An Open Letter to The LEGO Group: SDCC Exclusive Minifigures

[Faefrost]

^have you completely missed the news going around about this guy, Before the link was taken away he was bragging how he had STOLEN, many thousands of pounds worth of figures. All i did was track him down and made gave him an internet nudge to get him to consider his actions a little more carefully. Your argument is so crap im just going to leave it with this, If you want to let these things pass you by then fine, but i personally made some effort to set the track right. good night

All I can find is a post where he seems amazed that he sold 3 figs for $1300 and he is amazed that what he is doing isn't illegal. Everything else seems to be variants of the same exact article linked in this thread from Brickfan and similar claiming an Allegation, but that nothing has actually been reported stolen.

You didn't track him down you stalked and harassed. And all that probably would be while crude within boundaries of Internet standards, you then outed his real world employer on this board, on this thread. And subjected them and the guy with the figs to the wrath of the Internet. All because he has a few pieces of marketing fluff that you don't? You were "making him set the track right"?

I honestly can't believe that you are making me defend an Internet SDCC minifig scalper. I really can't. But your approach crosses so many lines. I'll say it again. It is one thing to voice displeasure with Lego regarding show exclusives and how they are handled. It's quite another to grab the torches and pitchforks and go Chase someone down on the Internet. If it was in fact stolen than it is Lego and SDCCs problem to deal with. The total assessed or declared value of the materials that may or may not have been stolen is somewhere around $60 usd. They have no other valuation because Lego does not sell them.

And above and beyond, these most likely have no impact on the actual availability of said Minifigs. Once again for the intellectually challenged Internet vigilante's and other merchants of outrage and affront. These are not product! These are not merchandise! These are show marketing giveaways. The same as mouse pads, pens, humorous squishy balls and on rare occasions t shirts. For any trade show the booth lead is pretty much universally given control of an extra 10% or so of the good stuff for discretionary purposes. Since the figures were in the wild before the shows doors open, chances are they were from that stock.

[agoodfella77]

I honestly can't believe that you are making me defend an Internet SDCC minifig scalper. I really can't.

As crazy as this situation is -- it's really the "tiny picture".

The real bigger picture is that these kinds of situations can be entirely avoided with a balanced distribution strategy.

[Lind Whisperer]

I have created the official meme* for all of those against Comic-Con exclusive minifigs:

Feel free to comment on the thread over in Licensed Figures!

*Sorry if the photo's oversized. And for the double topic post.

[Quisoves Pugnat]

The real bigger picture is that these kinds of situations can be entirely avoided with a balanced distribution strategy.

On the contrary, the bigger picture is that these kinds of situations are none of LEGO's concern. They may freely choose to distribute certain minifigures to those who attend Comic-Con. Even if they did make minifigures exclusive that might otherwise appear in sets, that would be a choice they are free to make. No-one is entitled to any LEGO products. If, hypothetically, LEGO chose not to make any Supergirl minifigures, simply because Jørgen Vig Knudstorp hated the character, that would be stupid, but no-one would be wronged by the decision. Furthermore, in actuality, there is no precedent for Comic-Con figures being exclusive. Superman and Azog were both given away at Comic Con, only to show up in sets months later. And of course there's Green Lantern. Yes, these may be only three exceptions, but they prove that LEGO is not bound in anyway to limit minifigures to Comic Con. If it ultimately does so, it likely because it has no plans to include these figures in sets. And as I said before, LEGO is not responsible for how its fans chose to spend their money. Nothing is forcing them to pay excessive amounts of money for the sake of minifigures. LEGO should be able to sell what it likes. Granted, it would be in poor conscience for it to sell inappropriate sets to its target age-group, but there is nothing morally wrong with it choosing only to sell so much of a certain product, or to sell that product in a particular way. You may not like its marketing, but you don't have to purchase anything from it.

[MAB]

What an insightful comment.

We are going around in circles. I guess we have to agree to disagree. I understand your point. But mine is simply that it is absolutely possible to satisfy both sides here and create a win / win.

It is only win/win from your point of view. If there was a win for lego by not doing exclusives, then they would stop doing them. The fact that they continue to do exclusives suggests that there is a good reason for them to do them. They don't do it just because they know it angers some collectors.

