It is called cowardice.

Dear Jesse: ROFLMAO has been around for ten years. Where have you been, sleeping with Rumplestiltskin?

... aww man my comment got moderated.



I had a thoughtful response too.

Oh my you have been a busy bee. I'm surprised you have any free time with the disbarment hearing in a few weeks.

Quick question; how did the the Alabama disciplinary trial go? Or were you able to stall that even longer?

I'm baaaaaaaaaaaaackk

Whats up guy's Well i see we have had quite a few posts from Jacky Boy...So here is another duffy rant and dont worry this isnt going to be as long as the previous one...So lets begin shall we


Ok well lets start off with the fact that Gta san andreas got the dreaded ao after the hot coffee crap was found...Now Manhunt 2 got an ao because of whatever crap reason there was (dont get me started on that cause then that will be a RANT)

This weekend i was playing conan on the 360 and even though it was a pretty good game what i happened to notice is that its a lot more bloody and violent then manhunt 2 or even gta..But what this post is mainly about is the fact that im curious is how does that get by with a m rating when in fact there is straight nudity in the game..If anyone's played it one way to get exp orbs is by rescuing those amazon looking women who are wearing nothing more then a g string and actully show breasts!...


What in the hell is wrong with this picture???

@JT

That's a verbal contract, and not worth the paper it is written on. Didn't you learn about those things in your fancy lawyerin' school?

@jack thompson, attorney

Mr Tallarico himself came in and shot down your claims. Game over, again

VGL is awesome. Back to Seattle too! Halloween two years ago was it? Good times.

Also, regarding your little letter to the GDC:

"Since this is how the video game industry treats its critics, no wonder it has a public relations problem with parents."
Any public relations problem the video game industry has is ill deserved and is driven by insecure agenda-pushing fear-mongers like yourself who do not undertand the issues at hand.

"This is an industry that lies about the ratings on its products,"
Untrue.

"sells those products to underage kids behind their parents’ backs,"
Untrue. Any kid that buys it on their own is taking advantage of lax retailers or is fraudulently using their parents credit card.

"and then wants nothing but an incestuous gathering in San Francisco to congratulate itself on how smart it is."
Why would people from outside the industry be invited or wish to attend an industry gathering? That's like saying a sheep-shearer's convention is "incestuous" because they don't invite the a musician's organization!

"Federal regulation of your industry is coming"
It may be coming, but it will fail, just as it has nine times before.

"because you folks simply can’t figure out why parents don’t trust you."
Parents don't trust them because (a lot of) parents don't understand video games are not just for children. Also, it's difficult to gain trust in anything when there are shrill, misinformed voices like your own screaming that it is evil.
How trustworthy do you think people would find you as a lawyer if there was someone going around telling everbody that you searched for gay porn, sent it to a judge, have had restraining orders put out against you and that you are facing several disciplinary charges on counts of unprofessional behaviour?

"Fine."
Translation: I thought I was invited to your party and I told everyone about it and even included it in a court filing. Now I find out it's not true, I'm embarassed and angry and I will vent my awkward anger through a snippy and childish little letter.

"When the regulation comes, and it will, don’t blame me."
As I said already, the regulation will come and will be shot down for Constitutional issues. And guess what, they won't blame you! It's impossible to blame someone for something that won't happen. The video game industry's lawyers may thank you for the costs they receive from the state, but that's about it.

@JT: "No, barratry is soliciting clients. "

It is? I refer you to definition #3 below. How the hell did you pass the bar?



Main Entry:
bar·ra·try Listen to the pronunciation of barratry
Pronunciation:
\?ber-?-tr?, ?ba-r?-\
Function:
noun
Inflected Form(s):
plural bar·ra·tries
Etymology:
Middle English (Scots) barratrie, from Anglo-French *baraterie, literally, deception, from Old French barater to be active, do business, cause strife, deceive, perhaps from Vulgar Latin *prattare, from Greek prattein, prassein to do — more at practical
Date:
15th century

1 : the purchase or sale of office or preferment in church or state
2 : an unlawful act or fraudulent breach of duty by a master of a ship or by the mariners to the injury of the owner of the ship or cargo
3 : the persistent incitement of litigation

@NG

He's already violated that agreement with Take Two several times.

It's just he does it in ways that have plausible deniability. Like here, if he was called into court, he'd say he had nothing to do with Target pulling the game.

Hopefully it'll be someone other than Lorne Lanning.... Hopefully they'll also be prepared and do their home work.... Of course then Jack probably won't want to debate them...

Lorne really didn't hit the issues with as much preparation as he should have.

anyone that does debate jack thompson has to be able to know the facts, with a sharp wit at that. You have to stab the snake to make sure it doesn't bite you.

also: @jt
this is the tenth time you've asked, what makes you think they are going to care, and I want you to prove this GDC appearance with something beyond you just saying it or I'm really not going to believe you.

I just love this: I debate one of the darlings of the industry, hold my own in the debate, and then the take on this (see above) is that the person whom I did fine against was never a worthy opponent in the first place.

ROFLMAO. Jack Thompson

Very interesting. I really hope I can make it to this year's GDC. I haven't had the time or money in the past (sometimes neither), but this year looks fairly promising for me.

The court filing is an interesting tactic. I believe I can see Mr. Thompson's intention with the filing, but I fail to see the impact it could have.

If he and I will both be at GDC, I'd like to take the opportunity to be present during what ever function (debate, round table, etc). I truly would like to introduce myself personally and ask him his thoughts about is happening in Florida, both video game related and not.

While I definitely know his stance on video games, I would really like to know how he feels about the major issues plaguing our state.

You held your own, Jack. Need I remind you that is not the same thing as winning, and you did not win that debate.

As indicated by Dennis in his previous piece, you had every opportunity in the world to come up and confront him. I was there right behind him and he was no less than 14 feet directly in front of you. Considering the fact that you claim that you're about to take him to court as part of your impending disbarment trial, I figured you ought to have been brave enough to come and exchange a few words with him if that was the case. From the looks of things to me, that makes you the scaredy-cat. Not him.

Dennis, perhaps he didn't come up to you because he thought the big gorilla behind him (me) was his ECA-hired bodyguard? ;)

Jack, please, tell me this. In the most specific way possible, please tell me, clearly and rationaly, why you don't want me to play Halo 3 (I'm 15)

Funny! It seems jack is a lot more brave when hiding behind a court filing or internet firewall than in person. In my town we call them cowards.

Jack, why are you scared?

"Two retail giants headquartered in your jurisdiction are, in my legal opinion, knowingly and actively involved in distributing sexual material harmful to minors"

Newsflash, Jack Thompson's legal opinion is now considered law. If he thinks something. Opinion counts for nothing Mr. Thompson.

"More specifically, Target and Best Buy are presently distributing, in their retail stores and on-line, a video game, Manhunt 2, which the makers of the game, as well as Best Buy and Target, admit is inappropriate and thus harmful to anyone under 17 years of age"

Inappropriate does not equal harmful. The f-word is inappropriate for children, but if they hear it they are not going to be traumatized or scarred or affected.

"and yet these two Minneapolis companies are selling it on-line to anyone of any age with no age verification."

Credit cards are accepted as a vaild form of age verification. If an underage person is using their parents card, then THEY are engaged in fraud, not the retailers.

"This may constitute criminal distribution of “sexual material harmful to minors” in violation of state and federal laws.

I doubt it.

"One leading parents’ organization has called the game “pornographic violence.”"

There's our old friend opinion again.

"Please proceed swiftly on this. I will provide you whatever evidence you need in these regards, as will others."

This should be corrected to read "I will provide you whatever evidence you need in these regards, while ignoring the mountain of evidence that undermines and blatantly disproves my theories, as will others."

ROFLMAO @jt saying ROFLMAO. That's classic.

