Discussion The Morality of Weighing Booster Packs

[Otaku]

Ya know the weird thing is I've never weighed booster packs; sometimes I've detested it and sometimes I've envied it (ignoring that if I really wanted to, I should have just invested in the right equipment). I find myself defending it though because of how it is being argued against (as opposed to just because it is being argued against). Go figure. =P

I'm not going to quote the entirety of @Shadow31 's previous post but I am going to reference it; using one comment to lead into my own. If anyone (including Shadow31) think I missed something in the post or am misrepresenting what was said, go ahead and call me on it. I am not trying to do that, but we all make mistakes and hey, plenty of people online aren't worth trusting just because they say you can trust them.

This certainly is an extreme example that probably doesn't occur in reality, but it gets the point across...

Only if the point is that instead of making a rational argument that still takes into account the feelings of others, you are instead focusing on "feelings" instead of considering the rights of others. Sorry to sound harsh, but I find if I don't cut off such a thing quickly, it grows like a cancer in a discussion. Shadow31, your post isn't all bad as you're supporting many of your points, but I find some of what you do present to be dubious or flat out wrong. First though I'll acknowedge where we agree; yes given the nature of TCG cards distributed via semi-randomized booster packs, anyone with the capacity to purchase that product is in competition with everyone else for it. Your "lucky pull" could have been someone else's. Note that this was only about a fifth of your post.

Something everyone needs to remember is scarcity within a TCG like Pokémon is entirely artificial. That does not mean we have a magic supply of cards for everyone to get, what I mean is that however easy or hard it is to obtain the cards, within the cards themselves the rarity only exists by design. There is also a mistaken notion that you are entitled to a chance to pull an Ultra Rare from the booster packs; if it isn't a freshly opened box, this is demonstrably false. How so? It would require adding more boosters to whatever is currently on the shelves anytime the final booster with a premium card was sold. As already pointed out, someone can simply luck into snagging the booster packs with all of the remaining premium rarity cards in them. The difference is that those weighing boosters are earning them. You have to invest in something to weigh the boosters, know what you're doing, and then actually do it!

Think of it a bit in TCG gameplay terms; if your opponent wins the game through a blatantly luck based card like something requiring a coin flip to work, doesn't it sting more than if they clearly did it through less potent but reliable effects? Now at the same time I do understand why people are annoyed with someone doing this and would prefer before the fact that it was down to luck; I hate losing to a coin flip but if my choice is an opponent with a reliable deck or one that requires the luck of the coin flips go their way? There is some appeal to the chance to win through luck.

Shadow31, you seem to have attempted "argumentum ad absurdum" (or "reductio ad absurdum"), where in order to prove something is true, you demonstrate that how absurd, false, or untenable a result occurs from its denial. Except you didn't; the result you gave isn't the only logical outcome from that which you are arguing against. If you wish to buy booster packs without weighing them, go right ahead. However it is your responsibility if you want to have a chance to pull a premium card with your purchase to only buy packs you know could still have booster packs with premium cards. Your right is to seek what you want, not to be guaranteed that you can find it. With this approach your rights don't clash with the rights of others.

Your extreme example assumes many things, among them that it is impossible to get to produce before others have weighed it in an attempt to get the boosters with premium rarity cards and that you are owed a chance to pull a pack with a premium rarity card. Both are false, as I've explained. Even if this improbable situation occurs, it does not then logically follow that no one should be permitted (or even think about) weighing boosters before purchase. For those who take issue with weighing booster packs, you are free to disdain it and even let people know you do (though here we need to follow the board rules ^^'). You can try to discourage others from doing it, but understand that their actions are actually quite reasonable. The better approach is to encourage TPCi (or whomever is in charge of this) to design packs where all weigh the same regardless of content (which they appear to be doing) or to make sure your local vendors know you won't be shopping buying loose boosters if the vendor allows weighing of booster packs, while at the same time making sure everyone you know who buys booster packs is aware of this risk!

Frankly I long ago became convinced that buying boosters in such a matter was a foolish move.

 

[Chip Thrasher]

Maybe it helps the pack weigher to select better packs, but what about everyone else who gets no Ultra Rares in 20 whole boosters? All the fun is spoiled for them.

