I am surprised there were jerks that paid 0. Really? You can't afford give them five bucks? You spend more on beer OR lunch OR coffee in Starbucks if you feel kinky. At least humble bundle not allow you to pay 0 :)
You are a jerk for calling them jerks. If it is "pay what you want" then you are invited to do exactly that. If you want to pay nothing, you may do so. It is perfectly inside the rules of the event.
I think you're missing the point of the game. Being given freedom doesn't exclude someone from the consequences. For example: life is "punch whom you want" and you're still a jerk for punching someone.
Life is most definitely not "punch who you want"; that's illegal and will get you thrown in jail. There's a specific rule against that in most places.
In certain designated areas of life, such as during a boxing match, the rules are different: if you're in a boxing match, you can indeed punch someone, and you won't get thrown in jail or suffer any other sanction (other than being punched back). A boxer who punches his opponent in a boxing match is not a jerk, because that is permitted by mutually agreed upon rules in that context.
In the case of the cards, the rules do explicitly allow paying $0, so it's in no sense a perversion of the rules, and people who paid $0 are not jerks.
If I made a whole bunch of awesome potato skins for a party and said "It is suggested you only take up to two potato skins", and you take 10, you are a jerk. Or at an open bar, if you don't tip the bartenders you are a jerk. Or if there's a potluck and it's suggested everyone brings something, and you bring nothing. Jerk.
"The rules" don't define whether you are a jerk or not. How you behave in the situation, does. They said up front that it cost them $3 to give you the cards. If you paid $0, you knowingly gave them the shaft. That's jerky.
The wording makes all the difference. In this case it was "pay what you want", so "take as many potato skins as you want". Would someone who takes that invitation still be a jerk? Or just selfish? Or a hacker?
The wording also said there was a suggested price of $5. "Pay what you want" is the equivalent of saying "tip what you want". You could "game" an open bar by never tipping, but that would make you a huge jerk.
Society is not based on rules. It is based on social interaction. You can break the rules and not be a jerk, and you can follow the rules and be a jerk. Rules have nothing to do with jerkitude.
Oh, and if I told someone "take as many potato skins as you want" with a bunch of other people there who might also like potato skins, and you take them all, you are again a huge jerk. Being nice to other people is important. Just like you shouldn't take all the potato skins, you should try to reimburse the makers of the game for at least their cost.
You are not a hacker and you are not gaming anything. You are just an asshole. People thinking like you are the reason we will soon need a lawyer just to cross the road.
Two things that make the world a worse place are excessive anger and self-righteousness.
Why are you so angry over this? Perhaps you should seek help.
Rules were established. Transactions were carried out according to those rules. Shock, horror, your supposed victim even made a profit (according to their own accounting). Why are you angry?
By paying nothing for it, you are telling CAH that that is exactly how much you think their product is worth to you. Nothing. If I were them, I would be a little bit hurt to see that.
Key point: "to you". I imagine that if the $0 option wasn't included, many of those who chose it would simply not "buy" it at all. So at least they get some marketing benefit out of it. Of course this works better for those "pay what you want" digital goods, where there isn't much marginal cost to giving away a copy.
Yet they did not cost these guys money. The game's creators advertised a pay-what-you-want event because they had a reasonable expectation of making a profit (for charity) even though many people would pay $0.
And in doing so almost certainly netted CAH more profit via the free advertising than if they had paid $5 (which, they still may have done). TBH, i wouldn't be shocked if it was an inside job.
Makes me feel better about just paying the normal full price of $25 to get a copy for my brother. The game is just so great, and definitely worth supporting.
I wonder if this has anything to do with the selected audience for this card game...
i.e. Are the type of people who find these cards hilarious more prone to acting with "jerk" behavior?
Only a hypothesis, but worth a look, since my primary assumption is that this is a selective (and interested) audience given that it's an expansion pack.
I knew there'd be some, but 20% is a miserably high proportion. Does anyone know if that percentage is similar to how other well-known examples of pay-what-you-want turned out? Are there any studies into the propensity to freeload among anonymous groups?
First two points make sense as reasons why people wouldn't pay, but I'm not sure how you get from those to your conclusion. Why do those two things not apply to other examples?
That answered my question, thanks. I was thinking of larger-scale, internet efforts (In Rainbows, Louis CK) but of course those don't involve physical delivery. Had not even considered honesty boxes.
Thinking more, I do remember reading about someone who started a business in DC delivering muffin baskets to beltway-area office buildings. Their business was purely honesty based, and I think losses due to cheapskatery were around 5%. In the end, they'd cut off buildings with rates worse than that. All that is more support for your points.
The site even made you feel guilty (in a "please reconsider" way) if you put anything less than $3, explaining that the cost for them to create, produce, and mail a single pack will cost them $3, meaning they're taking a loss. That really speaks to how selfish people are (especially considering it's the "most wonderful time of the year").
No kidding, I understand being frugal, but in that case, print them yourself and take the time to cut them out. Shockingly, the game is still just as fun.
