So your answer is that a government should bow to the general will, even if it means removing the requirements for a government. Thank you.

Additional question: The general will of a country is to wage war against another country, and that war will not be one they can win (or even draw). Going to war against such an adversary will mean the destruction of the country. Should the government declare said war, that the people wish, resulting in the destruction of the people, or should the government protect the people, even if it means ignoring their wishes?

Virtue depends on morals, not philosophy. Both philosophy and religion can give us a moral code, but it's a result, not a requirement.
And don't forget that the moral code a specific philosophy may give may not be considered moral by another philosophy.

Off to find a copy of Nicomachean.

There's always a limit to how much one company can get.

Besides, as long as people continue to be conservative and rigid, and a country such as yours continue to uphold restraints on old IP/copyright laws (what was it, 99 years after the death of the creator) and "freedom of speech", our culture will loose much more than a few unavailable games in the future.

Apropos monarchy; this type of ruling is a joke in modern "democratic/capitalistic" time. Of all the ages throughout the history - our (Norway's) monarchy have never had so low power and respect. Even though we cherish 200 year s of freedom, something that is impalpable to the Swedish king and his people, our King only "appears" strong because of traditions...

How? Through our laws, and even our politicians/critics can tell our king family to behave more properly, or even shut up, as recent events has unfolded in the media.

Isn't it a virtue to stand up and say what you mean truthfully? "There are no facts, only interpretations"

To expand on what HereForTheBeer already said, here's what's become my stock answer to questions and comments like this.

Has that been quantified anywhere? Or are we both just shooting from the hip?

JMitch has a statistics thread somewhere on this forum.

Here it is https://www.gog.com/forum/general/this_years_releases_on_gog/post68

If you look at the numbers, you can see that GOG released more "old games" (i.e. 10+ years old) during the jul2015-jul2016 period than at any point of its history, and nearly as many pre-2000 games as their first year.

So yeah, the number of "old games" that are coming to GOG is actually increasing. It's just that we don't notice them (in part because they tend to come in big batches that are impressive but with long intervals between them and so are quickly forgotten, like all the Lucasarts titles, the Disney games, the D&D gold box games...

Which part? I covered a lot of points in the linked post. ;)
If you meant the bit about the number of "old" game releases being roughly the same, then Kardwill answered pretty well already.
The other stuff regarding rights requiring lots of work to untangle, and games sometimes taking months to get running acceptably well, has all been spoken about by various GOG staff members -- both in the forums and elsewhere -- on many different occasions; I, however, don't have any of these bookmarked (I'm sure someone can find one or two such posts, though, and I found this RPS article from last year which shows some of the work it takes to get some older games ready for sale again).

Okay, shutting up now.

JMitch's stat threads are the ultimate "where are the old games?" conversation killers ^^

And the results surprised me too. I knew there were still a fair number of "old" releases last year, I just didn't realize how many. Those "release a complete oldies catalog every few month" cycles mess up with our perception of the sheer number of individual titles.