Story: Me and my dad bought 12 ROS packs (before knowing that was the one people weighed the most, because of Shaymin-EX) and didn't get a single good card. The best we got was... Unfezant? Not an EX, not a holo, not really anything good at all.

To sum it up, pack weighing is a questionable thing to do, and probably to some degree immoral. So I do agree with you.

 

[Purrloin]

If a person weighs their packs and then resells the others, but clearly describes them as being weighed, I am okay with it because they aren't screwing over the customer. Problem is, very few resellers on places like eBay admit to selling weighed packs. And worse, if you buy packs from a place that accepts trade-ins (like the many hobby storefronts online), there isn't even a way to say they're weighed even if the seller would like to.

If it's true that TPCi has been using different code cards to throw off weighing, I am for that 100%. I'd be for any system that helps keep it fair for every customer. But until such a time that anti-weighing is perfected, I will continue to consider it ethically immoral, outside of the gray area mentioned above.

 

[Chip Thrasher]

Note that Generations-on, they guaranteed a holo in every pack so nobody could do that (e.g. if there were no EXs, there would be some random holo, and if there was one, that would be the holo card in that pack).

 

[ninjanate]

I am gonna share a true story of Pokémon TCG sadness :
I live in Malta, a small island that has like 20 shops that sell pokemon boosters around, with the booster box bare on the counter to take a booster from there. I've been a Pokémon TCG collector/fan for nearly 16 years, I've bought hundreds of packs, found my share of happiness in these gems, and have lost alot (especially with baby pokemon in EX series but that trauma is over XD
Nowadays, I restarted collecting, not so difficult to obtain the good stuff, trading buying a blister pack or going on a spree to get the chance to see what I get
But never have I seen in my life have seen such a shame to Pokémon TCG player come up, until this :
I've come across a certain young 13 year old boy who has bought all his boosters by weighing all the sotres in malta, so this kid goes in stores and they let him weigh every single pack ... he even asked to open boxes to weigh the packs ... while reducing the opportunities of others in ever having the fun of opening a pack and finding something memorable of the Ultra Rares / while the kid (admitting) is basically buying the packs for profit only and is collecting only to make more money (he publicly confessed to me about it and he's proud of it!) I asked then:

Me: When you open the pack s and find such ultra rares, do you generously trade some of such EX's, full arts ?
Him: Of course not! I make the most I can off them!
Me: Isn't that a bit low even for you? (like robin hood, take from the rich and give to the poor )
Him : ... (More like robbing hood, I'll keep the riches and do no such thing)
Me: I mean consider all this time you do this, you must really have no joy opening a pack and just getting what you get, right? Why go through weighin a pack in a store?
Him: (offended deeply with a huge ) ... that's your opinion...
Me: Yes, but be thankfully you're finding such rares, why be so greedy as not to help others?
Him: Whatever (brushed my question off) hmm, I asked some other guy , he gave me a frown when I told him I do this, but he said nothing so it's okay.
Me: that doesn't mean you're doing right! well I see you're not really playing Pokémon TCG for the joy of being able to form a deck or a collection with what you can buy as singles or booster or box wise because it doesn't seem like you are ?
Him: No, I just do it for the money , I don't collect them because it's fun, I'll just buy a car with the profits I make off them one day (with a smirk)
Me: Okay ( in my mind, maybe if it's a circus car or the bond bug because this is just crazy)

THE END (in the end, I had to trade some VS seekers for a Primal Groudon EX from Ancient Origins, and I was gonna add Mega Rayqauza EX (dragon) and he blows it all by saying his cards are worth more personally due to mine being my cards!

I am personally amazed to this generation's greed in always finding the best in things, whenever I go the card game hub on my island, the poke bunch are a handful and the few there are are nearly the same, buy the cards for profit, big ol money banks in paper just forming on its own, why do shops not go against such manners of cheating out the chances of finding or not finding?
The booster pack was invented so you could have 3 options:
Either you find something to your advantage (collect or sell)
Or find nothing to your advantage, and try to trade to get what you need (trades or selling too)

But if this person, like many others around the world get to just buy packs, knowing they've got the good stuff...
What is the point of a booster pack now? What's the point of buying something useless while the person weighing gets everything , then has all of the endgame?
I just wish that something would change with this infernal practice, and that it could be countered, once and for all.

