If someone commits a crime using a knife, should we boycott or criminalize the company that made that knife? If there are criminals using cryptocurrencies to fund criminal activity, it is not cryptocurrencies's fault.
Do you even read what you answer to ? I explicitly said that I have nothing against cryptocurrencies, only against people misusing them.
You have authority to speak for yourself, not for others.
But you have this authority when it come to say that the reason why they "use the traditional means to receive donations" is because they are "laymen with regard to Bitcoin".
Although other people have agreed with your opinion here, you can't say with 100% certainty that everyone who develops adult games agrees with you.
Which is good, because I never said that. What I said is that they don't need to use cryptocurrencies, which is different.
As I said in a previous reply, if any user indicate another similar reliable service, I include in the guide without any problems. The more options, the better.
Well, please, add
You must be registered to see the links
; you haven't searched far, right ?
Again, this is your opinion, not the absolute truth. Even though most users boycott the game because of the ad, there will certainly be people who, if they are interested in the project, are going to play, even if it's offline, without any whining.
I didn't said that people will boycott your game, just that it would have proved that it's not a good way to fund the said game, which, again, is different.
There's many way to play your game without being bothered a single second by the ads you can put inside. You can edit the host table to redirect a-ads.com to localhost. You can configure your IP filter to block the connection to a-ads.com, or (mostly on Windows) to block any connection coming from the game. If you are a more advanced user you can configure the transparent proxy on your LAN to block the connection to a-ads.com, or overwrite the a-ads.com record on the DNS located on your LAN.
A boycott isn't the only reason why it's not a so good solution. The problem being that, by putting ads directly in your game, you'll impact authors putting them on their site, where nobody would have complain. You force some players to ban an ads agency from their computer, to not be bothered when they play your game, and it will also ban this agency from their computer when they'll browse the site of authors who respect their desire to not be invaded.
If you are too young to be able to use one of the dozens of debit cards that can be loaded using bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies, it may be best to ask for help from an adult.
Beep... You said that it would add no "administrative" task to the game's author. Having to load your credit card is an added "adminstrative" task.
Ah, devolving to insults now? Anne's probably older than you, I've spoken with him on many occasions throughout this site, sometimes wherein certain personal info has been shared, and can say for certain he's older than me.
It's not a secret, and not a privacy infringement to say it, I'm near to my fifties. I'm 47 years old, and be more or less since the first time I said it here more than one year ago. It's just that, during this time, I realized that I now prefer to use my official age instead of just using the nearest one ; it's something that happen suddenly when you grow older. So, I will have the longest 47 year in the history
Anyway I didn't really understood what he said. My youngest is, for few months only (I suddenly feel even older
), too young to come here and still have her own credit card since some years. So, if I'm here, I'm supposed to be old enough by default.
Being a cryptocurrency enthusiast, I don't see any problem in this, especially when the service has a good track record.
Like
@DarthSeduction said, it's word of mouth only. And I'll had "anonymous" word of mouth.
You're just making an empty accusation, without any evidence, just to try to say that all anonymity is used to commit crime, which is not true.
No, he was demonstrating something. And he did it well because, if he don't have evidences that they are the criminal (what he didn't said anyway), yourself have absolutely no evidences that he's wrong.
And the whole problem is here, in these two quotes. If they haven't hidden themselves so deeply, none of this would have happened. They would have been a well known society, responsible face to the Law if needed, and nobody would have had trust issues regarding them ; or at least these trust issues wouldn't be either not provable and not revocable, both at the same time.
But no, they've chosen to be a shadow that nobody know. It lead to this situation. One can't prove that they are the bad guy in this story, and you can't prove that they aren't, nor that the good words said about them don't come directly from them. And like someone entering in a bank wearing a ski mask raise legit suspicion, despite the fact that it's perfectly legal, a society that hide itself so deep and rely only on cryptocurrency raise legit suspicion.