[agoodfella77]

On the contrary, the bigger picture is that these kinds of situations are none of LEGO's concern. They may freely choose to distribute certain minifigures to those who attend Comic-Con. Even if they did make minifigures exclusive that might otherwise appear in sets, that would be a choice they are free to make. No-one is entitled to any LEGO products.

We will simply have to agree to disagree. I get all of your points. But here are is where we fundamentally disagree:

1) People keep on throwing around the word "entitled". Yes, no one is "entitled" to an SDCC figure. So what? No one is "entitled" to have a computer and have access to the internet and post on Eurobricks. "Entitled"? Frankly no one is "entitled" to anything at all if you boil it down to the lowest common denominator. If we devolved into a post-apocalyptic world -- only those smart enough and strong enough to secure the basic necessities will survive. This is an extremely weak argument. "Entitled"? Sure, I guess if being a bonafide LEGO customer for many, many years who has spent thousands upon thousands of dollars on their product makes me "entitled" -- with a slight but very important caveat -- what it makes me is "entitled" to is the right to voice my opinion. As a LEGO customer, that is what I (or anyone else for that matter) am "entitled" to.

2) Which leads to my second point. You state that "none of this is LEGO's concern". This is flat out wrong IMO. The reason why this is absolutely LEGO's concern is because they are marginalizing a very large portion of their customer base. So yes, they don't "have" to do anything about this. But if they care about the future of their business and keeping their customers happy -- they will listen. In fact, I know they are listening now -- because this is just the tip of the iceberg. This noise will only grow louder to the point that LEGO cannot ignore it.

So friends, AFOLers, LEGO-ers lend me your voice. Let them hear you! If you care, if this bothers you, if you think this is unfair, if you are frustrated because you live in another country / continent and will never be able to go to SDCC, if you a collector and you look at a $1,000+ eBay price tag for an SDCC figure and think that this is completely out of control, if you have been a life-long LEGO fan and customer (like me) and feel "entitled" to voice your opinion. Then do it. Just do it. Go to LEGO.com and send them your opinion on this issue. You are not alone. Together we can and will make a difference. Your voice counts: http://service.lego....en-us/contactus

Besides, what's the worst that can happen? That they will listen? :)

It is only win/win from your point of view. If there was a win for lego by not doing exclusives, then they would stop doing them. The fact that they continue to do exclusives suggests that there is a good reason for them to do them. They don't do it just because they know it angers some collectors.

See above.

Edited July 31, 2014 by agoodfella

[MAB]

Why will you never be able to go to SDCC? What you really mean is that you choose not to spend money on going to SDCC.

Lego also do highly prized Inside Tour sets, given only to a handful (~50) people that pay to go on their Inside Tour every year. These are not available elsewhere, only to those on the tour. Would you also have them either stopped or made available to everyone, devaluing the exclusiveness of the set for those that get it by going on the tour?

[tedbeard]

Lego also do highly prized Inside Tour sets, given only to a handful (~50) people that pay to go on their Inside Tour every year. These are not available elsewhere, only to those on the tour. Would you also have them either stopped or made available to everyone, devaluing the exclusiveness of the set for those that get it by going on the tour?

Touche and match.

There is no need for anything deeper as this topic is nothing but entitled moaning no matter how it is justified or how many schemes are proposed to somehow make it a "win-win". Whinge all you like but by continuing to do so it shows nothing but more variations of, "waaaaaaaaa, it's not FAIR!"

[legoman19892]

We will simply have to agree to disagree. I get all of your points. But here are is where we fundamentally disagree:

1) People keep on throwing around the word "entitled". Yes, no one is "entitled" to an SDCC figure. So what? No one is "entitled" to have a computer and have access to the internet and post on Eurobricks. "Entitled"? Frankly no one is "entitled" to anything at all if you boil it down to the lowest common denominator. If we devolved into a post-apocalyptic world -- only those smart enough and strong enough to secure the basic necessities will survive. This is an extremely weak argument. "Entitled"? Sure, I guess if being a bonafide LEGO customer for many, many years who has spent thousands upon thousands of dollars on their product makes me "entitled" -- with a slight but very important caveat -- what it makes me is "entitled" to is the right to voice my opinion. As a LEGO customer, that is what I (or anyone else for that matter) am "entitled" to.

You are entitled to an opinion. You are not entitled to have the opportunity to own the figure. Do not mix those two up. Your purchase history has nothing to do with this argument at all. LEGO already has GWPs on a monthly basis. You ARE getting freebies already fro how much you spend (If you by directly from them).