So what's your opinion on weighing packs? please comment below.

So what if your weighing packs and you are just doing it for fun? like if i wanted to do it once to see how well it worked for my self or just to see what I could get? I wonder if doing it and being kind to other people by weighing packs and bringing the good ones to the front would change the morality?

 

[MorningSTAR1337]

We can learn from the smart Japanese people on how to avoid this problem. Before the Black/White gen 5 era, EVERY Japanese pack had a holo card!! Although this made holo cards easier to get in the old sets, this did NOT lower their value much (popular holos were still expensive).

Personally, I've had my share of great pulls and bad pulls from loose English packs. Nowadays, I buy ultra rares individually.

Also, tell the store owners to NOT let anyone weigh the packs. That's called "tampering with the product before purchase", which may be considered a crime in some areas. Store owners must realize this is bad for their business in the long run.

I'm pretty sure that's why Reverse cards exist (well that and allow a player to get an all holofoil deck if they wished)

 

[ARHaslage]

It is a moot point now. TPCi tosses in TCGO cards adjusted to counter weighing of booster packs.

 

[MorningSTAR1337]

It is a moot point now. TPCi tosses in TCGO cards adjusted to counter weighing of booster packs.

It might not be, considering that "mapping" still allow the same result. Just with a few less dud packs.

 

[ARHaslage]

The mapping thing was S&M was odd.

 

[Rocket The Shellos]

I don't mind that they made the booster codes different weights, but surely they could maintain the same design? Seeing the full-green pack code accidentally when opening the pack is just a signal to throw the whole pack into the trash before I can even see the rare.

Also to the guy who was talking about electronic tagging measures and whatnot, theft of cards is so common in Australia (mostly due to the ridiculous price point of packs here) that most city retailers will actually move the boosters closer to a purchase counter and sometimes put electronic tags on the larger boxes and put locks on booster racks. Hell, one Kmart puts boosters inside the plastic containers they used to have DVDs/games in.

And of course some stores like EB Games just put them behind the counter. But they're the minority really

 

[Otaku]

I don't mind that they made the booster codes different weights, but surely they could maintain the same design? Seeing the full-green pack code accidentally when opening the pack is just a signal to throw the whole pack into the trash before I can even see the rare.

That's more a problem with game design/balance. The idea that rarity = quality is either a myth or bad game design. Unless the whole pack mapping thing means you also know that regular Rares and Uncommons are junk. Sometimes even a Commons are decent, though due to their availability even "good" ones don't usually get that high. During the BW-era, Pokémon Catcher hit $15 USD for an easy to purchase copy. VS Seeker, I thought, came close to that at times in the XY-era.

So, again, if it really is that bad, where the green code card means the entire pack is filler, the real problem is consumers tolerating so much filler in this TCG.

 

[TheRealBro..]

I understand both sides here, and would like to throw my experiences out there. First I use to buy booster boxes with friends and we would weigh packs out and split packs up as evenly as we could. I also weighed packs at my local target for XY and Roaring Skies. Often I would weigh out 10 or so good packs buy 4 and put the rest on the front of the rack so the next person to come up if they just grabbed a pack of the set they wanted would have better odds. I don't see it as too big of an issue if you don't get too greedy with weighing like if you leave over half of the good packs behind so other people can still pull Ultras then that's not too bad. I completely disagree with the idea of card shops weighting out packs and pulling certain packs for singles and selling the rest as if nothing happened. Basically if you're going to do it have some decency

Well, I don't agree. Weighing in stores and then buying the better packs lowers the chances of pulling something good for others, and is thus immoral. In my opinion there can't be a discussion about that. However, it's just Pokemon cards, so if you do it on a small scale it's not that big of a scam. It is however a bigger problem than it appears to be because everyone I know (including me) doesn't buy loose packs anymore because of the weighing. Pretty sad. Good thing TPCI did something about it!

