STOP before you make another life changing UPDATE,READ THIS!

[R27377783]

I see your point, you only want to debate the subject with people who already agree that slavery and trafficking is wrong. Preaching to the converted? Why not actually take the debate to the slavers and human traffickers around the world? That would be a worthwhile project. There is or was an entire movement of Abolitionists already dedicated to eradicating slavery. The Abolitionists would not care for your views as it seems you have missed the point.

The attention you're getting on this forum has nothing to do with your chosen topic of conversation.

Your correct even in being sarcastic. Yes I'm not here to debate the ethics of slavery. I made a correlation to slavery/people trafficking with the apparent "sales" of the Eudaemon entities in the game especially since there is no further context suggesting its an essential element to the games plot. I'm fairly certain the real abolitionists and anti human trafficking movements would also see the correlation and further request the change. I could be wrong, I'm okay with that. I can't account for the actions and interests of others. The slavers and human traffickers of the world are not responsible for the content f this game the devs and publishers and to some extent gaming community of WT is. I already know that slavery is wrong and that there are supporting cultures and complacent attitudes that surround almost any act of slavery. Normalizing has always played a very significant part of that culture and results in the dehumanization of the entire affected community. The often overlooked hindsight of accepting slavery in your culture is that if your neighbor can be taken as a slave then so can you. The next logical correlation of "people" trafficking as far as the game is concerned is its not unrealistic to presume that another update could allow players the ability to enslave each other. For myself if its obviously meant to be part of the game and done in such away that does not otherwise offend my tastes I might not object(Because I DO realize there can be a difference between gaming/simulation and endorsement of real life activities)..if its some kind of typo or oversight I will object. Inmy opinion NOT changing the button after attention has been called to the issue is more of an endorsement of the culture of slave/trafficking than the actual original oversight of creating the button. I guess thats the most unfortunate aspect of the gamer reaction to this thread. This is already the casein one other R2game title..I'm not going after that title because its not subtle oversight(I believe this sell button IS just that) its an ostensible part of the game and every player has plenty of indication what it is and whether or not they will participate in that feature of the game..Going after media that normalizes disdainful activities is a part of any meaningful campaign to prevent its proliferation. I understand that you don't have to agree with it. Its not my goal to convince people that slavery is wrong and it was not my original intention to even convince anyone that simulating an institution of slavery is also wrong but thats what it seems would be required here. I'm unwilling be the one to do it. Going after slaver operations is not my current profession either, so If you aren't already convinced that the correlation is unacceptable theres literally nothing I'm willing to do to convince you otherwise as I feel that your social sensitivity level is too low or you are indeed on the other side of the issue. If it bothers you that I feel you might be a supporter of the culture of slavery by not being willing to acknowledge the obvious correlation then thats your cross to bear. Its my opinion and I'm entitled to it. My goal in the OP and subsequent posts is to get rid of the word "sell" on the button. IF that wont happen because noone else here can or is willing to acknowledge the correlation then theres a good chance it wont get updated. I can accept that as far as this forum is concerned.
Finally regarding your last line..if you really think this is about me and not the attitudes of the respondents then why don't you give it a shot yourself..bring the issue up in a new thread dedicated to the question and for the sake of knowledge just pretend your on the side of the "abolitionist" regarding the "sell" button in the game..present it in your own words and see if you don't get the same results..that could be a VERY revealing experiment for you, if you think its "about me" or the way I brought it up. I'm sure you won't because even you already know that your conclusion in that last line is total b s.

[Alsatia01]

I'm not saying you weren't also trying to be helpful and offer constructive critisism thats obvious to me as well but you also meant it as an insult and your disclaimer did not convince me no matter how many times you rendered it.

It was not meant as an insult. That's why I took the time to explain it in very good detail, in several locations and on multiple posts. If you still can't understand that, I can only assume you have some kind of persecution complex. Either way, there's probably no more need to discuss the topic.

I'm used to people who acknowledge logic

Logic, you mean the part where you haven't demonstrated any of your assertions to have any evidentiary support whatsoever? Pretty sure that's a logical fallacy.

and know when their argument has been reduced to piddling

I have made no arguments.

