YES!

gog thinks prohibiting their users from talking about other storefronts is going to put them out of the red. lol

(Mark this answer as solution, pls! I want the free rep points!)

Oh FFS, the OP has now drawn the wasps to this thread - despite having had the answer multiple times. No doubt they will mark one of the wasps as the answer before this thread gets locked bacuse some numpty will go into politics.

Believe me, your four post were accurate clear, respectful and fair. I do not understand why you should apologize for doing nothing wrong, in fact you did fine.

Time will tell you and will prove you that you were right.

That so-called "open vote" point is highly debatable.

Who chose the criteria for who was eligible to vote in the supposed vote? You did, yourself, unilaterally (i.e. you decided that all the votes of anyone who wasn't listed in the OP doesn't count...but that decision to exclude their votes was not itself voted upon, but rather, arbitrarily decided by yourself).

Likewise, who decided how long the vote was to take place for? Again, you did, yourself unilaterally.

Likewise, who decided the criteria by which the results of the vote would be deemed legitimate and valid? (i.e. there was no minimum required participation level of the arbitrarily-decided "eligible" voters, which there could have been...and there probably should have been a vote about that). Once again, you did, yourself, unilaterally.

Who decided what to change the boycott thread title to? Again, you did, yourself, unilaterally.

So making such unilateral decisions as to what the Boycott thread must be and not be makes you the unequivocal leader of it, IMO.

As for saying "the boycott isn't the topic of this thread:" but you yourself brought up, in this thread, the point where you claimed not to be the boycott leader.

Accordingly, my replies to you are a direct response to your own assertion about the boycott, which you initially brought up into this thread, not I.

Surely if you are allowed to assert that you are not the boycott leader in this thread, then others with contrary opinions to that are also allowed to assert that in their contrary opinions, you are the leader?

Otherwise, that would be censorship...which is something that the boycott is very against.

I totally agree with both, the thread "Zoom Platform?!?" OP is not Time4Tea but Fever_Discordia
but that was not the idea I expressed.
Let me blame a lack of format/writing and assume it as a personal failure considering
the annoying redundant writing style of mine, plenty of:
Options/synonyms
[-Enclosing- formats_to_group_ideas]
which goal is to avoid misunderstandings as the non native English speaker I am... and I failed

Anyway, Please let me retry. The changes made:
-Reused the original sentence words -entirely-
-Added 2 extra portions which are the 2 thread titles in concern enclosed between double quotes ("")
-Moved (quoted) "having Time4Tea as OP" to a better position on the sentence

Original version for easy comparison:
3) This concern/thread happens at the exact time the ZP thread gets locked having Time4Tea as OP

The enhanced version:
3) This concern/thread "Is talking about other game stores now prohibited?" having Time4Tea as OP
happens at the exact time the ZP thread "Zoom Platform?!?" gets locked

As you may read, your comments are correct while you now may agree mine is too

-----------
Some clarifications I consider important -in my personal case-:
-Is not the same to point out a COI than to -judge- a COI
-I am not interested on -judging- your COI.
In such case, a verdict would be relevant if prosecuting you from material gains.
And unless yourself confess something like that. Honestly, I don't care
-I am not interested to participate on the topic of this thread -while- the COI you are into.
Bail out yourself from 2 of the 3 facts I cite and you will liberate yourself from the COI.
Just for the sake of mentioning -quick and totally simplistic yet silly- ideas:
a) Quit as the GOG boycott leader
b) Set distance from ZP
c) Quit being the OP of "Is talking about other game stores now prohibited?". In other words, Let someone else take the initiative creating a thread for the concern

After 2 of those, you will get my whole attention & support.
Again, not because with those -you served a sentence- (or any other evil interpretation you may make)

Now, let me answer to your reply

Please let me recapitulate on this as I dont want to be considered an opportunistic attacker
I timely expressed my concern about it exactly here (19Mar2022):
gog.com/forum/general/boycotting_gog_2021/post5218
Yes, I confess it is one of the few posts of mine on the whole forum I've edited & deleted.
Basically because:
a) At that date I was not part anymore of your Boycott lists
Joined from 23Sep2021 until 24Nov2021 (post2896 & post3351 for reference)
b) Not being part of it, did not give me any clear right/value to the matter
c) I regretted the next day of posting and not getting a reply from you but somebody else.
Frome there we can rescue part of my deleted post:
gog.com/forum/general/boycotting_gog_2021/post5221

Anyway, I consider ARD describes my concern very well on
For honesty sake I believe the issue was not solved but by the reasons I already
gave, wasn't my business. But with your today's text It becomes relevant if you really attempt to pursue everyone's benefit.

I am affraid you are not understanding.
Let me re-emphasize: You are under a COI because
-this 3 facts are happening right now at the same time-:
1) You lead/represent the GOG boycott
2) You are a ZP Discord moderator
3) You are the OP of this thread

I am not limiting your COI to the boycott thread only,
but a general Conflict Of Interest to:
a) Represent a list of unsatisfied customers with a list of legitimate complaints and demands
(That you made and you ran with a pseudo-voting, IMO by the way)
b) And at the same time Being associated to ZP to a degree deeper than any regular customer there
(Not every ZP customer is one of their Discord moderators. At least not me)
c) And at the same time -you- T4T be the OP defending/promoting ZP in such passionate/active way
to the point to create this thread questioning why.

Honestly, I totally perceive your are in a full dark blindness with your COI thing
I wish you take a deep breath, present the -whole situation- to people -you trust-
and ask for point of view. You need to get out of there

Meanwhile, I repeat: I fully stop any comment/clarification/answer on this matters.
Enough of time invested on it.