 

[Otaku]

Well, I don't agree. Weighing in stores and then buying the better packs lowers the chances of pulling something good for others, and is thus immoral. In my opinion there can't be a discussion about that.

There are issues where I won't bother trying to discuss the morality of something; maybe there is a core principle one accepts or one doesn't, or it is complicated enough that most message boards and similar places are a poor avenue for discussion. For example, this is a forum, so technically you're always talking to everyone who is here or could ever be herre. You may not specifically be addressing your comments to them, but others will come around.

This isn't one of the issues where I am inclined to draw the line. I've made multiple posts in this two page thread explaining why I'd like people to justify their position. So I'm going to ask, even if you plan on ignoring me: Why is it immoral? Anytime you get a good pull, premium or not, it lowers the odds of anyone else getting one from that same booster pack supply. The difference here is one person is investing in equipment and using skill to improve his or her odds of pulling a premium rarity card, which aren't always good cards, but tend to be worth at least enough to cover the cost of the pack. The other person is relying on blind luck. Either way, the next person has lower odds. This business model puts us all into direct competition.

Where we do agree is when a store weighs boosters, sorts out those that are most likely to have premium pulls, and sells the rest without disclosing that they've been weighed. That would be the difference of relationship: seller to customer versus customer to customer.

Good thing TPCI did something about it!

To be fair, remember that the powers-that-be (I doubt the decision is in TPCi's hands) are the ones who made this a trading card game. If it was just a card game, and collectors just focused on regular trading cards, then you wouldn't have to worry about scaling. You wouldn't have to worry that anytime one person pulls a good card from a booster, it is one less chance for someone else to pull the same thing. The fact you can enjoy "lucky pulls" are because everyone is in the same boat, dealing with mostly "average" and sometimes "unlucky" pulls. Instead of just getting that for which you paid.

 

[TheRealBro..]

This isn't one of the issues where I am inclined to draw the line. I've made multiple posts in this two page thread explaining why I'd like people to justify their position. So I'm going to ask, even if you plan on ignoring me: Why is it immoral? Anytime you get a good pull, premium or not, it lowers the odds of anyone else getting one from that same booster pack supply. The difference here is one person is investing in equipment and using skill to improve his or her odds of pulling a premium rarity card, which aren't always good cards, but tend to be worth at least enough to cover the cost of the pack. The other person is relying on blind luck. Either way, the next person has lower odds. This business model puts us all into direct competition.

Where we do agree is when a store weighs boosters, sorts out those that are most likely to have premium pulls, and sells the rest without disclosing that they've been weighed. That would be the difference of relationship: seller to customer versus customer to customer.

I'm definitely not going to ignore you, because I like a good discussion. You also brought good points. I guess you could call it skill, but still, in the end, even if it's not seller weighing against a not knowing customer, but a weighing customer against a not knowing customer it is immoral. My argument is simple; the heavier packs are the better packs, everyone agrees on that. By searching the heavier packs from the stack the packs with less worth remain. Doesn't matter if it involves skill. This is unfair, because everyone pays the same price at the store for the packs thinking they get certain odds, but now the next customer gets worst odds than you. This is because of what you did. The seller stands outside of this, providing he/she didn't know you did that. Yes, it is clever, but it is also unfair. You changed the odds for someone else in a bad way by searching the packs and that can not be justified. Your basically saying everyone should learn weighing to improve their odds, but where would that take things? All the ''not good packs'' would remain in the store and stores would stop selling Pokemon cards because these packs would not be bought anymore for the retail price. If you were not saying that, ignore that last phrase.

It's not a big problem, or super immoral, but when you look at it's basics it is a scam. You know you are paying less than you should for the specific packs you are now buying, because, as we stated, the price in the stores is for a pack with normal odds (say 3/10 for a valuable card). The heavier packs with the big odds are worth more simply because they have a 10/10 chance for a valuable card. The lesser packs you leave behind are worth less, 0/10. The next customer pays too much. This is how I see it.

Edit; I do agree though that when it comes to a store weighing it's a way bigger form of immorality because of the responsibility a store has.

 

[Otaku]

I'm definitely not going to ignore you, because I like a good discussion.

