|
Asimo posted:You're right, it is, should've thought that one out better. A better example would be some dingy guy on a street corner corner with a "YOUR CHARITY HERE" here sign that's just a bumper sticker on cardboard, asking for donations. When asked if they're actually related to the charity, they go, "Oh of course not, but I guarantee it's all going to the right place for a good cause!!" I mean, it's 100% true in this case, but can you at least see why maybe the actual charity in question would be hesitant about encouraging this? Especially when the news starts talking about that guy on the corner they've never met or interacted with as being part of your organization? You have to stop doing the "Man I am so right" thing when you are so, so wrong. You're comparing an obviously above-board charity drive with a hobo on the street. Do you not know the difference between a guy asking for handouts and a charity drive? The latter happen all the time, sanctioned or no. The Red Cross never shut down my schools' bake sale because they were afraid of being associated with a Catholic institution. But please, tell me all about how business works 
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:18 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2013 14:31 |
|
|
SynthOrange posted:I skimmed the last few pages because it's been going a mile a minute, but what's this? It was posted a few hours ago. It's an editor writing a headline that's disconnected with the text?
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:18 |
|
|
Calantus posted:Childs Play itself is a political statement refuting the stereotype that gamers are cretins. The origin: http://penny-arcade.com/2003/11/24/childs-play The link from the first sentence of the origin post: http://web.archive.org/web/20031205...18/17748407.cfm
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:18 |
|
|
Grey Fox V2 posted:Phenomenally stupid. I said "You can understand why people think that" and not "This is definitely what is happening". I don't think Penny Arcade influenced Childs Play to refuse donations and I don't think Penny Arcade were paid to give Mass Effect a positive write up. I'm saying that due to the past-working relationship Penny Arcade and Bioware have had (PA drew comics for their games), their reaction to the controversy and this new reaction from Childs Play, which is suprising, it's not shocking that some people are thinking up conspiracy theories.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:19 |
|
|
afflictionwisp posted:You can send your money wherever you want to. My point is that there is no reason to be dissatisfied with the charity itself. They did nothing wrong and are only very loosely involved to begin with. I'm sorry but refusing further donations is a pretty big deal in my book.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:19 |
|
|
It's kind of annoying how basically every mainstream news source that's picked this up is focusing on the "They don't like that the endings are sad" thing. It's not that they're depressing that's the problem. It's that they're bad. On the plus side they do seem to have the lack of choice problem in there pretty often.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:19 |
|
|
SynthOrange posted:I skimmed the last few pages because it's been going a mile a minute, but what's this? It was posted a few hours ago. It looks like the article is kind of wrong, actually. They haven't confirmed anything about changing the endings, though as quoted, they are working on clarifying some of it. What that means, who knows? But it's not confirmation of a change.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:19 |
|
|
briktal posted:The Penny Arcade guys donated $10,000 to the Entertainment Software Association Foundation on Jack Thompson's behalf.  But they can also do whatever they want with their brand - and a charity is a brand, as being able to use it and leverage it is how they get money for a cause - and making it clear they aren't officially associated with a particular group is part of that.It isn't some grand loving conspiracy or them sucking off EA's dick or whatever the gently caress. And people can still donate directly to them (or to whoever else) instead. 
