Slashdot Mirror
Jack Thompson Rescinds Offer
Goalmaster3000 writes to tell us Joystiq.com is reporting that Jack Thompson has rescinded his offer of a $10,000 donation to charity if a video game were made to fit his model. Recently a group of GTA modders cooked up a scenario to fit the bill but apparently Thompson is claiming that his piece 'A Modest Video Game Proposal' was intended as satire that the video game community was not bright enough to grasp. Perhaps Thompson was just afraid he was going to have to sue himself? Update: 10/17 20:02 GMT by SM: It appears that the Penny Arcade crew has taken the next step by donating the promised $10,000... in Jack Thompson's name.
The fact that the guy thinks he needs to explain that his request was satire just means he didn't understand that what he got back was infact satirical. You might say he's being sassed, and doesn't even realize it.
-Jesse
Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
A lawyer lied, and people are surprised?
With a name akin to Swift's famous "A Modest Proposal", I can believe that Thompson thought it to be satire all along. However, the bit about promising to donate to charity was uncalled for.
So a satirical response to a satirical comment gives us what...
Ah, the irony!
LINUX ONLINE POKER: Linux Poker
Well, I can see his point. Political statements are more important than people.
well, afterall, he is an idiot, you know.
So, he thinks we weren't bright enough to realize his "satire"? Well, at least we're bright enough to know the difference between video game violence and real-life violence. Otherwise, we'd be bunny-hopping our BMX bikes over his front yard fence and blowing him away with my machine gun.
I saw the entirety of a back-and-forth e-mail conversation that a 14-year-old gamer had with this moron. It was hot on the heels of the Hot Coffee debacle, and the kid was actually very well-spoken. He brought up excellent arguments, rebutted points made by Thompson, and continued to press his original point.
Thompson kept trying to weave out of the argument, and eventually ended up calling him names, telling him to grow up because he was just a pathetic child, and other crap unbecoming of an attorney. The kid completely won the argument by not only proving that gamers were not just idiotic 14-year-old kids, but also because Thompson resorted to mere name-calling when he couldn't win his argument.
What a fucking moron.
I used to think Linux was cool -- then I turned 14.
He is nothing but a common troll. He lives on attention. YOUR attention. Stop giving him page hits; stop giving him political capital; stop giving him the time of day.
Really, why is it necessary to point this out?
No kidding, what an ass. Who jokes about giving $10,000 to charity? I mean, if he'd offered it as a direct prize to the winner, that's one thing - but claiming you're going to give it to charity and then renegging? No wonder the NIMF wants him to never mention their name again.
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
The guy spouts to be an expert in everything under the sun. But once you call him on it, you come to know he only has a superficial understanding of things. If you can imagine a slimy car salesman, that's Jack.
Someone should have made a game where you kill the CEO and the family, but they come back as zombies, and then you play as the zombies and go torture and kill the lawyer "Thomp Jackson"
$8.95/mo web hosting
Jack Thompson, increasingly, resembles nothing more so than one of the least competent of slashdot's trolls.
...
MAN 1: I am going to kill you and rape your family!
MAN 2:
MAN 1: What, don't you know satire when you hear it? You have no sense of humor at all. Idiot.
"Jack Thompson Rescinds Offer" Should be: "Jack Thompson steals $10k from Charity"
since it goes with Shit. This basically sums up Jack Thompson's entire knowledge of the video game industry he has set out to try and destroy.
No, I don't think very young people should be playing violent videogames all day, every day but it is not Jack's problem. It is not the government's problem. It is a PARENTAL problem and should be dealt with as such. Parents should take fracking responsibility for raising their children and when their children become delusional, homicidal maniacs they should CONTINUE to take responsibility since it was THEIR parenting techniques that helped little Johnny become what he is today. It takes all of 5 to 15 minutes out of your hectic day to check in on what your child is playing, watching, or reading and if he/she is constantly going over to Billy's or Sandy's house then, as a parent, you had better damn well trust that Billy's Mom and Dad are raising their child like you are raising yours so that your philosophies match (ie. so that little Johhny doesn't run over to Billy's house to play GTA: San Andreas every day because Billy's parents don't give a shit what Billy plays).