Groovy.

You also brought good points.

Thank you. It is hard to "lose" when there is actual, civil discussion; worst case, all sides are firmly set in their position, but by explaining at least this is established as legitimate differences and not stubbornness.

Despite how I've begun, I'm not going to bother quoting the bulk of your comment. Doesn't seem necessary for you to follow what I am about to say, and I tend to get lost in minutae if I do (which is my own failing; please bear with me). So for now I'll ebalorate on some key areas of disagreement, or questions I have for you:

• Typical stocking practices means you don't waste time removing an old display if you can avoid it, and that if I have two half (or more) empty booster boxes on a shelf, I'm just going to combine them so that I may put new product in the empty space (whether it is more of the same, or something different). So without theft, scaling, etc. you are not guaranteed the odds you think you get.
• The true odds are based on the content of all the booster packs there. You won't know what those are, but that is why you should assume the worst, not the best.
  
• Not all good cards are premium cards, and not all premium cards are good cards. Just an important point to remember in general.
  
• If it is immoral to lower the odds of another person pulling premium rarity cards through scaling, then why is it not immoral to do the same thing through luck?
• If you consider weighing packs to be immoral, then is it not the seller's responsibility to safeguard against it? If theives were just ripping open packs and resealing them, and the vendor was making no serious action to stop them, you'd take issue with that seller, wouldn't you?

Your basically saying everyone should learn weighing to improve their odds, but where would that take things

I'm saying that you have faulty expectations when it comes to buying individual booster packs.

All the ''not good packs'' would remain in the store and stores would stop selling Pokemon cards because these packs would not be bought anymore for the retail price. If you were not saying that, ignore that last phrase.

If maintaining these odds is a thing, then why isn't it the vendor's responsbility to prevent scaling, just like one should expect them to prevent people from opening packs, removing a card, resealing them, and putting them back on the shelf? The only reason that isn't the kind of theft we expect is because outright stealing the entire pack is easier. XP

Oh, and if you stop shopping at places that don't safeguard their boosters from scaling, the other likely result is... they stop people from scaling. So they can still make good money selling booster packs (they are a high mark-up item that takes little shelf space).

 

[TheRealBro..]

• Typical stocking practices means you don't waste time removing an old display if you can avoid it, and that if I have two half (or more) empty booster boxes on a shelf, I'm just going to combine them so that I may put new product in the empty space (whether it is more of the same, or something different). So without theft, scaling, etc. you are not guaranteed the odds you think you get.

• The true odds are based on the content of all the booster packs there. You won't know what those are, but that is why you should assume the worst, not the best.

• Not all good cards are premium cards, and not all premium cards are good cards. Just an important point to remember in general.

• If it is immoral to lower the odds of another person pulling premium rarity cards through scaling, then why is it not immoral to do the same thing through luck?

• If you consider weighing packs to be immoral, then is it not the seller's responsibility to safeguard against it? If theives were just ripping open packs and resealing them, and the vendor was making no serious action to stop them, you'd take issue with that seller, wouldn't y

Well we agree on the civil discussion winners part Not the rest however.

Your first two points; true, but, still the odds sink lower than they would normally be when you cancel out some luck in buying only good packs. The odds are therefore lower than they would otherwise be. The fact that you stated about the odds being based on all the content in the store doens't change that your odds were lowered.

Your third point; again, true, but in general people want the valuable cards, because they are harder to get or just to sell them right away. These cards tend to be the Holo/EX/GX cards your taking out, thus leaving less valuable packs, again, in general.

Your fourth point; luck is just there. It's no one's fault some people have bad luck and some good. You can't blame 'luck' because it is not a person/entity. People are a different story. They can think about things and have a conscience, so when a person lowers the odds for someone else to do hem/herself a favour that means that person can be blamed for it.

Your fifth point; I agree with you here to a degree. Yes, it is indeed also the responsibility of the seller to check that these things do not happen, but that does not change the fact that the person who is weighing has a responsibility of his own to not lower the odds for someone else who has the right to have normal odds on a normal priced purchase.

