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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 6179661" data-attributes="member: 8835">I think the core of your examples is: does the store have a right to not sell content it doesn't like?In the Rockstar game example, I'm pretty sure the studio knew exactly what kind of game they were making and the rating they were going to get.I'm pretty sure the stores had a pretty simple bar they set.  Anything less than a certain rating from the rating board.There were no surprises here.  Certainly no favoritism of the picky Cuban book store owner.I think from a generic standpoint, of course the owner has a right to sell what they want to sell.  There's a reason the guy sells books and not hats.  Because he wants to sell books.  That's his right.Where the line gets fuzzy on that right, is when the owner's preferences are unreasonable and discriminatory.If I don't carry books about watermelon because I don't like watermelon, that might be OK.  But if I don't carry those books because black people like watermelon (a terrible stereotype on which I have no reason to believe is true) and I don't want them in my store, that might be a different animal entirely.I suspect that saying "My store doesn't sell naughty games. This game was rated N for naughty by an external board, so we can't sell it" is a reasonable policy.  there's no reason a Naughty Game store can't exist, so it's not on me to provide it.Whereas, if a case can be demonstrated that I'll accept books about other fruit, except Watermelon because I am targeting a demographic of people.  That's wrong.Now should a ton of people rally outside my door?  Maybe it depends on the facts.  If they do it because they think I'm a racist, when it's really because I just can't stand watermelon, then they are in the wrong.If you're going to take a stand, you better be doing it for the right reasons and against the right target.  I reckon that might be hard to tell which is which.  But in that, case I suggest erring on the side of caution and NOT rallying.</blockquote>

Verification