Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Faolyn" data-source="post: 8923103" data-attributes="member: 6915329">By that logic, you should avoid saying that they had any emotions at all here, including a desire to show generosity or decency.Here's the facts:They proposed a plan. People very vocally did not like it. People very vocally talked about boycotting WotC. The story was picked up by major news sources. Several major companies banded together to create a brand new license. Several websites put together lists of game suggestions for people who were ditching D&amp;D. Several non-WotC companies sold out of books. Many, many people cancelled their DDB subscriptions. If I'm understanding it correctly, their stocks went down quite considerably in January and at least some of that was because of this kurfluffle. When WotC proposed a revised plan, people still very vocally did not like it, both because it contained a false-sounding non-apology and because it failed to actually address the problems people were having with the plan. WotC then put out a poll and ended the poll several days early when they were getting results that said 62% of people would be satisfied with putting the game under the Creative Commons, 89% said they weren't satisfied with deauthorizing 1.a and 88% wouldn't want to publish under 1.2.So what would you call all that?OK, you're comparing the actions of fictional characters in a game, with fictional results, where the worst thing that could really happen is that I lose one of my dice under the sofa because I tossed it a bit too hard, to the actions of a real company whose actions could have a real negative effect on real people.Seriously?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Faolyn, post: 8923103, member: 6915329"] By that logic, you should avoid saying that they had any emotions at all here, including a desire to show generosity or decency. Here's the facts: They proposed a plan. People very vocally did not like it. People very vocally talked about boycotting WotC. The story was picked up by major news sources. Several major companies banded together to create a brand new license. Several websites put together lists of game suggestions for people who were ditching D&D. Several non-WotC companies sold out of books. Many, [I]many [/I]people cancelled their DDB subscriptions. If I'm understanding it correctly, their stocks went down quite considerably in January and at least some of that was because of this kurfluffle. When WotC proposed a revised plan, people still very vocally did not like it, both because it contained a false-sounding non-apology and because it failed to actually address the problems people were having with the plan. WotC then put out a poll and ended the poll several days early when they were getting results that said 62% of people would be satisfied with putting the game under the Creative Commons, 89% said they weren't satisfied with deauthorizing 1.a and 88% wouldn't want to publish under 1.2. So what would you call all that? OK, you're comparing the actions of fictional characters in a game, with fictional results, where the worst thing that could [I]really [/I]happen is that I lose one of my dice under the sofa because I tossed it a bit too hard, to the actions of a real company whose actions could have a real negative effect on real people. Seriously? [/QUOTE]

Verification