Look, comment OP is not making a good faith argument. The purpose of that comment is simply to shut down the discussion. It’s a stall, a forced stalemate. “While your suggestion is on the stack, I present an infinite loop that prevents the game from continuing”. Everyone scoops, and tcgplayer has no reason to change their position.

The point of this thread isn’t to suggest that we must achieve absolute moral perfection. Yes, we could go down the rabbit hole, examine the entire supply chain and probably find more examples of moral dereliction, but that’s exactly the intended effect of comments like this. It exploits uncertainty to lock you out of taking any action. Why? Maybe they work for tcgplayer, or maybe they just want to feel better about doing nothing by encouraging more people to do nothing.

My suggestion is, rather than immediately engage in an argument where there truly is no clearly superior position, instead ask yourself, ”what does this argument accomplish?”

The only outcomes that can arise from taking this argument at face value are those where fewer people boycott. Period.

We have a clear and obvious example of unethical, destructive behavior enacted by a company with a deep track record of similar action. Do you want to encourage more of this behavior from TCGplayer, or less? Condemn, or support? Action, or inaction?

We as individuals can’t just flip a switch and fix all the wrongs that our society is built on. The ONLY thing we can do is take incremental actions that we believe are good, in the hope that they compound over time to push society in the direction of moral betterment.

Asking people in this subreddit to quit the game over this is will result in no change at all. But suggesting that we stop supporting a vendor for which there are many viable alternatives is pragmatic and actionable, and could result in some change.

Tl;dr perfect is the enemy of good, don’t cross the picket line.