I have asked you to provide some semblance of evidence for your assertions, and you have not.

not people who argue for the sake of arguing

Maybe that could characterize me.

If you could provide any evidence for why you believe what you believe, and we just had a difference of opinion; I could live with that.

some vague forms of character assassination

Citation.

Again thank you Alsatia for the intruiging if mostly fruitless discourse.

I would probably agree that it's fruitless.

However, unlike you, I could actually change my opinion. I don't dogmatically follow blatant assertions with no evidentiary support, then attempt to call out others for not using the same 'logic'.

[R27377783]

It was not meant as an insult. That's why I took the time to explain it in very good detail, in several locations and on multiple posts. If you still can't understand that, I can only assume you have some kind of persecution complex. Either way, there's probably no more need to discuss the topic.

SO in your heart of hearts you honestly didn't believe that comparing someones written work to a middle schooler was likely to be taken as an insult? How do you know I'm NOT a middle schooler? The only thing you have to go by is my writings so if that were actually a true assessment of my work you would have already assumed I was a middle schooler and had no need for the disclaimer. Also I'd like to point out if I had said the same of your work you (while I don't know if you would have taken any offense ) but (based on our past exchanges) you certainly would have demanded evidence such as a scan of a middle schooler's schoolwork/essays etc. You would have not only asked me if I was a middle school teacher and could qualify to make that assessment but also demanded some sort of proof/credentials that I am that. I did ask you if you were a middle school teacher but ultimately I don't care if you are or not. I know what you say is a farce and I'm satisfied with my own opinion of your purpose in writing what you wrote.

However, unlike you, I could actually change my opinion. I don't dogmatically follow blatant assertions with no evidentiary support, then attempt to call out others for not using the same 'logic'.

you should just adjust your opinion once you know its wrong..all the arguing and evidence is supposed to be for those who don't already have an opinion or facts, but need to arrive at a conclusion. Demanding someone who is disinterested in you personally to provide you with evidence to change your view and not even offering them any compensation for their effort is a very entitled and narcissistic approach.

If you could provide any evidence for why you believe what you believe, and we just had a difference of opinion; I could live with that.

The evidence here on this current subject is in the game itself..
I don 't go around in the forums providing evidence for every little fact I present do you? I feel that much of my position and the facts I present are almost self evident..apparently you don't agree. In our other argument you were very resourceful in finding what you believed to be evidence in support of your argument that cultures are not distinct from one another at least not enough to be protectorates. I disagreed and also found the evidence you provided insufficient nor do I believe I asked you to provide such evidence..in fact I seem to recall expressing disinterest in your ability to prove your argument. Although I did wind up liking the pictures and felt your evidence did more to prove on of my points but again we could not reach a consensus. It seems that unlike you, I'm not a person who always requires alot of evidence or consensus to form my position. Does that mean I'm not an ideal lawyer or judge? Probably. Do I need to be to raise an issue in the Wartune Forum? Even after all the relentless and petty bickering I'd still say: no.

[Alsatia01]

I feel that much of my poisinot an dthe facts I present are almost self evident..apparrantly you don't agree.

No they are not self evident.

For example -

Please demonstrate how having a virtual eudaemon that follows you around, is equivalent to owning slaves. Better yet, demonstrate how any of these 'issues' have any demonstrable harm.

You not answering these questions, or explaining your position with evidentiary support, would be an example. Having the opinion, that having virtual eudaemon that follow you around, is the same as slavery, is not a self-evident position to hold.

Inour other argument you were very resourceful in finding what you believed to be evidence in support of your argument that cultures are not distinct from one another at least not enough to be protectorates.

I disagreed and also found the evidence you provided insufficient nor do I believe I asked you to provide such evidence..

That was not an argument I made.

That was an example, for why you had no basis for asserting that specific cultural aspects belong only to those singular cultures. I was trying to throw you a proverbial bone.

It seems that unlike you, I'm not a person who always requires alot of evidence or consensus to form my position. Does that mean I'm not an ideal lawyer or judge? Probably. Do I need to be to raise an issue in the Wartune Forum? Even after all the relentless and petty bickering I'd still say: no.

