http://gamingtrend.com
August 20, 2014, 10:36:13 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Boycott Amazon.com: Purveyor of Pedophile Literature  (Read 3088 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ATB
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15362


Thanks for everything, Ryan. 1979-2013


View Profile
« on: November 11, 2010, 12:23:11 AM »

I won't be buying anything from Amazon until this this disgrace is removed from their site.

If it is not removed from their site, I will no longer be shopping there period.
Logged
Moliere
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5099



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 11, 2010, 12:26:35 AM »

The Customer Reviews seem to agree with you. The side question remains: how did you run across this particular item?
Logged

That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
ATB
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15362


Thanks for everything, Ryan. 1979-2013


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 11, 2010, 12:29:28 AM »

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 12:26:35 AM

The Customer Reviews seem to agree with you. The side question remains: how did you run across this particular item?


Unnecessary baiting, Moliere.  Very low class.
Logged
PR_GMR
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3415



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 11, 2010, 12:44:29 AM »

Heard about it on Twitter today. Disgusting, isn't it?
Logged
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 11, 2010, 12:46:52 AM »

I can't wait to see what pops up in my 'related to items you have viewed' now.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8972


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: November 11, 2010, 12:50:00 AM »

Man... tough one.  On the one hand, yeah this is not right.  On the other, Amazon is really convenient.
Logged
Mr. Fed
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 985


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 11, 2010, 01:00:17 AM »

Hmm.  "Amazon Digital Services, Inc."  It appears to be a subsidiary of Amazon.  It it their self-publishing mechanism?  If so, what method does one use to get one's work listed there?  What supervision, if any, does Amazon exercise to determine what goes on there and what does not?
Logged

Popehat, a blog.  Now 35% less ugly!
Mr. Fed
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 985


View Profile WWW
« Reply #7 on: November 11, 2010, 01:06:33 AM »

Also, I would suggest exercising some skepticism.  Various places are quoting Amazon responses on the subject, but I am skeptical that they reflect any higher-level Amazon reflection on the issue (in part because the diction of the Amazon statement is odd).  Reserving judgment about what is actually going on here.

Also, I'd appreciate it if someone could post the specific, principled standard of exactly what works Amazon shouldn't carry.  Let's start with Piers Anthony as a given and go from there.  How about books advocating for the internment of Muslims in America?  Does that make the cut? 
« Last Edit: November 11, 2010, 01:08:28 AM by Mr. Fed » Logged

Popehat, a blog.  Now 35% less ugly!
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8972


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: November 11, 2010, 01:11:45 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 01:06:33 AM

Also, I'd appreciate it if someone could post the specific, principled standard of exactly what works Amazon shouldn't carry.  Let's start with Piers Anthony as a given and go from there.  How about books advocating for the internment of Muslims in America?  Does that make the cut? 

I actually started to think about this after I posted my snarky comment - I think I'd actually prefer Amazon sell all books that are legal to publish and let the consumer make the choice on whether to purchase rather than arbitrarily censoring certain topics.
Logged
morlac
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2778



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: November 11, 2010, 01:15:53 AM »

Quote from: ATB on November 11, 2010, 12:29:28 AM

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 12:26:35 AM

The Customer Reviews seem to agree with you. The side question remains: how did you run across this particular item?


Unnecessary baiting, Moliere.  Very low class.

They need to remove that book pronto, that is just all sorts of wrong.  I found this tidbit at the end of the linked article above, should be familiar to folks here....

"In 2009, Amazon stopped selling "RapeLay," a first-person video game in which the protagonist stalks and then rapes a mother and her daughters, after it was widely condemned in the media and by various interest groups."

Not to pour salt on old wounds but boy was writing an article containing a mini review of that game a low point for GT.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2010, 02:03:55 AM by morlac » Logged

morlac00 on PSN
Mr. Fed
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 985


View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 11, 2010, 01:17:45 AM »

Also, part of exercising skepticism about the OUTRAGE OF THE DAY involves asking "does this story really involve Big Evil (an avowed proponent of pedophilia) vs. Big Good (foes of pedophilia), or could it involve something less cinematic, like clearly mentally ill person vs. the world?