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:21 |
|
|
Revenant Threshold posted:I think you're being somewhat miserly with our knowledge. We know a big pile of money's been raised, we know that they've said no thanks for whatever reason (they've given a reason, of course, but that doesn't mean it's true), we know the opinions of the main PA guys as to the ruckus, we know that Child's Play's been linked in, well, quite a few notable journalistic sources by now, and been named or alluded to in quite a lot of others. My point is that nobody here knows what is involved with running a charity and reducing it to "they're not accepting donations! clearly, they are idiots" is really naive and stupid. Again, my viewpoint is that I tend to believe that these guys know what they're doing, but of course I don't know for sure and it could turn out to be a bad decision. However, I also am not saying with absolute certainty that what they're doing is smart or dumb, but there are tons of here flipping out over how terrible a decision it does without knowing both the majority of the facts of the situation, and the sort of things that a charity needs to do to prosper and grow.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:21 |
|
God I fucking love Diablo 3 gold, it even paid for this shitty title
|
Newspaper article posted:"It just crushes your soul," campaigner Sebastian Sobczyk told The Times. "It's like if 'Star Wars' ended with the deaths of Luke Skywalker, Han Solo and Princess Leia. For the love of God, give us a nice ending." It would probably make it harder for unrelated people to get the story, but I wish they'd focused on the awfulness of it over the sadness. Like someone's earlier analogy of instead of a final confrontation and redemption, Darth Vader just turns out to have been Jar Jar Binks the whole time. And THEN everybody dies.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:22 |
|
|
Asimo posted:Actually I'm not very fond of child's play, and a lot of major charities have pretty... questionable goals. Salvation Army, anyone? No one's claimed Child's Play shouldn't be 'allowed' to do what they've done. They're claiming it's a stupid thing to do. Stop moving the goalposts.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:22 |
|
|
Benjamin Black posted:I'm sorry but refusing further donations is a pretty big deal in my book. That's their prerogative. If you think them trying to avoid being seen as a part of a movement is a huge moral failing, then don't donate to them again.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:23 |
|
|
Mr.Unique-Name posted:That's there prerogative. If you think them trying to avoid being seen as a part of a movement is a huge moral failing, then don't donate to them again. I think them turning down money for sick kids when they're a charity for sick kids is a pretty huge moral failing.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:23 |
|
|
A children's charity stops accepting donations because of a mistaken association with a movement by fans of a video game to have the developers change the ending of said video game possibly because the charity is associated with a video game review site that disagrees with the fan movement to change the ending of a video game. We are truly though the looking glass now.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:23 |
|
|
Mr.Unique-Name posted:That's there prerogative. If you think them trying to avoid being seen as a part of a movement is a huge moral failing, then don't donate to them again. ...That's exactly what he said he was doing in the first place
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:23 |
|
|
SynthOrange posted:I skimmed the last few pages because it's been going a mile a minute, but what's this? It was posted a few hours ago. The Australian is a bizarre publication that intersperses quite good journalism between bizarre right wing fantasies. This appears to be one of the more retarded moments.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:24 |
|
|
I love how, apparently, Buzz Aldrin has no problem detailing Shepard's sexcapades, violence, and language to his grandchild. Edit: "Tell me another story about The Shepard" indeed.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:24 |
|
|
Lemming posted:My point is that nobody here knows what is involved with running a charity and reducing it to "they're not accepting donations! clearly, they are idiots" is really naive and stupid. Again, my viewpoint is that I tend to believe that these guys know what they're doing, but of course I don't know for sure and it could turn out to be a bad decision. However, I also am not saying with absolute certainty that what they're doing is smart or dumb, but there are tons of here flipping out over how terrible a decision it does without knowing both the majority of the facts of the situation, and the sort of things that a charity needs to do to prosper and grow. I notice you're spewing this same nonsense over on PA too! Maybe not do that so much, because you look like an imbecile just waving your arms around and going "but how can any of you knooooow"
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:24 |
|
|
Revenant Threshold posted:It's kind of annoying how basically every mainstream news source that's picked this up is focusing on the "They don't like that the endings are sad" thing. It's not that they're depressing that's the problem. It's that they're bad. It is annoying. If the ending was good, I would not care if it was a happy or sad ending. Not to mention the lack of choices which was what they promised in the first place.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:24 |
|
|