To sum it up; there's more discussion to be had about this subject than I initially thought, I have to admit that, but in the end I still think there is a problem with this practice. That problem does not lie in improving your own luck with skill, because the store doesn't care. The problem lies in that in doing so you steal away some chance for the next innocent customer who DOES care about pulling that good card, and in my opinion you have no right to do so. He/she pays the same price, and should not have to worry about not having a normal luck based chance (that implies your first two points), because his/her luck was changed by a person ON PURPOSE. That is obviously not what you WANT to do (you want to improve your own luck) but you still know that you do so, and do it anyway. That's a big difference with the seller who just shuffles (your first two points again) but does not know if the odds for the next customer improve by doing that, or don't. Although you could call it unlucky if you buy weighed packs, you can still blame the searcher for doing it intentionally

 

[Rammus Support]

See this large jar of assorted lollies, pay $1 per chance to guess it's weight and whoever is correct can keep it.
What I won't tell you is earlier today another contestant paid $1 and put the jar on scales.

Otaku,
If everyone is in the dark regarding the random packs they choose from a box, then it is fair.
Justify scaling all you like with equipment investments and 'lower odds', but
it's immoral and cheating.

Scaling artificially lowers the odds, especially since the scaler is not using 'blind luck' like everyone else.

Immoral.

 

[Otaku]

My apologies for the length of this comment, but there was a lot to say and I ran out of time to streamline it. This matters because not only do I want folks to not waste time reading unneccessary bloat, but I do want folks to read all of this post, and understand what is being said.

See this large jar of assorted lollies, pay per chance to guess it's weight and whoever is correct can keep it.
What I won't tell you is earlier today another contestant paid and put the jar on scales.

Otaku,
If everyone is in the dark regarding the random packs they choose from a box, then it is fair.
Justify scaling all you like with equipment investments and 'lower odds', but
it's immoral and cheating.

Scaling artificially lowers the odds, especially since the scaler is not using 'blind luck' like everyone else.

Immoral.

Since you resurrected this thread and the mods haven't said anything about it, I shall continue the discussion. You're making many false assumptions. Let us start with your jar example. If everyone is allowed to weigh the jar, then the test isn't entirely about luck but also reasoning skills. It also remains fair because, again, everyone can weigh the jar. If we focus on folks who lack access to a portable scale, we need to consider how unfair it is that those with access to more money can buy more guesses, so even if they could not weigh the jar, they could cover a wider range of guesses. Yes, we can then keep tacking on conditions, but it will go in circles. Only one guess per person? You go and have some trustworthy friends who would otherwise not have participated make guesses on your behalf.


The jar example is not good, however, for ignoring an inherently "unfair" aspect of buying booster packs, the aspect which matters whether someone is scaling or just naturally luck:

When someone purchases a pack, it's gone. ​

Indeed, bad luck also matters. There are a finite amount of packs in a booster box. Theoretically, you may have an abnormal box with all equally good cards, but realistically there are only so many copies of each card from the set in that particular box. When someone buys a pack before you, whether they have "good pulls" or "bad pulls" - and it is partially subjective depending on what they want from the set - that pack and those cards are removed from the pool, affecting your odds of getting them. Oh, and one other fact of which you should be aware; retailers don't always put out whole, fresh boxes. The short version is that it is quite likely a booster box gets opened up and used to top off what is already there.

You want it to be perfectly fair, you have a problem. We're all different people. Do you wait until you have the exact right amount of people all buying the same amount of packs that are equal to an even amount of boxes... then use a random means of distributing the packs to the players? No? If we're going to insist on things being perfectly fair, you haven't met the standard. Now, if we use (formerly) common sense we try for something where no one's rights are being interfered with in the process. The buyer and the seller both have responsibilities, legally. If asked, they need to disclose whether or not someone has been weighing packs or using some other method to improve their odds of pulling some of the finite amount of good cards. If they don't know, because they aren't keeping careful watch of the product, they also need to tell you when you ask them.

