← Back to context Comment by simonjgreen 16 hours ago So… not out of charity then? 4 comments simonjgreen Reply pixlmint 6 hours ago You're mixing motivation and end goal. Just because their motivations aren't purely charitable doesn't mean the end goal must be nefarious. lukan 16 hours ago No, mostly not, but that does not mean they engage with locking customers in. wtetzner 14 hours ago Of course not? I don't think anyone claimed it was out of charity. IshKebab 16 hours ago Not purely, but "charity" and "only doing it to lock people in" are not the only options.
pixlmint 6 hours ago You're mixing motivation and end goal. Just because their motivations aren't purely charitable doesn't mean the end goal must be nefarious.
IshKebab 16 hours ago Not purely, but "charity" and "only doing it to lock people in" are not the only options.
You're mixing motivation and end goal. Just because their motivations aren't purely charitable doesn't mean the end goal must be nefarious.
No, mostly not, but that does not mean they engage with locking customers in.
Of course not? I don't think anyone claimed it was out of charity.
Not purely, but "charity" and "only doing it to lock people in" are not the only options.