DreamHack CEO Departs Company With Inflammatory Tweet

[Steven Bogos]

DreamHack CEO Departs Company With Inflammatory Tweet

Robert Ohlen's final Tweet on the matter wishes the DreamHack event to "die an ignoble death."

Robert Ohlen, former CEO of the massive-scale esports and LAN event DreamHack, has reportedly been fired from his position, and he certainly is not happy about it. Ohlen took to Twitter to vent his frustrations, which is, in at least my opinion, not a very wise move. Here's what he said:

[tweet t=https://twitter.com/zer0n0ught/status/526054754821349376]

As you can see, it's not exactly the most... subtle Tweet, and it's quite obvious that his departure from the company was not willing, and that he took issue with that.

Fredrik Nystrom, the company's head of public relations confirmed that Ohlen had been "relieved of his duties," and assured us that DreamHack "will continue as usual without any interruption," as a new CEO has been chosen internally. The new CEO will be announced to the public on October 27, although current reports are suggesting it is highly likely to be Markus Lindmark, a former event manager for the company.

Ohler has always been a rather charismatic individual, but Twitter outbursts like this always just make you look like a spoiled child, and can't bode well for future career prospects. When will people learn to stop saying stupid stuff over Twitter?

Source: The Daily Dot [https://twitter.com/zer0n0ught/status/526054754821349376]

Permalink

 

[conmag9]

I'm also of the opinion that these sorts of twitter ventings are a terrible idea...but I have to give the man credit for using "a pox on all your houses" in the modern era. That one should never have gone out of style.

I've never heard of Dreamhack until this very minute. Was there any word on why he was dismissed (apparently abruptly enough to warrant public rage)?

 

[RJ 17]

When will people learn to stop saying stupid stuff over Twitter?

What are you talking about? Both Twitter and Facebook have "Get Morons in Trouble" as one of their primary purposes.

 

[Pirate Of PC Master race]

To be fair, he has been forcibly removed from his job for whatever he did wrong.

Besides on the scale of tweets, this is one of the top, presentable tweet. Cream of the crop stuff.

 

[klaynexas3]

While not the brightest idea, it's still a more subtle tweet than most people. It seems to have some class to it's lack of class. And it doesn't directly tell anyone off, just the company on the whole, which still isn't the best idea, but it's better than some people in the recent news.

I'm also of the opinion that these sorts of twitter ventings are a terrible idea...but I have to give the man credit for using "a pox on all your houses" in the modern era. That one should never have gone out of style.

I've never heard of Dreamhack until this very minute. Was there any word on why he was dismissed (apparently abruptly enough to warrant public rage)?

I do have to agree with this in full. Both to the pox comment, and never having heard of DreamHack. I'm still unsure of what it is, nor do I care.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

"a pox on all [you are] houses"

I'm amused to learn that being called a house is considered inflammatory. Mercutio you are not, ex-CEO.

 

[Barbas]

"a pox on all [you are] houses"

I'm amused to learn that being called a house is considered inflammatory. Mercutio you are not, ex-CEO.

Seconded. If you're going to depart with a statement of condemnation and a well-known quote, at least don't half-arse it and botch the spelling. People will start asking how you got the job of CEO in the first place.

 

[bat32391]

Is there any particular reason that we know of for why he was fired?

 

[uncanny474]

At least he didn't threaten to kill anyone. As far as twitter rants go, this is incredibly mild.

 

[Therumancer]

Meh, a lot depends on what is going on behind the scenes. CEOS are not like you and me where we'd wind up pounding the pavement and putting in applications to jobs where our history of this kind of thing is likely to follow us around. The guy here might very well have had some very high end dialogues with a lot of people, and could very well already have his next moves planned out.

What's more on a management level, the last thing you want in this kind of conflict is for the other side to be able to seize control of the narrative if you can help it. Given that this guy is apparently fairly well known, if he thinks these guys are crooks, the last thing he wants is for them to go around talking smack about how it was an amiable parting or whatever. It serves as a warning of sorts about doing business with these guys, and also shows both strength and enimity on his part, which can serve as a warning for third parties to stay back because he's going to be coming back swinging, so to speak.

We'll see what happens, it could be an impotent tantrum, but maybe not. No way to tell how well considered it is, or where all the cards are. Today's society is just used to a lot of trash talking without any substance or strategy.

