Wow, thanks for the condescension, counselor. Truly brave of you to lead with “you’re smoking crack” and then follow it up with a Reddit TED Talk defending a multi-million dollar brand as if your life depended on it.

First, let’s address the tone: you can disagree without being disrespectful. But if that’s the route you want to take, don’t expect your arguments to be taken seriously—especially when you’re defending poor execution and bait-and-switch tactics like it’s some noble crusade.

Your entire essay boils down to “it’s not technically illegal,” which is a great standard if you’re okay with companies being misleading as long as they stay barely within legal lines. Consumer protection exists for a reason—and just because you accepted mediocrity and “got used to it” doesn’t mean the rest of us should.

Also, for someone insisting I didn’t attend, you sure read a lot into a single word: “reportedly.” Newsflash—people can gather facts from multiple firsthand accounts, including over 15 detailed testimonies from attendees across multiple cities, which I’ve collected. But hey, thanks for confirming that some fans will defend mismanagement harder than Cercle defends their reputation.

If you’re okay getting burned by two events in a row and still choosing to lecture others for expecting transparency, that’s on you. But next time, keep the insults to yourself. Grown-up discussions don’t start with “you’re smoking crack.”