I can't tell who's worse - the people being salty over the chair or the people being salty because other people are salty over the chair.
Either way - fuck that chair.
Either way - fuck that chair.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Reggie Fils-Aime To Finally Receive His Aeron Chair After a Successful Petition By Fans
- Thread starter delete12345
- Start date
The funniest thing of all about that comment I replied to is that cleaning oil of seagulls is basically meaningless outside of photo-ops. The fish and animals all die a few minutes later anyway. It's probably an even less fruitful use of one's time than saying "yo, gamers, have you ever considered...seizing doing a loot run the means of production" on an industry forum
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/oil-spill-cleanup-illusion-180959783/
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/oil-spill-cleanup-illusion-180959783/
I save my social outrage for other venues; there's a reason I stick solely to the Gaming side of Era.
Uhh.. you are acting like reggie asked for the chair. His fans wanted him to have it. And in the grand scheme of things Reggie was nowhere near the most overpaid CEOs or COO's with his net worth around 40 million and he didnt even get all that from Nintendo..
It's the thought that counts when it comes to gifts and the thought that just because you have money, you cant recieve a gift is fucking stupid.
People are defenvise that this is being framed as a marketing ploy, wich it is.
But that detracts from the narrative that Reggie deserves free chairs because he is in good memes/they enjoyed his work.
I forget we're in the dark era of of the 2000s where acknowledging the morality of a situation can only be done in a state of outrage. As much as that might seem like a cheap swipe at you, unfortunately (or fortunately in the sense my intention is not to piss you off) I really mean it.
I can't claim to know nor do I pay attention to his net worth. But it's irrelevant. I don't want my point to get muddied, I agree no matter his net worth it's not any kind of moral issue that Reggie receives gifts.
I think it IS a moral issue to say that he's earned this gift and then justify it by pointing out that poverty exists.
I'm not a fan of the story of the millionaire getting a free chair and a simple comment pointing that out would have sufficed for me. But people defending it out of respect to the man they've never met is the ugly part for me. You can think Reggie is great (as I do) and agree that he didn't need the free chair.
Sure, but it would have also been bad form for him to decline the gift as well. "Why are you giving me a free chair when Puerto Rico is still recovering?" It's a completely unrelated matter.
I hope you decline every gift given to you if you are above the UN poverty line.
I am not asking Reggie to decline the chair either. The issue, I obviously have to reiterate again is not the reality of the situation.
The reality being a CEO gets paid far more than someone of the working class for potentially not a ton more effort, merit or time (for example, not that this is the extent of the reality of the situation). The reality being that people of all levels of privilege can receive gifts - yes shocker I have received gifts in my life.
However we ARE allowed to question the morality of an action such as Herman Miller gifting a chair to an ex-CEO. I think I would go as far as to say it's valuable and heartening that many here have pointed it out, I am glad that this question exists because of the dissonance the situation has produced.
Is that okay by you guys? I am not asking you to become buddhists.
Not wrong there.
I mean ultimately what is your point here - that if someone earns a lot they should no longer receive gifts? You say you're not asking him to refuse it, so what exactly do you want? You want it not to be gifted? Why? It's good marketing. This thread is going in circles, for real though, what is the point you're trying to make?
I'd rather spend my morality-questioning time wondering how "god-fearing Christians" support locking children in cages over innoculous gifts to former CEOs, but you do you.
Twist: some of us aren't budgeting our « morality-questions »
People aren't reading my posts. The point I was trying to make is that the 'stick in the mud's here were asking a valuable question. It is that simple. Please go back and read my posts here, it's been that simple all along.
I do think it's silly that it was gifted to a CEO who doesn't need it, the world isn't better off or worse off for that happening though. I do think it's better off for people acknowledging it's stupid that he was given a free, and fairly expensive gift.
See below, beautifully put.
Such a fun thread. I wonder if people are discussing fond memories of... Oh....
Oh...
Oh no, no, no, no, oh no, no, no, noooohahahaha!
Oh...
Oh no, no, no, no, oh no, no, no, noooohahahaha!
The human brain is capable of caring about lots and lots of things (aka, you can wonder about both!)
