$15.00
$20.00
$5.00
$30.00
Recommend
10 
 Thumb up
 Hide
40 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

SeaFall» Forums » General

Subject: Metal coin humor rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jamie Specht
United States
Downers Grove
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
This one falls in the same category of the rule books that tell you to first put the board on the table.

10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Travis Dean
United States
Escondido
CA
flag msg tools
The Golden Camel UberBadge is a mystery. Nobody knows where it came from or how it got there.
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
Be sure to open game box before removing game components for play.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Becq Starforged
United States
Cerritos
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Important: Be sure to remove dice from plastic bag before attempting to roll them!
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Travis Dean
United States
Escondido
CA
flag msg tools
The Golden Camel UberBadge is a mystery. Nobody knows where it came from or how it got there.
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
Becq wrote:
Important: Be sure to remove dice from plastic bag before attempting to roll them!


Is that why my rolls keep coming up the same values?

I just figured loaded dice were a part of the Legacy experience. I was looking forward to unlocking actual chance cubes.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Becq Starforged
United States
Cerritos
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Dolus wrote:
Becq wrote:
Important: Be sure to remove dice from plastic bag before attempting to roll them!


Is that why my rolls keep coming up the same values?

I just figured loaded dice were a part of the Legacy experience. I was looking forward to unlocking actual chance cubes.

And that is exactly why reasonable, common sense warnings such as those described above are so important to include in products of all sorts. It's much the same reason that coffee cups need to have warning labels announcing that the contents may be hot...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
O.Shane Balloun
United States
Bellingham
Washington
flag msg tools
I will play as the Atreides, Bene Gesserit, Emperor, Fremen, Guild, or Harkonnen.
badge
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
mbmbmbmbmb
Becq wrote:
It's much the same reason that coffee cups need to have warning labels announcing that the contents may be hot...


The plaintiff in Liebeck v. McDonald's initially sought a settlement with McDonald's merely for the cost of her then-current and anticipated medical bills to treat her third degree burns and consequential expenses after being served coffee at 190° F (87° C) in a drive-thru experience where placement of the cup in the lap by the customer was a very likely outcome. It's one thing to know that coffee is generally hot. It's another thing for the coffee to be only 22° (13° C) shy of boiling. No one reasonably serves coffee so hot; the fact that customers were likely to place the cup into their laps while receiving other food made the situation even more egregious.

Liebeck's requested damages when her attorneys contacted the defendant for settlement were only $20,000.

McDonald's is not known for being a claim-friendly corporation, so it resisted all reasonable attempts to settle for medical costs, at which point the plaintiff proceeded with the case. The jury, appalled at McDonald's obtuseness, awarded $2.7 million in punitive damages on top of $160,000 actual damages.

The trial judge ordered remittitur (reduction in damages) to $640,000 in punitives (4x vs. 16.875x) to make the award more reasonable.

Mind you, the jurisprudential purpose of punitive damages is to punish the defendant so that it does not engage in the same behavior with future potential plaintiffs. The award goes to the plaintiff (though many states tax such awards very heavily), but the purpose is to curb behavior. Punishment does not usually curb behavior unless it stings, and a sting is relative (a) to the wrong that was done and (b) the defendant's ability to pay.

$2.7 million was one seventh of McDonald's daily revenue in 1994. Or in other words, $2.7 million was McD's revenue for 3 hours and 25 minutes of 1994. After remittitur, the punitive damages represented 49 minutes of McDonald's revenue in 1994.

The case was used to champion tort reform, but despite the clamor from the press and the insurance lobby in the United States, the irony was that Liebeck was an exceptionally reasonably litigated case with a fair request by the plaintiff, a fair award by the jury, and an imminently reasonable remittitur by the trial judge.

Why? Because handing a cup of coffee heated to 190° to a customer who is likely to put the cup in her lap should at minimum come with a simple warning ("COFFEE HOT"). To have done otherwise was negligent.
29 
 Thumb up
0.27
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gustav Weberup
Sweden
Lund
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
grammatoncleric wrote:
Becq wrote:
It's much the same reason that coffee cups need to have warning labels announcing that the contents may be hot...


The plaintiff in Liebeck v. McDonald's initially sought a settlement with McDonald's merely for the cost of her then-current and anticipated medical bills to treat her third degree burns and consequential expenses after being served coffee at 190° F (87° C) in a drive-thru experience where placement of the cup in the lap by the customer was a very likely outcome. It's one thing to know that coffee is generally hot. It's another thing for the coffee to be only 22° (13° C) shy of boiling. No one reasonably serves coffee so hot; the fact that customers were likely to place the cup into their laps while receiving other food made the situation even more egregious.

