If you are so much for constructive feedback, can you finally explain GOG's standards in curation?

And moderation.
========================================
I can ask you the same thing. You are the one that demands some games to be removed on the basis that they make some people feel bad. Yet, other games that make other people feel bad, you think should be allowed to stay.

Yeah, coz there's no difference at all between demanding games are removed and saying they "probably should be".

So you obviously think every single game should be available then? All or nothing all the way with no room for compromise or nuance?

I can't say anything about racist games, as I haven't encountered them and, therefore, I had no opportunity to form any opinion. However, I think that a non-racist person will not play an openly racist game, because he is not interested in this. And the one to whom racism is close was already a racist without this game. And if games have such an impact on real life - why don't thousands of armed people every day run through the streets, wanting to kill others? Why don't all people who play erotic games run to rape someone? And why do people who don't play games both kill and rape? If a person is not all right with his head, it will be so with games, what without. And in the same way, a normal person will not start doing all sorts of nasty things just because he played the wrong game.

The question "Why should your wants trump anyone else's?" in the same way can be asked to you. Why should your opinion that a certain game should be removed be higher than the opinion of a person who thinks that it should be left? And do not talk again about "because this game can offend someone." If you delete all the games that someone can be offended by - not only GoG, even Steam will go bankrupt and close. People, if desired, can be offended even by a blank sheet of paper.

So let's digress from the genre of AO games and take some other one. Shooters, for example. One person will say "I love bloody shooters and want to buy them in my favorite store." Another - "I don't like shooters, but if someone likes them - let them buy, and I will just ignore these games." Third - "I think shooters are terrible and demand that they be removed. Let those who love them go to another store." What, in such a situation, the third will be right? Of course not. Because if you leave the shooters, no one will deprive him of the opportunity to act like the second one and ignore them. But if you remove them, the first one will have to go to another store. And this infringes on his rights, and harms the store itself. That is, the third, for the sake of his comfort, wants to spoil the life of other people, and leave the store without profit. So why should he be catered to to the detriment of others?

In general, since when did “I don’t impose anything on you, and you don’t impose anything on me” become worse than “you should all live the way I want”?

Deleting anything just because one group of people doesn't like it while ignoring another group of people is unfair. As I said, the most honest option would be to create the possibility of personal blocking of games, so that you can hide adult games, me - simulators, someone else - shooters, etc. And those who like these games could still safely buy them.
Not really. There are a lot of objectively trash games - "put together a puzzle to see a naked girl", "a shooter made on your knee in 20 minutes", "a race with three cars and one track for 89 cents", etc. These, of course, are not worth selling in GoG. The problem is that some people call garbage and require games to be removed because of their genre, regardless of their actual quality. "I think that the quality is bad, so it should be removed, there can be no other opinions." This approach is fundamentally wrong, because in absolutely any genre there are good games and trash. And if specifically I or you don’t like something, this does not give us the right to prohibit others from playing it.

okay. look. there're lots of discussions like this one on the internet, right? "objectualization", "sexploitation", "degradation" of women in games, and all the jazz. and males are to blame. I get it.
then I go to the street and see many women dressed the way I-No would applaud approvingly. and all the persons I asked told me that NO, they dress like that not because of males.
I won't say these are the same people. but both "camps" are quite large.
too contradicting for me. where's the truth? (okay, I know there's no ultimate truth. but still.)
better ask and look dumb than don't ask and be the one, right?
I'm just puzzled. don't want to pour the kerosene to the flame. only get just another opinion and leave this discussion for good.
(yeah, I suspect, my intellect level is of bread's loaf, but I'm still curious. you may laugh. I don't mind.)

But the long story short - I'm okay with not all games available in the store, as long as there are clear, objective, and reasonable criteria for what is available and what is not. "It makes me feel bad" is neither clear nor reasonable, not to mention objective.

Sexual revolution happened last century, but some people didn't get the memo, apparently.

Considering that "I Have No Mouth and Must Scream" is on GOG, it is pretty clear that making people uncomfortable is acceptable.

BTW guys, do you really think that THIS game/timothy_learys_mind_mirror is of better quality and interested more people than those games about which you raised so much noise here?