One could construct a cogent argument that Amazon should exercise its right not to sell a guide advocating pedophilia (assuming for the sake of argument that's what this does -- I'm not about to buy it) whether the author is an avowed pedophile or a crazy man.  But one might also consider carefully whether this is such a big deal because it is such a big deal, or because it's being whipped up as the Michael Bay/Jerry Bruckheimer OMG HUGE INCIDENT OF THE DAY on the series of tubes.
Logged

Popehat, a blog.  Now 35% less ugly!
morlac
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2778



View Profile
« Reply #11 on: November 11, 2010, 01:19:46 AM »

Quote from: gellar on November 11, 2010, 01:11:45 AM

I actually started to think about this after I posted my snarky comment - I think I'd actually prefer Amazon sell all books that are legal to publish and let the consumer make the choice on whether to purchase rather than arbitrarily censoring certain topics.

I think I would be ok with that as well, provided the backlashing and boycotting would be as big as I think it should be.  I certainly wouldn't go to a store that was willing to sell that kinda crap.  
Logged

morlac00 on PSN
morlac
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2778



View Profile
« Reply #12 on: November 11, 2010, 01:22:29 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 01:17:45 AM

Also, part of exercising skepticism about the OUTRAGE OF THE DAY involves asking "does this story really involve Big Evil (an avowed proponent of pedophilia) vs. Big Good (foes of pedophilia), or could it involve something less cinematic, like clearly mentally ill person vs. the world?

One could construct a cogent argument that Amazon should exercise its right not to sell a guide advocating pedophilia (assuming for the sake of argument that's what this does -- I'm not about to buy it) whether the author is an avowed pedophile or a crazy man.  But one might also consider carefully whether this is such a big deal because it is such a big deal, or because it's being whipped up as the Michael Bay/Jerry Bruckheimer OMG HUGE INCIDENT OF THE DAY on the series of tubes.

Not sure about everyone else but I don't need the news to tell me what to be outraged over.  I had not heard of this until this thread and it took me all of 2 seconds after clicking the link to Amazon to say WTF?  

edit to add:  Not sure what the authors mental state has to do with Amazon allowing it on their website.  The 'story' is about Amazon allowing it on their site, not really about where the Author was mentally when he wrote it.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2010, 01:28:28 AM by morlac » Logged

morlac00 on PSN
Qantaga
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1473


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: November 11, 2010, 01:25:21 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 01:17:45 AM

Also, part of exercising skepticism about the OUTRAGE OF THE DAY involves asking "does this story really involve Big Evil (an avowed proponent of pedophilia) vs. Big Good (foes of pedophilia), or could it involve something less cinematic, like clearly mentally ill person vs. the world?

One could construct a cogent argument that Amazon should exercise its right not to sell a guide advocating pedophilia (assuming for the sake of argument that's what this does -- I'm not about to buy it) whether the author is an avowed pedophile or a crazy man.  But one might also consider carefully whether this is such a big deal because it is such a big deal, or because it's being whipped up as the Michael Bay/Jerry Bruckheimer OMG HUGE INCIDENT OF THE DAY on the series of tubes.
   
Regardless of the rights debate, I feel like Potter Stewart (Jacobellis v. Ohio) in this case. It makes me feel sick just knowing something like that (crazy man or true perv) is on their site. As much as I love Amazon generally, I won't be visiting there again until this is removed.
Logged

Xbox Live: Sukaro
PSN: Suroka
  
Until I die I'll sing these songs on the shores of Babylon
Still looking for a home in a world where I belong

~Switchfoot
Moliere
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5099



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: November 11, 2010, 01:30:27 AM »

Quote from: ATB on November 11, 2010, 12:29:28 AM

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 12:26:35 AM

The Customer Reviews seem to agree with you. The side question remains: how did you run across this particular item?

Unnecessary baiting, Moliere.  Very low class.

And thanks to you and all the other outraged people the author should see a nice boost in his sales courtesy of the free publicity. Sometimes it's better to let things die a quiet anonymous death on their own rather than pulling out your boycott signs because someone is doing something you don't like.
Logged

That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
Mr. Fed
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 985


View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: November 11, 2010, 01:33:32 AM »

Quote from: Qantaga on November 11, 2010, 01:25:21 AM

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 01:17:45 AM

Also, part of exercising skepticism about the OUTRAGE OF THE DAY involves asking "does this story really involve Big Evil (an avowed proponent of pedophilia) vs. Big Good (foes of pedophilia), or could it involve something less cinematic, like clearly mentally ill person vs. the world?

