Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9455689" data-attributes="member: 7023840">Ugh, I mentioned I am sorry for bringing this up. That said, I do want to briefly address this.I do think that the breathless (and often inaccurate) reporting afterwards was a problem, compounded by an echo chamber that took the original (bad) reporting and made it worse. To the point where people ended up screaming about jack-booted Pinkerton thugs busting in some guy's house and grabbing his stuff at gunpoint. That's, unfortunately, is the nature of the internet today.However, I don't think it's fair to chalk this up to some agenda on the part of the person (Dan) in this story. Perceptions matter, and what one person is thinking and feeling can be very different from another person. From an objective POV, you might say, "Yes, the company tried multiple ways to contact him- from phone calls to trying to get his attention on his youtube comments. Only after everything failed, did they send people to try and talk to him directly and get the return of the cards, along with the guarantee that he would get a free set of cards when they came out."But that's because we also know these facts. If he wasn't aware of those attempts at contact, it might have felt differently. When people show up at your house, and say you have "stolen goods," it can feel intimidating. In addition, most PI firms (like the Pinkertons) hire from ex-LEO and armed forces, so even if they weren't wearing official police uniforms, it probably felt like an LEO situation.While anything is possible, it's also easy to imagine that both parties (WoTC and Dan) did everything in good faith. Again, Dan posted about the initial event. The followup post was basically, "Don't believe all the stuff you've been hearing about." And then he hasn't tried to capitalize (AFAIK) on this, other than naming the "official" reveal video with "No Pinkertons" which, you know, fair!We all get so invested in narratives, and making people heroes and villains, that we sometimes refuse to see that things are not that simple- usually.TLDR- I don't see any thing that makes me think that Dan was doing anything particularly bad, but relaying it as it happened to him. At most, he might have played up or embellished a few details because we do that when recalling events to tell a story, but who knows, and that's certainly not blameworthy.[USER=16668]@Ulorian - Agent of Chaos[/USER] Unfortunately, I was part of the discourse at the time, and tried to explain the legal issues to people. Short version- they don't care. If their mind is made up already, they will convince themselves that whatever the actual legal issues are or might be, they are right, and therefore the law must follow.See also-[URL unfurl="true"]https://theonion.com/area-man-passionate-defender-of-what-he-imagines-consti-1819571149/[/URL]</blockquote>

Verification