I tend not to threaten or talk trash, in part because if I ever decide to do something I wouldn't want a trail leading back to me, and I'd prefer whom I'm dealing with to actually not be looking out for me. If I ever did such a thing though it would be due to a combination of anger, and supreme confidence in being able to do what I'm saying, and either being able to control, or not caring about the repercussions. Given that this guy is a CEO, and he didn't go quietly like a lot of them do, leads me to believe he might be about to counter-stike in a big way. Of course business being what it is (with private reps mattering as much as public ones, and all kinds of legal stuff that doesn't become known to the public) we might never know if he does anything.... basically it's not like some middle manager ranting.

 

[PunkRex]

I'm also of the opinion that these sorts of twitter ventings are a terrible idea...but I have to give the man credit for using "a pox on all your houses" in the modern era. That one should never have gone out of style.

I've never heard of Dreamhack until this very minute. Was there any word on why he was dismissed (apparently abruptly enough to warrant public rage)?

Same here on both points, a Shakespeare quote is actually fairly classy these days.

I also have no idea what Dreamhack is.

 

[Kameburger]

Meh, a lot depends on what is going on behind the scenes. CEOS are not like you and me where we'd wind up pounding the pavement and putting in applications to jobs where our history of this kind of thing is likely to follow us around. The guy here might very well have had some very high end dialogues with a lot of people, and could very well already have his next moves planned out.

What's more on a management level, the last thing you want in this kind of conflict is for the other side to be able to seize control of the narrative if you can help it. Given that this guy is apparently fairly well known, if he thinks these guys are crooks, the last thing he wants is for them to go around talking smack about how it was an amiable parting or whatever. It serves as a warning of sorts about doing business with these guys, and also shows both strength and enimity on his part, which can serve as a warning for third parties to stay back because he's going to be coming back swinging, so to speak.

We'll see what happens, it could be an impotent tantrum, but maybe not. No way to tell how well considered it is, or where all the cards are. Today's society is just used to a lot of trash talking without any substance or strategy.

I tend not to threaten or talk trash, in part because if I ever decide to do something I wouldn't want a trail leading back to me, and I'd prefer whom I'm dealing with to actually not be looking out for me. If I ever did such a thing though it would be due to a combination of anger, and supreme confidence in being able to do what I'm saying, and either being able to control, or not caring about the repercussions. Given that this guy is a CEO, and he didn't go quietly like a lot of them do, leads me to believe he might be about to counter-stike in a big way. Of course business being what it is (with private reps mattering as much as public ones, and all kinds of legal stuff that doesn't become known to the public) we might never know if he does anything.... basically it's not like some middle manager ranting.

I am actually very inclined to agree with this statement. Once you're at the top, it's less about what you say, and more about the impact of your decision making process. IF there was some extraordinary reason that he was ousted from his position through some sketchy corporate dealings, then you also have to ask yourself what hand the company that ousted him has for doing so. I hate to point it out in such a plain way, but these guys are not just in their positions by chance and more often than not these guys have really rose up through the ranks because of their either talents, intelligence or really busting their ass. If that's the case we can't look at the firing of a CEO the same way you would look at the firing of the average employee. You can't say "oh he was just lazy," or "oh he was so incompetent" there is more likely something going on behind the scenes here that we just don't know.

It's maybe not an exact example but when Steve Jobs was ousted from Apple way back when, it wasn't because he was lazy or anything else, but rather it was because he wanted to do things in his own way and those who had stake in the company didn't like it. The way the rest of the company takes action and how they proceed in this case can be a very delicate action, and how they go about it can be quite ruthless or even worse if its not handled well. Never the less, this guy clearly felt he was wronged.

Actually in this case I would say that for the escapists part, rather than just calling him a baby, it might also be a good point to raise, that what lead to this could constitute some seriously iffy business practices. Of course that may not be the case and he may just be acting like a spoiled baby, which may not be so far from the truth, but either way is worth noting and taking into account.

I should say that the point I really want to add here if I boil it all down, is that there is more to this than just another public twitter melt down. This tweet was intentional and not unsolicited at least to the extent that it's in reaction to something that happened to him. It's not something that could have been misinterpreted or displays a kind of ignorance. It's a public figure, taking a swing publicly at a public entity. I would say that this at least constitutes some distinguishing from people like Phil Fish for example who's twitter outbursts seem a bit more the result of his personality getting the better of him.

