Well this aged like milk.

[u/waiha]

Stumbled upon this while clearing out the attic.

She visited my primary school in Edinburgh shortly after releasing TPS. The girl in front of me (my friend and train-to-school comrade) was Southeast Asian and has an incredibly elaborate sounding name. When Joanne screwed up her face when my friend gave her her name for the signature, I laughed. This is how she decided to sign my copy.

I was laughing at you, JK.

EDIT: It’s on EBay.

[u/orreregion]

Step 1) Team sends a mean letter alongside OP's merch order, because OP failed to check a box

Step 2) The mean letter addresses something that was a fault on their end, not OP's

Step 3) OP had in fact checked the box, but their site had not saved it

Step 4) OP sends artist a letter about their team's actions, thinking the artist might be concerned with the bad PR

Step 5) Artist sends an even meaner letter to OP

Step 6) OP stops supporting artist altogether

[u/Embarrassed-Weird173 → u/orreregion]

I guess the main point of confusion is "what's a dedication"?  An autograph saying who it's dedicated to? 

[u/d15p05abl3 → u/orreregion]

Reddit is so weird.

OP acknowledges they had forgotten to check the box when they left the page and came back to it to ‘refill it’.

For some reason, you have to make it the site owner’s fault that OP bailed on completing a form halfway through and then completed said form differently when they returned to it. Maybe OP intentionally doesn’t save forms or cookies.

Sounds like the webcomic guy might be an ass. You don’t need to be absolving OP of any responsibility - responsibility thy have themselves accepted. The world needs more nuance, not less.

[u/orreregion → u/d15p05abl3]

Bro I just posted a simplified version of events, that the person who couldn't understand what happened could understand. I purposely left out some details to make it easier to digest. There isn't some big scheme where I'm trying to make everything the site owners fault, I just wanted everything to fit into a sentence or two without having to explain the minutiae of how websites work.

[u/d15p05abl3 → u/orreregion]

OP says themselves they did not check the box. Why does your step 3 say they did? Changes things significantly (in what is, admittedly, a totally insignificant story).

And now the pitchforks are out to get the site named.

[u/Stuzo → u/d15p05abl3]

Whether OP ticked the box is irrelevant.

If you go to the shops and you think it would be nice to come back with apples and oranges, but you forget to buy the oranges; then the shop, apropos of nothing, calls you an arsehole for not buying oranges, the shop is quite clearly the villain of the piece.

You can always go back and buy oranges, but after this experience, unless you're a bit of a masochist, you'll probably buy them from another shop, and you'll probably warn people about the unhinged behaviour of the shop!

[u/d15p05abl3 → u/Stuzo]

Cool. It’s irrelevant. Let’s misreport it while making a summary all the same.

Is that your point?

I am so far from caring about this it would be hard to measure. I just find the process fascinating where posters here are finessing (fabricating) the detail so as to make the OP completely innocent of an apparent relevant factor. And now you’re stepping up to the plate saying the factor THAT OP INCLUDED is not a relevant factor at all.

Whatever.

[u/Stuzo → u/d15p05abl3]

It is quite common for people to include irrelevant details in a story, that's why editors exist. If someone does not understand a story, it's quite helpful for someone to edit out the extraneous detail and re-phrase the key points in a way that is simpler to understand.

You'd have a point if the OP had put a note on their order to say "I wish that everyone who works for this online shop gets food poisoning" and that had been edited out. But the difference between OP either accidentally or deliberately choosing not to buy an extra item is hardly relevant to them being yelled at!

[u/d15p05abl3 → u/Stuzo]

FFS. So why fucking change it? OP says they meant to choose to not buy it, acknowledges they wandered off to another site, came back, filled the form differently the second time, forgot to choose to not buy it and now this guy has edited it to say OP did choose to not buy it but the vendor's site screwed up the order. It just didn't go down like that and he has re-written the sequence to say that it did. And you think that's 'editing'. It's just perverse.

I've said it before: whatever. It's just weird to me that everyone thinks this is a totally normal way to approach this summary.

[u/Stuzo → u/d15p05abl3]

That's because everyone else thinks that the story that's worth sharing is that the retailer and the artist were rude without any justification. You think otherwise, and that's OK, sometimes the real story is somewhere else and people with determined tenacity like yourself are the ones who find it. Perhaps the buyer cut off the fingers of relatives of the store workers and artist and posted them to them one by one until they got a free postage coupon? Now that WOULD be a story worth telling and you might just be the one to expose the buyer and bring it to public awareness that the rudeness was MORE than justified!

...but the buyer maybe wanting to buy the extra, maybe forgetting, maybe a cookie error in the website meaning that their original attempt to buy it is lost, etc, Sure that's 'a' story, but it's not 'the' story the buyer is looking to tell, and it does not appear to be the case that the buyer is trying to hide their own skulduggery in their telling of the story. Most people feel that whether the buyer has purchased 2 items or 1, it does not justify abusive language from a retailer or artist, and is therefor irrelevant to the main crux of the story.

It's more interesting to hear how the murder was committed than what colour underpants the murderer was wearing, even if those underpants were canary yellow*. If someone asks for a summary of the key points, you have to let the person who is providing a free of charge summary include the details which they think are relevant, which is what u/orreregion did. If I was writing a summary of something you said and I failed to mention that your username was made up of a mixture of Arabic numerals and lowercase letters from the Latin alphabet, should I be hung drawn and quartered for providing an incomplete summary?

*perhaps if the underpants were made of images of famous serial killers I would change my position!

[u/orreregion → u/Stuzo]

Buddy, look at the votes. The only person who thinks this is incredibly super duper relevant is you. It's a tiny detail, the exact thing that deserves to be left out in a quick recap. The person I originally responded to already didn't understand what the person THEY were responding to meant, even though the language that person originally used was already simple & easy to understand imo. I broke it down as much as I could, while still keeping the original "story beats" intact.

I don't know why you're so obsessed with whether or not the site site is coded to retain filled in forms once navigated away from is more important or if OP forgetting to refill every single check box is more important. It's semantics. It doesn't matter to anyone else but OP and the website team. Are you a representative of the website? If not, I think it's time to step away instead of writing multi-paragraph essays across multiple days about a nit you feel compelled to pick.

[u/orreregion → u/d15p05abl3]

Because their site didn't save the filled in form... And everyone already knows what the site is, because OP said it before I made this comment. You're apocalypsing about something that already happened, with little to no effect because everyone already knows that artist is a weirdo.