Rockstar Strikes Back

I bet... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 08:26 · Score: 1, Funny

he'll be flailing his arms for sure after seeing all the SPAM he's gonna get now.

Hehe.... by ben0207 · 2005-09-16 08:31 · Score: 5, Funny

CITIZENS
UNITED
NEGATING
TECHNOLOGY
FOR
LIFE
AND
PEOPLE'S
SAFETY

Cuntflaps, for the very slow. R* show us again where their true talent lies!

--
cmd-q.co.uk - some sort of stupid fucking internet bullshit

Re:Hehe.... by cobras2 · 2005-09-16 15:40 · Score: 1

It's kind of sad, really.. it would be more fun if the opposition was even a little bit competent.

I mean, I actually agree with them on some points - GTA has a few things in it that I'd rather it didn't. But, guess what? I also know that they are being extremely satirical in that game. And of course, the box already had an M on it anyway.. so who realy cares if it jumps from 17+ to 18+?

So anyway, like I said, it would be more fun if the opponents actualy made any sense when they talked :)

--
Early bird may get the worm.. but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Re:Hehe.... by PakProtector · 2005-09-16 23:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

The problem is best summed up by C. S. Lewis:

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

To sum it up: People who want to forbid you from doing something for your own good who do it because their own concience tells them to do so will never stop doing it, and will keep stopping you from doing things, not because that thing hurts them, but because it hurts you or someone else.
I tend to live by the idea that no one has any right to tell anyone not to do anything else as long as it's not hurting someone -- and something hurting someone is defined by the person who is supposed to be being hurt.
In other words, I cannot beat the crap out of people in broad daylight on city streets -- unless that person happens to not mind my doing it.
However, if that person doesn't mind it, no one, whether it be a fellow no-one like me, or someone like the Pope or the Dalai Lama, has any right to stop me from doing it , or to stop the person who is enjoying having the crap beaten out of them from enjoying it.
People always want rules, they always want laws -- always for other people. When is the last time you ever say some elected official trying to get something banned, "Because I need it to be banned to make me stop?" Never. First of all, if you know it's wrong, why do you need a law to make you stop doing it? And second of all, if you know it's wrong in the first place, why are you doing it? You must not think it's really that wrong, or you have no self-control. And if you have no self control, why are you in office?
I don't think we're going to get anywhere in this world until we find some way to rid humanity of the busy-body trait that makes others try to stop letting their fellow humans go to hell in their own way. Of course, the problem is, people like me, who feel in this way, are generally too pacifist to take any drastic action to stop it.
However, even though I am a pacifist, I am still rational, and I never let my pacifism get in the way of what I feel needs must be done.
To these people who want to take away our rights to listen to and read and watch what we will, I say this: If it offends you, don't watch it. Turn off the TV, or the Radio, or skip that story in the Magazine. But don't you dare stop me from being able to turn of the TV to that Program, or the Radio to that Song, or to that Page in the Magazine or Newspaper. Restricting the Rights of the People 'a little bit' falls into the same classic silliness as 'a little bit pregnant.' You are either pregnant or not. You are either taking my Rights away or not. There is a reason they are called Rights, and not Privellages.
I would, to paraphrase the words of Thomas Jefferson, suffer from having too much Freedom than too Little. To badly quote Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary security deserve neither." Has no one ever noticed that the Product of Freedom and Security is a constant? To have freedom, you must give up your security!
The freedom to drive an automobile is the freedom to be involved in a 37 car pile-up on the interstate. The freedom to have hardware stores is the freedom to possibly be killed with a hammer by an assailant, or to nail your hand to a board with a nailgun.
Are so many of my countrymen in these, the failing days of our once great Republic, become so stupid? Are the words of our Founding Fathers no longer required learning, even for those who would run this, the country they designed?
Very soon in this country, one of two things will happen. Either we will become the Evangelical Christian States of A

--
Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
man: no entry for woman in the manual.
"Qua!?"
Re:Hehe.... by Haeleth · 2005-09-17 01:01 · Score: 1

However, if that person doesn't mind it, no one, whether it be a fellow no-one like me, or someone like the Pope or the Dalai Lama, has any right to stop me from doing it , or to stop the person who is enjoying having the crap beaten out of them from enjoying it.

That's a fine sentiment. But how do you determine whether that person doesn't mind it? You can't necessarily believe them if they say so. They might be afraid that you'll do something worse to them if they say they don't like it.

This is not a hypothetical question. It's an issue that comes up a lot in rape cases, for example. So what's your solution? How would you solve this problem in your mature and permissive utopia?
Re:Hehe.... by PakProtector · 2005-09-17 01:50 · Score: 1

However, if that person doesn't mind it, no one, whether it be a fellow no-one like me, or someone like the Pope or the Dalai Lama, has any right to stop me from doing it , or to stop the person who is enjoying having the crap beaten out of them from enjoying it.

That's a fine sentiment. But how do you determine whether that person doesn't mind it? You can't necessarily believe them if they say so. They might be afraid that you'll do something worse to them if they say they don't like it.

