Is that not what happens with a mistrial?
I didn't add anything. Look at my username.
In response to the rest:
It also didn't imply the shittyness was unevenly distributed.
If that's what you mean, say as much, then you'll have no cause to be upset at other interpretations of your ambiguous statements.
Or not, you do you.
both sides appear to be badly at fault, with the girl as the instigator.
not said or implied ?
That sounds reasonable and is significantly more than i previously knew about the subject.
If there are no effective mechanisms for reigning in that obstruction wouldn't that be a form of control, even if only over a single aspect/issue.
Like if someone is obstructing the only exit door and i have no viable means of rectifying that situation they effective control over my ability to exit and anything that would follow on from that.
Also, people literally forced Disney’s hand by cancelling all of their subscriptions. Bullying corporations is extremely easy now that we have access to their social media.
They did, but the difference there is that disney already took a position and realised they'd fucked up directly (fiscally, disney absolutely does not give a fuck about morality or ethics ) and then had to backtrack.
Nintendo haven't (actively) taken a position yet, if they do then they'd have to face the backlash of whichever way that went in the court of public opinion.
by not taking a position they only get the backlash from the passive "support" of a position.
Looking at my reply i can see how it sounded.
I wasn't actually saying you were incorrect , i was saying the way you presented it was shaky.
The reply you just gave makes sense.
"it can't be controlled by one nation because some nations are complaining" does not.
I'm possibly misreading the tone of your reply, but my reply is agreeing with your "now do something" stance.
I don't know enough about how the UN is supposed to work to say if it's broken or not.
The trick is for it to obviously cost them more to not act.
Good luck with that, hasn't worked so far.
Not that you shouldn't boycott the shit out of Nintendo if you want to, just don't hold your breath while waiting for them to do something that isn't profit motivated.
I wonder if there is a legit way to get some betting company to cover this, because i'd lay good money on Nintendo taking the shittiest route possible (well, the second in this case, the shittiest would be to actively endorse it ).
Because money.
They aren't quite as bad as Disney so far, but I suspect that's only becayse they haven't been given the chance yet.
Completely aside from the op's statement, in this case, condemnations don't mean shit unless there is action associated with it.
At worst it's the political unions version of "thoughts and prayers", at best it's genuine dissention that's being ignored until it's too fucking late to matter.
Im sure there are political considerations I don't see as a layperson but nations speaking up and control being in the hands of a single or small minority of nations aren't mutually exclusive states.
My stance on the issue is obvious but I'm not arguing that stance here, just that your reply is logically shaky.
Constitutionally yes, assuming US context.
Outside of that it's case by case depending on context.
Stating that megacorps pulling this cowardly shit is well... Cowardly isn't complaining that they are doing something illegal it's just pointing out that it's shitty.