You know, a mature person faces his embarrassments, learns from them, and perhaps ultimately comes to laugh at them. An immature person tries to run from his errors or cover them up. By making it easier and legal to be immature, it's like the EU is determined to weaken us as a species...
I'm confused. Why do you think people only ask questions when they're surprised? It makes it sounds like you operate according to a woefully simple religion or something.
Wow, I try to be kind to you, and in return you twist around everything I say so it supports your religion. I hope you realize some day how vast knowledge like yours can and is often used to achieve a higher state of ignorance.
YES! THE MEME IS DEAD! EVEN IF IT'S ONLY FOR A LITTLE WHILE, IT'S TOTALLY WORTH--
...aw hell, this is still copyright as censorship. That means I have to oppose it and help fight to bring this stupid song back anyway. Man, the broken state of copyright sure makes for some strange bedfellows...
Except it's really a bunch of entitlement clauses masquerading as a trade agreement--
--actually, that gives rise to a greater point. Do we even need more trade agreements in the first place? Maybe everyone should be against them, especially since they're so rarely about trading anymore.
Saying "EA isn't perfect" is putting it mildly. In fact, the way you use the phrase, it honestly sounds like you're trying to make excuses for them. I do actually believe you when you say you're not a shill, but I think you're too much of a company patriot for your own good, and that does nothing to help your credibility.
You need to exercise more wisdom and realize that nothing you say is going to change any minds here, not because people are prejudiced, but because EA has worked hard to prove that it is untrustworthy. The Consumerists' annual competition is most significant as a litmus test that reinforces what everyone already knew beforehand: that people are sick to death of being deceived by EA and they aren't willing to give them anymore chances. That's the kind of challenge your company faces.
As for Origin... I suspect that EA having complete control over it is exactly why so many people don't want anything to do with it. In fact, it's quite a testament as to how far a company has fallen when people looks at the unique programs Origin offers and still want nothing to do with them. I personally do not want to try out Origin's Great Games Guarantee, Game Time Program, or On The House Program because there's no guarantee that the rug won't somehow be yanked out from underneath me later.
1.) Every step forward EA takes is accompanied by at least one step backward, so the good things the company does ultimately don't amount to anything. When the net gain is still negative, your good gestures are liable to come off as too little, too late at best. I know that sounds like an unfair situation to be in, but you really do have to work hard to earn the Consumerist's Worst Company in America competition two years running, and you need to accept that it's going to take even more work to overcome all that bad karma. If you really mean to put your past behind you, you need to stop complaining and focus on tackling the mountain you built in your path.
2.) The kind gestures you list are only relevant to EA's Origin platform, while plenty of disasters continue to occur elsewhere. See Battlefield 4 and the infamously bad Sim City, for example.
See, for example, Yahtzee's review of Super Smash Bros. Brawl, where he ignored most of its many faults just to bash it on principle. He's supposed to be a critic, meaning it's his job to criticize, so why didn't he?
Aw c'mon. I'll have you know that I wrote that story specifically so I could give it away at every opportunity, and it's not like all I ever do is post links to my work in stories that have nothing to do with writing. Could you save your snobbery for the Writer's Guild or someone else who's really asking for it?
Online roleplaying and MUSHing are similarly healthy. I only ever roleplayed on two places, Videoland MUSH and Multiverse Crisis MUSH, but I met a lot of interesting characters, saw many silly and serious ideas for plots, and being forced to contribute story paragraphs on the fly (called "posing" in the community) has helped me learn how to bust through writers' blocks as a novelist.
Then I guess you could classify it as a rare non-evil kind of DRM. It doesn't look like it even places the same kinds of restrictions that Steam or even Minecraft does. Instead it plays a harmless prank, so even if you're against DRM on principle (and you probably should be), you'd have to be pretty anal to get upset over this.
Well, that is pretty much the bed you've made for yourself, so you have to sleep in it. Not saying that the person using personal attacks is right, but you really do bring this out on yourself, and you seem unable to understand why. You seem very much like a robot, actually. I've met people like you before who think the facts are on their side simply because they've failed to account for all the facts in play.