Sorry for the rant but I'm past the point of believing the crap about it takes a village to raise a child. How about it takes a concerned parent (single or plural) to raise a child. If your job takes away too much of your parenting time then perhaps you should do without the new BMW and Lexus in the driveway and spend more time with your child, less with your paycheck -- eh?
Dream as if you'll live forever.
Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
~Anonymous~
In general, this is a 'contract to the world', an offer of reward on completion. It's often called a "race across the desert", a unilateral contract with neither consideration nor quid pro quo. The first one who completes the contract gets the reward. If revoked prior to completion, you generally have no recourse. If that is not the case, there are two common ways to sue, or offer as a baseline for negotition, for failure to fulfill his end of the promise.
First, if you complete the contract first and give sufficient notification of such, and it is prior to his unilateral revocation, you can argue that he breached the contract. As the first person across the line, you are typically entitled to the reward. Breach of that may entitle you to estop the contract. In other words, entitlement to fulfillment of his promise.
Second, if you say that you relied on his contract and had sufficient reason to believe that the contract would be fulfilled (i.e. there is precedent for this type of contract, e.g. auctions for services to be rendered; or it would be unreasonable economic policy to not enforce payment because your reliance on his statement was reasonable and it would be poor form to permit his type of statement when it incurs your type of economically inefficient reliance), you might be able to sue for your costs, your lost opportunity, or his benefit.
Tycho called this one already. When Penny Arcade's last Jack Thompson comic came out Tycho wrote the following:
- 14
"Of course, he's not serious. Machination is too glorified a word for what he's doing. Ruse would make it seem debonair. He's essentially holding money hostage from charity, and if someone did make it, even as a joke, he would say that it didn't conform to his "design." This sort of thing is usually called a shell-game."
http://www.penny-arcade.com/news.php?date=2005-10
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
A lawyer offering to give money to charity? Who could fall for that?! ;- )
You can't take the sky from me...
In all fairness to your valid point, the difference here is that the grandparent substantiates the fact that the guy is a "fucking moron," whereas Thompson's name-calling was apparently unsubstantiated and resulted solely from being unable to rebut the arguments of a 14-year-old kid.
It's the difference between saying "I can't stand up to you in an argument, so therefore you are an idiot." and saying "You can't stand up to a 14-year-old kid in an argument without resorting to ad hominem attacks, so therefore you are a moron."
Jack Thompson
"A Lisp programmer knows the value of everything, but the cost of nothing." - Alan Perlis
The emails sent from the 14 year old, can be found here: http://croqaudile.com/?article_id=10299 There is also a great wikipedia article ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_(attorn ey) ) that relates his history, and well, exploits.
Oh, it wasn't that at all? Well, you know if someone had fucking LINKED THE ORIGINAL THING THAT JACK WROTE then I would have known that. Goddamn.
I found this description of the original hoo-hah:
You're welcome.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
this guy is a nutcase. ask anyone who has known him personally (like my dad). you guys are just feeding him. he eats this stuff up.
as great as it is to see penny arcade bothering the sad old dirtbag, he would be much more provoked if no one gave a crap what he said. everyone knows he's an idiot, so lets let this old man die lonely and ignored
-- lol pwned
If he can actually do that. I mean, he's made the offer, you make this game I give $10,000 to charity. I kind of wonder if he actually has the legal ability to just go "ha ha only kidding" at this point and back out.
I mean, the feeble "it's satire... really" identifier in the title doesn't change the fact that what follows is several pages of Mr. Thompson very personally fantasizing about violently killing his enemies. And I think the feeble attempts to pretend he was writing satire would mean even less from a legal perspective. Is "gotcha... it was just a joke!" a recognized defense in contract law?