That's the consumer's job; either you find a seller who does things exactly how you want so you don't have to ask, or you need to ask. This way, you are free to buy packs how you see fit, but those who want to approach things differently are also free to do as they see fit. If we start worrying about morals that are not also laws, because you think it is wrong to weigh packs no matter what... okay, but what about the people who think that buying packs is gambling and that such a form of gambling is immoral? What about just spending non-discretionary income on frivolities? I am not calling for laws on such a thing, but when we go beyond the fundamental, most common morals as a basis for law, then we've got to suddenly decide whose more specific morals to follow. That... doesn't usually work all that well.

 

[Rammus Support]

It also remains fair because, again, everyone can weigh the jar.
There's an unfair difference between a guess (randomly choosing a pokemon pack) and using scales (far higher chance of getting a desired result).

If we focus on folks who lack access to a portable scale, we need to consider how unfair it is that those with access to more money can buy more guesses, so even if they could not weigh the jar, they could cover a wider range of guesses.
That is fair. You purchase more chances, but each guess is legitimized via purchase (purchasing random packs). Scaling is picking packs via weight you believe to have the good cards, meaning better chances while spending less (is mapping also ok?).


Yes, we can then keep tacking on conditions, but it will go in circles. Only one guess per person? You go and have some trustworthy friends who would otherwise not have participated make guesses on your behalf.
My jar analogy reflects the unfair nature of scaling. You might pay 100 dollars to guess 100 times, and still lose to a person who pays and weighs the jar on scales once.
You might purchase 100 dollars of booster packs, AFTER a person has weighed and purchased all the packs of value, and therefore have a very low chance of getting good cards.
Big difference between random people who have luck and pull the good packs, before another person spends money on junk packs unknowingly. In this case everyone is on a level playing field as packs were randomly purchased (not scaled).


The jar example is not good, however, for ignoring an inherently "unfair" aspect of buying booster packs, the aspect which matters whether someone is scaling or just naturally luck:
Obviously, if I randomly pulled, with much luck, all the good packs, then there is zero chance of others picking good packs as I have them, but that is the nature of a random purchases. What is not random and fair is scaling, obviously.


When someone purchases a pack, it's gone.
When somebody scales, they have an unfair advantage.

The short version is that it is quite likely a booster box gets opened up and used to top off what is already there.
There is no unfair advantage if nobody scales. Regardless of which packs are left or merged, you will not know what is inside a pack until you purchase and open them. A scaler will scale, see the good ones have been purchased (by themselves or others) and not purchase any. Again, scaling is wrong.


You want it to be perfectly fair, you have a problem. We're all different people. Do you wait until you have the exact right amount of people all buying the same amount of packs that are equal to an even amount of boxes... then use a random means of distributing the packs to the players? No? If we're going to insist on things being perfectly fair, you haven't met the standard. Now, if we use (formerly) common sense we try for something where no one's rights are being interfered with in the process. The buyer and the seller both have responsibilities, legally. If asked, they need to disclose whether or not someone has been weighing packs or using some other method to improve their odds of pulling some of the finite amount of good cards. If they don't know, because they aren't keeping careful watch of the product, they also need to tell you when you ask them.
It's perfectly fair if I purchase a sealed box. It's perfectly fair if I purchase 15 random packs from a store (online or offline). What is not fair is scaling: the scaler does not in most cases tell you they have sifted through a box and taken the good packs because they are selfish).


That's the consumer's job; either you find a seller who does things exactly how you want so you don't have to ask, or you need to ask. This way, you are free to buy packs how you see fit, but those who want to approach things differently are also free to do as they see fit. If we start worrying about morals that are not also laws, because you think it is wrong to weigh packs no matter what... okay, but what about the people who think that buying packs is gambling and that such a form of gambling is immoral? What about just spending non-discretionary income on frivolities? I am not calling for laws on such a thing, but when we go beyond the fundamental, most common morals as a basis for law, then we've got to suddenly decide whose more specific morals to follow. That... doesn't usually work all that well.
Cheating: act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage. "she always cheats at cards".
Cheating, for example by scaling Pokemon packs for your benefit at the expense of others, is immoral.


Your attempts to justify cheating (scaling), isn't working.
You may accept scaling because you've given up, but that does not make it moral.
I feel sorry for those who buy loose packs and not know there is a chance they have been scaled.

