Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
UK Gambling Commission pronounces loot boxes ‘not gambling’
-
Reistr_the_Unbroken✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Or blind bags and boxes, which certainly don’t have a card in themKiralyn2000 wrote: »Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »Bubblegum baseball cards do exactly what you describe above.
No, they don't, that is a total misrepresentation.
When you buy bubblegum you are technically buying bubblegum, to eat, that it also has cards is a bonus.
That is you get something tangible and fixed in value EVERY time, and there are baseball cards that may have varying value.
Gambling Crates have no "fixed item every time" of a "fixed value".
Everything is a gamble.
Moreover, unlike other forms of gambling, the odds of getting X or Y are not known.
All The Best
How about when you buy a pack of Magic cards? No bubblegum in there.
(Or, for extra bonus points, how about when you buy a pack of Magic cards from an old mid-90's set. For $3000. Because the rare card in that pack might be one of the ones worth $10k+.)
0 -
Skwor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Well we're screwed.
Since self control isn't a thing.
Ah well.
Plus the fact more and more people have no ability to think critically anymore. All that seems to matter is how they "feel" about a thing, not what the actual reasoning or logic may be. This results in opinion equated with fact and no understanding that words matter not because of how they make you feel but because they actually mean something. As such words in a legal sense lead to an ability to control actions, not through bad feelings but the power of an agency via enforcement. Such people have no clue that vagaries in legal language then lead to handing over near absolute power to soulless governments which will absolutely abuse it and use it to strip individual freedoms.6 -
Kalante✭✭✭✭✭
✭I like how this thread doesn't get locked after one page due to "bashing comments. Since this thread has derailed and is no longer constructively discussing the topic" just like the other threads calling them out on their predatory crown crate practice.0 -
therift✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭.Well we're screwed.
Since self control isn't a thing.
Ah well.
Plus the fact more and more people have no ability to think critically anymore. All that seems to matter is how they "feel" about a thing, not what the actual reasoning or logic may be. This results in opinion equated with fact and no understanding that words matter not because of how they make you feel but because they actually mean something. As such words in a legal sense lead to an ability to control actions, not through bad feelings but the power of an agency via enforcement. Such people have no clue that vagaries in legal language then lead to handing over near absolute power to soulless governments which will absolutely abuse it and use it to strip individual freedoms.
Because we have built a society that has been taught (at all ages) to Like or not, Thumb Up or Thumb Down, Tweet and Retweet, Swipe Left or Swipe Right, Share, Agree, Insightful, Awesome, etc all based on a gut reaction to a social medium post in which immediate reaction is rewarded.
2 -
Monte_Cristo✭✭✭✭✭
✭They can just slap 'gamble responsibly' on the loading screen and it'll be fine in Australia.0 -
Androconium✭✭✭✭✭
✭Monte_Cristo wrote: »They can just slap 'gamble responsibly' on the loading screen and it'll be fine in Australia.
The irony capital.0 -
Androconium✭✭✭✭✭
✭randomkeyhits wrote: »Seems like gambling to me. You play at a game of chance in the hopes of obtaining prizes. That's essentially what gambling is.
Your generalization is incorrect, because you have generalized. Law uses precision language - the mumbo-jumbo legalese we all sneer at - because imprecision can have deleterious unintended consequences.
The three elements of gambling are Prize, Chance, and Consideration. Consideration has a precise legal definition that is just as important as Prize and Chance. Under your generalization, a vast amount of innocuous activity would become unlawful.
I'm with Jeremy on this, a gamble is taking a risk, nothing more. Risk is inherent in many things in many different degrees so the law systems come up with a definition of licensable gambling as it is impossible to legislate for all forms of gambling nor is it appropriate.
Its this arguing over its gambling, its not gambling which is frustrating as the actual argument is whether something is, or should be, a licensable form of gambling with all the regulations and controls that ensue.
I'm also agreeing with you too in saying that and there are things which you know, maybe should be considered unlawful, especially if they can be shown to be predatory, ie having a just reason to be considered for regulation.
Using you definition as a legal one would mean switching jobs, having children, driving a car all qualify as gambling becuase they all involve taking a risk. Therefore they would all need to be oversighted by the state gambling regulators. It is not just semantics, with the law words matter, alot!Well we're screwed.
Since self control isn't a thing.
Ah well.
Plus the fact more and more people have no ability to think critically anymore. All that seems to matter is how they "feel" about a thing, not what the actual reasoning or logic may be. This results in opinion equated with fact and no understanding that words matter not because of how they make you feel but because they actually mean something. As such words in a legal sense lead to an ability to control actions, not through bad feelings but the power of an agency via enforcement. Such people have no clue that vagaries in legal language then lead to handing over near absolute power to soulless governments which will absolutely abuse it and use it to strip individual freedoms.
You have no understanding of democracy or the process of government.