I mean, I am not a lawyer, but then, Jack Thompson appears to only be a lawyer in the most superficial sense. So I would be very curious to see whether Thompson has stumbled into some kind of self-constructed legal trap by putting the offer to donate to charity into his work of "satire". If you post a public notice promising to donate $10,000 to charity if someone does thing X, are you in any way committing to this? Like, those public notices saying "$1000 reward for information leading to the capture of the kidnapper of Media Heartthrob". Are those public notices legally binding to the person who put them up? If so, I'd be very, very interested to see what happens if that group of GTA modders, or the people working on the sprite flash game, actually complete something. Since both of those games entered production before Thompson issued his retraction, is there any chance they could go to court and try to claim Thompson's offer legally binding or his retraction legally invalid?
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
The mod does not fit the bill at all - other than the fact there is a lot of violence involved. The mod is only "Defemation of Character", as advertised; it has little do with Thomspon's scenario.
Gaming companies need to seriously address the issues Thompson brings up. I find particularly pursuasive his analogy to cigarette advertisements as well as the real world examples that have been coming up for the last seven years or so.
See, that responsibility is important and all, but the nuclear family is a relic of the past age. If the parents you mention fail to be concerned enough, we as the metaphorical village get stuck with the sociopathic loser for the next 30-60 years. Their responsibility becomes our responsibility.
Also keep in mind that nothing in American society comes close to the "it takes a village" philosophy. Our society is still nuclear-family at its core, and will not be changing any time soon.
Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
That's the thing about Jack's fantasy: He's already trying to live it. Whether he really does despise game(r)s that much or he's that much more of a power monger, he needs to see this come to fruition that he probably couldn't care if someone died to complete his vision. Given the gravity and senselessness of the violence in his proposal, I wouldn't be surprised at all if he's really pathologically violent. Read about his conversation with Mike Krahulik (Gabe) from Penny-Arcade, or even worse, read the transcript of his emails with Scott from VG Cats.
Personally, I still think the Postal2 team could have made his game and sold millions on it because everyone would accept it as a joke like the rest of thier work. People aren't supposed to take games this seriously, and even one of the institutes he frequently cites for research told him to stop referencing them in every way because he distorts thier studies, and gives them a bad name.
Perfecting Discordia
www.stevenvansickle.com
if by "jack thompson" you mean "penny arcade"... http://www.penny-arcade.com/news.php?date=2005-10- 17#2834
for a minute there, i lost myself...
I'll grant that, no problem. But can someone describe for me the "narrative context" in Postal 2 which justified such actions? Or even Manhunt , which, god help me, I actually paid money for and played all the way through.
(If you never played Manhunt, the idea is that you're a convict secretly rented out to a snuff film producer to take part in a game so shocking and post-modern that it was considered a classic of short story literature in 1947. You get extra points for exterminating your hunters in as gruesome and vicious a manner as posible.)
So to recap, no love lost for Jack Thompson, but Tycho should be a little more honest when it comes to the really disgusting games out there.
Or have a short fuse and do not feel like debating the issue any longer with that specific person. It does not take long in a discussion with someone to realize they are not open to your opinion or ideas and they are not going to change their views regardless of what points you bring up. In a real organized debate in front of an interested crowd, you can continue to pound the points home and although the direct person you are debating with may not change or even acknowledge your points, there is a chance that you can get people in crowd to understand them. The incentive to continue a debate under some circumstances is much less if the surrounding crowd is small or non existent and you are debating in a non live event in front of people like email or over the phone.
For those of you that do not agree with what I just said above, too bad and I think you are all dirtbag losers.
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
Tycho and Gabe just made the donation on Jack's behalf. See the 3rd post down.
According to an update on today's Penny Arcade, PA went ahead and made the promised $10,000 donation themselves to the Entertainment Software Association... in his name.
The PA guys really know how to cut someone down with class. Help kids and drive Jack Thompson insane all in one fell-swoop. I wonder about what he's going to threaten to sue now.
E pluribus unum
Slashdotters seem to think video games have no effect on people. Thompson sees them as horrible killer-trainers. Personally, I fall somewhere in between.