I love how you said: "No no, this was the point I was making!" and then went on to make the point "its stupid he gets it for free" which I can only imagine is because of the reasons I outlined the first time I asked you what point you were trying to make, which was:
So you want me to be happy that you acknowledged it was a "stupid gift", but you don't actually want to make any other point beyond that. Really the only way I can interpret this is that you want to be celebrated for being concerned about something that you don't actually want to do anything about. What bollocks.
Dude, all the way through I have been making the same point, read my posts I beg you. It was clearly my mistake for even sharing my opinion on the chair gift itself in that post, I even pointed out that it hasn't made the world a better or worse place. It was too distracting for you
Not everyone is so bloody narcissistic they need their point celebrated or need the person on the forum to be happy with their comment.
My point was/is/forever will be, I am glad people are pointing out this was a weird situation, gifting an expensive chair to a privileged man. I think that's an important question and comment to be made, others might read it and go 'oh yeah, that is a bit weird' and silly small things like that inform our perception of class imbalance. My "bollocks" point is that it is a good thing to look critically at that.
EDIT
We can definitely agree on that. :)
Personally, I think its appropriate to say that a rich dude getting a free chair is bad in a thread about a rich dude getting a free chair. I'm less inclined to think its appropriate to discuss Christians supporting an administration that locks up children in a thread about a rich dude getting a free chair.
See, this is where I disagree.
"A rich dude getting a free chair" is (IMO) neither intrinsically good or bad. It just IS. It is (based on the evidence we have available) an act between the giver and the receiver. It has no more intrinsic moral value than me giving you a cookie from my lunchbox.
As I understand it, some people feel that "A rich dude getting a free chair" is bad because the rich dude doesn't need a free chair. But that's a silly argument to make, because it assigns an arbitrary value on a perceived "need". That's like saying it's bad if I give you a cookie from my lunchbox because you're not a starving child, and I should have given the cookie to that kid instead. What, I can't give deadbass one of my cookies because I felt like it? It's the start of a slippery slope of arbitrary arguments, where any gift-exchange should be ranked based on how much the recipient needs the item in question.
Sometimes a gift is just a gift.
I genuinely appreciate the work you put into your logical argument about morality, but I doubt there's anything that can convince me that thousands of people signing a petition to have a rich person be given a chair he can easily afford many times over is not a bad thing. I'm not making an argument that can be represented with symbolic logic or something, I'm not arguing that a person can't give someone they like cookies, I'm saying that people participating in a mass campaign to have someone be given a luxury item is something I don't consider to be good, i.e. I think it is bad.
There are shades and gradients between black and white, you know...
I think that is a great post, personally. It's clearly not the kind of ground you wanted to cover when coming in this thread so I want to acknowledge that when as others have demonstrated it's easier to just be annoyed and post recalcitrant responses you've engaged. Thanks!
Morality of a scenario can't be easily translated with an analogy, it doesn't take into account the contributing elements overt or abstract, so I don't really want to dwell on the cookies. However, I don't think anyone here is saying giving gifts is bad or that all gifts must be policed somehow.
I just think in this situation it's clearly resonated awkwardly with many, and I think that's a discussion worth having and voicing that concern is valuable. Speaking for myself I am coming at it mostly from a classism angle. I don't want to lump in deadbass's view with my own here, as their take might be different. Incidentally I do think there are other overt angles to be upset with in this situation, before the more abstract "what about starving children" ones.
Anyway, I should probably let sleeping dogs lie now.
Thanks again!
I know it's a dumb gotcha, but I feel inclined to point out that you necessarily are budgeting that. We all only have so much time.
This post probably won't get much attention but it hits on the essential characteristic of the stupid times we live in: people act as if they have an infinite supply of outrage, and then wonder why they feel burnt out all the time.
Meanwhile, the folks who signed the petition literally just clicked a button and went on with the rest of their lives.
What if I told you both of them had intrinsically linked causes (hint: it's capitalism)
It certainly is a dumb gotcha, expecially when the person I was reponded to posted in this thread like 10 times lol
Like, findng this distateful and discussing it isn't taking anything away from any other cyber causes you think you are helping by being a keyboard warrior.
you don't need a $1000 to get a good chair
you just need to search around and research. I don't know your specific body type or back condition, so I can't give exact suggestions. but I've had plenty of computer chairs that cost $20 to $50 which were fine, and I'm 6'1"
I don't think I did. People are mad that a rich dude got a free chair. It's pretty blatant to see on any of these 8 pages ITT
Shit, look TWO POSTS above rofl.