Liebeck's requested damages when her attorneys contacted the defendant for settlement were only $20,000.

McDonald's is not known for being a claim-friendly corporation, so it resisted all reasonable attempts to settle for medical costs, at which point the plaintiff proceeded with the case. The jury, appalled at McDonald's obtuseness, awarded $2.7 million in punitive damages on top of $160,000 actual damages.

The trial judge ordered remittitur (reduction in damages) to $640,000 in punitives (4x vs. 16.875x) to make the award more reasonable.

Mind you, the jurisprudential purpose of punitive damages is to punish the defendant so that it does not engage in the same behavior with future potential plaintiffs. The award goes to the plaintiff (though many states tax such awards very heavily), but the purpose is to curb behavior. Punishment does not usually curb behavior unless it stings, and a sting is relative (a) to the wrong that was done and (b) the defendant's ability to pay.

$2.7 million was one seventh of McDonald's daily revenue in 1994. Or in other words, $2.7 million was McD's revenue for 3 hours and 25 minutes of 1994. After remittitur, the punitive damages represented 49 minutes of McDonald's revenue in 1994.

The case was used to champion tort reform, but despite the clamor from the press and the insurance lobby in the United States, the irony was that Liebeck was an exceptionally reasonably litigated case with a fair request by the plaintiff, a fair award by the jury, and an imminently reasonable remittitur by the trial judge.

US-americans are crazy!

grammatoncleric wrote:
Why? Because handing a cup of coffee heated to 190° to a customer who is likely to put the cup in her lap should at minimum come with a simple warning ("COFFEE HOT"). To have done otherwise was negligent.

No
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jamie Specht
United States
Downers Grove
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Actually the hot coffee at McDonalds thing was more than that too. They had already been warned about the lids they were using. That they weren't safe. And I think they were previously warned about the coffee temperature. They ignored both due to the expense involved in changing it (lower temperature coffee means it won't stay hot with the cream they used or something. Don't remember. )
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
O.Shane Balloun
United States
Bellingham
Washington
flag msg tools
I will play as the Atreides, Bene Gesserit, Emperor, Fremen, Guild, or Harkonnen.
badge
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
mbmbmbmbmb
Webbe wrote:

grammatoncleric wrote:
Why? Because handing a cup of coffee heated to 190° to a customer who is likely to put the cup in her lap should at minimum come with a simple warning ("COFFEE HOT"). To have done otherwise was negligent.

No


Yes—as a matter of law.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Stanton
United States
Paoli
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
"The case was used to champion tort reform, but despite the clamor from the press and the insurance lobby in the United States, the irony was that Liebeck was an exceptionally reasonably litigated case with a fair request by the plaintiff, a fair award by the jury, and an imminently reasonable remittitur by the trial judge.

"Why? Because handing a cup of coffee heated to 190° to a customer who is likely to put the cup in her lap should at minimum come with a simple warning ("COFFEE HOT"). To have done otherwise was negligent."

In law school this was an example the Torts professor used as an example of B.S. business 'reporting'. They only gave the thumbnail summary of 'someone stupid enough to put coffee in their laps deserve what they get.' Also, McDonalds had been paying damages to thousands of customers previously injured by the extreme temperature of their coffee - that didn't look good when it came out, of course.

Ask and I'll tell you the "absurd" story of a person who sued the telephone company, and won!!!!!, when they were hit by a car while just being in a phone booth**. **For those of you too young to remember, phone booths were exterior 'boxes' by the roadside/service stations with a closeable door for privacy while making a pay-phone phone call.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
soak man
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
grammatoncleric wrote:
Becq wrote:
It's much the same reason that coffee cups need to have warning labels announcing that the contents may be hot...


The plaintiff in Liebeck v. McDonald's initially sought a settlement with McDonald's merely for the cost of her then-current and anticipated medical bills to treat her third degree burns and consequential expenses after being served coffee at 190° F (87° C) in a drive-thru experience where placement of the cup in the lap by the customer was a very likely outcome. It's one thing to know that coffee is generally hot. It's another thing for the coffee to be only 22° (13° C) shy of boiling. No one reasonably serves coffee so hot; the fact that customers were likely to place the cup into their laps while receiving other food made the situation even more egregious.

