Printable View
Did you mix up FansProject and iGear? I personally see iGear's "mini MP Prime" as a definite KO because it is just a scaled copy of an existing toy:Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AZRAEL1
http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showth...?t=5450&page=3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle
I think I may have, but there are too many to count. They just keep popping up all over the place. They were the ones that made the LED gun as well arent they?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle
Point is, I see them as making a toy for the fans that is more in scale with the Grimlock that was released.
Are you saying that if a parent believes in and uses corporal punishment, then they don't have any moral ground to complain if someone sexually assaults their kids?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaydisc
Most parents who are pro-corporal punishment aren't advocates of child abuse. They don't hit their kids with the intention of abusing them, if anything they do it as an act of love. I personally don't agree with corporal punishment (I'm more of an advocate for the Behaviour-Consequences model), but at the same time I don't deny that people who are pro-corporal also have their children's best interests at heart, and they also discipline their children out of love, not malice.
I don't know how an act of love, even if you and I strongly disagree with it, can be compared with something as henious as sexual assault. You could argue that corporal punishment is a form of physical abuse, but again the underlying motivation is completely different - there is NO malice.
And parents who believe in corporal punishment aren't necessarily the same as those who physically abuse their children. There's a difference between spanking your child because s/he's done something naughty, as opposed to bashing your child up because you're drunk and you had a crap day. Again it all boils down to intent.
Apples and oranges are bothcitrusfruits.
Except for apples, which aren't citrus fruits. Which leaves oranges. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
I'm not digressing into a discussion about child-rearing. It was a ludicrous analogy to being with. Your Parenting Thread is here.
1. It was actually Kyle who first introduced the child abuse analogy. Then you responded to it ("Well, if we are really going to try to shoehorn this example in,"), so I in turn responded to that. So it was never about me trying to redirect this discussion into one about parenting - it was an _analogy_.
2. How is it any more or less ludicrous than other analogies that have been presented?
e.g.: stealing, killing etc. - the point I was trying to make is that there are different moral and legal grounds concerning even the same acts depending on the intent and motivations behind those acts.
e.g.:
+ stealing because you're starving vs. stealing to make money
+ manslaughter vs. murder (they're both forms of killing)
Which comes down to:
+ infringing IP to create products that don't exist vs. infringing IP to counterfeit already existing products
What I'm saying is that _intent_ and _motive_ are factors which ought to be taken into account.
My bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaydisc
Hilarious! Tear inducing Laughter! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Sky Shadow
About KOs
Hasbro appears to have sold a large selection of moulds in china. It is a pretty common theory on the internet that Hasbro just pretty much dumped everything when transformers lost popularity. It was the thinking of the time that everything was over. They sold the factories, moulds, plans, machines that print the boxs etc. They didn't store their property properly nor did they dispose of it thoughtfully... Like it or not but they are responsible 100% for this mess, they didn't count on this nostalgia boom... all they ever do is what is profitable for themselves.
Would you buy all this up and not use it?
About IP stealing new products
It's great. In this day and age competition should be encouraged. Hasbro has shown that they are not willing to care about the adult collector market at all. If they cared they would have gone to china (you can go anywhere online now) and offered these talented designers jobs. What they did was typically american "you can't do that, it's mine!! I'll sue!" whatever.
Now someone’s gonna have light their darkest hour! :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Robzy
That’s certainly how I see it. It’s more in scale with the BTs and MP-08 and that’s their reason for doing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AZRAEL1
That’s exactly why I wasn’t gonna touch it. Not even with a forty foot pole.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaydisc
My sincerest apologies for missing it. With the degree of posts in this thread, I was bound to be remiss at some point. And if anyone else feels I’ve missed their points, I apologise and will respectfully respond if you point it out to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle
But my response is that I don't think it absolves Hasbro/Takara if they are touching on other's IP but two wrongs also do not make a right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle
I think there's a high degree of provocative flippancy within your tone in this statement and the ones that preceded it and I've felt it most apt to sidestep that to avoid digression onto awkward discussions on other social issues. Mind you, I do not think that is the best way to conduct oneself across the board when trying to convey a point but if that's what the board passes as okay these days then perhaps we should all start posting like that in other threads. To answer your overall point; I completely agree FP have a high degree of creativity. It's truly breathtaking a lot of the stuff that they produce and I have no problem with buying it. My only problem is how one can maintain some air of moral superiority when what they support stems from the very same infringement - theft of someone else's IP. As Griffin pointed out there is a spectrum of products but at their most fundamental level they all include theft of IP. If you are more creative in terms of what you do, does that make it okay? So I steal a part of the block of land u no longer use and build a spectacular waterfall, that's okay as long as its wonderfully creative? I think not. I don't have a problem with either KOs or mass customs. I just think there needs to be a recognition that they only ever exist b/c you are stealing someone's IP. You can't steal from someone and then rationalise that it's okay b/c of whatever reason you conveniently want to use.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle
And yes, I do acknowledge that i think there is theft of IP by all along Griffin's spectrum but the very reason why I don't really care is b/c to me, as Kyle points out, there are a lot more important moral issues out there. Some that are substantially more weighty. I just refuse to be hypocritical b/c I full well realise that both stem from the same infringement and the moral high ground shouldn't be taken on one but not the other.
