Death of the LGS

[Umbran]

Folks,

It is at this point that I must remind you that real-world politics are not an acceptable topic of discussion for these boards. That's a matter of general policy here: we find it creates too many arguments. I understand it may hamstring your discussion, but I'm going to have to ask you to leave that branch of the discussion behind.

 

[Raven Crowking]

deleted

 

[mlund]

This is exactly why economics should not be a part of this discussion.

No, it is exactly why people need to step back and separate political theory from basic economics. If one has a problem restraining the urge to interject "fairness" and political rhetoric into a discussion involving basic economic realities then it is going to be a sore spot.

Not every economic discussion needs be a political one. Not every scientific definition need be discarded or devalued for the sake of cheap political rhetoric either. And certainly no one's unfaithfulness to the facts was ever excused by calling his critics "elitists."

- Marty Lund

 

[Corjay]

I once again suggest the whole economic theme be dropped. As this thread has proven, it will invariably lead to politics, as some ideas must be backed by law and others are dependent entirely upon one's political view. One clearly cannot be had without the other.

The purpose of this thread isn't to discuss the whys and wherefores of how LGS are in the position they're in, but how they can survive. Elude to an economic situation, but please don't go into it in detail, as it serves no purpose but diverting and subverting the topic.

 

[Mallus]

Exactly.

So are you conceding that large chain stores are Amazon's real competitors, not the penny-ante independent gaming stores? Because that's what I get from Turjan's post.

It is the idea that Amazon (or anyone) will sell for less unless they gain a direct and tangible benefit from doing so that flies in the face of economic theory.

No-one is debating that RC, except you with yourself.

Brick & Mortar retailers offer only two things that online retailers do not: the ability to browse, and the ability to pick up a book now.

That doesn't change the fact that some brick&mortar stores (ie the small, independent one) are insignificant competitors. They're like lemonade stands.

Please note that, in past discussions on the same topic, several EN Worlders admitted to browsing in the B&M, and then purchasing online....effectively gaining the vaule of both models. It should be relatively obvious that this isn't a sustainable practice.

Right you are. Certain kinds of small, independent specialty stores probably aren't sustainable. Especially if they sell merchandise widely available from other retailers at lower cost.

We, as gamers, have a vested interest in whether or not there will be B&M stores.

Yes, but not all of them.

Am I getting through?

 

[Korgoth]

Folks,

It is at this point that I must remind you that real-world politics are not an acceptable topic of discussion for these boards. That's a matter of general policy here: we find it creates too many arguments. I understand it may hamstring your discussion, but I'm going to have to ask you to leave that branch of the discussion behind.

Is it OK to ask for a clarification? What I'm wondering is whether economics (which this discussion seems like it has to include, since it's about the economic status of the LGS) can be discussed and defined as long as political statements/opinions are left out? For example, making a point about economic Liberalism which is not a political position and to which most American "conservatives" and many "liberals" subscribe.

Just trying to get a handle on what is or is not allowed before I post anything else.

 

[Corjay]

Is it OK to ask for a clarification? What I'm wondering is whether economics (which this discussion seems like it has to include, since it's about the economic status of the LGS) can be discussed and defined as long as political statements/opinions are left out? For example, making a point about economic Liberalism which is not a political position and to which most American "conservatives" and many "liberals" subscribe.

Just trying to get a handle on what is or is not allowed before I post anything else.

Those terms were challenged by mlund and I believe they are synonymous with and inseparable from political issues.

 

[Korgoth]

Those terms were challenged by mlund and I believe they are inseparable from political issues.

I wasn't asking you, ace.

Let's let the Mods make the big decisions.

 

[mlund]

Those terms were challenged by mlund and I believe they are inseparable from political issues.

I think you've already made it clear what you believe.

He's asking the moderator, not you.

Some people can't resist the urge to interject politics into economics - decrying or cheer-leading perceived Capitalism or Statism at every opportunity. That's a personal problem one has to deal with, not a requirement to change the board rules to keep one happy.

- Marty Lund

 

[Corjay]

Correction, guys. I was speaking on the terms Korgoth quoted.