I'm not asking you to provide complete without-a-shadow-of-doubt proof. I'm asking for some basic evidence, some reason why you believe what you do.

So to recap. If you assert something as true, that is obviously not self evident - like owning eudaemon is the same as slavery, for example, provide evidence for it.

That's all there is to it.

[R27377783]

You want to bring back the useless need to run around the farms to harvest?

I do want to bring back the farm instances..but not becuase I liked having to do the running around to harvest my cops I hated that too but I got used to it. The current farm system is far worse and has no potential to be a fun co-op level with an auctionshop in the "hamlet" that existed there.. Which I haven't truly gotten around to suggesting yet.

[Alsatia01]

Since you edited your post, I'm just going to make this addendum.

SO in your heart of hearts you honestly didn't believe that comparing someones written work to a middle schooler was likely to be taken as an insult? How do you know I'm NOT a middle schooler? The only thing you have to go by is my writings so if that were actually a true assessment of my work you would have already assumed I was a middle schooler and had no need for the disclaimer. Also I'd like to point out if I had said the same of your work you (while I don't know if you would have taken any offense ) but (based on our past exchanges) you certainly would have demanded evidence such as a scan of a middle schooler's schoolwork/essays etc. You would have not only asked me if I was a middle school teacher and could qualify to make that assessment but also demanded some sort of proof/credentials that I am that. I did ask you if you were a middle school teacher but ultimately I don't care if you are or not. I know what you say is a farce and I'm satisfied with my own opinion of your purpose in writing what you wrote.

If you were a middle schooler, it most definitely wouldn't have been an insult then. More importantly, I explained in detail why I chose such an admittedly demeaning characterization. Which is why I went into great detail, explaining exactly what I meant. I not only laid it out in extreme detail, but I even rewrote your own post to emphasize what I meant. If you're still upset about it after that.... I don't know what I can say about it.

you should just adjust your opinion once you know its wrong..all the arguing and evidence is supposed to be for those who don't already have an opinion or facts, but need to arrive at a conclusion. Demanding someone who is disinterested in you personally to provide you with evidence to change your view and not even offering them any compensation for their effort is a very entitled and narcissistic approach.

Sigh..... no.

Evidence is not there for those who do not already have an opinion or 'facts'. Evidence is there for those who do already have an opinion (because believe it or not, everyone probably has an opinion of it immediately), and it helps to actually show why they should change their opinion.

You're essentially saying, 'To everyone who already agrees with me, good. To everyone who doesn't, well.... obviously you aren't going to change your mind, so I'm not even going to provide basic evidence for my position.'

I'm not asking for you to provide evidence why I should believe you. I'm asking..... why do you believe what you do?

[Meikura001]

R27377783

Has it occur to you that I don't really give a flying f<beep>? You make it sound like it is a bad thing considering it just a game. I see it as a game and so what if there is a sell button or any other button. I am just going to "sell" off any junk/dupe Euds because it is there. Has nothing to do with slavery, has nothing to do with trafficking, has nothing to do with exploitation, so come off your f<beep>in' high horse will ya?

You want to be adamant in all of this with the diatribe you're spewing? Grow a pair and go play "police" out in the real world that has that s<beep> going. Do not bring it into a game or forum. It's political nonsense the way I see it and it has no place here.

[Alsatia01]

R27377783

Has it occur to you that I don't really give a flying f<beep>? You make it sound like it is a bad thing considering it just a game. I see it as a game and so what if there is a sell button or any other button. I am just going to "sell" off any junk/dupe Euds because it is there. Has nothing to do with slavery, has nothing to do with trafficking, has nothing to do with exploitation, so come off your f<beep>in' high horse will ya?

It's actually a bit worse than that in my opinion.

Let's say for example that we were all playing a game about slave-trading and marketing. Where the purpose of the game is to make/trade/sell/buy and otherwise profit from the slaves in some regard. While it would be ethically questionable.... would there be anything objectively, demonstrably...... wrong with it? Every study that has come out attempting to show a correlation or causation between violence in video games and actual violence has shown, that they have had no significant impact whatsoever.

