Harvonsgard wrote:If a creator makes it easier for us to get our hands on her/his decks then I don't see any reason for us as a community to be pissed about.
I think you might be overstating our reaction when you say that the community is "pissed about" it. But, certainly, I'm disappointed.
This isn't because "oh, the pwecious thing isn't as wawe as I wanted." Screw that noise. It's because they broke a promise that was very easy not to break, and was very unnecessary to make in the first place. They broke a promise that I didn't care about, and that I didn't ask them to make. I'm not upset about the promise. I'm disappointed that they devalued their word.
I buy the decks I buy because there's something I like about them (the art, the bling, the tuck, the theme, the innovation, the designer, the novelty, whatever). Rarity almost never plays a factor, although it might influence *when* I pull the trigger. However, the integrity of the designer/creator can play a factor (see Natalia Silva).
With this misstep, Uusi doesn't slide as far down the integrity scale as Ellusionist has (and, to be fair, I still purchase Ellusionist decks). Rather, I'm disappointed because they are no longer firmly anchored to the top of the integrity scale, where reside those whose word is taken as a bullet-proof, iron-clad guarantee just because they were the ones who said it.
So, to reiterate what I'd said in my original post: if we're going to bother to call others out for doing this (as we do every time Ellusionist does it), why wouldn't we call out Uusi?
Edit: removed the sentence that is referenced in the post below about Uusi having lied, as I find Justin's argument persuasive.