Anyways, I'm really looking forward to this, especially if jt acts like his normal self.

PhoenixZero: I'm sorry, but what part about an ESRB descriptor stating "Strong Sexual Content" do you not understand?

Dear jds: Apparently you don't know what an "over/under" bet is. It would be a bet, with odds, as to whether it happens. No possible over/under calculation. I've been invited. I've accepted, so has N'gai to moderate it. We're just waiting on Lorne. If he says no, then they'll get somebody else.

By the way, Lorne Lanning said at the debate that the ESA's Doug Lowenstein is now running guns, if I heard him correctly. Check the tape.

GP:  yeah, Lorne said that. However, he's incorrect. Doug is running the Private Equity Council, a lobbying group for private equity firms.

@Zachary -
I'm in the same spot as you. I *might* have the money this year, but if I come up short I'm going to get a sponsor for the rest of the funds so that I can finally partake in the event (and hope it is better than last year's).

The big problem might be finding the time, but I will probably be programming for EA by then so it might all work out in the end. If you won't make it to I/ITSEC, maybe GDC is the perfect time to grab those IBCs

@PHOENIXZERO: Yah, I'm confused too. I don't deny the fact that there is gratuitous violence in MH2, but I've yet to hear any sexual content. Maybe someone who has played it can confirm/deny the claim.

(normally post under the alias of GameDevMich, using real name for thread directly related to Mr. Thompson per his request. Also, apologies for bad grammar as coffee has not been ingested yet.)

@ Ken

Yes, unfortunately we'll never get to see Jack debate against an opponent who knows his every move inside and out. We'll never see him debate Henry Jenkins for example. He'll always back out at the last minute. :P

(As an side, I was talking to Hal Halpin at the expo, and we both agreed that we would have lost money that day when we found out that Jack showed up!)

That having been said, as with his appearance at G4, I think Jack underestimated who he was going up against. His quip, "And I thought this was going to be friendly," kind of bore that out.

And oh yeah, Jack. That reminds me of something else. Sorry to disappoint you in your little attempt at self-martyrdom. That's the real reason you came. You were expecting someone, somewhere there to come out and take a shot at you, didn't you? Everybody knew you were coming. I saw you walk by with three security people, but that wouldn't have been enough to stop somebody if they were determined enough.

So admit it, Jack. In spite of what you may call us, many of us are an intelligent, well-spoken and well-adjusted bunch. That moment alone when everyone in the room raised their hands when asked if they played Grand Theft Auto should have told you something, as by your logic, a few of us should have attacked you despite security presence and the code of conduct.

I suggest that the audience all stand and give Mr. Thompson the classic "Heil Mein Furor" salute.

Afterall, we really must pay proper respect to the leader of the moral facism, anti-gaming, wing of the conservative party.

Okay, seriously, can we delete the self-congratulatory press releases about things not related to the topic at hand? I appreciate your feedback and responses to people's questions, here, Jack, really, I do, but the random press release about MH2 being illegal is irrelevant. That, and you've already mentioned it on other threads - it's old news, mate, and hardly even 'news' because there's no actual action taking place, just you asking someone else to do your dirty work for you because your settlement with T2 precludes you from doing so yourself.

I'd be delighted to debate Henry Jenkins. Bring him on. Make him my opponent at GDC. We'd have to move to a bigger facility. I pledge to debate him. I'd absolutely love it. Now shut up about how I won't debate people. You're making a fool of yourself, Black Manta.

Benji, I didn't put out any news release on the debate. Are you okay, or what? Dennis McCauley is reporting at this thread a court filing, because what I did in Philly relates to what is gong on down here in Florida.

I have a constitutional right to appear before the Board of Governors of the Bar, to make my case, under certain laws here, to them, as I made my case in Philly for myself. Dennis gets the point, but you dont.

By the way, if Lorne is right that my "business plan" is to just wait for more game-inspired murders to occur, then why am I drafting and getting passed laws to stop the sale of games to the potential murderers. that would dry up my gravy train, right? Ask Lorne about that one.

GP: Lorne got this wrong. As far as I can tell, Jack has no "business" plan.

"...sleeping with Rumplestiltskin?"

I've commented before that Mr. Thompson's use of "dark humor" has made me laugh.

I've also been known to laugh at complete absurdity (*see It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia). The Rumplestiltskin remark is so "from out of left field," that my mind is now stuck in an infinite "for loop of depraved LOLness"

A good chuckle at the start of a Monday in my office is a good start to the week.

Dear Jaded Critic: Allow me to explain why I was invited:

I have something to say, and apparently some people think I said it well. Check out, for example, http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/11/vgxpo-jack-tomp.html.

Secondly, whether you hate me or not, I've been in this debate since April 1999 when we filed our Doom lawsuit that arose out of the Paducah school massacre.

Thirdly, there are people within the video game industry who actually understand that Take-Two is a bigger problem for the industry than I am! Think about that a second and let it sink it. Warren Specter said so in Montreal two years ago. Even Doug Lowenstein, in a rare moment of truth, said so.

If the industry would speak the truth about the sociopaths at Take-Two, then I would be totally superfluous to all this, and I could crawl back under the rock from whence I allegedly came.

The utter failure of the ESRB, the ESA, and the industry generally to ostracize and shame Take-Two and do anything about that company's illegal/immoral/unethical activities is why I exist to beat the living crap out of them.

Get your act together, video game industry, when it comes to the scofflaws at T2, and I melt away. Until then, I'm the 800 pound gorilla opponent that Take-Two itself created. Deal with it. Be mad at Take-Two, not me. Jack Thompson

"Get your act together, video game industry, when it comes to the scofflaws at T2, and I melt away. Until then, I’m the 800 pound gorilla opponent that Take-Two itself created. Deal with it. Be mad at Take-Two, not me. Jack Thompson"

You know, that could be partly true. Yeah, we can be mad at Take-Two for making some stupid decisions when it comes to their games. I mean, seriously, all this business about Manhunt 2, and the game itself isn't even that good.

But honestly, Jack, I think we have every right to be mad at you, too, considering all the crap you spit out at us. And yeah, I realize that some of it may be well founded. Yeah, people have been idiots towards you, too, and called you with threats and such. But that doesn't excuse the sheer amount of baseless, hateful blanket statements you've made about us.

You know, I'd fancy a guess that most of us don't even care that you're out to get Take-Two. I'm guessing most of the people here are tired of you simply because of your massive superiority complex. You consider every one of us here to be children, and yet you keep on coming back to belittle us more. If anything, that should speak mountains about YOUR character, not ours.

You know, if you'd actually bother trying to be nice and/or civil once around here, once in a while, instead of saving it for your nice publicity stunts, I don't think you'd have as many problems with us.

@Salen.... hmmm.... I don't run the server, we're hosted, but I will drop them an e-mail. Thx for pointing it out.

-GP

@JT:

Trying to shift gamers' hatred from you to T2?

@Unafiliated Annonomous:

Actually, that's a good point. I was thinking about that myself. If everyone comes in expecting a fire-and-brimstone monster and Jack acts like a regular person, there's a certain easing of tension there that helps radiate a positive light.

Then again, it's also a lot easier to be a troll online when you don't have to face people.

What, and get more of this (from Wired)?

At one point, Thompson said "no one in their right mind would say that a videogame by itself would turn an angel into a demon," but seemed to be splitting his message. At times, his message was about not letting retailers sell violent games to kids, at others it was that violent games make kids trained killers.

I can get that kind of dislexia from Fox...

Lorne messed up my wrongfully assuming that Jack was a money-grubbing lawyer. Instead he's a morality... nazi. (for lack of a better word...) He'll go the reasonable route, and say it's just about parents making the right choice for their kids. And then when pressed, he'll revert back to his "but it turns kids into psychos!" rant.

He pretends to want parental choice, AS LONG as the choice is the one he wants.