I don't think I am being contrary just to be contrary,
You'd be surprised how often that kind of statement supports the denied accusation. If you were sincerely not acting like that, you would have said something like, "I don't mean to sound contrary just for the sake of being contrary and I really am sorry if I've come across that way."
I think the biggest issue is that too many people seem to forget that the other side is really just people too.
Fair enough. Now, what kind of people are they? Are they the sort of people who are already well off, or are they the sort who are needy and oppressed like most of the general public has been becoming? One of those groups generally does have a responsibility to help the other.
As much as you pull for the rights of people, you have to remember that you are pulling them away from other people as well.
But you should remember that sometimes that's exactly how it should be. ALL leaders must live up to higher standards than their subjects, whether they're corporate owners, political leaders, or the head of a family, and that often means restricting them in various ways at the very least so that the next person who comes into power won't be able to ruin what everyone else who held his or her position spent their lives and careers building.
I don't have much to say about your comments about laws. I think I understand what you're trying to say, and I do kinda agree with it, but you seem to use a lot of words to say relatively little.
Getting uppity about NSA and then celebrating companies who ignore the law seems a little two faced, don't you think?
Not at all, actually. You're forgetting about the responsibilities of leadership when you say that. Sometimes double standards exist because they are part of a hierarchy, so they have a darn good reason for existing. It's a case where Tropes Are Not Bad.
If someone's only a decent person because they think a 'higher power' is watching them, and/or there might be a penalty for acting bad, then they're a pretty lousy/terrible person.
I totally agree! We really shouldn't need gods or any sort of higher power to help us regulate ourselves.
But... if that was how the world actually worked, we wouldn't need police to patrol our streets either.
Well, a higher power does, ultimately, tend to be what it freaking takes in order to make people behave, but that is rather sensationalist of PRMan. Furthermore, I'm not sure that things were necessarily better in the 60's. I think the same old evils were still around, and if anything, people were generally more oblivious to them or they did a better job at hiding.
I think if you go back to my original post in this thread, you can see it's about ideas and not people.
Yeah, that's the whole problem. It should be people first, ideas second. You can't wade into these debates without going in caring about the people you'll be debating as people.
I often post here because many of the stories have a lot of space for an opposite and equally viable opinion or answer.
Are you saying that you're mainly contrary for the sake of being contrary? No wonder your points tend to go over like a lead balloon.
The main thing you'll find around here is that the commenters are interested in the rights of people and the public above everything else. That's why you end up at odds with them all the time. They probably should be as well, as we live in an era where corporations are showing the same sort of desperation people show when there's little food or water, so whenever you try to argue for that side, you're essentially coming off as being against the betterment of humanity. You should probably clear that up if you don't mean to seem that way.
Sometimes there is glossing over of laws too, but that's because laws are not absolute. They can be changed, and there is just a thing as bad laws just like how there are bad scientists, bad Christians, etc. Calling something a law does not end the discussion, and if you think it does, you're the one who's shortsighted, not your opponent.
First of all, drop that group think. If someone mistreats you and you mistreat them back, guess what? You've become the same kind of scum that they are. Be a bigger man than that.
Your claim that you treat people with courtesy is betrayed by how you antagonize the people you get into debates with. I see you slipping all sorts of little jabs and insults into your posts and you do not try to make peace with the people who oppose you. You don't try as hard as you think you do to understand them and consider whether any of their points are good so that you might all discover a bigger truth together. You may tell yourself that you're better than a lot of other people who have come around here, but being good isn't about being in competition with others. In fact, thinking you are better than the other guy opens you up to becoming a worse person because it gives you an excuse to stop regulating yourself.
Also remember that if you focus on argument topics first and people second, then the former won't matter because you won't be able to reach the latter. It's always people first, topics second. If you don't secure the former, you won't have an audience, so what difference will the rest make?
