Discussion The Morality of Weighing Booster Packs

Status
Not open for further replies.
Whenever is say immoral, refer to this:
Immoral: not conforming to accepted standards of morality.
Morality: principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour.


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.
If the problem of scaling has been resolved, why do people still do it? Because some have not realized the weight method does not work on new cards?

You keep saying there is an unfair advantage, but you fail to explain why.

I may not have explained this properly, but if you weigh a pack, let others know that you have. If you weigh WOTC cards and sell the non-holo packs online, tell the customer they have been weighed, or even better, don't sell them with "unweighed" in the description.

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).
In a perfect world everyone would know that scaling exists and where it happens, but that is not reality. The Pokemon Company changed the packs to counter scaling.
I only just realized scaling existed recently, hence why I will not open my WOTC packs purchased online, as they most likely been in circulation for so long that someone along the line has scaled them. If I wanted to play with very low odds, I would purchase the unsealed Korean booster boxes or short shadowless base boosters.


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.
We are talking about the idea of scaling itself (using equipment to find which packs have a better chance of having holos), so let's focus on old packs that are easily scaled.
All the people paying to guess the weight, are guessing it. The last guy who 'guesses', uses scales to determine it's weight. VERY different odds. It would be like me entering a cycling competition, but I ride a motorbike. Very different odds.

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.
You are using the same logic as Otaku. I explained this in my previous post, but you may not have read it all as I edited a few things just before you posted, but i'll put it another way: Let's say there is an open untouched booster box (old weighable packs) and two people separately choose 10 packs they would like to purchase, but do not have the money currently and decide to come back later when they do. Both coincidently would like to purchase the same packs. One person randomly picked the packs first, and the other person entered the store later and put all packs on his scales and determined which packs most likely have holos. The first guy have great luck (today), the other guy does not have luck, but rather equipment to determine which packs are most likely more valuable. The guy who scales is not going to have good and bad luck. He knows which packs to search for in order to get good cards. Immoral and not chance. Or if you really want to keep pushing the chance angle, he has an unfair advantage... or is scaling fair?? It's certainly not a level playing field as the scaler has pushed the game in his favour with minimal chance of receiving junk packs.

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.
Not everyone knows about scaling, therefore the scaled junk packs are purchased by those who either do not scale or do not know that scaling exists.
A fresh batch of packs are put on the shelf (could also be merged with old ones) and ready for the scaler to work his magic.
Again, when speaking of odds, it is immoral to up your odds of getting good packs at minimal cost through scaling, leaving unaware buyers to have high odds at getting junk packs. Now let's not go back to the argument of "but with insane luck you might randomly pull the good packs, leaving the junk for others", because we are talking about the morality of scaling, which is not fair and not random.

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.
Most people would love to get the best packs, but they do not cross the moral line and buy equipment to weigh old packs to hoard the good ones for themselves at minimal price and minimal error. Scalers know they themselves are efficiently taking the good packs and leaving the junk ones for the majority. That is what scaling 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.
You would not pay to guess the weight of the candy jar knowing someone has already put the jar on scales and know the precise weight, because your chances of winning are drastically reduced.


A scaler cannot know if a booster pack has more valuable cards from its weight.
Old packs, which are still sold online. Some honest people do state the packs have been weighed, but this means the paks are sold cheaper, and all one has to do is resell it for a higher price and say it's unweighed or say nothing, making a profit. Immoral.

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.

You're allowed to cheat at cards, but when people find out you are a cheater, they are not going to want to play with you, because cheating is viewed as immoral. Scaling is immoral (wrong behaviour), and not everyone knows about it, therefore it is immpossible for everyone to partake in this wrong behaviour. Why did Pokemon company counter scaling with modified packs?

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.
Again, we are talking about chance. The scaler has an unfair advantage in pulling good packs.

Cheating at card games is immoral (wrong behaviour), so why is scaling ok?

If scaling is ok, is mapping ok?
 
I can't believe this needs to be argued.

