I guess I did not get my point across well enough but it was the censorship that really irked me. Yes I understand that I do not get to gatekeep how people spend their money but I was genuinely curious when I asked and was trying to start a convo about but instead was immediately censored for it. It did lead to others reaching out to me about how ridiculous the prices were and how uptight the mods were.
My other issue is that based on watching some of his other streams, he does tend to have a younger audience and there was a bit of dishonestly in the fact that he never stated what the packs should be going for and kind of just smirking at the fact that he was raking in the money to go on top of that you couldn’t type in chat about how ridiculous it was that packs were going for $75.
It just seemed very sketchy to me.
How does that qualify as gatekeeping?
That seems to be the de facto response to any time you question the actions or disagree with what what a content creator does.
I get the whole personal choice and things like that. That’s still such a lame ass and lazy response. However, the fact that shining fates packs are selling for $75 which is nearly the cost of what booster boxes used to cost doesn’t concern you enough to say something other than personal responsibility/gatekeeping is a joke.
I just don’t get how people can’t look at the power and influence these celebrities and influencers have over their young and impersonal audiences. In my opinion I don’t see how you can genuinely care about a community when you’re willing to overcharge them like that. Especially when it’s modern product. people complain about scalpers and people buying out McDonald’s packs and it being terrible and sad, but they fail to realize or recognize that they’re learning these actions from these influencers.
I prefer our very own Zandg. Good content, no ridiculous thumbnails, and hands down the best prices for unweighed packs or box breaks.
Not sure if this was intended for me or pfm
Couldn’t have put it better myself.
Questioning why people are paying $75 for a $4 pack of Pokemon cards isn’t gatekeeping. It would be gatekeeping if @dragonwarrior said something like “people who spend $75 for a $4 pack aren’t tru collectors.” But he didn’t say that.
But can we really trust someone who chooses to use dragonwarrior as their username, when it should be dragonquest? 
How dare you disrespect me and every Kung Fu Panda fan by suggesting I should be using a pathetic name like dragonquest.
Gatekeeping might not have be the best word choice for this situation. But it’s a similar attitude. The point is that some other person (who is not you) is making a value determination and deciding to spend their own money. Who are you to stand in the way of this transaction?
Yeah let people be idiots and waste their money
I’ll give you a reason why. Let me use an example. In the fitness industry there are plenty of Influencers pushing products that are promising weight loss, muscle gain, and increased strength. Some of these people use their PhD to sell products that make sense even by their own scientific studies. There are plenty of people in the fitness industry who call out these influencers.
I’ve mentioned it before but today’s Influencers and social media would be perfect for replicating the milgram experiment. They have a incredible amount of sway. Many of these Influencers are pushing things for their benefit and sometimes that comes at the cost of their followers. I don’t get why we get rebuffed when critique some of these pokémon content creators.
We all know that Collectibles are largely unregulated. A lot actions that happen from large collectors would be a SEC violation because it’s illegal, unethical and unfair. Just because there’s no laws being broken, why is it okay to do unethical or unfair things? Some Influencers are giving out financial advice as well, which a lot of it a crap shot.
If other industries call out their influencers for greedy, unfair, manipulative, misleading and/or unauthentic actions why shouldn’t we do it?
I’ve mentioned numerous times in patreon that streamer packs are clearly overrated if you are buying for the literal pack. But markets are dynamic, because people are dynamic. People buying these packs are probably doing it for peripheral reasons: supporting/interacting with a streamer then enjoy, getting a shout out, etc. I’ve done multiple calls with grown men who willingly buy from streamers to get their name out there. As seen in LP’s stream. Its an effective form of advertisement.
The fitness analogy isn’t parallel as people in pokemon know exactly what they are buying. The SEC is not going to regulate adults willingly buying a non-essential good. Also, I don’t know what “calling out” actually does in this scenario. In fact “callouts” in pokemon tend to be more toxic than productive.
It depends on how the content creator is advertising what they sell. If the content creator is honest about the risks and the value of what they’re providing, then there’s nothing wrong with charging people exorbitant amounts for packs. A prime example of an ethical content creator is Rusty.
But some content creators aren’t entirely honest; they’ll do things such as cite inflated prices, only cite PSA 10 prices, portray what they’re selling as an investment, etc. Content creators should work tirelessly to ensure the honesty and integrity of the information they share.
Your argument is flawed. Your example is based on deception - ie. you are promised something but don’t receive it. If a person is promised a pack for $75 and then receive a pack for $75 then what is the problem?
People complaining about others paying $4 for $75 packs. Buckna throwing insults for those daring to question. how noble.
People constantly complaining are equally as terrible as those on their high horse.
How dare people be allowed to question things and motives.
I’ll give a quick shout out to Randolph Pokemon for his pack openings. His responses to opening crappy non-holo rares are like a normal human being instead of someone trying to comfort a little kid. Just move onto the next pack instead of pretending to be excited.
PS: For anyone interested in the open mouth face thumbnail debate, the best argument I’ve heard is that with the majority of viewers browsing on mobile, the size of the thumbnail basically makes it hard to discern any meaning at all. However, human brains are REALLY good at recognizing emotions on faces, so a “shocked” face at 100 x 100 pixels is still understood perfectly.
Interestingly, there’s a certain piece of art that uses this exact idea…could this be the original open mouth thumbnail?
@zorloth, Sure. I get if someone is telling their audience a hidden fates pack contains a pikachu illustrator. I guess I am speaking about people like PokeRev, Leonhart, pokerand, Rusty, etc. Basically E4 guys. I don’t know anyone beyond that.
A genuine nice comment about a Pokémon content creator in this thread?
- Also I agree. PokeRand seems to be very nice and authentic
There are bad, manipulative, lying streamers out there more or less taking advantage of people. They likely have only have a few hundred subscribers or so, but for the individuals affected it doesn’t make the situation better. I guess it’s good most people don’t know about them, “calling them out” only brings attention 