2) Which leads to my second point. You state that "none of this is LEGO's concern". This is flat out wrong IMO. The reason why this is absolutely LEGO's concern is because they are marginalizing a very large portion of their customer base. So yes, they don't "have" to do anything about this. But if they care about the future of their business and keeping their customers happy -- they will listen. In fact, I know they are listening now -- because this is just the tip of the iceberg. This noise will only grow louder to the point that LEGO cannot ignore it.

What data are you basing this paragraph from. Just because AFOLs are the loudest doesn't mean they are the biggest demographic. AFOLs are WAY less than %50 of the customers. I am willing to be they are close to around %10. 1 person yelling really loud doesn't counter the 99 who hold the opposite opinion.

If you think that this situation will cause LEGO to go in the red and/or lose customers, you are hilariously mistaken. As a business they are very well aware of their profits and spending. With the VIP and other surveys they know where the product is going to (Kids, adults, teens). Those two combined, they create a business plan that hopefully grows the company so that they may bring a better product to us. We don't have access to their finances, who know if they worked in exclusives and possible set releases of those exclusives. 5 year plan? 10 year plan? That requires LEGO publicizing things they never will, so we will never know. The people at LEGO corporate offices know how to run the company better than we do.

So friends, AFOLers, LEGO-ers lend me your voice. Let them hear you! If you care, if this bothers you, if you think this is unfair, if you are frustrated because you live in another country / continent and will never be able to go to SDCC, if you a collector and you look at a $1,000+ eBay price tag for an SDCC figure and think that this is completely out of control, if you have been a life-long LEGO fan and customer (like me) and feel "entitled" to voice your opinion. Then do it. Just do it. Go to LEGO.com and send them your opinion on this issue. You are not alone. Together we can and will make a difference. Your voice counts: http://service.lego....en-us/contactus

Besides, what's the worst that can happen? That they will listen? :)

If your thoughts do not align with their thoughts, there isn't much you can do. If it annoys you that much stop buying LEGO. Like you said, if people are mad enough that they no longer shop with the company, and those lost customers have an impact, LEGO will do something.

Until then. LEGO can do whatever they want. You are not entitled to have any exclusive in your collection.

Edited July 31, 2014 by legoman19892

[agoodfella77]

Why will you never be able to go to SDCC? What you really mean is that you choose not to spend money on going to SDCC.

Um, no it absolutely, positively does not mean that I choose not to spend money to go to SDCC.

Some people from the US amaze me. Many are so insular. Many are so US-centric. The world revolves around the US amirite?

You do realize that LEGO is a non-US brand right? (it's from Denmark in case you were wondering) You do realize you are posting on a forum called "Eurobricks" not "Mericabricks", right? You do realize that LEGO is a global brand, do you not? You do realize that LEGO sells product all around the world? You do realize that not everyone lives in the US? You do realize that many non-US countries require a visa to visit the US and you do realize that many people will never have the opportunity to visit the US? You do realize that some people cannot fly (due to health reasons, medical reasons, disabilities etc). I mean really the list goes on and on and on. This default assumption that the only possible reason that someone could not go to SDCC is because they are a cheap bastard -- it's so profoundly ignorant, it's almost sublime.

Your assumptions are completely incorrect, and in fact are insulting -- to yourself -- because of your own ignorance -- and I don't mean that as a personal insult, I mean that at face value. You don't know what you don't know. Which is fine if you kept that to yourself. You make these "matter of fact" assumption (and in such a condescending way mind you) but the funny thing is -- you are completely and utterly wrong at times. The sheer irony is something to marvel really.

As I said, some people will never be able to go to SDCC (and not because they are cheap bastards).

You are entitled to an opinion.

Not that I need your permission, but I'm glad you acknowledge this.

Edited July 31, 2014 by agoodfella

[legoman19892]

Um, no it absolutely, positively does not mean that I choose not to spend money to go to SDCC.

Have you ever gone to SDCC? By being aware of it's existence (before the event occurs) and not spending money on travel, hotel, and tickets you have made the decision to not spend money to attend for whatever reason. The only exception is for people who do not know of SDCC.

Some people from the US amaze me. Many are so insular. Many are so US-centric. The world revolves around the US amirite?

