I know you have said in other topics you don't really care for me to use big words, but please look up the words "connotation" and "denotation." They show what is going on here. AB2012 and I are using the connotation of the term "DRM-free" while you are using the denotation of the term "DRM-free". These are not one and the same (see next point).

I am using the term "anti-consumer" to push back against a certain attitude that it is ANYONE's responsibility but the dev, pub, and store, to ensure that the product works offline out of the box, if it is being sold "DRM-free". Customers are basing the standard of what is "DRM-free" off of the general understanding of the term (connotation), not the precise "dictionary" definition (denotation).

Btw, I do not generally think devs as malicious on this point (pubs and some other select storefronts can be a different story). My view is that trying to justify any sort of laziness, malice, or even unintended accidental oversight on the part of dev/pub/store which in turn prevents a game from being totally accessible offline with no end user hoops to jump through, is ultimately anti-consumer.

Ah! Good. I got your attention and now we are getting somewhere... It is almost as though when buying games from Steam (or Epic, EA, whatever take your pick), you have no expectation for it to work offline out-of-the-box. Or, put another way, your expectation is that those games will not work DRM-free offline out-of-the-box. Hopefully now it is clearer why people who buy DRM-free games, do expect the DRM-free games to work offline out-of-the-box.

I get pushing back against attitudes like that, but I never meant to infer I hold that stance/that attitude.

I said devs/companies should fix what they can and have time to, but that people should fix what they cannot or won't in some cases. That way, one can enjoy said product(especially in the case of older media that needs tweaks to run on older OSs that GOG hasn't done themselves and for which the support has dried up/stopped entirely) in the meantime or if support is not available any longer for a product/service.

Basically in some cases I advocate for the saying "Be the change you want to see happen".
============================
I feel I was more trying to explain rather than justify, but to each their own.

Also to me this is not that "major" to deserve the anti-consumer label(I understand I am not everyone and that not everyone feels that way, though)......to me it'd have to be intentionally done or done through a dev/company's gross negligence and have a major impact on a consumer.
============================
No, I do have such expectations for certain games(the older ones one can port to source ports/etc).....I just accept some might need a bit of love to get to work on one's system, what with how picky some games/media are on some systems due to differing setups/configs/etc.

I hold those responsible for things they should be held liable for and expect them to fix such, while still being able to be flexible enough to use tweaks/etc to consume said media as best I can in the meantime.

I GET that some want all or most games to work out of the box, though, and why thy want such.