This is not a hypothetical question. It's an issue that comes up a lot in rape cases, for example. So what's your solution? How would you solve this problem in your mature and permissive utopia?

My solution? If they're saying they're enjoying it, and I have no reason to suspect they're lying, then I must assume that they are enjoying it.

I can only operate on what data I am given. If someone is not enjoying or does not like something, I have no way of knowing that if their body language and speech indicate otherwise. If they don't like something, they shouldn't lie about wanting me to stop. That's not rational.

--
Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
man: no entry for woman in the manual.
"Qua!?"
Re:Hehe.... by cobras2 · 2005-09-17 02:12 · Score: 1

>That's not rational.

Ah, if only everybody was always rational.
Unfortunately, I don't think that's going to happen any time soon.

--
Early bird may get the worm.. but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Re:Hehe.... by PakProtector · 2005-09-17 05:23 · Score: 1

That's not rational.
Ah, if only everybody was always rational. Unfortunately, I don't think that's going to happen any time soon.

I don't think it is, either. But I'm a rational anarchist. I have a perfect ideal towards which I strive, knowing that I am an imperfect being and thus my attempts will never be anything more than imperfect, yet I keep on trying.

Anyway, I could stand America staying as irrational as it is if everyone wasn't so damn stupid.

--
Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
man: no entry for woman in the manual.
"Qua!?"
Re:Hehe.... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-17 12:54 · Score: 0

*Sigh*

You know, there was a time when I could defend Rockstar...but every time they get into the spotlight they show their fourteen year old kid side. I'm a girl gamer and I hate Jack Thompson - the man is obviously a moralistic idiot. But this bullshit is almost as bad. Come on Rockstar...give me something mature to defend.
Re:Hehe.... by CFTM · 2005-09-19 02:26 · Score: 2, Insightful

Although I agree with the general sentiment of your statement, I think you're coping out by saying that you're a pacifist. If this is important to you, do something about it. You needn't be violent to be a part of the solution and that implication is short-sighted on your part; had you said I'm lazy that would be fine.

That being said, the Evangelical Christians are a real threat to this country; I would argue it is every bit as dangerous as Islamic Fundamentalists although some may call that statement flamebait. The fuckers are setting up schools to teach young politicians how to use the bible to make lawmaker-type decisions. If that isn't the most absurd, dangerous and stupidest thing I've ever heard than I'll run around naked for a week. And yes, I think I'm employing the user of hyperbole here ;)
Re:Hehe.... by zxnos · 2005-09-19 07:17 · Score: 1

The fuckers are setting up schools to teach young politicians how to use the bible to make lawmaker-type decisions. If that isn't the most absurd, dangerous and stupidest thing
whether you want to admit it or not, everyone has some sort of ethical strategy for making choices in their lives. why is the evangelical's strategy less valid than yours? why are their ideas so dangerous? your ideas are not? just because you disagree with them doesnt make their ideas dangerous. 'tolerance' in the u.s. appears to last only so long as everyone agree with those who decide what is 'right'.

--
always mosh clockwise
Re:Hehe.... by Zarquon42 · 2005-09-19 08:46 · Score: 1

That being said, the Evangelical Christians are a real threat to this country; I would argue it is every bit as dangerous as Islamic Fundamentalists although some may call that statement flamebait. The fuckers are setting up schools to teach young politicians how to use the bible to make lawmaker-type decisions. If that isn't the most absurd, dangerous and stupidest thing I've ever heard than I'll run around naked for a week. And yes, I think I'm employing the user of hyperbole here ;)

I have two comments to make here. First, the comment about the schools. As I have seen on at least one other reply, why is it any worse that it is a Christian basis for ethics? And to expand, do you have a problem with a school that teaches young politicians ethics? I expect politicians to make choices based largely on their ethical ideas. And I happen to believe that Christian ideas are pretty good. So are a number of religions. At least one atheist I know follows a ethical schema very similar to Christianity. I am not trying to provoke you, I just want to know what the difference is between a school teaching secular ethics to one teaching Christian ethics? What is the great danger that you see? I see an opportunity for people to take the ethical/religious beliefs and actually incorporate them into their actions, and hopefully avoiding the hypocrisy of believing one way and acting another.

Second, I wince every time I hear the term Evangelical Christians. I know it has become common usage, but I imagine the people you are talking about are Christian fanatics. Evangelical is actually a denomination in the Christian Church. One way or another the term Evangelical Christian has become a brand with which people can label Christian ideas and Christians themselves with whom the labeler does not agree. Anyone who hold Christian beliefs and actually tries to act on them is fitted with this label and discounted. For that matter the term Islamic Fundamentalist is used in a similar fashion.

How long do you reacon it will be... by Enjoi · 2005-09-16 08:31 · Score: 0

until they have to hire their own new team of lawyers?

Re:How long do you reacon it will be... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-19 18:35 · Score: 0

By my guess it will be 3000 reacons before i work out wtf a reacon is.

yay for Enjoi the spazmo!

