New Anti-Gaming movie from religious extremists

[Krang's Uncle]

Originally Posted by Mecha Cow

Have you read a single post in this thread? Who here is 'whining' about people 'wanting to take away their video games'? Quotes please. I also don't see how Peanut is a hypocrite for being 'upset'. Funny how you call others ignorant. How about you stop hiding behind the fact 'naughty' words were used and actually bring up some arguments? Oh wait, you can't, because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

Please don't post again. Ever.

Apparently you dont understand whats being written. Ive already brought up an example this being blown out of proportion. Peanut is a hypocrite because he rails against how some people think of the gaming industry, yet he has no problem sounding like an idiot, much like they do, when hes on his rants. Thats been what ive been against from my first post on. I havent said anything about games needing to be toned down, i just want an attitude that is more constructive to not painting you and fellow gamers as losers on par with Thompson. And i posted again. What are you going to do about it?

Iris, if you work for a rights organization should know that someones rights wont just get stolen in the night and that people arent powerless. What do you do to counter slander? You get the persons stance, and you break it down with facts. You wont win over people undecided on an issue by saying they need to shut the **** up because you dont agree with them.

Peanut, your right. You, and I, are simple people on a message board. That doesnt mean your words cant influence someone. Whos to say there isnt someone one here that could set up a facts site regarding games? All it takes is some motivation and the right attitude. You already have an ally in the gaming industry. He can be countered, but you wont get an opportunity to do that raving like a lunatic against him. Really, what does that do? It only further entrenches people in their own ground, and makes any sort of compromise slip away. Just look how Mecha Cow, Iris, you, and I have hijacked this thread. This is no longer about the issue, but about how we dislike the other. Its up to you guys if you want to keep this nonsense up.

[Peanut]

But I'm not raving like a lunatic. That's the part you don't seem to understand.

And now you're saying you dislike all of us, for our opinions on this matter? Someone needs to grow the hell up.

[Anarky]

Ladies, Gentlemen, calm down. All of you.

Uncle, you did not really get my meaning. I generally agree with the gamers that Jack is overreacting and fighting something that isn't worth fighting. Just because I play Unreal Tournament on a more or less regular basis, I don't feel the sudden urge to grab me a Shock Rifle and blow people up using a cleverly executed Shock Combo. But I do feel a little shaky for about five minutes afterwards and prefer to do little to nothing in the half hour following my playing. But that's because I'm tired and not ready to kill. I'm ready to kill when I'm shopping on Saturday afternoons and when my bus is filled with old people that make us late for more than 15 minutes on a way that usually takes five.

But what I'm saying is that the gamers who argue that gaming doesn't make you run amok as soon as someone calls you stupid or there's someone saying the words "Headshot" in a crowded area shouldn't get all heated and call people names, especially not the ones who are in desperate need of ground to stand on (the anti-gaming-faction for example). They can take every single word of what you say and prove, without a doubt, that you're ticking timebombs. So, the calmer you stay, the less of a case the AG-Faction has. Child's Play and stuff are nice things, but they're, as you noticed, overlooked. So what you need to do is just stay calm, brush off everything they throw at you and be smarter than them. Because one day, you could go "If we're the ticking timebombs, why's Jack always the one yelling?" and then you could follow up with proof. Lots of it. But right now they could practically prove you're all spree killers waiting for a gun by just browsing through this section.

And I doubt videos like the one with the kid levelling up in WOW are of any help. Because that is just one idiot.

Originally Posted by Peanut

But I'm not raving like a lunatic. That's the part you don't seem to understand.

But you sound like one. And because we can't see you and Jack can't see you calmly sitting in front of the screen, drinking a glass of apple juice, we have to assume that you're foaming and smearing the word "kill" in your own feces on the wall of your room that has been made into a weapons chamber.

