The sentiment that people will always complain and it will never be good enough for everybody so therefore we should never change practices that are harmful and indeed exploitative is lacking any initiative to better the world that we share. There are many real world examples where there is a certain group of people who believe that change will fix nothing even though there are other countries that have proven otherwise but I will avoid being overly political but through some critical thinking I’m sure those of us who are mindful and aware know what I’m talking about. I can’t speak for the community but for myself I would not mind if prices went up. I already said that affordability is not the issue. The issue is the temptation of gambling. The system is designed to be tempting especially for those of us who have a deeper appreciation and necessity for cosmetics for our own personal play style enjoyment. You can say that box of Oreos that you eyeball in the store is also tempting so isn’t it bad? Well I don’t have to put money in a slot machine and receive boxes Ritz crackers and Wheat Thins Before I get that box of Oreos. Man I hope my luck is better at the drink counter. I’d hate to have to dip my Oreos in orange juice. But at least I’m getting something physical and treats that I can share with my friends…unlike digital goods that I don’t even have to take any effort other than booting up my computer. No having to run out to the store. Gambling is now direct access rights from the comfort of your own home. This is just a little humor to try and shed some light on why there is a fallacy and thinking digital goods are equal to mystery boxes/TCGs/Kinder Eggs etc.. (at least you get something you can share or sell or at least actually own).

yoyo420232 wrote: »

I personally like the loot boxes and I’m not seeing the issue zos made it so people can gift crowns for gold I have spent millions on crown crates and as I see it I’m trading a game currency for a chance at fancy cash shop items it costs me zero real money for anything I want from the store the store only gets me if they have some sweet fancy new house but all my loot boxes are usually bought with in game gold

So you have no issues with the gambling of loot crates because it’s not even your money that you’re risking. But you are gambling your time that you spent acquiring in the gold. Despite your lack of issues with gambling it does not mean others do not have this issue. I’m sure you can agree that we each have our own struggles and when a system is built from the ground up to exploit that struggle it is a problem.

Frikgrim wrote: »

Here's something I'd almost guarantee.

If ZOS were to remove the loot boxes, but left the path to get those items to be endeavors, we'd soon learn that loot crates were never the problem, but rather it's endeavors.

Then, if ZOS put a hefty price tag on the items, instead of using the endeavors, we'd learn from the same people that it wasn't really loot crates or endeavors that are the problem. It's, instead, having to pay the hefty price for what they want. . .

The line will always be shifted by those complaining, until they get what they want straight up handed to them for no effort and with no cost. And until that happens, every system ZOS will put those items behind will be "nefarious, evil, illegal, exploitive," or whatever language they can muster up to make their banner of "Me, Myself, and I" appear like it's a chivalrous banner to "protect the community."

Endeavors only exist to keep Microsoft happy, There are mounts that are way overpriced. Players homes already cost $130ish, so if what you say about people complaining of inflated costs were true then where is the outrage for those prices?

There’s a huge difference between sky high prices and a gambling loot box system designed to take advantage of players.

Also, saying you shouldn’t address an issue because someone may find the next issue to complain about is not a valid argument against loot boxes. It just demonstrates how weak the argument that is in defense of loot boxes actually is.

Frikgrim wrote: »

Here's something I'd almost guarantee.

If ZOS were to remove the loot boxes, but left the path to get those items to be endeavors, we'd soon learn that loot crates were never the problem, but rather it's endeavors.

Then, if ZOS put a hefty price tag on the items, instead of using the endeavors, we'd learn from the same people that it wasn't really loot crates or endeavors that are the problem. It's, instead, having to pay the hefty price for what they want. . .

The line will always be shifted by those complaining, until they get what they want straight up handed to them for no effort and with no cost. And until that happens, every system ZOS will put those items behind will be "nefarious, evil, illegal, exploitive," or whatever language they can muster up to make their banner of "Me, Myself, and I" appear like it's a chivalrous banner to "protect the community."

@Frikgrim

Actually, the masking the real cost of crown store purchases behind a fake currency and then making the desirable items a random and rare drop in the crates is in itself the biggest problem. This double disconnect masks the cost of getting an item twice which is something that is not being discussed in this thread.

However, you do bring up a valid point in a roundabout way. As the cost of developing games has increased over the years, yet the cost of playing them has not increased, developers have had to look for additional ways to bring in revenue which is why cash shops have come about. Loot crates are a big part of driving that revenue to cover the cost we do not pay with a sub or DLC purchases.

