Ebola goat

[Sillyputty]

The real question is..... Does it fare well in pet battles?

[Tziva]

I've seen a few comments from EU players (understandably) not wanting to donate to an American charity, and wanted to reply because I've seen it a few times and I think it's based on some confusion and misconceptions...

There are many, many valid arguments why one might opt not to donate to them (many of which I agree with, in fact), but the conclusion that the money is going to an American charity isn't one because, really, it's not. It's going through an American charity.

Yes, the American Red Cross is a national subset of the organisation that helps in America with things like national disasters and health services. That was where the money from the hurricane Sandy pet went, and that money stayed in America to help Americans. But with the context on this one, the money is going to funnel to the international side of the organisation since the ebola outbreak is not occurring in the United States. You can even see on the American Red Cross' website that this is precisely what will happen - the money goes through them to the international NGO. The Red Cross international NGO was founded in Europe and has a network of members across many, many, many nations. On no level is it an American charity.

It's also worth commenting tat although this is a relatively small and contained issued, diseases and pandemics are a relevant issue to every country since they are not a problem that is limited by national or political affiliation. I'm not saying ebola is the most critical health issue to worry about right now -- it's not, just the one with the most media attention -- but the idea of "it's happening elsewhere and therefore isn't relevant to me" is shortsighted. You want to handle it when it is happening elsewhere and isn't relevant to you, because if you wait until it is spread and is relevant, it's too late. Altruism or selfishness; in either case you want that kind of shit solved before it is everywhere. TL;DR charity money towards world health issues benefits everyone, not just the people being affected now.

(and a related aside, I also saw someone who assumes red cross just does palliative care for the ill rather than helping with prevention/stopping outbreaks at the source and wanted to say that the Red Cross actually assists with all these things)

I'm not trying to convince people to buy the pet or do donate to this (or any) charity, nor am I trying to "white knight" the Red Cross, but I thought some more information might be a good idea so people can at least make an informed decision based on accurate information.

(And if you want to donate but not through the American Red Cross, I vote for MSF )

[Tharkkun]

The problem is not that it's not worth the price, the problem is that it has a price. And yes, I am in fact entitled to a lot of things, when I pay for a game, by purchasing expansions and paying a subscription fee. Getting pets and mounts without paying additional real money should be one of those things. Next you're gonna tell me I'm not entitled to playing the game, just because I subscribed, or that I'm not entitled to new content just because I purchased an expansion pack.

Do you complain when you buy a new car and you must pay for mud flaps, upgraded sound system, trim, etc? Do you cry to the waiter when it's extra for bacon on your cheeseburger? No. So why do you complain when Blizzard offers and extra pet/mount in their store? It's the same damn thing. It's being entitled when there was never any plans to include these items with the standard subscription. You saw them datamined which means nothing.

- - - Updated - - -

Both competition and collecting are big parts of WOW. In most games the ability to acquire things are based on your ability, doing something that is hard or time consuming to earn something, etc.

But in WOW, they just want to milk your pocket. While some items exist that you must earn in game, there are an ever-increasing number of them that are exclusive to their little store and must be bought. It pisses off people who like to collect things because it creates a gap in your collection of things you will never be able to obtain no matter how good you are at playing the game or how often you play the game, it is content that is locked from you ever being able to get to it despite all the money you pay (which for people like me is thousands of dollars in blizzard's pocket at this point) and yet they still won't let you get certain things without paying even more.

I know right....

Those 88 new pets and 50 mounts are NOTHING compared to the greed of selling a single new pet and mount in the store. /rolls eyes. Blizzard must be so greedy. Entitled people make me sick.

[DarkMethod]

I've bought a few things from Blizzard store, as well as race/faction changes. I think I'm kind of done with that now. I don't want to spend money there any more.

Great of them to do that however.

[Deleted]

Those 88 new pets and 50 mounts are NOTHING compared to the greed of selling a single new pet and mount in the store. /rolls eyes. Blizzard must be so greedy.

Any serious pet collector is going to buy it anyway.

[Deleted]

didn't buy it

firstly because money is tight atm

second, i don't donate to charities
i see no point in doing so as it in most cases doesn't help with much.
And donating just to make yourself feel better.. no.. money doesn't buy happiness

[Nevakanezah]

Ebolagoat should spread corrupted blood.

[NuLogic]

I will probably get the mount and pet soon but I honestly don't care what blizzard does with the money. Nice if they want to donate.

[Deleted]

i bought the bundle, probably only because it was $10 to charity AND a $5 saving on the mount, otherwise i probably wouldnt have been able to "justify" the purchase. Now I have it im pleased with the purchase and will (hopefully) actually put the little goat to some good use

[Deleted]

I've seen a few comments from EU players (understandably) not wanting to donate to an American charity, and wanted to reply because I've seen it a few times and I think it's based on some confusion and misconceptions...