[gobo]

Originally Posted by Anarky

And because we can't see you and Jack can't see you calmly sitting in front of the screen, drinking a glass of apple juice, we have to assume that you're foaming and smearing the word "kill" in your own feces on the wall of your room that has been made into a weapons chamber.

*blowing soda out the nose* THAT'S AWESOME!!

[Peanut]

Because I cursed twice? My dad is from the East Coast of Canada. He curses every other word, but not because he's angry or a "lunatic". That sh*t tends to rub off. Where the f*ck are you people from where one or two curse words equals "raving lunatic, totting a gun, smearing the blood of children on the walls"?

[gobo]

No one said anything about the blood of children, so that doesn't cast any doubt on the possibility of you being a lunatic. Now, I shall quit watching this thread.

[Anarky]

It's not just the curses, don't be silly. It's the whole tone I imagine you using when saying out loud what you've typed. Also, swearing distracts immensely from the content of your writing. As soon as you start using curses, your writing's gone off the deep end and become a rant. And even if you don't cuss, you still can suggest a tone of voice. Just look at your writing again, from a point of view where you're assuming you didn't write it and find out how it seems to others. Because right now, while you might not be one (there, I said it again), you sound like a guy who's really two seconds short of eating your neighbour's newborn child while running around naked in your yard firing shots of an M16 into the air.

[Peanut]

I understand how I come off when I type. That's why I've told everyone, especially you, numerous times to not take my posts offensively. I can understand this Krang's Uncle yokel thinking I'm a maniac, but not you, Anarky! Say it ain't so.

[Anarky]

I know, it hurts my heart too. And while I'm at it, I have an affair with your wife and dog. And Fernando's now with Esmeralda although she claimed she loved you last week.

No, seriously. If people don't know you. And I know you're probably sitting there, drinking some soda while petting your cat, others might not agree. And the one's lobbying against you gamers will certainly take every piece of "evidence" they can get, since they don't really have ground to stand on (as you all know).

[iris]

Originally Posted by Krang's Uncle

Apparently you dont understand whats being written. Ive already brought up an example this being blown out of proportion. Peanut is a hypocrite because he rails against how some people think of the gaming industry, yet he has no problem sounding like an idiot, much like they do, when hes on his rants. Thats been what ive been against from my first post on. I havent said anything about games needing to be toned down, i just want an attitude that is more constructive to not painting you and fellow gamers as losers on par with Thompson. And i posted again. What are you going to do about it?

Iris, if you work for a rights organization should know that someones rights wont just get stolen in the night and that people arent powerless. What do you do to counter slander? You get the persons stance, and you break it down with facts. You wont win over people undecided on an issue by saying they need to shut the **** up because you dont agree with them.

Peanut, your right. You, and I, are simple people on a message board. That doesnt mean your words cant influence someone. Whos to say there isnt someone one here that could set up a facts site regarding games? All it takes is some motivation and the right attitude. You already have an ally in the gaming industry. He can be countered, but you wont get an opportunity to do that raving like a lunatic against him. Really, what does that do? It only further entrenches people in their own ground, and makes any sort of compromise slip away. Just look how Mecha Cow, Iris, you, and I have hijacked this thread. This is no longer about the issue, but about how we dislike the other. Its up to you guys if you want to keep this nonsense up.

Eh... I don't know about you, but I've been trying to stay on topic up until now.

But what are you saying? You admonish people for being antagonistic because it just makes the other side more stubborn, yet your approach is to be antagonistic yourself. You claim you want to promote a constructive attitude, and yet you make rude, judgemental statements about its participants. Please tell me how that makes sense. Was it some ingeniously orchestrated plan to demonstrate your point?

Expressing anger toward someone may lose you points with them, but it is not hypocrisy, no matter how much you want to throw that word around. Word to the wise: if you want to be taken seriously, anger beats hypocrisy hands down.

FWIW, Peanut, I don't really know you but I didn't think you sounded like a 'raving lunatic.' I'm pretty thick-skinned, though, so, grain of salt and all that.

