Fang
Junior Strategist
Posts: 117
|
Post by Fang on May 10, 2018 18:01:19 GMT
You should be careful making such judgements, morality differs between person to person. So you think they are rationalizing their morality, because you assume they share the same morals as you, when it could be that they simply don't share that belief.
For me and you, we think it's immoral. But to someone else, we look silly as a mini is a mini, like a chair is a chair. For that person, they think if a company produces a chair of a certain design, and someone one ups them with better materials and pricing, why would you go with the lesser product for more money?
When I buy a tool, I don't only buy the original brand of a tool and I certainly don't judge others for doing so. The innovator of a tool doesn't get support and may not be able to design new ones because of this, but I don't stop to think about that. I'll get whatever is available to me. It is not hard for me to see how similar reasoning might be applied here for some. Taking this to the argument of company does bad thing so I won't support it isn't an excuse therefore, but sound reasoning. If my favourite tool maker starts making business decisions that negatively affect me, why should I continue support them?
I wouldn't buy recasts, but also wouldn't judge others as thieves for it. The only reason I am against it is that I want the game to live on. But if the makers of the game kill their scene off overseas, then as someone in the affected category they will lose me as a customer regardless. Whether or not I buy minis that look like theirs after I decide not to buy from them anymore is then irrelevant.
|
|
|
Post by elshinare on May 10, 2018 18:04:54 GMT
Just keep in mind that it's in all of our interest to keep Privateer Press in business. Without the constant tweaks, nerfs, buffs, yearly Steamrollers, and new models they're putting out, we wouldn't have this hobby we all love. It's tempting to get that $75 unit on the cheap, but if enough people do that, the game dies. Absolutely true, but the same goes for PP. If they put the game in a state when people rather buy it from forgers, that means something is going kinda wrong. You can say "people will always do it!" but I remember well, that at least for the first two thirds of MK2 noone would even think about making out with pirates for WMH models, for any reason. While forgers were quite available. Though I guess the third factor - and main problem here - is bloody international fees. The thing is, people will always want to buy from forgers/recasts, because it is cheaper. It is the same reason we all have bought second hand models, get more for less. At the same time, we do need to support our game designers and makers (your flgs doesn't make as much as you think on the models, if you know how and who to ask you can get that info). Our game that we love does have price bloat, but, only because we do not see the costs of design, manufacture, leases, etc...Personally 3d print terrain, templates, and mods for your models. Or buy 3rd party for all of that (because the third party does generally pay a licensing fee) to support the game. Personally, it takes me 3 months to have the extra money to go buy anything for the game, but, I also buy what I want, not the best lists that are out there.
|
|
crimsyn
Junior Strategist
Posts: 389
|
Post by crimsyn on May 10, 2018 18:16:15 GMT
You should be careful making such judgements, morality differs between person to person. So you think they are rationalizing their morality, because you assume they share the same morals as you, when it could be that they simply don't share that belief. For me and you, we think it's immoral. But to someone else, we look silly as a mini is a mini, like a chair is a chair. For that person, they think if a company produces a chair of a certain design, and someone one ups them with better materials and pricing, why would you go with the lesser product for more money? You should be careful about making judgements about serial killers, morality differs from person to person. See how silly that sounds? If people want to buy recasts, I can’t stop them, but they should really stop pretending that it is morally justified to participate in blatantly stealing other people’s IP because of some gripe over pricing or exchange rates or they just really really want to play Gaspy3 Nine Slayers or Ghost Fleet or Nemo3 or Mad Dogs or whatever the boogeyman of the week is. It’s silly and obnoxious, and they should just admit that they are buying recasts because it’s cheaper and they don’t think they will get caught.
