So should I also run around like a headless chicken every time some company or person does or says something that seems suspect or that I dislike? How does that help anything?

I see the issue some seem to have, and respect their rights to voice such opinions. I just think some are overreacting to this.
(and that gog users in general seem to underreact to other things to do with gog and the site in general, while we're on the topic)

Anyhoo, i'm done with this reply chain as well(for now)...going off to game and such....later, all.

Segregating users already?

What next?
"Games for Galaxy users only?"
"Toilets for Galaxy users only?"
"Bus seats for Galaxy users only?"
"Voting rights for Galaxy users only?"

Yeah, I'm having a fun time imagining something like this on the site's description:
"Get our optional Galaxy online client now! You may choose an option not to use Galaxy, but by doing so you are giving us the permission to piss on you and clean our boots off you because our service is for Galaxy users only! Oh, and FCK DRM!"

They're called preorder(or other types of) bonuses. If you want such things you need to buy from a certain store, fulfill the requirements, etc.

That's how life works on all aspects....not everyone gets everything everyone else does. Unfortunate, but that's life.
(it'd be nice if we had star trek "cornucopia tech" and everyone could have anything and everything they want, but sadly that isn't so)

Yup, murder, treason, all bad things, big or small, are part of life, that's not new, cpt obvious.
But telling it won't protect baddies in judgements.
Maybe you're right that GOG fears nothing from the law by selling DRM, but it's still moraly bad.

I know right. "But, but, but it's only cosmetics, I just don't understand why people dislike DRM on a DRM-Free site, someone please explain that to me cuz I don't get it..." For those who are a bit 'slow' at joining the dots, Tallima spelt it out perfectly in 8 words in post 114 "But the slippery slope keeps getting more slippery" People buy the GOG version of these games to get away from this "go online for single player games" cr*p without having to waste hours researching multiple community DRM, 2nd class citizen, out of date builds, etc, lists trying to figure out what the unique "not DRM BUT" catch is with the offline installer version this time...

Let's pretend Galaxy wasn't created in 2014. Now let's add internet connection required (post-download) to access online "bonus content" into the offline installers. Same functional difference as now. Only the most half-witted village idiot here would seriously try and push a weak-ass excuse of "well, uh, it's a bonus reward for downloading downloaders! It's a positive thing! We're showing you how special you are vs those smelly people using GOG Downloader / gogrepo! You should be thanking us for reminding you of your specialness!..." without being laughed at into oblivion. It is ENTIRELY about push, push, pushing Galaxy until it's "default enough" that it's no longer optional over the longer term. Some are just a little more savvy in seeing the blatantly obvious than others...

I stated what I did to illustrate my point....of course people know that already.

I'm not "protecting" anyone.....I just don't see this as as big of a deal(unless perhaps worse things come to light) as others seem to.

(btw, i've been quite vocal about various things I dislike about GOG and CDPR in the past, so i'm not like some blind fan or anything)

At worst it's just business(as in done to make a buck and entice customers)....like a coffee shop giving a free cup of coffee to their customers for every 5 purchased vs another coffee shop not doing the same thing.

Now if it were something like companies using slave labor to make their products(like Nike) then i'd be more upset.

One thing I can't understand is why some of the most angry and aggressive users in this topic are those without a valid GOG profile :D

Well, whatever ;)

Just like Gwent was available drm free in the future right?

No idea who you're referring to but I thought it would be basic common sense that if someone doesn't use Galaxy, then they'll have no need for a Galaxy profile that would otherwise sit there incorrectly showing 0hrs played on every game for eternity...

Do you mean Gwent without Galaxy? I do not own the game, but I doubt it, because of the nature of that game by design.

That's because it is JUST cosmetics....and (imo) some people seem to be reacting like the site is turning sith levels of evil because of it.

If people want to complain, fine, but no one should rudely put down others that don't want to exhibit the same level of reaction as them.

The slippery slope is a fallacy for a reason.

Remember the GTA panic from decades ago, where some parents thought GTA turned people into killers? Or the satanic panic over rock music where some parents thought rock turned people to the devil? Did any of that happen(beyond maybe a few random exceptions)?

Telling the truth and explaining things does not equal making excuses.

Or it could be that some people(generally speaking) are distrustful and just want to suspect things and assume the worst with some things.

What is a a valid GOG profile? Do you think mine is not valid or what?

What do you mean by not valid? Like deactivated profile or what?

(just curious)

I do not believe for one second that you are stupid enough to not understand it's the trend that's the issue (from tweets like this to offline installers first "accidentally" remaining outdated and now being deliberately given less content, etc), not just the individual issues themselves. Likewise for your "fallacy", what happened next for the rallying defence of "but it's only cosmetics" for first-generation micro-transactions was literally the exact opposite of a fallacy. The "alarmists" who predicted pay-to-win, "time-saver", "surprise mechanics", etc, ended up a lot more correct than the doe eyed useful idiots who went around calling everyone critical of the obvious "distrustful negative nancy's always assuming the worst"...