The argument uses anti-trust language, so I believe so.
My primary issue at this point is that it's in arbitration, per the old Subscriber agreement, so while I'm in general against arbitration, agreeing to court proceedings all the way across the country from the jurisdiction I live in is not in my best interest.
The argument is that Valve's exceedingly large market share in the digital marketplace has increased prices of third party publishers, notably via the clause that obliges third parties to not undercut steam if they want to be listed there. Valve's 30% cut then becomes a markup which injures its end users.
Steam functions normally, but the way I'm reading it, if I keep using steam on Nov 1st, that constitutes agreement. And if I want to make another purchase prior to then, I will be obliged to agree.
My lawyer has advised to not agree, and not make purchases.
I read it. Disputes are required to go to court-- in a court in Washington, which I would bet is in Valve's backyard. By agreeing, you waive all rights to hold trial in different jurisdictions. It's similar to the boilerplate that forces RV buyers to sue the RV manufacturer in a the jurisdiction where they're based. Whether that jurisdiction is compromised/biased is an open question.
Considering I am part of a class action against valve at the moment, I am not amused.
Satisfactory has hit 1.0
Factory sim FPS. Gather ye thy power slugs!
Corekeeper also hit 1.0
Top-down 2D Terraria-flavored explore/craftathon
Zero Sievert is at 0.52
Top down single-player Tarkov-like extraction-based looter-shooter
It's not fanboism. It's friend-enemy distinction. They'd rather give the people on the right who are being pursued by institutions captured by the left the benefit of the doubt.
Yeah. Tribal. Stupid? Maybe not. Fanboism it ain't.
I believe that both of those things are true.
I am arguing for the presumption of innocence, from the position of 'trust but verify.' I don't trust the DoJ or the youtubers. Stacking up conditional judgements based on sources I don't trust strikes me as folly, but hey-- it's your time and energy.
Knowingly 'taking money from a government source' would certainly be questionable. These youtubers took money from Tenet Media which (correct me if I'm wrong) isn't a government. If you're only saying it looks bad, then duh, it's been engineered to look bad by bad actors.
Only now has it been revealed that Tenet Media is Russian funded-- who knew what and when is a very valid question, but not what you're asking. You're rushing to judgement about the youtubers who were associated seemingly without asking what they knew about Tenet Media. You're blaming the patsies for the crime before the trial even begins.
If this was a government op to poison the well and tarnish moderate-right youtubers, then you've fallen for it.
Being bigoted against those who spent less time on their education indoctrination, is one of the most common and accepted forms of bigotry. Aydin Paladin did a good documentary on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdwtbIulfI0
100% true. The issue of ASoIaF being a subversion of heroic fantasy only complicates the writing of the ending for 'Hard R' Martin. See-- the 'traditional' ending would be a marriage. (Snow/Daenerys with her as the crown is what's usually proposed.) Martin has been so thoroughly subversive of the genre that now he's stuck having to either write a traditional/standard ending or not finish at all. Anything else, like the way the show ended, won't satisfy. So he's stuck.
Adventurer Conqueror King is what you want. Have a link: https://autarch.co/adventurer-conqueror-king/