No $ for you SoE.

Discussion in 'The Veterans' Lounge' started by Siddar, Jul 3, 2013.

  1. Toquillaw Augur

    If you think a 40% discount is wildly off from a 50% discount, when you can also buy the items themselves on sale ... then wait until whenever it suits you.

    My point is utterly obvious, and dead simple. The two are close enough, but if you feel that a small difference is the end of the world, then wait until later.

    But to call for boycotts, and to raise a stick is downright silly.

    We get it, you feel you need a 400% ultra awesome deal 110% of the time. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen all the time, so you must wait. Until then, I will enjoy what the sale got me.
    Tegila likes this.
  2. BoomWalker Augur

    Stop attacking me...I am not the OP....I just pointed out your 40% is the same as 100% argument is silly.

    I didn't call for a boycott...I didn't even see the 40% discount offer since I wasn't online during the time it was made public and available.

    Argue for not calling for boycotts...fine. Argue that 40% is the same / close enough (what is the new level tomorrow) to 100%...fine. Respect the responses that point out how silly it is to claim 40% and 100% are the same thing. Engage the folks that hold the position of calling for boycotts.

    Just don't try to ignore the $8.50 you need to pay extra for all the things that you buy for $42.50...because it is close enough.

    Calling for boycotts on a sale that reduces the total cost in real $$$ would appear silly. The reasons for this boycott would have to have merit to those wishing to follow the boycott request.

    Those that are undecided on boycotting or not...are probably not all that convinced with the argument that 40% is close enough to 100% to don't boycott. Even if your point is dead simple...yet flawed.

    Holding out for a value that is right for a player would appear to be the best solution for all involved.
  3. Siddar Augur

    I never advocated a Boycott I simply stated that I myself wasn't buying SC as I had intended to because of the corporate money gouging SoE was attempting.

    In the end Riot took half the money SoE would have gotten from me. There game cash sales are a lower % so they only got half what SoE would have with there standard double SC sale. The positive is there system has higher rewards for purchases and is much more predictable in regards points sales.

    SoE is creating great uncertainty with how there handling SC sales and will likely lose sales because of that uncertainty.
  4. Toquillaw Augur

    It is their position (and yours) that 40% and 50% discounts are wildly dissimilar. I simply point out (repeatedly) that this is simply not the case, that 40% discounts and 50% discounts are close enough to be considered a sale, and that people should take advantage of it accordingly.

    Your "40% and 100%" concept is fundamentally flawed since you are comparing a 40% discount with a 100% bonus of points and saying that 40% discount is nothing at all like 100%. It's a stupid argument because "100% more points" is identical to a 50% discount, which is remarkably close to a 40% discount. Certainly, and with no doubt whatsoever, a 40% discount is more like a 50% discount than it is a 0% discount, and so the call for people not to purchase is absurd.

    A 40% discount is actually a large discount. I think in hindsight, SOE spoiled things by ever offering a triple points day, clearly because that is the standard by which all sales are judged. I hope they do have double and triple points sale, but 40% discount is almost the same as double points anyway.

    Plus they also discount the items themselves within the various games.

    The issue is when people demand the maximum sales perks for each and every sale. When you demand that, then you lose out on number of times a sale is offered. I simply disagree with the OP, strongly, that ONLY the most extreme sales should ever be offered otherwise we should not buy the items.

    As such, I will absolutely voice my opinion about this especially since the "40% isn't 100%" argument is so deeply flawed.
    Tegila and EQbud like this.
  5. Tulisin_Dragonflame Augur

    This'd be where I'd jump in and say that gouging is pretty subjective, especially when it comes to an entirely luxury and zero-scarcity good like SC, but I think at this point in the thread that this is already pretty apparent.
    Tegila likes this.
  6. Djinnkitty Augur

    "What's that? You're selling $1.00 candy bars for $0.60 each? You price gouging cheapskates!"
    Geroblue and Tegila like this.
  7. BoomWalker Augur

    Again, you are putting me in with those holding a position on 40% discount being good/bad....yet I hold no position on it. Nowhere have I claimed that 40% and 50% are "wildly dissimilar" just that your math is wrong. Your math is still wrong...

    I didn't put the 40% is same as 100% as a was a quote of your post that I used..not something I suggested.

    Your position that 40% and 100% (or 50%) are the same flawed. The point has been made...your off by $8.50 which is nothing to be it. It is clear you don't get it still...they are not the same and yet you insist on making that claim...but now you have changed it to "almost the same" which is a softening of your position now that you realize how flawed your position was to begin with...

    You switched from 100% to the 50% in what appears to be an attempt to make it more appealing in your argument. Shrug. Play with the numbers as all you want...

    But you are still trying to prove that your point is valid....but it is horribly off...when it comes to 40% vs 100%...your post used those values...and it was shown to be wildly different...but you hold on to your strong position that it is the same thing...and undermine your argument against the OP.

    As for your strongly held position about the OP...great. I hold no position on the subject stated previously...I have plenty of SC and even missed the offer...but to have someone abuse the math in a sad attempt to prove a point...that will not stand...

