Talk:Collective Shout: Difference between revisions

(6 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)

Line 38:

:The term anti-consumer should be reserved for practices that prioritize profit or control over consumer rights without ethical justification. Collective Shout's advocacy, while controversial, is rooted in preventing harm rather than suppressing choice for financial gain. Labeling them as anti-consumer overlooks their motivations and conflates them with corporations whose actions are objectively more harmful to consumers. Their methods can be critiqued as overly broad or collaterally damaging, but not inherently anti-consumer in the same way as corporate practices.

[[User:DzLamme|DzLD]] ([[User talk:DzLamme|talk]]) 08:22, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

:I have discussed this with @[[User:Keith|Keith]] and we have agreed that the Collective Shout article is relevant to the wiki for a few reasons:

:#All of Itch.io's NSFW tagged games were deindexed as a result of Collective Shout's actions [https://itch.io/updates/update-on-nsfw-content]

:#Said games did not violate Steam and Itch.io's terms prior to the incident

:#Like @[[User:Lowspeedguy|Lowspeedguy]] mentioned before, their campaign against GTA V [https://www.collectiveshout.org/win_target_and_kmart_remove_r18_game_from_stores] was heavily misguided (as killing women isn't required in the storyline or to progress in the game).

:#The wider impact this incident can have on consumer's rights in the future.

:We appreciate your bringing this up in the talk page, as not many users wish to share their opinions on existing articles. [[User:Mr Pollo|Mr Pollo]] ([[User talk:Mr Pollo|talk]]) 16:03, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

::I think part of the issue here is that, if we took such a definition of anti-consumer, there could be a lot of very conusmer-relevant things that we may not end up talking about, despite them being very relevant/important. I do think that this article has grown beyond where it needs to be, and might need to be pared back however. [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 16:13, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

:::I may have misunderstood your point @[[User:DzLamme|DzLamme]] (thinking that you were arguing for the article's non-inclusion, rather than commenting on the use of the term 'anti-consumer'). in any case, I'll replace the deletion notice with a relevancy discussion notice, as i don't think there's a good reason for the article to be deleted in short order. [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 16:15, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

==Propose reversion to prev. version==

it looks like since revision https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=Collective_Shout&oldid=23853 - the article has both ballooned in size, and has also lost a lot of its citations. It seemed to be in a reasonable place at that point, so might it be best for us to revert it to that state? (minus the deletion notice, i don't think that was necessary as of the mentioned revision) [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 16:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

:I think the "Methods and Campaigns" section is still relevant as a header, but could be condensed into a paragraph or two. It shows the the tactics they use and why they were so effective in their aggressive activism. NPOV is key [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 16:42, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

:I agree. There is also the fact that the current version repeats itself a lot. [[User:Lowspeedguy|Lowspeedguy]] ([[User talk:Lowspeedguy|talk]]) 18:37, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

:I agree. More context can be added where needed, but the wiki should strive for conciseness in articles. As it is I believe the article wades too much into the weeds. — [[User:Sojourna|Sojourna]] ([[User talk:Sojourna|talk]]) 20:48, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 :The term anti-consumer should be reserved for practices that prioritize profit or control over consumer rights without ethical justification. Collective Shout's advocacy, while controversial, is rooted in preventing harm rather than suppressing choice for financial gain. Labeling them as anti-consumer overlooks their motivations and conflates them with corporations whose actions are objectively more harmful to consumers. Their methods can be critiqued as overly broad or collaterally damaging, but not inherently anti-consumer in the same way as corporate practices.
 [[User:DzLamme|DzLD]] ([[User talk:DzLamme|talk]]) 08:22, 7 September 2025 (UTC)
+:I have discussed this with @[[User:Keith|Keith]] and we have agreed that the Collective Shout article is relevant to the wiki for a few reasons:
+:#All of Itch.io's NSFW tagged games were deindexed as a result of Collective Shout's actions [https://itch.io/updates/update-on-nsfw-content]
+:#Said games did not violate Steam and Itch.io's terms prior to the incident
+:#Like @[[User:Lowspeedguy|Lowspeedguy]] mentioned before, their campaign against GTA V [https://www.collectiveshout.org/win_target_and_kmart_remove_r18_game_from_stores] was heavily misguided (as killing women isn't required in the storyline or to progress in the game).
+:#The wider impact this incident can have on consumer's rights in the future.
+:We appreciate your bringing this up in the talk page, as not many users wish to share their opinions on existing articles. [[User:Mr Pollo|Mr Pollo]] ([[User talk:Mr Pollo|talk]]) 16:03, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
+::I think part of the issue here is that, if we took such a definition of anti-consumer, there could be a lot of very conusmer-relevant things that we may not end up talking about, despite them being very relevant/important. I do think that this article has grown beyond where it needs to be, and might need to be pared back however. [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 16:13, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
+:::I may have misunderstood your point @[[User:DzLamme|DzLamme]] (thinking that you were arguing for the article's non-inclusion, rather than commenting on the use of the term 'anti-consumer'). in any case, I'll replace the deletion notice with a relevancy discussion notice, as i don't think there's a good reason for the article to be deleted in short order. [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 16:15, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
+==Propose reversion to prev. version==
+it looks like since revision https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=Collective_Shout&oldid=23853 - the article has both ballooned in size, and has also lost a lot of its citations. It seemed to be in a reasonable place at that point, so might it be best for us to revert it to that state? (minus the deletion notice, i don't think that was necessary as of the mentioned revision) [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 16:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
+:I think the "Methods and Campaigns" section is still relevant as a header, but could be condensed into a paragraph or two. It shows the the tactics they use and why they were so effective in their aggressive activism. NPOV is key [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 16:42, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
+:I agree. There is also the fact that the current version repeats itself a lot. [[User:Lowspeedguy|Lowspeedguy]] ([[User talk:Lowspeedguy|talk]]) 18:37, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
+:I agree. More context can be added where needed, but the wiki should strive for conciseness in articles. As it is I believe the article wades too much into the weeds. — [[User:Sojourna|Sojourna]] ([[User talk:Sojourna|talk]]) 20:48, 8 September 2025 (UTC)