He's just like Hillary Clinton in that regards. She wants parents to be able to make a choice, but then still claims that "the village" needs to be able to step in an make the "right" choice should the parents make the "wrong" one. Jack just isn't so direct about it, merely implying that parents who make the "wrong" choice instead are destroying their kids' brains...

If it's all about empowering parents Jack, why claim it turns kids into serial killers? And if it's all about kids becoming serial killers, why allow parents the opportunity to buy this at all?

Mr. Jack Thompson, what is your personal stance on violent video games? Do you feel the game should be banned all together or do you feel the games should be federally held accountable according to their ratings?

This is the only site I know you visit frequently, this is why I asked the question here. Plus I feel your answer would have some insight for other people as curious as I am.

Thank you,
-Mike

Scott, go find a crowbar, your capslock is stuck...

it reallly can't be jack thompson, he's posting too much.

this is the first time I'm saying it, but I don't believe that's really thompson.

@GP

Then again, it’s also a lot easier to be a troll online when you don’t have to face people.

Oh he's a jerk on TV too. See any "fair and balanced" interview where he spends the whole time shouting down his opponent rather than let him speak.

The internet troll is merely an extension of that. My theory is the greater the separation between a real-life meeting and whatever he's doing, the greater the confrontation and overall arseholishness.

So from "civil" to "asshat", the confrontations go as follows:

-In-person meeting
-Phone call
-TV "debate"
-letter/fax/court filing/press release
-Interweb

Granted there are some exceptions, such as when he's a complete asshat during a phone call, on when he's really civil during an email interview, but they are the exception rather than the rule.

Jack said:
"...and getting passed laws to stop the sale of games to the potential murderers..."

Doesn't that imply that he already sees gamers as murderers before the games even get into their hands? This guy has a preconceived notion that gamers are bad, even before the violent games make it to their hands, and that the games are all they need to start pulling the trigger. How can he be taken seriously when he arrives at a debate or comments section with his mind already made up?

The guy stinks of hypocrisy.

@ scott

Lay off the caps lock please. My eyes are bleeding.

Hackangel, that was a nicely written post, and I definitely agree with what you said about the need for both sides to respect each other. I think it would help if some people stopped and looked at stuff that we have in common with Jack Thompson. Obviously, most of us care about children, and I personally feel that there are many games children shouldn't be playing without parental knowledge and consent. I think the ESRB ratings need to be enforced more effectively for them to have a better meaning. Some places enforce them, others don't, and for all I know it just boils down to whether or not the individual employees care to enforce it. There are similarities, we just prefer to look at the differences and point those out, like how I don't agree with Mr. Thompson's methods, and I feel that he takes things a bit too far sometimes. However, there are still some common goals in there that people should look for instead of just blindly ranting against him like an idiot and instantly rejecting ideas solely because they came from Jack Thompson...

I’m sorry, but what part about an ESRB descriptor stating “Strong Sexual Content” do you not understand?

Wow, featuring a sex club is now the same as distributing porn? I guess CSI has some s'plaining to do... ;)

@ Michael Perry

I think Jack meant to say Rip Van Winkle when he said Rumplestilskin. Wouldn't be the first time though that he got the name wrong on something.

Eh, standing up to epeens or filing motions so the epeens can voice their opinion. I'm glad to see JT arguing with people in the comments section.

@ JT: You mentioned that Dennis didn't attend the convention, but he said he did (not to mention the proof). No retraction?

Also, this seems to be the same angles you've taken in the past to be a nuisance. I understand you're sticking to your convictions (bravo), but do you spend any spare time to think of more creative ways to approach your perceived problem? Google employees spend plenty of creative time to develop ideas. It might be beneficial.

I'm not here to berate you or stoop to name calling levels, but your actions just seem to fail to be constructive at the very least. I'd like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but I'm not seeing it yet. I'm actually impressed you'd defend yourself to a bunch of non-people online, but that's far from saying you've been impressive in your conduct over the past few years (including your countless defeats).

@Jack Thompson

For what it's worth. I'm one of them. I'm of the humble opinion that Rockstar's games aren't high enough quality to offset the PR damage they do; I wouldn't cry about it one bit if they closed down. Keep in mind, though, I'd close Rockstar down, not Take2.

With that said. Hate is a strong word. I think you'd find that if you dialed your behavior back somewhat, stopped being quite so belligerant and insulting, and engaged in more rational dialog, I think allot of people might not quite be so quick to whip out the mob torches. I don't think anybody here seriously expects to go buy a xbox and start working on your gamerscore with us, but by the same token; you can't realistically expect us to completely renounce something we've been doing for decades.

Well, if the GDC thing is true, congratulations. Maybe if you start doing more events like that you can persaude people instead of bludgeoning everyone who doesn't agree with you to death with subpeonas. It's more civil, and certainly preferable.

“… when it comes to the scofflaws at T2, and I melt away. Until then, I’m the 800 pound gorilla opponent that Take-Two itself created. Deal with it. Be mad at Take-Two, not me. Jack Thompson”

Umm… nope Take 2 didn’t create you. In fact you say you have been doing this since 1999 with Doom which was not created or published by Take 2. So please keep in mind what you have said before and keep the flow of your story constant, it makes it more “believable”.

@Davian
there's a fine line between being jack thompson, and impersonating him.
just because the posts have made it through so far, could simply mean GP hasn't checked the new posts.

when it comes to the scofflaws at T2, and I melt away. Until then, I’m the 800 pound gorilla opponent that Take-Two itself created. Deal with it. Be mad at Take-Two, not me. Jack Thompson

I thought 2LiveCrew and id Software created you?

Doom 3/Quake 4 wasn't violent enough for ya? Carmack too much for you to handle?

Reading Jack's comments on here makes me way more violent than any video games have made or will make me violent. His mindset is as warped as a funhouse mirror, yet about as flexible as a brick wall; and his entire attitude makes me want to stab forks into my eyes. Repeatedly.

@ JT

"PhoenixZero: I’m sorry, but what part about an ESRB descriptor stating “Strong Sexual Content” do you not understand?"

I'll answer for him, Mr. Thompson.

'Sexual content' does not necessarily mean the depictment of actual sex acts. Sexual content means things such as clothed lap dances and closing the door right when you see a bra fall to the floor. Do you actually SEE the pixelated sex? No. The images aren't there. The sexual suggestiveness is.

Content using actual sex acts on-screen contitutes a different rating detail from the ESRB.

That is the difference between sexual content and actual sex, Mr. Thompson. I advise you learn it.

Off-topic, i'm proud that you're actually taking the time to respond to several comments here, albeit still twisting words to your liking, but at least you're acknowledging opinions instead of turning everyone down but yourself.

Hey, Jack. I don't play any Take Two games. Its true. I'm an evil sociopath gamer, but I've never even touched a Take Two/RockStar game. Why? They don't interest me.

I'd rather play Fable or KOTOR and choose to act heroic or be a general villain and beast. I'd rather play a good action game like God of War or Heavenly Sword than Manhunt. I'd rather play a good RPG like Final Fantasy than Bully. Yes, I openly admit I don't play Grand Theft Auto. It never appealed to me.

It's not because I hate TT. Some of their games even look well made. I'm not even angry that they make controversial games. Rather, I'd applaud them for having the guts to challenge people's perception of video games. For pushing the envelope. At one time, even comic books were considered obscene. Scratch that. At one time, the Waltz was seen as an obscene dance that would "corrupt our children". People need to be morally and intellectually challenged. That's how we grow.

I'll defend TT/RR from the critics, not because I like them or what they say or do, but because they have a right to say and do those things. Take Two has the right to exist. You may not like it, but that's just too bad.

"I may not like what you say, but I'll defend, to the death, your right to say it."