I believe... by overpayd · 2005-09-16 08:33 · Score: 2, Interesting

That's a fake email address.

But I'm not sure about this: "Jack Thompson can assure the world that the only thing to which he is "addicted" is eating entertainment industry scofflaws for breakfast - and golf."

Is that a real quote?! First of all, why is Jack Thompson referring to himself in the third person? And secondly, what the hell is he talking about anyway?

Re:I believe... by nb+caffeine · 2005-09-16 08:44 · Score: 1

First of all, hes got a massive ego, it seems. And secondly, hes out of his mind. Nothing else could explain it.

--

"Something's wrong with you...and I hope we never do meet again." - Deftones When Girls Telephone Boys
Re:I believe... by Lally+Singh · 2005-09-16 08:47 · Score: 1

He should be arrogant! I mean, he has a giant penis...

Wait, correction, he *is* a giant penis. My mistake.

--
Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
Re:I believe... by overpayd · 2005-09-16 08:53 · Score: 1

Not sure if I'm the only one, but this quote reminds me of a Seinfeld episode called "The Scofflaw"

Besides the obvious "scofflaw" reference, doesn't Jack Thompson kind of act like Jon Lovitz's character Gary Fogel? Maybe off-topic, but hilarious anyway...
Re:I believe... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 12:12 · Score: 0

Bob Dole thinks that its ok for people who are like Bob Dole to talk to themselves in the third person, like Bob Dole.

Take it from me, Bob Dole!
Re:I believe... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 14:07 · Score: 0

First of all, why is Jack Thompson referring to himself in the third person?
Because he is an egotistical nutcase.

And secondly, what the hell is he talking about anyway?
Just his usual mis-understanding of the facts, and his usual ego booting bullshit.

Jack Thompson by Digital_Quartz · 2005-09-16 08:37 · Score: 3, Funny

I find it interesting that Jack Thompson refers to himself exclusively in the third person everywhere he is quoted...

Re:Jack Thompson by Adelbert · 2005-09-16 08:49 · Score: 1

Adelbert does this, too.
Re:Jack Thompson by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-17 06:56 · Score: 0

Are you Jack Thompson? (I am not.)

Lberals? by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 08:47 · Score: 0

Like Hillary Clinton and Yee?

Please tell me this is fake... by thebdj · 2005-09-16 08:51 · Score: 2, Funny

http://www.stopkill.com/
I hope the upper 90% of it was parodied by someone and the bottom like 10% with addresses and all is real. Or hell that the whole is real just proving the man has no sense of how to prevent being harassed by gamers, liberals, e-mail scanning bots (which subsequently leads to porn, home loans and medications), and who knows maybe just the total nut job who would go as far as stalking him.
One can only dream...I now have motivation for getting my law degree, to laugh my ass off across the court room when the judge tells him to go read the damn constitution...*snaps up from dreaming*...oh sorry...

--
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."

Re:Please tell me this is fake... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 09:34 · Score: 0

http://www.stopkill.com/

From the site: "This site's purpose is to give you the means to contact Miami attorney Jack Thompson if you know of someone harmed as a result of violent entertainment"

Well it won't be hard to find at least a couple criminals that like the Arnold Schwarzenegger movies... Now what?
Re:Please tell me this is fake... by Kazzahdrane · 2005-09-17 07:03 · Score: 1

I actually used that site to write Jack Thompson a short e-mail asking about his reasons for this "crusade" he's got going on. It was polite and inoffensive, suffice to say he didn't reply probably because it didn't give him any ammunition against gamers.

who cares by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 08:52 · Score: 0

that is about as stupid and worthless as this post

Re:who cares by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 23:23 · Score: 0

Yeah, I don't give two tugs of a dead dog's cock about any of you people.

Okay, Okay by radicalskeptic · 2005-09-16 08:52 · Score: 4, Funny

Well, someone had to do it.

The first GIS response for "teenage girls water sports"...

Not exactly what I was expecting o_O

--
WARNING: If accidentally read, induce vomiting.

Re:Okay, Okay by TubeSteak · 2005-09-18 06:07 · Score: 1

About the only offensive link google turned up in its first 10 results was "PenisBot's Porn "Links
And you obviously have your safe search turned off. With it on, this is the first and only GIS result

And btw- Its readily apparent that JT didn't actually try searching for teenage girls water sports or he would have discovered that gURL.com is Google's #1 result.
Then again... They've got a a nice picture of a pair of underwear saying "THE PENIS?" as part of their "Sex Quiz Series" "how much do you know about the wonder down under?"
I got 10/12 questions right, but seriously, how the F*** am I supposed to know whether the word penis comes from a Latin, Greek or Arabic root word?

--
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!

radio pornographers? by kaptron · 2005-09-16 08:56 · Score: 3, Funny

...the oldest dodge used by the porn industry, first used on Jack Thompson by radio pornographers whom Thompson got fined by the FCC in 1989.

Even without numbers I can assure you that the multi-billion dollar porn industry is not making its money off of radio porn.