One could construct a cogent argument that Amazon should exercise its right not to sell a guide advocating pedophilia (assuming for the sake of argument that's what this does -- I'm not about to buy it) whether the author is an avowed pedophile or a crazy man.  But one might also consider carefully whether this is such a big deal because it is such a big deal, or because it's being whipped up as the Michael Bay/Jerry Bruckheimer OMG HUGE INCIDENT OF THE DAY on the series of tubes.
   
Regardless of the rights debate, I feel like Potter Stewart (Jacobellis v. Ohio) in this case. It makes me feel sick just knowing something like that (crazy man or true perv) is on their site. As much as I love Amazon generally, I won't be visiting there again until this is removed.

Law-geek aside:  the Potter Stewart reference is frequently misused to abdicate the need to define a standard to call something obscene, or unacceptable, or pornographic, or what have you.  That's a misrepresentation.  Stewart actually said, in effect, that he need not offer a coherent definition of obscenity in the case because the movie in the case clearly wasn't obscene by any standard:  "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that."

In other words, if anyone is saying "this is unacceptable -- I can't say why or offer a principled standard, but Potter Stewart says that's ok", then they are misconstruing Stewart.  He's saying the opposite.  


I'm not going to buy the book to satisfy myself about what it actually has.  I see multiple conflicting reports about whether it advocates and encourages people to engage in pedophilia or whether (as the Smoking Gun link suggests) it does not.  I would find a book that encourages ways to get away with pedophilia to be depraved and disgusting; I would not find a book that told pedophiles that they are human beings but must not molest children and should masturbate instead (see, again, the Smoking Gun link) to be depraved and disgusting.  I am skeptical of the genesis and development of this outrage.
Logged

Popehat, a blog.  Now 35% less ugly!
morlac
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2778



View Profile
« Reply #16 on: November 11, 2010, 01:36:13 AM »

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 01:30:27 AM

Quote from: ATB on November 11, 2010, 12:29:28 AM

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 12:26:35 AM

The Customer Reviews seem to agree with you. The side question remains: how did you run across this particular item?

Unnecessary baiting, Moliere.  Very low class.

And thanks to you and all the other outraged people the author should see a nice boost in his sales courtesy of the free publicity. Sometimes it's better to let things die a quiet anonymous death on their own rather than pulling out your boycott signs because someone is doing something you don't like.

Yep, it's much better to close our eyes, plug our ears and say lalalalalala till the badness goes away.
Logged

morlac00 on PSN
th'FOOL
Executive Producer and Editor-At-Large
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5011


Never whistle while you're pissing


View Profile WWW
« Reply #17 on: November 11, 2010, 01:37:48 AM »

Quote from: morlac on November 11, 2010, 01:15:53 AM

Not to pour salt on old wounds but boy was reviewing that a low point for GT.

Uh, we didn't review it. If you're going to pour the salt, at least get your facts straight.
Logged

Mike Dunn
Executive Producer & Managing Editor, GamingTrend
Qantaga
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1473


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: November 11, 2010, 01:41:26 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 01:33:32 AM

Law-geek aside:  the Potter Stewart reference is frequently misused to abdicate the need to define a standard to call something obscene, or unacceptable, or pornographic, or what have you.  That's a misrepresentation.  Stewart actually said, in effect, that he need not offer a coherent definition of obscenity in the case because the movie in the case clearly wasn't obscene by any standard:  "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that."

In other words, if anyone is saying "this is unacceptable -- I can't say why or offer a principled standard, but Potter Stewart says that's ok", then they are misconstruing Stewart.  He's saying the opposite.
 
I do understand that the Supreme Court reversed Jacobellis' conviction in that case. However, that doesn't change the fact that, in my mind, this particular incident more than crosses into the opposite realm of his decision on that particular motion picture. Even though Stewart was saying that motion picture was NOT (pornographic), I still think I can apply the "I know it when I see it" to items that cross the line, as well as those that do not.
   
Edit: To clarify, I am certainly not trying to interpret any legal standards here. I just know that the mere fact that item is on Amazon makes me sure that I don't want to visit there right now.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2010, 01:45:56 AM by Qantaga » Logged

Xbox Live: Sukaro
PSN: Suroka
  
Until I die I'll sing these songs on the shores of Babylon
Still looking for a home in a world where I belong

~Switchfoot
Mr. Fed
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 985


View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: November 11, 2010, 01:50:28 AM »

Quote from: Qantaga on November 11, 2010, 01:41:26 AM

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 01:33:32 AM

Law-geek aside:  the Potter Stewart reference is frequently misused to abdicate the need to define a standard to call something obscene, or unacceptable, or pornographic, or what have you.  That's a misrepresentation.  Stewart actually said, in effect, that he need not offer a coherent definition of obscenity in the case because the movie in the case clearly wasn't obscene by any standard:  "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that."