It might help if you stop and ask yourself why you debate in the first place. Do you want to be effective and try to enlighten people, or do you just want to preach even if no one is listening?
I think you'll find that if you treat people with a little more courtesy, especially those who you consider your enemies, you'll find that people will be nice in return and that we don't actually live in a culture that steals anything that isn't nailed down. It's always up to you to make the first move though. Set a good example.
Unfortunately, copyright probably should be completely torn down at this point. Even Derek Khanna cautions against throwing out the baby with the bathwater, but it doesn't seem to do anyone any good anymore. It just encourages people to bicker and squabble with each other, and all the arguing that ensues results in everyone being held back. It's only useful in theory; the evidence that it has any practical use or value has long since been lost in an ocean of abuse. It's an obsolete invention, like the typewriter.
On the post: EU Regulators Want Google To Expand Right To Be Forgotten Worldwide And To Stop Telling What Links Have Been Forgotten
On the post: Why Does The Author's Guild Refuse To Even Acknowledge Views Of Authors Who Disagree With It?
Re:
On the post: Key Sony Gaming Websites Go Down Because They Let Their Domains Expire
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Once Again, Millions Of Rickrolls Go Silent As The Original Rickroll Is 'Blocked' On YouTube
...aw hell, this is still copyright as censorship. That means I have to oppose it and help fight to bring this stupid song back anyway. Man, the broken state of copyright sure makes for some strange bedfellows...
On the post: Top EU Politicians Call For TAFTA/TTIP's Corporate Sovereignty Provisions To Be Removed
Re: Shocking news
--actually, that gives rise to a greater point. Do we even need more trade agreements in the first place? Maybe everyone should be against them, especially since they're so rarely about trading anymore.
On the post: Key Sony Gaming Websites Go Down Because They Let Their Domains Expire
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You need to exercise more wisdom and realize that nothing you say is going to change any minds here, not because people are prejudiced, but because EA has worked hard to prove that it is untrustworthy. The Consumerists' annual competition is most significant as a litmus test that reinforces what everyone already knew beforehand: that people are sick to death of being deceived by EA and they aren't willing to give them anymore chances. That's the kind of challenge your company faces.
As for Origin... I suspect that EA having complete control over it is exactly why so many people don't want anything to do with it. In fact, it's quite a testament as to how far a company has fallen when people looks at the unique programs Origin offers and still want nothing to do with them. I personally do not want to try out Origin's Great Games Guarantee, Game Time Program, or On The House Program because there's no guarantee that the rug won't somehow be yanked out from underneath me later.
On the post: Key Sony Gaming Websites Go Down Because They Let Their Domains Expire
Re: Re:
1.) Every step forward EA takes is accompanied by at least one step backward, so the good things the company does ultimately don't amount to anything. When the net gain is still negative, your good gestures are liable to come off as too little, too late at best. I know that sounds like an unfair situation to be in, but you really do have to work hard to earn the Consumerist's Worst Company in America competition two years running, and you need to accept that it's going to take even more work to overcome all that bad karma. If you really mean to put your past behind you, you need to stop complaining and focus on tackling the mountain you built in your path.
2.) The kind gestures you list are only relevant to EA's Origin platform, while plenty of disasters continue to occur elsewhere. See Battlefield 4 and the infamously bad Sim City, for example.
On the post: An Actual D&D Effect: Inspiring Kids To Become Writers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: An Actual D&D Effect: Inspiring Kids To Become Writers
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: An Actual D&D Effect: Inspiring Kids To Become Writers
Re: Re:
On the post: An Actual D&D Effect: Inspiring Kids To Become Writers
Heck, check out this free-to-download story and tell me if you think I'm any good. https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/445045
On the post: Skullgirls Creator Combats Piracy With Humor And By Being Awesome
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: If TPP Is So Important, Why Are Those It's Supposed To 'Help' Fighting Against It?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: perhaps
I don't think I am being contrary just to be contrary,
You'd be surprised how often that kind of statement supports the denied accusation. If you were sincerely not acting like that, you would have said something like, "I don't mean to sound contrary just for the sake of being contrary and I really am sorry if I've come across that way."
