Uber upgrade?

[nameless noob]

First off, this will probably be my last post in this thread. We have gone far afield, and the original poster has long since had his question answered. If someone wishes to continue via a new thread (say in the lounge) that'd be fine.

Given the site that you're posting your arguments on, this seems remarkably short-sighted on your part.

IFD: I am forced to admit that my use of the term "prig" was a "poor ad hominem", as you so aptly termed it, and indeed shortsighted since I applied it to a group which may be large and diverse. However, I stand by, and even reinforce my use of the term elitist. Based on your own description of your group and its requirements, and its demonstrated adversity toward philosophical outsiders, elitist only begins to cover it.

I'm not telling you how to play the game. I'm telling you that it is arguments such as yours that have contributed to the poor state of the realms...

Nope, you're not telling me how to play the game; that'd be constructive. You're just saying that my way is wrong.

Good day to you sir. Sorry to have gotten underfoot.

----

gekko:

This part was good, too:

Did you know that you can buy a Rolex ™ on the streets of any major city for as little as $10? Does that make the purchase of any Rolex ™ wrong? The example is directly analogous.

Actually, you AGAIN are boxing me unfairly. See, I can be opposed to purchasing fake Rolexes (or stolen, for that matter) and still be fine with purchasing legitimate ones.

Yes, but thus far you have been opposed to both, or so it has seemed. These are from four different posts of yours. Emphasis added is mine.

I was not objecting to you purchasing items. I was objecting to your suggestion that purchasing items was acceptable behavior.

2) without you and people like you purchasing these items, the market for such botted/hacked items does not exist.
3) Therefore, by purchasing items from these websites, you are providing supporting what they do and perpetuating their existance. In other words, you may as well be doing the botting/hacking yourself.

(2) Purchasing such items drives the market for hacked/duped/botted items and therefore contributes to constant stream of new hacks and the use of bots to obtain these items.

(4) As with most markets, this one is drive by purchaser, not the seller. That's why you have to accept some responsability for the hacks/dupes/bots on the realms if you purchase items online! As a consumer, you have enormous power. If everyone stopped buying items from online sites, cold turkey, no matter what the prices or items available, how long do you think they'd stay open?

So coming back to the Rolex example. Rolexes (items) exist. People want them; because of this they have value. Because people are willing to pay (relatively) lots of money, scammers and scum exist that sell counterfeit (duped/hacked) and stolen (botted) "Rolexes". Sometimes common sense might tell us these Rolexes are illegitimate (the guy in the street in the city with the $10 "Rolex"; the D2items site that you keep bashing maybe?). Other times, the items appear to be legit, probably even ARE legit (ebay sellers? Possibly sites other than D2items? Me, if I decided to sell my BER rune?). Our analogous Rolex market then has some legitimate items surrounded by a veritable glut of illegitimate items. Just like b.net.

You seem to be arguing:
-Without people purchasing (Rolexes), there'd be no market for stolen or counterfeit (Rolexes).
-Purchasing (Rolexes) drives the market for stolen and counterfeit (Rolexes), and therefore contributes to the constant stream of new Theft and Counterfeiting.
-If everyone stopped buying (Rolexes) cold turkey, no matter what, counterfeiters and thieves would go out of business.
-Purchasing (Rolexes) is unacceptable behavior.

Now perhaps you believe that markets for "time" or for "virtual items" are somehow different at a moral or philosophical level? It would be interesting to discuss this maybe, and we even could, if your fear(?) of being pinned down didn't keep you from establishing a clear position.

Your arguments, when applied to (Rolexes) are all ABSOLUTELY CORRECT AND TRUE. Putting Rolex Corp out of business would solve the problem of Rolex related crimes. What I take exception to is the explicit conclusion you draw: That the purchasers of (Rolexes) bear particular responsibility for those crimes and are each directly responsible for all such crimes. Although I may buy a Rolex, it is not reasonable to treat me as directly culpable in all previous and future Rolex related crimes.

I don't ask you to agree with peoples' decisions to purchase items, or to consider such purchases. Rather, I ask that you treat such people with courtesy at least (you and others did not) because, regardless of what some may prefer, in society at large, purchasing items IS acceptable behavior.

I hope somebody someplace found this all interesting.

-nameless noob