Firstly, I do want to clarify again that I’m not attacking FP by any stretch of the imagination. I’m not supporting anti-KOs. I’m not supporting anti-fan customs. I’m simply trying to make the point it’s very hard to reconcile how you can deride one but not the other. Both stem exist and only exist b/c of the very same reason. You steal someone’s IP and produce something based on it whose complete success relies on that IP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle
To inadvertently answer Sky Shadow’s query, the creativity behind designing an all new transforming toy is not the same. I think those are legit. In many ways, they are competitors b/c they focus on making a transforming toy as opposed to stealing the character developed and nurtured by Hasbro. Why do we get unhappy that when we get Hardshell instead of Bombshell? Tankor instead of Octane? What’s in a name you say? An awful lot. B/c of the time, money and energy put into developing that trademark. That’s IP. To build your own transforming toy is something I’d definitely support as I do like transforming toys and not dependent on the IP of another. KOs and fan customs, wherever they sit on the spectrum breach that. You cannot steal something and after the fact try and justify it with whatever convenient reason there is.
And nor do I see fan customs as being exactly the same thing as KOs. I do appreciate that they sit somewhere else along the spectrum. But the fact is though the very reasons anyone wants to use to justify the existence of one in favour of the other can be twisted to justify the existence of the other. If you want to chastise one you have to chastise the other b/c they exist b/c of the very same reason: theft of IP. To do otherwise is a pretty hypocritical situation.
And lastly, even if we agree that Hasbro/Takara are stealing IP themselves, two wrongs do not make a right.
Which is pretty much what I’ve done. Ironically enough it wasn’t all that long ago, maybe a year, that I was spouting hatred of KOs. Funny how things work out, huh?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hereticpoo
I don’t think we need a poll though b/c it’s clearly that not everyone agrees but I think there’s some challenging times ahead and the issues become more and more blurry. I think it was a very worthwhile discussion to have though.
I don’t want to get into these analogies and will not argue those. As with some of the child rape ones which are inherently loaded and flippant, I think to compare this (stealing of IP) to murder is quite far fetched. To compare it to stealing b/c you’re starving? I don’t want to go any further but are you trying to compare fan customs to starving people? People who are struggling to get by? That’s a bit rich.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
Or are you comparing the motives and intent of fan customs to those of charitable organisations? That they’re pure and noble? Again, isn’t that a bit rich? Especially when you have to steal first to be pure and noble of intent and motive?
I think we do try and compute why a KO or mass custom has been built. As you and others have pointed out, there are a number of reasons. Some better than others. Some less so than others.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
But let me put it this way:
So I steal from you what’s rightfully yours and then turn around and say to you “well you weren’t using it anyway.” Would any of us like that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
Which as I’ve previously said you’re perfectly entitled too. You don’t buy either. It’s those that buy one yet deride the other as if they’re some unholy evil.
When you say malicious then, if a producer of a KO is completely open and discloses that it is a KO then is it okay? They’re not deceiving anyone then, are they? How can they be malicious? Isn’t that validating the existence of KOs? KOers as I said could be viewed that they are simply producing something that Hasbro/Takara have said in the past that they have no intention of producing. They do the research that Hasbro/Takara find too expensive to do by recasting the molds and put it out there so people have the opportunity to buy a nice minty version of a vintage toy. Is that all okay then for a KO to exist?
