international dont get the paint sets until march?

[GentleGiant]

Reaper theoretically has more data points. Anyone who pledged below Vampire level but has put more money in their pledge to an amount that's divisible by $18 are potentially paint buyers.

Plus those who have already locked in their pledges, of course.

[DonTheDime]

Reaper theoretically has more data points. Anyone who pledged below Vampire level but has put more money in their pledge to an amount that's divisible by $18 are potentially paint buyers.

Plus those who have already locked in their pledges, of course.

 

Right, and with each passing day (and more pledges locked in) those data points will show Reaper more and more of the complete picture. I would be interested, just out of curiosity, what the final numbers look like. Obviously Reaper had a sense of their popularity when they decided to include the paint sets in the Bones Kickstarter, and I don't doubt that the data mine of information that this Kickstarter provides them will be of multiple uses for them in the near and long term.

 

Anyway, here's to hoping that things will work out so everyone will find satisfaction in the end results! I know I am looking forward to the 'mountain' of Bones miniatures coming my way in March.

[smokingwreckage]

Hello, Seamus. Quotes hate me so I'm gonna go with italics.

 

Out of curiosity, what's your source for that statistic? Not that I think delaying all shipping is a good idea, but since your rebuttal argument is based on this assertion I'd be interested to know if it has any factual basis.

 

Largest block of customers, then. My point works either way. And while you're taking me for pure snark, you're wrong. Oh sure, there's a bit of snark, but mostly it struck me as an interesting question.

 

 

 

(cutting the bit where you demonstrate that you missed the point)

 

Exaggerated for the sake of the example, actually.

 

I believe GentleGiants suggestion is that, when Reaper receive a shipment of (say) 10,000 bottles, they use that to fulfill the next 500 or so orders of paint.

 

While that weakens my argument relative to the admittedly exaggerated illustration I gave, it doesn't answer it. You really have just assumed I was here for nothing but sarcasm. Now, while i was playing for laughs, I was making a genuine point.

 

I don't really intend to take sides on this, but if you don't think his suggestion is a good one and you wish to argue with it, at least argue with his suggestion instead of trying to ridicule it.

 

Well, I'd like to say "I was successfully ridiculing it" but that would be me playing for laughs, which as we see here has already caused at least one person to overlook the points I raised. At no point did I claim any magical or insider knowledge. I am simply raising what seem to me to be intuitively obvious problems with GG's proposed solutions. I do so as a participant in the conversation, not as the oracle of all knowledge.

 

 

We have a saying where I come from "The squeaky wheel gets the grease".

 

I know, and I actually alluded to that, in pointing out that using the idea of "fairness" as part of a squeaky wheel strategy is disingenuous - if that was what GG was doing. But if he's just genuinely upset, then all my points stand. What is the logical or ethical basis for causing distress to another customer in order to privilege GG? So there, the best approach is a one-off solution addressing GG's problem directly. A refund for GG would be one such, and would particularly address his problem with shared and scant funds, a problem with which I sympathise.

 

It occurs to me that international customers might have gone for the paints a lot harder than US, who'd have access to them via Reaper. Paints are hard to get here in Oz, for example, if you don't like GW or Vallejo. However, this point does not go in favour of GG's implicit argument (as it seems to me) that Reaper is favouring US customers for undisclosed, but possibly sinister, reasons. Instead it would mean international customers were part of a larger and more complex shipping arrangement. In fact I pointed out the probable increase in complexity as a potential factor already.

 

Anyway, I hope I've helped. Don't let the bent sense of humour put you off. If you read my post as shallow point-scoring, you'll miss my better arguments, affording me the opportunity for shallow point-scoring.

[kit]

I'm sorry, even without evidence I think its very safe to say that the majority or the 17000+ are in the US.

 

Heisler is correct.

[Argentee]

Hi Kit! Have you gotten any sleep yet?

[GentleGiant]

We have a saying where I come from "The squeaky wheel gets the grease".

 

I know, and I actually alluded to that, in pointing out that using the idea of "fairness" as part of a squeaky wheel strategy is disingenuous - if that was what GG was doing. But if he's just genuinely upset, then all my points stand. What is the logical or ethical basis for causing distress to another customer in order to privilege GG? So there, the best approach is a one-off solution addressing GG's problem directly. A refund for GG would be one such, and would particularly address his problem with shared and scant funds, a problem with which I sympathise.

Again, reading comprehension please. I've mentioned several times that "my pledge" is actually an "our pledge" since we are several people who have pooled our finances together. Thus a refund isn't an option as that would mean my friends wouldn't get anything either.

And I could turn your question around, what is the logical and ethical basis for causing distress to international customers in order to privilege others?

In fact, don't answer that, because I think it's a disingenuous proposition in the first place, whichever way it's turned around as I have made no such claims.

I (and other international customers) are not asking for special privileges, just the same as everyone else or a solution that's close to it.

 

It occurs to me that international customers might have gone for the paints a lot harder than US, who'd have access to them via Reaper. Paints are hard to get here in Oz, for example, if you don't like GW or Vallejo. However, this point does not go in favour of GG's implicit argument (as it seems to me) that Reaper is favouring US customers for undisclosed, but possibly sinister, reasons. Instead it would mean international customers were part of a larger and more complex shipping arrangement. In fact I pointed out the probable increase in complexity as a potential factor already.

