Search results

Yeah. Not direct harm, but you know, the suffering of someone/thing else. Like say for example, someone not being able to be with their family while they work on a D&D module, for example. Is that directly on you? I would say no, but you still have achieved happiness at the expense of someone...

you don't know me hat, you don't know what i've been through

But then you'd just get people upset that they are only now selling PDFs. I mean, I'd prolly do it, if only to upset those people, but that's why I'm not an executive.

It's almost like people don't have a problem with their own greed and are naturally hypocrites or something...

I wouldn't if I were them, considering how many negative things without anything constructive coming out of it.

I mean, you don't have their best interest at heart considering you want their work for free. Can you put forth an actual rebuttal, or not?

Don't you see though? Working in a sweatshop is exactly the same as not getting free stuff!

well then stop demanding that they do so, so you can have fun, or find hobbies that don't involve exploitation. oh wait, the happiness of one is based on the suffering of another, nevermind.

Y'know, I have seen quite a lot of companies take accountability for their actions. The People though? Not as much. It's always the companies fault, when they are just following what the consumers (that's you) want them to do.

So a younger person's opinion doesn't actually matter?

You can't expect him to actually take action though, can you? That would involve effort.

So you're closeminded, got it.

So only your opinion on the quality/subject matter of something matters? And no, it wouldn't be fair, hoping that someone else doesn't get what they want because it's different from what you want is dumb, stupid, and makes it seem like your the only person who matters.

So you don't care about me potentially losing something I would be interested in? Would it be fair for me to want see the same thing to you?

So if I could get use/enjoyment out of something that you couldn't, would it be a bad product?

So you would prefer that nothing come out rather than stuff you specifically don't like?

So I can pencil you in for a F.A.T.A.L. game then?

Well they could do that, or they could pointlessly aggravate people. Given that Paizo is a Corporation, and thus as Chaotic Evil as Demogorgon if not more so, guess which option they are going to pick?

What about the aforementioned meteor strike/ nuke? Or are superheroes just by default completely invulnerable with no weaknesses?

That second example is probably why the chunky salsa rule exists, especially since the rule is from Shadowrun.