In the end, if loot boxes go away companies, including Zenimax, will have to come up with another way to generate that revenue and it is likely something worse than loot boxes. It will either be an increase in overall cost to just play the game or it will be a notable decrease in quality and quantity of content and a reduction in fixing issues with the game.

All of this costs money and one way or another we will collectively pay for the cost of developing and maintaining this game or we will not play it.

Lostar wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Lostar wrote: »

yoyo420232 wrote: »

I personally like the loot boxes and I’m not seeing the issue zos made it so people can gift crowns for gold I have spent millions on crown crates and as I see it I’m trading a game currency for a chance at fancy cash shop items it costs me zero real money for anything I want from the store the store only gets me if they have some sweet fancy new house but all my loot boxes are usually bought with in game gold

So you have no issues with the gambling of loot crates because it’s not even your money that you’re risking. But you are gambling your time that you spent acquiring in the gold. Despite your lack of issues with gambling it does not mean others do not have this issue. I’m sure you can agree that we each have our own struggles and when a system is built from the ground up to exploit that struggle it is a problem.

But, other's peoples struggles shouldn't be the basis in which we define the rest of the world. Many people have drinking issues, that shouldn't impact our laws around drinking or limit bars, just like someone's problem with gambling shouldn't be a factor in regards to limiting gambling. Honestly, I really don't care if someone loses their livelihood gambling, that doesn't justify banning or removing it in any way. Many more people are able to adequately navigate gambling mechanics and gambling itself in healthy ways.

At least you are calling it what it is: gambling. And you know there are laws and tools in place that are enforced with the sole purpose of protecting addicts and minors. If we can all accept that loot boxes are gambling then we can all accept and understand that the ESRB label needs to change from M to Ao and those legislation pressures that keep online casinos in check extends to loot boxes that really have no place in our games anyways. But if people are saying that they must remain for their own enjoyment because they have fun with the dopamine kicks/disappointment emotional roller coasters they get out of them (much like a self unaware addict), then they need to be regulated with as much tenacity that we already have in place for other gambling activities.

I only use gambling here because that is what this anti-gambling group wants to call it. But it is not actually gambling, since there is a guaranteed minimum outcome that has value. So you are paying for the minimum outcome, always, with the opportunity for something else. It's as much gambling as trading cards, or Happy Meal toys, or those little trinket gumball like machines.

But also, I think we over-regulate gambling. Absurdly over-regulate it. If I want to play blackjack at my local gas station, I should be able to do so if the gas station is willing to offer it.

jaws343 wrote: »

Lostar wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Lostar wrote: »

yoyo420232 wrote: »

I personally like the loot boxes and I’m not seeing the issue zos made it so people can gift crowns for gold I have spent millions on crown crates and as I see it I’m trading a game currency for a chance at fancy cash shop items it costs me zero real money for anything I want from the store the store only gets me if they have some sweet fancy new house but all my loot boxes are usually bought with in game gold

So you have no issues with the gambling of loot crates because it’s not even your money that you’re risking. But you are gambling your time that you spent acquiring in the gold. Despite your lack of issues with gambling it does not mean others do not have this issue. I’m sure you can agree that we each have our own struggles and when a system is built from the ground up to exploit that struggle it is a problem.

But, other's peoples struggles shouldn't be the basis in which we define the rest of the world. Many people have drinking issues, that shouldn't impact our laws around drinking or limit bars, just like someone's problem with gambling shouldn't be a factor in regards to limiting gambling. Honestly, I really don't care if someone loses their livelihood gambling, that doesn't justify banning or removing it in any way. Many more people are able to adequately navigate gambling mechanics and gambling itself in healthy ways.

At least you are calling it what it is: gambling. And you know there are laws and tools in place that are enforced with the sole purpose of protecting addicts and minors. If we can all accept that loot boxes are gambling then we can all accept and understand that the ESRB label needs to change from M to Ao and those legislation pressures that keep online casinos in check extends to loot boxes that really have no place in our games anyways. But if people are saying that they must remain for their own enjoyment because they have fun with the dopamine kicks/disappointment emotional roller coasters they get out of them (much like a self unaware addict), then they need to be regulated with as much tenacity that we already have in place for other gambling activities.