[Krang]

Originally Posted by Krang's Uncle

Apparently you dont understand whats being written. Ive already brought up an example this being blown out of proportion. Peanut is a hypocrite because he rails against how some people think of the gaming industry, yet he has no problem sounding like an idiot, much like they do, when hes on his rants. Thats been what ive been against from my first post on. I havent said anything about games needing to be toned down, i just want an attitude that is more constructive to not painting you and fellow gamers as losers on par with Thompson. And i posted again. What are you going to do about it?

Despite all of your accusations, it seems that the one who is the most angry and vicious here is you. How can you expect people to have a "constructive" attitude when you have such a condescending one yourself? Any point you were trying to prove was lost long ago when you started acting like a forum troll. If you can't post in this thread without provoking people, please don't post in it at all.

[Mecha Cow]

Peanut is a hypocrite because he rails against how some people think of the gaming industry

BZZZT.

This is where your argument falls apart. Like I've said -and like you've ignored- before, people dislike Thompson because he's making ungrounded insults and uninformed assumptions and for generally acting like a Nazi - Not for being angry in general. As such, there is no hypocrisy in being angry at him. Do you even know the meaning of the word?

If you did, you would realise the only hypocrite here is you, as Krang just pointed out. You bitch and moan about people sounding like 'idiots' and 'lunatics', but sweetheart, you're the only one who has a problem here. You're the only one attacking other members.

You are a troll, and you clearly have nothing of any value to contribute to this discussion. Just go away.

[Krang's Uncle]

Originally Posted by Krang

Despite all of your accusations, it seems that the one who is the most angry and vicious here is you. How can you expect people to have a "constructive" attitude when you have such a condescending one yourself? Any point you were trying to prove was lost long ago when you started acting like a forum troll. If you can't post in this thread without provoking people, please don't post in it at all.

Angry? The only thing im "angry" about is how people on this board act just like the lunatic they so despise. How do you guys think Jack Thompson gets his ammunition to attack games/gamers? By blowing their behavior and why he thinks it happens (by playing games) out of proportion. By cursing and screaming at him that he doesnt know anything, that only reinforces his opinion. Im not trying to provoke people, i would much rather they try to set something up to counter his claims. And i see no one touched upon that part of my last post. I guess its just easier to try and bash someone rather than to work towards making something that will help your cause. Its too bad that a differing opinion is equated to being a troll.

[愛]

You came in here singling people out, calling them hypocrites, when you have been contradicting yourself left and right. You're a troll and a hypocrite yourself. You can call people lunatics and idiots all you want. It doesn't make you sound any more intelligent.

I didn't want to post in this thread, because I knew it would come to this, and to be honest, I don't really see any point in continuing this thread. It will be locked soon unless it gets back on topic.

[Ecto Jedi]

Originally Posted by Peanut

They don't seem to understand that we don't care that these people hate or detest games. We care that they are actively trying to ruin and or put enforcements on them, while at the same time spreading the stereo-type that we're all gun-totting time bombs. It's like that one PA comic, where Tycho screams "I play violent games" to get to the front of a long line. Jack Thompson can go on ranting and raving about how bad games are forever for all I care, but when he's trying to step in and get involved in things he just doesn't understand, i.e. the whole Bully incident, that's where I, as a gamer, take offense.

Exactly. Just like the MPAA witch hunts of the '80s, these current tirades against violence in video games are enfuriating because they come from people who, for the most part, were never to be the intended audience for such entertainment. Who the **** gives them the right to assume that they should take it upon themselves to police and govern us? It's all a matter of opinion, but dammit, when people take their bullsh*t views and use their authority to impose their beliefs on others (especially when they happen to find themselves in the wings of government), that's when I have a problem with it.

[iris]

Originally Posted by Krang's Uncle

How do you guys think Jack Thompson gets his ammunition to attack games/gamers? By blowing their behavior and why he thinks it happens (by playing games) out of proportion. By cursing and screaming at him that he doesnt know anything, that only reinforces his opinion. Im not trying to provoke people, i would much rather they try to set something up to counter his claims.