I think the biggest issue is that too many people seem to forget that the other side is really just people too.
Fair enough. Now, what kind of people are they? Are they the sort of people who are already well off, or are they the sort who are needy and oppressed like most of the general public has been becoming? One of those groups generally does have a responsibility to help the other.
As much as you pull for the rights of people, you have to remember that you are pulling them away from other people as well.
But you should remember that sometimes that's exactly how it should be. ALL leaders must live up to higher standards than their subjects, whether they're corporate owners, political leaders, or the head of a family, and that often means restricting them in various ways at the very least so that the next person who comes into power won't be able to ruin what everyone else who held his or her position spent their lives and careers building.
I don't have much to say about your comments about laws. I think I understand what you're trying to say, and I do kinda agree with it, but you seem to use a lot of words to say relatively little.
Getting uppity about NSA and then celebrating companies who ignore the law seems a little two faced, don't you think?
Not at all, actually. You're forgetting about the responsibilities of leadership when you say that. Sometimes double standards exist because they are part of a hierarchy, so they have a darn good reason for existing. It's a case where Tropes Are Not Bad.
On the post: If TPP Is So Important, Why Are Those It's Supposed To 'Help' Fighting Against It?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: perhaps
I totally agree! We really shouldn't need gods or any sort of higher power to help us regulate ourselves.
But... if that was how the world actually worked, we wouldn't need police to patrol our streets either.
On the post: If TPP Is So Important, Why Are Those It's Supposed To 'Help' Fighting Against It?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: perhaps
On the post: If TPP Is So Important, Why Are Those It's Supposed To 'Help' Fighting Against It?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: perhaps
Yeah, that's the whole problem. It should be people first, ideas second. You can't wade into these debates without going in caring about the people you'll be debating as people.
I often post here because many of the stories have a lot of space for an opposite and equally viable opinion or answer.
Are you saying that you're mainly contrary for the sake of being contrary? No wonder your points tend to go over like a lead balloon.
The main thing you'll find around here is that the commenters are interested in the rights of people and the public above everything else. That's why you end up at odds with them all the time. They probably should be as well, as we live in an era where corporations are showing the same sort of desperation people show when there's little food or water, so whenever you try to argue for that side, you're essentially coming off as being against the betterment of humanity. You should probably clear that up if you don't mean to seem that way.
Sometimes there is glossing over of laws too, but that's because laws are not absolute. They can be changed, and there is just a thing as bad laws just like how there are bad scientists, bad Christians, etc. Calling something a law does not end the discussion, and if you think it does, you're the one who's shortsighted, not your opponent.
On the post: If TPP Is So Important, Why Are Those It's Supposed To 'Help' Fighting Against It?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: perhaps
Your claim that you treat people with courtesy is betrayed by how you antagonize the people you get into debates with. I see you slipping all sorts of little jabs and insults into your posts and you do not try to make peace with the people who oppose you. You don't try as hard as you think you do to understand them and consider whether any of their points are good so that you might all discover a bigger truth together. You may tell yourself that you're better than a lot of other people who have come around here, but being good isn't about being in competition with others. In fact, thinking you are better than the other guy opens you up to becoming a worse person because it gives you an excuse to stop regulating yourself.
Also remember that if you focus on argument topics first and people second, then the former won't matter because you won't be able to reach the latter. It's always people first, topics second. If you don't secure the former, you won't have an audience, so what difference will the rest make?
It might help if you stop and ask yourself why you debate in the first place. Do you want to be effective and try to enlighten people, or do you just want to preach even if no one is listening?
On the post: If TPP Is So Important, Why Are Those It's Supposed To 'Help' Fighting Against It?
Re: Re: Re: perhaps
On the post: If TPP Is So Important, Why Are Those It's Supposed To 'Help' Fighting Against It?
Re: perhaps
On the post: UK Advertising Regulator Nixes EA's Dungeon Keeper Advertisement Due To Microtransactions
Next >>