I love playing Halo. It's exciting and fun, and the "violence" is pretty mild. I have played Unreal Tournament and GTA (older versions), but gave them up because to me, they were too sadistic. They didn't make me want to kill people, but they made me a little more inclined to be a jerk.
It's the same with TV. If I watch a show like "The Shield" or some pissy reality show where everybody hates each other, I get a little bit into that angry, "screw you" mentality.
Think about your personality and attitude. Me, I'm very laid back, because my dad is laid back. I like goofy jokes because my dad does, and my friends growing up did too. (I also watched Monty Python.) I can see how these influences shaped the way I am.
Most of us spend several hours a day using some kind of media - music, TV, internet, video games, etc. Just like the people we're around, these virtual friends DO shape our mentality, somewhat.
I will never be a homocidal maniac, regardless of what I watch or play. But I do know that seeing examples of people who laugh, who love and forgive each other - whether those are real people or on TV - makes it easier for me to do the same. Exposing myself to hours of anger and selfishness makes me likely to replay those thoughts and words. Just because I'm an adult doesn't mean that everything is equally good for me.
Does anybody else see that?
http://www.penny-arcade.com/news.php?date=2005-10- 12
Gabe was talking to Jack via email, suggesting a charity which would have liked to received the money, which Gabe is active in promoting. It is backed by gamers, but isn't pushing videogames (any more than other toys) upon children.
Jack noted that Gabe's phone number was in his email, and took it upon himself to call Gabe and personally chew him out and threaten Gabe.
Gabe & Tycho of Penny-Arcade have made a donation to who they think Paul Eibler would have picked: The ESF.
From their site:
It was only a matter of time until a mod team took Jack Thompson's disgusting revenge fantasy and made it flesh - and, just as I suggested, it was deemed insufficient.
Thompson now claims that his repellent suggestion was "satire," and we must conclude that his financial offer was also satire, some new breed of satire apparently that I'm sure is just hilarious to people in need.
You know what, Jack? We're going to be the men you're not. You said that your insulting, illusory ten thousand dollars would go to the charity of Paul Eibler's choice. We've got a good guess that he'd direct your nonexistant largesse toward The Entertainment Software Foundation, a body that has raised over six point seven million dollars over the last eight years. We've just made the donation you never would, and never meant to. Ten thousand dollars' worth. And we made it in your name.
By rescinding the offer in 2005, he likely escapes, the key line being:
Quoth TFA:
Yeah, I read that and couldn't believe it. That's insane. That's incredible. Just for that, I'm going make it a point to donate to Child's Play this year.
PA just earned the maddest props they could have possibly earned. Wow.
And now, for a sig that's a complete copout.
From today's CNN:
Wow, look how the crime rate has absolutely skyrocketed as violence in games has increased. Someone send these figures to Jack so he can use them in his jihad.
...and did it in his name, according to the newspost at the bottom if this page.
So Jack Thompson is a Warrior of God now? Glad to see he's attacking something as significant as video games, and not tackling war or poverty or anything silly like that. Yeesh.
I produce electronic music and write little games. Have a look.
It might be worth noting that the good people at Penny Arcade have already made up for Thompson's retraction, and donated $10,000 to charity in Thompson's Name. He he. Gotta love those PA kids.
Here's the quote from the PA site: "You know what, Jack? We're going to be the men you're not. You said that your insulting, illusory ten thousand dollars would go to the charity of Paul Eibler's choice. We've got a good guess that he'd direct your nonexistant largesse toward The Entertainment Software Association Foundation, a body that has raised over six point seven million dollars over the last eight years. We've just made the donation you never would, and never meant to. Ten thousand dollars' worth. And we made it in your name.
Mod my comments down. It'll be fun.
Forgot the attribution on TFA quote: Advanced Media Network.
John B. Thompson, Attorney at Law
1172 South Dixie Hwy., Suite 111
Coral Gables, Florida 33146
305-666-4366
jackpeace@comcast.net
August 5, 2005
Patricia Vance
source: http://www.vgcats.com/jack.php
Make sure to write any letters or make any calls in the same civil manner as he himself has shown others.
