Also, interesting comment I found on HackerNews (HN):

This post was definitely demoted by HN. It stayed in the first position for less than 5 minutes and, as it quickly gathered upvotes, it jumped straight into 24th and quickly fell off the first page as it got 200 or so more points in less than an hour.

I’m 80% confident HN tried to hide this link. It’s the fastest downhill I’ve noticed on here, and I’ve been lurking and commenting for longer than 10 years.

  • @TheEntity@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    197 months ago

    Subsidise how? They were using their existing plan as intended and even willing ditch the grey-area parts. If CF cannot afford to offer their plans as they are, they should change the offered plans, not hunt for easy prey.

    • @HowManyNimons@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -87 months ago

      Clearly CF were losing money on this account, so their other customers were subsidising.

      Ah fuck it, I’m clearly at the bottom of a dog pile here, and I don’t want to be friends with any of you, nor am I going to start thinking that an online casino deserves anything but contempt, so I’ll be off.

      • @FederatedSaint@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        117 months ago

        No no, you’re really not far off. Few, if any people here are advocating for CF to continue to provide the same services for the same price. It seems clear to most (including the author) that a price increase was justified. The problem we’re all having is how they went about it, agnostic of the client.

        (I don’t care who the client was and don’t care one way or the other about online casinos.)