I only use gambling here because that is what this anti-gambling group wants to call it. But it is not actually gambling, since there is a guaranteed minimum outcome that has value. So you are paying for the minimum outcome, always, with the opportunity for something else. It's as much gambling as trading cards, or Happy Meal toys, or those little trinket gumball like machines.

But also, I think we over-regulate gambling. Absurdly over-regulate it. If I want to play blackjack at my local gas station, I should be able to do so if the gas station is willing to offer it.

And what a contrived value (original video talks about the Anchor method).. yet that is besides the point. Others have looked at your point (that has been made before) and dismantled it in this thread. Scientific studies conducted by researchers who are far more qualified than you or I have demonstrated in their papers how loot boxes are indeed gambling and how they are indeed exploitative and predatory and effectively so.

Lostar wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Lostar wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

Lostar wrote: »

yoyo420232 wrote: »

I personally like the loot boxes and I’m not seeing the issue zos made it so people can gift crowns for gold I have spent millions on crown crates and as I see it I’m trading a game currency for a chance at fancy cash shop items it costs me zero real money for anything I want from the store the store only gets me if they have some sweet fancy new house but all my loot boxes are usually bought with in game gold

So you have no issues with the gambling of loot crates because it’s not even your money that you’re risking. But you are gambling your time that you spent acquiring in the gold. Despite your lack of issues with gambling it does not mean others do not have this issue. I’m sure you can agree that we each have our own struggles and when a system is built from the ground up to exploit that struggle it is a problem.

But, other's peoples struggles shouldn't be the basis in which we define the rest of the world. Many people have drinking issues, that shouldn't impact our laws around drinking or limit bars, just like someone's problem with gambling shouldn't be a factor in regards to limiting gambling. Honestly, I really don't care if someone loses their livelihood gambling, that doesn't justify banning or removing it in any way. Many more people are able to adequately navigate gambling mechanics and gambling itself in healthy ways.

At least you are calling it what it is: gambling. And you know there are laws and tools in place that are enforced with the sole purpose of protecting addicts and minors. If we can all accept that loot boxes are gambling then we can all accept and understand that the ESRB label needs to change from M to Ao and those legislation pressures that keep online casinos in check extends to loot boxes that really have no place in our games anyways. But if people are saying that they must remain for their own enjoyment because they have fun with the dopamine kicks/disappointment emotional roller coasters they get out of them (much like a self unaware addict), then they need to be regulated with as much tenacity that we already have in place for other gambling activities.

I only use gambling here because that is what this anti-gambling group wants to call it. But it is not actually gambling, since there is a guaranteed minimum outcome that has value. So you are paying for the minimum outcome, always, with the opportunity for something else. It's as much gambling as trading cards, or Happy Meal toys, or those little trinket gumball like machines.

But also, I think we over-regulate gambling. Absurdly over-regulate it. If I want to play blackjack at my local gas station, I should be able to do so if the gas station is willing to offer it.

And what a contrived value (original video talks about the Anchor method).. yet that is besides the point. Others have looked at your point (that has been made before) and dismantled it in this thread. Scientific studies conducted by researchers who are far more qualified than you or I have demonstrated in their papers how loot boxes are indeed gambling and how they are indeed exploitative and predatory and effectively so.

Well, no one really dismantled anything beyond just saying they don't like to gamble and therefore think no one should be allowed to do anything remotely similar, because maybe kids might be harmed, or addicts might be harmed. Doesn't really change the fact that I still don't think you or anyone else should be able to control how another adult spends their money.

jaws343 wrote: »

If you buy a crate, you are guaranteed to get 4 items. Those 4 items represent the cost of the crate. When you buy the crate, you are buying those 4 base items. With a chance at a better item, or even a 5th item. But, at the end of the day, unlike Poker, your purchase comes with a guaranteed item. You may not like the item, you may not find it valuable, but the fact is it has a value assigned to it, the value of 1 crate cost. Unlike Poker, you don't start at 20$ and go to zero, you start at 20$ and get 20$ worth of base crate items, at a minimum.

You are right in that they are not like Poker.

They are more of a pull-tab or scratch off lottery ticket than something like Poker.

jaws343 wrote: »

But, other's peoples struggles shouldn't be the basis in which we define the rest of the world. Many people have drinking issues, that shouldn't impact our laws around drinking or limit bars, just like someone's problem with gambling shouldn't be a factor in regards to limiting gambling.

This is how the world works. I expect legislation to be focused around children, not adults, and not adult gambling addicts who might be tempted by gambling in a game.

