No, you're a cunt. You use a similar passive-aggressive / "high and mighty" style of FretRider where you try to say something, it seems to have no relevance unless read in a certain context, but when that context is pointed out you retreat from it. You either lack the capability to say clearly and directly what you mean (which in this case is: I want a custom avatar and I think $200 is too much) - which I doubt; or you're being a cunt.
I made a parallel with De Beers and the issue of human-made scarcity for monetary purposes and commented that I consider that behaviour of low value for a community and scum-like, but not of the same magnitude. This quite straight-forward statement was answered by simply calling me a cunt.
In the end it is your web-site, you work for it and I get to enjoy it. I respect that and that's why I try to offer criticism, else I would just roll my eyes. Helping and criticising is what "friends" or "allies" (I use the terms loosely here) do. If trying to offer criticism or understand the logic behind decisions that affect a community makes me a cunt, then what more can I say? It's the fucking internet, I don't have a way to convince you of my honest intentions. I guess being called a cunt...
RPG Codex | We're a bunch of angry cunts.
...comes with the Codex job description.
You didn't "ask" about it. You out-right said: "The reward for $200 (a price for real scarcity) was the personalized MCA avatar, not the forum-right to use it."
There is no question mark there denoting a question. It's a blunt statement. And it is incorrect. At the time we had custom avatars because of our lack of XenForo avatar gallery, meaning anyone who got one would be allowed to use it. Denying them that right now would be a pretty shit-cock move. Along the lines of upping the ad-free prices and not compensating people who paid the stated price earlier - but didn't get their ad-free time until now.
Plus this is while you were talking about the Codex doing things "for the sake of money and power" and leading to decline. Your position only seems to be an attempt to refute Crooked Bee's "right" to have a custom avatar while you can't (because you couldn't or weren't willing to pay the price).
I should have written "Ask about the issue of avatars and monetization". I admit it wasn't the clearest sentence, but you understood what I meant from the rest of the discussion and already answered in your previous post. If you say it is incorrect, then it is incorrect.
And I don't want to refute her "right" to use her avatar, this is ridiculous. The avatars are not the main issue here.
1. Except you used your comment about sacrifice to lead into an argument that "One of the reasons most societies are awful is because they are defined and controlled purely for the sake of money and power, instead of the community itself. Unfortunately, the Codex is slowly going down that road." Dude, we're talking about custom avatars on an internet forum. Over-reaching much?
2. "Sacrifice" isn't relative. Just because $200 may not mean much to me, doesn't mean I'm not "sacrificing" it for what I believe is a higher or more worthy cause. And in this case, the Codex didn't even get the money.
3. You mentioned this in response to evdk's comment about people having to make a "similar monetary sacrifice". If you weren't complaining about the price, then your entire comment is completely irrelevant (uhhh... thanks for the semantics on the word "sacrifice"?). It only has relevance when taken in context of evdk's comment and reading your reply as a rebuttal that "someone who donates just $1 could be sacrificing more" (IE: your personal situation) with the implication being therefore that they are somehow worthy of a custom avatar. Which they're not, just in case you're unclear on that.
1. No, the comment about sacrifice was not connected to the next, that's why I split them into two paragraphs.
The issue of the avatars is just being current and used to illustrate a situation, you can substitute them with anything similar. The main and underlying issue is something many have mentioned, the negative (or positive depending on the point of view) prospect of turning into an SA-like forum. I'm not overreaching, society is a word that can be used for the members of a forum.
2. I didn't say it is relative to the cause, but it is to the person.
3. Yes, it was clear from your previous post and I didn't say they are equally worthy of a custom avatar. I wrote about the semantics, in a different paragraph, to point out the human aspect of it. Nothing more or less.