Does that mean that a video game that is heavily based on the profiteering of slavery would also have no impact on actual slavery/opinions on slavery? Probably, I would presume.

[R27377783]

[QUOTE=Alsatia01;1526286]No they are not self evident.
You not answering these questions, or explaining your position with evidentiary support, would be an example. Having the opinion, that having virtual eudaemon that follow you around, is the same as slavery, is not a self-evident position to hold.[QUOTE]

For a person who can hold that the sale of persons/individuals implies ownership which is the main reality of slavery then putting the sell button on the Eudaemon screen is a self evident implication of slave trade. Its more opinion than fact. I never even touted it as a "fact". I don't even believe it was the devs INTENT to imply a slave trade exists in the game although theres no way I can be sure of that. What kind of evidence do you really need me to provide in order to "PROVE" my OPINION? ITS my OPINION that it implies ownership/slavery it doesn't have to be a FACT to be immoral or a disgusting oversight..to ME. IF you don't believe that simulating the sales of persons in a game implies ownership of that "person" in the game then I can't help you nor can or will I provide any "evidence" that it has any effect on the greater population(which I have not YET claimed to even be a concern of mine.) Not being able to provide evidence of something does not make it socially or conceptually irrelevant, and neither does the possibility that it does not currently even have an impact on the culture of the game or community in question. Just because its not having an impact now does not mean it would not in the future or that it should be allowed to persist unnecessarily until it does. If you really need me to provide you with evidence that this is a bad enough implication that it should be edited..then I can't help you..in fact it may not ever have any further effects on anything..that doesn't ALSO does not automatically make it okay either-in my opinion. The game is often marketed as 18+ (although I'm absolutely certain gamers of all ages play it) perhaps thats all the reason devs could feel they need not justify it or that it might be unnecessary to correct the oversight if it is indeed that. I don't have to be okay with that conclusion and everyone else can decide for themselves how they feel about it, I've never tried to suggest that they every individual can't decide for themselves BUT I do reserve the right to call ahole based on the circumstances of those decisions..particularly if they use it as a platform to distract from the rest of what is intended to be serious discussion in my forum post. The reality for me is that there are plenty of other explanations that could explain why there is a sell button on that screen that do not imply the players toon "owns" a person, but without providing any further context for the button the most obvious and unfortunate reason IMO is still the reprehensible one. I just feel if your going to include something as reprehensible as selling people or in this case "person-like" entities, you really out to flesh it out and make it real a part of the background story of the game or feature. So players can decide for themselves if they're comfortable with their toon being a part of that. I don't feel I need to prove THAT to you to get my point across. Maybe I do need to but I have no reason to suspect I do and I'm sure I wont try to either. For me its to obvious to devout that much attention to convincing anyone but especially someone who is already adversarial about anything I type.

So to recap. If you assert something as true, that is obviously not self evident - like owning eudaemon is the same as slavery, for example, provide evidence for it.

That's all there is to it.

why do I need to provide evidence for something thats not even necessarily the a fact? Why do I need to make the distinction between an implication and a fact of matter to someone I believe to likely be an adult? I would need to know the intent of the devs and have access to their plans in order to prove that to be the case, becuase theres no further context for it in the game other being able to set them in formation of being in harms way and that they follow me and are subject to my whim as long as they are in formation..which I don't take as an automatic implication of slavery because a "PET",soldier,body guard,or stalking super fan a might do the same behavior..but I cannot sell a soldier or superfan, I can sell a pet but Eudamons don't strike me as "pets" though the case could be made.. At least one of them even seems to be able to read a book thats more of a "person" thing for me. The implication however is self evident to anyone who understands slavery. Selling the Eudaemon implies OWNING the Eudaemon which implies slavery its not a fact and it doesn't need to be..its an implication. Most people here so far seem okay with that implication primarily from their words "because its just a game." I'm not satisfied with that and thats my own choice. It doesn't have to be anyone elses either..I know that already no need to point it out. Being a game or simulation doesn't automatically justify everything that occurs in such..its can be very circumstantial and affect my opinion of the game...I have no doubt that alot of these bozos using that argument could easily be offended by something ELSE in any game and likely even rage/quit. Maybe theres also a huge difference between how I value my time versus how many others do, and how I rate the quality of a "game". There are many games out there I do not play and some that I do. So many factors can go into that decision that an outsider might even find the criteria to be random. Most times I play for various reasons beyond enjoyment of the game. In almost all cases though its not "just a game" to me its an "activity" that I'm participating in, sometimes me playing a game is part of a bigger project of something I'm trying to do. Its my time and particularly when theres a multiplayer element, inevitably its a community that I'm causing myself to be a part of for better or worse. Reason enough for me to give rats bottom about whats going on in the game and how people are reacting to it.