Again, please don’t see this as defending KOs. It isn’t. It’s trying to point out many of the reasons for mass-customs can be applied to KOs. And the reason that is, is b/c they steal IP that is desirable in the first place – whether it be in a mold or a character. KOers aren’t going to produce Go-Bots. Mass-customs aren’t going to produce Go-Bot accessories. And the fundamental reason for that is b/c there is no value in that.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While I have enjoyed this discussion, I do have to agree with Kup that this is becoming rather circular.. Hence why my subtle suggestion in my previous post to let's finish this. I think all points of views have been conveyed and the positions set out and at the very least this is an issue that's been raised and put out there. I don't think it'll go away and we'll see more fan customs to come that test the very boundaries. That said, if there is further debate, I do certainly welcome it.
No no. It is not okay to use provocative flippancy on the board. If I came across as using it or did accidentally use it then I also offer my sincerest apologies. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by STL
I do believe this is the very least that all can agree. :o:)Quote:
Originally Posted by STL
If the discussion is meant to be about morals instead of legality, it should be known that most people regard following the law as a moral and ethical thing to do. For those who don't respect the law, legality isn't a moral issue, and their opinions would differ on this matter. Because morals is, doing what makes you feel good about yourself, based on what you have been taught and what you have learnt. If you don't respect a law, or it is an unjust law, does adhering to it make you feel good about yourself? If you've learnt, or been taught the values of honour, respect and decency towards others and yourself, you wouldn't object to adhering to most laws, because most laws are ethical.
Legally, we've discussed this issue. And most have only looked at the raised concepts from this perspective, because to most, legality = moral values. At least, when the Law is Just, Fair, and Ethical.
And Ethics relates to both.
A moral compass relates to the ethics of an individual. If it is ethical to adhere to the law, than the legal position is a moral one. If one does not believe a law is ethical, the moral position is to break the law. Sure, you get in trouble, but you will feel good about yourself for doing 'the right thing'.
This is the basis of the American Constitution - the people are obligated to replace the people/person in power if they are corrupt or abuse their position. Sure, it would be considered treason by the people in power, but in the minds of those overthowing the government (or 200 years ago, overthrowing British rule), they are doing the ethical, moral thing.
The character of Robin Hood was inspired by the same concept, that an unjust law needs to be fought by those who have the power and ethics to stand up to it, or else they can't feel good about themselves (morally).
In capitalist societies, laws can sometimes be unethical, or used unethically, because the priority of a business is to make money (a selfish ideology) rather than providing for the needs of others (a selfless ideology).
The laws relating to patents are ideally meant to protect the hard earned time and money of the inventor/creator, by giving them exclusive rights to any profit from that item/design. That seems fair doesn't it? If you personally invented something, like a clean energy device that would revolutionise and save the world, you should be rewarded for it by preventing anyone else from manufacturing it, or an inspired item, without authorisation. But what if an oil company buys up the patent (because you name a price and easily make your millions), and locks it away to prevent anyone from being able to ever use it? Is that ethical of the oil company? No, but it is legal. The global warming issue gets worse and you are the only one with the knowledge to offer a clean energy source. Legally you wouldn't be allowed to help the people of the world, but morally... what would you do? Adhere to an unethical situation because you are bound by the law, or do the illegal, yet moral act of making public the clean energy technology?
Okay, so that is just an extreme example to illustrate that adhering to the law isn't always a moral or ethical issue. But it does relate to this discussion about toy Intellectual Property.
So a more relevant example.
Gun-Formers are illegal in Victoria, but how many of you have one... and how many of you have complained about it being illegal to own them? Would it make you feel good to not own some prized TFs just because it is illegal in your state? Those whose fear of imprisonment outweighs the desire to own what others are legally allowed to own, will feel good NOT to own them. But those in the reverse, or feel it is an unjust, unfair law, would only feel good if they owned them. Who has the moral high ground? Well, both do, based on what they believe to be more important to themselves and their personal moral welfare.
Back to the topic - Legally, all unauthorised product that sells off the back of the Transformers Brand, is illegal, because it infringes on Hasbro/Takara's ownership of that IP.