I have and will never scale packs to gain an unfair advantage in selecting booster packs, because objectively, scaling skews the odds of pulling more valuable cards in the scaler's favor.

This really is all that needs to be said about the subject.
 
From a thread earlier this year about the same topic.

Weighting packs nets no benefit.

PokeMedic said:
A few nights ago my friend and I weighed a bunch of boosters from each SUM and on set using a laboratory grade scale that could measure grams down to the hundreth. Could have done pennyweight or nanos, but grams were fine. We found a variation of weight between all packs anywhere from 22.18 grams to 22.23 grams. However the greater weight of the pack wasn't any indication of its contents. Just because it was heavier didn't mean it contained any sort of ultra rare, full art, etc. Variations in weight are expected, but this range of variation is nothing significant and hasn't accounted for any particular type of content within the packs.

We then weighed individual cards. A full art Bridget, a Full art Sycamore, and a full art N all came in at 1.83 grams. Common non-shiny cards we used across XY to Forbidden Light came in at the same weight of 1.83. We found it funny that Bridget weight the same as a Snorlax for other reasons.

From this little experiment the whole scaling controversy doesn't seem like its worth getting upset over. The person who is scaling can't tell the quality of the pulls within from the weight alone. In the past I know it was far easier to get an idea of what was inside. Older cards weighed more and had different variations in their ink distribution, cut, and card stock. We even put some older ones on the scale from base set up to HG/SS. We got a lot of cards to come in at 1.80 grams a piece up to 1.98 grams based on their shiny-ness. I'm sure over the years all TCG companies have become privy to this practice. TPCi wants all the cards to sell after all. Getting all cards to the same weight or close to it helps to mitigate that potential loss of sales from scalers.

At some point in the future we'll try using a caliper and then try to attempt the same thing the OP said he saw just to see if it gets results.

I know I just used high class scientific equipment to do something you might hate, but remember that it was done to demonstrate that scaling isn't a real threat to the integrity of packs that some think it is. Just don't go thinking that I condone scaling because I didn't explicitly condemn scalers in this post and demand that they be tared and feathered for not buying singles like the rest of us.

We may have tried a non-contrast CT scan of a pack, but that would be silly if we did wouldn't it.
 
Serperior,
When people justify scaling by:
1) comparing scaling to lucky pulls.
2) saying everyone is free to scale, but ignoring the fact not all people know or will ever know scaling exists.
3) ignoring Pokemons attempt to counter scaling.
4) ignoring the immorality of gaining an unfair advantage through scaling.
5) ignoring that most scalers do not tell you they have scaled packs, so they can get a higher profit online, or allow other oblivious customers to purchase junk packs in store.
6) saying they don't like to be randomly surprised, as they want the rare cards.
7) ignoring or forgetting the old packs ability to be scaled.

Don't forget most of us who know scaling works with old packs will not purchase them (or are hesitant), due to the problem of scaling for profit. It's just laughable how a person will think it's foolish to purchase single packs due to scaling, but will defend it happening.

Pokemedic,
old packs are still in circulation. Even if the problem is solved, we are still here discussing peoples opinions on the morality of weighing booster packs.
 
Last edited:
old packs are still in circulation.

Woopdidoo. I got the same result with old B&W packs I never opened from 2011. I can't argue over morality when there is no actual benefit to performing pack weighing. People are just wasting their time, and that's just being a detriment to themselves— not to others. Now years backs pack weighers were considered the scum of the Pokemon world with Netdeckers following in a close second place. Weighers were just financially poor plebs who should've just bought singles for $20+ like the rest of us.
 
Last edited:
It still occurs as there are still people opening old booster boxes, weighing and selling the junk packs without telling the customer, or even worse, stating it is not weighed.

Regardless, both the intent and act of scaling are immoral, and yet you still have people here, today, using logical fallacies to defend it.
 