[R27377783]

It's actually a bit worse than that in my opinion.

Let's say for example that we were all playing a game about slave-trading and marketing. Where the purpose of the game is to make/trade/sell/buy and otherwise profit from the slaves in some regard. While it would be ethically questionable.... would there be anything objectively, demonstrably...... wrong with it? Every study that has come out attempting to show a correlation or causation between violence in video games and actual violence has shown, that they have had no significant impact whatsoever.

Does that mean that a video game that is heavily based on the profiteering of slavery would also have no impact on actual slavery/opinions on slavery? Probably, I would presume.

such a study would have to be multi-generational, I'd expect, and would best require consideration of more factors than just the game and actually more behavioral and attitude indicators than just whether or not the subjects would be outright willing "to own or become a slave"...I'd expect I'm not a career researcher.

[Alsatia01]

For a person who can hold that the sale of persons/individuals implies ownership which is the main reality of slavery then putting the sell button on the Eudaemon screen is a self evident implication of slave trade.

I don't see it that way. Just because you can 'sell' off someone doesn't necessarily mean they are slaves. The relationship could be more similar to a sports team, where players are..... sold.... to other teams. It could be like many careers around the world, where employers sell employee's and their contracts off to other companies. There is no context for what happens to the eudaemon after you sell them, so like you said, it's largely an opinion.

What kind of evidence do you really need me to provide in order to "PROVE" my OPINION? ITS my OPINION that it implies ownership/slavery it doesn't have to be a FACT to be immoral or a disgusting oversight..to ME.

You, the writer, presumably wrote your OP in the hopes of not only changing the wording on the button, but also to get people to see why it could potentially be a problem. I did not ask you to prove anything. I asked you to provide evidence for your argument, some reason why you believe this is a problem. Something, anything.

Maybe you wouldn't have convinced me or any others, but at least you could say that you attempted it with some sensibility of objectivity.

such a study would have to be multi-generational, I'd expect, and would best require consideration of more factors than just the game and actually more behavioral and attitude indicators than just whether or not the subjects would be outright willing "to own or become a slave"...I'd expect I'm not a career researcher.

Agreed.

[R27377783]

R27377783

Has it occur to you that I don't really give a flying f<beep>? You make it sound like it is a bad thing considering it just a game. I see it as a game and so what if there is a sell button or any other button. I am just going to "sell" off any junk/dupe Euds because it is there. Has nothing to do with slavery, has nothing to do with trafficking, has nothing to do with exploitation, so come off your f<beep>in' high horse will ya?

You want to be adamant in all of this with the diatribe you're spewing? Grow a pair and go play "police" out in the real world that has that s<beep> going. Do not bring it into a game or forum. It's political nonsense the way I see it and it has no place here.

