Dotty, the charity pet...sort of


(Rhielle) #1102

You aren’t telling the truth. You’re making crap up left and right.

Of course you are. Because you’ve been called out as deliberately making things up, been shown proof, and now have nothing to feign outrage over.

Try having the correct discussion instead of randomly quoting someone out of context. You quoted something that was part of an entirely different conversation in this thread and was not in reference to the OP.

Yup. Still liking posts and not responding because they’re wrong and have no way to back it up, so they’ll use the “I’m muting this” excuse.


(Lejk) #1103

The usual suspects are still at it I see. :laughing:


#1104

i gotta do something to pass time before dinner


(Lejk) #1105

Fair dues dude! We all need a hobby. :slightly_smiling_face:


(Apollokai) #1106

Not sure what is going on at Blizzard. Why that particular cap? Is there a law out there, which limits the amount a charity organization can receive per company?


(Alakhai) #1107

I miss worded something deleted it, I didn’t answer you and you are bothered now several hours later. It’s nice that you feel the need to get an answer out of me, please feel free to carry on reading down, I addressed it.

I don’t see why you keep bringing up numbers when you fail to include the other donations raised by Blizzard this year. And I still don’t get you trying to drag up something I said hours ago that covered both replies. That help appease your mind?

I won’t change my stance here. I am gosh darn proud of Blizzard for their historical donations.


(Rankin) #1108

It’s $500k higher than they’ve ever gotten from any charity pet.

Yes, actually. They’re limited to 10% of their pretax income. We don’t know how much they donate outside of the charity pet deal.


#1109

I’m taking the op at face value.

The intent is to be neutral and not pro/ against it from one extreme or the other.


#1110

Is it worth it to catch up on this thread or just the same arguments being recycled?


(Nobully) #1111

are we still pretending to be outraged by this?

…hasn’t a new “non issue” come along in the last 24 hours?


#1112

Then why are you feeding into it if you think it’s trolling and negative?


(Rankin) #1113

You’re assuming that they’re honest, which isn’t neutral. It should be pretty clear that they’re dishonest given that they abandoned the thread once it built up enough steam to keep going on it’s own.


(Alakhai) #1114

Another 12.7 mil was raised through OW for breast cancer research, that one out there for sure. I haven’t been able to find out what they raised at Blizzcon either though off their charity auction.

That’s a few they made public, we do know they make others as well, that they don’t broadcast.


#1115

I’m just taking the words at face value.

Assuming it’s clear that they are dishonest is more toxic than approaching the conversation in a neutral manner.


#1116

https:/ /imgur .com/a/iCbLbfk

i mean id believe you if it wasn’t me that you miss worded it too and then deleted the post, fortunately somehow the reply to your reply has saved your reply

why am i bringing it up hours later, well because i was afk

why dont i bring up their prior donations this year, well because they finished the third quarter with only 204 million retained and if they donated their current cap of 600 million theyd have lost all their investors

also were on the same side


(Teufelgott) #1117

Says the guy with the second highest post count in the thread.


(Atalanta) #1118

Unless a blue has corrected you (I’m on mobile and it’s being laggy):

Blizzard, like many companies, is setting a charity limit. They’ll donate X amount 100% to charity, and then the rest is absorbed.

In my opinion the notice should change immediately upon completion. Once the allotted charity amount is reached it should no longer be a charity pet. I also wonder if it couldn’t be false advertising otherwise (fine print be damned, no one reads that and that’s exactly how people get away with it).

Whether Blizzard does that or not is not known to me.


(Rankin) #1119

But you’re not being neutral if you’re taking their side.


#1120

They didn’t take a side. They requested clarification and asked multiple questions.


(Teufelgott) #1121

It’s literally all the same people making all the same arguments, on both sides (myself included).

There are a couple latecomers who started spouting some pretty ridiculous conspiracy theories. They couldn’t back up their claims, though, so they made a big show of leaving the thread (except they’re still :heart:ing posts)