@Ravens1113
Then clearly you weren’t reading the whole discussion. It was a comparative comment to get someone to see the main point at hand.
In fact, I had read the whole discussion, and actually understood it. The complaint that has merit isn't that the price changed. The complaint that had merit was something else, which required comparing differential opportunity. In your complaint, every hypothetical person had the same hypothetical opportunity, but some bought before a change in price and some bought after. That's entirely on those individuals for their choices, and thus the complaint is just whining.
If you had understood where the fundamental unfairness lies, you would never have written your metaphor the way you did. But you did write it that way, and I had every reason to believe that you'd entirely missed the point of the one true and valid complaint. If you wanted to make a "comparative comment to get someone to see the main point at hand", then you would have written a comment that focussed not on changing the price for a single customer, but changing the price for different customers in different time zones, since the only legitimate complaint is found there. "The main point at hand" was actually nowhere in your analogy.
Saying now that you totes understood it and that you just wrote a complaint that didn't address the real point because everyone else had already done that and asking why shouldn't you have written a completely misguided, non-analogous complaint and get mad at people for taking it as if it was your actual complaint ... well, that's just blaming other people for something that's actually your fault: your choice to write a bad analogy.
Which, come to think of it, is just whining.
