Jack Thompson's GDC Debate Prospects Not Looking Good
Jack Thompson's GDC Debate Prospects Not Looking Good
November 5, 2007
Jack Thompson at the Game Developers Conference?The Earth might spin off its axis...
But, fresh off of Saturday's appearance in Philadelphia, the controversial attorney claims that he has been invited to reprise his VGXPO debate at GDC, which takes place in February in San Jose.
The news comes from a motion filed by Thompson with the U.S. District Court in Florida, where the anti-game activist is suing the Florida Bar. While the document itself is little more than a legal maneuver, the following text caught GP's eye:
This past Saturday I journeyed to the Pennsylvania Convention Center and debated Lorne Lanning, an iconic figure in the video game industry, on the very issues that spawned the Blank Rome/Take-Two SLAPP Bar complaints against me. You can read all about the debate at http://www.gamepolitics.com/.
It appears I did very well, despite heavy security insisted upon by the event, not by me. I was invited, they said, into the “lions’ den.”
In the audience [for] this event, unbeknownst to me, was the man who organizes the largest video game gathering in the world, the Game Developers Conference (GDC), attended by 20,000 folks...
Because of the quality and coherence of my presentation, I was then asked by the GDC to reprise the Philadelphia debate, this time in February in San Francisco in a 5000 seat arena, as the keynote event.
GP: We haven't verified this with anyone connected with GDC as of yet, but we're working on it. Read Thompson's court filing here.
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 GDC. Tallarico was in attendance at VGXPO, but told GP he did not discuss the debate idea with Thompson personally (see below).
UPDATE 2: GP has just received this statement from the GDC's press representative:
"The Game Developers Conference has not extended an invitation to Jack Thompson to speak at GDC 2008," Jamil Moledina, executive director, Game Developers Conference, said. "We look forward to announcing the full speaker lineup closer to the show."
UPDATE 3: GP has just spoken with Tommy Tallarico about this confusing situation. Tommy, who has attended VGXPO for several years, said that he introduced himself to Jack Thompson before Saturday's debate.
After the [Moral Kombat] movie, I walked up to Jack Thompson and introduced myself... when I started talking to him, honestly, he was quite charming, it was a nice conversation...
After the debate Tallarico had dinner with Lorne Lanning and Spencer Halpin. They discussed the possibility of having a similar debate involving Thompson at GDC. Spencer Halpin's wife, an organizer of VGXPO, broached the possibility of a debate with Thompson by phone and Thompson expressed interest. Tallarico said that he never personally spoke to Thompson about the debate idea. He told GP that he planned to put the idea before the GDC board for consideration:
I was literally writing the e-mail to the advisory board when I got the call... [saying] go to GamePolitics... [where the story had already broken]...
GP: It is, perhaps, unfortunate, but given today's controversy it looks like any potential debate involving Thompson and GDC is a dead issue.
UPDATE 4: Thompson has posted a letter to GDC director Jamil Moledina which reads:
Since this is how the video game industry treats its critics, no wonder it has a public relations problem with parents. This is an industry that lies about the ratings on its products, sells those products to underage kids behind their parents’ backs, and then wants nothing but an incestuous gathering in San Francisco to congratulate itself on how smart it is.
Federal regulation of your industry is coming because you folks simply can’t figure out why parents don’t trust you. Fine. When the regulation comes, and it will, don’t blame me.
GP: In the end, one has to wonder exactly what Thompson hoped to accomplish here. Had the deal been finalized, the GDC event could have been fascinating for attendees and beneficial to Thompson in an image sense. Very little, if anything, was to be gained by adding the prospect of a GDC appearance to the U.S. District Court record, which publicly exposed it to media scrutiny.
Comments
No one else thinks that kids should not have their parents approval before getting an M rated game. Parents should always be in the loop.
So you have no problem with parents buying their kids M rated games. Good to know.
Agreed. I used to fly off the handle at JT comments. I kinda mellowed out, especially after my temp ban.
I had a thoughtful response too.
At least you said pleas,e so I do apologize, however, many a time you have gotten more than just an "FU" email and your response was no less childish of abrasive regard less of what it said. I have seen you spout insults at people who have sent you well written arguments and personal experiences. Calling someone's parents messed up is hardly a mature response
"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."
Look, I would seriously like to believe this, but your actions have not reflected it, and if it is your real issue then banning the games completely is not the way to do it. Educating parents on what the ratings are, and possibly making the ratings a little more clear are the way to do it. And really, Take Two is not responsible for someone who isn't of age getting a hold of one of the M rated games they publish. That falls on the retailers and more directly parents.
Quick question; how did the the Alabama disciplinary trial go? Or were you able to stall that even longer?
He'll probably spin it the same too, claiming that the press rep is a drooling idiot who doesn't know his arse from his backhand, and that the REAL organizer still invited him...
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???
