Yopaz said:
I know how bad SOPA is, but I also know that a website that can't pay for server costs or server maintenance wont be able to contribute any content. Not forum. Not news. Nothing game related. A site going bankrupt would result in the exact same things that SOPA would result in. Except that a boycott would make loss of money a certainty rather than a possibility.
Now please do you dare answer how sites already struggling would survive when a big chunk of their income disappears? When their budget suddenly disappears how will they keep doing what they already do? How many people would risk losing their job to prove a point?
I am aware SOPA could very likely mean the death of sites like this one so stop trying to convince me that SOPA is bad. I am aware and I would not want that to pass ever. Try to convince me how sites like this going bankrupt helps the greater good. Tell me how sites where the community and the employed contributors going bankrupt will stop SOPA. If The Escapist where to boycott E3, lose a lot of money, have to fire popular contributors causing them to lose more money which could lead to the site going down. How is that worse than the Escapist going to E3, let SOPA's influence grow, but have the resources to rally against it when things get to its worst?
I don't know why I bother doing this since you refuse to address any of my questions about money like money isn't an issue.
Like I said before, other conventions. The idea is that the press still get their attractive stories and the game companies still get their exposure, it just doesn't come from E3.
I'll make it simple. Everyone goes to a new convention called E4, all the companies and all the press. Everyone is happy, except E3. That is the ideal result.
A more likely one is that what would have been at E3 gets split up between several conventions, E4 5 and 6. This doesn't make a difference to the gaming companies but it's actually better for the press. More stories over a wider period of time instead of a single peak.