You do realize that LEGO is a non-US brand right? (it's from Denmark in case you were wondering) You do realize you are posting on a forum called "Eurobricks" not "Mericabricks", right? You do realize that LEGO is a global brand, do you not? You do realize that LEGO sells product all around the world? You do realize that not everyone lives in the US? You do realize that many non-US countries require a visa to visit the US and you do realize that many people will never have the opportunity to visit the US? You do realize that some people cannot fly (due to health reasons, medical reasons, disabilities etc). I mean really the list goes on and on and on. This default assumption that the only possible reason that someone could not go to SDCC is because they are a cheap bastard -- it's so profoundly ignorant, it's almost sublime.

Your assumptions are completely incorrect, and in fact are insulting -- to yourself -- because of your own ignorance -- and I don't mean that as a personal insult, I mean that at face value. You don't know what you don't know. Which is fine if you kept that to yourself. You make these "matter of fact" assumption (and in such a condescending way mind you) but the funny thing is -- you are completely and utterly wrong at times. The sheer irony is something to marvel really.

As I said, some people will never be able to go to SDCC (and not because they are cheap bastards).

Some people don't have internet and don't live near a LEGO store. Does that mean that LEGO should make GWPs and other LEGO Store Exclusives available at all their distributors? How are SDCC figs different from LEGO Store Exclusives?

I don't have the opportunity to visit Denmark and do the tour for the gift or to buy the LEGO House poly bag. Does that mean LEGO should assist me in getting those by releasing it to places I can go to? It does not.

Not that I need your permission, but I'm glad you acknowledge this.

Your tone makes you sound like a grade A jerk.

Edited July 31, 2014 by legoman19892

[Super Goblin]

Why will you never be able to go to SDCC? What you really mean is that you choose not to spend money on going to SDCC.

Lego also do highly prized Inside Tour sets, given only to a handful (~50) people that pay to go on their Inside Tour every year. These are not available elsewhere, only to those on the tour. Would you also have them either stopped or made available to everyone, devaluing the exclusiveness of the set for those that get it by going on the tour?

Do those inside tour ses have unique characters or costumes that you can only get in that set? Do those inside tour sets have minifigs in them of characters that people grew up with in comics and film from a theme that people buy in large part because of the characters?

The thing is Lego is treating the Superheroes theme like other themes and you can't do that. The reason the Super Hero theme is popular is because of characters. When you make characters exclusive to an event where the majority of the customer base can't reallistically attend you are hurting your image and alienating that customer base.

I collect the Super Hero theme because of the characters not the builds. I buy the modular and city themes for the builds.

The real solution to this is to offer exclusive packaging for these minifigs at SDCC then offer the fig in a set later on. This is win win for SDCC attendees, Lego and Lego customers.

Edited July 31, 2014 by Super Goblin

[TheLegoDr]

^I would agree with this more so than a lot of these arguments.

Certain licenses are all about the characters and since LEGO is a building toy first, they incorporate builds with the figures. The positive, you get both bricks and figures and have a complete toy. The downside, they don't seem to be able to sell figures by themselves (I don't have details of each deal they make with their license holders).

But since certain licenses are more about character building than set building, you'd think they could handle it differently. Maybe when they negotiate LEGO tries to get more access to figures, but since the license holder doesn't want that, there isn't much LEGO can do. They aren't in full control of every little detail, not if they want to sell a product with someone else's IP stamped on it.

I'd love to get all of the SDCC figures. Even the characters I don't know much about. But I won't pay the aftermarket prices for them either since I'm not DYING to have any of them. I collect Super Heroes for the figures also. I collected LOTR for the figures. In terms of a collection, yes my collection will always be incomplete. But that is the point of collecting, to chase after that one missing piece. Most people after they get a complete collection, actually feel less satisfied than they did when they were chasing the missing pieces. Yes, I know it is frustrating. I realize we shouldn't "just have to deal with it," but that is the point we are at.

LEGO is listening. How many were given away last year? 300? How many were given away this year? 1750!!! That's a big jump. No, not everyone will receive them. Aftermarket prices may still be expensive, but there are a lot more out there than the previous versions.

[Faefrost]

Do those inside tour ses have unique characters or costumes that you can only get in that set? Do those inside tour sets have minifigs in them of characters that people grew up with in comics and film from a theme that people buy in large part because of the characters?

