Tripmonkey_uk said:
EvilDragon said:
Yes, and then second batchers would get first batch units as well, despite not having waited two years.
Besides, 7 out of 10 premium units (at least in my shop) where first batch preorderers who upgraded, so they already waited but decided to put in a little extra money to help us and get their unit a tad faster...
Second batchers being moved up the list to fill empty spots in batch one would have been fine as they have been waiting too. I also don't have as much of a problem with people who already had a pre-order upgrading. Letting brand new customers jump in front of first and second batchers who have been waiting is completely different and I find it very worrying that you can't seem to understand the difference
Sure I know the difference. There are many things I don't like, however, understand that they have to be done.
This seems to be different from your point of you: You see it happened, and while you kinda seem to have understood it needed to be done to continue the project, you still seem to try to tell us we did wrong here.
EvilDragon said:
So, how much % of the full amount of preorderers is that? As a lot of first-batch preorderers upgraded, they seem to want to support us.
So it doesn't matter to you at all and you feel justified in what's happened because most people wont be affected by it? What about the people that it does effect?
And what about people who have stood by you and want to upgrade but can't afford it. Should they just be forgotten about because they don't have the money?
How many times do I have to tell that I am not HAPPY about that it had to be done, but do understand that it HAS to be done.
I do care a lot about the people - that's why I think what Craig did was the right thing.
He hired more people, so assembly was faster. So those premium orders sped up the delivery for the current normal orders as well.
The risk that things needed even longer and Craigs Company would go bust because too many cancel was there, and that would've meant that NO ONE, no single preorder would get neither Pandora nor money back.
So we've got too choices here: Safety with Premium Pandoras, which would not even cause delays for normal orders, or continue to build the units at a slower pace, with the risk that the company goes bust and no one will get anything.
Sorry, but the choice is obvious if you CARE about the users.
But even if it would've caused delays:
You rather would not get your unit nor your money back than having to wait 2 weeks longer?
Honestly?
EvilDragon said:
Ask the question to which exactly you want an answer and I will give it as good as I can. But stop moving around in circles, please.
Actually your the one moving in circles by bringing up the following stuff that has nothing at all to do with what were talking about.. yet again..
Nope. I asked for a question here which you didn't provide me.
At least, I cannot see any questions here.
No I don't want the project to fail, I feel that I've made that point pretty clear more than once on this thread alone.
I find it strange that your point of view has changed so completely within the last 4-5 pages of this thread but your still trying to make me out to be wrong.
You've gone from saying that you agreed with what Craig did and that there was nothing wrong with it, to admitting that "Yes, legally, the latter one might not be 100% okay" and "so Craig might be at a legal fault" and saying that "you are not responsible for anything Craig does" and that you weren't too happy with what he did yourself.
Sorry, but I've never changed my point of view.
From the very beginning I stated that:
1. I never was HAPPY about that, but I AGREE to do it if it is necessary. Easy.
2. I didn't see it from a legal point of view, when I said it's okay what he did, but from a logical point of view. I still think it was the correct thing to do to continue with the project, even if what Craig did was against the law.
3. I never said anywhere I am responsible if Craig does something to break the law, did I? Nothing changed here.
My opinions have never changed here, maybe you didn't understand that I always use two different views:
a) The legal view
B) The human view
In some countries there are laws that allow you to kill women if they cheat their husband.
Can't say I agree with those, so with B) I'd say they shouldn't have killed that woman, but with a) I'd have to say she broke the law in her country.
It's the same here, and I always try to be on the HUMAN side of life.
And people are tying to make out that my arguments don't make sense :huh:
EvilDragon said:
I'm going to leave it at that. After your point of view has changed so dramatically, I really don't see how you can continue to argue with anyone without changing the facts to suit your side of the argument. As far as I'm concerned I've got my point across.
Well...
1. I never changed my point of view, as explained above.
2. You never asked a direct question, even though I told you in my last post to do so (also see above).
So, if you want answers, make direct questions I can answer.
And if you think I changed my point of view, tell me where I did that.