You obviously DO give a flying -bleep- or you wouldn't be discussing it. Its not political, your calling it/making it political. Your problem is that for some abstract reason YOU DON'T want anyone else to care about it either and because I DO you want to make a war with me. So how is it you can claim you don't care when your willing to go to war with me over it? Right now my only concern is with the game. I don't feel it belongs in the game as is. You don't agree or rather you don't care that its in the game...but also because you believe that ideals are separate from the game, you don't think I should mention it. I've mentioned it. What I've mentioned is still in the game so its relevant to the forum. So what if YOU believe that everything else is separate or irrelevant to the game. This separation of ideals and gaming is not true in ANY case, and its also just your shallow opinion. Its your IDEAL that social responsibility has no place in the game just as much as its mine that they DO have a place in it. HOW IS IT POLITICAL? Ideals are not political until they are politicised. For discussing it in the game's forum to make it political it would have to be a political forum. I don't have a problem with politics, but they are not allowed in the forum. I am not aware of any current political debate in real life regarding slave trade. As far as I know slavery has been just about unanimously condemned by most political movements that have any real influence in geopolitics. So how is bring it up opening a political debate? Thats what I mean when I say its not really a subject of political debate. You are politicising it just by saying its political.. The reality is that I think your tying it to some raging political debate happening elsewhere about political correctness. I don't participate in that debate because I believe its a misnomer and a strawman/cop out argument from the outset. I'm not the one bringing that topic of debate about political correctness, YOU are. If you really didn't want me or anyone else to discuss this subject and compare anything in the game to anything SOCIALLY controversial you would be against having anything SOCIALLY controversial in the game. In other words you would effectively be on the "change the button" side of that topic, if for no other reason than that its now become a cause for discussion about its sociability in the forum. Which seems to be a sore spot with you (to discuss the social acceptability of game features) and yet you still feel compelled to participate in such discussions for reasons that must be your own. The only other conclusion I have is that you simply wish it didn't **** anybody off for social reasons but theres nothing anybody can do about that reality because it already DOES **** off at least one person who is willing to ask that it be changed.
I really I don't get what you expect anyone to do to change THAT fact: It already pisses someone off. You can hate me for that I guess..but theres really nothing anyone can do about that, not even me. It already pisses me off and your outspoken ignorance somewhat pisses me off...does that mean there should be something I can do about it? No. I'm sure everyone will agree that just because you **** me off doesn't mean that there should be something I can do about it. I have to accept it...you need to accept that this button pisses me off..Even if it doesn't **** you off or you think it should make everyone see rainbows.. Just like you think I'm an ahole for having that opinion I think your an ahole for having yours. You know this already so if you really don't care what the button says and...I don't get the impression that you'd like to affect my rationale, what are you hoping to gain by discussing it? I suppose I'm curious.
Conclusion: I don't consider it realistic that your angry at the fact that it pisses ME off. I sure don't see how you could give a rats bottom about what pisses ME and apparently anyone else given your attitudes and assertions in the previous posts I've had with you...therefore the first conclusion is the logical one..You wish to politicize this subject by tying it with the ridiculous popular debate about "political correctness". That topic is a straw man debate and filled with cop out reasoning, I don't follow that debate and I wont participate in it here in this thread. Either you see the implications of slavery here on the sell button or you don't. I'm not going to try and describe why the implication is objectionable its very plain for me and I can't relate to those who don't see it as plainly(therefore I'm not the ideal person to explain it to them.) Nor am I going to try and convince anyone that slavery itself is objectionable..if your not sure if its an objectionable activity then you need to work that out in your head or utilize a search engine. I'm not going to debate about my "right" to post my opinion about a feature of the game. I don't see anything about not being able to discuss moral objections to features of the game in the forum rules. Where do you get off creating that rule?

[R27377783]

You, the writer, presumably wrote your OP in the hopes of not only changing the wording on the button, but also to get people to see why it could potentially be a problem. I did not ask you to prove anything. I asked you to provide evidence for your argument, some reason why you believe this is a problem. Something, anything.

the "reason" is logic based its not an evidenciary matter. The deduction that being able to sell the Eudaemons implies ownership/slavery is logical one.. and imo very obvious once the connection has been pointed out. Thats not to say that it is the only logic that can be deduced as you seem to have demonstrated with your example.(btw people are NOT being sold in sports trading. As you seem to have maybe realized already, the contracts are being "traded" not the people being sold the difference is only as ethical as the contract itself though so I'd digress on that point.)..someone already associated that similar contractual logic to the question of Eudaemons in this thread and I find it to be reasonable and maybe even game world appropriate but it actually requires more logical assumption and content support to securely arrive at that conclusion than the assumption of some kind of slavery/bondage and it has no more contextual support than the assumption of slavery. Without even reading the wiki on Eudaemons I myself feel I have been able to come up with some believable alternative logic to the sell button besides the implication of slavery but I will not share them because I don't think they outweigh the slavery concept without more content support. At this time I'd rather they just change the text on the button, so I will not argue for them to come up with some elusive back story about the button. I also see no reason to believe that any other concept I could share would get any more support here than my original suggestion. Probably YOU could do better than I in that regard but I actually think you and anyone else would run into the same attitude problems I have here.