|
|
Fang
Junior Strategist
Posts: 117
|
Post by Fang on May 10, 2018 18:44:20 GMT
You should be careful making such judgements, morality differs between person to person. So you think they are rationalizing their morality, because you assume they share the same morals as you, when it could be that they simply don't share that belief. For me and you, we think it's immoral. But to someone else, we look silly as a mini is a mini, like a chair is a chair. For that person, they think if a company produces a chair of a certain design, and someone one ups them with better materials and pricing, why would you go with the lesser product for more money? You should be careful about making judgements about serial killers, morality differs from person to person. See how silly that sounds? If people want to buy recasts, I can’t stop them, but they should really stop pretending that it is morally justified to participate in blatantly stealing other people’s IP because of some gripe over pricing or exchange rates or they just really really want to play Gaspy3 Nine Slayers or Ghost Fleet or Nemo3 or Mad Dogs or whatever the boogeyman of the week is. It’s silly and obnoxious, and they should just admit that they are buying recasts because it’s cheaper and they don’t think they will get caught. Americans have the death penalty, so they support murder in the eyes of other counties. Americans who support the death penalty don't see it that way. I don't go and call all Americans murderers because of this, as that would be incorrect. This example is closer to your example than either example is to my original statement. But it is still a fallacy on my part, to show that I can play your fallacy game just as hard. You are playing on emotions by taking a charged non equivalent situation (murder) and replacing my statement directly on a completely different subject with it. Either you are suggesting that IP theft and murder are equal, or you are trying to make it look like I said that. If the latter, attacking me underhanded in this way has no benefit to this discussion. As for the rest, you completely missed the whole point of what I said. You are so caught up in what you think is right that you seem to have trouble even acknowledging the possibility that others might have a different world view than you, which is what allows you to attack these people without any moral repercussions for your conscious.
|
|
|
Post by elladan52 on May 10, 2018 18:45:39 GMT
You should be careful about making judgements about serial killers, morality differs from person to person. See how silly that sounds? If people want to buy recasts, I can’t stop them, but they should really stop pretending that it is morally justified to participate in blatantly stealing other people’s IP because of some gripe over pricing or exchange rates or they just really really want to play Gaspy3 Nine Slayers or Ghost Fleet or Nemo3 or Mad Dogs or whatever the boogeyman of the week is. It’s silly and obnoxious, and they should just admit that they are buying recasts because it’s cheaper and they don’t think they will get caught. Americans have the death penalty, so they support murder in the eyes of other counties. Americans who support the death penalty don't see it that way. I don't go and call all Americans murderers because of this, as that would be incorrect. This example is closer to your example than either example is to my original statement. But it is still a fallacy on my part, to show that I can play your fallacy game just as hard. You are playing on emotions by taking a charged non equivalent situation (murder) and replacing my statement directly on a completely different subject with it. Either you are suggesting that IP theft and murder are equal, or you are trying to make it look like I said that. If the latter, attacking me underhanded in this way has no benefit to this discussion. As for the rest, you completely missed the whole point of what I said. You are so caught up in what you think is right that you seem to have trouble even acknowledging the possibility that others might have a different world view than you, which is what allows you to attack these people without any moral repercussions for your conscious. Are you saying his thinking is wrong?
|
|
Fang
Junior Strategist
Posts: 117
|
Post by Fang on May 10, 2018 18:48:19 GMT
Americans have the death penalty, so they support murder in the eyes of other counties. Americans who support the death penalty don't see it that way. I don't go and call all Americans murderers because of this, as that would be incorrect. This example is closer to your example than either example is to my original statement. But it is still a fallacy on my part, to show that I can play your fallacy game just as hard. You are playing on emotions by taking a charged non equivalent situation (murder) and replacing my statement directly on a completely different subject with it. Either you are suggesting that IP theft and murder are equal, or you are trying to make it look like I said that. If the latter, attacking me underhanded in this way has no benefit to this discussion. As for the rest, you completely missed the whole point of what I said. You are so caught up in what you think is right that you seem to have trouble even acknowledging the possibility that others might have a different world view than you, which is what allows you to attack these people without any moral repercussions for your conscious. Are you saying his thinking is wrong? The thing is we agree, but he attacks others who don'the think the same under the flag that his beliefs are right. I may share his beliefs on this matter, but that doesn't mean I agree with his attitude towards others based on those beliefs. Edit: Also what I haven't mentioned but someone else touched on, I like playing the game. To play the game I need other people. If another person has pirated models, I would not refuse to play them because of that. I would rather focus on growing the community than enforcing my moral beliefs on others in my community. And my original post was asking to watch the judgements as they could potentially alienate part of the community. If they are at the point where they for whatever reason don't buy pp models, I'd rather still have them around to play with and maybe draw others into the hobby.
