I’ve had many a roommate in my life. I’ve never shared a computer with a roommate. Family computer with my family? Yeah. Roommate. No. Roommates are essentially two completely autonomous people who happen to live together. That’s the distinction.
This is a person making this distinction for a company in order to justify why they think this is fair.
I never said the company thought it was fair. It’s pretty obvious that the company is fine with penalizing their customers/treating them like scalpers in order to prevent what they consider anti-social behavior.
Its either one address limitation or none at all, since a company isn’t going to make exceptions based on whether someone is related or not and verify it.
Arguing an emotion based opinion of a policy to someone pointing out the flaws in the policy isn’t going to win you this argument.
I understand that you feel that this is a non-issue, and perhaps for you it is. But that doesn’t mean that it is a fair policy across the board. It just means that you have justified the policy to yourself.
![[Frame] Honest hardworking scalpers when you tell them there's a reservation lottery](https://europe.pub/api/v3/image_proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Fquokk.au%2Fstatic%2Fmedia%2Fposts%2FsC%2FFd%2FsCFdszuqvuPYASu.jpg){kind=link}
Roomates or family are members of a household. One unit per address. I don’t see why relations would matter.
I’ve had many a roommate in my life. I’ve never shared a computer with a roommate. Family computer with my family? Yeah. Roommate. No. Roommates are essentially two completely autonomous people who happen to live together. That’s the distinction.
Why would a company care about the distinction. All they care about is limiting it by household.
This is a person making this distinction for a company in order to justify why they think this is fair.
I never said the company thought it was fair. It’s pretty obvious that the company is fine with penalizing their customers/treating them like scalpers in order to prevent what they consider anti-social behavior.
That doesn’t mean we can’t be irritated about it.
Its either one address limitation or none at all, since a company isn’t going to make exceptions based on whether someone is related or not and verify it.
Arguing an emotion based opinion of a policy to someone pointing out the flaws in the policy isn’t going to win you this argument.
I understand that you feel that this is a non-issue, and perhaps for you it is. But that doesn’t mean that it is a fair policy across the board. It just means that you have justified the policy to yourself.