Originally Posted by Uncle Billy
"Specifically excluding items" (logos) of participants, that is, not branding with one of the participants in the debate is how they "wish to be left out of the debate". It's that simple.
They inserted themselves in the debate by co-branding, and wished to remove themselves from the debate by not co-branding anymore. How simple can it be?
Well, it WOULD be that simple ... if it were that simple. But it isn't.
Because they didn't say they didn't want to co-brand with firearms companies to stay out of the debate. They said they don't want to co-brand with firearms companies because they don't get enough return on investment. How much "investment" can there possibly be in firing off an e-mail saying, "Sure, you have permission to use our logo on your MegaBlaster WWP model, in return for [__] percent of the proceeds from sales thereof. A copy of the artwork is attached for your use. Thanks for your support."
They don't get enough "return" to cover THAT?