The funny thing is that I've never weighed packs. The closest I came is learning of a trick with the oldest Yu-Gi-Oh packs; mentioned it up thread, based on printing irregularities in the packaging. It is hard to avoid repeating yourself when we're just going in circles. I find myself defending the practice largely because I find the arguments of those against it to be morally reprehensible and/or lacking in logic, imposing their values on others without sufficient justification.

If I accept the justification given, you all better prepare for me to start imposing my values for this game on y'all. You think I'm annoying now with how often I bring up the need to revise the first turn rules, demand the powers-that-be print better Evolving Pokémon, ban Double Colorless Energy, etc.? Just wait until I think I've got a moral imperative to fight "unfairness". ;)
 
If we are going in circles, it is because your argument is based on false equivalences.

One more time: Good luck in random pulls does not equal or justify scaling. The odds, however you want to frame them, does not justify scaling. Scaling is an unfair advantage.

Could you explain which of my arguments are morally reprehensible?

We are here discussing the morality of scaling, not imposing values.
But it should be obvious scaling is frowned upon by the majority (who know of it), since it is viewed as wrong behaviour (immoral), which is the point I am explaining.
It's also interesting to see the mental gymnastics used in defending scaling.

Also would be interesting if you addressed Seperior's recent post above.
 
If we are going in circles, it is because your argument is based on false equivalences.

June 7, 2017, is when @TheRealBro. made the then last post. Just coming back to this thread means trying to pick things up after over a year of it being done. I'd given TheRealBro. some things to think about, and had pretty much made my case. I didn't see a reason to further comment because if I hadn't convinced anyone by then, I wasn't going to change anyone's mind. All we'd really be doing was wasting time.

I really should have stuck with that decision, because I really don't have anything worth adding. You specifically called me out, and after giving enough time to make sure the thread wasn't going to be locked for necroposting - checked the board rules, that isn't one here, so my bad! - which is the only reason I was foolish enough to give it another go. My reward is that I've wasted time I could and should have been using on other activities. Oh, and aggravating certain medical conditions, which happens when I let myself get angry and upset over something. My own body is reminding me to relax, and not waste time worrying on the unimportant things... like this.

The answers you want from me are in past posts. If they weren't good enough for you, then we simply disagree. If you wish to press the issue, without presenting anything new but presenting the same premises with which I've disagreed in the past, that is when it stops being a discussion and Evolves into... something else. I start to question your sincerity because it feels very trollish; you have only been a member of these boards since last Tuesday according to your profile, and we have your own behavior in these last few comments to provide further evidence. You know, things like

Also would be interesting if you addressed Seperior's recent post above.

Which simply reads

I can't believe this needs to be argued.

I have and will never scale packs to gain an unfair advantage in selecting booster packs, because objectively, scaling skews the odds of pulling more valuable cards in the scaler's favor.

This really is all that needs to be said about the subject.

...which asserts a fact that has not been proven, and which evidence presented contradicts. All it adds to the discussion is knowing this person's stance on the matter... a less efficient version of "Liking" a comment. It is good to know, though. I have an opposing view, one based on more general views on morality and governance. I've already stated it, so I'm not wasting time repeating it. I won't claim that I'll never reply to this discussion again, because someone might make a good point or I might have another lapse in judgment.

PokeMedic was quite correct in comparing the treatment of scalers to the treatment of netdeckers a.k.a. people approaching the situation logically but being scorned for it.
 
You're kidding me right? What kind of evidence are you looking at? I encourage you to visit YouTube, search "Scaling Pokémon Packs", and view any one of the hundreds of videos that detail individuals identifying heavier packs that inherently hold foil-containing cards. How can you say there is no benefit when the results are right. there.

"I have an opposing view, one based on more general views on morality and governance"...what? How can you be ok with scaling and make this statement subsequently?
 
Otaku,
There is nothing to be worked up about. We disagree and I'm trying to understand your defense of scaling.

...which asserts a fact that has not been proven, and which evidence presented contradicts.

