IndigoSundown.5419 Posted April 7, 2022 Share Posted April 7, 2022 18 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said: I literally used the definitions you provided, and oppression is in them. So is the word "or,' whose purposes in the language include the delineation of alternatives. If both conditions were required, the correct word would have been "and." 18 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said: Laws don't just "protect" the "victims", they adversely affect people that don't mind buying the keys. There are a few threads on these forums complaining about things similar to this, one of which has to do with mount skin boxes not being available in Belgium. Enough people said "there ought to be a law", and now there is, and they can't purchase a product that is guaranteed to give them something they don't have, even if it's not the one they're hoping for. I'm not advocating for a law. It's possible to point out that a business practice is predatory without demanding that daddy fix it. 18 hours ago, robertthebard.8150 said: I don't mess with them because I like to know exactly what I'm getting when I buy something. I'm not looking for the government, or a government, to protect me from them, I don't need it. Where does government interference stop? People are addicted to coffee, is that next? Tobacco? I know my state made it illegal to smoke indoors in public places, and yet, they didn't lower their taxation on the product... At some point, it is on the consumer, or those close to them, to deal with their issues. It should never be up to the government. Ronald Reagan said it better than anyone I've heard: "the scariest 9 words in the English language: I'm from the government, and I'm here to help". I get it, you'd prefer that government stay out of peoples' business. So would I. What I'd like is for companies to voluntarily refrain from tricking people out of their money. In the meantime, I post to perhaps make people think about things. That's promoting change the slow way -- by attempting to influence consumers to be aware of what is involved in these types of transactions. Do I expect to effect change this way? Not really, but I do it anyway. Maybe someday the horse will sing. Finally, I'd settle for ANet to make two changes. First, post the odds where a prospect can easily see them, without depending on the consumer to know that the wiki exists and how to find the likely odds there. Second, offer a "pity" mechanic where you get what you want after so many tries. Those are two ways someone can look at the likelihood of getting what they want "cheaply" if they get lucky, and what the cost would be to get "it" if they don't. While statuettes pretend to be this, they aren't because the current gewgaw isn't available. At least that way, the onus would be on the consumer to exercise due diligence. 4 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now