I agree. We do have common goals despite the actions of JT. Acting like an adult despite the opposition makes you a bit more respectable when you share your comments though. It's why many of the commenters here don't have much respect for JT. It's also why often (despite the direct confrontation) many of you lose your cool and then respond in some immature manner.

I can't blame you for being in a difficult situation, but Knight does a good job at trying to retain some composure when responding. Not to fluff the guy up, but it's best to go the respectable route when responding. Count to 10.

@ Everyone supporting my question

Thanks. I did give up on receiving a reply and that is why I posted the email on the forums. I am now glad I did. It really shows what John Bruce's motives really are. Just by ignoring my questions, he shows that he really does not support parents in this debate. I still have yet to figure out his true motives, but I hope I will soon.

@Pandralisk

First off, Godwin's Law.
Second, I agree.
Third,:

!I suggest that the audience all stand and give Mr. Thompson the classic “Heil Mein Furor” salute."

It's Heil Hitler, and Mein Fuhrer.

Finally, I will see you at the PKK meeting in Northern Iraq, Comrade.

@Dennis

Could you define opinion for me? I'd like to see if it's anything like what i'm thinking.

With Respects, BlackIce

Think I like this one better.

Just a warning to everyone, i'm far to the left today, so bear with me.

With Respects, BlackIce

@kurisu7885

Agreed. I used to fly off the handle at JT comments. I kinda mellowed out, especially after my temp ban.

I had a whole writeup about comparing JT to the relative everyone has who thinks the government is one big conspiracy, and practically bursts with pride every time they let everyone in on the "secret", but then I realized that I don't need to go into detail. Everyone knows what I'm talking about. ;)

@Jabrwock

You only have 1 of those relatives? I've got an entire branch thats like that.

Somebody get this guy some mental health help:

Jabrwock Says:

November 5th, 2007 at 11:47 am
@Boffo97

When do you intend to reimburse the money from what is essentially your mistake?

Remember, the Illuminati and the Masons (and Take Two!) are conspiring against him. So it’s not his fault that he lost, it’s all the fault of the great conspiracy against him, involving government, industry, and the courts. They’re all against him… They’re all out to get him… Get him… geeeeeeet himmmmmmm…

Manta... I agree with you very much so, but you have to understand that there is a connection between the development and the distribution of information.

That's why T2 is even considered part of the problem in this instance. They are part of the distribution chain.

Drugs: Growers are the real problem, but there are the transporters and the dealers.

Pornography: Photographers actually take the images, but there are the publishers and the distributers.

My point is, because they maintain that relationship, they can be held as accountable as the people that create the content. If T2 felt it was their responsibility to no longer support the material that is continuously developed by R*, then they could drop them. However, they continue to publish the games that are developed. They have to be able to stand up to any scrutiny that arises.

@Black Manta

Yes, Rockstar has a habit of releasing games that have content not suited for everyone. But the problem doesn't lie there. That is actually the restriction that they place upon their own games, and it's up to the public and retailers to understand that. No, these games are not for everyone. They are for people ages 17 and older. For those keeping track, that's one year of people who are minors, and many years of those that are adults.

Rockstar also created several franchises and stand-alone titles that aren't GTA, that sold - Max Payne, Midnight Club, The Warriors, and Oni.

The thing is that if Rockstar gets shut down because of this, that just opens the floodgates for morons like JT to come in and try to either censor more material or find a way that violates our freedom of expression. At that point, where's it going to stop? Would Sephiroth have really killed Aeris on screen, or would a text box pop up later in the game saying "Aeris died of Cholera?" Would Mario really jump on Goomba's heads, or would he just sidestep them, saying "Excuse me?" I realize these examples are extreme, but it's the direction that this would continue if idiocy from these censorship-preaching peons were allowed to go unnoticed.

@Jabrwock

I have a friend like that ^^;

@Jack Thompson, our hero and idol

Read DavCube's response. I've actually played Manhunt 2, with and without the overlaying filter and will do so again shortly though actually playing it is more punishing than any of the executions shown in it.

I'm a little disappointed that it's taken you that long to respond to something I've said.

@DavCube

You pretty much responded as I would have if I saw his reply sooner.


@Gameboy

I agree, I started playing Manhunt 2 since Halloween night and I'm barely into the second "stage". I never finished the first game either. Though I do enjoy GTA (or at least the 3D ones, never liked the others largely due to my dislike of the top down view) though mainly for the exploring aspect to it.

@ JT

Oh Jack, you were on such a good run. About 12 hours before going back to your old ad-hominum ways. So sad.

"Secondly, the day I disclose to all my tactics at GP is the day I pack it in. Nice try."

Do you think we were actually expecting some sort of bad action movie villain cliche from you?

"Do you think retailers should sell alcohol, tobacco, and firearms to anyone of any age? If no, then why would you think that retailers should sell to anyone under 17 a Mature game, with no parent in sight?"

Well, they don't. Almost ever. Since you stand right next to your son when he buys the game for your single-sample study (which you yourself say is inconclusive) the clerk takes the assumption that you think your son is mature enough to play the game without becomes a murderous bottom-feeder. The human mind is a wonderful thing, isn't it?

"That’s my only issue. Deal with that, and stop with the other stuff."

Same to you. Quit threatening a bunch of anonymous people on the internet with legal action challenging threats that don't even fit the definition of 'threat.'

Also Jack, when are you going to say about the Punisher game that came out two and a half years ago and published by THQ? People have been removing the filter from that game's executions for years now with no one batting an eyelash. Hey at least now I doubt the free publicity would mean much seen as the game is over two and a half years old.


@Weighted Companion Cube

Rockstar didn't make Max Payne, that was Remedy, Rockstar was a publisher and bought the rights to it.

Wow, I don't think I've ever seen Jack post this much.

Folks, keep in mind that what JT is trying to do isn't really 'debate', not in what I think is the truest sense of the word. Debate I always figured is the exchange of ideas - a two-way exchange. JT doesn't come off as one who wants to get more information on the matter at hand in order to form an opinion; he already has an opinion and is using 'debate' as a medium by which he can express said opinion to as many people as possible in an effort to convince them he's right. In other words, I don't think he CARES about your arguments. You can keep reasoning with him if it'll make you feel better, but at this point I'm not inclined to think it'll matter.

@Johnny

Nicely written, well-reasoned argument.
Poorly written, unreasoned argument coming from Jack in 3...
2...
1...

Dear Manta: First of all, stop being a coward and use a real name.

Secondly, the day I disclose to all my tactics at GP is the day I pack it in.

And the day I actually give you my real name is the day that you promise you won't threaten to use that knowledge to threaten to sue my ass like you tried last year, asshole.

As for the retailers? That's their problem, not Take 2's the developers or anyone else's. You fail to understand how buisness works and that's why your proposal for the developers of games to not support retailers doesn't work. First off, they don't have that kind of clout. Second it'd be economic suicide for them and you know it.

You deal with that and stop the other stuff.

@Lard

Publicity is only worthwhile if you can capitalize on it. Dennis makes no money from GP (no ad revenue), so publicity actually COSTS him money. Poor business model if you ask me. I submit that you maybe didn't think that all the way through.

BTW Jack you never answered my email question about the Saw movies and the Hostel movies.

@Johnny: I think JT's line on the movie thing is that games, by virtue of being interactive, are more threatening than movies. (It's a popular argument in the anti-game camp. While it's not well supported by research, the research often gives that impression just because there's a lot out there on the effects of interactive media. To my knowledge the effects of movies and passive media is studies with much less frequency.)

@IanC:

Quantity =/= Quality

@ Weighted Companion Cube
Oh i know that :)

Still, surprised.

I think it is the real one. GP responded to most of them.

@ jadedcritic

I understand that position. I would not want anyone giving out my email willy nilly either. Unfortunately for him, I got his email from one of his public court filings.

Okay, there's way to many comments from 'JT' here. Hey GP, is there a faux Jack running around?

