Not sure who 'we' is but I was describing my own perspective - which I clearly stated. So I dont think I am part of your 'we'.

You are using 'should' - interpreting that as 'I want it so' (if you mean sth else with 'should' you may want to express it differently) my personal opinion is: GOG should indeed totally ignore that. I dont want GOG to censor (and thus incite self censorship too) their game selection based on such a thing. So GOG "should" indeed completely "overlook" that for their decision as to whether this game fits with GOG or not.

Them announcing it in China: I dont care. Them announcing it elsewhere: Yes they "should" do that like with other games too.
I dont know what you are trying to say? If GOG is a business making a business decision then "being upset" is a means to them chainging their behavior. So logically people who dont like what they did (and/or are doing) "should" indeed be upset. So from my POV - you are not making sense. (And of course there are plenty of other potential reasons for "being upset" but one is enough to question your question.)

Obviously a simple "we have delisted Devotion" would have been way better.

In addition to what I wrote above: There is the dishonesty part which people "are upset" about. Not all profit-oriented corporations go out there and claim they are the consumers best friend or something like that. GOG however did claim "honest communication" or similar stuff.

Not sure what you are trying to say here...

You said something about 'polarization' and 'black and white' - It appears you are painting like that yourself here...

Just received one of gog's awesome promo emails (probably didn't unsubscribe fast enough after claiming the freebie): "The clock is ticking! It's your last chance to make ENORMOUS savings! "

What gog apparently doesn't know is that I already made ENORMOUS savings... by not buying anything, lol.

Did you know that you could save even more by not buying when the game is full price, rather than when it is discounted?

The best savings can be had during the Interseasonal Unsale and, of course, the Luck of the Dutch Unsale.

You may only speak for yourself, but that doesn't change the fact that if it wasn't China and GOG, people wouldn't be talking about this a whole lot.

We're breaking down the causality chain that led to this. We're not at GOG yet.

Also, I don't buy into complete subjectivism. I think there are behavioral guidelines that maximise overall well being and happiness. And then, there is this. There is a place for "should".

If you're an individual, you can say whatever you like (well, not quite, but you certainly have a lot of leeway). Unless you're an important intellectual, people won't really care. If you represent a larger entity, you don't call a world leader a moron. If you do, don't get offended if there is blowback from people who support said leader. Cause and effect.

Being upset about a business being a business is like getting upset at the Earth for causing an Earthquake. It is quite pointless.

Gog will not change. They are what they have always been. You have just recently been made aware of this reality. That's all.

I can't say I'm happy with corporations having as much power as they do. However, I'm not upset at corporations. I'm annoyed at leaders and the electorate for being so easily swayed and not defending public interests better.

They do that all the time all over creation. That's called marketing. The bs in the corporate world is really really high. Its all about managing public image.

A lot of it probably should be illegal, but its not.

People scream about their rights and free speech being under threat. I'm saying this incident is rather contained. The impacted company is China's next door neighbor.

The day China will want to weight in on the menu on my neighbourhood restaurant being politically correct, we'll talk.

I'm not. I'm not far left. I'm more center left.

I don't hate corporations. I think they have a place in the world.

I would just prefer they'd be reigned in more.

Corporations didn't drop the ball. We did.

I dont know and I dont want to speculate. (And I dont agree with you calling your own speculation 'fact'. Especially given that you even imply that 'China caused it' trumps all over causes. This is a pretty strong statement. Like if it would have been Steam instead of presumably-CCP that GOG groveled too - you sure this wouldnt have caused an uproar too?).
There are lots of places for 'should'. 'Should' is perfectly fine if the context makes it clear what the goal is or if there is proper agreement for a common goal. In cases like here I dont see a clearly defined context (in terms of what to strive for) nor an agreed-upon goal. So this leaves the subjective interpretation.
I dont see your point. You are explaining how the world works? But for what purpose? What does that have to do with whether people "should" quietly submit to GOG doing what it does or whether they "shouldnt"?
I believe it is
a) Everyones 'divine right' to decide for themselves whether they are upset about this or not.
b) Everyones 'divine right' to believe whether this is entirely pointless or not.
c) Everyones 'divine right' to not care about whether the answer to b) is yes or no.

Also: There is a difference between what an egoist and an altruist would consider pointless. All kind of lobbying, voting, boycotting etc are from a purely egoistical perspective approximately pointless. From a (overly simple but still) mathematical purely altruistic perspective however you can "change the world" (for one person - distributed over all affected persons) with what you do or dont do.

