stephen01king

I’m so confused by what you meant. Can you explain which part is the positive that you mentioned?

I do feel like that sometimes, so completely understandable.

If you were looking for consistency, that is by definition you looking for the same result, which is not covered in the definition of insanity.

Seed more?

Is that even a car? It just looks like a massive drone.

So you admitted that people have succeeded in adding loopholes to the US government that makes all your argument no longer true, and you think they still should be allowed handle payment processing? To me it just sounds like you’re arguing for transferring the power from one corruptible party (for-profit payment company) to another one (the government).

It would be easier for the government to actually regulate payment processors so they don’t become so big that they can influence online stores that use them than preventing people in governments from turning corrupt and misusing the control over payment processes. Even then, the US government has failed to do the former, so how do we expect them to do the latter?

So you expect governments like the Trump administration or Saudi Arabia will less likely block porn games than for profit companies?

You do realise this happened because thousands of people called the payment processors to complain about it, which means with thousands of people, you can pressure these companies to change their mind again. Try doing that to your own government, let alone a foreign government.

A for profit company can be replaced with another and is more easily affected by boycotts. A goverment is neither easily replaced or influenced by people from other countries.

Do you really think most governments will administer payment processes in a transparent and democratic manner?