It isn't a "fantastic post" it's a complete cop out.
So your moral indignation on "awful people" only extends to if you know specifically about it, but you're happy to turn a blind eye and support equally awful people so long as it isn't put under your nose?
If you're taking a moral stance of "I don't buy games which involve people with horrible opinions or actions" then it shouldn't matter whether it's specifically brought to your attention or not. Again, this is a cop out in order to be morally inconsistent.
Laws of averages dictate that any game developer of any size will have many, many people with "awful opinions and actions". Therefore if your moral line as to buying a game is to not support those people you cannot buy those games.
If you want to be morally inconsistent and pick and choose when you support these awful people and which ones to support go ahead, but be aware it isn't a consistent stance.
Why would anyone give a flying fuck about being "morally inconsistent"?
You, I, and everyone else in the world is operating on limited information. We are making decisions based off of what we know rather than what we don't know. That's all we're capable of doing. The idea of unflinchingly doing right decision every time in order to maintain consistency is an excellent principle for a universe we don't actually exist in.
Why, then, would we just throw our hands up in the air and go "I give up on making ethical decisions" because we might have a chance of getting them wrong? All this does is put us in a decision between giving up and trying to do the best we can; the latter option is still better than nothing, if marginally so.
This whole Schrodinger's Asshole scenario tends to come across as a cheap way of justifying one's having no morals because it doesn't really lead the decisions that it's presented as encouraging. It's always "well, someone making the games you
do buy might be an asshole, so you should give up and buy them". But, if our lack of knowledge makes our options pointless - not that that's really true, since limited information is not
no information, we might still know
some of what we're supporting - then why do I buy anything? Why don't I go, well, video games are a luxury good. I can just boycott the lot of them.
Now, if we're going to criticize being morally inconsistent, I can't help but notice how people start caring about the devs that might be affected by someone not choosing to purchase a game only if they do it for ethical reasons. If they do it because they don't like the publisher, the developer, the story, the franchise, the graphics, the gameplay, or god knows what else, that discussion somehow doesn't come up.
