LogFAQs > #974063297

Aloc posted...

He was really toxic in that lizzo thread.

Is zonbei just the biggest contrarian here?

I didnt agree with you personally two whole times, so I must be a contrarian. Thats definitely how that works.

And right, I was the toxic one in the Lizzo thread. Not all the people being horrible about someones weight and generally acting like dicks. People Ive disagreed with IN THIS TOPIC agreed with me in that one. Pretty sure thats not how being a contrarian works.

Kloe_Rinz posted...

because zonbei has ignored the studies that prove piracy doesn't decrease sales. he has to type 4 paragraphs of bootlicking to justify his anti-consumer beliefs

zonbei doesnt even understand what piracy is or how it differs from theft

I wasnt talking about piracy. I was talking about theft. Youre the one that doesnt seem to know the difference. I have no problem with piracy when it isnt blatantly theft. Which it is when you say I dont like them charging money, so Im cancelling my subscription and pirating all their shit instead. Thats not the same thing as I cant afford this so Ill pirate it or the service is so terrible and unusable Ill pirate it or its not available so Ill pirate it.

Also, the very study youre so smugly citing didnt prove that piracy doesnt affect sales. Heres the actual words from the actual study:

The results do not show *robust statistical evidence *of displacement of sales by online copyright infringements. That *does not necessarily mean that piracy has no effect* but only that the statistical analysis does not prove with sufficient reliability that there is an effect.

It DID find that pirating recent top box office hits actually DID impact sales negatively. This is, again, the literal study youre citing.