|
|
|
Post by elladan52 on May 10, 2018 18:50:42 GMT
Are you saying his thinking is wrong? The thing is we agree, but he attacks others who don'the think the same under the flag that his beliefs are right. I may share his beliefs on this matter, but that doesn't mean I agree with his attitude towards others based on those beliefs. So are you saying his attitude is wrong? The obvious point I am driving at is to admonish someone for being wrong while defending someone else on the grounds that morality is relative to the individual is inherently hypocritical. But if you aren't saying that he is wrong, what exactly are you bringing to the conversation?
|
|
Fang
Junior Strategist
Posts: 117
|
Post by Fang on May 10, 2018 19:00:26 GMT
The thing is we agree, but he attacks others who don'the think the same under the flag that his beliefs are right. I may share his beliefs on this matter, but that doesn't mean I agree with his attitude towards others based on those beliefs. So are you saying his attitude is wrong? I see where you are going with this mate. No, I didn't and have not said that. I do disagree with his attitude as it potentially damaging to the community in my eyes. I could scream that it is wrong, but then I would be doing the same, hurting a member of the community by trying to enforce my beliefs on him. If you read my posts instead of trying to get me to make a trip up, hopefully it will become clear that all I intended was to elaborate another side of the story to add to the discussion, and by doing so I am attempting to discharge a negativite atmosphere towards these people so they can play games with us without the nastiness. If it wasn't clear I apologise and recognizable that I am probably being too wordy for it to be clear.
|
|
Fang
Junior Strategist
Posts: 117
|
Post by Fang on May 10, 2018 19:06:37 GMT
The thing is we agree, but he attacks others who don'the think the same under the flag that his beliefs are right. I may share his beliefs on this matter, but that doesn't mean I agree with his attitude towards others based on those beliefs. So are you saying his attitude is wrong? The obvious point I am driving at is to admonish someone for being wrong while defending someone else on the grounds that morality is relative to the individual is inherently hypocritical. But if you aren't saying that he is wrong, what exactly are you bringing to the conversation? To answer your edit, I am trying to bring nuance to the recasters are evil into this conversation. It has turned quite negative towards recasters/customers of recasts. If you want an actual conversation, then you need the multiple sides of the problem to talk. Making it unlikely for one side to post turns it into an echo chamber.
|
|
|
Post by elladan52 on May 10, 2018 19:09:31 GMT
So are you saying his attitude is wrong? I see where you are going with this mate. No, I didn't and have not said that. I do disagree with his attitude as it potentially damaging to the community in my eyes. I could scream that it is wrong, but then I would be doing the same, hurting a member of the community by trying to enforce my beliefs on him. If you read my posts instead of trying to get me to make a trip up, hopefully it will become clear that all I intended was to elaborate another side of the story to add to the discussion, and by doing so I am attempting to discharge a negativite atmosphere towards these people so they can play games with us without the nastiness. If it wasn't clear I apologise and recognizable that I am probably being too wordy for it to be clear. I read all your posts, I just remain unconvinced. Moral relativism is a sticky morass and your posts are not sufficient to justify it. But we don't need to continue on in this discussion, this is something that is decided first and built on, not something that we can change through this debate.
|
|
crimsyn
Junior Strategist
Posts: 389
|
Post by crimsyn on May 10, 2018 19:12:23 GMT
I’m not playing any fallacy game. You’re basically saying that that we can’t make moral or ethical judgements because everyone has different views on the issue.
Sorry, but I don’t subscribe to that philosophy. For example, some people legitimately think that, for example, Jim Crow laws are morally justified. That is their opinion, and my opinion is that those people are racists and their views on morality are horribly wrong.
If we can’t make ethical judgments and everyone is equally correct, then what is the point of even discussing anything? From grand political issues to wardollies, if we aren’t prepared to take a stance and make arguments rooted in facts and ethics, then what’s the point of even discussing anything? This sort of attitude is why we get things like “alternative facts” in our public discourse.