'Your house is on fire.'
(runs home to check his house, then returns)
'Hey, my house isn't on fire!'
'No, it isn't.'
'But you said that it was!!'
'Yes, I did. Does that make it true?'
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?
1. Remain neutral, do not use personal vendettas or faith as your basis for your actions.
2. Court filings are to be text-only. No gay porn pictures. Duh.
3. Verbal contracts mean nothing. If that were true, you'd have a lot of contracts to fill up on. Where's all those suits you said you'd file against the people posting here, and that guy you said you'd arrest for insulting you? Thanks for going back on your own word, Jack. Sure, that's the RIGHT thing to do. Not.
4. You're a lawyer, not an officer of the law. Your stings are flawed by your own claims, not to mention you're a vigilante.
Anything else i forgot?
Mr Tallarico himself came in and shot down your claims. Game over, again
More like buys 2 dozen eggs from the super market and expects them to hatch.
I was going to write a mature and sensible little note here directed at you.. unfortunately I really fail to see the point in such an endeavor.
You would fail to return the favor.
so all I'll say is:
Awareness and education will always be better than legislation or litigation, you really must re-examine your tactics and adjust accordingly.
"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.
So instead of admitting a mistake you take to burning your bridges before you ever cross them.
They could have easily continued and made a formal invitation, but not now. Not that you have stooped to threatening the GDC for something that was a little more than a misunderstanding.
Way to go on the PR front. Remind me to never hire you for my press agent.
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
if you are jack thomson, then take some advice and hire a bodyguard, cause you think that videogames can contribute to causing youngsters to commit horrific crimes yes? well i dont think you are right, but if you are, and you get some psychopath's favorite violent video game pulled, then he is probably going to be quite annoyed....at you. sure you would supposadly save people in the future's lives from violent deaths, but at the cost of your own?
are you a martyre jack? are you really?
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.
Seriously, I hope too that someone worthy is out on stage with him.
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.
Jack Thompson
GP: Of course I was there. You read my article, you cited it to the court.
ROFLMAO. Jack Thompson
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.
John B. Thompson, Attorney at Law
1172 S. Dixie Hwy., Suite 111
Coral Gables, Florida 33146
November 5, 2007
The Honorable Rachel K. Paulose
U.S. Attorney, District of Minnesota
600 U.S. Courthouse
300 S. Fourth St.
Minneapolis, MN Via email to david.anderson4@usdoj.gov
Re: Alleged Fraud and Alleged Distribution of Sexual Material Harmful to Minors
Dear US Attorney Paulose:
Two retail giants headquartered in your jurisdiction are, in my legal opinion, knowingly and actively involved in distributing sexual material harmful to minors, in violation of federal law, and doing so fraudulently and deceptively, also in violation of federal law.
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, and yet these two Minneapolis companies are selling it on-line to anyone of any age with no age verification. Both companies claim they are not selling such games to anyone under 17, but they are, and if so, this is a fraudulent and deceptive trade practice.
Further, this is a game that contains so much sex and violence that it is banned for sale even to adults in the UK and other EU countries, yet it is being sold by Target and Best Buy to minors. This they are doing openly with no refutation of that even possible.
Additionally, Manhunt 2, is marked on each unit of the game on its ESRB (Entertainment Software Rating Board) descriptor as containing “Strong Sexual Content,” yet these untis are being sold, willy-nilly to individuals under 18 by Best Buy and Target. This may constitute criminal distribution of “sexual material harmful to minors” in violation of state and federal laws. One leading parents’ organization has called the game “pornographic violence.”
Please proceed swiftly on this. I will provide you whatever evidence you need in these regards, as will others.
The above-noted activity by these two Minnesota companies is occurring this very day, November 5, 2007, despite calls from national organizations that it stop.
Sincerely, Jack Thompson
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? ;)
...
*cough*
O......Kaaaay. I think you should lay of the chatrooms and online games for a while, Jack. Just a suggestion.
It's not a debate when all you do is attack your opponent's personally. Grow up and become professional.
Jack, why are you scared?
I would like confirmation of the GDC debate. I really want to go this year, if I have the spare cash.
@ John Bruce
Didn't you already post that letter? I thought you tried that last week.
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."
Anyways, I'm really looking forward to this, especially if jt acts like his normal self.
First off, you don't even provide any evidence in that letter. You just say "Both companies claim they are not selling such games to anyone under 17, but they are, and if so, this is a fraudulent and deceptive trade practice."
You don't even have any proof. Furthermore, you are citing other countries' decisions on what to do with the game? Man, I hope our country's laws are dictated by other countries'. That would be swell.
Also, "yet these untis are being sold, willy-nilly to individuals under 18 by Best Buy and Target." - Makes no sense. It's a game for 17-year-olds and older. So, yeah, they are being sold to under 18-year-olds. Looks like they're following the practices here.
