Worth doing still, but the first one worked so well because it was taking to the people paying them (advertisers) about the decisions other people (scum journos) were making on their behalf, to leverage changing their paymasters' minds against them.

This one is going to be way harder, it's shit talking to the people who made the decisions themselves, they know what they've done and they're (probably) not retarded enough to think it would actually be popular, they already know you're pissed, they just don't care. The problem with Visa/MasterCard bullshit is there isn't anyone upstream like advertisers to lobby to instead, their model is sitting at the top and just skimming from everyone below them. The closest would be government intervention, who also aren't really interested in what the public actually want so the odds of convincing them to change anything seem low too. Even if they did intervene it would either have to be direct government action against Visa-MC, which has its own pitfalls as a precedent. Or finally loosening up the regulatory burden so as not to hand them a defacto monopoly on money transfers, which then also needs the public to en-mass make a decision to change who they do business with on principles rather than purely financial considerations, all whilst hoping the "new" competitors they're raising up aren't just the same old people in a different skin suit.

It seems to me like it's going to take something more like a mass grassroots uprising on a scale that either the gov can't ignore, or something too big to control with something like mass crypto uptake and populating a secondary financial system too big and too quick to stamp the boot on.

But in the meantime spitting in their eye when it's without any negative repercussions is probably the best course of action. Can't have a mass movement without a shared history and communal goals. "Fuck visa's coms" seems like a good, wholesome community builder and a way to unlearn the habit of helpless inaction. But realistically it's probably only step 1 of very many needed to actually change anything, just so no-one gets disillusioned with results that are slower to materialize than expected.

[Edit] Actually I suppose you could still indirectly lobby the people who pay Visa, aka the people behind storefronts like Steam. Although what you'd have to lobby for would have to be a little wild.

They can't leverage Visa into changing anything, but they could maybe be convinced to offer a separate cryptocurrency-only storefront for the otherwise censored games under an "independent", legally distinct company. Having a mainstream service point like that that only takes crypto would be a huge foundation block for a system that could sidestep Visa's monopoly. The hardest part would be convincing them the public support is so massive the government wouldn't dare financially ream them with bullshit rules and finding enough game devs willing to be paid in crypto, but that shouldn't be nearly as hard now that they've been fucked out of any other options.

Worth doing still, but the first one worked so well because it was taking to the people paying them (advertisers) about the decisions other people (scum journos) were making on their behalf, to leverage changing their paymasters' minds against them.

This one is going to be way harder, it's shit talking to the people who made the decisions themselves, they know what they've done and they're (probably) not retarded enough to think it would actually be popular, they already know you're pissed, they just don't care. The problem with Visa/MasterCard bullshit is there isn't anyone upstream like advertisers to lobby to instead, their model is sitting at the top and just skimming from everyone below them. The closest would be government intervention, who also aren't really interested in what the public actually want so the odds of convincing them to change anything seem low too. Even if they did intervene it would either have to be direct government action against Visa-MC, which has its own pitfalls as a precedent. Or finally loosening up the regulatory burden so as not to hand them a defacto monopoly on money transfers, which then also needs the public to en-mass make a decision to change who they do business with on principles rather than purely financial considerations, all whilst hoping the "new" competitors their raising up aren't just the same old people in a different skin suit.

It seems to me like it's going to take something more like a mass grassroots uprising on a scale that either the gov can't ignore, or something too big to control with something like mass crypto uptake and populating a secondary financial system too big and too quick to stamp the boot on.

But in the meantime spitting in their eye when it's without any negative repercussions is probably the best course of action. Can't have a mass movement without a shared history and communal goals. "Fuck visa's coms" seems like a good, wholesome community builder and a way to unlearn the habit of helpless inaction. But realistically it's probably only step 1 of very many needed to actually change anything, just so no-one gets disillusioned with results that are slower to materialize than expected.

[Edit] Actually I suppose you could still indirectly lobby the people who pay Visa, aka the people behind storefronts like Steam. Although what you'd have to lobby for would have to be a little wild.

They can't leverage Visa into changing anything, but they could maybe be convinced to offer a separate cryptocurrency-only storefront for the otherwise censored games under an "independent", legally distinct company. Having a mainstream service point like that that only takes crypto would be a huge foundation block for a system that could sidestep Visa's monopoly. The hardest part would be convincing them the public support is so massive the government wouldn't dare financially ream them with bullshit rules and finding enough game devs willing to be paid in crypto, but that shouldn't be nearly as hard now that they've been fucked out of any other options.

Worth doing still, but the first one worked so well because it was taking to the people paying them (advertisers) about the decisions other people (scum journos) were making on their behalf, to leverage changing their paymasters' minds against them.

This one is going to be way harder, it's shit talking to the people who made the decisions themselves, they know what they've done and they're (probably) not retarded enough to think it would actually be popular, they already know you're pissed, they just don't care. The problem with Visa/MasterCard bullshit is there isn't anyone upstream like advertisers to lobby to instead, their model is sitting at the top and just skimming from everyone below them. The closest would be government intervention, who also aren't really interested in what the public actually want so the odds of convincing them to change anything seem low too. Even if they did intervene it would either have to be direct government action against Visa-MC, which has its own pitfalls as a precedent. Or finally loosening up the regulatory burden so as not to hand them a defacto monopoly on money transfers, which then also needs the public to en-mass make a decision to change who they do business with on principles rather than purely financial considerations, all whilst hoping the "new" competitors their raising up aren't just the same old people in a different skin suit.