In other words, if anyone is saying "this is unacceptable -- I can't say why or offer a principled standard, but Potter Stewart says that's ok", then they are misconstruing Stewart.  He's saying the opposite.
   
I do understand that the Supreme Court reversed Jacobellis' conviction in that case. However, that doesn't change the fact that, in my mind, this particular incident more than crosses into the opposite realm of his decision on that particular motion picture. Even though Stewart was saying that motion picture was NOT (pornographic), I still think I can apply the "I know it when I see it" to items that cross the line, as well as those that do not.

My point, and I think Stewart's point, is that it is not necessary to articulate a coherent standard when you are declining to place something into a forbidden category, but necessary when you are, lest you become an arbitrary "censor" (scare quotes because this is not government).


Several people out there stepped in front of the bullet and bought the damn thing to satisfy their own skepticism about what it actually said.  Such reports seem to suggest that it is, in fact, an apologia for, and manual on how to get away with, at least some adult-child sexual contact.  It also sounds crazy.  So that clarifies that.

Of course you have a right to boycott Amazon.  Of course Amazon has a right to carry a work or not carry a work. 

Questions:

1.  Do you expect Amazon to change its digital publication method so that some Amazon editor reviews each and every product?  If so, what criteria should they use, and how closely must they look at the work?
2.  If you only expect Amazon to remove offensive works when they are called to its attention, what criteria are they advocating they use?  Is it just a matter of how many people complain, or how loudly they complain? 
3.  Would you boycott Amazon if they yielded to a boycott of a work you think should be available on Amazon?
4.  How do you feel about the morals, good sense, and taste for free expression of your countrymen?  Do you trust their judgment about what Amazon ought and ought not carry?
5.  Are you going to say "I don't need to confront any difficult questions because this one is over the line, whatever and wherever the line is"? 
Logged

Popehat, a blog.  Now 35% less ugly!
morlac
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2778



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: November 11, 2010, 01:55:34 AM »

Quote from: th'FOOL on November 11, 2010, 01:37:48 AM

Quote from: morlac on November 11, 2010, 01:15:53 AM

Not to pour salt on old wounds but boy was reviewing that a low point for GT.

Uh, we didn't review it. If you're going to pour the salt, at least get your facts straight.

Oh right, forgot it was satire and didn't have a score even if the author did play the game and give a description of it.  Just like a review.


edit: Fixed it to make it a bit more accurate for ya.  
« Last Edit: November 11, 2010, 02:02:33 AM by morlac » Logged

morlac00 on PSN
Qantaga
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1473


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: November 11, 2010, 01:58:43 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 01:50:28 AM

Questions:

1.  Do you expect Amazon to change its digital publication method so that some Amazon editor reviews each and every product?  If so, what criteria should they use, and how closely must they look at the work?
2.  If you only expect Amazon to remove offensive works when they are called to its attention, what criteria are they advocating they use?  Is it just a matter of how many people complain, or how loudly they complain? 
3.  Would you boycott Amazon if they yielded to a boycott of a work you think should be available on Amazon?
4.  How do you feel about the morals, good sense, and taste for free expression of your countrymen?  Do you trust their judgment about what Amazon ought and ought not carry?
5.  Are you going to say "I don't need to confront any difficult questions because this one is over the line, whatever and wherever the line is"? 
   
All good questions, from a theoretical/constitutional/rights standpoint. However, Amazon is not in the business of theory/rights/constitution as much as they are in the arena of commerce.
   
I actually do expect Amazon to review any work offered for sale on their site. Then, I expect them to make an economic decision on whether or not to carry that particular item.
   
Then, as a customer, I (individually) can choose whether to reward their business with my patronage or not.
   
I find it hard to believe that Amazon, as a business entity, can possibly consider this to be a wise business decision.
   