But morally, it comes down to the ethics of both the producers of the unauthorised stuff, and the ethics of the IP owners (and the laws that protect their capitalistic, greed oriented objectives). So the extent of how much you care about your impact on Hasbro/Takara with your purchases, your morals will reflect that. If you prefer to support all official product, than morally, you wouldn't buy anything unauthorised. If you prefer to support 'ethical' official product, morally, you'd still avoid just about everything unauthorised, but wouldn't feel bad about purchasing an item that substitues an official item that Hasbro/Takara have packed in with an expensive, unwanted item. And even then, those people have the morals to not pass it off as the real thing or claim it is. Those who don't care about their impact on Hasbro/Takara, or don't care about the purity of their collection, will not feel bad about buying anything unauthorised.
Moral standards are not universal - to each other, or to everything.
It comes down to what they see is the right thing to do for themselves and for others (IP owners, other fans, etc), to make themselves feel content with their decisions.
Since the purpose, intention and legality of these things (replica figures, replica accesories, fan-custom stuff) vary, it is wrong to expect people's moral standards on each to be the same.
There is no 'all is right, all is wrong' morality here.
To prove it, here is my moral values on each of these elements.
Replica past figures (of any size scale) don't pay any commission to the entity that created or own the designs, and actively intend to deceive the consumer by trying to make sure the product can pass as the real thing without close inspection. Since these toys are progressively going to disappear as time goes on, if the official owner of them doesn't produce more, then we should accept that certain items are going to become rare, and not have the expectation that all old TFs will forever be cheap and easy to acquire. Morally, I don't respect the intentions of replica producers, and don't support or condone buying them. The greed in me would love to easily find and buy all the toys I don't have, but I wouldn't feel right about it, because they wouldn't count in the collection, and would remain on my purchase list. But others who can't yet afford the real thing, would see them as a temporary place-filler, to inspire them to buy the real thing. I can't recall anyone on this local forum proudly displaying replica TFs toys in their collection, because morally, I don't think anyone here sees them as actual replacements of the real thing.
Competing 'entire' product (both custom or replica), like Arcee or Drift, or past figures that are going to be reissued, are more illegal because we definitely know that it would take away sales of current/future official (ethical) product. One of the reasons I don't support items in the first category, is based on the slight possibility of them ever being reissued. But as soon as they are definitely going to be reissued, there is no excuse for buying a conterfeit figure. So morally, I wouldn't support any figure that competes with the real, official thing, because, I don't feel bad about avoiding them.
Exact replica replacement parts/stickers/accessories, also don't pay any commissions to reproduce those parts, but the intentions by those producing them and selling them are often mixed (selfless and selfish), so I also don't pursue these for myself, (but more for the purpose of me keeping my collection pure). In a similar vein to the first category, I feel that items that are no longer in production, should be allowed to become rare and expensive over time. I might not like paying out more for a rare figure or part, but I will feel happy that it is a legit item and keeps the collection as a purely Transformers (r) Brand collection (my moral position on this particular issue). Stickers are probably the only repro items I wouldn't be too fussed about, because they are fairly insignificant to the overall toy, but I do have a problem with repro parts/accessories, because like replica figures, they can end up in circulation as the real thing, contaminating collections of real figures and parts.
Custom figures/parts/accessories - provided they are obviously different to anything officially available, or don't compete with any current/future/foreseable item, these do not negatively impact on the IP owners' earnings.
This differs to 'entire' custom figures that compete with official product, because a custom accessory is only worth buying if you buy something in the official product line. And as such, creates a sale, rather than prevents it. Even the recent MP Grimlock crown accessory (provided it is a non-replica, fan-custom), ensures the purchase of *A* MP Grimlock, which makes Hasbro/Takara profit.
But when the official source unethically wants the more serious/bigger collectors to re-buy an entire, expensive toy just get a new accessory, that should have been in the first release (which is like when they have a multi-pack with just one new figure), you either miss out, or pay a fortune to get it (if you really wanted one). Either way, you feel bad it, and if you have to have the exact same moral position on every unauthorised item, those negative feelings shouldn't be there. After all, the 'moral highground' is supposed to make you feel good about yourself and your decisions. It might be illegal to produce or purchase an unauthorised Custom item, but ethically it comes down to how much you despise the intentions of the IP owner for how they are making the official item available. I personally wouldn't support an exact replica of the official crown, but don't see how a non-replica crown is any different from any other fan-custom item that actually guarantees the purchase of an official item.