That said, I do wish that studios could offer assistance, even if just a "gambling hotline number". Sadly, I expect that this would just put some sort of a legal target on the studio and open them up to lawsuits.

At the very least there should be actual official odds disclosure and an actual price tag without going for "crowns" and "gems" to confuse and mislead people whilst covering themselves against regulations and protection systems in some countries. Good analogy was with houses, not much people complain because prices alone (and in my state it's a half month wage for a big one lmao) but because it's way more transparent it's less of an issue. For some spenders and gamblers it's better situation when you would be able to have more informed decision. But I'm for outright ban anyways, this practice needs to stop. Gaming companies won't starve cause of it, if some do it's probably has everything to do with lack of "gaming" in their product to begin with.

I'll play "devil's advocate" for a minute. Let's see if any of you will. And later I'll get a bit real with something.

Let's call loot boxes gambling. Let's even say they stir up people who are prone to addiction. Let's say they are exploitive and unfair. Let's say I even go as far as to say we need to nix the loot crates to protect those people who may fall victim to them.

Now, let's say I have a friend who plays ESO who is triggered severely by images of bears. Images of bears cause them to have severe mental issues that are very complicated and difficult for them.

Want to join me in getting bears banned from ESO and the community? I mean, shouldn't they be protected, too? Or, are you likely to be a bit "selfish" and say that my friend should find things to do that doesn't trigger them?

I'm going to wager than nobody would be willing to stand behind my imaginary friend, or even if it were a real friend with a real problem . . . because we expect people to handle their own problems in society, rather than society bending to their problems.

Now, because I played "devil's advocate" in this post doesn't mean I am agreeing that loot crates are gambling, because I still feel they are not. As for triggering addicts? Maybe some are triggered, but I've yet to see someone step up and say they are an addict and that the loot crates a problematic for their addiction tendencies.

So, know what I will do? I will put myself out there a bit.

My name is William, and I am an addict. My last negative engagement with my addiction was in January 2009.

Want to know something else about this addict? I'm not triggered in the slightest by loot crates and I have to be very careful in life what I do or associate with because of my addictive tendencies.

I have gambled myself into some pretty serious financial conditions before. Yet, amazingly these "exploitive and addicting loot crates" haven't caused me one single problem. And yes, I've purchased some, just to tinker around. Then, you know what this addict was very, very capable of doing? Dropping the "Nope, I'm out" card because it's NOT gambling. It was merely a purchase of items, with a chance that some could be "rare." There was no "feel good for this addict" reaction, because there IS NO POTENTIAL LOSS element. I paid for crates that told me they'd give me 4 items each, and they did. Actually, some gave me 5! One I didn't even pay for. Was I happy with all the items? No. But know what else I wasn't happy with? I bought a lot of clothing off Ebay not long ago. I knew they were all my size, but didn't know exactly what I was getting until it got here. I didn't like all items in that lot, but did I get manipulated or harmed by it? No. I made a choice to purchase it. Was it a gamble? No. I got the exact number of items I was told I'd get.

Now, can someone show me where an addict is having a problem with these loot crates?

Or, is it more along the lines of people with an overactive sense of entitlement having a problem with them because they don't get what they want from them?

jaws343 wrote: »

Heartrage wrote: »

@jaws343
Except, we do limit these things. There are gambling laws to force casinos to give odds of winning. Restaurants and bars can get their alcool license revoked if they serve alcool irresponsibly to minors or to adults that get too rowdy. Alcohol commercials must say to drink responsibly. Minors also can’t do those things. There are no reasons why lootboxes shouldn’t also be limited.

That's great, also, this game isn't for minors. And the only way minors are playing this game is their parents allowed them to do so, and paid for it. So, not really my problem, or anyone elses for that matter, if there are irresponsible parents out there who let their kids run free with their credit cards.

Plus, all of those things are for adults you listed. Gambling for adults should be unrestricted and lesser regulated. ADULTS. All I am saying is that maybe we should stop micromanaging the choices adults make with their own money because some people make bad choices. Someone's poor choices at a bar certainly can negatively impact that business, but those "restrictions" in place for adults are incredibly subjective. Two people can drink 6 drinks, and only one of the two will get shut off for being too rowdy, while the other goes on to drink 2 more and carries on with their life. The rowdy person hasn't zero impact on the responsible adult in this situation. And a commercial saying drink responsibly is literally nothing in terms of limitation.