It's like Terry Pratchett said - "Don't put your trust in revolutions. They always come around again. That's why they're called revolutions."

Exactly. That's the essence of the horror genre. In fact, I even saw an article about most impactful horror games always having to deal with taboo topics and thus can't be done by mainstream corporations. The situation, not unlike the one with porn games.
=======================================
I've already said - clear, reasonable, and not depending on someone's personal tastes.

Ah sorry, I meant an example. I can't seem to think of anything beyond technical issues that would be so clear cut.

Nice try, but it won't work. Racism is a concept that has more or less clear characteristics. But sexism is a very vague concept. Some may record a person as a sexist even because, in their opinion, he just looked at the girl somehow wrong.

Actually answered. I do not put my opinion above someone else's, because I do not force people to do what I like, but they do not like. I advocate that EVERYONE decides for himself what he needs and what he doesn't. Because we all have equal rights. But opponents of AO games are trying to get others to dance to their tune. So I ask - why do you think that your opinion is more valuable than the opinions of other people?

"some probably should be" - and by what criteria to decide which ones? Why so far I've only seen nit-picking about ao-games and arguments like "it offends me that there are sexy girls" (no one forces you to look at them) and "everything in anime style is rubbish"? Where are the nitpicks about other "offensive" games? Where are the nitpicks about low-quality games of different genres?

And how does my desire to buy certain games affect other people badly? I repeat once again - someone forces you to buy these games? Yes or no? If not, why can't you just ignore them the way everyone else ignores the games, books, and movies they don't like? For example, Hollywood has made thousands of films about good Americans and evil "Russians" (including other people from the former USSR). So, now I have to be offended and demand that these films not be shown? By your logic, yes. But I just don't watch them, that's all. And those who like it - look. And the world didn't fall apart, can you imagine?

P.S.:
Not sure "the right to buy violent games at a shop of my choice" is an actual right - All people have the same rights. Including they have the right to freely buy whatever they want, if it is on sale. And everything that is not prohibited by law can be on sale. Is there a law against GoG selling such games? Judging by the fact that this is an official store, and not a pirate bay, no, there is no such law. So, by demanding to delete something, you demand to put your interests above the interests of other people. In any situation in which someone gets more rights, someone loses them on the contrary. So, by demanding the right to decide what to delete and what not, not supported by law, you somehow oppress another group of users.

Yes. And that's exactly the problem, as it allows censors too much room for personal bias in their judgment.

And yet, there are still criteria that are clear enough. Tits and butts are considered erogenous zones. So, images with those naked parts are considered erotica. And the depiction of sex organs goes even further and is considered pornography. Obviously, there are many "edge cases" or some questionable "workarounds" but in most situations, you are able to say where porn or erotica is.

Children, who haven't gone (and even haven't reached) puberty can't perceive porn and erotica adequately, like adults. Since kids are very impressionable, there is a big chance that such a scene would impact them greatly and in a non-predictable way. Thus, it's reasonable to restrict their access to pornography and erotica.

If GOG advertised itself as a child-friendly store, I would agree that not selling games with erotic and sexual content is a reasonable decision. The line of reasoning in such a case would be clear enough.

But GOG already sells games with erotic and sexual content. Starting from CDPR own Witcher and Cyberpunk series. So, GOG is not a child-friendly store. There is no reason to deny selling a game simply because it has erotic or sexual content.

P.S. Fun fact - the forum doesn't allow to post V-word. But does allow the word "penis". Sex discrimination?

Just a side note: blocking by genre or game tags is not safe, at least on gog, in my experience. The tags are often wrong, and sometimes even the genre is wrong (e.g. often turn-based RPGs are listed as action games, such as Rise of the Third Power just today). This means that even though there are game genres I always avoid (FPS, RTS, pure VN), I still have to vet each game manually. That means that not having 20 new games a day is a good thing, I guess, so hooray for curation.

Because of this, I think any a priori filtering, even user-initiated, is a bad thing. On the other hand, my back log is huge, and I don't really need any more new games, so I guess an overzealous filter isn't that harmful.