4 ms·
> This is a poor article since few readers will have any idea what point he is making. The author explicitly states that the text should be taken as an aseptic
by gioele 15y ago
> This is a poor article since few readers will have any idea what point he is making.
The author explicitly states that the text should be taken as an aseptic catalogue of facts:
> Below I present an incomplete list of PC games where the developers no longer receive payment for their creations. I wont offer an editorial, think of it what you will.
(emphasis mine)
- Dylan16807 15y agoClaiming lack of opinion in performing an action is nothing but a cop-out.
- nitrogen 15y agoSo what do you make of Wikipedia's NPOV policy? Surely there must be people out there providing information just for the sake of information.
- teamonkey 15y agoWikipedia has an opinion, which it clearly states. It wants to be a free encyclopedia, which it can only do if the information is nominally unbiased.
- droithomme 15y agoI agree, especially as a blog post with such a list. This seems dangerously close to a case where someone is listing the home addresses of animal lab researchers and whether they have been assassinated yet or not, then puts "this page for informational purposes only". It seems like the person might be advocating criminal activity, but then has some wishy washy words to cop out on taking responsibility for it. Stating what his purpose is in posting such a list would clear up a lot of questions. Maybe he is calling for more companies to establish royalty payments for artists and developers on the project, much as hollywood does for their projects. If that's the case it's a great idea! But who knows, it's just a list, being passed around the internet. It's certainly true that some are claiming it's an invitation for them to take the games without paying. That may even be the most common interpretation. If he didn't intend that, he should clear up the misunderstanding. Along with explain his sources other than to say they are secret.