I just knew these people would try and manipulate us again after the collab was announced... Protecting them? Please. Following Valko's cancellation, my monthly spending on LaDS went from your average payment on a high-end car to nothing at all. I encourage other players to cut their playing and spending, too. I warn new people interested in LaDS about the company's terrible mishandling of their games. I clown on them whenever the opportunity presents itself. And I routinely call them out for their woeful incompetence. People really need to educate themselves on boycotts and how they actually work. If you are tearing down the company, then you are not boycotting. The goals are entirely different things. The primary goal of a boycott is to hold them accountable. They cannot make positive changes and improve for them better if they are not allowed to exist. And, if you are calling for the company's downfall, then you are not giving them the opportunity to give you what you want. Pressuring them through a boycott says, "Fix this or you will face consequences". The consequence being that their success as a gaming company will plummet. That isn't protecting them. That is holding their feet to the fire. Holding them accountable. In this scenario, whether or not they go down is their choice. And the idea is that they will choose to do the right thing due to the financial and reputational pressure. I'm so sick of these people smearing the company, leveling false accusations against them, behaving no differently than the CDG and acting like it is something noble. No, you are not "holding them accountable". You are dragging them through the mud by gaslighting, taking things out of context, spreading slander, exaggerations, misinformation, and hate. In the case of Valko's cancellation, all it does is further the goals of the antis, who also do not want PPG to exist. They don't want a successful re-launch for Valko either. Boycotts push the company to do better, to move towards positive change. Smear campaigns push for destruction, towards the edge of a cliff. Boycotts take time. Businesses have some bit of cushion for these kinds of things. It takes time for the company to feel the heat. But, if the boycott holds as successful as it has been, then there is absolutely no reason that Valko cannot come back. They will have to bring him back in order to recover. You're just making up the excuse of "he can't come back" as justification to destroy the company instead. No, he can come back. The only thing that will prevent that from happening is if you decide that you'd rather destroy his path back home instead. You're attacking the wrong problem. PPG is by no means a perfect company. They have made mistakes. They are inexperienced, woefully incompetent, and pitifully fold at the barest hint of negative press. However, ultimately, it is the smear campaign against them that is truly responsible for Valko's cancellation. They did not cancel him of their own free will. Their arm was twisted, and in typical PPG fashion, they folded. The CDG may have got what they wanted, but it was not the CDG that they were listening to. They were responding to the negative articles and fear of government shutdown. They did not cancel Valko because they "don't care", so quit acting as if they did! Pointing all that out is not "protecting the company". It is the acknowledging the reality of what happened. That reality needs to dictate how we move forward. Otherwise, the real problems won't be addressed, and we will never get Valko back. If you're angry about Valko's cancelation, then please direct your ire towards what actually caused it. Mass false reporting. Slander. Taking things out of context. Gaslighting. The very things that you are doing. I say it all the time, but it bears repeating again. Don't attribute to malice what is actually attributable to stupidity. A business deciding to cancel one of their products sucks for the people who were anticipating that product, yes, but it is well-within their rights to do so. PPG did what they thought was best for their game and their company, under duress, and miscalculated. There was no ill-will behind it. In fact, I'm sure they never wanted to do it at all, given how important Valko was for their plans to expand and grow.