Would have loved having that hunter write like that to me what a idiot, you did the right thing if not only because of the way he responded.
Would have loved having that hunter write like that to me what a idiot, you did the right thing if not only because of the way he responded.
Do you hear the voices too?
Control of property confers a title that is good against the whole world except the owner of the absolute title (who is also the OP). It's impossible to be selfish with something you have sole legal title to.
Even as a morality question OP wanted it for player power (which is the point of gear). If he was going to just vendor or shard it or use it for X-mog I can understand how it could be perceived as morally questionable (because he receives no power from these resources). Further, it's only selfish in the sense it benefits him, applying your logic here not giving away all his loot is selfish (besides he stated he handed off a trink that dropped before).
Nope. A tiny bit selfish? Maybe. But that's perfectly okay. After all, you're human. Sure, they had a right to kick you, but it was a dick move on their part. As mentioned, no loot rules were mentioned at the time. So that's on them.
given that it was a clear upgrade for the other,yeah,you're selfish and deserved the boot
How is it selfish? Asking for other peoples stuff is selfish. You do understand that this happened in a PuG?
In case you really aren't lying by saying that, ask yourself this. Is it worse if players keep their own loot or raid leaders ninjaing it for themselves or their friends?
Are you dense? self·ish
/ˈselfiSH/
adjective
(of a person, action, or motive) lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure.
Sure its possible that he wouldn't have gotten anything. But that's what happens with every raid does that make all raids you don't get loot a waste of time? Why is this raid suddenly a need for loot? And would he never gotten another azerite piece? He also could have mentioned that he would give it to them at the end of the raid and then left if it was the only thing he got or asked someone for a trade.
Again I'm not saying it wasn't within his right to keep it. I'm saying it was dumb as he lost out on more potential loot and selfish as he put himself first.
Wait wait wait...that logic can lead down a pretty bad path. Does context matter at all or is it just literally "I have X and if I don't share X when asked, I'm at least somewhat selfish"?
Selfishness is synonymous greed, narcissistic, self-centered etc. It's a pretty darn negative connotation to put on someone.
These digital items don't cost Blizzard anything.
If it is truly nice, it would give everyone a full set on day one.
It cannot, because it wants the $15 monthly sub.
It wants people to progress as slow as possible, but not slow enough to rage quit.
The loot drama on a digital item is the stupidest thing a human can do, because you are a sheep to Blizzard.
What the hell kinda bullshit is this? Seriously, what on earth are you flapping on about? You need to get out of mother Russia as fast as possible because it is warping your mind. If I buy a pizza, I'll do whatever the hell I want with it, and refusing to share it with someone does NOT make me selfish - I consider a few factors - I paid for it, they did not, I don't know them, I don't know their intentions, and I'm not comfortable with the situation. I decide NOT to give them any of my pizza - and that does not meet the the definition of selfish.
That's some seriously warped 2020 logic man.
- - - Updated - - -
The irony here is that the only selfish person in the scenario presented is the person asking for loot. The fact these 2020twisted minds can't see that shows how far we have strayed. The begger is only considering themselves, with no thought for the rightful owner of the loot - you know, selfish. If some people put their agenda down they would be able to see more clearly.
You can't just declare it impossible because you believe it so.
- - - Updated - - -
Yes, context does matter, but selfishness isn't wrong. We are have selfishness that we deal with. Negative doesn't mean wrong either. Sad is a negative ... is feeling sad wrong?
The problem here is that so many people are thinking that selfishness is always a bad thing ... it isn't.
Last edited by Darththeo; 2020-05-31 at 08:47 PM.
Peace is a lie. There is only passion. Through passion I gain strength. Through strength I gain power.
Through power I gain victory. Through victory my chains are broken. The Force shall set me free.
–The Sith Code
A single instance of Not Giving Something Up does not impart the title of 'SELFISH'. The only dense one here is you. The OP said they offered up a trinket they, also, got from the same raid. Yet because they wanted to keep that one particular item, because it would possibly benefit them over some fuckhead of a hunter with entitlement issues, you slap on the 'SELFISH' title on someone?
How the fuck do you know what all was going on? You don't. The only dense one here is you, by not taking into account a myriad of possibilities of which we were not privvy to.
That being said, if someone reacted towards me the same way that hunter did, I'd have told them to fuck right off, taken the boot and, given the ilvl of the OP and the DPS they were cranking out, immediately joined another pug that could or could not have been also filled with just enough entitled fuckwits.
You can see all the god damned morons in this thread who think the OP was 'bad', 'wrong', or otherwise by their posts without considering all the facts we have available.
And given his repeated posts in this thread, it's pretty safe to assume he's a chill dude otherwise. But hey, whatever floats your fucking boat, ye?
Personal Preference and Opinions ≠ Facts, Truth, or Logic
Definition: (of a person, action, or motive) lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure.
If I choose not to share for the sole reason, I paid for it ... that's selfish. Is it the worse selfish thing a person could do? No, of course not. But to pretend it isn't selfish on some level is nonsensical.
Last edited by Darththeo; 2020-05-31 at 08:48 PM.
Peace is a lie. There is only passion. Through passion I gain strength. Through strength I gain power.
Through power I gain victory. Through victory my chains are broken. The Force shall set me free.
–The Sith Code
This indicates repeated selfish actions. He stated he was willing (and did to my understand) trade a trinket he didn't need he'd gotten from Xanesh. Just because one does something for one's self, does not intrinsically indicate SELFISH as the status quo. People don't understand that SELFISH, when slapped on someone, is incredibly negative and have likely never been accused as such.
Self-serving, sure. Selfish? No. He went into the pug to benefit himself, not a bunch of randos he'd never see again. He got the item that would do exactly what he wanted. Had he gotten other items, would he have given them if others needed? Given what we know from this thread, yes. Its incredibly likely.
Personal Preference and Opinions ≠ Facts, Truth, or Logic
That true, but has nothing to do with whether or not someone is being selfish. My issue isn't the claims on ownership it was the use of ownership as an argument against being selfish. Just because you own something does not negate the ability to be selfish concerning said item.
Peace is a lie. There is only passion. Through passion I gain strength. Through strength I gain power.
Through power I gain victory. Through victory my chains are broken. The Force shall set me free.
–The Sith Code
If you're in a true PUG it's always nice to give things away but ultimately it should be your decision unless any other loot rules have been agreed upon. If you're in a guild/friends run you trade that piece or you're a selfish prick.
I wouldn't say you were a bad guy. You weren't a good guy either though, and I probably would've removed you if we didn't need you had it been my run, but with no hard feelings personally.
I don't need to imagine it any different. Again, "Personal Loot" is a meaningless term; nothing about it is actually personal. If it were, there'd be no need for the game to tell everyone what everyone else got, because it would be none of their business. "Personal Loot" is just a term Blizzard gave to the current system to appease those who aren't particularly bright so that they'd think the problem was solved, when it was anything but.
I suppose the issue then is what the difference is between "self-interest" and "selfish" and what part of the spectrum the OP falls on. Or if you see a meaningful distinction between acting in one's self-interest and acting selfishly.
My personal take is you only move from self-interest to selfish if you act irrationally or excessively for yourself. To me the fact the OP showed a willingness to trade-off items specifically and only kept the helm because it contributed to his player power suggests the act falls into the bounds of self-interest