Submitted by GoodRobotUs - January 10, 2008 at 5:30 pm -050085.210.180.178
The problem here Thomas is that it does NOT apply to all types of Media, a law which did that would actually more constitutionally sound, but would never get past the lobbying stage because of the influence and lobbying experience of the TV, Video and Movie industries.
The problem, for me personally, is not so much that children should not play games intended for adults, we all agree with that concept, both sides of the argument, my problem is with the idea that this law should apply only to Video Games, it singles them out using the worst kind of stereotyping and generalisation, and establishes a precedent that people who play Video Games are somehow in the same league as smokers or drinkers, who are the only other groups which have their distribution controlled by a non-voluntary system. That, in and of itself, would be an open door to vexatious litigation by Jack Thompson wannabee's throughout the US, such a law, if passed, would effectively be a blatant claim that Video Games were an immediate health risk (not a passive one). In somewhere like the US it would be like opening the floodgates and would stand a high chance of crippling the Game Industries ability to grow for decades, much as the Comic Code did for Comics in the US.
Posted 07/24/08 at 01:45pm Dark Sovereign: A fitting metaphor lumi
Posted 07/24/08 at 11:21am lumi: their own. Looks like they're arguing with ghosts...
Posted 07/24/08 at 11:20am lumi: Ooh, and to prove the validity of their arguments, they've deleted all the comments from the gamers/outsiders, and just left
Posted 07/24/08 at 11:20am lumi: Wow...there's worse invective and vitriol on that first feminist site's comments than in most gaming forums I've read...
Posted 07/24/08 at 11:19am SimonBob: You guys can read the feminist blogs? One of 'em has over 1400 comments -- my browser locks up when I try to load the page!
Posted 07/24/08 at 10:49am M. Carusi: That's probably the message to describe hardcore feminism in general. :P
Posted 07/24/08 at 10:35am Tom90deg: Meh, it seems like most of the comments are "I'm right, and it you don't agree with me, you're a girl-hating masonogystic pig!"
Posted 07/24/08 at 10:30am M. Carusi: Those comment walls on the feminist blogs complaining about FP are generating some hilarious content.
Posted 07/24/08 at 08:48am E. Zachary Knight: @ lunatic, What you see is what you get. Once a comment gets pushed off it is gone forever.
Posted 07/24/08 at 07:39am sortableturnip: Best...comments...ever: http://jaablog.jaablaw.com/2008/07/06/jack-needs-your-help.aspx?pg=5&view=threaded
Posted 07/24/08 at 05:42am sortableturnip: Alteffor: I 2nd that motion. GP you should have a special section for all of JT's correspondence to you
Posted 07/23/08 at 10:13pm GRIZZAM PRIME: Lunatic: Nope. Ever fading if I'm not mistaken.
Posted 07/23/08 at 08:05pm LuNaTiC: is there a way to view old shouts? sorry if its a noob question.
Posted 07/23/08 at 07:07pm gamepolitics: momma didn't raise no sock puppet
Posted 07/23/08 at 06:15pm Rodrigo Ybáñez García: Jack is a repressed man. Don´t be surprised...
Posted 07/23/08 at 06:07pm GryphonOsiris: So Jack admitted paying for gay porn... all I can say is wow... just wow...
Posted 07/23/08 at 05:09pm lumi: to the case, and he's been on 60 minutes once!
Posted 07/23/08 at 05:09pm lumi: GP, you should mention you'll be filing a legal injunction against him if he doesn't comply. Phoenix Wright will be attached
Posted 07/23/08 at 03:32pm Alteffor: You should add a section to the site for anything Jack CC's to you. It's always entertaining to read the stuff he writes.
Posted 07/23/08 at 03:31pm Matriculated: Does anyone know when the Supreme Court reaches their decission?
The problem, for me personally, is not so much that children should not play games intended for adults, we all agree with that concept, both sides of the argument, my problem is with the idea that this law should apply only to Video Games, it singles them out using the worst kind of stereotyping and generalisation, and establishes a precedent that people who play Video Games are somehow in the same league as smokers or drinkers, who are the only other groups which have their distribution controlled by a non-voluntary system. That, in and of itself, would be an open door to vexatious litigation by Jack Thompson wannabee's throughout the US, such a law, if passed, would effectively be a blatant claim that Video Games were an immediate health risk (not a passive one). In somewhere like the US it would be like opening the floodgates and would stand a high chance of crippling the Game Industries ability to grow for decades, much as the Comic Code did for Comics in the US.