The thing is Lego is treating the Superheroes theme like other themes and you can't do that. The reason the Super Hero theme is popular is because of characters. When you make characters exclusive to an event where the majority of the customer base can't reallistically attend you are hurting your image and alienating that customer base.

I collect the Super Hero theme because of the characters not the builds. I buy the modular and city themes for the builds.

The real solution to this is to offer exclusive packaging for these minifigs at SDCC then offer the fig in a set later on. This is win win for SDCC attendees, Lego and Lego customers.

This has always been my problem with the SDCC figures. I have no problems with exclusive con or trade show figures. But the marketing people need to understand what the key defining points of certain product lines are. I view the I Love NY T shirt Yoda as an absolutely perfect con giveaway. It's neat. It's unique. It certainly has value to someone who went to the con. And it is so far removed from the core product line of the Star Wars line as to not be part of it.

But for the Super Heroes line, the colorful characters are the core product. Each and every one of them is some bodies favorite. And making any of them, even some fairly obscure variants, exclusive, ultimately harms your core product line. It's a different product model for SH than it is for SW or Harry Potter or LotR. It doesn't help that most of the SH fan and customer base have been trained and driven over the years to be not simply collectors, but fairly completist collectors. About the only thing worse Lego could do would be to license a Pokemon line, then only ever make 1000 Pikachu's.

[Lind Whisperer]

This has always been my problem with the SDCC figures. I have no problems with exclusive con or trade show figures. But the marketing people need to understand what the key defining points of certain product lines are. I view the I Love NY T shirt Yoda as an absolutely perfect con giveaway. It's neat. It's unique. It certainly has value to someone who went to the con. And it is so far removed from the core product line of the Star Wars line as to not be part of it.

But for the Super Heroes line, the colorful characters are the core product. Each and every one of them is some bodies favorite. And making any of them, even some fairly obscure variants, exclusive, ultimately harms your core product line. It's a different product model for SH than it is for SW or Harry Potter or LotR. It doesn't help that most of the SH fan and customer base have been trained and driven over the years to be not simply collectors, but fairly completist collectors. About the only thing worse Lego could do would be to license a Pokemon line, then only ever make 1000 Pikachu's.

Exactly. I Love NY Yoda was not a part of the SW canon, or any other SW materials, except that event. He is a cute little figure to have, but you don't need to have him to have the complete range of SW characters*.

*You might need him for the full range of all figures related to SW, but that's an entirely different matter.

[agoodfella77]

Have you ever gone to SDCC? By being aware of it's existence (before the event occurs) and not spending money on travel, hotel, and tickets you have made the decision to not spend money to attend for whatever reason. The only exception is for people who do not know of SDCC.

Have you ever been to the Moon? By being aware of it's [sic] existence (before the next landing occurs) and not spending money on space travel and Astronaut training you have made the decision to not spend the time, effort and money to go to the next lunar landing for whatever reason.

The only exception is for people who do not know of the Moon.

The thing is Lego is treating the Superheroes theme like other themes and you can't do that. The reason the Super Hero theme is popular is because of characters. When you make characters exclusive to an event where the majority of the customer base can't reallistically attend you are hurting your image and alienating that customer base.

I collect the Super Hero theme because of the characters not the builds.

The real solution to this is to offer exclusive packaging for these minifigs at SDCC then offer the fig in a set later on. This is win win for SDCC attendees, Lego and Lego customers.

All excellent points. I fully agree.

Please contact LEGO, let them hear your voice on the matter.

I'd love to get all of the SDCC figures. Even the characters I don't know much about. But I won't pay the aftermarket prices for them either since I'm not DYING to have any of them. I collect Super Heroes for the figures also.

Thanks for your input.

Please contact LEGO, let them hear your voice on the matter.

This has always been my problem with the SDCC figures. I have no problems with exclusive con or trade show figures. But the marketing people need to understand what the key defining points of certain product lines are. I view the I Love NY T shirt Yoda as an absolutely perfect con giveaway. It's neat. It's unique. It certainly has value to someone who went to the con. And it is so far removed from the core product line of the Star Wars line as to not be part of it.

But for the Super Heroes line, the colorful characters are the core product. Each and every one of them is some bodies favorite. And making any of them, even some fairly obscure variants, exclusive, ultimately harms your core product line. It's a different product model for SH than it is for SW or Harry Potter or LotR. It doesn't help that most of the SH fan and customer base have been trained and driven over the years to be not simply collectors, but fairly completist collectors. About the only thing worse Lego could do would be to license a Pokemon line, then only ever make 1000 Pikachu's.