Also, you should really be careful about making moral judgements about people who make moral judgements about recasting... (see, I can play this game too...)
|
|
Fang
Junior Strategist
Posts: 117
|
Post by Fang on May 10, 2018 19:18:31 GMT
I see where you are going with this mate. No, I didn't and have not said that. I do disagree with his attitude as it potentially damaging to the community in my eyes. I could scream that it is wrong, but then I would be doing the same, hurting a member of the community by trying to enforce my beliefs on him. If you read my posts instead of trying to get me to make a trip up, hopefully it will become clear that all I intended was to elaborate another side of the story to add to the discussion, and by doing so I am attempting to discharge a negativite atmosphere towards these people so they can play games with us without the nastiness. If it wasn't clear I apologise and recognizable that I am probably being too wordy for it to be clear. I read all your posts, I just remain unconvinced. Moral relativism is a sticky morass and your posts are not sufficient to justify it. But we don't need to continue on in this discussiom, this is something that is decided first and built on, not something that we can change through this debate. That is fine, and I can accept that you don't find my posts strong enough. However, regardress of who is right or wrong, or what comes out of this discussion, there will be consequences based on how we all choose to go forth. I would like to think that discussing the potential consequences (with regards to likeliness where possible) is relevant to the discussion. I'd also like to believe that opening up the conversation for the 'opposition' by showing some empathy or understanding is beneficial as a whole.
|
|
crimsyn
Junior Strategist
Posts: 389
|
Post by crimsyn on May 10, 2018 19:30:26 GMT
I'd also like to believe that opening up the conversation for the 'opposition' by showing some empathy or understanding is beneficial as a whole. They are free to post, and some of them have been. However, most of their arguments are, in my view, unconvincing and kind of weaksauce. Honestly, I might be a little less dismissive if people just said “I know buying recasts is wrong but I do it anyways because it’s so much cheaper” than try to make a weaksauce moral justification for it based on complaints about pricing or perceived power level. That position at least stands up to some scrutiny.
|
|
Fang
Junior Strategist
Posts: 117
|
Post by Fang on May 10, 2018 19:37:14 GMT
I’m not playing any fallacy game. You’re basically saying that that we can’t make moral or ethical judgements because everyone has different views on the issue. Sorry, but I don’t subscribe to that philosophy. For example, some people legitimately think that, for example, Jim Crow laws are morally justified. That is their opinion, and my opinion is that those people are racists and their views on morality are horribly wrong. If we can’t make ethical judgments and everyone is equally correct, then what is the point of even discussing anything? From grand political issues to wardollies, if we aren’t prepared to take a stance and make arguments rooted in facts and ethics, then what’s the point of even discussing anything? This sort of attitude is why we get things like “alternative facts” in our public discourse. Also, you should really be careful about making moral judgements about people who make moral judgements about recasting... (see, I can play this game too...) I am not judging you, in the sense I don't think any more or less of you for your methodology. I was trying to show you a different possible view point. I later tried to elaborate on the effect the viewpoint might have. As you reject these, I am not going to hammer at you until you think the same way, indeed I am posting more to try to explain myself than to convince you if that makes sense. But here is the thing, I used the moral greyness in this one example and only this one example, saying a different inequal example that triggers emotional responses is a fallacy. To use that thinking for all examples would be folly in my eyes. So please stop putting other examples into my mouth (which is a fallacy). There is a law but not every country follows it, which gives some indication that this is a much more moral greypoint than murder. I am not preaching some philosophic absolute, I am using what I find for myself a good sense idea on this particular topic, which may have dimished my point in your eyes but I stand by my belief that the nuance is important here. Also ethics are entirely about the differences in morality, coming to a community common ground. Which is why I can do some work in England but not in Germany regardless if that work is acceptable in my eyes or not. We are here discussing recasting as an ethical problem and I would rather have input from everyone than to just hear everyone that agrees. If we all agree (or no one dares disagree) it's not a problem and discussion tends to die at that. For all I know that might be how this should end based on what the majority believes.
|
|
Fang
Junior Strategist
Posts: 117
|
Post by Fang on May 10, 2018 19:44:34 GMT
I'd also like to believe that opening up the conversation for the 'opposition' by showing some empathy or understanding is beneficial as a whole. They are free to post, and some of them have been. However, most of their arguments are, in my view, unconvincing and kind of weaksauce. Honestly, I might be a little less dismissive if people just said “I know buying recasts is wrong but I do it anyways because it’s so much cheaper” than try to make a weaksauce moral justification for it based on complaints about pricing or perceived power level. That position at least stands up to some scrutiny. Yes, they have but if they are going to be called theives and that their personal beliefs are 'weaksause' or mere rationalizations when they might truly believe they are in the right, it might feel pretty hostile. Why can't you point out the problems without resorting to attacks? I guess I am just repeating myself and if you want me to stop I will lol.
|
|