You generalised to all porn games. Now you’re moving the goalposts again. This move by Visa/Mastercard has been affecting all NSFW games. Just like I don’t think it’s objectionable to have sex depicted in a movie, I don’t think it’s objectionable to have sex in a game. Adults can choose what content they consume. Payment processors should be forced to be common carriers.
I’m not moving anything. We have the same basic opinion. “Visa and MasterCard should not be allowed to leverage their monopolized position into a morality police of what we are allowed to buy or not”
I’m not here to debate you on what is you think is objectionable or not. I simply stated that I wish for people to not make this about porn. Because I don’t think that’s going to be helpful. You’re just giving ammunition for the opposition to use against you. It will take them 5 seconds to use it against you and reach an audience of 100 million. You will have to spend 50 minutes trying to counter, and it will only reach the 10 million that actually bothered to look into it.
How many times do we have to go down this road before anyone learn from it?
So what is the solution? Don’t give them that ammunition to begin with. Use other arguments. Arguments that can not be turned against you.
You don’t have to agree with that advice. That’s fine.
You generalised to all porn games. Now you’re moving the goalposts again. This move by Visa/Mastercard has been affecting all NSFW games. Just like I don’t think it’s objectionable to have sex depicted in a movie, I don’t think it’s objectionable to have sex in a game. Adults can choose what content they consume. Payment processors should be forced to be common carriers.
I’m not moving anything. We have the same basic opinion. “Visa and MasterCard should not be allowed to leverage their monopolized position into a morality police of what we are allowed to buy or not”
I’m not here to debate you on what is you think is objectionable or not. I simply stated that I wish for people to not make this about porn. Because I don’t think that’s going to be helpful. You’re just giving ammunition for the opposition to use against you. It will take them 5 seconds to use it against you and reach an audience of 100 million. You will have to spend 50 minutes trying to counter, and it will only reach the 10 million that actually bothered to look into it.
How many times do we have to go down this road before anyone learn from it?
So what is the solution? Don’t give them that ammunition to begin with. Use other arguments. Arguments that can not be turned against you.
You don’t have to agree with that advice. That’s fine.