As a reader of grey comments(like yours), engagement is engagement at the end of the day. Whether anyone sees it or not is probably irrelevant.

Just commenting because I saw “Show all 1 comments” and I just couldn’t move on without doing my part.

Any valet company has to have great gobs of insurance, considering the liability on them every time they take the keys to a car, right? Why would they stonewall on making this right? I would think they would want it resolved as quick as possible, before they start losing contracts.

Ok. 

Don’t you mean go back to Cancun?

I assumed it was aimed at Ted Cruz and really said Go Back to Canada.

Why would anyone voluntarily move from CA to Nevada anyway.  

Viva pinata came out in 2006 at 84 metacritic and sold well. The sequel also sold well.

Perfect Dark Zero also had over an 80 metacritic and sold well.

Kameo sold well and also reviewed well.

RARE’s peak period was well before microsoft bought them, definitely. But they’ve still had plenty of success. 

It’s just because it’s painful how fucking stupid all of the concern trollers are about this topic. It’s just regurgitating insanely stupid ‘big company bad’ talking points. It’s even more painful because it’s in the opposite direction of what they claim their goals are. Sony is the market leader.

The defintion of…

You do realize that the “wizards” at the FTC just got shut down by a federal judge, right? That suggests that their case doesn’t actually have any legal merit.

Wizards at FTC think it violates antitrust laws because, per their closing remarks, Sony players might not get Christmas COD skins they used to receive and Xbox players MIGHT get them.

Not a bright wizard to bet on.

I give you a lot of credit for even trying.

We aren’t arguing about good or bad. We’re arguing about whether or not this merger violates antitrust laws. The answer is no, it does not. If you can refute that, please do. If not, you don’t actually have anything to contribute here.

So you aren’t going to bother providing any actual counter-arguments other than “nuh uh, ur wrong?” Alrighty.

You’re pretty bad at this whole “debate” thing. You need to support your rebuttals with actual counter-arguments. Please explain how IP exclusivity is an antitrust issue in this particular merger when it’s been a standard practice across the industry for decades.

When your argument revolves around calling people bootlickers, you don’t really have an argument.

The obvious outcome is that the merger isn’t violating any antitrust laws. “Consolidation is bad mmkay” isn’t a valid legal argument. MS doesn’t have a monopoly in the relevant markets and the merger won’t change that. The merger doesn’t hurt consumers in any ways that aren’t already happening regularly through…

What are you talking about? The claim is correct that limiting the availability of games to specific stores or launchers has a demonstrable detrimental effect on sales. It’s not just battle.net and CoD, EA and Ubisoft also experienced fallen sales figures after making their games launcher exclusive.

Even before he became a stellar asshat, it was apparent that there were build and quality issues with teslas years ago, so while I can get a model Y for slightly less, I would expect the quality to still be decent.

Tesla is non-union. I’m not buying a non-union made car, period.