@IanC: Yeah, its like being on LJ all over again. Its great. *passes over some popcorn*

@Black Mantra: JT threatened to sue you? Yeah, I can see why you might not give him your name, not that I would either. Not like I wouldn't expect JT to not threaten to sue folks, or try anyways.

With the way Mr. Jack Thompson responds in this forum, I would say half his battle would be a "personal" vendetta against the gamer types he meets in here then what he thinks is "wrong or right".
He responds with such disdain and hate. Not that the majority of gamers do not do the same thing, it is just that I expected more from a public/professional figure.

I think we all agree that retailers shouldn't sell games to inappropriately aged minors. But that's up to the retailers to police, not publishers. Using the alcohol/cigarettes/guns argument is silly because in that case then it's the producers of those products are also at fault when a retailer sells them to minors, yet when is the last time Budweiser was successfully sued (or sued period) because a teenager got drunk and killed someone while behind the wheel of a vehicle? Don't get me started on the times the tobacco and fire arms industries were sued because I do think those instances were stupid also, though at a lesser extent with tobacco.

Besides, I'd much rather have someone under 21 or 18 get a copy of an M Rated game or R-Rated, hell XXX movie than a 12-pack or a pack of cigarettes or a gun.

The break down of the family unit or families where both the mother and father have to work (and sometimes more than one job for one or both) in order to make ends meet and the stress on a family caused by it is a much bigger problem than M Rated games getting in the hands of a "inappropriate" age group.

I'd really, really like to know who he's actually going to debate. And for the love of games, whoever it is had better be prepared. We all know how a real debate with JT should go down, and to be honest I'm tired of being disappointed.

@ Jack Thompson

"Dear Ms. Knight: I support parents’ rights, which is why they support me. Retailers should not sell Mature games to kids with no parents in sight. You don’t want a debate. You want to be “clever.” You failed on both counts."

I am a parent..and I have NO support for you at all. I like the ability to choose what, where, and how me and my family plays and watches. My oldest (just turned 7 the other day) already knows what the ESRB ratings are and which ones he can and can not play from a cusrsor glance. Anything in the grey area, then I go and check it out for approval. So yes, I want the right to be able to say that a T rated game is ok for my child, or even an M rated one (in whole or part depending on the content and my decission) is appropriate for my child to play. That is why I don't support you.

Oh, and about the above comment telling someone to give their real name..I have no issue with that. My name is Jeremy Powers. Anything else?

Ok, lets get one things straight. Jack Thompson and his legion of freaks (Joseph Lieberman and Presidential Not-Hopeful Hilary Clinton) are trying to ruin the "FREEDOM" of game creation. They have nothing else better to do than to complain about the gaming industry and what it does. Honestly, it is not the gaming industry's fault for any of this action. If the parents dont want their kids playing viloent video games, then so be it. If they choose to let them play these sorts of games, then that is their issue. But yes, the adult must be in the presence of the child that is purchasing the game. Jack Thompson is going around and stating that these violent games should be banned. If game developers want to make their games directed towards kids, cool. But if they want to make it the bloodiest thing ever created, let them. Its THEIR FREEDOM to do so. And that is what Jack Thompson fails to realize, WE ARE IN AMERICA AFTER ALL!!!!!

I see the folly in debating Jack Thompson now.

When he's in a debate, he sticks pretty well to logical constructs. After all, no one's ever going to argue that M rated games should be sold to children under 17. If that's all you stick to saying, then yeah of course people will agree with you. No one has ever objected to that line of reasoning.

But when he's in the media (or writing lawsuits), what comes out of his mouth is insane frothing madness - that adult games should be banned in order to protect children. He never takes that to the debate. He never took his attempt to get Bully banned to a debate.

So debating this man is not constructive; it just gives him a sense of position and authority to continue making the crazy claims once he's out of earshot of smart people.


Here's where we need to wind up;

1) If you want to see an R or NC-17 rated movie, you need be that old or bring an adult with you. If you bring the DVD home, the DVD player needs its parental controls to permit that.

2) If you want to play an AO or M rated PC game, you need to be that old or bring an adult with you (example: have a credit card). Unfortunately, PC is teh suxxors for parental moderation (consider: the Internet exists). Parents should generally avoid it.

3) If you want to play an AO or M rated console game, you need the parental controls unlocked. Optionally, you need to be that old or bring an adult with you to buy it, but it's not really necessary - that's just an optimization that keeps folks from spending money just to return it. It's true: If you let your 12 year old have a soldering gun, he might be able to play AO or M rated games anyway if he knows what to do. In this case, I'm more concerned that your child is a mad scientist bent on world domination than any causal relationship between video games and their behaviour.


That's the truth. That's where we need to be; what we need to be doing. It also turns out to be precisely where we are at today.

So, your work here is done, Jack. Go home with the peace of a job well done.

Jack still has to name a single TRUE fact in order to become a legitimate critic. His best argument so far is that video games were not around during the Ancient Era in Greece.

"WE ARE IN AMERICA AFTER ALL!!!!! "

Exactly, think that Jack Thompson would be able to pull stunts like that in Canada?

@ Johnny

We're certainly feeling the effects of his type in the UK. Go the BBFC etc...

Dang, all this hype on Manhunt has me wanting to go get it now.

Anyone else notice that Jack again completely ignored the question of when he was going to reimburse states for the money they lost in legal fees in passing un-Constitutional bills that he wrote?

He even quoted Jabrwock quoting me asking the question and failed to answer it.

I mean, it is of course 100% his fault that money was lost. A competent lawyer would have written Constitutional law. Especially, he wouldn't keep making the same mistakes.

@las, attorney

Jack still has to name a single TRUE fact in order to become a legitimate critic. His best argument so far is that video games were not around during the Ancient Era in Greece.

Yeah, that one made little sense. By that regards, the only true art out there is either of wars, sports, homo-eroticism, or naked people... or giant erect penis statues on every street corner (state-sponsored fertility statues ftw!)

jack thompson, attorney Says:

November 5th, 2007 at 12:02 pm
Dear Manta: First of all, stop being a coward and use a real name.

Secondly, the day I disclose to all my tactics at GP is the day I pack it in. Nice try. Here’s the only issue for me:

Do you think retailers should sell alcohol, tobacco, and firearms to anyone of any age? If no, then why would you think that retailers should sell to anyone under 17 a Mature game, with no parent in sight?

That’s my only issue. Deal with that, and stop with the other stuff.


Well, rightfully they shouldn't, but kids can go to Best Buy and pick up Hostel or Saw II as well, but I don't see you suing the major movie studios.

The fact that you think that games are somehow not only something that should be subject to regulation over and above other media with violent or sexual content, and the fact that you actually seem to think that a video game is on the same calibre as a gun or alcohol demonstrates your profound lack of understanding.

You can't even prove that there's a causal link between violent video games and real life violence, how can you possibly say that games are as destructive as a firearm in the hands of a minor? It's gross hyperbole at it's finest.

"A dialog has no agenda to achieve other than both people walking away from it with a better understanding of the other person’s stance."

Inthat regard, since he turned it down,many, MANY times, he does not want to understand for fear of having his reality broken.

"Until then, I’m the 800 pound gorilla opponent that Take-Two itself created."

that explains why your such a fucking idiot.

@jonc2006

Oooh, BURN!
You hear that Jack? You just got PWNED!
(If you're gonna use ROFLMAO then I'm gonna use PWNED. Deal with it.)

@jonc2006

Now that was brilliant.

"My issue is: “stop the sales of mature games to kids under 17, with no parents around. You want my issue to be more than that. It’s not."


Really? Because as far as I've seen the only thing you've pushed for is a total removal of these games from stores shelves. And as I'm sure you realize would inhibit the rights of those over 17 as well.

