please end mystery boxes (loot boxes, glorified gambling)

"

Sickness wrote:

Following that path you can define advantage as whatever you like and keep moving the goal posts so that nothing is ever P2W (much like what has been done over the last 15 pages). That is not interesting from any standpoint.

Exactly! And that's exactly why this entire argument is pointless. It's your opinion vs mine. How pointless is that? The only reason I even engaged in this entire discussion was because you claim that your definition is fact and is something we all should apply ourselves to. I challenge that, but at least we can agree on something. Progress has been made, unfortunately it's not my thread and you're still ignoring the topic.

"

Sickness wrote:

You rolled 1 on the logic check,it's ok. Dont dig the hole deeper.

Aww, just had to twist that knife, didn't you? I'm hurt. :(
But, hopeless optimist that I am, I still like to see the silver lining. You just proved to me that you do in fact know the definition of ad hominem. :)

"

Xavathos wrote:

Exactly! And that's exactly why this entire argument is pointless. It's your opinion vs mine. How pointless is that? The only reason I even engaged in this entire discussion was because you claim that your definition is fact and is something we all should apply ourselves to. I challenge that, but at least we can agree on something.

That is exactly why I have been asking for people to say what they consider to be P2. To have something to evaluate against. You didn't like that and told me that it was my job define it, but that is obviously pointless. My method has been to show posters that tabs are P2W using their own personal definitions, just look at the last response to vio.

I have naturally assumed that you think that anything that is more advantageous than a insignificant boost to IIQ is an advantage that qualifies for p2w, based on your previous statements.
Your current position is that getting any boost to IIQ/IIR for a 10 seconds every century is an advantage (and "absolutely P2W" in your own words) but saving significant time on sales netting far more than the IIQ/IIR buff is not.
How is that a rational position? You are trying to have it both ways, but you just can't.

"

Xavathos wrote:

Progress has been made, unfortunately it's not my thread and you're still ignoring the topic.

I am replying to more or less every open post that is made on the original topic.

Guys, if you wanna continue the stashtab discussion, do it here:

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2298092

This is completely off-topic, since this thread is about the loot boxes, not stashtabs.

"

AceNightfire wrote:

Guys, if you wanna continue the stashtab discussion, do it here:

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2298092

This is completely off-topic, since this thread is about the loot boxes, not stashtabs.

They don't care.

"

Xtorma wrote:

"

AceNightfire wrote:

Guys, if you wanna continue the stashtab discussion, do it here:

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2298092

This is completely off-topic, since this thread is about the loot boxes, not stashtabs.

They don't care.

Nope, they have no interest whatsoever in respecting others.

But they can always surprise us and prove us wrong.

...Don't hold your breath. Multiple requests were summarily ignored by all three of them.

Let's watch them continue to selfishly derail this thread in 3, 2...

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

...Don't hold your breath. Multiple requests were summarily ignored by all three of them.

I don't feel like I'm being included in this little trifecta of yours, but all of your messages posted just to say how others are breaking the rules are as bad as the off-topic posts themselves, if not worse.

Those posts, despite being on a different topic, at least derived from the original topic. Yours are just spam.

If you want to be all high and mighty, then do it right and when you see rules being broken, you silently report and move on. That's what a real "player" moderator would do.

Not saying that's me or anything, I'm not that much of a purist, but I don't have to explain that to you, right Gibbs? We all have our baggage on these boards... :)

"

Xavathos wrote:

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

...Don't hold your breath. Multiple requests were summarily ignored by all three of them.

I don't feel like I'm being included in this little trifecta of yours, but all of your messages posted just to say how others are breaking the rules are as bad as the off-topic posts themselves, if not worse.

Those posts, despite being on a different topic, at least derived from the original topic. Yours are just spam.

If you want to be all high and mighty, then do it right and when you see rules being broken, you silently report and move on. That's what a real "player" moderator would do.

Not saying that's me or anything, I'm not that much of a purist, but I don't have to explain that to you, right Gibbs?

I don't report. It's not my style. When people do things that are rude I simply ask them to stop. I even do it politely (at first). This approach typically makes for a better forum environment than calling in the moderator artillery. (It's also much less obnoxious to them.)

Why is that not enough? Why do people have to have the cops on their ass before they can actually behave? For fuck's sake, people. You're not adult enough to know that a completely different topic merits a separate thread? Even when the OP has asked you to knock it off? I mean, seriously.

"

achillesdub wrote:

stay on topic or leave

How DIFFICULT is it to understand this request? Could it have been stated any more clearly? Is it ambiguous? Are you having trouble understanding those words? I honestly can't think of a less ambiguous request than that.

Or is it that you think I am wrong? And that there is nothing wrong with derailing a thread completely instead of taking 1 minute to make a new thread? Well, that's another discussion.

Incidentally...

"As bad as the off-topics posts themselves," you say. Do you see me monopolizing a thread for multiple pages with off-topic posts?

No? You don't? Really?

You don't say. You live in a glass house, man. May want to keep your stones in your pocket.

"

Xtorma wrote:

"

UlfgardLeo wrote:

I haven't read all those pages and the last two are kind of off-topic.

Did we agree that loot-boxes are praying on peoples weaknesses and abuse psychological biases(dopamine rush/ sunken cost fallacy) which can push a vulnerable group into bankruptcy? Or did the side win that argued that everyone is responsible for themselves?

There is no win or lose here.

I think, when it comes to loot-boxes, there is only lose.

"

UlfgardLeo wrote:

"

Xtorma wrote:

"

UlfgardLeo wrote:

I haven't read all those pages and the last two are kind of off-topic.

Did we agree that loot-boxes are praying on peoples weaknesses and abuse psychological biases(dopamine rush/ sunken cost fallacy) which can push a vulnerable group into bankruptcy? Or did the side win that argued that everyone is responsible for themselves?

There is no win or lose here.

I think, when it comes to loot-boxes, there is only lose.

Could you clarify that?

"

UlfgardLeo wrote:

"

Xtorma wrote:

"

UlfgardLeo wrote:

I haven't read all those pages and the last two are kind of off-topic.

Did we agree that loot-boxes are praying on peoples weaknesses and abuse psychological biases(dopamine rush/ sunken cost fallacy) which can push a vulnerable group into bankruptcy? Or did the side win that argued that everyone is responsible for themselves?

There is no win or lose here.

I think, when it comes to loot-boxes, there is only lose.

In the context of a discussion, there is no win or lose.