Make extra sure.
No, I think that's the wrong reference. We'd be riding our bikes around and looking at boobies:
- 18&res=l
http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php?date=2002-10
You cant stop it. In the 70s or so, it was comic books that they blamed. In the 80s, it was music and hair-metal that got the blame. In the 90s, it was Television and MTV and etc, and now its video games. People in America seem to have a common problem, for the most part. They can't realize that they are the ones causing their own problems.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
http://croqaudile.com/?article_id=10299
Enjoy it. I know I did.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
...this Jack Thompson fellow. And I say this as a games programmer, although not one who's ever worked on a violent game of any sort. Anyway.
When all this fuss kicked off over the last few weeks, I read a bit of what he has to say. And to be honest, reading what he says to people in private correspondance (and to an extent in his public statements) you get the impression that he's a rabid loon. Then on Penny Arcade, I spotted a link to an audio interview some guys did with him. I downloaded and had a listen. And to give the man some credit, he comes across much better in person. I'm much less surprised that he gets the attention he does, having listened to him - he comes across as a slightly opinionated but earnest and frank concerned guy, worried about the effect games have on kids and teenagers. At least, he does initially.
After a while though, when he's gone past the fairly logical point of discussing M-rated game sales to minors with someone who agrees with him, he starts getting a bit out there. EA in cahoots with the porn industry, deliberately aiming for them to make porno skins for The Sims? Please. Thing is, because he *seems* reasonable, people who don't know too much about games probably think he *is* reasonable. And in small doses, for short periods of time, he probably is. But disagree too much, scratch the surface of his arguments, and things suddenly get a lot stranger...
Game dev and music blog
His proposal was as follows:
Here is what was made:
All those bogus charity sites are really just satirical homages to Red Cross!
Hate to reply to myself, but I went looking for an email address and while there isn't one directly on his website, the whois listing gives the address "greytop@comcast.net", which doesn't bounce. I'll post the conversation if I get a reply.
From that text: While Hellfish seems awfully creative, I don't know if they qualify as a video game "company" and they don't seem to be "selling" the module (and as an even more minor point, it's not 2006).
Jack strikes me as an extremely fearful man. It could be argued that most of what he does is driven by fear. He's afraid of gamers. He's afraid of the world. So he became a lawyer so that he could feel powerful. And look at his responses to e-mails. He obviously feels threatened by VGCATS and Penny Arcade, and he has a fight/flight reaction (He tends to choose fight). Its obvious to me that these violent, threatening responses that he makes are caused by FEAR.
He pictures the gamers of the world as these horrible violent people that might shoot him or his family at any time, and so he wants to stop it. He imagines that we're all violent and that video games made us this way. He's afraid, so he strikes out. Like a cornered dog.
But what he doesnt seem to get is that, yeah, there are violent people, and yeah there are gamers, and yeah there are a few gamers that are also violent, but they are the VAST MINORITY. Most gamers are peaceful! It's like saying "HEY, all these murderers had something in common. They ate sandwiches. Sandwiches make you murder!"
Someone should draw him a venn diagram...
I'm honestly not sure if he means that he did commit to donate the money, or that he did give reasons why he won't. I'm also not clear on why he says that he hasn't been contacted WRT which charity to pay, then says that the terms of the proposal weren't met (and therefore implies he won't pay until they have been).
Write to your members of Congress, inform them that you vote and you actively follow the issues that are important to you, and then tell them that if they associate with Jack Thompson, you will vote against them when they are next up for re-election. It might be helpful to include links to Jack's initial offer, and the open letter ending his association with NIMF.
= 12259
Initial offer and game description:
http://gc.advancedmn.com/article.php?artid=5883
NIMF letter:
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid
Be polite, be civil, and be sure to include your full, real name, and your full, real address. Ask for a reply. You'll probably get one.