@Jack Thompson

Good to see you around and engaging in a bit of positive debate with the people at GP. This is the sort of thing we could probably all do with happening more often. (@Everyone: Ad hominems aren't cool.)

I would like to address one point of yours though.

My issue is: "stop the sales of mature games to kids under 17, with no parents around." You want my issue to be more than that. It’s not.

If this is your single issue, then I applaud it. I'm one of the supporters of the BBFC-style system where ratings are considered law. However, if this is the case, then why does the recent Manhunt 2 hack feature in your arsenal? Manhunt 2 off-the-shelf is a Mature game, and the hack doesn't add any more content to the game, making it no more Mature and certainly not upping it to the dreaded Adults Only band. Why make such a fuss over a simple hack if it isn't related to the sale of Mature games to kids?

The elephant in the room is that this is a debate between policy and law.

ESRB ratings are a policy that distributors, manufacturers, and consumers have all agreed on. Its goal is to advise consumers as to what games are appropriate to consumers of what ages. It is not, however, law.

Until this changes, everything said on the topic of legality of the actions of stores is moot.

@jack thompson, attorney
My issue is: “stop the sales of mature games to kids under 17, with no parents around.

You continue to disregard the statistics of video game sales compared to other media. According to the FCC reviews, the rates of underage people buying M-rated games is about the same as underage people getting into R-rated movies, and is significantly less than the rate of underage people buying R-rated or "unrated" movies at retailers. Why are you so obsessed over video games, when they are more successful than movies at enforcing age restrictions?

Meanwhile, books are completely unregulated. Anyone can buy any book, no matter its content, be it a Kama-Sutra guide, the Anarchists' Cookbook, the Bible, the Koran, Mein Kampf, or the Communist Manifesto, all of which are probably more harmful to minors than Halo. Why have you never gone after books?

I must concur with Lorne that you are, in fact, only interested in money. You do not go after films or publishers because there is too much precedent protecting their rights, while you can drum up more support from ignorant citizens as video games are a new medium. I find further evidence in that, despite this being "a moral crusade" for you, you refused to debate Jason Della Rocca unless you were handsomely compensated. Considering how much time you waste trolling the forums, I cannot believe you have such a paucity of time that a trip to a college would actually inconvenience you.

@BlackIce

Don't worry, I could never go into law. There is not enough soap or steel wool in this world to make me feel clean if I did.

I think that Jack Thompson can really make a cohesive, interesting argument when he's not busy grandstaging and I look forward to seeing him at GDC.

For the record, I personally feel that M-rated games (and R-rated movies) should be required to have the purchaser carded upon purchase. If Jack goes in with that argument, and does research ahead of time on the specifics of the Manhunt 2 deal, etc. I think he will do very well.

If Jack himself is reading this, I would like to say that whoever you are going to be debating WILL know everything that they are talking about, and if you say something non-factual you will be taken to task for it. If you want to come out on top, you really do need to take the time to do serious research into this matter.

"“Until then, I’m the 800 pound gorilla opponent that Take-Two itself created.”

that explains why your such a fucking idiot."

True. JT is fighting a pointless battle. Basically, here are the three things Jack has been campaigning for in the last few years:

1) Video games to be rated according to their age-appropriateness.
2) Said ratings to be enforced at point of sales.
3) The right of a parent to choose what video games their child plays.

Congratulations! These are all in effect as we speak!

1) There is an organisation called the ESRB which is independent from the industry, contrary to popular belief (and by popular belief, I mean just what you think, Jackie Boy). Yes Jack, I'm sure you'll be astounded to discover that the ESRB is independently run and not controlled by the video game industry, or Jews (as I have no doubt you have some sort of anti-Semitic feelings, considering all the racist remarks you've made about my nationality. Remember when you classed us Scots as whiskey-drinking, kilt-wearing sociopaths?).

2) Your lies about the age-rating not being enforced don't hold water, especially in the face of overwhelming evidence, such as the recent stories of retailers actively refusing to sell Manhunt 2 to anyone under 18 (despite the rating saying it is suitable for 17 and over). Yes, there are occasions when stores accidentally sell a mature game to a minor, but I can guarantee that this happens in the film, DVD, music, firearms, tobacco and alcohol industries as well. Hell, I'll throw in solvents, flammables and knives in for kicks too. If your beef is with people selling inappropriate material to minors, then you need to take up your cause across all the industries, otherwise you're a hypocrite and a coward.

In regards to your claims that any minor can buy games intended for mature audiences online, you have to completely ignore the fact that there is 99% of the time credit card confirmation. However, you seem to be very good at ignoring the facts and instead preferring to spout lies and mistruths, such as how Sony and most of Japan are propagating 'Pearl Harbour 2'. Way to go with the racial stereotypes again, I'm sure we could get you classed as a public nuisance with your hate-speech.

3) Guess what? Parents do have the right to decide what their kids play? How do they exercise this right, do you ask? They simply go to the room where their kid is playing a game, and if they have a problem with what their kid is playing, they can simply take the game away from them! In fact, all the major consoles now have parental controls so if parents are feeling particularly lazy, they can restrict the content their kids can play without even being in the same room!

However, sometimes parents can get tied up, such as being involved in frivolous lawsuits against video games concerning the death of police officers despite the fact it was the murderer who committed the crime and not the video game. But you don't care about the facts, do you Jack? All you care about is getting more money off grieving families to fuel your immoral and hate-filled agenda.

Sorry for interviene into your lively discussion... Break!

Dennis, we've included your blog into our vertical search engine ( http://yolto.com) for information about virtual worlds and games (People > Blogs section). Any comments and/or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Regards. Alex

Bang! BOX !

@ jack thompson, attorney

You're so cute! You come in here dancing around like a kid who sold the most magazine subscriptions, and will not get to go to Six Flags. You did well in the debate, congrats.

I took a debate class. I remember how easy it was to survive a debate, even on topics I had no clue about, or the time she made me take the role of someone for gun control, when I believe the opposite.

I don't know why you keep trying to blame T2, when it is Best Buy and Target who you choose to sue. Oh wait, yeah, you kept harrassing T2, so you don't want to piss them off again, because they may take YOU to court. Almost forgot about that.

You do realize that there was violence in the world way before Pong, right?

You support parents huh John Bruce then please point out to where you have done one of the folowing:
Empowered parents to control their children by enabling the parental controls on their children’s consoles.
Empowered parents by showing them what the ESRB rating is and how they can use it to pick better games for the kids.
No instead you want the ESRB to be destroyed leavening parents with less power not more. Jack Thompson’s tactic: destroy that which is working then sell you his replacement. Before you start with your the ESRB doesn’t work stuff let’s assume that you are right and self-regulation is insufficient that still doesn’t explain why you loath the ESRB. If legislation is a clearly necessary as you would have us believe fine get it passed and leave the ESRB in place as an additional tool; after all your legislative efforts would only affect M and AO games. Parents would still need a tool to showing what appropriate for a pre-teen (E rated games) as opposed to teenagers (T-rated games) and tools that say why a game got a certain rating (content descriptors), and something that can be used with parental controls, which to remind you again can be used by parents to only allow E rated games, your laws would only stop M and AO) games but not T. If you truly where on the parents side, you would support both the ESRB and your legislative efforts. It is not one or the over the ESRB serves functions that assuming such laws will ever pass are not replaceable by legislation. So why is John Bruce that you speak of the ESRB’s potential downfall with glee why do you constant insult and harsh them, why do foster distrust amongst parent for the system.
It can’t be because it better for them see the above, and let me add that even if you do get laws passed depending on the ESRB in the time between now and them is still better then depending on the big fat nothing your failed (as in declared unconstitutional or otherwise rejected) legislative effort have provided. Could it be because the presence as good self regulation (as measured by comparing it the accept MPAA self-rating body) is a big detriment to your actual goal of passing one of your laws; parents, the children, the first amendment and everyone else be dammed.

cast = case. Sorry for late edit.

