Ok? He decided to put alot of money into the game so ftp don't have to pay. I don't see a problem. He'll have a semi tough time in GAC but maybe that's not his focus. We're you trying to get an angry reaction? Im sure somebody will jump in eventually but I don't see the point in this
if someone has the means, and enjoys it, then nothing wrong with it
That might be a bit of a loaded statement....could definitely see how that might take some ethical turns here or there.....
Is it? Can you?
I guess if you ignore all context.
Since the op is not the person in question spending the money, I’d say we have little context at all other than young shard, lots of money.
Does he have the means or is he just using debt to finance an addiction?
Does one truly enjoy an addiction?
I hope Ultra is right, but to think the other side of the coin doesn’t exist is just naive. Ethical? 🤷♂️
There are those that have the means and enjoy it and there are those that don’t but find a way.
Except there isn't a way to interpret it as unethical
Ultra said:
If they have the means: meaning if they are of the ability to spend that money freely without repercussions
If they lack the means and found a way, the statement doesn't apply and the following antecedent is irrelevant
The addiction and lack of means cases are negated by the specificity of language used
Also, what in the blue milk galaxy does ethics have to do with a forum post about someone throwing money around?
if someone has the means, and enjoys it, then nothing wrong with it
That might be a bit of a loaded statement....could definitely see how that might take some ethical turns here or there.....
Is it? Can you?
I guess if you ignore all context.
Since the op is not the person in question spending the money, I’d say we have little context at all other than young shard, lots of money.
Does he have the means or is he just using debt to finance an addiction?
Does one truly enjoy an addiction?
I hope Ultra is right, but to think the other side of the coin doesn’t exist is just naive. Ethical? 🤷♂️
There are those that have the means and enjoy it and there are those that don’t but find a way.
Except there isn't a way to interpret it as unethical
Ultra said:
If they have the means: meaning if they are of the ability to spend that money freely without repercussions
If they lack the means and found a way, the statement doesn't apply and the following antecedent is irrelevant
The addiction and lack of means cases are negated by the specificity of language used
Also, what in the blue milk galaxy does ethics have to do with a forum post about someone throwing money around?
All I said was there was little context, provided an alternative to this simply being some rich dude throwing money at a game. The shrug was meant to question what ethics had to do with it.
Replies
Not the first and won’t be the last.
DISCLAIMER: Post is subject to change.
Just showing off someone rich in my shard
I'm also seeing an R7 Ackbar, which hurts the eyes.
Thanks. Never seen someone rich in a shard before.
Well, u can have both gl
Kids are easily impressed
I have seen a Rich in a shard though.
Ain't got nothing on this guy!
That might be a bit of a loaded statement....could definitely see how that might take some ethical turns here or there.....
Is it? Can you?
I guess if you ignore all context.
how is it a loaded statement?
Since the op is not the person in question spending the money, I’d say we have little context at all other than young shard, lots of money.
Does he have the means or is he just using debt to finance an addiction?
Does one truly enjoy an addiction?
I hope Ultra is right, but to think the other side of the coin doesn’t exist is just naive. Ethical? 🤷♂️
There are those that have the means and enjoy it and there are those that don’t but find a way.
DISCLAIMER: Post is subject to change.
Except there isn't a way to interpret it as unethical
Ultra said:
If they have the means: meaning if they are of the ability to spend that money freely without repercussions
If they lack the means and found a way, the statement doesn't apply and the following antecedent is irrelevant
The addiction and lack of means cases are negated by the specificity of language used
Also, what in the blue milk galaxy does ethics have to do with a forum post about someone throwing money around?
All I said was there was little context, provided an alternative to this simply being some rich dude throwing money at a game. The shrug was meant to question what ethics had to do with it.
But hey, jnterpret it anyway you like.
DISCLAIMER: Post is subject to change.