Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Proudfeet

  • Rank
    Hedge Knight

Recent Profile Visitors

3,435 profile views
  1. The only difference you have come up with so far is availability. And that really isn't a factor. They aren't likely to run out of stock.
  2. Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? The contortions in logic made to defend booster packs and criticise loot boxes is amazing. You can always print more if there is demand. You are also more likely to run out of money and/or complete whatever you want before they run out of stock. Also, if you are wealthy enough to do that, you should be able to afford the expenditure anyway.
  3. I'm sorry, I honestly don't see the difference. The limitation is physical and easily bypassed. If you wished to, you could just go over to the next store after you clear the stock of one store and so on. Loot boxes are booster packs. They have the exact same mechanics. The only difference is whether they are digital or not. Whatever harm a loot box can have is the same harm a booster pack can have. Reckless spending. You can buy fifty loot boxes at one go, you can also buy a whole box of booster packs at one go. Where is the difference? But sure, complain about Overwatch being the culprit of popularising loot boxes. Never mind that crates have been around forever as far back as TF2 or that Hearthstone players of all people are amongst the complainers. To be clear, I'm not defending loot boxes. It is the defense of booster packs that gets me.
  4. That's ridiculous. Booster packs serve the exact same functional purpose. Except that booster packs are explicitly pay to win. Loot boxes, depending on how they are set up, may not. Yes, MtG offer "proper packs". Video games offer the "base game". Loot boxes are gambling. That should not be in dispute. I honestly can't see what basis you are contending that booster packs aren't.
  5. Proudfeet

    NBA playoffs 2018: Will the Celtics be Raptored?

    I only caught some glimpses of it, but the refereeing felt really one-sided.
  6. Proudfeet

    Screw the banks

    Yeah, its hard to hold banks to account. They play such a critical role that you can't just take away their license to operate or give them too substantial a fine. As the financial crisis showed, we prefer to bail them out rather than let them become insolvent. As far as overdrawing an account, its a cost that is easy to quantify($x per transaction or x% of transaction value). Not so for lost sales, or inability to purchase that cascades into increasing costs. I don't think you are charged by your bank but the rival bank you are withdrawing from. Banks want to attract more deposits. Accessibility is a competitive advantage and it doesn't make sense for them to allow users of other banks to use their facilities when they are the ones spending money to setup and maintain the ATMs. It may seem like a penalty to the consumer, but to do otherwise is a lose/lose scenario for them. They don't get your money and they still have to pay for the costs of the ATM. That said, it would be better if they charged the rival bank rather than the consumer. It is probably already in practice. Just maybe not all banks are in the network.
  7. Proudfeet

    Screw the banks

    I'm not familiar with Australia laws and regulations, but they should at least be incurring fines. If you fudge it a bit, fines -> government revenue -> reimbursing customers. It is no consolation, but the problem with reimbursing customers directly is quantifying the loss. It is hard to calculate and prove so its not really feasible. Not sure how hardware failure is stupidity with money though. Failing to invest enough into backup systems?
  8. Proudfeet

    NBA 2017 - 18: A Shot at Parity

    I would think it was an instinctive move. He sees an opening, decides to go for it and realises what he actually did afterwards.
  9. Proudfeet

    Tennis Volume 6

    You are really talking past each other. His point is, Murray being the fourth best player, is far removed from the Big Three. Stan doesn't come into consideration at all.
  10. Proudfeet

    NBA 2017 - 18: A Shot at Parity

    You are missing the point. It doesn't matter East vs West. Its about the individual teams. You can also have a 50/50 conference split but have a conference that is top and bottom heavy in a 16 team seeding.
  11. Proudfeet

    NBA 2017 - 18: A Shot at Parity

    Eh, not for the purpose of a reseeding. The Cav's victory over the 73 win 3-1 lead Warriors (and by proxy the Spurs) seems more of an upset. As in, they have a win total difference that would have been enough to create a gap similar to the first and second seeds against the seventh and eighth seeds. Basically unthinkable. The Thunder beat the Spurs and almost beat the Warriors that year too, so win totals isn't everything, but it is still a pretty good predictor regardless.
  12. Proudfeet

    NBA 2017 - 18: A Shot at Parity

    Well, so I was wrong about that, but that wasn't my argument. I honestly didn't know as I wasn't paying attention to basketball then. My point on that was that it was a cherry picked example anyway (and not a very good one upon looking it up as they had a similar win total to the Lakers who they defeated so it wasn't like they were huge underdogs who crushed the favourites). I don't care about history that "balances out". You can always improve instead of settling for balancing out. I don't get the resistance to reseeding.
  13. Proudfeet

    NBA 2017 - 18: A Shot at Parity

    Was that the same Pistons team that were beaten by the one-man Cleveland team who were swept by the Spurs in the finals the next year? Regardless, my point was that you have to look beyond the finals. If we are cherry picking, look at the standings for the 2013/14 season. 9th place in the West, 3rd/4th place in the East? And that's not even what they are proposing to address. They are still taking the top eight teams from each conference. Its about making the later rounds of the playoffs more competitive, both East and West.
  14. Proudfeet

    NBA 2017 - 18: A Shot at Parity

    That's not the issue here though is it? It's the perception that the ninth and tenth team in the West are more deserving than the seventh and eighth team in the East. Or how the second to fourth seeds in the West are better than the second seed in the East. If you are going by history, how many of those titles were won by LeBron? How many were lost by him? He has contested every final since his move to Miami. And more often than not, swept his way there. That may be due to the strength of his teams, but is surely exacerbated by the lack of competitiveness in the East. I don't quite get the intention of the play-in tournament. I guess there is incentive to be the sixth seed to avoid missing out and the seventh and eighth seeds to get two tries, but the gap in wins get so much more pronounced when you reach the ninth, tenth and eleventh teams that they are basically assured of a play-in spot even if they don't make the eighth seed. ETA Actually historical strength shouldn't be an issue. So what if it balances out? Two wrongs doesn't make a right. Besides, if we really want to take in geographical/scheduling considerations, why not do playoffs by division and have wins be the tie breaker instead?
  15. Proudfeet

    NBA 2017 - 18: A Shot at Parity

    Curry has two MVPs as opposed to Durant's one MVP. The point I was trying to make though was that if Curry's level of defense is acceptable to voters why shouldn't Harden's be as well? Besides, the MVP is a popularity contest. Flash is more important than substance. Generating highlights and stuffing the box score is the way to go. Defensive highlights and box scores are hard to come by, especially at his position.