Liebeck's requested damages when her attorneys contacted the defendant for settlement were only $20,000.

McDonald's is not known for being a claim-friendly corporation, so it resisted all reasonable attempts to settle for medical costs, at which point the plaintiff proceeded with the case. The jury, appalled at McDonald's obtuseness, awarded $2.7 million in punitive damages on top of $160,000 actual damages.

The trial judge ordered remittitur (reduction in damages) to $640,000 in punitives (4x vs. 16.875x) to make the award more reasonable.

Mind you, the jurisprudential purpose of punitive damages is to punish the defendant so that it does not engage in the same behavior with future potential plaintiffs. The award goes to the plaintiff (though many states tax such awards very heavily), but the purpose is to curb behavior. Punishment does not usually curb behavior unless it stings, and a sting is relative (a) to the wrong that was done and (b) the defendant's ability to pay.

$2.7 million was one seventh of McDonald's daily revenue in 1994. Or in other words, $2.7 million was McD's revenue for 3 hours and 25 minutes of 1994. After remittitur, the punitive damages represented 49 minutes of McDonald's revenue in 1994.

The case was used to champion tort reform, but despite the clamor from the press and the insurance lobby in the United States, the irony was that Liebeck was an exceptionally reasonably litigated case with a fair request by the plaintiff, a fair award by the jury, and an imminently reasonable remittitur by the trial judge.

Why? Because handing a cup of coffee heated to 190° to a customer who is likely to put the cup in her lap should at minimum come with a simple warning ("COFFEE HOT"). To have done otherwise was negligent.


This actually makes a lot more sense now, but even so, hot coffee will inevitably be hot. You would think it might be reasonable to put the coffee in a cup holder once it was handed to her in the vehicle. Warning labels SHOULD be on hazardous materials anyway; there are some cases where a person may not have feeling in their fingers and may need a reminder that the contents are dangerous.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelly

Colorado
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I came for the Seafall and got edjumicated in tort law. Good times on BGG.
19 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Teage Watson
United States
Hilliard
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
soakman wrote:
This actually makes a lot more sense now, but even so, hot coffee will inevitably be hot. You would think it might be reasonable to put the coffee in a cup holder once it was handed to her in the vehicle. Warning labels SHOULD be on hazardous materials anyway; there are some cases where a person may not have feeling in their fingers and may need a reminder that the contents are dangerous.


Please watch the documentary "Hot Coffee". The car had no cup holders according to the defendants nephew, who owned the car. Cup holders have not always been as ubiquitous as they are now.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
soak man
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Also *insert humor here* laugh
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Becq Starforged
United States
Cerritos
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The woman was burned not because of something McDonalds did (ie, serve her the hot coffee that she requested) but because of something she did (open the coffee cup to put in cream and sugar while the cup was between her legs).

As to the temperature, I don't drink coffee, but a quick Google search tells me that coffee is best brewed at about 195 to 205°F, which is consistent with the temperature cited in this case (which presumably cooled a few degrees).

Congrats to the woman -- her careless mistake won her the litigation lottery.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sam Cook
United States
Denton
Texas
flag msg tools
*beep*
badge
mbmbmb
Becq wrote:
The woman was burned not because of something McDonalds did (ie, serve her the hot coffee that she requested) but because of something she did (open the coffee cup to put in cream and sugar while the cup was between her legs).

As to the temperature, I don't drink coffee, but a quick Google search tells me that coffee is best brewed at about 195 to 205°F, which is consistent with the temperature cited in this case (which presumably cooled a few degrees).

Congrats to the woman -- her careless mistake won her the litigation lottery.


By that logic it would be reasonable if they handed you a bag of french fries that were still 375°F because that is how hot the oil was. I think there is a reasonable expectation that food served is more or less immediately consumable.

8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
O.Shane Balloun
United States
Bellingham
Washington
flag msg tools
I will play as the Atreides, Bene Gesserit, Emperor, Fremen, Guild, or Harkonnen.
badge
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
mbmbmbmbmb
Becq wrote:
The woman was burned not because of something McDonalds did (ie, serve her the hot coffee that she requested) but because of something she did (open the coffee cup to put in cream and sugar while the cup was between her legs).

As to the temperature, I don't drink coffee, but a quick Google search tells me that coffee is best brewed at about 195 to 205°F, which is consistent with the temperature cited in this case (which presumably cooled a few degrees).

Congrats to the woman -- her careless mistake won her the litigation lottery.