In relation to your post here:
https://www.gog.com/forum/general/boycotting_gog_2021/post5619

I thought I was quite clear in the report thread as to why I reported your boycott thread. To put it bluntly, you are That Guy who walks into any store and yells at the actual paying customers to shop elsewhere.

If you have any questions, you may private message me. I'm actually quite friendly. :) Please be mindful that because I just reported your thread without engaging in any debates first that I have zero interest in debates.


/ᐠ_ ꞈ _ᐟ\ɴʏᴀ~
Cat thinks that debates are boring.

So at the end of the day, T4T is causing more harm to ZOOM image than good?

Because it went away from what it was supposed to be focused on, and just became an ongoing argument and attack.

And while you can blame Time4Tea for a few things, he was certainly ganged up on, and like I said, baggage from Discord was brought here, and the whole thread became negative.

I asked folk to consider and stop, and they didn't, and so the thread was locked. To my mind that is deliberate sabotage.

Yes you are the leader.
Starting something and maintaining it means leading it.
(Now I'm awaiting your reply, where you ask me whether I deem a secretary general of any organisation that was founded 150 years ago by another person, also a "leader"...come on - we both know that's your usual shtick - don't hold back)

See, your constant blame shifting, and re-defining the meaning of words long defined ("well, my definition of what boycott means, is not the rest of the world's definition of boycott" - remember that?), or your smug grin when you "thank" users who have a different opinion than yours, for "keeping this thread on page one of General Discussion, and therefore relevant", whenever they say something which you can't dispute, doesn't escape the more intelligent part of GOG's userbase.

Completely irrelevant.
If you were as impartial as you always claim to be, you would have given up the boycott thread as soon as you became a Z mod.
But that wouldn't serve your agenda, of course.

See? again - "it's not me, it's 100 others in whose names I speak...how can you blame me for being the mouthpiece of other's legitimate complaints? Is there no free speech anymore?
It's not my fault, that GOG elicits so much criticism."
See? That's where your re-defined meaning of a boycott comes into play:
"I don't want to harm GOG - I simply declared that I will not buy any games here anymore, and that I welcome anyone who shares that sentiment."

If you don't buy products from a store (aka: if you boycott said store!) - you hurt that store financially.

That's the whole point of boycotting a store: to hurt the store financially as a means to force said store to comply to one's demands.

That's what you're doing.
And no matter how often you state: "well, that's not MY definition of a boycott", doesn't change anything.

It's the abusive spouse's argument:
"see, what you make me do? If you would do what I say you have to do, I wouldn't be forced to punish you!"

And again: blame shifting and false accusations.
That seems to be all that you've got left now.

So we have established Time4Tea likes Zoom Platform more than GOG.

Is he working for them? Maybe. I could say that there are several people in this thread that are employed by GOG to slander Time4Tea so that GOG doesn't look like the bad guy for trying to stifle discussion of viable alternatives. Maybe.

Stop spamming the forums in any case.

Absolutely, no storefront should be singled out when references to it, links, etc, all flow naturally amongst peers invested in genuine discussion carried out in good faith. On the other hand when employees/affiliates of any given platform adopt a disrespectful, disingenuous, disruptive, "smart-ass" demeanor on someone else's home then their behavior should absolutely be highlighted.

And, seriously, now all of a sudden you're playing coy and trying to distance yourself from the capacity of "leader" of that other thread ? Is it my toon prefacing the op or is it yours ? Who's in there riling up the folks, who for some unfathomable reason served themselves up as pawns to be used by you, with "who's with me?'s" calls to arms ?

You have been given, by gog's staff, the latitude that you know you would not have been granted anywhere else ON THE PLANET, no other storefront would have put up with this circus on a forum, social media, wherever. Yet you are the same person that leads a thread listing a myriad of naïve and/or hypocritical reasons as to why folks in here should not shop at gog and should instead shop at "your" shop and "censorship", of all things, actually gets top billing.

Sort out the mess concerning the multiple capacities in which you present yourself before this community. The overlap is, obviously, not a problem, the problem is what you're dong with it. I'm afraid until you sort it out i can not, i will not, acknowledge you as a peer.

1) So much drama. Time4tea has his opinions on what a good DRM-free store should be doing. He tries to pressure one shop into doing it, he supports another for doing it. It's not contradictory. I doubt that other shop's success is its own finality, in his eyes. But apparently interpreting it as such seems convenient for many people. The question should only be : does he have double standards about his criteria.

2) Yep, GOG since recently frowns on the evocation of concurrent shops, and the mods have been rampaging the forum, shutting down any discussion that seemed to open a window on the concurrence. It's become a taboo. It's a commercial war, and, well, it's as lame and logical, I guess, as all commercial wars. And that's it.

3) Bleh. Frankly, none of that is very important.

1) you know what they say about opinions? They are like assholes - everyone has one.
Having an opinion doesn't mean much on its own.
Feel free to have as many opinions, on as many topics, as you want - that doesn't mean that anyone has to share those opinions.

2) to pressure someone is not the same as to support someone.
See, I can support my girlfriend in having an active sex life - or I can pressure her into having one...that's not the same.

3) For the outcome it may not be contradictory - and if the outcome is all you care for, sure...then you'll see nothing contradictory in the two ways leading to it.
But if you have to pressure someone in doing something that you want...I would say that is quite contradictory to supporting someone, who is willing to do what you want, anyway.

Edit: typo "tow" instead of "two"

You don't agree with someone and insinuate they're an arsehole and a rapist.

Wtf.

Close this thread too please.

Mods are as much to blame here but the ganging up here by GOG fanboys is also despicable here.

Nope. That's just your personal takeaway from my post.

I have no control over what you're thinking.