Mr.Unique-Name posted:That's their prerogative. If you think them trying to avoid being seen as a part of a movement is a huge moral failing, then don't donate to them again. TheJoker138 posted:...That's exactly what he said he was doing in the first place And we've come full circle.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:24 |
|
|
Dan Didio posted:I think them turning down money for sick kids when they're a charity for sick kids is a pretty huge moral failing. They aren't turning down all donations. They're turning down donations through a specific vector. You can still donate and say you did it for RTM. Edit: Benjamin Black posted:And we've come full circle. I missed that, sorry. My rage is blinding me.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:25 |
|
|
Jeff Gerstmann made some quip about how if EA/Bioware really did hold back a 'good' ending to charge people for it later and if the fans support that decision then 'video games are over'. He was right, it turns out, but for the wrong reasons. Mr.Unique-Name posted:They aren't turning down all donations. I didn't say they were, so thanks. You've already seen in this thread that this decision is going to lose them donations, hell you just called someone out for it and there's no way decentralizing the donation stream from the 'retake' group won't affect donations.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:25 |
|
|
I'm not disputing that Child's Play made a boneheaded decision on a matter that could have been resolved by a simple statement, maybe even made a contrary suggestion, "Hey, how about you set up a "We love Mass Effect 3" donation drive and you both can fight it out for a good cause?" or whatever. Yeah, that was dumb. At the same time, I'm still not really seeing the hundreds of past "gamers are really and genuinely angry because they had a lot of emotional investment in this game, and they have a right to be" posts really meshing with more recent dozens of "heh, literally no one really cares about this" posts. I'm sure, or at least I'd like to think, that most people involved in the debate aren't as worked up as they would be over literal life and death stuff, but a whole lot of people in this thread and elsewhere have definitely not been "eh, it's just a game."
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:26 |
|
|
Mr.Unique-Name posted:They aren't turning down all donations. They're turning down donations through a specific vector.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:27 |
|
|
Lemming posted:My point is that nobody here knows what is involved with running a charity and reducing it to "they're not accepting donations! clearly, they are idiots" is really naive and stupid. Again, my viewpoint is that I tend to believe that these guys know what they're doing, but of course I don't know for sure and it could turn out to be a bad decision. However, I also am not saying with absolute certainty that what they're doing is smart or dumb, but there are tons of here flipping out over how terrible a decision it does without knowing both the majority of the facts of the situation, and the sort of things that a charity needs to do to prosper and grow. I think the problem is that, even if we say that they're entirely correct and right to drop future donations of the quality of 80k, that means that they see some value source which is worth more to them than that, plus worth taking the hit from the bad publicity and negative reactions to this move. It's a pretty big ask, essentially; it's a notable sum and a notable loss of face, which are the two things that a charity is basically about. They might well have a reason - but it would have to be a drat good reason.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:27 |
|
|
Dan Didio posted:No one's claimed Child's Play shouldn't be 'allowed' to do what they've done. They're claiming it's a stupid thing to do. Stop moving the goalposts. But the actual, direct response from Child's Play to be cautious and tell them to ratchet it back a bit is, in fact, perfectly understandable. That's the point! It's the as-yet-unseen particulars that would show whether it was done dumbly, and legal trademark bullshit is always going to look weird from an outsider perspective even when it's perfectly serene and resolved amicably.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:29 |
|
|
Benjamin Black posted:What does that say about them that they're refusing donations from a certain cause? Depends on the cause, right? Retake Mass Effect is completely harmless, yet they're pulling the plug on it. I think it's outrageous. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I mean I agree that the movement is harmless, just not that their choice is outrageous. I'll agree it probably isn't terribly smart, also. Edit: Tangentially, why isn't Child's Play listed on Charity Watch, or is it under a different name? Mr.Unique-Name fucked around with this message at Mar 23, 2012 around 02:35 |
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:29 |
|
|
chrisf posted:The origin: http://penny-arcade.com/2003/11/24/childs-play Awesome, thanks. As soon as I posted that I thought someone is going to ask for proof and then I'd have to track that poo poo down. But now I don't have to. 
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:30 |
|
|
Benjamin Black posted:And we've come full circle. Yeah, gotta say that if you're willing to admit "if you think this is a failing then don't donate to them" then the way is open for people to come here and try and make the case that this sort of failing should convince you to donate to someone else instead. It's sort of how the argument "That's just your opinion" is really a setup for someone to try and convince others of its validity.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:31 |
|
|
mastajake posted:I love how, apparently, Buzz Aldrin has no problem detailing Shepard's sexcapades, violence, and language to his grandchild. "Uh...that's a story for another time kid."