It seems to me like it's going to take something more like a mass grassroots uprising on a scale that either the gov can't ignore, or something too big to control with something like mass crypto uptake and populating a secondary financial system too big and too quick to stamp the boot on.

But in the meantime spitting in their eye when it's without any negative repercussions is probably the best course of action. Can't have a mass movement without a shared history and communal goals. "Fuck visa's coms" seems like a good, wholesome community builder and a way to unlearn the habit of helpless inaction. But realistically it's probably only step 1 of very many needed to actually change anything, just so no-one gets disillusioned with results that we slower to materialize than expected.

[Edit] Actually I suppose you could still indirectly lobby the people who pay Visa, aka the people behind storefronts like Steam. Although what you'd have to lobby for would have to be a little wild.

They can't leverage Visa into changing anything, but they could maybe be convinced to offer a separate cryptocurrency-only storefront for the otherwise censored games under an "independent", legally distinct company. Having a mainstream service point like that that only takes crypto would be a huge foundation block for a system that could sidestep Visa's monopoly. The hardest part would be convincing them the public support is so massive the government wouldn't dare financially ream them with bullshit rules and finding enough game devs willing to be paid in crypto, but that shouldn't be nearly as hard now that they've been fucked out of any other options.

Worth doing still, but the first one worked so well because it was taking to the people paying them (advertisers) about the decisions other people (scum journos) were making on their behalf, to leverage changing their paymasters' minds against them.

This one is going to be way harder, it's shit talking to the people who made the decisions themselves, they know what they've done and they're (probably) not retarded enough to think it would actually be popular, they already know you're pissed, they just don't care. The problem with Visa/MasterCard bullshit is there isn't anyone upstream like advertisers to lobby to instead, their model is sitting at the top and just skimming from everyone below them. The closest would be government intervention, who also aren't really interested in what the public actually want so the odds of convincing them to change anything seem low too. Even if they did intervene it would either have to be direct government action against Visa-MC, which has its own pitfalls as a precedent. Or finally loosening up the regulatory burden so as not to hand them a defacto monopoly on money transfers, which then also needs the public to en-mass make a decision to change who they do business with on principles rather than purely financial considerations, all whilst hoping the "new" competitors their raising up aren't just the same old people in a different skin suit.

It seems to me like it's going to take something more like a mass grassroots uprising on a scale that either the gov can't ignore, or something too big to control with something like mass crypto uptake and populating a secondary financial system too big and too quick to stamp the boot on.

But in the meantime spitting in their eye when it's without any negative repercussions is probably the best course of action. Can't have a mass movement without a shared history and communal goals. "Fuck visa's coms" seems like a good, wholesome community builder and a way to unlearn the habit of helpless inaction. But realistically it's probably only step 1 of very many needed to actually change anything, just so no-one gets disillusioned with results that we slower to materialize than expected.

[Edit] Actually I suppose you could still indirectly lobby the people who pay Visa, aka the people behind storefronts like Steam. Although what you'd have to lobby for would have to be a little wild.

They can't leverage Visa into changing anything, but they could maybe be convinced to offer a separate cryptocurrency-only storefront for the otherwise censored games under an legally distinct company. Having a mainstream service point like that that only takes crypto would be a huge foundation block for a system that could sidestep Visa's monopoly. The hardest part would be convincing them the public support is so massive the government wouldn't dare financially ream them with bullshit rules and finding enough game devs willing to be paid in crypto, but that shouldn't be nearly as hard now that they've been fucked out of any other options.

Worth doing still, but the first one worked so well because it was taking to the people paying them (advertisers) about the decisions other people (scum journos) were making on their behalf, to leverage changing their paymasters' minds against them.

This one is going to be way harder, it's shit talking to the people who made the decisions themselves, they know what they've done and they're (probably) not retarded enough to think it would actually be popular, they already know you're pissed, they just don't care. The problem with Visa/MasterCard bullshit is there isn't anyone upstream like advertisers to lobby to instead, their model is sitting at the top and just skimming from everyone below them. The closest would be government intervention, who also aren't really interested in what the public actually want so the odds of convincing them to change anything seem low too. Even if they did intervene it would either have to be direct government action against Visa-MC, which has its own pitfalls as a precedent. Or finally loosening up the regulatory burden so as not to hand them a defacto monopoly on money transfers, which then also needs the public to en-mass make a decision to change who they do business with on principles rather than purely financial considerations, all whilst hoping the "new" competitors their raising up aren't just the same old people in a different skin suit.

It seems to me like it's going to take something more like a mass grassroots uprising on a scale that either the gov can't ignore, or something too big to control with something like mass crypto uptake and populating a secondary financial system too big and too quick to stamp the boot on.

But in the meantime spitting in their eye when it's without any negative repercussions is probably the best course of action. Can't have a mass movement without a shared history and communal goals. "Fuck visa's coms" seems like a good, wholesome community builder and a way to unlearn the habit of helpless inaction. But realistically it's probably only step 1 of very many needed to actually change anything, just so no-one gets disillusioned with results that we slower to materialize than expected