Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 9166630" data-attributes="member: 8461">I'm not sure why you care why I care; to be honest, that smacks of "your points are less important than your motivations," with the implication that my motives are something suspect. I'd rather you look at the points I raised in and of themselves than trying to intuit some sort of deeper motivation on my part.And, to reiterate again, it's the "how" by which companies seek to make money that's being discussed, because not every option is held to carry the same weight in terms of how acceptable people find those practices. I'm sure that WotC ran an internal analysis on the profitability that their OGL v1.1 would have gotten them, and I'm (almost as) certain that the people who made the decision to go ahead with that didn't care that they were reneging on their promise that the OGL v1.0a would be perpetual (and that using dubious legalese about the difference between "perpetual" and "irrevocable" wasn't a sufficient excuse), endangering the livelihood of a lot of other people who worked in the same industry. Things like that don't become excusable just because companies are expected to chase profits. How they do it matters; it's why "ethically sourced" is a buzzword these days.If you go back and read what I wrote, you'll notice that I acknowledged that the idea that smaller companies chase excellence (trusting the money to follow) while larger companies chase profits (putting excellence second, if that) is indeed a generalization. But it's not a generalization that's lacking in practical examples; when you're holding back popular monsters in order to ensure that a follow-up book will have higher sales, that's an example of trying to make money at the expense of your customers, rather than by doing as right by them as you can. To showcase an example of the opposite end of that generalization, all of Paizo's monsters are legally available for free online.And I'm trying to tell you, the justifications for that attitude are already out there, and have been for a while. You are, if I'm reading you rightly, looking at things like the OGL scandal, the Pinkerton scandal, the $1,000 set of reprint M:tG boosters scandal, etc. and saying that they're all justifiable/excusable because companies are supposed to seek profits. I'm trying to tell you, that's not something that I – and, I believe, a lot of other people – give them a pass for.</blockquote>

Verification