If Bezos chooses to make a constitutional stand, that is his perogative. It is also every consumer's right to do what they wish with that perogative.
Logged

Xbox Live: Sukaro
PSN: Suroka
  
Until I die I'll sing these songs on the shores of Babylon
Still looking for a home in a world where I belong

~Switchfoot
Mithridates
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 631


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: November 11, 2010, 02:03:29 AM »

Quote from: morlac on November 11, 2010, 01:55:34 AM

Quote from: th'FOOL on November 11, 2010, 01:37:48 AM

Quote from: morlac on November 11, 2010, 01:15:53 AM

Not to pour salt on old wounds but boy was reviewing that a low point for GT.

Uh, we didn't review it. If you're going to pour the salt, at least get your facts straight.

Oh right, forgot it was satire and didn't have a score even if the author did play the game and give a description of it.  Just like a review.


edit: Fixed it to make it a bit more accurate for ya.  

Yeah, no kidding.  I was thinking for second maybe I was imagining that review.
Logged
th'FOOL
Executive Producer and Editor-At-Large
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5011


Never whistle while you're pissing


View Profile WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 11, 2010, 02:07:21 AM »

Quote from: morlac on November 11, 2010, 01:55:34 AM

Quote from: th'FOOL on November 11, 2010, 01:37:48 AM

Quote from: morlac on November 11, 2010, 01:15:53 AM

Not to pour salt on old wounds but boy was reviewing that a low point for GT.

Uh, we didn't review it. If you're going to pour the salt, at least get your facts straight.

Oh right, forgot it was satire and didn't have a score even if the author did play the game and give a description of it.  Just like a review.


edit: Fixed it to make it a bit more accurate for ya.  

Except the author didn't play the game.  You got the description part right, though. Kudos.
Logged

Mike Dunn
Executive Producer & Managing Editor, GamingTrend
Mr. Fed
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 985


View Profile WWW
« Reply #24 on: November 11, 2010, 02:16:58 AM »

Quote from: Qantaga on November 11, 2010, 01:58:43 AM

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 01:50:28 AM

Questions:

1.  Do you expect Amazon to change its digital publication method so that some Amazon editor reviews each and every product?  If so, what criteria should they use, and how closely must they look at the work?
2.  If you only expect Amazon to remove offensive works when they are called to its attention, what criteria are they advocating they use?  Is it just a matter of how many people complain, or how loudly they complain? 
3.  Would you boycott Amazon if they yielded to a boycott of a work you think should be available on Amazon?
4.  How do you feel about the morals, good sense, and taste for free expression of your countrymen?  Do you trust their judgment about what Amazon ought and ought not carry?
5.  Are you going to say "I don't need to confront any difficult questions because this one is over the line, whatever and wherever the line is"? 
   
All good questions, from a theoretical/constitutional/rights standpoint. However, Amazon is not in the business of theory/rights/constitution as much as they are in the arena of commerce.
   
I actually do expect Amazon to review any work offered for sale on their site. Then, I expect them to make an economic decision on whether or not to carry that particular item.
   
Then, as a customer, I (individually) can choose whether to reward their business with my patronage or not.
   
I find it hard to believe that Amazon, as a business entity, can possibly consider this to be a wise business decision.
   
If Bezos chooses to make a constitutional stand, that is his perogative. It is also every consumer's right to do what they wish with that perogative.

They aren't constitutional/rights questions at all.  Nobody has a constitutional right to sell on Amazon, and Amazon has an unquestioned right not to sell this item.

They're a question about people who want to boycott, and their motives, and whether they've thought it through, and whether there is any principle behind the boycott, or just visceral reactions.

Not that there's anything wrong with visceral reactions.   
Logged

Popehat, a blog.  Now 35% less ugly!
morlac
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2778



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: November 11, 2010, 02:20:28 AM »

Quote from: th'FOOL on November 11, 2010, 02:07:21 AM

Quote from: morlac on November 11, 2010, 01:55:34 AM

Quote from: th'FOOL on November 11, 2010, 01:37:48 AM

Quote from: morlac on November 11, 2010, 01:15:53 AM

Not to pour salt on old wounds but boy was reviewing that a low point for GT.

Uh, we didn't review it. If you're going to pour the salt, at least get your facts straight.

Oh right, forgot it was satire and didn't have a score even if the author did play the game and give a description of it.  Just like a review.


edit: Fixed it to make it a bit more accurate for ya.  

Except the author didn't play the game.  You got the description part right, though. Kudos.