This game is rated M. 17 year olds are minors. I’d argue most people don’t develop good reasoning and rational until their mid to late 20’s (some, never at all).

In case anyone was interested in just how invested ESO is at monetizing their customers (that means you), here is a job listing that describes what they want their monetizers to do:

Responsibilities:

• Develop and manage the economy/monetization components of our games
• Develop and manage a calendar of offerings, updates, and events
• Work with other teams to ensure the success of offerings, updates, and events
• Work closely with design team to develop a framework for a successful live game
• Manage the pricing of virtual goods and balance free vs. paid currency in the game economy
• Design game features that monetize and re-engage players
• Review reporting on in-game currency usage, earning and purchasing
• Drive new initiatives for monetizing the customer base
• Work with a team of analysts to propose new features and define, collect and analyze metrics

_Zathras_ wrote: »

In case anyone was interested in just how invested ESO is at monetizing their customers (that means you), here is a job listing that describes what they want their monetizers to do:

Responsibilities:

• Develop and manage the economy/monetization components of our games
• Develop and manage a calendar of offerings, updates, and events
• Work with other teams to ensure the success of offerings, updates, and events
• Work closely with design team to develop a framework for a successful live game
• Manage the pricing of virtual goods and balance free vs. paid currency in the game economy
• Design game features that monetize and re-engage players
• Review reporting on in-game currency usage, earning and purchasing
• Drive new initiatives for monetizing the customer base
• Work with a team of analysts to propose new features and define, collect and analyze metrics

This is the type of stuff that sucks the soul out of gamers when it's put into practice. Really a shame. Thanks for the info!

Looking at the victims of bad parenting in my friend circle, I'd say most parents manage their children poorly (example to illustrate the point, don't take it personally parents). However, we still have no required certificate or education for becoming a parent, because society would see that as an infriction on personal liberties. Just bringing it up is often met with aggression.

And that's where the fine line is between meddling and protecting the weak. Are the consequences severe enough to justify denying people that activity? In my opinion with loot boxes, no and I'm sad that some countries have implemented laws to that effect.

Your alternative is to buy crowns with in-game money though, so there are ways to obtain the items that have no influence on your real life money and depending on your job show you the value (aka time invested) better then using your credit card.

For me, I bought crown crates to get one mount and one full outfit. Then I tallied up the crowns spent, presented myself the bill and decided that's a cost too high for the gain and in fact, I found the lack of chance a factor that I didn't like it as a "game" experience. Haven't bought any since. I know not everyone has that kind of character, but again - I don't agree that the consequences are severe enough. Other checks and balances already fail if someone wrecks their life this way. You should fix those, not the symptom and implementing a band-aid, will take resources and attention away from looking at the real problem.

Frikgrim wrote: »

Lostar wrote: »

Frikgrim wrote: »

I'll play "devil's advocate" for a minute. Let's see if any of you will. And later I'll get a bit real with something.

Let's call loot boxes gambling. Let's even say they stir up people who are prone to addiction. Let's say they are exploitive and unfair. Let's say I even go as far as to say we need to nix the loot crates to protect those people who may fall victim to them.

Now, let's say I have a friend who plays ESO who is triggered severely by images of bears. Images of bears cause them to have severe mental issues that are very complicated and difficult for them.

Want to join me in getting bears banned from ESO and the community? I mean, shouldn't they be protected, too? Or, are you likely to be a bit "selfish" and say that my friend should find things to do that doesn't trigger them?

I'm going to wager than nobody would be willing to stand behind my imaginary friend, or even if it were a real friend with a real problem . . . because we expect people to handle their own problems in society, rather than society bending to their problems.

Now, because I played "devil's advocate" in this post doesn't mean I am agreeing that loot crates are gambling, because I still feel they are not. As for triggering addicts? Maybe some are triggered, but I've yet to see someone step up and say they are an addict and that the loot crates a problematic for their addiction tendencies.

So, know what I will do? I will put myself out there a bit.

My name is William, and I am an addict. My last negative engagement with my addiction was in January 2009.

Want to know something else about this addict? I'm not triggered in the slightest by loot crates and I have to be very careful in life what I do or associate with because of my addictive tendencies.

