Submitted by Mnementh2230 - January 29, 2007 at 6:21 am -050059.100.154.95
As I am unable to figure out who to send disparaging emails to, I shall instead post the needed text here and hope the idiots in charge will read them.
----------------
Dear "idiots in charge",
Allow me to clear up a few things which you seem to have no understanding of, as evidenced by the recent conversation quoted on Game Politics. There are many different types of games, but for simplicity's sake, we'll narrow it down to two: Those games that are commercially released, and those that are free for download (usually made by one or two people, no corporate involvement). The "columbine game" which you have probably never even seen, is actually named "Super Columbine Massacare", and is one of the latter types of games - no commercial release, and therefore no ESRB rating. The game "Bully", as it is known in the USA, is a commercially released game from Take Two interactive, and is rated T for Teen by the ESRB.
"The Columbine Game" can never be regulated effectivly, as it is free, and while tasteless is not overtly objectionable enough to fall under a profanity or pornography law. Discussing this game during business hours is a waste of tax-payer dollars.
"Bully" is already industry-regulated, and is rated 'T' because of its cartoon-like violence. The theme is about standing up to bullies by being violent back to them (which in my experience WORKS, as opposed to the new-age crap recommended by most so called experts). The only other content that anyone would find objectionable is the possibility of homosexuality, which is only available if the player choses to persue the game in that manner - the issue is not forced upon the player. In that regard, a gay teen playing the game is actually more able to persue the game in a manner agreeing with his sexual preference, which broadens the game's appeal to that demographic. Beyond this, however, the farthest any relationship in the game goes is kissing, and awkward kissing at that - there's nothing in that that isn't shown in television market towards the same age group.
Please, PLEASE get your facts straight before making decisions - doing otherwise makes you look like a self-important wind bag, ego so over-inflated you can't be bothered to do five minutes of research - literally, five minutes is all it took to read this far, and that's if you read slowly. Legal decisions are your ballywhack, so I wouldn't dream of telling you which way to decide on the issue, but at least get the damn facts straight before making that decision, lest you make the wrong one.
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?
Posted 07/23/08 at 03:04pm Freyar: I demand to see this letter! (Not that I have any grounds to demand on.)
Posted 07/23/08 at 02:53pm gamepolitics: JT called me a "sock puppet" in an e-mail to Hal Halpin... i gave him 24 hours to retract it, LOL
Posted 07/23/08 at 02:46pm Haggard: Might want to take a look at what Anthony Horowitz wrote about GTA IV in the Telegraph, article seems to have been taken down
Posted 07/23/08 at 01:05pm Silencets: Beutiful. I always did wonder about Jacko Wacko
Posted 07/23/08 at 10:24am Matriculated: So Jack (an anti-gay activist) PAYED for gay porn
Posted 07/23/08 at 10:22am Matriculated: [i]...and purchased membership.[/i]
Posted 07/23/08 at 10:21am Matriculated: [i] few months later, as part of his ongoing campaign against Kent, Thompson followed links to gay porn on Kent's website[/i]
Posted 07/23/08 at 07:40am sortableturnip: Jack's at it again: http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2008/07/jack_thompson_faces_permanent.php
----------------
Dear "idiots in charge",
Allow me to clear up a few things which you seem to have no understanding of, as evidenced by the recent conversation quoted on Game Politics. There are many different types of games, but for simplicity's sake, we'll narrow it down to two: Those games that are commercially released, and those that are free for download (usually made by one or two people, no corporate involvement). The "columbine game" which you have probably never even seen, is actually named "Super Columbine Massacare", and is one of the latter types of games - no commercial release, and therefore no ESRB rating. The game "Bully", as it is known in the USA, is a commercially released game from Take Two interactive, and is rated T for Teen by the ESRB.
"The Columbine Game" can never be regulated effectivly, as it is free, and while tasteless is not overtly objectionable enough to fall under a profanity or pornography law. Discussing this game during business hours is a waste of tax-payer dollars.
"Bully" is already industry-regulated, and is rated 'T' because of its cartoon-like violence. The theme is about standing up to bullies by being violent back to them (which in my experience WORKS, as opposed to the new-age crap recommended by most so called experts). The only other content that anyone would find objectionable is the possibility of homosexuality, which is only available if the player choses to persue the game in that manner - the issue is not forced upon the player. In that regard, a gay teen playing the game is actually more able to persue the game in a manner agreeing with his sexual preference, which broadens the game's appeal to that demographic. Beyond this, however, the farthest any relationship in the game goes is kissing, and awkward kissing at that - there's nothing in that that isn't shown in television market towards the same age group.
Please, PLEASE get your facts straight before making decisions - doing otherwise makes you look like a self-important wind bag, ego so over-inflated you can't be bothered to do five minutes of research - literally, five minutes is all it took to read this far, and that's if you read slowly. Legal decisions are your ballywhack, so I wouldn't dream of telling you which way to decide on the issue, but at least get the damn facts straight before making that decision, lest you make the wrong one.
Sincerely,
Mnementh2230