I canonlyhope yournot asking me to come up with evidence to explain the negative social impacts of slavery inthe real world. As a concept and institution slavery is already such a demonstrably immoral activity that it would be inapproriate for the scope of this post or forum to try to re-assert. There is no shortage of resources available in real and fiction that asserts the immorality of slavery so much so that it would be widely regarded as cold hard fact. If you don't see the immorality of slavery itself I'm not going to help you with that because in that case your not worth my time or energy and once again..its inappropriate to the scope of this post, and I personally would not have enough respect for you to even discuss it rationally with you.
Finally perhaps you wish me to bring forth evidence about the impact of slavery in the gaming environment. My response is pretty much the same as above. except with the addendum that I don't think its automatically inappropriate to simulate just about ANYTHING in a game environment so long as there is some context given to it,its deliberate, and in some way part of the marketing disclosure of the title. Again I understand thats my own logical OPINION on the subject..others may have different thresholds regarding anti-social depictions in gaming, thats to be expected. Again I see no reason or need to provide evidence of anything for anyone with enough mental presence to have registered for this forum to make for themselves a moral choice regarding the text on this button. I've pointed out MY logic and what I generally associate with the concept of selling persons FAR more than I feel I should have had to, and I've actually made no assertion that it does impact the community for this game or any wider community, though I personally believe it does, I don't feel that opinion needs to be asserted NOR even held by anyone with common sense to arrive at a conclusion about the subject and I don't believe that someone worth my time genuinely needs to be given evidence of studies to find it objectionable, so its not a platform of my suggestion that I am personally willing to put forward or argue. IF you need evidence or statistical data to convince you that its a gross oversight and immoral feature, and that will be the determining factor of whether or not you would support changing the button then its likely you will remain on that side of the issue its not going to be any part of my effort to convince you or anyone with similar priorities otherwise. I personally feel it means your too far gone for me to reach you with the bare minimum efforts I'm willing to extend toward you on the matter. From where I stand, I've already fulfilled my "karma" just by bringing it up really, I'm not going to invest all that time googling and interpreting about it for someone that I'm actually convinced is already determined not to the see connotations that are already the obvious to me. Like you said you didn't see it that way so perhaps the fact that you didn't see it that way in the beginning makes it difficult for you to see it MY way..and that might remain the deciding factor for you..IF YOU can accept that about yourself, then so can I, I don't have to LIKE it..but I DO have to accept it. Especially if I'm unwilling to humor you with "evidence" about how theres a slavery implication or that it could be objectionable in a game environment. Sorry for that.

[AdaJames]

So, in other words, you come in, make all sorts of accusations and claims, refuse to back them up when asked, and basically say that you are not going to respond to calls for evidence nor reveal your method of thinking because you don't entertain people who don't agree with you?

Bravo! You're a greenie, aren't you?

[R27377783]

You're essentially saying, 'To everyone who already agrees with me, good. To everyone who doesn't, well.... obviously you aren't going to change your mind, so I'm not even going to provide basic evidence for my position.'

yes. thats almost exactly what I'm saying..this is not a rocket science equation for me. If it is for someone else then they're beyond my pay grade.

I'm not asking for you to provide evidence why I should believe you. I'm asking..... why do you believe what you do?

If THATS what your asking, then why wont you accept my answer and stop asking me for "evidence". The problem is self evident for me. You think I needed evidence to confirm the conclusion I came to when I saw that button? No I didn't and It's beyond my pay grade to argue with or "convince" someone who does..as far as I'm concerned the discussion/debate should have ended with the OP, but I didn't consider the possibility of a special breed of forum monkeys living on this exchange not sure It would have changed my post if I had maybe I'd have moved the topic of Eudaemon selling a bit further down in the post.