Thompson doesn't need to get ammo to attack gamers. He just points the violence in the games, and then points the violence in society and links them together.

It's just like when a cross-sectional study comes out saying that people who eat lots of hot dogs also have a higher incidence of cancer, and then the news editor comes up with the headline: "Hotdogs Cause Cancer." Sounds rational, right? Even though the study didn't say that at all. It's a logical fallacy (applying a causal relationship to a correlative relationship). But people believe it because you don't need proof to convince people of something! You just have to state it in such a way that it looks like you're right.

People play violent video games in America.
People use violent actions in America.
:: Violent video games cause violent actions.

What I would like to see is evidence that Thompson looks at general gamer behavior. As far as I can see, there's no indication that he would give a widget about that, because mainly uses speficific cases. I've just been looking at his record; he has made a career at setting up straw men for the public to burn.

[Ra]

Originally Posted by iris

What I would like to see is evidence that Thompson looks at general gamer behavior. As far as I can see, there's no indication that he would give a widget about that, because mainly uses speficific cases. I've just been looking at his record; he has made a career at setting up straw men for the public to burn.

Same here, Iris. Thompson doesn't really seem to look at the general video gaming audience, save for the ones that have all of the qualities he needs for a good example for a "violent gamer". I have no idea if that is the truth or not, but that is just my opinion

It makes me wonder what he has against video games. Maybe he couldn't get one as a kid, so then he thought "If I can't get one, NOBODY gets one!" or something? *shrugs* Again, just my opinion...

[Krang]

Originally Posted by Krang's Uncle

Angry? The only thing im "angry" about is how people on this board act just like the lunatic they so despise.

Regardless of your reasoning, you're still admitting to acting angry toward other members, which was my point exactly.

Im not trying to provoke people, i would much rather they try to set something up to counter his claims.

From your very first one to the one I'm replying to, every single post of yours in this thread has been condescending and rude to the members who post here. If you think you're not provoking people, you're going to need to try a little harder.

Its too bad that a differing opinion is equated to being a troll.

Anarky provided a differing opinion in this thread without trolling. Go look at his posts as proof that it's possible. See the difference, or are you too blinded by anger to notice?

[Anarky]

Originally Posted by Ra

Same here, Iris. Thompson doesn't really seem to look at the general video gaming audience, save for the ones that have all of the qualities he needs for a good example for a "violent gamer".

He does look at the videogamers. See the Penny Arcade and the VGCats incidents. Or if he doesn't look at it himself, he has someone looking at it for him. Otherwise there was little way he could have heard of those things. And yes, he needs gamers to be violent in order to have a case. Of course we know that they aren't a particularly violent bunch, so he can use every little bit of gamer violence he gets. Which basically means, every opinionated post every gamer yelling online, every little attack on him or his side is just further "proof" of his "just fight".

That's why you shouldn't get arguments on a personal or emotional level, especially when you're the ones defending.

[iris]

Originally Posted by Anarky

He does look at the videogamers. See the Penny Arcade and the VGCats incidents. Or if he doesn't look at it himself, he has someone looking at it for him. Otherwise there was little way he could have heard of those things. And yes, he needs gamers to be violent in order to have a case. Of course we know that they aren't a particularly violent bunch, so he can use every little bit of gamer violence he gets. Which basically means, every opinionated post every gamer yelling online, every little attack on him or his side is just further "proof" of his "just fight".

That's why you shouldn't get arguments on a personal or emotional level, especially when you're the ones defending.

I totally disagree with you on this one, Anarky. I think people should speak their minds, and I don't think it was too excessive in this thread. Thompson does it backward-- he looks at violent cases for any evidence that the perpetrator liked rap music, movies or shows that contain violence, or video games that contain violence. Being that many, many young people play "violent" video games, it's an easy thing.