You can't sell your cake and discriminate too!

[Witchyjoshy]

I guess the issue is whether you think it only counts as a boycott if such an action is organized vs. spontaneous.

A boycott's a boycott. Nowhere in any legitimate definition does a boycott have to be an organized action. It's like saying that someone holding up an anti-corporate sign outside of Walmart isn't really protesting because they didn't organize a protest.

Except they did organize a protest.  They had to make the sign, they had to arrive there, and they had to hold it up.

In regards to boycotting, it'd be pretty easy to say that you're boycotting a product simply because it wasn't as good or as cost efficient as another product.  Like if you buy a dove chocolate bar instead of a hershey's chocolate bar.  The wider the definition, the less impact the word has.

[PosthumanHeresy]

I guess the issue is whether you think it only counts as a boycott if such an action is organized vs. spontaneous.

A boycott's a boycott. Nowhere in any legitimate definition does a boycott have to be an organized action. It's like saying that someone holding up an anti-corporate sign outside of Walmart isn't really protesting because they didn't organize a protest.

Except they did organize a protest.  They had to make the sign, they had to arrive there, and they had to hold it up.

In regards to boycotting, it'd be pretty easy to say that you're boycotting a product simply because it wasn't as good or as cost efficient as another product.  Like if you buy a dove chocolate bar instead of a hershey's chocolate bar.  The wider the definition, the less impact the word has.

But that is a boycott. You're boycotting it due to quality or cost.

[Witchyjoshy]

I guess the issue is whether you think it only counts as a boycott if such an action is organized vs. spontaneous.

A boycott's a boycott. Nowhere in any legitimate definition does a boycott have to be an organized action. It's like saying that someone holding up an anti-corporate sign outside of Walmart isn't really protesting because they didn't organize a protest.

Except they did organize a protest.  They had to make the sign, they had to arrive there, and they had to hold it up.

In regards to boycotting, it'd be pretty easy to say that you're boycotting a product simply because it wasn't as good or as cost efficient as another product.  Like if you buy a dove chocolate bar instead of a hershey's chocolate bar.  The wider the definition, the less impact the word has.

But that is a boycott. You're boycotting it due to quality or cost.

So basically, everybody is boycotting 90% of everything just by existing then.

[PosthumanHeresy]

I guess the issue is whether you think it only counts as a boycott if such an action is organized vs. spontaneous.

A boycott's a boycott. Nowhere in any legitimate definition does a boycott have to be an organized action. It's like saying that someone holding up an anti-corporate sign outside of Walmart isn't really protesting because they didn't organize a protest.

Except they did organize a protest.  They had to make the sign, they had to arrive there, and they had to hold it up.

In regards to boycotting, it'd be pretty easy to say that you're boycotting a product simply because it wasn't as good or as cost efficient as another product.  Like if you buy a dove chocolate bar instead of a hershey's chocolate bar.  The wider the definition, the less impact the word has.

But that is a boycott. You're boycotting it due to quality or cost.

So basically, everybody is boycotting 90% of everything just by existing then.

Only if they were buying 90% of everything and then stopped. It's not a boycott if you never bought it or bought it only once if it's a more-than-once type of thing.

[chitoryu12]

I guess the issue is whether you think it only counts as a boycott if such an action is organized vs. spontaneous.

A boycott's a boycott. Nowhere in any legitimate definition does a boycott have to be an organized action. It's like saying that someone holding up an anti-corporate sign outside of Walmart isn't really protesting because they didn't organize a protest.

Except they did organize a protest.  They had to make the sign, they had to arrive there, and they had to hold it up.

In regards to boycotting, it'd be pretty easy to say that you're boycotting a product simply because it wasn't as good or as cost efficient as another product.  Like if you buy a dove chocolate bar instead of a hershey's chocolate bar.  The wider the definition, the less impact the word has.

But that is a boycott. You're boycotting it due to quality or cost.

So basically, everybody is boycotting 90% of everything just by existing then.

A boycott is intended as a punishment or protest. So in this case, PHH is taking it a bit far.

Except they did organize a protest.  They had to make the sign, they had to arrive there, and they had to hold it up.

Don't be pedantic. You said before that boycotts "have to be organized." Simply making a sign and standing outside a building requires barely more effort and organizational skill than refusing to buy a product because the company making it is run by cuntstains. If making a sign and standing outside Walmart is "organizing a protest", refusing to buy their products is "organizing a boycott." Your own logic has circled around and run into itself. The explosion was spectacular. Many lives were lost.

[Sigmaleph]

For "boycott" to be at all meaningful, there has to be a distinction between
a) Not buying a product or service because you are not interested or there are cheaper/higher quality alternatives, or whatever.
b) Not buying because you want to penalise the business for a practice you dislike, that doesn't directly affect your experience when using their product or service.

The first is the default reason we don't buy most of the things we don't buy. The second is a boycott. If they were the same thing, they probably wouldn't have needed to invent a new word for it.

[PosthumanHeresy]

Well then, it's still a boycott.