Liberals? by Seumas · 2005-09-16 08:58 · Score: 5, Insightful

The only things worse than the Internet are computer games and liberals ...

Yeah, because liberals are completely rational about the effects of entertainment media.

(Not a liberal or conservative - just sayin').

Re:Liberals? by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 09:06 · Score: 0

Good point, sir. When will people step back and realize "there's no point dividing human beings along minor political lines. Both parties are equally jam-packed with idiots"?
Re:Liberals? by FidelCatsro · 2005-09-16 09:11 · Score: 2, Insightful

The US political definition of liberal is " mild authoritarian ". Half the insults directed at liberals are against these people who are no more liberal than your average authoritarian conservative .
I think Rockstar are using liberal in the classical sense of the word

--
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Re:Liberals? by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 10:01 · Score: 0

Honestly I dont consider any of those people liberal. I find Republicans Nazi like and Democrates conservative. The green party is the only party I agree with. Personally I think our country needs a revolution.
Re:Liberals? by j0nb0y · 2005-09-16 13:45 · Score: 1

No, the implication I got from it is that Jack Thompson is a conservative of the variety that says that liberals are bad, or whatever. The implication is also that conservatives are the ones trying to outlaw these games.

This is pretty funny, as the vast majority of the people who have been passing and pushing for these "violent game" laws are liberal democrats. But its blamed on conservative republicans, because, you know, its cool to blame everything on conservative republicans nowadays.

Rockstar can kind of be dismissed for this ignorance, as they are a British company, and this idea is so prevalent on the internet (and especially /.) that it is understandable for them to mess it up.

Slashdotters, however, have no excuse. Pretty much everytime a story like this comes up, there is some bill being passed or supported by democrats, and the /. response is "those dirty awful republicans." followed by a few comments saying, no, these are democrats, you morons. Not that it helps, because the same republican bashing goes on everytime the issue comes up again.

I tried to google for Jack Thompson's political affiliation, but I couldn't find it. AfAIK, he has never publicly stated it. Anybody know anything about this?

--
If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?
Re:Liberals? by Nimey · 2005-09-16 14:10 · Score: 1

Just wait. When the Democrats come back in power, it'll be the thing to bitch about them instead. {grins} I complained about Democrats back in the early '90s and about the Republicans today.

--
Hail Eris, full of mischief...

E pluribus sanguinem
Re:Liberals? by FidelCatsro · 2005-09-16 16:20 · Score: 4, Funny

The Democrats are a conservative party , just slightly less so than the Republicans .

--
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Re:Liberals? by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 17:44 · Score: 0

I'd venture to guess Democrat. Trial laywers and union leaders are about as pro-Democrat as petrochemical and defense industry leaders are pro-Republican.
Re:Liberals? by j0nb0y · 2005-09-16 19:11 · Score: 1

True, but that's not how we use the terms these days in the good ole USA =]

Our liberals are quite conservative compared to the liberals of europe. Well, most of them anyway.

--
If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?
Re:Liberals? by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 20:39 · Score: 0

Don't come crying to me when one of those crackheads shoots up your daughter's kindergarten, then.
Re:Liberals? by FidelCatsro · 2005-09-16 20:49 · Score: 1

Not all of them are that far off. If I was in the USA i would choose between the Greens or one of these guys
(Of course the Greens have same crazy policies that I disagree with as well)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Choice_Party
Except I am a strong supporter of some socialist ideals (as well as a strong free market) .. So their opposition to social security is rather contrary to my ethics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(Un ited_States)
or these guys (with the same problem , oh and I think some Gun control is needed to ensure safety ). .. I think I would vote for Ralph Nader actually .

--
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Re:Liberals? by j0nb0y · 2005-09-17 00:01 · Score: 1

I'm not sure about the personal choice party, but I would consider the libertarian party to be conservative, not liberal.

Greens are definitely liberal though.

Just perused the wikipedia entry for the personal choice party. I think they're conservative too.

--
If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?
Re:Liberals? by Bimo_Dude · 2005-09-17 00:06 · Score: 1

In the 2004 election, Ralph Nader split from the Greens and ran on his own. I think this is because he disagreed with part of the platform of the Green Party. There isn't a party that can be all things to all people, and (due to media / electoral control and corruption), the US is stuck in a rut of Reps/Dems. I think they are both equally contemptible, in that they all go to the same rich people and corporations for their money. There are a few rare exceptions, but I don't live in their districts.
I would like to see a complete turnover of the white house, senate, and house by people voting for anybody OTHER than a Dem or Rep. One can dream...