I have gambled myself into some pretty serious financial conditions before. Yet, amazingly these "exploitive and addicting loot crates" haven't caused me one single problem. And yes, I've purchased some, just to tinker around. Then, you know what this addict was very, very capable of doing? Dropping the "Nope, I'm out" card because it's NOT gambling. It was merely a purchase of items, with a chance that some could be "rare." There was no "feel good for this addict" reaction, because there IS NO POTENTIAL LOSS element. I paid for crates that told me they'd give me 4 items each, and they did. Actually, some gave me 5! One I didn't even pay for. Was I happy with all the items? No. But know what else I wasn't happy with? I bought a lot of clothing off Ebay not long ago. I knew they were all my size, but didn't know exactly what I was getting until it got here. I didn't like all items in that lot, but did I get manipulated or harmed by it? No. I made a choice to purchase it. Was it a gamble? No. I got the exact number of items I was told I'd get.

Now, can someone show me where an addict is having a problem with these loot crates?

Or, is it more along the lines of people with an overactive sense of entitlement having a problem with them because they don't get what they want from them?

Fear of bears or spiders or whatever in video games has not led to financial hardships nor is it equivalent to what happens in our brains at the chemical level when being enticed into gambling habits that often turn into gambling hobbies (it is at this point an individual gets defensive for their hobby and constructs outlandish false equivalencies to detract and detail and deny).

eBay is always a gamble but at least you gained physical ownership over your poor purchase that you could turn to recover some of your loss. One person’s trash is another’s treasure.

It is extremely difficult for people to come out and say they have been manipulated, tricked, and taken advantage of. A lot of people in this community would say “well that’s your fault/personal problem” and it’s been demonstrated within this thread and beyond this thread and in other gaming communities because the billion dollar industry you’re defending has won the battle of normalizing this in many of us. It’s hard to accept when you’ve been fooled and exploited. Maybe there’s a level of shame. So, I do not expect any of those who have been hurt by loot boxes to speak up.

I’m glad you feel like you’ve overcome your addiction. I hope that is true, I really do. Yet, you admit to engaging in the activity.

Hook>Habit>Hobby

Alright. You're getting close to dismissing my ACTUAL EXPERIENCE with addiction and how it correlates with what you term as "gambling" and suggest could be "addictive" here. You seem to be wanting to pander the community for support to get the loot crates abolished for your, seemingly, personal reasons.

I take offense to the last line in your statement. I am fully in control of my addiction. There are questions I could directly ask you, but have not because I am discussing an ISSUE, not you. Yet, you want to express innuendo that I may still be engaging in my addiction. Could it be because I, as an addict, have stepped up and put myself out there and maybe, just maybe, it has made your point a little harder to drive home in the light you want it to be received?

A person's mental reaction to things in-game isn't important to you even if it causes them distress, but a hypothetical group of people who are addicted or may become addicted to the crown crates are? That right there was a true show of how far-reaching (or not so far-reaching) your concern is for others.

You keep using the word gamble, but I am getting confused because you may not understand it as much as you believe you do. Ebay wasn't a gamble. I paid for a lot of clothing in my size. I got a lot of clothing in my size. Just as when I paid for loot crates I got what I paid for. I didn't gamble. Believe me, if it had ANY type of feel of gambling, I'd probably be in financial trouble today. If it even remotely smelled of gambling, I wouldn't have engaged from the beginning.

I really am not sure what you're advocating for here. It has nothing to do with addiction (at least to loot crates). It has nothing to do with gambling, because buying something and getting what you pay for is not gambling.

You even feel people are defending loot crates and expressed, "What in the late capitalism is this?" The same could be shot right back at the opposing stance, "What kind of entitlement is this?"

I’m sorry if what I said came off as dismissive. I do hope you have overcome your addiction. I don’t know you but I know people in my own life who has had addiction problems and how easily they have deceived themselves. I don’t know whether or not that has any validity in your circumstances so just as you can only take my intentions with a grain of salt, I can only take your word with as much tenacity. It’s not to dismiss any achievements you have made in overcoming if that is truly the case. It is simply alarming to hear a person say “I have risen above this addiction” while still being engaged in the activity to any degree. But I do truly hope you have somehow managed to conduct yourself in a healthy way. It’s not so easy to do for a great many of people. A post in this thread, a page back, I believe, spoke about the struggles of a close friend. There are testimonials online. Have you gotten to watch the video I posted in the original post? The Jimquisition video that reads out several testimonials people have been brave in sharing? I’ll post that video here again.

These people are not hypothetical.
https://youtu.be/7S-DGTBZU14