Areskahn
Areskahn
Areskahn

It is possible that it could be an old ID as she could no longer be a student or some other scenario where someone could still have an ID. I don’t know if they run into that often enough for a policy to necessitate checking the ID against the database or even if that policy exists, but it sounds like they just checked

That doesn’t really make it ok to do this, it just makes it convenient for others to rationalize it.

Based on what?

You’re probably right. It’s laughable to think that anyone on here could even attempt rationale and unbiased thought processes. But I still feel sorry for them, so I don’t think it’s fair to use that many Os to laugh at them.

What if... and I know this is crazy, but what if she actually did kill herself? And it wasn’t some elaborate and completely unmotivated murder cover-up? Is that somehow not possible because the family decided she wasn’t suicidal? Even though it’s a fairly common occurrence with families and friends of suicide victims.

Or when you buy a jar of peanuts, there could be 378-385 peanuts, guess you’re also gambling there.

But you do know what you are spending your money on, it’s just that what you get has an external variable value. Digitally they all have the same exact value when you receive and use them as they are meant to be used, it’s only within an external market do they have a variable value with the possibility of profit. The

First of, being addicted to spending money on something isn’t gambling, what the fuck are you talking about? There are people who are addicted to buying shoes, I guess by this idiotic definition they are also gamblers? No they aren’t.

Actually it isn’t. It had a real world value when you bought it and you still get an item with a real world value. Just because an alternative source might pay you for the thing you got and they may pay you more then the amount of the loot box, that doesn’t make it gambling. The purpose of a loot box is not to get an

If you’re too lazy to cite your sources you have no business bringing them up in your argument. And it’s not an appeal to ignorance to ask for evidence that nobody ever provides. Saying “I’ve seen it” is not a good enough. Especially before making emotion-based legislature driven by a bunch of whiny and entitled

The profit side of this is entirely on the players is what I’m getting at. Using most loot boxes doesn’t award a player with a profit. Most games don’t even let you trade or sell the items so it’s dumb to lump them all together. Some players in some games are taking tradeable items you can buy in the game randomly

Yes and I think they were incorrect and possibly dishonest in their application of their definition of gambling. Their criteria was apparently:

If there aren’t any studies on it actually being harmful then how can you say that it’s harmful? You’re just assuming it’s harmful and claiming that the studies that say it’s harmful haven’t been done yet to support your claim so we should make them illegal in the meantime? How does that make any sense? Studies aren’t

Except the game doesn’t assign the item’s value at that point, the market does. Is reselling something for a profit the same as gambling or otherwise illegal? The loot box is just a way to get the items and not everyone takes part in the selling/trading aspect and not all games gives people the ability to sell and

Loot boxes didn’t go further, gamers got louder. A majority of people dislike microtransactions so much they’ll make anything claim to try to force them to go away, including falsely claiming they’re gambling. I would love for MTXs to go away, but I’m not gonna lie and say it’s gambling or even if that it’s

Exactly, “Think of the Children” is one of the worst arguments for anything. It doesn’t require research or data; you don’t need facts or scientific analysis; it’s just raw uneducated emotion. It’s understandable to dislike something if you think it’s detrimental to your experience, but I’ve never played a game and

The argument isn’t there there’s no value, I haven’t made that claim at all, they have value as they are assets you’ve purchased for the price of a loot box. I’m claiming that there isn’t an inherent win or lose/profit or loss system intrinsically attached to buying a random item generator. If I buy a $3 Loot Box, the

But I don’t understand why you wouldn’t just pass new legislation and then regulate loot boxes if you really think they should be illegal. Throwing them into the same boat as gambling is more about stigmatizing them rather than accurately creating a consistent legal precedent. My main issue is just that it weakens the

Sure they can be worse for some reasons, but not liking something and thinking it’s bad doesn’t mean that gambling doesn’t already have a defined meaning.

The game of chance in a scratch ticket is scratching the ticket. And there’s a profit and loss with a scratch ticket and other forms of gambling, there is not inherent profit and loss with buying a loot box. It exactly the same as buying a blind bag item, buying and opening a pack of cards hoping to get the ones you