--
"Teleporting Rodents with D-Cell Battery Displacement" theory -- IgnoramusMaximus (692000)
Re:Liberals? by FidelCatsro · 2005-09-17 01:18 · Score: 1

Fiscal conservatives defiantly , but liberal on social values .
Key tenets of the Libertarian Party platform include the following: a mostly unregulated free market economy, including support of the right to keep and bear arms, opposition to drug prohibition (see also: drug legalization), and elimination of the state-supported social welfare system. strong civil liberties including free speech, freedom of association, sexual freedom, and a foreign policy of free trade, absolute non-intervention, and opposition to the initiation of force (particularly military) to attain goals.
It all comes down to the definition of Liberal .When I speak of Liberalism I am Meaning :Freedom of choice. .As for the fiscal side of things .. I would more fall in line with Socialism .. though I believe in a strong free market outside of infrastructure :Education , communications ,Transportation networks , policing and other emergency services including military, health care , social care : everything else should be on a rather open free market (though with tight controls to ensure it remains free , a GPL market as such )
As such I am stuck in a political limbo .

But on the main point of the article , Rockstar(most likely Rockstar north) are definitely using the European "Liberal" .. which of course will lead to some confusion in the residents of the US

--
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Re:Liberals? by j0nb0y · 2005-09-17 03:26 · Score: 1

I don't think they necessarily are. I think they are just trying to poke fun at Jack Thompson. They have heard US Conservatives (of the Pat Robertson kind *shudder*) say that liberals are bad, and they think Jack Thompson is a conservative, so they put words in his mouth.

I think the meaning of conservatism has kind of been muddled by republicans in the last 10 years. Conservativism wants to keep the government out of everything, as much as possible. But conservatism recognizes the need for police, a strong military, and other essential government services. Social Security, is something that a true conservative hates. I see civil liberties as a conservative issue just as much as a liberal issue. Civil liberties are, after all, in the original Constitution.

I remember a good quote from a libertarian candidate, I forget exactly who though. It was something like "Just as much as we want to keep the democrats out of our wallets, we want to keep the republicans out of our bedrooms."

Fiscal conservatives shudder at the idea of "reducing the deficit." That's just a code phrase that means "we're going to keep spending more than we bring in." Don't reduce the deficit. Eliminate it. Preferably by reducing spending, not by raising taxes.

Bush and the Republicans are conservative in some ways, but they aren't in probably just as many.

--
If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?
Re:Liberals? by FidelCatsro · 2005-09-17 04:43 · Score: 1

In many ways there is little difference between a true liberal and a true(political ) conservative.. well bar perhaps the embracing of the new .
Liberal is the antitheses of Authoritarian not conservative (as traditional values could be at one stage liberal and conservatism is seeking to preserve these things).I honestly don't mind paying fair taxes so long as the money is spent well and I have my fair say as to how it is spent.

Conservative and liberal have both had their meaning skewered over time . Mainly because of the Media and their logical fallacies .The political compass does not work as a 2d object in reality and people trying to pigeon hole things has caused confusion such as "All liberals are left wing hippies " and "all conservatives are greedy right wing fascists"

--
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Re:Liberals? by Have+Blue · 2005-09-17 08:27 · Score: 1

What part of this site is a joke don't you understand?
Re:Liberals? by Seumas · 2005-09-17 15:20 · Score: 1

Let's see if we can explain this so your wittle pee brain can understand:

It's a parody. Satire.

The person or persons at Rockstar who created the parody made the "liberals" comment part of their gag, in such a way as to insinuate that liberals are wrongly accused of supporting violent games while conservatives bash them. This is clearly wrong since the ignorance and political-whoring of the subject is exceedingly bi-partisan.

In other words, the implication of the tone of the parody deserved comment.
Re:Liberals? by j0nb0y · 2005-09-17 15:33 · Score: 1

Yeah. Very true. The whole liberal/conservative thing is an attempt to understand political beliefs along a single line, from far left to far right. In reality, it's just not that cut and dried.

--
If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?

Hot Tea by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 08:59 · Score: 1, Funny

And in the "Hot Tea" add-on, you get to run over him with a steam roller, right?

Teenage girl watersports by Seumas · 2005-09-16 09:05 · Score: 4, Insightful

Only last week, I was using the Internet to look up some information for my 15 year old niece, who is a keen water skier and state wide sailor ... Trust me when I say this - searching under the subject matter "Teenage girls water sports" is not for the faint hearted.'"

I know it's a parody, but I'm tired of hearing idiots talk about "when you search for stuff on the internet, all you get back is pornography!". That's complete bullshit.

Go into "preferences" on google and select "safe search". Now, search for teenage girls water sports .

I only looked at the first 15 pages worth of results, but NONE are inappropriate or pornographic or sexual whatsoever. Even with "safe search" turned off, six of the first ten results are about the intended, non sexual, subject.