Are you really arguing the schematics of that 'article'.  Much less in such a snarky tone?  Having some flashbacks here. 
« Last Edit: November 11, 2010, 02:26:22 AM by morlac » Logged

morlac00 on PSN
Qantaga
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1473


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: November 11, 2010, 02:24:45 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 02:16:58 AM

Nobody has a constitutional right to sell on Amazon, and Amazon has an unquestioned right not to sell this item.
 
So, I guess I'm missing your point.
   
I'm not talking about boycotts, at all. I'm talking about my choice to purchase from them or not.
   
From your previous posts and your list of questions, it seemed that you were advocating that Amazon didn't even need look at what was offered on their site and that any (and every) thing, offensive to some or otherwise, should be available there.
   
I apologize if I misread your position.
Logged

Xbox Live: Sukaro
PSN: Suroka
  
Until I die I'll sing these songs on the shores of Babylon
Still looking for a home in a world where I belong

~Switchfoot
Mr. Fed
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 985


View Profile WWW
« Reply #27 on: November 11, 2010, 02:26:36 AM »

Quote from: Qantaga on November 11, 2010, 02:24:45 AM

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 02:16:58 AM

Nobody has a constitutional right to sell on Amazon, and Amazon has an unquestioned right not to sell this item.
 
So, I guess I'm missing your point.
   
I'm not talking about boycotts, at all. I'm talking about my choice to purchase from them or not.
   
From your previous posts and your list of questions, it seemed that you were advocating that Amazon didn't even need look at what was offered on their site and that any (and every) thing, offensive to some or otherwise, should be available there.
   
I apologize if I misread your position.

People seem to want to impose some sort of standard on Amazon in exchange for their continued business.  Assuming the standard is not merely "we want this one specific book off of Amazon right now," I'm trying to figure out what that standard is. 
Logged

Popehat, a blog.  Now 35% less ugly!
th'FOOL
Executive Producer and Editor-At-Large
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5011


Never whistle while you're pissing


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: November 11, 2010, 02:35:53 AM »

Quote from: morlac on November 11, 2010, 02:20:28 AM

Quote from: th'FOOL on November 11, 2010, 02:07:21 AM

Quote from: morlac on November 11, 2010, 01:55:34 AM

Quote from: th'FOOL on November 11, 2010, 01:37:48 AM

Quote from: morlac on November 11, 2010, 01:15:53 AM

Not to pour salt on old wounds but boy was reviewing that a low point for GT.

Uh, we didn't review it. If you're going to pour the salt, at least get your facts straight.

Oh right, forgot it was satire and didn't have a score even if the author did play the game and give a description of it.  Just like a review.


edit: Fixed it to make it a bit more accurate for ya.  

Except the author didn't play the game.  You got the description part right, though. Kudos.

Are you really arguing the schematics of that 'article'.  Much less in such a snarky tone?  Oh never mind, I remember your defense of it at the time so this is pretty much par for the course. 

"Schematics"? The game was never played by the author or any other member of this staff, period. I'm pretty sure we made that perfectly clear.

Didn't we fucking resolve this like a year ago? Have any articles like that appeared ever since? Have we posted any additional content by that author? You spoke and we listened. That article has faded into memory but you thought fit to derail this thread and bring it up again, so forgive me if I get a little agitated by your misrepresenting the facts.  If you really want to continue this discussion, then I advise you to start another thread or take it up in PM. That is all I have to say on the matter.
Logged

Mike Dunn
Executive Producer & Managing Editor, GamingTrend
Qantaga
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1473


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: November 11, 2010, 02:42:46 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 02:26:36 AM

People seem to want to impose some sort of standard on Amazon in exchange for their continued business.  Assuming the standard is not merely "we want this one specific book off of Amazon right now," I'm trying to figure out what that standard is. 
   
I'm honestly not trying to be argumentative, but isn't that a cornerstone of every personal buying decision when dealing with any business enterprise? If I feel that a particular store/restaurant/service has crossed my own expectation of quality, I most likely won't spend my money there again, unless I feel it was an anomaly or until that particular problem has been resolved. It would seem that the standard would vary from person to person.
   
I can't help you with the global Amazon standard. I do know that this particular item on Amazon will cause me to halt my commerce with them. If they remove this item, I will be more than willing to resume my enjoyment of their service.   
   
I know that you're trying to look at what might cause/halt a boycott, so I'll retire from the discussion and hope that others can help you figure out that standard.
 