There are many, many valid arguments why one might opt not to donate to them (many of which I agree with, in fact), but the conclusion that the money is going to an American charity isn't one because, really, it's not. It's going through an American charity.

Yes, the American Red Cross is a national subset of the organisation that helps in America with things like national disasters and health services. That was where the money from the hurricane Sandy pet went, and that money stayed in America to help Americans. But with the context on this one, the money is going to funnel to the international side of the organisation since the ebola outbreak is not occurring in the United States. You can even see on the American Red Cross' website that this is precisely what will happen - the money goes through them to the international NGO. The Red Cross international NGO was founded in Europe and has a network of members across many, many, many nations. On no level is it an American charity.

It's also worth commenting tat although this is a relatively small and contained issued, diseases and pandemics are a relevant issue to every country since they are not a problem that is limited by national or political affiliation. I'm not saying ebola is the most critical health issue to worry about right now -- it's not, just the one with the most media attention -- but the idea of "it's happening elsewhere and therefore isn't relevant to me" is shortsighted. You want to handle it when it is happening elsewhere and isn't relevant to you, because if you wait until it is spread and is relevant, it's too late. Altruism or selfishness; in either case you want that kind of shit solved before it is everywhere. TL;DR charity money towards world health issues benefits everyone, not just the people being affected now.

(and a related aside, I also saw someone who assumes red cross just does palliative care for the ill rather than helping with prevention/stopping outbreaks at the source and wanted to say that the Red Cross actually assists with all these things)

I'm not trying to convince people to buy the pet or do donate to this (or any) charity, nor am I trying to "white knight" the Red Cross, but I thought some more information might be a good idea so people can at least make an informed decision based on accurate information.

(And if you want to donate but not through the American Red Cross, I vote for MSF )

I really like this post, very well argumented. I also saw people complaining that the money does not go to their nation's charity organization and they don't give a shit about others... and I feel sorry for such people, for, in the end, they're not even the ones making the donation, Blizzard is, and if they wanted to donate to their nation's charities, nobody is stopping them, but they want the pet and then whine that the money goes to the AMERICAN red cross and not to their charity helping their people alone... I don't know, aren't we all people? It shouldn't matter who are the people helped as long as they do need help truly, and Ebola affected nations do need it.

[Kelimbror]

If I buy the Ebola goat it will simply be because Argi is the cutest little mofo and pet battles are fun. I won't delude myself that I am doing anything meaningful for charity. Totally glad they will donate my money, but there's nothing charitable about my actions. I could just donate money on my own instead of getting the cute bugger, but I want it.

[Deleted]

Do you complain when you buy a new car and you must pay for mud flaps, upgraded sound system, trim, etc? Do you cry to the waiter when it's extra for bacon on your cheeseburger? No. So why do you complain when Blizzard offers and extra pet/mount in their store? It's the same damn thing. It's being entitled when there was never any plans to include these items with the standard subscription. You saw them datamined which means nothing.

Do you need to pay for said car every single month just to use it? And I'm not counting gas, I mean only to enter the car, do you? No. Can the car be taken from you by the builder at any moment they wish? No? Oh, ok.

So, when you will have to pay to enter the car, still need to pay for the mud flaps, upgrades sound system, trim etc and the company who made the car will be able to take it back whenever they wanted, then we can compare.

But let's do the cheeseburger. It would be like paying for the cheeseburger, and then it's brought to you, you pay for extra bacon and want to eat it... but waiter says no, you payed just to see the cheeseburger, you also need to pay to access it extra. You don't? Ok, then they'll take it back, and all that bacon you ordered for it too.

[Zonned]

I love the cheeseburger analogies in this thread I bought a bag of 10 mcdonalds cheeseburgers to chow down on today.

Anyway I see that people are conflicted about the good or not good ebola goat is doing. It is true that he is a carrot for charity but it still does go directly to charity, I don't think it diminishes it because you are getting a digital pet I mean the pet costs nothing. It's really no different than those TV commercials offering to send you cards and pictures for your donations... its just you get the goat instead.

[Zoneseek]

Can anyone speak to how strong of a battle pet it looks to be?

[Mosotti]

I don't give a fuck about goats. Or ebola.

[Deleted]

If you want that "part of the expansion experience," buy it. Otherwise, go pound sand.

And that's a terrible attitude to have. Companies love sheep like you.

[Zonned]

And that's a terrible attitude to have. Companies love sheep like you.

I think a cow would be a better comparison because he is getting milked.