So you would have people vote with their wallets, just so long as they don't also complain while doing it?
I don't think you would really tell your mother that. Maybe you would tell your mother to stick with Windows 7 after trying out Windows 8 in the store, but I do not believe for one second that you would say anything to the effect of "Microsoft doesn't owe you that" in response to her reacting to the change.
Vote with your wallets and complain. Why the hell not?
> "Of course, your examples involve things that people pay for"
Admittedly yes, in the Windows 8 case (outside of trying it out in the store). Not so in the New Coke case. Nobody bought a lifetime subscription of Coke. People were upset because they could no longer buy the old Coke, not because they were duped into buying New Coke (well, not for more than a few cents anyway).
Nobody was owed the ability to buy classic Coke. Complain they did though, and can you really fault them for that? Really?
I do not believe for one second that you would say anything to the effect of "Microsoft doesn't owe you that" in response to her reacting to the change
Why not? My mother's no idiot; she may not understand the intricacies of her computer works but she doesn't expect Microsoft to automatically accommodate her tastes any more than she expects Volvo to keep making her favorite model from the 80s. If anything she helped instill this attitude in me when I expressed disappointment about my favorite kids TV shows going away. As a consumer I don't expect producers to be sentimental about their offerings; if I think some particular change is foolish then I argue that on economic grounds (but if it turns out to be the profitable thing to do, then I have to accept I was wrong).
I mean, there are certainly choices I'd like corporations to make - I'm into synthesizers, for example, and I really wish that Roland corporation would start issuing TB-303s again, especially now that their competitors have chosen to resissue some of their classic designs at affordable prices. But after analyzing the numbers and potential profit margins, I'm 99% certain that it's Not Going To Happen no matter how much I and my fellow synth geeks beg for it. It's not worth the risk involved, and they don't owe me such a product. (On the other hand, it would make good economic sesnse for them to reissue certain classic drum machines...)
Not so in the New Coke case. Nobody bought a lifetime subscription of Coke.
They bought bottles and cans of Coke, and when they discovered that they didn't like the taste of New Coke I presume the they stopped purchasing it. I guarantee that Coke executives paid a great deal more to consumers' behavior than whatever it was they said.
When someone voices a complaint, they are not inherently making an implicit statement about being owed something.
I doubt you would speak to your mother that way because, frankly, it is an rather anti-social reply. She's not dumb, she knows she is owed nothing. In the hypothetical complaint she was not claiming to be owed anything. Your quip is clearing nothing up.
I disagree. Complaining about some deficiency on a free blogging platform sounds exactly like a misplaced expression of entitlement to me.
Maybe it is anti-social, but I don't feel bad about that. I have yet to receive a coherent answer to my original 'so what' question, about why Tumblr should enable NSFW content indexing on Google if they (Tumblr) feel that it's hurting their brand to do so.
The thing about "so what?" questions is they are rarely real questions.
I like apricots... so what? Taxis are yellow... so what? This T-Mobile coverage at the airport is shit... so what? Some people are displeased with recent tumblr changes... so what?
Why would you expect an answer to any of those "questions"?
I wouldn't, but that wasn't the sort of question I asked. Instead, I quoted the specific context, because I was curious about why the parent poster thought it mattered if adult-flagged blogs got delisted from search engines. He had phrased his comment in such a way that it seemed like he considered this a Bad Thing, whereas it seems to me that a) you could still build an audience without relying on Google and b) it seemed strange to me that the existence of a blog should be measured only in terms of its readership.
I think this was perfectly clear from the context, and substituting arbitrary statements about nothing in particular to critique my original question (after having complained about how I would communicate with my mother or console a bereft cola drinker) suggests to me that it's you who doesn't have any particular point to make.
I found some of the other comments disagreeing with my viewpoint more enlightening, but I'm not clear on what your point is other than having a go at me.
Did it occur to you that perhaps he thinks it will negatively impact him?
If that is genuinely what you were not getting, then you have been anything but clear. My point is that you seem to be engaging in a sort of senseless anti-social comment sniping. I think that has been pretty clear, though I admit I could have done more to make my intentions plain.
I don't think you would really tell your mother that. Maybe you would tell your mother to stick with Windows 7 after trying out Windows 8 in the store, but I do not believe for one second that you would say anything to the effect of "Microsoft doesn't owe you that" in response to her reacting to the change.
Vote with your wallets and complain. Why the hell not?
> "Of course, your examples involve things that people pay for"
Admittedly yes, in the Windows 8 case (outside of trying it out in the store). Not so in the New Coke case. Nobody bought a lifetime subscription of Coke. People were upset because they could no longer buy the old Coke, not because they were duped into buying New Coke (well, not for more than a few cents anyway).
Nobody was owed the ability to buy classic Coke. Complain they did though, and can you really fault them for that? Really?