This is another excellent point and perhaps even another solution -- I am considering editing my Open Letter to incorporate this suggestion -- i.e. have each SDCC figure be VERY specific to each SDCC -- i.e. have them printed as SDCC 2015. That way it's really bragging rights for Convention swag, it's truly "exclusive" and yet others won't feel "excluded".

Please contact LEGO, let them hear your voice on the matter.

Exactly. I Love NY Yoda was not a part of the SW canon, or any other SW materials, except that event. He is a cute little figure to have, but you don't need to have him to have the complete range of SW characters*.

*You might need him for the full range of all figures related to SW, but that's an entirely different matter.

Excellent points

Please contact LEGO, let them hear your voice on the matter.

Edited August 1, 2014 by agoodfella

[obsidianheart]

This thread and the Scalpers thread are just the same thread now.

Edited August 1, 2014 by obsidianheart

[Lind Whisperer]

Have you ever been to the Moon? By being aware of it's [sic] existence (before the next landing occurs) and not spending money on space travel and Astronaut training you have made the decision to not spend the time, effort and money to go to the next lunar landing for whatever reason.

The only exception is for people who do not know of the Moon.

It took me a minute to get it. And then I got it.

Well, well, well written - I tip my hat to you, sir - well done.

[obsidianheart]

An Open Letter to NASA: Moonrocks is a pretty dumb comparison.

[legoman19892]

Have you ever been to the Moon? By being aware of it's [sic] existence (before the next landing occurs) and not spending money on space travel and Astronaut training you have made the decision to not spend the time, effort and money to go to the next lunar landing for whatever reason.

The only exception is for people who do not know of the Moon.

I REALLY want to go to the moon, but you don't see me making posts about how unfair it is that I am unable to at this present time. I like the comedy because do that exact thing on other forums, but I actually think this post sides against your actual opinion.

I do like other opinions on doing variants like the I <3 NY Yoda. Cute, Collectible, but based on a fig already available to buy.

[jodawill]

Well, this thread escalated quickly.

Last I knew, this is a forum for adult fans of Lego. Hopefully at some point in our lives, each of us adults learned that we can't always have what we want.

[agoodfella77]

An Open Letter to NASA: Moonrocksis a pretty dumb comparison.

I REALLY want to go to the moon, but you don't see me making posts about how unfair it is that I am unable to at this present time. I like the comedy because do that exact thing on other forums, but I actually think this post sides against your actual opinion.

Not everyone gets satire. Don't beat yourself up about it.

Well, this thread escalated quickly.

It's fantastic! I'm glad it's escalating. It means it's an important topic. It means people are interested and engaged. It gives this thread more visibility. As the TS, I couldn't be more happier.

It took me a minute to get it. And then I got it.

Well, well, well written - I tip my hat to you, sir - well done.

Thanks!

Edited August 1, 2014 by agoodfella

[jodawill]

It's fantastic! I'm glad it's escalating. It means people are interested. It means it's an important topic. It gives this thread more visibility. As the TS, I couldn't be more happier.

I don't think the attention has been positive. Frankly, you've come off as quite a greedy cuss, which doesn't help you get more supporters.

Why can't we just be happy for the fans who were able to take part in such a unique opportunity? I have a friend who gets much rarer items than this quite often because of his position in the community. I don't demand that TLG give me the same opportunities. I say, "Oh, that's cool" and move on with my life.

[agoodfella77]

I don't think the attention has been positive.

Change is not a pretty or comfortable process -- especially for those who like the status quo.

But I was taught from a long time ago to stand up for what I believe in -- and to stand up for others as well. Nothing will keep me silent on this issue, until there is change. So dig in. I'm in it for the long (or short) haul -- whichever comes first.

Edited August 1, 2014 by agoodfella

[jodawill]

Change is not a pretty or comfortable process -- especially for those who like the status quo.

But I was taught from a long time ago to stand up for what I believe in -- and to stand up for others as well. Nothing will keep me silent on this issue, until there is change. So dig in. I'm in it for the long (or short) haul -- whichever comes first.

Why don't you put all of that effort into something productive like dismantling the NSA or something?