Talk:Collective Shout: Difference between revisions
→Relevancy to CRW: Reply |
→Final argument, regardless of outcome: new section |
||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
::And to add: The group ''is'' one of the main parties to the controversy regardless of one's position on the subject. It's not as though Collective Shout's involvement is merely incidental when it was pressure ''from them'' that led to Mastercard, Visa, and PayPal suddenly caring a lot more about video games based around sexual violence or otherwise deeply disturbing themes. — [[User:Sojourna|Sojourna]] ([[User talk:Sojourna|talk]]) 00:23, 6 September 2025 (UTC) | ::And to add: The group ''is'' one of the main parties to the controversy regardless of one's position on the subject. It's not as though Collective Shout's involvement is merely incidental when it was pressure ''from them'' that led to Mastercard, Visa, and PayPal suddenly caring a lot more about video games based around sexual violence or otherwise deeply disturbing themes. — [[User:Sojourna|Sojourna]] ([[User talk:Sojourna|talk]]) 00:23, 6 September 2025 (UTC) | ||
:::I am not saying their involvement was incidental, I'm saying that this talk page is larger than an article on CS's systemic anti-consumer practices could be. I started an article about the DeIndexing, tell me what you think. [[User:DzLamme|DzLD]] ([[User talk:DzLamme|talk]]) 00:44, 6 September 2025 (UTC) | :::I am not saying their involvement was incidental, I'm saying that this talk page is larger than an article on CS's systemic anti-consumer practices could be. I started an article about the DeIndexing, tell me what you think. [[User:DzLamme|DzLD]] ([[User talk:DzLamme|talk]]) 00:44, 6 September 2025 (UTC) | ||
== Final argument, regardless of outcome == | |||
@[[User:Mr Pollo|Mr Pollo]] | |||
: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) | |||