    But you won't let it will try to spin this and spin it to get out of your flawed math and turn it against any and all in the feeble attempt to deflect your mistake. Have at it...but your math is wrong...

    And previously stated...arguing that 40% discount is not good enough...would need to have a strong position to convince people to agree for a boycott. Arguing against that call for a boycott would need to be reasonable as well...
  8. EQbud Augur

    This was 4 days ago now. Does it matter at all anymore?
  9. --Voodoo-- Augur

    Matters to those of us enjoying the hilarity of people trying to mathematically prove whether or not two sale points are "close". :)
    BoomWalker and Sinestra like this.
  10. Toquillaw Augur

    Ahhhh, so sorry! I see where I went wrong. Yes, I now humbly bow to your greater math skills. Clearly, my wife and I have more money than cents, as you have so aptly displayed.

    To show our humble apologies, we will give away large amounts of cash should SOE ever drop their 40% discount to the 60% (possibly even 70%) discount range, we will help your price point advantage by covering the difference ourselves and provide you with your double points. We will suck up the losses, because we were so terribly wrong, simply because I didn't see that a 0.0061 per SC cost was so different than a 0.00435 per SC. But, whatever it takes to help you get double points, we will see what we can do on future failed sales.

    I just really hope that the mean ole' Elidroth doesn't actually do a 60% off sale! We love where we live, we don't want to move.
  11. Toquillaw Augur

    Hey, be nice, we are about to lose our shirts here.
  12. Tobin Augur

    I wish I could have gotten the Wal-Mart cards - every time they go into stock someone in my area "steals" all the cards off the rack and then comes back later whenever SoE has double or triple SC sale. Since they have no value until checked out the inventory show the store has MANY in stock but none are on the shelve.
  13. Buktum Lorekeeper

    I blew about $50. People will find anything to complain about. I bet the OP has an RV that he drives to Black Friday sales 3 days before too.
  14. BoomWalker Augur

    Classic defensive response...humbly bow to someone who have proven your inability to discuss a topic. Your entire family can come to your defense on your money status all you want...

    Your math is wrong...still wrong...and you won't accept that point. As for the point that calling for a boycott or not...had you decided to discuss that on merit perhaps it would have been an interesting discussion. Rather...your position has devolved to you start name calling...classic defenseless position.

    Oh well...enjoy your money and math.
  15. Siddar Augur

    No I don't but it would cool if I did.
  16. Tobin Augur

    maybe we should lock this thread as calling for ANY boycott is against the rules. As for the math problems... who cares! just shut this down because it's beating a dead horse. And, as for the name of this thread - get real we all pay what we want to for the EQ we have. I spend SC for what I want. If I think it's too high a price - I'll wait for a sale or double/triple event, I would never call for "No $ for you SoE" that's just WRONG.
  17. Siddar Augur

    That makes no sense because no one in thread has called for a Boycott.

    One would think people accusing others of calling for a boycott are deliberately trying to derail thread into a discussion not related to the thread for the sole purpose of getting thread locked.
  18. Tobin Augur

    Well look at the name of this thread - It implies SoE should not get $ for its product and that is disparaging towards SoE therefor the thread is unworthy for discussing under the rules of this forum. Plus after reading lots of posts in the thread it has turned into a battle over who's math is right - that is also against forum rules as it is not productive at this point. Maybe you're right and I should have just reported the offending posts in this thread and the original post.
  19. Sinestra Augur

    This thread was derailed long ago and not by calls for boycotts or claims of others calling for boycotts.
  20. Siddar Augur

    The name of the thread implies I didn't give SoE $. It in no way implies I said for other to not give SoE $. The entire rest of post was a further explanation of what I meant. Then several times I have explained that I was in no way calling for a boycott but providing feedback.

    If you read something I had not intended into my original post then I can understand that even though my post doesn't in anyway support your position. There is a exchange of ideas in any discussion and people will take what is said and add onto that to more fully understand what is being discussed. Ive done so myself many times. Sometimes though those added suppositions are simply wrong. This is part of reason board has a reply feature so that those false suppositions can be corrected. There is no real cause to be upset that someone made a incorrect supposition based on something you wrote.

    However once you have corrected that incorrect supposition several times and person ether again repeats that supposition are a new person simply ignores the fact that you have already said that supposition was not correct you have arrived at point where supposition becomes instead a accusatory personal attack.

    In this case Ive said I in no way was calling for a boycott several times. Refusal to prove by my original statement that I was in fact a calling for a boycott and that i'm incorrect in saying it wasn't. That is infact the same as calling me a liar with out providing anything to prove that is the case. It becomes nearly impossible to have a discussion within the bounds of these boards rules when someone refuses to accept basic veracity of what other are posting.

    Simply entering any thread and calling others liars is a certain way to derail a thread from it original intent into a series personal attacks. Then claiming thread should be locked after doing so because of forum violation is hypocrisy of the first order.

Share This Page