It is time to forgive WOTC and get back onboard.

[UngeheuerLich]

These seem like valid reasons to not buy their products, then. I'm not sure what the OGL situation has to do with it - if their products are not working for you, then that's enough.

I don't avoid Taco Bell because of their business shenanigans. I avoid them because their food does not agree with my delicate constitution.

Good that sometimes body and mind align.

 

[Faolyn]

These seem like valid reasons to not buy their products, then. I'm not sure what the OGL situation has to do with it - if their products are not working for you, then that's enough.

Because it's another point of data.

It's like with the hadozee thing. Making a primate race isn't bigoted, making a former slave-race isn't bigoted, making a race whose art has them in a "jovial musician" pose isn't bigoted. All three together, though, were very much Not Good.

After Spelljammer (it's lack of lore and mechanics and its use of thick stock to pad out the size of the books) I was leery of buying future books, and I vowed to not pre-order any--I would wait for reviews on the three books upcoming books I was interested in. But then came the OGL kerfluffle, and tweeted allegations of an "environment of fear" in their offices, and their attack on VTTs. All these things together make me not want to give WotC another dime, at least not for a long, long time.

 

[Parmandur]

Given these last 2 posts, I'm not entirely sure why either of you chose to respond to my initial post questioning if people saying no harm had been caused considered the fire sale losses to some 3pp since that would be an example of financial harm. Your posts responding to me have been pretty dismissive of that harm actually existing, citing the publishers that benefitted. Again, whether that harm is of concern to you was never called into question by me if you read what I've posted. My entire point has been that harm HAS existed as a result.

Sure, and I was granting thst harm was done. It was dumb. Immaterial to me and my hobby purchases.

 

[Faolyn]

If you don't understand the differentiation in lost trust in the company and trust in the products, i can't help it.

So, a company produces bad material, what exactly do you trust the company to do? That they will one day produce good quality material again. This makes no sense. A company produces products. They are its products. If I lose faith in its products, then that means losing faith in the company as well.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

So, a company produces bad material, what exactly do you trust the company to do? That they will one day produce good quality material again. This makes no sense. A company produces products. They are its products. If I lose faith in its products, then that means losing faith in the company as well.

No. It makes total sense.

Trust in company not to screw you over
!= Trust in company to make good products.

Lilewise I would probanly trust you to be a nice guy, but I have no trust in you, to not mix up two different things.

As I said, if you want apple-orange-juice, bon appetit.

 

[Umbran]

I don't get your mentality either. In my opinion, and I know, you will call it whataboutism, there are other companies constantly doing harm, no matter how much the outcry and how many people will boycot them. Just by holding a position where you can't get around them. WotC just forefeited that position forever.

Yes, it is whataboutism. It is making perfect the enemy of good - you can't address WotC's issues unless you similarly address all other issues.

This argument implies that no issues can ever be addressed, because nobody can address all of them. Is that what you want - that nobody ever act on a corporate ethical failure?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Yes, it is whataboutism. It is making perfect the enemy of good - you can't address WotC's issues unless you similarly address all other issues.

This argument implies that no issues can ever be addressed, because nobody can address all of them. Is that what you want - that nobody ever act on a corporate ethical failure?

I am sorry, you read it that way.
You make unbased assumptions in your last paragraph. And in the first you are wrong too.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

That question really isn't on topic for this thread. Let's not derail.

Why do you ask me not to derail and then go on with that line of conversation? I wanted to respect that request. Probably I mistook your normal voice for your mod voice...

 

[Velderan]

Sure, and I was granting thst harm was done. It was dumb. Immaterial to me and my hobby purchases.

So in a strange journey, we ended up mostly in agreement I guess.

 

[Faolyn]

No. It makes total sense.

Trust in company not to screw you over
!= Trust in company to make good products.

Lilewise I would probanly trust you to be a nice guy, but I have no trust in you, to not mix up two different things.

As I said, if you want apple-orange-juice, bon appetit.

They're both trust.

If I can't trust the company to not screw me over, then I have no reason to buy from them.
If I can't trust the company to make good products, then I have no reason to buy from them.
If I can't trust them to not screw me over or produce good products, then I have no reason to buy from them.