Of course GOG is changing. Everything in this world is ever-changing.
Its inevitable that some are worse at this than others. You can interpret what I wrote as "GOG is worse than most others that I have seen".
A lot probably is illegal. See false/deceptive advertising laws and directives.
For me this incident is about GOG. And GOG has a lot of games here. So from the POV of GOGs forum posting: This incident is a big thing. Consequently calling for a boycott (etc) is a "natural" reaction for people who care about such things.
A misunderstanding? My impression was that you were painting the black/white onto others with the quoted statements.

So I see that this thread got zero attention from gog either. Not even a “use our optional client galaxy” response. Typical. Anyways, my wish list is growing a fair bit, must be over £100 of releases since nov last year which have now come and gone.

So your wishlist still works at the moment? I'm using my wishlist as 'games I would have bought eventually' list too. But I just encountered a new bug. I wanted to add FATE. But whenever I try to wishlist a game, GOG asks me to log in again. I am logged in (as proven by posting in the forum). I can access my account. But I can't put any more games on my wishlist.

When I follow the request to log in, it just drops me back to the start page and then, when I try to wishlist a game again, the same pop-up appears asking me to log in. Did anyone else encounter this bug?

Works fine here, tested on mobile.

I would like to join the second list. I will keep buying DRM free games on GOG, because I still believe this is the best store (for now) and it is the only store I buy games in (for now). But the DRM shenanigans GOG has been pulling lately, sure are worrisome and aren´t an invitation to optimism regarding the future of this site.

I´m well aware that GOG´s "suits" don´t give a shit about customers and that they have their own agendas, but a protest is better than doing nothing.

It wouldn’t add for me either earlier, said it was wishlistedin game page, but wasn’t on the list. It is now though.

Yep, wish list = direct loss of revenue.

Now the wishlist (or in other words, my personal boycott list) works again.

We speculate about things all the time with a reasonable amount of certainty. For example, if someone punches you in the face, you can be reasonably certain that he's mad at you without having to read his mind.

But sure, I'll throw you a bone here. The fact that GOG was impacted is most likely at least equally important to users here.

Valuable proper guidelines of behavior tend to be established at some point BEFORE they become the norm.

Just because a lot of people think its a good idea to do something doesn't mean it is.

However, in this case, I think you'd find a fair amount of people who will find that words like "idiot" and "moron" are in bad taste when referring to a live person, let alone a leader. I mean, you think that will lead to a more enlightened rapport with the sizeable following said leader has? Do you think they're gonna go "Oh yeah, you're right, he's idiot. Why didn't I see it before? OMG!!!" or do you think they'll just get upset and more polarized?

So yes, while it may lead to disagreements, I stand firmly behind my "should" here.

Intend without proper aim might give some people warm feelings, but it doesn't get things done.

I'm more of a humean than a khantian. Whatever prosperity and comfort we have, we don't own to good intent alone. We own to people executing their good intentions well.

Good intentions alone might give you some warm feelings about yourself and how good of a person you are. Its great self-gratification. Good execution is what will lay that brick that people will stand on going forward.

I'm very skeptical that this will steer GOG in any direction, but best of luck with that. For what its worth, I sympathize with the DRM-free angle.

Short of going political or coming with super dev-friendly drm-free alternatives to those corporate gaming platforms being established, I don't know what will.

On the bright side, copyrights do expire at some point. Can't talk about future games, but for existing games here, in a generation or two, if they are successfully preserved by some people, they can be made available to all.

That's something I suppose.

I don't quite see what point you are trying to push here. In the country I live in (US), freedom of speech and freedom from censorship are fundamental rights that are guaranteed by our constitution. I have the legal right to openly mock Chinese President xi jinping if I want to. Whether the Chinese (people or government) like that or not is completely irrelevant.

You are entitled to your opinion. However, by cancelling the release of Devotion, in my view GOG and China are conspiring to deny me my fundamental rights. That seems to be a good justification for a boycott, in my opinion.

Free speech doesn't mean you can say whatever you want say and not face any social/economic consequences.

Free speech doesn't mean it is prescribed behavior to say whatever you want to say without any regard for the consequences.

Free speech just means that, barring some exceptions (ex: If you tell someone to kill someone else and they do it, you are liable), you can say whatever you want to say and not go to jail.

As far as I can tell, nobody went to jail over this.

PS: That doesn't mean that it makes sense that you should be crucified for something you said 5 years ago or that the economical embargo on Devotion was a measured response. However, if you say offensive crap and offend people, yes, you will get burned in some way. You just won't go to jail over it.