Taken out of context, no, they don't. Put in context with the 13+-page thread of flames that spawned this discussion, they do.
Notice, I'm not saying it's a bad idea at all to have some kind of indication on these listings about whether a game costs money to play or not. Frankly, I think it's fine. At the same time, I agree with the poster who indicated that it doesn't take that long to check out a game and learn it costs money to play. If money is an object, you move on.
My primary point is simply this: If you care about the list and how it's presented, just drop Synozeer an e-mail or a private message. Second-guessing him in a public forum, or trying to tell him how to run his site, is, simply put, rude. You wouldn't like him coming to your game and rallying people to say change how you do things, so why is it any better for you to do that to him here? On my game, I often get suggestions via @mail or private pages from people who have ideas for improving or altering how we do things. I also implement some of those ideas, but not all of them. It's much easier to accept and take seriously such suggestions when they aren't challenging the status quo in a public venue.
Your suggestions and concerns are valid, and they even make sense. I reiterate my support of some kind of marker for pay-to-play games. But I also support the low-key approach when it comes to suggesting significant changes to how things are done on someone else's site.
|