I thought scaling old packs was proven to raise the chance of pulling the holo packs which are sought after, hence the point of scaling and the communities (especially in the past) view of scaling as wrong behavior (immoral). Is it not proven?
Just as Serperior states above regarding youtube videos, and many other forums.

PokeMedic was quite correct in comparing the treatment of scalers to the treatment of netdeckers a.k.a. people approaching the situation logically but being scorned for it.
This might be another false equivalence. I do not know anything about the game, outside of collecting, but is netdecking similar to a person following a winning item build and strategy in a MOBA? I don't know how much skill is in a tcg, but in a MOBA, your skill counts more than the build. Are plays in Pokemon tcg very limited and therefore counter decks cannot be built or skill used to win? But I guess this is beside the point.
Netdeckers are not scaling packs. A Netdecker might buy all the best cards online with much money, while another player might spend $500 on boosters and get zero holos because of a scaler.
This leads into a previous argument of yours of, 'well not all desired cards are holo', but this is also beside the point.

"I have an opposing view, one based on more general views on morality and governance"

As Serperior stated: How can you be ok with scaling and make this statement subsequently?


I'm having trouble understanding this quote of yours on the first page:
Why is your preference [no scaling] superior to their preference [scaling], and why can they not coexist? Why are you allowed to ruin it for people like @StriatonIsMagic? [who supports scaling because he prefers knowing he will get good cards such as EX]
You might have a point, but with so little explanation [Eamorayden referring to scaling and it's unfair advantage decreasing the likelyhood of others randomly pulling a good pack] your argument seems equally applicable to the opposite stance; just swap a few words around
Regarding the red text, can you give an example?
 
Last edited:
@Serperior
@Rammus Support

Really @Anyone who hasn't read this thread. It is from after this thread, being about 6 months old instead of 18 months (like this thread). Basically, it is the missing chapter. @PokeMedic actually quoted from thread but didn't actually use the kind of quote that links to the original source. This will give you the idea of the "tone" with which I've been reading your comments. It will also answer some of your other questions. Not all, but some.

The only other thing I'll answer is that net decking - copying the winning list of another player - was viewed as "cheating" in the earliest days of the game, and frowned upon until... 10 years ago? Sounds like a long time but remember how old trading card games are in general, and that Pokémon TCG goes back to 1999... as does my participation in it. Decklists were "meant" to be secret, supported by how WotC treated them with Magic: The Gathering. At least, back then; I think they've finally opened up as well. It was okay to ask for advice, but just copying a list was seen as lazy and if it was without the express consent of the deck's creator, theft of intellectual property.
 
@Serperior
@Rammus Support

Really @Anyone who hasn't read this thread. It is from after this thread, being about 6 months old instead of 18 months (like this thread). Basically, it is the missing chapter. @PokeMedic actually quoted from thread but didn't actually use the kind of quote that links to the original source. This will give you the idea of the "tone" with which I've been reading your comments. It will also answer some of your other questions. Not all, but some.

The only other thing I'll answer is that net decking - copying the winning list of another player - was viewed as "cheating" in the earliest days of the game, and frowned upon until... 10 years ago? Sounds like a long time but remember how old trading card games are in general, and that Pokémon TCG goes back to 1999... as does my participation in it. Decklists were "meant" to be secret, supported by how WotC treated them with Magic: The Gathering. At least, back then; I think they've finally opened up as well. It was okay to ask for advice, but just copying a list was seen as lazy and if it was without the express consent of the deck's creator, theft of intellectual property.


This is a problem with players today, they see how decks are played in other Countries and just play it that way, They already have the advantage as Somebody else already figured out the workings of a deck and go on to become the "Meta" players. I personally think cards should be released at the same time in each country, or at least change card strats for each region keeping the same artwork.. The cards are already region locked so it makes sense to change the text and rework decks for the region. That way when cards are released you'll need to figure out your own Strat/decklist as opposed to just copying and pasting other peoples decks. However that I'm sure is way off topic, for this thread.
 
All the useful content from this conversation has run its course and devolved into back and forth arguments.

Thread closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top