The original compensatory damages verdict was $200,000. The jury found Liebeck 20% at fault for the actions you describe, which is why—under New Mexico's comparative fault damages paradigm (fairly typical in most states), it was reduced to $160,000.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Davis
United States
Burbank
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
This is the most educational thing I've read on the internet today.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Gross
United States
Syracuse
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I love the real story behind this story.

To those protesting...read it again...THIRD degree burns. If you've ever spilled coffee on yourself, you probably got first degree burns. Maybe second if you were real unfortunate.

Check out these pictures to feel some sympathy pain: http://www.healthline.com/health/burns#Pictures2

McD's served the coffee waaayyy too hot. Plain and simple. I'll complain about litigious society with anybody, but not on this one.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben Martell
New Zealand
flag msg tools
mbmb
There was nothing reasonable about the case - in any other common law country the claim would have been dismissed (and wouldn't have been a jury trial).

In New Zealand, where I practice, there wouldn't even be grounds to sue at all... the plaintiff could claim accident compensation from the government for a portion of medical costs (which would also be minuscule compared to their cost in America since the government pays for most of the healthcare). This scheme was designed to avoid copious claims of this type, and is a great example of tort reform that works.

There's a reason the case is so widely derided - the outcome is atupid. Mcdonalds ought not have to tell people that coffee is hot, and even if they had the warning wouldn't legitimately be expressed through a drive through exchange. The plaintiff still would have done what she did, the only different outcome being that McDonald's wouldn't be successfully sued. When you are doing things not because they add any value to the world but solely because you need to do them in case you are sued, there is every reason to call for tort reform.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
O.Shane Balloun
United States
Bellingham
Washington
flag msg tools
I will play as the Atreides, Bene Gesserit, Emperor, Fremen, Guild, or Harkonnen.
badge
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
mbmbmbmbmb
benmartell wrote:
There was nothing reasonable about the case - in any other common law country the claim would have been dismissed (and wouldn't have been a jury trial).


It might surprise you that on average here in the United States, plaintiffs receive higher awards on average from bench trials rather than jury trials. It turns out that 6–12 people together are statistically more cynical.

Quote:
In New Zealand, where I practice, there wouldn't even be grounds to sue at all...


Good thing the plaintiff's subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction over McDonald's wasn't in New Zealand.

Quote:
This scheme was designed to avoid copious claims of this type, and is a great example of tort reform that works.


Cite examples. How do we really know other than via your conclusory statement?

Quote:
There's a reason the case is so widely derided - the outcome is atupid. Mcdonalds ought not have to tell people that coffee is hot


Read: "McDonald's ought not have to tell people that coffee they brew is so hot that it might cause third degree burns from their cups if you spill it."


Quote:
and even if they had the warning wouldn't legitimately be expressed through a drive through exchange. The plaintiff still would have done what she did, the only different outcome being that McDonald's wouldn't be successfully sued.


This is probably true, except that McDonald's changed how it serviced coffee from drive-thrus thereafter, which is entirely the point of punitive damages in the first place—to engender behavioral change.

Quote:
When you are doing things not because they add any value to the world but solely because you need to do them in case you are sued, there is every reason to call for tort reform.


See above. McDonald's not serving third-degree-burning coffee to its millions of daily customers provides material value to American society.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben Martell
New Zealand
flag msg tools
mbmb
McDonald's serving colder coffee adds value? No, it doesn't. It just makes their bad coffee even worse. thats not value, it's just the sad reality of us tort law.

And yes, read 'McDonald's ought not have to tell you that boiling water scalds'. McDonald's, nor any company, should have to tell you things that you should know from the age of three.

You know what can happen if you are a director of a company in nz that does something that seriously risks customers health and safety? Jail time. You know what doesn't? A stupid person getting awarded massive damages.

And you know what the behavioural change all this tort law stuff drives is? Massively long disclaimers in legalese that nobody reads and a paralysing fear from lawyers of using new language people might understand because they don't understand the position and their risk of being sued and having an award of massive damages against them is entirely unquantifiable. There is very little value in fear based lawyering.

The American legal system is twenty years behind the rest of the world. You're stuck in a dark age, and you're the first person I've ever come across who defends it.

As for examples of why accident compensation works - what would you prefer, a guarantee you'll have your medical costs covered in the case of an accident up front, even where you are at fault, or being out of pocket for months or longer paying for them while you go to court and hope to find a viable candidate to sue and win?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Stanton
United States
Paoli
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, here's a second person.