Logged

Xbox Live: Sukaro
PSN: Suroka
  
Until I die I'll sing these songs on the shores of Babylon
Still looking for a home in a world where I belong

~Switchfoot
Mr. Fed
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 985


View Profile WWW
« Reply #30 on: November 11, 2010, 04:25:37 AM »

Looks like they've taken it down (edit:  or maybe the page has just crashed from so many hits).  We'll see what they say about it.

Meanwhile, in a development that could not possibly be foreseen, unless of course you have not been living in a cave for the last thirty years, all the hubub put it on the Amazon bestseller list.  Inasmuch as it was a digital download, there's no canceling shippping (although maybe Amazon will repeat its "1984" performance and delete some of those downloads from Kindle.)  

Can Amazon refuse to pay this author the money he is owed for so many downloads?  Probably not.  They may try.

If not, the impact of approaching the issue in an OMG WEB OUTRAGE manner may have been to make a crazy pedophile a bunch of money.  

It's a funny old world.

Edit:  I'd like to boycott Amazon for selling this.  If you don't, I think I will conclude you support animal cruelty.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2010, 04:27:48 AM by Mr. Fed » Logged

Popehat, a blog.  Now 35% less ugly!
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: November 11, 2010, 04:41:27 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 04:25:37 AM

Looks like they've taken it down (edit:  or maybe the page has just crashed from so many hits).  We'll see what they say about it.

just checked on the link in the OP, it's still there.

Quote
Edit:  I'd like to boycott Amazon for selling this.  If you don't, I think I will conclude you support animal cruelty.

that brought up this book along with this one in my recommendations  icon_lol
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
ATB
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 15362


Thanks for everything, Ryan. 1979-2013


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: November 11, 2010, 04:57:58 AM »

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 01:30:27 AM

Quote from: ATB on November 11, 2010, 12:29:28 AM

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 12:26:35 AM

The Customer Reviews seem to agree with you. The side question remains: how did you run across this particular item?

Unnecessary baiting, Moliere.  Very low class.

And thanks to you and all the other outraged people the author should see a nice boost in his sales courtesy of the free publicity. Sometimes it's better to let things die a quiet anonymous death on their own rather than pulling out your boycott signs because someone is doing something you don't like.

I've never boycotted anything before (other than interplay for the buggy debacle that was fo2).  If this isn't something to be outraged about what is? 
Logged
Mr. Fed
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 985


View Profile WWW
« Reply #33 on: November 11, 2010, 05:01:08 AM »

Quote from: ATB on November 11, 2010, 04:57:58 AM

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 01:30:27 AM

Quote from: ATB on November 11, 2010, 12:29:28 AM

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 12:26:35 AM

The Customer Reviews seem to agree with you. The side question remains: how did you run across this particular item?

Unnecessary baiting, Moliere.  Very low class.

And thanks to you and all the other outraged people the author should see a nice boost in his sales courtesy of the free publicity. Sometimes it's better to let things die a quiet anonymous death on their own rather than pulling out your boycott signs because someone is doing something you don't like.

I've never boycotted anything before (other than interplay for the buggy debacle that was fo2).  If this isn't something to be outraged about what is? 

Well, right now I'm kind of outraged that the torch-and-pitchfork mob have lifted a one-sale book from obscurity and effectively bought its crazy pedophile author a plasma tv.  Well, maybe "outraged" is the wrong word.
Logged

Popehat, a blog.  Now 35% less ugly!
Caine
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9946


My cocaine


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: November 11, 2010, 05:16:40 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 05:01:08 AM

Quote from: ATB on November 11, 2010, 04:57:58 AM

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 01:30:27 AM

Quote from: ATB on November 11, 2010, 12:29:28 AM

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 12:26:35 AM

The Customer Reviews seem to agree with you. The side question remains: how did you run across this particular item?

Unnecessary baiting, Moliere.  Very low class.

And thanks to you and all the other outraged people the author should see a nice boost in his sales courtesy of the free publicity. Sometimes it's better to let things die a quiet anonymous death on their own rather than pulling out your boycott signs because someone is doing something you don't like.

I've never boycotted anything before (other than interplay for the buggy debacle that was fo2).  If this isn't something to be outraged about what is? 

