Comment by imiric
4 months ago
It's remarkable how you keep ignoring my point.
I set a deliberately contrived example to illustrate why someone might be understandably upset when a service or product they've been enjoying degrades in quality, regardless of whether they paid for it or not, and the parallels that situation has with OSS rug pulls. Yet you've managed to make this about consumer protection laws, for some reason.
Since the conversation has derailed, and since I really don't have the patience to rehash everything I've already said in this thread, I'm out.
It's not contrived, it's just bad, unfit for the conversation at all. A meal at a restaurant is paid for, MiniIO is not. There's no room for "regardless whether they paid for it or not", the distinction is fundamental to the discussion. You don't get to decide it doesn't matter.
You can't complain that the neighbour who used to give you a handful of apples each day suddenly stops giving them to you, regardless of how dependent on them you've become. He did not "create an expectation", you did. He did not make you "dependent" on himself, you did.
I ignored your point because it wasn't relevant to what I was saying. I was just pointing out a factual error.
It's a bit like someone pointed out a simple spelling mistake in your comment, so you rewrote your whole argument at them. Or even claimed that you had spelled it right after all!