“Get your act together, video game industry, when it comes to the scofflaws at T2, and I melt away. Until then, I’m the 800 pound gorilla opponent that Take-Two itself created. Deal with it. Be mad at Take-Two, not me. ”

That is one thing I agree with. Take Two has only increased the "power" of Jack Thompson by not taking him down when they had the chance. They decided to make an agreement with him and trusted him to not break it. Take Two can be blamed for not taking him down when they should have. They could have known that Jack Thompson will never follow the rules, be it law or anything else.

Jack Thompson is nothing else but a two-faced snake. He has deserved the lack of respect he is getting from some of us. Of course, I will never send him an email because he is not deserving of that kind of attention.

There is no good reason to attack Take Two over games being sold to children when Take Two isn't even selling the games, the stores are. There is also no reason to enforce the ratings for just one type of entertainment. There are enough games that are rated M, which is perfectly fine for someone who is 15. It is still, ultimately, the decision of the parents, not the store, and most certainly not Jack Thompson. It is also very appalling he dares to compare games with the likes of tobacco, alcohol or firearms. They aren't remotely in the same league.

Also, credit cards are used to verify the age on a lot of porn sites, why not go after them as well, Jack? Credit cards are used as age verification in many countries. When a parent gives a credit card to their kid who is underage, they have no leg to stand on when they dare to claim that it is too easy for their kid to buy a game with a credit card. Someone under the age of 18 shouldn't even have access to a credit card. You allow little Billy to use your credit card, then you are the one allowing him to buy an M-rated game, this is not the fault of the game industry.

@Luke J J

Nah, Lizzie Borden was made up.

“stop the sales of mature games to kids under 17, with no parents around. You want my issue to be more than that. It’s not.

So you are ok with parents buying the game for their kids?

I would like to think that you are merely trying to support parents in their decisions:

"Do you think retailers should sell alcohol, tobacco, and firearms to anyone of any age? If no, then why would you think that retailers should sell to anyone under 17 a Mature game, with no parent in sight?"

but with comments such as this it becomes obvious through your own words that is not the case and you seek federal regulation of the distribution of games to people, a clear violation of our First Amendment rights.

JT wrote: "I support parents’ rights, which is why they support me."

No, it is blatantly obvious that you do not support mine or other parents right to let us choose what is best for our children. I and many, many, many other parents do not support your actions Mr. Thompson.

Would I buy Manhunt 2 for my kid? Absolutely not. Some parents may though, thinking they are mature enough to handle it. IT IS THEIR CHOICE.

I find it funny you never once mention books, movies or music in your current litigation stunts? Do you find it acceptable that children can buy Hostel, Saw 3, or any number of R rated movies? What about UNRATED movies sold? How about music containing vulgar and insulting language? That seems to get a pass as well.

Videogames are here to stay, fully protected under the First Amendment. I know that angers you but thats the facts. Parents have a right to buy M rated games for their kids as much as letting them see a R rated movie or listening to violent music or read a horror story.

"Dear court to whom I am suing and is trying to disbar me,

I was invited to speak out against video games at a convention.

The End."

Why is this in a court filing. What possible relevance does it have to the case that Jacko is a terrible lawyer? Mind you, he makes a dandy zealot, but that's not what the case is about.

Why do people give that lunatic credibility by inviting him to their events? :/

@Vinzent

Why is this in a court filing. What possible relevance does it have to the case that Jacko is a terrible lawyer?

He's trying to use the fact that he was invited to speak to "the enemy" as "proof" that he's not a fruitloop. And so therefore he should be allowed to whine and complain directly to the Florida Bar's Board of Governors instead of just ranting at them through gay porn docket submissions...

Dearest Vinzent:

I guess you'd have to be a) a lawyer, b) able to read a court file, c) willing to read something other than a game magazine, d) obsessed with something other than gay porn like Jabrwock, and e) able to understand what an analogy is.

I had a fantastic and successful weekend ,obviously. So sad that that fact drives you haters absolutely out of your minds. How telling. How sad. How useful. :)

@Jabrwock

The Time Clock Lobby Association must be a bush supporter. They've definitely seen an increase in sales lately.

@JT

So what's with the unusual magnitude of postings? Free time? Got out of the right side of the bed? New meds?

On another note, what do you hope to accomplish with a debate at GDC? Just curious.

jack thompson, attorney Says:

November 5th, 2007 at 10:08 am
"...what a mentally ill person I am..."

So you admit that you're mentally ill? Wow just wow.

"Deal with it. Be mad at Take-Two, not me. ”


Pray tell why would I be mad at Take-Two. Take-Two makes (some) games that I enjoy. You try to ban the games that I enjoy. It isn't a hard decision of who to be mad at.

You know what just occured to me? JT must realize by now that the minors who actually buy this game (and manage to play it) on their own without any parental involvement is extremely minor. So how does he deal with it? Collective punishment, for the good of the people!

Sheesh, you'd think JT would be AGAINST living in a socialist society... ;)

So jack kids buying and then watching movies like Saw or Hostel is ok in your book?

Glad you had a fantastic (or, to use a word you probably prefer, Fabulous) weekend. Successful...eh. You engaged in a discussion where neither side got anywhere. You went off on some tirade about Christians being persecuted, and Lorne got all green on us.

The only people that made any headway were the audience, who shoved your GTA "goal of the game" theory back up your ass.

After the following from JT:

"I guess you’d have to be a) a lawyer, b) able to read a court file, c) willing to read something other than a game magazine, d) obsessed with something other than gay porn like Jabrwock, and e) able to understand what an analogy is."

I take back my assertion that JT's behavior has improved over time...

There was no reason to be so negative and insulting. Clearly, no productive discussion can take place with you involved, which is a shame because not all of your ideas are bad ones.

@ John Bruce

Dearest Vinzent:

I guess you’d have to be a) a lawyer, b) able to read a court file, c) willing to read something other than a game magazine, d) obsessed with something other than gay porn like Jabrwock, and e) able to understand what an analogy is.

a) b) You don't have to bbe a lawyer to read and understand court filings. You just have to be intelligent. Vinzent was merely stating that your filing did not really give your defence any more credibility.

c)Gamers do not only read game related books and magazines. We have other interests in this world. You just chose to battle this particular one.

d) Also you seem to be the one obsessed with gay porn as you actively seek it out. Javrwock simply rubs your nose in it.

e) The analogy was a very well crafted one. The only problem was that Daniel was put in the lions' den to die. You were invited to the debate to voice your position in a point/counter point manner.

I had a fantastic and successful weekend ,obviously. So sad that that fact drives you haters absolutely out of your minds. How telling. How sad. How useful.

It seems the true troll has emerged. Instead of continuing the discussions, you try to change the subject.

You know, it occurs to me that Jack keeps repeating the same tired arguments over and over again. It'd save time if someone put up a Jack Thompson Frequently Refuted Arguments page, similar to an FAQ, only not questions.

Obvious candidates include:

* "I'm not trying to ban games, just keep M rated games out of the hands of kids."

* Comparisons of games to alcohol, tobacco, firearms and/or pornography

* "There was an APA study in 2005 that proved a causal link between violent games and real life violence!" (and other studies)

* "Games were responsible for Paducah!"

There was a similar kind of thing back on someone's LiveJournal when GP itself was back on LiveJournal, but that was debunking individual JT posts. This would be refuting an argument, so if he tries trotting it out again, we could just give him a link or C&P the response.

We could even make it a Wiki thing, so everyone could put the response together, but that takes it beyond my means and expertise.

@JT

d) obsessed with something other than gay porn like Jabrwock

Hehe. I'm not the one who said that the Ancient Greeks were the definition of high art... you do realize what Greeks considered "normal" vis a vis sexuality, right? You've actually LOOKED at Greek art, right?