Well, right now I'm kind of outraged that the torch-and-pitchfork mob have lifted a one-sale book from obscurity and effectively bought its crazy pedophile author a plasma tv.  Well, maybe "outraged" is the wrong word.

wait, how many damned sales has this ass-clown made?
Logged

"It's like chess with big guns against aliens. Which isn't like chess at all when I think about it." - Jake Solomon
Mr. Fed
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 985


View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: November 11, 2010, 05:20:25 AM »

Quote from: Caine on November 11, 2010, 05:16:40 AM

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 05:01:08 AM

Quote from: ATB on November 11, 2010, 04:57:58 AM

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 01:30:27 AM

Quote from: ATB on November 11, 2010, 12:29:28 AM

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 12:26:35 AM

The Customer Reviews seem to agree with you. The side question remains: how did you run across this particular item?

Unnecessary baiting, Moliere.  Very low class.

And thanks to you and all the other outraged people the author should see a nice boost in his sales courtesy of the free publicity. Sometimes it's better to let things die a quiet anonymous death on their own rather than pulling out your boycott signs because someone is doing something you don't like.

I've never boycotted anything before (other than interplay for the buggy debacle that was fo2).  If this isn't something to be outraged about what is? 

Well, right now I'm kind of outraged that the torch-and-pitchfork mob have lifted a one-sale book from obscurity and effectively bought its crazy pedophile author a plasma tv.  Well, maybe "outraged" is the wrong word.

wait, how many damned sales has this ass-clown made?

Before the OUTRAGE, he had sold one.  After the OUTRAGE, according to the TechCrunch I posted above, he's #80 on the bestseller list.

Please do not let this deter you from the belief that internet OUTRAGE is effective.
Logged

Popehat, a blog.  Now 35% less ugly!
SkyLander
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1880



View Profile
« Reply #36 on: November 11, 2010, 05:36:56 AM »

Going to go with Fed with this one. All the OUTRAGE did was let this guy sell 5000 more copies of his book than he would of sold otherwise. Good job guyz.

Anyway it looks like it got pulled. So you all can just point your OUTRAGE back at 4chan or something.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2010, 05:45:59 AM by SkyLander » Logged

Pretty....what do we blow up first?
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8972


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: November 11, 2010, 06:19:45 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 05:20:25 AM

Quote from: Caine on November 11, 2010, 05:16:40 AM

Quote from: Mr. Fed on November 11, 2010, 05:01:08 AM

Quote from: ATB on November 11, 2010, 04:57:58 AM

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 01:30:27 AM

Quote from: ATB on November 11, 2010, 12:29:28 AM

Quote from: Moliere on November 11, 2010, 12:26:35 AM

The Customer Reviews seem to agree with you. The side question remains: how did you run across this particular item?

Unnecessary baiting, Moliere.  Very low class.

And thanks to you and all the other outraged people the author should see a nice boost in his sales courtesy of the free publicity. Sometimes it's better to let things die a quiet anonymous death on their own rather than pulling out your boycott signs because someone is doing something you don't like.

I've never boycotted anything before (other than interplay for the buggy debacle that was fo2).  If this isn't something to be outraged about what is? 

Well, right now I'm kind of outraged that the torch-and-pitchfork mob have lifted a one-sale book from obscurity and effectively bought its crazy pedophile author a plasma tv.  Well, maybe "outraged" is the wrong word.

wait, how many damned sales has this ass-clown made?

Before the OUTRAGE, he had sold one.  After the OUTRAGE, according to the TechCrunch I posted above, he's #80 on the bestseller list.

Please do not let this deter you from the belief that internet OUTRAGE is effective.

Wait wait wait... so you're saying ANY attention is good attention?  FUCK.  Why isn't this some fucking basic principle of marketing that someone could have warned us about before the collective got all pissy and angry on the internet about it.  IF ONLY.  FUCK.
Logged
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6422


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #38 on: November 11, 2010, 07:18:17 AM »

Two things about this case please me:

1) The book in question seems to have been pulled from the market.

2) Knee-jerk Internet OUTRAGE has once again proven how idiotic it is. This whole debacle would have been much better solved by contacting Amazon directly and telling them about the book which they probably had no idea even existed. The book could have been quietly pulled off the virtual shelves. Instead people let their emotions get the better of them (what else is new) and the book becomes an instant sales hit. I find it deliciously ironic and fitting, at least as long as I ignore the subject of the book itself.
Logged
theohall
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1151



View Profile
« Reply #39 on: November 11, 2010, 07:53:21 AM »

I clicked on the link from the original post and got a "link on longer available" type thing, so I have no idea what you all are discussing.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.302 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.116s, 2q)