Since I don't much care about having a Crown for MP Grimlock, I don't feel bad about not having one or missing out on one. But morally, I wouldn't have a problem with a custom item being produced to compete with an unethical officially released item.
And since it is okay for Hasbro to produce figures that are inspired, but not authorised, by other IPs, it would be hypocritical and unethical for them to complain or prevent non-replica, Custom items.
As this forum admin though...
I would prefer to have no unauthorised/illegal stuff on this forum, but due to Hasbro's position on different issues and their own unauthorised use on 'inspired' likenesses of other IPs, I allow the items that Hasbro appear to have no problem with (small production, non-replica, Custom items).
The only 'convenience' I see here in this topic, is trying to apply the same moral value to different issues and different people. As soon as two things like Replica items and Custom items can be distinguished legally, ethically and to their intention, the moral values assigned to each differs. Especially when taking into account the beliefs and integrity of each individual person.
Well said. :)
There was someone who did post images of their undersized KO G1 Seeker jets in a manner that, at least in my interpretation, seemed as if they were proudly showing them off as if they'd just finished their G1 Seeker collection. They even posted size comparison pics with more recent Universe toys. I'm not going to say who it was because I honestly don't remember! (even if I did I wouldn't publicly name them :p) There are other boards where people do boast about acquiring KOs... some people even start discussion threads about specific KO toys and even make reviews of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by griffin
The custom crown for MP Grimlock is an interesting example. When the Japanese toy magazines showed the MP Grimlock prototype with a crown, it got fans excited. Fans were then disappointed with the general release of MP Grimlock not including the crown. This custom crown now "discourages" fans from buying MP-8X, but at the same time "encourages" fans to buy the general release MP-8 as the crown can "complete" the toy.
Now I don't feel like debating or arguing with anyone, but do feel like simply sharing my own collecting habits after reading griffin's post. This is in no way saying what I do is correct, nor trying to get anyone to agree with or follow what I do.
I have only kept 2 items which I consider to be KO in my own collection: (1) KO Super God Sword for Brave Maximus/God Fire Convoy and (2) KO MP sized Roller with accessories.
I suppose I'm "morally" ok with (1), as I could only "officially" get the sword as either a lucky draw item or with the purchase of JP TRU exclusive clear God Fire Convoy boxset. I felt cheated when Takara released the sword with the TRU boxset but provided no other means to "purchase" the sword if I already bought their general release Fire Convoy and God Magnus earlier. Granted, as much as I don't agree with Takara's decision, it's Takara's IP and they were legally free to do whatever they wished with their IP, and I did happily buy the Fire Convoy and God Magnus toys for exactly what they were (before they announced the sword).
When I came across the KO sword on eBay much later, the stock of the TRU boxset was long gone from JP TRU store shelves. I could only see my purchase affecting directly the aftermarket value of either the lucky draw sword or the TRU boxset, with minimal damage (I'd hope :o) to Takara itself. Call me selfish but I don't really care about the aftermarket value of other people's toys. :D This KO sword allows me to enjoy my official Fire Convoy and God Magnus toys to their fullest. However, if Takara one day decides to reissue the sword with new or no changes, then I would HAPPILY buy an official Takara one.
Now on to (2). I'm a fan of Takara's Masterpiece series, and have collected every single release so far. When Takara released MP-4 with the trailer, I again felt cheated. But again it was well within Takara's right to do whatever releases they wished to. And I bought the MP-4 toy. (I would also like to point out that I have bought two of every single Takara MP releases.) I then saw the scaled up MP sized Roller as an opportunity to complete my enjoyment of my own official Takara MP-4 toy, and I didn't see it competing with Takara directly since Takara already missed their own opportunities to include MP-1 and MP-4 with a Roller toy. Is this legal? No. Do I feel good about it? Yes. However, if Takara one day releases an official MP sized Roller toy, or even like a MP-4 toy AGAIN but with an extra Roller (say MP-4X), I WILL still buy two of any of these official Takara items again because I'm crazy. :o
The new "mini-MP OP" though, is definitely something I'm not a fan of. It (a) does not complement or complete any exisitng Takara toy, (b) is extrapolated from an existing toy, and (c) has zero creativity whatsoever.