Re:Teenage girl watersports by Jarlsberg · 2005-09-16 09:18 · Score: 0

Hmmm.. http://www.google.no/search?hs=E91&hl=no&client=fi refox&rls=org.mozilla%3Anb-NO%3Aunofficial&q=teena ge+girls+water+sports&btnG=S%C3%B8k&meta= First results:
Water Sports & Pissing Porn Links PenisBot's Porn Links Smothering Spanking Uniforms Voyeur & Upskirts Water Sports Zoo Fetish ... Teen girls revealing all secrets and realizing hidden desires. ... www.penisbot.com/ - 43k - 14 sep 2005 - I hurtigbuffer - Lignende sider
gURL.com - an interactive web thing for teen girls. gURL.com takes a different approach to the experience of being a teen girl with ... --court & field sports, --water sports, --winter sports, OTHER BOARDS: ... www.gurl.com/ - 89k - I hurtigbuffer - Lignende sider
Peeing with pissing girls and golden showers Pee hole play teen peeing, gallery pee girls free clean no pop up tgp watersports galleries latina amateur screw my wife, public piss watch girls pee in the ... www.hwired.com/hw-wwwboard/messages/2701.html - 24k - I hurtigbuffer - Lignende sider
Re:Teenage girl watersports by Seumas · 2005-09-16 09:27 · Score: 1, Redundant

What part of &safe=active didn't you understand?

==========
gURL.com - an interactive web thing for teen girls.
gURL.com takes a different approach to the experience of being a teen girl with ... --court & field sports, --water sports, --winter sports, OTHER BOARDS: ...
www.gurl.com/ - 89k - Cached - Similarpages

gURL.com - an interactive web thing for teen girls. ... experience of being a teen girl with interactive message boards, games, ...
water sports athletics shout out about travel and your part of the globe ...
www.gurl.com/connect/boards/pages/0,,621992,00.htm l - 67k - Sep 15, 2005 - Cached - Similarpages

A Guide to Eating for Sports
Teen athletes have unique nutrition needs. Because athletes work out more than their ... If you like the taste of sports drinks better than regular water, ...
kidshealth.org/teen/food_fitness/nutrition/eatnrun .html - 26k - Sep 15, 2005 - Cached - Similarpages

Plymouth Library Teen Zone Booklists--Sports Books for Teens ... as well as participating in water sports, racquetball, tennis, boxing, wrestling, ... Teen Zone Fiction Johnson. Lewin, Michael Z. Cutting Loose. A girl ...
plymouthlibrary.org/yasportsbib.htm - 62k - Cached - Similarpages

5 Ways to Make a Big Splash ... Montauk's most popular and consistent break -- you'll find teenage girls ...
A few weeks on the water and you'll be buying your own equipment (try the ...
www.newyorkmetro.com/urban/guides/summerfun/outdoo rfun/summerfun_big_splash.htm - 29k - Cached - Similarpages

Teen Girl Surfing In Hawaii Photos Pictures Photographs - Acclaim ...
Teenage Girl Surfing In Hawaii.. Original Stock Photography from Acclaim Images. ... activities, water sport, watersport, watersports, water sports, ...
www.acclaimimages.com/_gallery/_pages/0019-0411-26 14-3650.html - 26k - Cached - Similarpages

Teen Girl Gaming: The New Paradigm
The most popular online games with the teen girls we talked to were simple ones ... Ball Sports. Winter Sports. Water Sports. Adventure. Basketball ...
culturalpolicy.uchicago.edu/conf2001/papers/groppe .html - 34k - Cached - Similarpages

Baffled by beverages? Milk is preferred for kids, especially ... ... preteen and teen girls, at mealtime, and water is great throughout day, experts
say ... Growing preteen and teen girls need milk particularly. ...
www.ajc.com/health/content/health/0805/23milk.html - 64k - Sep 15, 2005 - Cached - Similarpages

Guardian Unlimited Travel | Water sports | Leap of faith
Water sports fron ... member of the local search and rescue team, Dave had spent
the last two nights on Exmoor looking for a missing party of teenage girls. ...
travel.guardian.co.uk/activities/watersports/story /0,7447,1323094,00.html - 46k - Cached - Similarpages

Water Sports Camps - MySummerCamps.com
Water sports camps for boys, girls, kids, teens, youth. Summer camps directory. ... Find Water Sports Camps by activity & location. ...
www.mysummercamps.com/camps/Sports_Camps/Water_Spo rts/ - 89k - Sep 15, 2005 - Cached - Similarpages
Re:Teenage girl watersports by Geoffreyerffoeg · 2005-09-16 14:08 · Score: 1

Try this: go to SafeSearch and search for naked chicks .

Google gives you two barely noticeable error messages:

The word "naked" has been filtered from the search because Google SafeSearch is active.

The word "chicks" has been filtered from the search because Google SafeSearch is active.

And then it goes on to perform the search and find stuff like Britannica, Web Standards Project, Sun emplyoment, and the Yahoo team. WTF does it get these from? It's searching for nothing at all and it found this!

You get exactly the same list when searching for something like "porno porn". Meanwhile, SafeSearching "nude porn" gives: "Suggestions: - Try different keywords." Strange behavior.