Many R-rated movies contain strong sexual content. Yet there's no law against letting a 10-year-old view it. Just a ratings board, which doesn't constitute any legal enforcement. And since our country's laws aren't founded by one out of many parental organizations, their opinion doesn't matter.
So yet again, you fail to make any logical conclusions within your letter. Go try again, which I know you will.
Govern yourself accordingly.
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.
Remember when he said he wasn't going to post here again?
He is still maintaining that the Bar's complaint is regarding his mental health, so now the fact that he was able to hold off the insults and ad hominem attacks for a while and appear reasonable, means that he is a normal person.
It's a pity that the Bar complaints are all regarding his professional behaviour. The complaints include insulting Judges who rule against you, disobeying direct orders to the court, threatening and intimidating opposing attorneys, alleging case fixing by a Judge you were appearing before and other similar charges.
You don't have to be crazy to do those things....but it probably helps...
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.)
Personally, I'm not feeling much like shaking the hand of someone who is currently threatening to sue me for no particular reason...
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.
GP: don't spam articles, you've been advised before. The Wired piece you cited here is already linked from my coverage.
Afterall, we really must pay proper respect to the leader of the moral facism, anti-gaming, wing of the conservative party.
Well, I'm sticking to my guns. I still think it's preferable that at least rational discussion is being had, as opposed to 2-min sensationalist scare-the-children soundbytes. Though I must confess, I find myself wondering why the focus seems to have shifted from MH2 is violent to MH2 is sexual? (shrug)
There's only two logical possibilities as to the story. 1) He was invited to GDC, 2) He wasn't. I have no trouble believing that he was, but I have a hard time understanding the real motive, he couldn't possibly be hoping they'll somehow see "the error of their ways". One can't help but wonder what it is he's really hoping to accomplish. That said, I don't see any harm in it. In fact, it's probably preferable to his usual TV appearances.
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.
Pandralisk Says:
November 5th, 2007 at 10:19 am
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.
GP: that's his opinion... I don't see the comments policy precluding it.
GP: Lorne got this wrong. As far as I can tell, Jack has no "business" plan.
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.
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
Anyways, I can't wait to see what happens during the debate. I hope someone will get a chance to record it so we can all watch it later.
Side note: I think the GP server needs to have the time rolled back 1 hour, since according to the post times, it looks like its running 1 hour ahead.
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.
-GP
Jack, I certainly hope you are given the opportunity to never practice law ever again. You are both a failure as a lawyer and a decent human being by pulling this sh*t.
Get a life.
Trying to shift gamers' hatred from you to T2?
Now Mr. Thompson, sorry if I seem to point you out from the others, after all you're the one with the opinions I disagree. I can finally agree with you now that you have debated someone with more knowledge of videogames issue than "who of the ACLU?" and some "TV bad boy on Fox?". Althought I find it true that Lorne Lanning gave you some free passes, you at least show that you are willing to debate in front of people who might pose a real challenge to your views.
There are some things I would like to point out though. I wouldnt say you walked out of the VGXPO "praised" your "enemies". More like "hey, this guy is not as crazy as his wikiquote page makes him out to be". As for your "quality" of character here is something everyone can agree on: "Mature videogames should not be played by kids". Although everyone can agree with your "goals" it is because of your methods that we disagree with you (how many times has this been said?) and your methods (which amounts basically to banning some games) also disagree with your "goals" (which are "fine, let the adults play them, not kid" why then ban them?).
I hope you've learned some valuable insight in the debate. Like when everyone that played GTA told you by a show of hand that not one of them thought that killing policemen or prostitutes was the goal of the game. Or like when N'Gai Croal reminded you that a lot of public figures speak publicly about their faith (doesnt George Bush mentions God in every appearance?) without being chastised for it (it's the way you go about it).
I'd like to speak more, but got to go earn a living. I'd like to remind you, that there was a email with some important questions that you refused to answer.
And remember folks, respect goes a long way when both sides show it.
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.
Yes, I'm aware of what an over/under is, just as I'm sure you are aware of what one is, but thanks for the education nonetheless.
I used it as an allusion (a passing or casual reference; an incidental mention of something, either directly or by implication) to your backing out of a certain previous debate invitation.
My allusion is akin to you 'conveniently' not showing up. However, I hope you do show up, for the more you show up and speak, the more you marginalize yourself.
Hooah!
John Shrader: Acts his age, and you don't.
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?
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
I can answer this for you, he thinks Mature rated videogames should not be played by kids. To make sure of that he thinks that "games should be federally held accountable according to their ratings" and for some other games (like Bully and Manhunt 2) he seeks to have them banned.
this is the first time I'm saying it, but I don't believe that's really thompson.
I'm having issues with this. It makes me suspicious, yet confused and also in a strange way proud....
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.