I had a fantastic and successful weekend ,obviously. So sad that that fact drives you haters absolutely out of your minds.

I guess "success" nowadays (for you anyway) means not getting boo'ed off stage. How low your bar has been set. Congrats, you didn't get your butt handed to you, because your opponent was too busy bashing Bush, talking about global warming, and under the delusion that this is all about money...

You know, I really hope that Dr. Jenkins is the one to debate you at GDC. Because unlike Lorne, Dr. J knows exactly what this is all about.

@Davian

25 to Life actually bombed which I attribute to the reviews it received, which were awful to say the least. I'm sure it would have sold even less if it wasn't for all the media attention it got.

Well it does make sense that Jack would look towards the Greeks for what his definition of art is. Much of Greek art included men doing all sorts of terribly erotic things to one another, some of it to underage boys.

And Jack being the purveyor of gay porn that he is, well it all adds up.

But I was more blunt about it.

@jack thompson, attorney

You, once again, claim there is no age verification for online purchases, despite there being a requirement for a credit card to authorize the payment, which has been shown to be a valid and authorized method to check for age (whether the purchaser is an adult or not), I believe by the FTC. If you don't believe it is good enough, maybe step one would be getting the FTC to rescind the authorization for that to be a valid form of age verification. Otherwise, your entire statement is frivolous, and utterly pointless, a waste of time for anyone to read.

@ Xlorep

John Bruce feels that credit cards are not a valid form of age verification except when it comes to his gay porn filings. When the verification is needed to access something he is directly responsible for, it is sufficient. :)

@Jack Thompson

Three posts since "Why would think it’s okay for retailers to sell a rated R movie to someone under 17 with no parents in sight? (I doubt you will answer, you’ve never made a public statement about this as far as I know which shows how much you’re scared to be called out on that)."

Why are you afraid of answering that simple question? Were you too busy thinking up insults (that's what your last posts were).

@EZK

John Bruce feels that credit cards are not a valid form of age verification except when it comes to his gay porn filings. When the verification is needed to access something he is directly responsible for, it is sufficient.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that. :)

My my but jack's been busy today. What is it, 20-some responses to this thread now? And not a one of them without some deragatory statement or insult.

Pity.

I see Jack feels the need to counter all the facts he's been confronted with. Oh wait, you can't use the "c" word around him or he'll think you're threatening his life. What a sad, pathetic man....

Allow me to offer you the first, "Heil Mein Furor," salute, JT. Heil Thompson!

Sorry if my comment offended you JT,

Sadly, it's largely analytical in nature. I apologize if your actions reduce you to the role of a moral facist who wishes to rape every adult in American of their moral autonomy, freedom to consume a product, and create/practice their own values. Video games, like you perverse and contradictory religion, fall under this same freedom.

I need not even inject my personal value claims into this: you have clearly stated that your values and morals motivate your attacks on the freedom that allows adults to freely play games. You have, on countless occasions, attempted to enforce your moral norms by censoring and challenging adult content -- on flawed and absurd grounds.


You are a moral facist in every sense of the definition of the terms. So, Heil, good sir. It's a shame you do not understand or value the concept of freedom.

Sigh...Jack 2 is back at it again.

@GP

UPDATE: Contrary to what is written in Thompson’s court filing, “the man who organizes” GDC, director Jamil Moledina, was not in attendance at VGXPO. Thompson is apparently referring to noted video game composer Tommy Tallarico, who is on the main advisory board of the show. Tallarico was in attendance at VGXPO.

Shouldn't be surprised I guess. Not the first time he's stretched the truth to self-inflate his own importance. Jeb Bush called ya back yet? ;)

JT @ GDC? He'll be as welcome as a fart in a spacesuit.

I would like to think that Jacko would earn something here. Don't act like a jackass and people won't think you are a jackass. Act like a jackass and people will treat you like a jackass.
If jacko would stop acting like such a jackass then people might stop treating him like a jackass.

Curiously, though, what does "Pandralisk" mean? Is it your surname?

"My issue is: “stop the sales of mature games to kids under 17, with no parents around. You want my issue to be more than that. It’s not."

what about trying to get bully declared as a public nuisance? that was not the same as pushing for stricter store policies on game sales, that was just a textbook attempt to ban the game and make it so even people who are of age cant play it. and you say you want to stop the sale of M rated games when they are without parents? did you ever stop and consider WHY there are no parents with kids in the first place? where are they? what could be so damn important that makes them not care about what their child sees? your issue should be directed to parents who dont care to pay attention. if they are not willing to put in their share of the effort, then that is who you should be targeting.

that said, the industy isnt forcing these games down peoples throats, adult or not. you worry about kids purchasing these games? again, direct your issue at parents, because they are the primary source of the money kids who dont make their own income use to buy games. if parents stop giving money to a child who is incapable of following their rules, the kid cant buy the games. your argument would be best used when its presented to the people who are actually responsible for children, the parents. the industy isnt a fill-in for a parent.

I hear you Mike Oldfield!

[...] Vía | Destructoid y GamePolitics [...]

That's actually pretty funny.

BlackIce,
http://www.toucansolutions.com/oldfield/lyrics2.htm
Your line is from "To France", lyrics by Mike Oldfield.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software

I got lucky and was able to avoid the dreaded

"

Joke Thompson... Why won't you just give us a straight answer? You don't need to keep avoiding the main issue.

Please tell us why Manhunt 2, rated M=17+, needs to be pulled from store shelves, when there are people of age who want to have the right to play it themselves.

This has NOTHING to do with children at all. It is an adult game that you want banned so no one can play it. Please explain why we, as (both young and old) adults, apparently can't play games like these without government/your permission.

Children don't matter in this situation because it is not a kids game. It is as simple as that. The game will have to go through adult hands before it can reach a child.

The world is getting way too P.C. these days. Let games be games. Geeez.

P.S. No Insults please. I am 18 (I could buy Manhunt 2 if I so desired) and I like my screen name.

I also am Canadian. I know this doesn't have a major effect on me as a gamer, but I don't want to see our rights being infringed by anyone, anywhere.

@Skylar

That's pretty much everything I said earlier and pretty much everything a lot of people point out to Jack Thompson again and again. Everyone can agree that M rated games are not for kids but Jack Thompson's methods and conduct (not that the conduct of certain posters here is any better) certainly doesnt help to an open dialogue.

What I find sad is that if you are a poster here and seek to have an open dialogue with Jack Thompson he automatically ignores your questions or results to childish name calling.

Mr. Thompson,

It is certainly nice to hear you come in with more of a professional dialog. (I will ignore the last few of your posts, attributing to the arguements growing old after a day or so of bickering back and forth.)

However, I have a question for you. I'm not trying to be "clever" or whatnot, this is a serious question. Over the past couple of years (the time that i've been reading of your ongoing persuits) if not before you've been, let's just say less than professional and on occasion downright rude. You've made comments comparing gamers to certain undesireable groups from history and made disparaging remarks about individuals from the industry.

At this point in your career do you regret that you have, by your own actions, damaged your relationship and image with the industry and gaming community (and in some cases the political sphere) to a point that it may be an impossible task to accomplish your goals?

I understand in some cases a firmer hand is needed, however it seems that in the case of preventing video games getting into the hands of minors a softer touch would have yeilded better results. At this point any legistlation or lawsuit handled by you would surely be challenged and denegrated (if that is the correct word) by the industry and game enthusiasts themselves.

I am just curious as to your feelings on this.

Just read Update 2.

Turns out that John Bruce is a lier. He lied through his teeth to a federal court. I hope that they are informed of these updates.

*sigh* It would be ironic if there was a murder and the murderer said "Jack Thompson made me do it". That would be great, then we'd have people filing hundreds of court documents in an attempt to ban Jack Thompson from the general population. And it would work...well, according to Jackie boy's logic.