(Incidentally, is this a back door to find the highest PageRanked sites?)
Re:Teenage girl watersports by Jarlsberg · 2005-09-17 01:53 · Score: 1

The original rant didn't mention anything about safe searching. Thompson would still have a fit about having to turn on safe searching to avoid pornographic material (or as he would have thought of it, hax0ring Google).
Re:Teenage girl watersports by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-17 10:49 · Score: 0

It's a funny joke, that's it. Apparently you need to check your "sense of humor" box under your personal preferences. I think you may have left it unchecked and kept it turned off.
Re:Teenage girl watersports by AndyL · 2005-09-18 12:09 · Score: 1

The character writing the email about watersports is a fictional character in a computer game that is set in the year 1999.

Google did not have a safesearch feature in 1999.

The point is not that I'm trying to nitpick, the point is that it's a period piece. The internet and people's attitudes towards it were very diferent just six years ago.
Re:Teenage girl watersports by Jackmn · 2005-09-19 06:49 · Score: 1

The original rant didn't mention anything about safe searching.

Are you blind?

Go into "preferences" on google and select "safe search". Now, search for teenage girls water sports.
Re:Teenage girl watersports by lolocaust · 2005-09-21 06:45 · Score: 1

actually all I found was this post.

--
Why does my post history abruptly stop? I want to laugh at the stupid things I posted as a kid.

Heh... by Dehumanizer · 2005-09-16 09:25 · Score: 4, Informative

... reminds me of the "Conservatives Against Nearly Everything", in Leisure Suit Larry 5.

--
The Tlog - a technology blog

Uh Oh by idonthack · 2005-09-16 09:33 · Score: 4, Insightful

They're doing this? To the guy who was going to take legal action on the author of VGCats because he sent the guy an email?

Can you say "lawsuit"?
---
It's not a lie. It's the truth with lossy compression.
Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey

--
Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?

Re:Uh Oh by the_ed_dawg · 2005-09-16 15:22 · Score: 1

Can you say "lawsuit"?
Like Hustler Magazine making a fake advertisement about a drunken Jerry Falwell making it sweet in an outhouse with his mother? The US Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of Hustler. I don't think that Rockstar is worried in the least.

--
There are two types of people: those prepared for the zombie apocalypse and those who will be eaten.
Re:Uh Oh by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 16:08 · Score: 0

Wow...I read through the email exchange and I can't imagine how Jack Thompson actually manages to craft the kind of diatribes we hear from him all the time. The man seems to have a very loose grasp on the English language and concepts of argumentation when he isn't quoting articles about himself.

(Also, why did he tell Scott to "get a name"? It's not as though he's trying to go by some online handle like "0ptikal" or "monk3yboi.")

turn of the evil internet by El_Muerte_TDS · 2005-09-16 09:41 · Score: 2, Informative

I wonder how many times Jack Thompson visited this site.

Re:turn of the evil internet by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 10:19 · Score: 0

I wouldn't be surprised if he tried to shut it down... It's obviously a graphic representation of a breast, and there isn't even a "Do not enter unless you are 18" page!

The full email text by 88NoSoup4U88 · 2005-09-16 10:37 · Score: 4, Informative

Since the full email text is all embedded within the flashfile, finally an occasion to karma-whore with a reasonable reason ;)

Dear Liberty Tree,

The internet is unambiguous evil. The only things worse than the internet are computer games and liberals. The fact of the matter is our Constitution clearly protects us against the internet. They had foresight, to go along with their wooden teeth, and the Constitution clearly alludes to "unwanted connectivity".

We want to turn the internet off before this parasite swallows all of us. The fact is, this may be an e-mail, but I am revolted with myself, and will punish myself, vigorously. We need to be free from the internet. It's getting mankind in a hideous and vice-like grip and before you know it, our lives, which were once perfect, will be reduced to nothing but cyber sex and learning things we have no business knowing, like the fact the government lies, or you can safely go on vacation outside the old 48 contiguous. It's revolting, and we're all suffering.

Only last week, I was using the internet to look up some information for my 15 year old niece, who is a keen water skier and state wide sailor. Trust me when I say this - searching under the subject matter "Teenage girls water sports" is not for the faint hearted. The fact is people who care about our society really should join our society. CLICK WWW.CITIZENSUNITEDNEGATINGTECHNOLOGY.ORG FOR MORE DETAILS.

Re:The full email text by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-16 11:17 · Score: 0

Viewing this site requires a Javascript-enabled browser. Which we haven't detected on your system. What kind of joker are you? Get it Done!

Hmmm, how about rockstar pay someone with a clue to design a web site instead of the 'use javascript to embed flash' rubbish some halfwit has defaced their current webspace with? If these cuntflaps can't even do a webpage, their code is most probably of very low quality.

The site is real. by chanda3199 · 2005-09-16 12:14 · Score: 2, Informative

I'm kind of surprised that I didn't see someone post a link to the site from the email address.

Re:The site is real. by snuf23 · 2005-09-16 14:07 · Score: 1

Well, real as in it does exist, but uh fake in that it is a parody site.

KILL THE MOUSE!!!
REMOVE ITS BALLS

Pretty funny site.

--
Sometimes my arms bend back.

