I knew it Nintendo is evil. They hate the enviroment.

[Lingyis]

Snufft said:

Lingyis said:

on the other hand, it's equally bad, if not worse, that GreenPeace decides to give them a zero. this is equally irresponsible from their part--feels like a power struggle, in that they try to show Nintendo what they can do instead of actually educating consumers and providing a fair assessment of environmental impact.

 

sensationalism--that's what they're going for. too bad really.

 

ps. actually, not quite sensationalism. i give up trying to come up with a word to describe green peace.

I would think Greenpeace tried to give a fair assessment of Nintendo by asking for information, and were thus denied the opportunity to do so. Greenpeace is only making what information they have available to the public so they can make a decision for themselves. Nintendo should have understood the ramifications of their decision not to give Greenpeace information.

 you said it--the ramification is that now GreenPeace can give them a zero and get some headlines for themselves.  exactly what attention grabbing organizations do--a responsible study would say data not available.

you can argue that green peace is responsible not to the method of study but the environment, in which case nintendo not providing material to the public could be viewed in some lights reprehensible and fully deserving of a 0/10.

 that's why i also said in an eariler (the post immediately above that i believe) that nintendo should have provided data.  apparently last year green peace did something similar to Apple.

as much as i dislike greenpeace's tactics, they do work from time to time.