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:33 |
|
|
Oxxidation posted:I notice you're spewing this same nonsense over on PA too! Maybe not do that so much, because you look like an imbecile just waving your arms around and going "but how can any of you knooooow" Thank you for teaching me the value of making a judgment of a situation without knowing all of the facts. Truly, this is the most important lesson anyone could ever learn.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:34 |
|
|
Lemming posted:My point is that nobody here knows what is involved with running a charity and reducing it to "they're not accepting donations! clearly, they are idiots" is really naive and stupid. Again, my viewpoint is that I tend to believe that these guys know what they're doing, but of course I don't know for sure and it could turn out to be a bad decision. However, I also am not saying with absolute certainty that what they're doing is smart or dumb, but there are tons of here flipping out over how terrible a decision it does without knowing both the majority of the facts of the situation, and the sort of things that a charity needs to do to prosper and grow. As someone who sits on the board of a non profit org, I can totally understand why they may have decided to pull out of supporting retake mass effect - it could damage their long term brand and associate them with a cause that large elements of mainstream media are now reporting on. The fallout of that could be either positive or extremely negative in the long run and sometimes it's worth it to just step back and move away from it. BUT. 1. retake mass effect is not exactly a white power group throwing money at a charity or some sort of dubious cause that's really embarassing and gross to accept money from. 2. it's a lot of freaking money and non profits/charities and orgs really do start to count the pennies when it comes to finances, budgeting and the like (unless you had some rich white benefactor throw a million or two at you at the inception of your company, then you live off the interest). I can't believe they're wanting to wave away further cash after the $80,000 mark, it seems ridiculous to me. it's a strange decision, and I can sort of see how they ended up at it, but it's not where I would have personally gone. Cthulhu Dreams posted:The Australian is a bizarre publication that intersperses quite good journalism between bizarre right wing fantasies. This appears to be one of the more retarded moments. stories like this generally get re-edited shortly after being put up and made more factual. The joys of the 24/7 news cycle.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:35 |
|
|
I got a response back from Child's Play.quote:On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Jamie Dillion
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:36 |
|
|
Grey Fox V2 posted:And Mass Effect 3 will have 17 different endings and if people knew what Bioware had in store they would hold onto their copies forever. Actions speak louder then words and every action from Child's Play and Penny Arcade has been "We want you guys to stop because we disagree" Whatever the reason for this decision it is really drat stupid and just hurts them. If they wanted to be neutral in all this they should of just said "We do not support any causes or movements our donators may or may not belong to. We support one cause and that is the children." Really it's that simple.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:38 |
|
|
Benjamin Black posted:I got a response back from Child's Play. But I agree, that should be a public statement.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:39 |
|
|
mastajake posted:I love how, apparently, Buzz Aldrin has no problem detailing Shepard's sexcapades, violence, and language to his grandchild. "And the Shepard wasn't satisfied with his reward, so the consort had sex with the Shepard as Tali and Ashley watched. My sweet."
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:39 |
|
|
Also, for fun, the 'donation in Jack Thompson's name' story: http://www.penny-arcade.com/2005/10/17/
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:41 |
|
|
Another response:quote:On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Jamie Dillion So, yes, please, upvote the reddit post.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:42 |
|
|
Benjamin Black posted:I got a response back from Child's Play. It just seems like they're more concerned with the implications that a charity is being used to help advertise some other cause, which is a pretty legitimate concern for any charity. They aren't 'shutting down' donations from people who support RTM. I'm pretty sure they just don't want it done in the name of some cause, period. You can still support RTM and donate to ANY charity you drat well please, post what you've done on their facebook or whatever.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:42 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2013 14:31 |
|
|
Benjamin Black posted:I got a response back from Child's Play. I know I was defending their decision not 20 minutes ago but  SLIPPERY SLOPE is probably not the right term to use.Just saying they don't want to be directly associated with any external movement/group would be better, in my opinion.
|
| # ? Mar 23, 2012 02:42 |
|