Believe it or not, members of Congress pay close attention to these things. They spend hundreds of thousands of dollars per year on staff and supplies for constituent relations. I know it's cool to think that only big corporations get things done in Washington, but it's not true. When enough people speak up, they can move the government.
You can be sure that those who agree with Jack are writing letters once a week. Only by matching or beating that can we fight back.
Here's a good site to get started, for free. Find your representative and senators and write today!
http://www3.capwiz.com/y/dbq/officials/
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
I don't think that games turn people into killers. In fact, I enjoy Unreal Tournament 2004, WoW, etc, which obviously involve "killing" to reach your goal. But I do support the parent posting's observations...
I think that in their rush to defend an anything-goes mentality, other posters in this thread overlook obvious connections:
1. Olympic and all world-class athletes use visualization as a part of their training. They imagine themselves doing their sport in as vivid a detail as they can. For example, a weight lifter imagines walking up to the weights, feeling the bar, gripping it, heaving it upwards, etc, etc. They imagine the perfect performance again and again, and it helps to shape their reactions to achieve it.
Your brain does not know the difference between real and imagined. That's why you can get angry "just thinking about that jerk that cut you off this morning". Obviously, higher-level functions allow us to reason and realize "it's just a memory/game" but our instincts and reflexes may not be so lucky.
2. Read Blink and see how what we view affects how we act. In particular, the experiment where people were primed (unknowingly) to be either rude or polite and how unbelievably strong the effect was. The experimenters expected noticable but minor differences and found HUGE differences in reaction that astonished them.
In light of that, someone who spends HOURS trying to grief others and demolish them (or get steamrolled themselves) in vicious ways will, as the parent comment says, definitely be more likely to be jerks. Or worse. And that's the difference, say between sports and video games: you cannot demolish 20 opposing basketball teams in a long night of playing. You can easily do this in video games, including some of my favorites.
Again, I'm not going to kill someone because I play violent games. But please don't ignore obvious and deep issues to say that video games (or porn, or whatever) have nothing to do with anything. (Read Blink's description of gender and racial biases that are very unconscious but can be accurately measured and can be affected by our experiences and then think about how games or porn present various different classes/professions/races/genders and imagine how being "primed" in this way would affect attitudes and interactions, even if they never were consciously accepted and acted upon in open ways.)
So telling people to harass someone is "informative" and a good way of proving our point(s)?
Given what we know about his replies already, lets not drag ourselves to his level. The egomaniac craves attention, and guess what examples of the things those "evil gamers who oppose me do" he is going to bring up next? And we already know that he doesn't want to have a civil debate or discussion, so why even bother talking to a brick wall?
He also has been on a losing streak lately, and now you have to add more fuel and "creditability" to his fire. He may be nuts, but encouraging people to harass him just makes us look bad. Even more so when we are reduced to his level of "acting civil."
Seriously slashdot, enough with the spamming/calling/Ddosing of people we don't like; please grow up and be more mature about dealing with things like this. I don't have a problem with informative emails(i.e. non-emotional and informative complaining about company X's defective product or really restrictive DRM), but this one is really asking people not to be civil with the intent to hammer him. Stuff like this and intentionally Ddosing sites(i.e. needing to check the RIAA's site several times, "just to make sure it is still up")make no real progress with the issue at hand.
I think we ought to use Mr. Thompson for own ends. Seeing as he is so keen to sue people, maybe we should sign his email address up with every major spammer across the world and see how he reacts. I bet he'd have his legal dogs of war on their asses by the end of the week, maybe if we got really lucky the spammer and JT would use all their energies trying to eradicate each other leaving the rest of the world in peace. Oops, I hope JT doesn't decide to sue me for writing this!
I believe the mod in question is a GTA mod, so Rockstar should get together with the modders and host the mod on their servers. Make the mod downloadable in exchange for a charitable donation. Tens of thousands of gamers would no doubt donate hundreds of thousands of dollars downloading the thing. The charity wins and Rockstar gets a single piece of good publicity (as they are pretty much the "worst offender" when it comes to violent games).
