You're lying by omission when you fail to acknowledge that you tried to manipulate the vote by stating that if it didn't go your way you'd no longer be leading the boycott-that-doesn't-have-a-leader.

It's hardly manipulation when you are completely open about your stance. Politicians do this before votes and elections all the time. And often, it does not go the way they want.

Right. The way I saw it, I was simply being honest. I wasn't going to be willing to keep spending my time managing a protest list that I fundamentally didn't agree with. That was a relevant point to the vote and it was important that consequence was known, since if it had gone the other way, someone else would have had to step up to manage it, if it was going to keep going.

Again, from what I recall, there were very few procedural complaints about the voting, before the voting started and the result was known. However, afterwards, there was a distinct sense of 'sour grapes' from several people.

to be completely honest it's a bit 'whose line is it anyways' everything's made up & the points don't matter.
In this case the reasons why people boycott well each to their own to figure and no matter who voted for what in the end boycotter's gonna boycott till their satisfied of the outcome.

Anyways good to be back playing armchair general to twist the knife into the GOG Corps once again.
It seems that willful or not the threads been keeping bumped up and visible.
Which is always nice to see as evidence i'm not some raving ol' crankpot investing way too much time into uppence.

Still pity sanity hasn't been restored to the GOG corporate body; seems to be no brains at the head of it; but we'll keep trying.
Roll up the sleeve ol' boys (;) and lasses) this fiscal quarters gonna kick their asses.

He was pretending that the boycott has no leader at the same time he was threatening to take his ball and go home. That's disengenuous and manipulative.

Comparing him to politicians is rather pathetic considering the bar doesn't go any lower than that. C'mon man.
Yes, any day now the brocott will bring GOG to it's knees and force them to change their wicked ways.

Today GOG, tomorrow the World!

That is just your interpretation of what he was doing, because you are not satisfied by the completely understandable reason given, and because you are looking for anything at all to pin on OP. I guess that is why you are also blatantly disregarding OP's own reply to your rather defamatory accusations.

It's rather sad that you have to resort to words like pathetic, when I have not even compared OP to politicians, but the action of giving your stance on a given issue before a vote. Which is completely normal and fine.

<3

Everything is interpretation with human beings because perception is subjective, and all communication is manipulative to some degree because there is always a desired response that is being solicited.

If he claimed he isn't a leader -- which he did -- what is the point for him to provide his "stance" during the voting?

If he isn't the leader your analogy doesn't hold, if he is the leader he was untruthful, and putting out his "stance" altered what was being voted on because if it didn't go his way someone else was going to have to fill his shoes. If that isn't manipulative then what is?

Because he is OP, and thus able to edit and maintain the list. This is not the same as being the ‘leader’, whatever that means, and I think you know that. And if he was to not maintain he list anymore, someone else would have to do it. This is pure consequential, practical information.

And besides, who cares. You’re just here to quarrel.

<3

I can just as easily say that you're here to piss on GOG because they don't live up to your pie-in-the-sky expectations.

See how that works?

A leader is someone that shoulders the responsibiblity with respect to tasks that involve more than one person. But perhaps English isn't your first language. It's rather rudimentary.

Have a wonderful day.

Are you GOG?

See how that works? :)

You're right, it's not my first language, I still understand that someone who makes a post in a forum and maintains a list is not necessarily a leader of anything or anyone. Sounds more like a secretary to me.

And the Oxford learner dictionary seems to have yet another definition;
[url=https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/leader#:~:text=noun-,noun,country%2C%20an%20organization%2C%20etc]https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/leader#:~:text=noun-,noun,country%2C%20an%20organization%2C%20etc[/url].

But perhaps you meant rude rather than rudimentary?

<3

If you want to go with facilitator that's fine but facilitators are supposed to be neutral, and T4T wasn't. A leaderless project is only possible in the land of make-believe. There can be more than one leader, but there has to be at least one or nothing gets done. Since maintaining the list is the full extent of this project's output, that makes T4T the defacto leader, in spite of his protestations to the contrary, and he most certainly did try to sway the vote by stipulating that he'd be done with the list if the vote didn't go his way. If he didn't feel he could maintain a modicum of neutrality he could have stepped down and let someone else conduct the vote, free of manipulation. That would have been the ethical thing to do.

What business does a person have protesting someone else's behavior when they don't hold their own self to a high standard?

Yawn. I don't want to go with anything. You're wrong and just want to argue. You're completely free to start a new boycott thread if you don't like the standards of this one, Who cares.

The output of the boycott is the boycotting.

<3

No, you're wrong and just want to piss on GOG for not living up to your pie-in-the-sky expectations.

If boycotting is the total output of the boycott then you're boycotting for the sake of boycotting. The primary output *should* be achieving your demands, fuzzy as they are.

Have fun playing boycott, and have a great day.

Yawn.

<3

The output of the boycott is reduced sales. the input of the boycott is boycotting; the reason it exists is it's terms.
Ooh we can put it into maths or even a computer instruction set.
While registered DRM stance is less than required to meet community expectation do boycottt.; else end boycott.
det(S<E)==B
The determinate of the boycott equivalence is whether stance is less than expectation. Noice.