Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 9558458" data-attributes="member: 2525">They didn't know where in the chain things had happened. It's only from that very investigation (the investigation you earlier claimed didn't happen as you repeatedly said they had no investigators) that they eventually tracked what happened.Because when you locate stolen goods as part of an investigation you of course get them right away before they're further distributed, of course. I am not even sure why you'd question it?We don't "know" we just "strongly suspect" based on the information I mentioned earlier. Corporations don't comment on criminal investigations, nor do the police, generally speaking. Even after they're done, there is only liability that comes from commenting on such details and very little benefit to a company. I don't think we will ever know for 100% certain exactly what happened.I'm not sure. Pinkertons are one of the largest, and it's not like there are a huge number of major companies that can field-track stolen good and figure out where in the supply chain there was a breach very quickly. They may well be the best people for that kind of job. It's certainly not a job for a local private investigator, given time was of the essence.My friend, if you look back, it's you who used the term "wild west" and not me. I was just repeating the phrase you chose to describe your own position. What I said was you specifically have the wrong impression about their non-protection departments. You repeatedly claimed they don't have investigators when that's not just false but it's probably their largest department these days. You repeatedly described events relating to their Protection departments when you knew at that point this matter had nothing to do with their Protection departments. You seemed to be doing it as an emotional appeal; apparently thinking if you can describe some portion of their company doing something bad recently then all parts of their company must be bad. Kind of a strange emotional appeal, given we're discussing D&D, where everyone understands Hasbro Toys is not the same as the D&D department of WOTC.So which part I just replied to was what you'd characterize as something other than your honest opinion?I have not implied you're stupid or a bad guy and if anything I said seemed like I was implying that I apologize. I don't think you're stupid or bad, I just disagreed with your opinion. Nor do I care what you think of me buying D&D books. Why would I? I'm guessing you don't care what I buy either. That seems a strange claim to make.I do think this incident was messed up and have said so before. My end game is for people to make at least a vague attempt to try and describe it more accurately, that's all. This sub-thread of the thread started when someone accurately (IMO) said the Pinkertons incident was overblown and exaggerated. You then jumped in and, again IMO, wildly exaggerated it in the very manner that had just been characterized. You made inaccurate claims it didn't involve investigators when it did, that it directly involved the kind of people who bust unions when it did not, and that this was some sort of intentional intimidation and shake-down when the victim didn't describe it that way.That's it. My end game is just trying to persuade people to not wildly exaggerate this incident because they emotionally dislike WOTC. You and I are both gamer nerds. And, usually, it comes with that territory to desire for things to be at least someone accurate. The rest of social media and such might go for all the fake news and clickbaiting headlines and wild exaggerations for attention, but us gamer nerds (which includes you and I) usually try to be better than that.Sorry for the very long point by point post. I think I've said my last on the topic. Feel free to have the last word.</blockquote>

Verification