I can argue that my (1) KO Super God Sword is the same as (b) and (c), however it does not agree with (a) so I'm still ok with it. Similarly for (2), it is the same as (b) and (c) but again does not agree with (a). And keep in mind that I will be buying the official versions of these items if they can be made available to me.
Now an interesting question is would I buy a KO for parts to complete a broken toy? Now I have never done this yet, but I would say yes as it goes against (a) and will "complete" my original official toy. I would find this acceptable as long as I keep this toy in my own collection, and I will be even ok to sell it as long as I make sure the potential buyers understand exactly what the toy is.
I would like to point out that I was at some point very tempted to have "WST Dinobots" and "KO mini Seekers" in my own collection, but I ultimately decided against having them. I can however understand their appeal to some fans though. But since they agree with all of (a), (b) and (c) I would prefer waiting for official Takara/Hasbro reissues at some point.
And yes, I made up my own rules about what's right and what's wrong. Did I change them or update them to accommodate my own needs and make myself feel better? Certainly. Will I continue to change my own rules if I see them as convenient? Of course yes. I simply don't see why I can't change my "moral goal posts", and why someone else should come up to me and tell me that I'm not allowed to change them. :D
Now onto fan customs. Since you all know I'm a big fan of FansProject stuff, I'll only use them here as my examples. All of the FansProject stuff don't agree with (a), (b) or (c). So I'm perfectly ok with them.
Will I still buy an official Magnus Armour and Prime Trailer, if Hasbro/TakaraTomy decide to bundle them with their old toys so I have to buy the old toys again? I would say yes (but I'm only speaking for myself here.)
I would buy a KO or repro Spike in a heartbeat, just because finding Spike on his own would just be so freakin' expensive. I paid $240 for my Fortress Maximus (cos it's yellowed, missing Spike and accessories) and I would probably pay more than that for a lone Spike, which I just think isn't worth it. So while I otherwise don't buy unlicensed products, I would make an exception for Spike.
But as Kyle pointed out, that would come under an aftermarket value of the toy, so I would find that ok as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoktimusPrime
Some of the older toys are far too expensive for most people, and I can see why they settle for "non-official" parts. And in the highly unlikely event that they would re-release him, I know you would probably buy it, so it doesn't affect Has/Tak's sales.
Personally though, I like to buy the official stuff even though it costs me an arm and a leg :p
Some might argue that because you don't encourage these on this forum, they're more reluctant to show photos of them. :D Howerver, there're other things you're known to dislike, yet people still do them often on this forum anyway. So I don't think this point can really hold? :confused::o:pQuote:
Originally Posted by griffin
I f***ing hate direct, replica KO's with an unnatural degree of abhorrence, yet amongst my maybe 1000 Tfs there exists one lone KO that I bought because I was young, foolish and a little over eager to finish a sub-set.
The ebay seller was trying to pass it off as genuine but I knew what it was before purchase.
Do I incur any self-hate over this?
Sure, a bit. Hypocrisy is a loathsome quality to me personally, yet I am practicing it by still displaying said figure instead of throwing it vengefully off the twelth story of my building.
Do I feel morally righteous by actively hating KO's yet extolling the virtues of mass-produced fan customs?
F***ing oath!
Do I feel any hypocrisy in this attitude?
No f***ing way!
I had a KO Ratbat which I was duped into buying. For a long time I had no idea. I didn't know he was KO until several months to a year later and during that time I displayed it proudly - You can still see it in my older collection pics. After I read the KO ID page I grew suspicious as the subtle KO characteristics matched with mine so started to compare it with other people's vintage Ratbats and it became clear without a doubt that I had a KO....
However - although I was 100% it was a KO and I was out looking for a guinine Ratbat (which I now own) I continued to display it in my collection as a place holder.
Yeah I know, shameful :(:o
Yes that was rather eloquent of you Griffin. I have enjoyed the discussion here actually, but the one thing that bothered me was what you described:
As you stated we are all tempered by our own moral values, the only thing about this thread that bugged me was when the "H" word got thrown around (sparingly thankfully). I don't think a person is a hypocrite unless they are untrue to their own moral values.Quote:
Originally Posted by griffin
If people believe there is a moral difference between, (for example) a replica figure and a custom figure, and criticise one and praise the other. I think they have the right to if that's what they truly believe. Their argument may seem legless in the eyes of others but we should not hold others accountable to our own personal values.