That was my initial thought, that maybe it wasn't really Jack, but all the posts sound similar in style to what we've seen verified by Jack before, and GP is probably checking the IPs on each one I would assume. He usually seems to be fairly careful about that. I know its not infallible, but I doubt that GP wouldn't check them after THAT many posts.
"...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.
If you are so willing to debate people, why are you not able to respond to an email requesting a serious open dialog? It has been nearly a week and not a single response from you.
It would seem that with all the time you spend posting on Game Politics, you could find the time to respond to an email or two.
Also, Why should we punish Take Two or Rockstar? They have done nothing wrong. They have caused controversy and made a couple of mistakes on the business side, but they have not broken any laws or contracts. Hot Coffee happened before the full disclosure clause was added and Manhunt 2 was found to have not broken any part of the ratings agreement. So again, Why should we punish them?
Lay off the caps lock please. My eyes are bleeding.
What does attending a debate in pennsylvania have to do with a court case in Florida? I mean in a substansive manner, not in a "look, I'm important" ego-stroking manner.
Wow, featuring a sex club is now the same as distributing porn? I guess CSI has some s'plaining to do... ;)
EZK's question wasn't silly. You just don't have a competent answer.
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.
It is silly to think that parents have a greater understanding of what entertainment is best suited for their child? It is silly to think that parents know their child better than the government or some third party? It is silly to think that a parent has the power to take away a game that they told their child they could not have?
If you really think that parents are so powerless to control the media intake of their child, I really feel sorry for your son as I know he is not being raised by a sensable human being.
@ 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).
You've authored bills which have proven to be un-Constitutional and have cost the states that made the mistake of passing them hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, particularly Louisiana (which is essentially stealing the money from people who still need relief from Hurricane Katrina damages).
When do you intend to reimburse the money from what is essentially your mistake?
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.
About GDC, I am hoping to go. Right now I am not sure where the finances will come from though and it being in February does not help that in any way. If I do get the chance to go, I will gladly have an IBC.
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”.
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…
It's hard sometimes. I think parents should have a choice. He seems to think parents (and himself) are being assaulted by the greatest conspiracy since the Illuminati and the Masons. I think kids can differentiate between fantasy and reality. He thinks kids are drooling idiots. I think supporting evidence should actually be supporting. He only cherry picks soundbytes, or stretches the truth (see quotes relating to Secret Service findings on Columbine, or refusing to acknowledge the APA study's co-chair clarifying the statements about there being no claim of causation, or being snotty at the Swedes just because their medical community doesn't agree with him)
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.
Putting on your best game face and appearing charming for a couple of hours does not disprove that you acted like a disgraceful asshat at other times.
You're not an 800-pound gorilla. You're a 2-pound feces-throwing gibbon monkey.
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?
Sexual content tends to run the gamut from scantily clad women to suggestive or sexually charged dialog to the occasional nude figure.
However, nudity does not instantly equate to pornography, in fact to my knowledge an actual sex scene does not instantly make a piece pornographic.
When I was a lad of 17 I went and purchased many a ticket for R rated movies, not to mention many a DvD movie, some of which featured nudity and actual sex. These movies were rated R, and most of them were far more violent than manhunt, and most of them featured far more suggestive content than manhunt. None of the movies were considered pornographic, and all were sold off the unlocked shelf.
However since our definition of pornography is different, you considered two boys kissing "gay pornography", I assume you will be going after certain retailers (Fry's Electronics and Target) for selling pornographic movies to a minor(Me).
As for the topic at hand, Mr Thompson Lorne Lanning way an industry Icon. Keyword was, and even then he was only a well known figure in certain parts. There are far better people to debate on the industries behalf.
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...
"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.
The reason I asked is that you seem to be willing to voice your opinion in any medium that allows you to be a public figure. Thus you will gladly accept any invitation to be on TV, be interviewed for a newspaper or website, debate at a conference etc. But when you are asked to respond to a private email and give a valid answer to a serious question, you refuse to answer. Why is this? Because it will not give you that public attention to which you are addicted.
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."
Um, Thompson[sorry for omitting Mr,you just keep managing to push my respect for you past the negative zone] why is it instead of competently answering anyone you go right for the personal attacks without ATTEMPTING to answer in a respectful manner?
And I saw Zach's question, it was far from silly. If you think parents are so powerless over their children IN THEIR OWN HOMES that they can't return a game disc their children somehow got a hold of
AS to weather or not you're waiting for another massacre to chase, you blamed V tech on video games before there was a body count or even before we knew the name of the attacker. Wow, since no games were installed on his computer, I guess Solitaire game him all the training he needed, ignore the hours hes pent on a gun range
In any case, if you debate Dr Jenkins, I would love to see it so long as you don't go shouting people down like I have seen you do on G4, where you even tried to shout down the moderator, or on that other channel where the other side hardly spoke, at all.
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.
Thanks. I did give up