I got a little chuckle... by Alizarin+Erythrosin · 2005-09-16 16:00 · Score: 1

But then it turned into something like "AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! HA HA! BUUUUUURRRRRN! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa"

Then I couldn't breathe anymore and had to take a break.

--
There are only 10 kinds of people in this world... those who understand binary and those who don't

You're Listening to KXXX FM... by Thedalek · 2005-09-17 03:25 · Score: 3, Insightful

Even without numbers I can assure you that the multi-billion dollar porn industry is not making its money off of radio porn.

Without hesitation, I'll go ahead and hazard a guess that Madman Jack is talking about Howard Stern. No, I know what you're thinking, Howard Stern isn't porn. You don't get it. To Jack, anything exceeding his personal obscenity barometer is pornographic filth, including but not limited to swimsuit and underwear ads, soap and shampoo commercials, commercials for "femenine hygene" products (probably also wicked tools of the Evil Femenist Regime (TM)), and pretty much anything that in any way expresses that there is some physiological difference between boys and girls.

It's an old tactic used by those who wish to manipulate the public by slapping spurious labels on what they don't like. Saying "We want filth and pornography off our airwaves," is likely to get more support than "Thinking about sex is wrong and evil."

Really, the question shouldn't be "What are Jack Thompson's views on the matter?" (Which no one really asked, but Jack supplied anyway), but "What are Jack Thompson's wife's views? Is his zealotry detracting from their marriage?

--
Happiness is relative, Based upon the way we live.

mod -1, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-17 06:01 · Score: 0

read seamus' post again. it did mention turning on safe search. that was sort of the whole point.

You can tell the maturity level of R* by gameboyhippo · 2005-09-18 18:17 · Score: 1, Interesting

It seems that R* has taken a major blow by JT himself. Rather than trying to prevent scientific evidence to refute the ideas Jack Thompson is presenting, they make a parody site. I can imagion how a court case in the future will look. Jack: "Interactive media simulate the brain more than passive media and thus influences a child's behavior more." R*: "You're a @%$# #*@^er! *snicker*" Give me a break. If R* wants to legitimize their games, they should fight smarter, not prove that the corporation is run by 12 year olds.

Re:You can tell the maturity level of R* by leland242 · 2005-09-19 01:01 · Score: 1

I agree - on the surface, this is a righteous "fuck you" to Mr. J.T., however when you think about it, it's only helping his cause.

In the latest issue of PC gamer there is an article that compares statistics from the FBI on youth crime rates to GTA releases. Turns out, it's been on the decline for a while and is currently at all time lows. GTA et al. has had no effect on youth crime. My only problem with this comparison is that the stats from the FBI are a few years out of date...so maybe there has been a huge uprising...but I doubt it.

It would have been just as easy for R* to create an elaborate site with these kinds of comparisons and studies.

Although, on the flip-side, I can see people dismissing it since the info isn't from an unbiased source.
Re:You can tell the maturity level of R* by Tsaot · 2005-09-19 01:56 · Score: 1

Naww, they're right on the same maturity level as he is. If anything, any laysuits between the two can be filmed as a documentary and then marketed as a comedy.
Re:You can tell the maturity level of R* by rohlfinator · 2005-09-19 10:10 · Score: 1

"Although, on the flip-side, I can see people dismissing it since the info isn't from an unbiased source."
Or because it's completely meaningless. Video games aren't the only factor on youth crime. Maybe something about the education system improved over the last five years. Maybe parents are doing a better job of teaching their kids to respect the law. Maybe law enforcement is doing a better job of deterring youth from illegal activites. Or maybe kids are too busy playing GTA to steal stuff in real life. Studies like that can't really directly correlate games and crime rates.

And I also agree with the GP, this is a very immature move from Rockstar. It makes the entire industry look very childish. Their site could possibly be construed as libel, in which case I'm sure Jack Thompson wouldn't hesitate to sue them, as if Rockstar needs any more legal problems.
Rockstar should have just admitted defeat while they had the chance. Now they risk further criticism of the industry. If this little retort makes it to the mainstream press, it'll probably set public perception of the games industry back about five years.

Way to go, Rockstar. Idiots.
Re:You can tell the maturity level of R* by Dmala · 2005-09-19 17:35 · Score: 1

The problem is that Jack Thompson is not trying to have a reasonable or logical debate. His tactics are all about sound bites and media exposure. He makes a big noise in the media when he files his ridiculous lawsuits and gets all the sheep in the country to go "Oh my gosh, videogames are teh evil!" If you look at his track record, he hasn't won very many cases like this. Even in the Hot Coffee thing, he didn't win a legal victory, the ESRB just bumped the "appropriate age" for the game from 17 to 18. The only reason it made a damn bit of difference was because places like Wallyworld don't carry AO games, and it knocked the hell out of R*'s bottom line.

You can't argue with someone like that because if you start winning, he'll just change the parameters of the argument. Failing that, he'll just start spouting nonsense that sounds good when the media takes it out of context. Rather than fight a useless battle, R* resorts to their stock-in-trade, parody... which is what the GTA series has essentially been since day one.

81 comments