Separation of data between accounts makes them fall under different retrieval requirements.
As one account, a request for all of the data from that account contains both chunks. Separation of those accounts separates the need to accommodate requests for data from one on the other.
It can also mean that internally they may have a sufficient mechanism that data that was previously identifying to no longer being identifying (breaking userid to data pairings for example) which is sufficient to “anonymize” the data that it no longer needs to be reported or maintained.
GDPR and pii reasons most likely. It’s a nightmare keeping track of why certain data is on certain accounts. This can vastly simplify the GDPR compliance mechanisms. If your GOG account is merged with your PR account, there is probably significantly more “sensitive” data (CC numbers, addresses, etc) in the GOG account. This probably exempts some data that either cdpr or gog tracks from deletion or retrieval requests.
Excellent. It looks like we both explained ourselves. You appear to understand my position, and when I ask for clarification further on yours you tell me that it is my fault. Thanks for pointing out my flaws without clarification.
The whoosh is part of the joke… Which apparently you didn’t know. Also, it isn’t insular. It’s literally the opposite of that. I thought they were participating in the joke until they replied in such a negative way.
I don’t understand why you are so upset about this and why you are so derogatory towards what is potentially the largest generation of chess players proportionally to their generation size to have ever existed.
Wow. Heaven forbid I used a joke from the largest online chess influencers following when there are multiple threads on this post from the same community…
My argument directly engaged with the original post that game developers should be forced to open source their software. The analogy you made has nothing to do with open source software, it has to do with payment models…
Edit: and ops position doesn’t make any claims about payment models…
Why would I need to elaborate on an argument I didn’t make? I don’t understand? I made my argument, if you don’t understand it, I don’t know what you don’t understand?