Cool art gallery, if you're into that sort of thing.
I'm just curious why no one has contacted his Bar association. From what I'm reading in these various transcripts, if they are indeed accurate, he is violating several of their ethical guidelines, particularly with his threats. In the very least, several complaints made against him to the Bar would require a review of his actions and the reflections they are making on the legal profession in his jurisdiction.
He would be taken quite a bit less seriously if his teeth were removed and he was no longer able to legally practice law.
From the Florida Board of Bar Examiners website:
"The primary purpose of the bar examination is to ensure that all who are ultimately admitted have demonstrated minimum technical competence. In order to be admitted in Florida, an applicant must have proof of good moral character and must successfully complete the Florida Bar Examination."
In the admission requirements are then the following items:
"What is disqualifying conduct?
Pursuant to Rule 3-11 a record manifesting a deficiency in the honesty, trustworthiness, diligence, or reliability may constitute a basis for denial of admission. Any of the following may be considered by the Board to be a basis for further inquiry before recommending admission:
* Unlawful conduct
* Academic misconduct
* Making or procuring any false or misleading statement or omission of relevant information, including any false or misleading statement or omission on the Bar Application, or any amendment, or in any testimony or sworn statement submitted to the Board.
* Misconduct in employment
* Acts involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation
* Abuse of legal process
* Financial irresponsibility
* Neglect of professional obligations
* Violation of an order of a court
* Evidence of mental or emotional instability
* Evidence of drug or alcohol dependency
* Denial of admission to the bar in another jurisdiction on character and fitness grounds
* Disciplinary action by a lawyer disciplinary agency or other professional disciplinary agency of any jurisdiction
* Any other conduct which reflects adversely upon the character and fitness of the applicant
Additional details about the Florida Bar, the exam, and how to file complaints can be found at http://www.floridabar.org/
Here's the thing, though, the title of his little satire should have tipped everyone off: it is modeled after (Gulliver's Travels author) Thomas Swift's "A Modest Proposal", which is itself a pretty well known satire of the English treatment of the Irish people. Come on, folks, if we're going to keep up with the assholes and hustlers, we need to be up on our literature and history, not just technology. In closing, though, this guy is a grade-A asshole. And that's not being sarcastic.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
Mr. "dgatwood",
Your reference to my tombstone is a clear, and actionable threat of death. Please remove it from the website "www.slashpoint.com" at once or I will pursue legal action and criminal charges against you, the owners of the website, and John Carmack.
Jack Thompson
cc
New York State Attorney's Office
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Interpol
God
Freedom: "I won't!"
While I think it was not fair of him to offer a donation for what he later called satire Jack Thompson made it semi clear that it was in fact a satire. While the violence was over the top his suggestion wasnt. However if you paid attention in high school or college you may have heard of a work know as "A Modest Proposal" by Jonathan Swift. One of the early and most well known satires about Swift suggesting that Ireland suffering from Famine and poverty should eat and sell their children for food. Note the title of Jack Thompsons proposal "A Modest Video Game Proposal." For the record I am not siding with Jack Thompson but I'm not the smartest man in the world but when he claimed his work was ment to be satire I put 2 and 2 together so I would hope someone else has. Also I would bet the someone here may have already pointed this out but with upwards of 300 posts I'm not going sift through them all. Look it up or read it here. Its short and sadistically funny. http://www.english.upenn.edu/~jlynch/Courses/95c/T exts/modest.html
Rockstar has lawyers of its own, as well as an entire PR department. I'm sure it would be fairly simple to put out a press release praising Jack for his charity and saying that if he feels the game is satisfactory, Paul has strong feelings toward the fight against childhood leukemia (or somesuch), and if Jack likes, he can choose any charity that works toward its cure. In fact, Paul might say, that Jack's idea has moved him so that he would like to make the same donation.
Hell, even if Jack refuses and attacks Rockstar for misinterpreting him, Paul could apologize, say he misunderstood, and make the charitable donation himself.
[insert witty quote here]