Emphasis mine.

I have made no such accusations, that's a strawman argument and I'd like you to refrain from doing so.

Once again, Ed Pugh has said that shipping isn't the cause, a lack of bottles is. I've commended him on giving us that information and now I just want to make sure what that entails exactly (or rather, what they have planned exactly), so I can act accordingly to those plans.

[smokingwreckage]

Sorry for misreading you, GG. That's just how it seemed to me.

 

I (and other international customers) are not asking for special privileges, just the same as everyone else or a solution that's close to it.

 

I simply provided a perfectly reasonable defeater for your position. It's not to say you're wrong, just to point out a common mistake when treating for "fairness". You specifically asked that everyone have their shipments delayed to match yours. Or yours and your friends', or international, it has no relevance to my point whatsoever. I believe that was one of two solutions you proposed.

 

I am not saying you have no right to either affront or resolution, merely that one of your proposed remedies did not meet the criteria you laid out for it - namely, fairness. My point is that assuming total parity, Reaper must surely try to cause the least possible distress to the least possible number of customers. Your counter assertion is that I am wrong, and that you could just as easily argue that Reaper must.... what? Cause equal distress to all, even if that means causing a great deal more total distress? So, if a Reaper rep backed over your dog, he'd then be morally obligated to run over every dog of every customer?

 

Once again, you have every right to be upset, and to seek an end to that distress. I pointed out a logical problem with one solution, that hardly means there is no possible solution.

[Adrift]

So, maybe we can arrange a paint swap? Where folks in the US that are willing to wait can allow folks abroad to get some of theirs? I am willing, as long as I get my paints eventually.

 

The Auld Grump

 

I'm okay with getting my paint at the same time as international pledgers, if it comes to that.

 

I said the same thing a few pages back. Why don't we all just wait until March for our paints..US/Canada and International alike?!

[Hellcow]

I said the same thing a few pages back. Why don't we all just wait until March for our paints..US/Canada and International alike?!

 

I'll dissent on this. I want my paint before March otherwise I would have chosen different options (and pledged less) to buy paint now from Reaper direct. Causing everyone to wait in some misguided solidarity movement is unacceptable to me. I feel for the international pledges (and keep in mind it is a pledge NOT an order) and would be pretty disappointed myself about this but to ask *everyone* to wait because of it? Ridiculous. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

[Darsc Zacal]

Yep. I don't think you're going to get a consensus on having everyone's paint delivery delayed with over 17,000 people in the mix.

 

Reaper already asked in the RPM if we wanted one or two shipments and has responded to the international issue. This thread is going in circles now. It's done.

[JackMann]

Fairest way I can think of is to do so in order of when people joined the Kickstarter. But that might not be easy to do in practice (depending on how the data was given to Reaper). I figure they'll get it out to as many people as they can, as best they can, and that's the best we can ask from them.

[sumbloke]

Yep. I don't think you're going to get a consensus on having everyone's paint delivery delayed with over 17,000 people in the mix. Reaper already asked in the RPM if we wanted one or two shipments and has responded to the international issue. This thread is going in circles now. It's done.

 

I think you're just as likely to get that consensus as you are to get a consensus among international people that we should have to wait while North Americans can get what was promised to everyone. There seems to be quite a lot of vitriol being aimed at someone who made a quite reasonable suggestion that all customers be treated equally or even close to equally instead of having those who happen to live on other continents being treated as second-class citizens.

 

Note that I have stated elsewhere that although I was looking forward to getting paints earlier, I understand the decision to postpone orders. I'm simply standing up for someone who is getting unreasonably attacked.

[Darsc Zacal]

I didn't attack anyone. I merely pointed out that Reaper has stated their position and this thread is going nowhere.

[ced1106]

If you're looking for fairness, forget KickStarter.

 

KickStarter isn't even a pre-order. You are funding a project. The project has rewards to entice pledges. Unlike pre-orders, there is no guarantee that you will receive your reward, any other promises offered by the project, or if the project will complete. Quite a few posters were unhappy that Reaper took a long time to send out their RPM, the RPM was not IE-compatible, two sculptures were swapped, and international shipments were reduced to the March date. In their eyes, this project was not fair in that promises were not kept.

 

I think it's safe to assume that it's not fair if you pledged in a KS, did not receive product, and had to resort to a lawsuit to get your money back. See this Hansfree KS where this is precisely what is happening: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/831303939/hanfree-ipad-accessory-use-the-ipad-hands-free/comments Not related to fairness, but another KS article worth reading is of KS projects whose high funding actually hurt their projects : http://www.wired.com/design/2012/07/st_kickstarter/?pid=695

 

Really, if you want fairness, you have to pay for it. Wait until you know you will get product when you expect it. But I don't think this will happen on KickStarter.

[Goblyn]

all customers be treated equally or even close to equally instead of having those who happen to live on other continents being treated as second-class citizens.

 

 

first class citizens got free shipping and get his paints right away

 

we second class citizens pay our shipping and get ours in six months