As long as the thread stays factual I'm sure it will be fine. Famous last words......

[AndyC]

No matter how much money you've lost on a Kickstarter, there is really no good reason to take the law into your own hands. Vigilante justice should be left firmly in the realms of video games.

[stupidget]

We need a popcorn emoji

[p13z]

Can we refer to this specifically as the VEGA PLUS debacle, please. The ZX Vega was a successful little project, with some great people onboard, which pretty much delivered what it promised.

[PeterJ]

Can we refer to this specifically as the VEGA PLUS debacle, please.

Done!

[8BitAG]

They're very much linked but at least the initial project ended up with units in the hands of backers; even if it did leave others not receiving promised payments.

Sadly, the Spectrum scene has never really recovered fully from the Vega+ part of the saga, but that pales into comparison with the personal impact on some people; as seems to be the case here. It was blatantly obvious, at the time, that clear lines both in decency and in law were being crossed.

[Nitrowing]

Mine never materialized and, yeah, if I'd had an address I'd have definitely walked away with whatever I considered "goods to the valhe of"

[Ralf]

I don't like to be the kind of person who writes "admin please delete this if not allowed"

I believe that we could talk freely about Vega here, if staying polite. Not like at the other forum

I'm really surprised that anybody still cares about it. How many years have passed from that saga? 4? 5?

After all these years I still don't know if the money was "stolen" or just wasted and who was the good guy,
who was the bad guy and who just got "sucked in" into the affair. My intuition tells me it was bad guy vs bad guy fighting
for cash and power but I don't know any secret facts.

Speaking of this hater guy, he has clearly crossed the line and got what he deserved. The only injustice which happened
was punishing him alone while there was a whole online group of trolls/haters/stalkers. These guys actually never
cared about Zx Spectrum itself, never came here to discuss gaming or programming, all they ever did was moaning and
whining about their Vegas. I don't have any sympathy for them, they aren't my buddies.

Yes, they lost some (rather small) money but that's life. Sh!t happens and you have to live with it. If you think over and
over about things that went wrong in your life, you are going to be a very bitter man.

[Matt_B]

It's actually less than two years since the company was finally wound up by the liquidator.

Most of the money went on costs for the legal actions against Cornerstone Media and the two founders who had resigned. They had debts of over £1.2 million when they collapsed, which is more than twice the money raised by the crowdfunding. There's some more detail here, although I don't think there's a breakdown of the creditors.

https://find-and-update.company-informa ... ng-history

I'd have to say that I found Martin to be utterly contemptible for her part in the above failure. As managing director of Retro Computers Limited, the buck ought to stop with her for that, as well as all the lies and vitriolic rants that were sent out via official channels on her watch. Did she stand up and own any of it though? No, of course not. She was flinging the blame at everyone but herself right to the last.

Still, I'm not going to blame the victim here. Stooping down to her level would be bad enough, and this was clearly far worse.

If I ever meet her though, she owes me £120 and an apology. It'd probably be for the best if that never happens, because I don't fancy my chances at getting either.

[Joefish]

I'm left with no respect for anyone mentioned in the Companies House listing of directors. The ones who were running up those debts were not the names I recognise from the Kickstarter - who actually took everyone's money off them in the first place.

But the trolling was disgusting. I saw part of a Facebook group supposedly administered by some fairly well-known names who were - if not directly encouraging - happily standing by and watching the organisation of concerted trolling attacks and kicking out anyone who didn't go along with it. (Though most of the group member names were obviously fake).

The abuse directed at those who were simply volunteering their efforts, past games, etc. in the hope something would finally emerge was out of order too. There are far more people need to be punished for the extent of abuse that was generated. The internet, and that disconnect from seeing the person you're relating to face-to-face, has unearthed a huge reserve of sociopathic tendencies that would never air in public.

[Vampyre]

I can't imagine so, as I guess this case wasn't going on at the time, but was all this (as in the smear campaign and subsequent police investigations) anything to do with why Vega+ discussion was banned from WoS? Apologies if I'm opening a can of worms that's better left closed and, like Pete said, delete this if it crosses a line. I'd ask on WoS but there's no chance of getting any unbiased answer.

I always found it very odd that all mention of it was banned. And I found it even more odd that members accepted it. I'm a little naive to the whole Vega+ ordeal (but have read up on some stuff about what happened) as I never really got why the device was greenlit in the first place with ZXDS around.

[clebin]

as I never really got why the device was greenlit in the first place with ZXDS around.

Rick Dickinson's design has to be one big reason. I'd still love to see the product as he imagined it. If ownership of the design is in the hands of some liquidators rather than the people who wasted the money the first time round, the community could buy it and open-source it perhaps.

[1024MAK]

In answer to the question of what happened, this is a quick summary from my point of view. There is a link to a Wikipedia article in the next post below mine.

There was an existing ZX Vega. Even some retailers were selling this model.

The ZX Vega+ was supposed to have been mostly already designed. Some respectable names were involved. It looked like a product that may help to reenergise the scene.

Unfortunately, something went very wrong in the company. I don’t believe the whole story has come out. It may never come out. But some of the people originally involved, left. New people came in.

