This topic is locked
Well, I'm pretty surprised that your own arguments didn't make you change your opinion. You've actually compared threatening to kill someone's daughter to being competitive in a goddamn videogame... Don't you see anything wrong with this comparison alone? Well, let me comment then.
Wrong. Coercion is the use of or threat to make use of violence to make people do what they don't want to, influence - by any means - is the use of arguments and/or incentives to change someone's opinion about acting in one way or another. You can say that someone has the freedom to not give your purse to the thief who is pointing a gun to their head, but no one in a normal state of mind would do so. We have self preservation mechanisms in our brains that prevent us from doing so, and can only be bypassed by an abnormal state of mind (e.g. a traumatic experience) or training (military, police, etc.).
No, we can't agree with that. You can use that argument to make comerce itself illegal. The means are of extreme importance, it's way different to ask for someone's money by offering a good or service, and ask someone for money "else I'll kill you". BTW the threat by itself has no power. If I say that I'll kill you, you'll just laugh, becase I don't know who you are, where you live, etc. But if I provide some kind of proof that I can harm you, this changes. How can WP harm people that cannot control themselves by offering a chance of getting "competitivity in a videogame"? These people with no self-control harm themselves.
Already refuted above. What you're trying to do is compare an abnormal state of mind (addiction, which is some kind of mental disease that can and have to be treated) to pontual excesses that can be commited (someone drinking too much one night, or eating too much, or wasting too much money on OCP boxes once or a few times non-recurrently) to VIOLENCE! I'll just quote Oda again. Jesus Christ, click, just no.
The word you're looking for is "equating" saying that one thing is equivalent to another, which at no point in time did I say.
Comparing something is the act of weighing one thing against another in order to assess it, which, in this sense of the word I did do. I can take 1 + 1 = 2, and 100 + 100 = 200, and say they are similar, I did not however say at any point in time that they were equal. Nor did I say at any point in time that Warp Portal's actions were illegal, simply immoral.
While one could argue as to the nature of commerce and coercion, I did not, at any point in time, imply that commerce in any way shape or form could be considered illegal. I simply stated that coercion is the act of threatening, implying, if not flat out stating that there are consequences, not benefits. Perhaps it's my fault, I thought that you were smart enough to comprehend what you were reading. However, I will once again state, coercion is the act of threatening consequences for your decisions, as was, again, stated in my last post, had you taken the time to comprehend what you were reading.
Coercion means that one faces consequences for one's action, or lack there of. The same formula is applied in all cases of coercion, we can all agree on that right?
We want MONEY, if you don't give into our demands you will no longer be competitive.
Fits into said formula perfectly, even more so when you add in the connotation "And you may never be able to get this again." or "And will be unable to progress."
Why did I compare one's child being slain to the pressure applied by Warp Portal? To dispute your claim of free will, as once again, addiction is a more powerful thing than you or I, as sane adults, can understand. In an addict's mind the game is more important than anything, likewise, in a father's mind the child is more important than anything, so while you may have the option to say no, that option to exercise free will, you will not do so. So I reiterate, coercion, regardless of it's legality or severity, is still coercion. "You do X or Y happens", a threat that you admitted exists, yet dismissed because "free will", is still a threat, and free will, the ability to say no, is an option that many addicts do not see, nor have.
Gambling too much, while un-equatable to murder, is still the most common of the problems created by MMO addiction. Don't believe that people can become addicted to MMOs? Don't believe that addicts will throw free will and common sense out the window for said MMO and do horrible things? Don't believe that it can cause serious harm to themselves and others? Here's some reading material for you.
http://www.ranker.co.../michael-gibson
http://www.sptimes.c...y_in_deat.shtml
http://www.ign.com/a...of-manslaughter
And here's a good one, what do I keep saying? Feed your kids?
http://www.thedailyb...starve-to-death
Oh and, let's not forget the boy who was tied up in an attic, and was tortured to death, literally having limbs and other chunks of flesh hacksawed off over a loan in an MMO that he didn't pay back. A loan more or less equivalent to $0.50 USD. I'd post a link, but the pictures are a bit too graphic to give a direct link on the WP forums.
Now, since I clearly need to connect the dots for you, ask yourself, if this -_- happens because of MMOs, what happens that's off the radar, that doesn't make the news? Are people gambling too much? Yes. Is it possible these people have an addiction, albeit mild? Yes. Are people wasting valuable resources that could go towards something more conducive to survival, even more so being able to thrive? Hell yes.
Edited by ClickClickClick, 17 August 2017 - 05:28 PM.
