“Funko did not request a takedown of the @itchio platform.”

Man, I fucking hate corpo-speak like this.

Yes, you didn’t personally make the request against itchio… But you hired this company to enforce “brand protection” and that’s what they did. So you did actually request the takedown, but you just did so by authorizing another party to make such requests on your behalf.

This is like a military General saying “hey I didn’t commit any warcrimes, I just gave the orders to my men to commit warcrimes!”

I agree they don’t have to be anti-consumer to be pro-developer, but my point is that that is how they are approaching being pro-developer - by limiting pro-consumer features at the behest of developers. Or perhaps I should be saying more actively publishers, to be fair.

I gave what I see as a significant example in my original comment. Not being able to see comments or reviews from those who have purchased games through the storefront is a problem for me. If a game has a bug or problem, especially if it is one that could potentially be tied to or unique to the EGS version, I would like to know about it. That EGS currently doesn’t provide readily available user feedback when it frankly has been the standard as defined by steam, just doesn’t for me.

So you have to ask yourself why they wouldn’t include such a simple a rudimentary feature - the only result I can come up with is to appease developers who want to prevent being negatively impacted by bad reviews. Thus what we have is prioritizing the wants of developers at the expense of features which benefit consumers.

Some people prefer not to do business with entities whose business practices they don’t support.

Steam doesn’t engage in the same kind of strong-arming and anti-consumer practices, so it’s not exactly comparable, is it?

I say this every time Epic comes up but it remains the same.

Steam is the pro-consumer storefront. Epic is the pro-developer storefront. What Epic seems to fail to understand is that by being so staunchly pro-developer, they effectively become anti-consumer. And as a consumer, I’m just not going to spend money on an anti-consumer marketplace.

When Epic considers adding necessary pro-consumer measures like actual user reviews so I can hear how a game actual performs from real end users, then and only then will I consider Epic a real storefront viable for consumers.

I can’t decide if I’m proud or sad that this answer was buried so deeply into this post

Mine is full of big titty adults; I don’t know what y’all are doing wrong.

I may take slight issue with your last statement. To be clear, I’m not trying to have a “dishonest discussion”, I genuinely don’t understand the distinction and there isn’t really an article or anything here for me to clarify.

I apologize, I sincerely wasn’t trying to imply you were being willfully dishonest or disingenuous, I was just trying to offer the correction to ensure clarity. I promise, I intended no offense and did not mean to imply anything about your character. I hope this clears that up and am legitimately sorry if you felt wronged.

I believe the objection is not to Snoop for his gang affiliation, but rather to the dance specifically which is being claimed as a more overt gang symbol, sort of like if they added the blood hand sign.

Of course I don’t think this is even remotely an issue of concern for most of the reasons others have already commented on this post (it’s a pop culture thing now, essentially), but I do think it’s worth acknowledging the distinction between person and symbol here to be able to have honest discussion of the topic.

So what, you’d rather just cook alone in silence?