The time line repeatedly slipped, and there was not much to show. Things started to get nasty. Now any announcements were seen with lots of suspicion. It became increasingly less likely that everyone would get what they backed. Then the company failed.

In the end, it was a disaster. As the fall out split the community.

If anyone else has any details and wants to fill in the blanks, or correct any of the above, please do so.

Mark

Edited at 17:59 Mark

[citizenfish]

I was a backer and followed the whole debacle

Wikipedia is pretty much on the nail factually: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZX_Spectrum_Vega%2B

[1024MAK]

For the avoidance of any doubt, I too was a backer, and yes, I never received anything or any refund.

Mark

[Einar Saukas]

After all these years I still don't know if the money was "stolen" or just wasted and who was the good guy,
who was the bad guy and who just got "sucked in" into the affair. My intuition tells me it was bad guy vs bad guy fighting
for cash and power but I don't know any secret facts.

I don't have any secret facts either. But this project was clearly Chris Smith's dream. It's a safe bet that he really wanted it to succeed. I doubt he was motivated by cash and power.

Starting from this premise, I think it's possible to deduce everything else.

[Joefish]

What I do find sad about the court case is that they eventually convicted this particular person with stalking, implying that the alternative charge under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003, 'Improper use of public electronic communications network', is not taken seriously enough by either the prosecutor or the courts, and remains largely toothless legislation. Which means there's still no effective deterrent to online bullying and abuse.

[Matt_B]

What I do find sad about the court case is that they eventually convicted this particular person with stalking, implying that the alternative charge under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003, 'Improper use of public electronic communications network', is not taken seriously enough by either the prosecutor or the courts, and remains largely toothless legislation. Which means there's still no effective deterrent to online bullying and abuse.

I'm pretty sure that if you sent a politician or some other public figure a threatening tweet, you'd be arrested and charged under that law very quickly. It's just not going to be used to protect the likes of you or me.

It's a bit like thinking that laws against fraud might protect you from those who'd squander half a million pounds of other people's money that had been raised for a very specific purpose. Again, only the rich and influential get to see that happen.

[Nitrowing]

I'd like to know;
How many units were made
Where said units ended up

[Alessandro]

I'd like to know;
How many units were made
Where said units ended up

This is what I discovered from my research for the Spectrumpedia (see Vol. 2, p. 28-29 for the references).

Only on 26 July 2018, RCL announced the shipping of a first batch of 400 units, for those subscribers who had agreed to receive the console without preloaded games (except for a group of 18 titles, the work of Jonathan Cauldwell), since the company had announced that it was no longer able to maintain the rights to them.5 Early comments were mostly negative: in particular, the poor quality of materials and build was highlighted.6 Another reason for controversy was the discovery that the Vega+ emulated the Spectrum through Philip Kendall’s open source FUSE emulator, unbeknowst to him. Moreover, FUSE’s GNU GPL version 2 distribution license and source code were not provided with the console.

On 1 August, Sky Group Ltd, owner of the rights to the Sinclair brand obtained in July 2007 following the acquisition of Amstrad, confirmed the announced definitive revocation of their concession to RCL, which, in fact, meant for the remaining backers the end of their hopes of receiving the
console. This sparked further arguments between Levy and his former partners.

In February 2019, RCL went into liquidation at the request of Private Planets Ltd, headed by a former director of RCL, Janko Mrsic-Flogel. Since then there have been no further developments; Vega+ patrons have given rise to several initiatives to get their money back, but their outcome is still uncertain.

[PeterJ]

Thank you @Alessandro,

That's very clear.

You could probably alter this bit now:

Vega+ patrons have given rise to several initiatives to get their money back, but their outcome is still uncertain.

I lost money too, but as they sing in 'Frozen', you just have to 'Let it go!'. Life is too short.



I personally would be very loathed to participate in higher value crowd funding campaigns in the future. Once burnt and all that. We all know that crowd funding isn't the same as going into PC World.

[Joefish]

I'm pretty sure that if you sent a politician or some other public figure a threatening tweet, you'd be arrested and charged under that law very quickly. It's just not going to be used to protect the likes of you or me.

That's not entirely true. MPs are subject to horrendous abuse on Tw*tter, and it's particularly aggressive towards female MPs. The difference there is that MPs have paid staff to wade through it for them, so don't actually have to deal with it themselves. A luxury most people can't afford. But then Tw*tter is a well-known cesspit run on American concepts of 'free speech', so it's practically the Ts&Cs of signing up that it will be vile.

[PeterJ]

I know this would never work in practice and it would be hugely unpopular with rights campaigners, but I do think that before anyone could create a social media account there should have been some system to confirm ID (there would obviously be a few exceptions). It's obviously way to late now for anything like that though.

[1024MAK]

Not wishing to derail the topic, but I can’t resist replying. My Facebook account was actually set up my one of my former workmates (only former because he left the company not because of any other reason) using a new email account also set up by him.

Let me be clear, it was not done for any bad reason. He was just trying to persuade me to get on social media. So he very quickly told me what the security details were.

I don’t know if that is still possible, but it goes to show that you should be very careful on what you believe when reading/viewing social media.

Also, for lots of people, if you go searching using their real name, you are likely to get lots of results of other people. It’s not difficult to get enough information to use for misleading purposes.

Mark