Have you personally written a letter either of complaint or support, in relation the Crown Store Crates to your branch of government that this issue falls under? If not then you choose to ignore all the freedoms that you so fervently defend.
The only group that can FORCE change on this issue, is a government. Bethesda may take the (intelligible) content from this discussion along with views from similar discussions around the world, and review their legal and/or moral responsibility on this issue.
They then may make an unforced change of their own volition. If not we go running to Nanny (the Government) who will either hit them with the rolling pin (legislation); or tell us to stop being tattle-tales (they are within their rights).
Government agencies don't wake up one morning and say "let's talk Bethesda loot boxes". They will 'talk loot boxes' when they have 2000 (for example) letters complaining about them.
No democratic government will sit on an issue that the public is complaining about. They will at least discuss it at some level. Sitting governments NEVER like being embarrassed.
0 -
Taloros✭✭✭✭Androconium wrote: »No democratic government will sit on an issue that the public is complaining about.
Well, let's they shouldn't do that. I think we could all name some issues that do get ignored, no matter the letters.
But the intent of your post is correct, of course.
Complaing on the forums -> does little.
Writing letter to government/parliament/king/supreme ruler -> probably doesn't do much more, but at least has the potential.0 -
Gandrhulf_Harbard✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »
You really have no idea about the law or legal reasoning do you?
Unfortunately for you I do, that is why I am poking holes in your ignorant argument so easily.
The Bubblegum you bought, what selling regulations is it covered by?
In the US it is FDA (Food & Drug Administration): Title 21 (Food & Drugs), Chapter 1, Sub-Chapter B (Food For Human Consumption), Part 172 (Food Additivies Permitted for Direct Additions to Food for Human Consumption), Sub-Part g (Gums, Gum Bases & Related Substances), Section 172.615 (Chewing Gum Base).
Which means whether you consumed the Bubblegum or not is irrelevant, the product was sold as Food.
If you going to argue a point at least do basic level due diligence on the facts of the matter, you can end up looking silly when you don't.
All The BestEdited by Gandrhulf_Harbard on July 27, 2019 8:56AMThose memories come back to haunt me, they haunt me like a curse.
Is a dream a lie if it don't come true, or is it something worse.1 -
Gandrhulf_Harbard✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Kiralyn2000 wrote: »Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »Bubblegum baseball cards do exactly what you describe above.
No, they don't, that is a total misrepresentation.
When you buy bubblegum you are technically buying bubblegum, to eat, that it also has cards is a bonus.
That is you get something tangible and fixed in value EVERY time, and there are baseball cards that may have varying value.
Gambling Crates have no "fixed item every time" of a "fixed value".
Everything is a gamble.
Moreover, unlike other forms of gambling, the odds of getting X or Y are not known.
All The Best
How about when you buy a pack of Magic cards? No bubblegum in there.
Then different rules will apply, it's not too hard to figure that out - is it?
All The BestThose memories come back to haunt me, they haunt me like a curse.
Is a dream a lie if it don't come true, or is it something worse.0 -
Fermian✭✭✭I don’t care if it’s gambling or not. However, it is undesired market practice. And in my opinion should be restricted or just not allowed.
As a comparison. The exploit of game flaw is probably not allowed and covered in the terms and conditions. Why should the exploit of human flaws be allowed. Time for new fundamental laws which cover the digital dimension.2 -
Skwor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »
You really have no idea about the law or legal reasoning do you?
Unfortunately for you I do, that is why I am poking holes in your ignorant argument so easily.
The Bubblegum you bought, what selling regulations is it covered by?
In the US it is FDA (Food & Drug Administration): Title 21 (Food & Drugs), Chapter 1, Sub-Chapter B (Food For Human Consumption), Part 172 (Food Additivies Permitted for Direct Additions to Food for Human Consumption), Sub-Part g (Gums, Gum Bases & Related Substances), Section 172.615 (Chewing Gum Base).
Which means whether you consumed the Bubblegum or not is irrelevant, the product was sold as Food.
If you going to argue a point at least do basic level due diligence on the facts of the matter, you can end up looking silly when you don't.
All The Best
LMAO then why do not casinos sell fries at every gambling table? Oh becuase your wrong. Food regulated via FDA does not prevent other regulatory bodies from action. What does is it is not defined as gambling. Honestly you are not poking holes in anything but your own posts.0 -
![[Deleted User]](https://us.v-cdn.net/5020507/uploads/06301530861bfae62d56b72eef4ac33d.png)
[Deleted User]Soul ShrivenHello everyone,
With this thread holding a lot of bashing, baiting, flaming and real-world politics, we're going to go ahead and close it down. For further posts be sure to stay constructive and respectful with the Forum Rules in mind to avoid thread derailment or action on one's own account.
Thank you for understanding.0
This discussion has been closed.