Years ago I purchased two Delta Species packs in store and both had holo charizards. Luck. If they had been scaled previously, I would have had a much lower (unfair) chance of getting them.
I legitimately pulled those packs (random and fair), a scaler does not (pre-determined and immoral).

Defending scaling is like defending lottery fraud.

 

[Vom]

You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion (which is as valid as the next guy's) but the reasoning behind it is deeply flawed. It all comes down to one assumption you made that you seem to consider a fact: pack-weighters steal all the good packs from the non-pack weighters. Note the neutral terminology because, again, there is no absolute rule about this (unless there is store policy concerning it) and it all comes down to morality, which is itself a very subjective term.

There's an unfair difference between a guess (randomly choosing a pokemon pack) and using scales (far higher chance of getting a desired result).

Obviously, if I randomly pulled, with much luck, all the good packs, then there is zero chance of others picking good packs as I have them, but that is the nature of a random purchases. What is not random and fair is scaling, obviously.

When somebody scales, they have an unfair advantage.

You keep saying there is an unfair advantage, but you fail to explain why. Why is scaling unfair? Literally everyone is allowed to weight packs (which is fair) and if they're not, then no one at all is allowed (again, fair).

That is fair. You purchase more chances, but each guess is legitimized via purchase (purchasing random packs). Scaling is picking packs via weight you believe to have the good cards, meaning better chances while spending less (is mapping also ok?).

Believe is the key word here. There is nothing factual about scaling, as it is at best an educated guess, because there is no surefire way of knowing a pack's contents.

My jar analogy reflects the unfair nature of scaling. You might pay 100 dollars to guess 100 times, and still lose to a person who pays and weighs the jar on scales once.
You might purchase 100 dollars of booster packs, AFTER a person has weighed and purchased all the packs of value, and therefore have a very low chance of getting good cards.
Big difference between random people who have luck and pull the good packs, before the person spends 00 on junk packs. In this case everyone is on a level playing field as packs were randomly purchased.

Your jar analogy does not in fact reflect the "unfair nature of scaling". In your analogy, anyone weighting the jar (which could be literally everyone) has a 100% chance of getting the prize, as their guess has turned into a fact, because they know what the exact weight of the jar is. You cannot know for a fact that a pack has more valuable cards from its weight, not anymore.
You might also purchase the one pack left by a non-pack weighter, and get a valuable card while they do not. It's still chance.

There is no unfair advantage if nobody scales. Regardless of which packs are left or merged, you will not know what is inside a pack until you purchase and open them. A scaler will scale, see the good ones have been purchased (by themselves or others) and not purchase any. Again, scaling is wrong.

Which side are you trying to defend here? The only facts I see here work against you. There is indeed no unfair advantage if nobody scales, but there is no unfair advantage if everyone can scale, either. In order to know if the heavier packs are completely gone to the point of coming to the decision of not purchasing any, the scaler would need to weight every single pack in the store, which is not realistic.

It's perfectly fair if I purchase a sealed box. It's perfectly fair if I purchase 15 random packs from a store (online or offline). What is not fair is scaling: the scaler does not in most cases tell you they have sifted through a box and taken the good packs because they are selfish).

This assumes the scaler somehow has the ability to know whether a pack is 'good' or not. If you really want to go into being selfish, analyze every single action you take. If you really want to, everything becomes selfish, even the most basic of things, such as eating, breathing, or drinking.

Cheating: act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage. "she always cheats at cards".
Cheating, for example by scaling Pokemon packs for your benefit at the expense of others, is immoral.

It's not going against any rules. It's not like only some people can do it. It's either anyone can or no one can.

Basically:

• A scaler cannot know if a booster pack has more valuable cards from its weight.
  
• In a world where heavier packs automatically means better pulls, scaling is still not unfair because either everyone or no one at all can do it.
• Packs are never purchased randomly, you always have some reason for buying exactly the ones you're buying, especially if you're fishing for good pulls. Whether it be they're the ones on top, they're the ones on bottom, the box looks neat, etc., pack weight is just one more factor. You always make a conscious decision as to what pack to buy, or if someone chooses for you, they make a conscious decision. You have the control over which ones you buy.