McDonald's served a product that was hazardous when used in a manner McDonald's knew/should have known was dangerous. Everyone knows (knew) people (used) to be a drink from a drive thru between their legs (back in the day before cars had copious cup holders). Even if that was a 'misuse', it was a known misuse to McDonalds, and therefore they had a duty to warn their consumers/not prepare coffee to such a high temperature.

They served coffee hotter than any other restaurant. Their super hot coffee was therefore defective. When someone purchases and consumes a hamburger, their don't expect to find a bone fragment in the burger. When someone purchases KFC chicken, it isn't unreasonable to bite into a small pocket of hot grease/oil.

Now, before you say AH HA!!! hot fried chicken, hot grease, hot coffee, hot coffee. Chicken is fried in hot grease/oil and therefore a piece of chicken may be still some of that hotter grease/oil. Coffee is not prepared in such a manner, no one would prepare themselves coffee at such a high temperature and then attempt to drink it.

Further, the McDonald's plaintiff contacted McDonald's and just ask that her medical bills be paid (I don't know, but she may have requested damages for pain and suffering). The woman had third degree burns in her crotch. The total sum may have been ~ $10,000 (I'm guessing). McDonalds refused to settle the claim. The plaintiff was forced to sue McDonalds for recourse.

During trial/discovery it turned out that McDonalds had been settling such cases related to their super hot coffee for years, and which numbered into the thousands. In this case, they refused, forcing the plaintiff to sue. They got hammered for it by the jury - that was part of the punitive damages award.

I'm also sure that whatever award the jury gave was reduced post verdict. This is a common tactic by the 'defendant industry', yell about the initial award, but ignoring what was actually paid. (See my comment above re phone company sued by person stuck by car while in an outside phone booth. "My, that's ridiculous" - not if you know the facts of the case. Same Here)

From Wikipedia: "The jury damages included $160,000[3] to cover medical expenses and compensatory damages and $2.7 million in punitive damages. The trial judge reduced the final verdict to $640,000, and the parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided." So, our system did not pay millions of dollars of damages to a woman 'dumb enough' to put hot coffee between her legs.

Edited to add last paragraph.
3 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Travis Dean
United States
Escondido
CA
flag msg tools
The Golden Camel UberBadge is a mystery. Nobody knows where it came from or how it got there.
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
This has gone way off topic, but is very interesting.

Times change and it's easy to simplify an issue down to something that can be misconceived. To relate it to something more modern, it sounds like it would be similar to if Samsung made no efforts to fix their new Note 7 phone issues. Would it be the consumers fault to bring a phone on board a plane and then suffer the consequences when it overheats or explodes? Knowing full well that we've been able to bring phones onto planes for over a decade and no other phone ever overheats, smokes, or otherwise explodes when brought on board? Is it common sense to leave mobile devices at home when you go on a flight?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Becq Starforged
United States
Cerritos
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
There's an easy solution to this.

People should be allowed to register for "I'm a sue-happy moron" stickers that can be placed on their driver-side windows, purses, wallents, credit cards, etc. When a restaurant worker sees this sticker, they will know to cool or warm their food and beverages to within, say, 10ºF of room temperature, to prevent them from injuring themselves by way of life-threatening failure to take their own safety seriously. Without the sticker, the restaurant should be allowed to assume that their customer is a rational human being, and serve hot or cold food products with the assurance that standard warning labels advertising that the item is (for example) "hot" are sufficient.

Problem solved!

Dolus wrote:
This has gone way off topic, but is very interesting.

Times change and it's easy to simplify an issue down to something that can be misconceived. To relate it to something more modern, it sounds like it would be similar to if Samsung made no efforts to fix their new Note 7 phone issues. Would it be the consumers fault to bring a phone on board a plane and then suffer the consequences when it overheats or explodes? Knowing full well that we've been able to bring phones onto planes for over a decade and no other phone ever overheats, smokes, or otherwise explodes when brought on board? Is it common sense to leave mobile devices at home when you go on a flight?


Keep in mind that is *reasonable* to assume that a battery should not catch fire/explode/whatever. That is an aberration to what the normal function of a battery is. It is similarly reasonable to assume that coffee, especially coffee labeled as "hot", is in fact hot. Most hot drink fans learn to check the temperature of the drink, and possibly let it cool to taste, before guzzling it or dumping it in their own lap.

If the McDonalds worker had spilled it in the customers lap, it would have been their fault. It's not their fault that the customer does so on their own.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.