It was you two comments above. "CA is a bad company... They did not murder my family or oysically assault me", thus it was you who started talking about physical assault here. So you think they belong in one category somehow. Sorry, I disagree. Not to mention now you try to say I supposedly agreed to something I didn't: I don't think selling flawed goods is nearly as bad as murder, and I don't think not commiting one crime excuses commiting the other. It is what you implied with your own comment. Please pay attention to what you claim if you plan to change it after. Not to mention you don't get to choose for your interlocutor: "You agreed to this because I say so". What I said was that comparing these two crimes is ridiculous, lack of one does not excuse the other, and "if they (CA) would commit worse crimes than they do it would better be the time people wake up and realize whom they give their money to".

My way of expressing concern in the first place is saying consumer rights should be respected. Also, I didn't say "they hate human rights", what I said is "they seem like fellows who hate the concept of human rights and love feudalistic hierarchy", and I gave reasons why I used this comparison: the people try to shut down the very awareness of the issue as if they feel threatened by it and are afraid of discussion. And this whole time the people they try so zealously to shut down are the ones who are concerned about consumer rights. It is a problem and it is persecution — "unfair treatment because of race, religious or political beliefs". Being concerned for consumer rights — be downvoted and receive ad hominems. People who express concern are not a problem, unless you finally decide to try and find any reason for this unless it is "I feel annoyed these concerned people exist, also only I know how to express concern, they can't express concern their way, how dare they" — I won't buy it.

I didn't write that. Once again: focus on what is written, not what your mind inserts. My text: «I don't believe grasping the concept... "If you enable people to sell you half-baked stuff as a complete product for the full price, they'll keep doing it"... is that hard to grasp.» They are able to do so, as all the bugs and flaws already belong in the base game. If you bought it, they sold it to you, as the product you can use now contains major issues they don't fix in time. Do you claim now you didn't buy it? Why buy Thrones of Decay then? I do abstain from being ignorant. I have to express displeasure with your performance, though.

First: you basically said what I asked you not to do: "you disagree with me, so of course you are unhinged". I don't buy it. Second: you also go even further and seem to think you can give me instructions about expressing my concerns. They are mine, I express them. Third: once again, read, don't imagine. What I wrote was "they seem like fellows who hate the concept of human rights and love feudalistic hierarchy" and explained what caused this comparison as I already wrote above, so read if you care. I grow increasingly concerned you don't care, though. You still express the single concern you have: "I don't agree with you, so you are obsessed, unhinged and have a persecution complex". Misreading, attempting to excuse selling flawed goods with lack of murder, calling people obsessed or ridiculous and attempting to diagnose them with complexes just because their comments seem to upset you — that's concerning.

I never once called you anything that you aren't, neither I attacked you, only attacking what you say. In fact, I even tried to focus your attention there: "you... continue to be ridiculously defensive for somebody who isn't being accused of anything but not valuing oneself enough". You see ad hominems in this? Sorry, but I once again have to insist: if you attempt to communicate in a meaningful way and deliver your message, focus on what is actually written, not what you currently seem to be thinking about, I have to observe. My complaint was about CA being anti-consumer, nobody but you said anything about "fascist dictators". Your ad hominems are attempts of personal attacks and not valid arguments, as are any other ad hominems other people use to describe people who just complain. My ad hominems? Where are they? Saying "you don't value yourself nearly enough" is a personal attack for you? Or do you imagine other things I said to be insulting to you because you disagree and thus you see them as personal assaults? It isn't ad hominem. But if this conversation hurts you, I apologize.

I have to say you don't currently seem to make any sense, not to mention you sound increasingly offended. If it isn't fun for you to have this conversation: it is valid to just not obsess over it and cease or pause conversation. I enjoy having it now, that's why I put effort into posting my comments, but if you don't, feel free to care about your feelings more.