 

[Kajin]

Don't know who this guy is. Don't know what he did to get fired. Don't know anything about DreamHack. Is this tweet really the only information on the situation?

 

[Shocksplicer]

The combination of poor spelling, odd formatting, and ridiculously pretentious tone makes this kind of hilarious.
Good luck getting a new job after this, mate!

Dreamhack started as a giant lan party in Sweden

Read this as giant Ian party. Man, that guy Ian sure knows how to party!

Captcha: Ok guys, sort your shit out. I had to refresh the captcha about 15 times before I got one even remotely legible. I'm pretty sure most of the characters weren't even real letters! THEN, when I finally got one which actually worked, it did the whole "Oops! You must have posted since you started writing this post.(I didn't) Please fill in the Captcha below to proceed!" thing. THEN I had to go through another 10!
Not good enough.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

Meh, a lot depends on what is going on behind the scenes. CEOS are not like you and me where we'd wind up pounding the pavement and putting in applications to jobs where our history of this kind of thing is likely to follow us around. The guy here might very well have had some very high end dialogues with a lot of people, and could very well already have his next moves planned out.

What's more on a management level, the last thing you want in this kind of conflict is for the other side to be able to seize control of the narrative if you can help it. Given that this guy is apparently fairly well known, if he thinks these guys are crooks, the last thing he wants is for them to go around talking smack about how it was an amiable parting or whatever. It serves as a warning of sorts about doing business with these guys, and also shows both strength and enimity on his part, which can serve as a warning for third parties to stay back because he's going to be coming back swinging, so to speak.

We'll see what happens, it could be an impotent tantrum, but maybe not. No way to tell how well considered it is, or where all the cards are. Today's society is just used to a lot of trash talking without any substance or strategy.

I tend not to threaten or talk trash, in part because if I ever decide to do something I wouldn't want a trail leading back to me, and I'd prefer whom I'm dealing with to actually not be looking out for me. If I ever did such a thing though it would be due to a combination of anger, and supreme confidence in being able to do what I'm saying, and either being able to control, or not caring about the repercussions. Given that this guy is a CEO, and he didn't go quietly like a lot of them do, leads me to believe he might be about to counter-stike in a big way. Of course business being what it is (with private reps mattering as much as public ones, and all kinds of legal stuff that doesn't become known to the public) we might never know if he does anything.... basically it's not like some middle manager ranting.

I agree. It's not a good idea to burn bridges in the business world, but sometimes you might have to if enemies might follow you across, in the form of them defaming you, as you said. It also sure helps when you're high enough in you industry to have connections everywhere and be able to get a job in the next town. They usually don't even care whether you were a saint or ate babies as long as they believer you'd be useful to them. Whether that the case here or a company getting rid of a bad decision maker, we may never know.

OT: Well, at least he didn't threaten to kill a person. (Unless, he really is going home to practice archaic magicks.)

 

[nightmare_gorilla]

does twitter like poke you in the eye everytime you open it up? seriously i'm as offended as the next guy by some of the ignorant and hateful things being said on twitter lately but i'm starting to wonder if it has more to do with the service itself I mean holy crap people just go crazy when tweeting it seems.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

I'm also of the opinion that these sorts of twitter ventings are a terrible idea...but I have to give the man credit for using "a pox on all your houses" in the modern era. That one should never have gone out of style.

If only he hadn't killed the effect by botching the grammar. Shame, really.

When will people learn to stop saying stupid stuff over Twitter?

Never, I hope. Not until people learn to stop being stupid. And the only way we'll get there is to give idiots every opportunity to expose themselves as such so that they can be mocked and scorned as they deserve.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

"a pox on all [you are] houses"

I'm amused to learn that being called a house is considered inflammatory. Mercutio you are not, ex-CEO.

Seconded. If you're going to depart with a statement of condemnation and a well-known quote, at least don't half-arse it and botch the spelling. People will start asking how you got the job of CEO in the first place.

I already asked myself that a few times after my improper-use-of-word-alert went off. Also, who the fuck is DreamHack and why the hell should I care?
If I haven't heard of a company, maybe that explains also why their former CEO has no clue the proper contraction to use...