Slashdot Mirror
Jack Thompson vs Amazon?
Zorglub writes "Feeling his book page at Amazon has been harassed by bad reviews, nasty tags, and a user-submitted vomit pic, anti-game lawyer Jack Thompson threatens to sue Amazon if the offending material isn't removed."
Isn't all publicity good publicity? At least there's interest in his book. ;-))
Does Amazon even own the comments? Like Slashdot, they probably have a disclaimer. Even then, isn't it considered free speech?
Now this was about 4 years ago, maybe they've changed since then, but we've found amazon to be pro-author.
First I must agree with every rational person posting here that this guy is an idiot, and has no right to sue Amazon. So to him I say, fuck you! Sue Slashdot now :P
/ 1647245&tid=105)
But as we're on the subject of the supposed negative influence of games, I must post something original about Child's Play, a charity that provides games to children stuck in hospital. (previous Slashdot coverage http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/08
To quote founders Gabe and Tycho (pennyarcade.com)
"For two years now we've set up and organized a charity called Child's Play. We set it up because we were angry the media decided to blame all the world's problems on games and gamers. Basically they said that gamers were bad people, and we thought that wasn't right. Apparently, you guys agreed: through Child's Play you sent nearly a million dollars in toys, games, and cash to the sick kids in Children's Hospitals around the nation."
So at some good (he'd disagree) did actually come indirectly from this guy voicing his wrong opinion. Argh, he makes me angry. Now excuse so I can kill some stuff in HL2.
The more Jack Thompson opens his mouth, the more of a joke he becomes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson
http://www.google.com/search?q="jack+thompson" blowhard
Here's an e-mail exchange between Jacko and a 14 yr. old boy.
http://croqaudile.com/?article_id=10299
The original e-mail is long, but if you keep reading you'll see how quickly Thompson's replies devolve into complete and utter asshattery.
Loud doesn't = right
lemme say that again for Jack's benefit
LOUD DOESN'T = RIGHT
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
This is a very interesting post on this guy, how a 14 year old properly rebutted all he has been bs'ing about. This 14 year old is not me... just posting what he put here because i find it interesting...
I wrote:
I found a link to your site, www.stopkill.com, through an online forum. I looked over it, and although I think that there is some genuine concern over the effect of violent media on kids, many of your statements on that site were made in ignorance. What I plan to do in this email is to help you gain a better understanding of video games, and to show you that while your intentions are good, your current course of action is a mistake. I'm going to present my arguments calmly and logically, and you're welcome to write a rebuttal if you wish. First off, let me tell you a little about myself. I'm 14, and I've been playing video games avidly since I was 8. I'm pretty knowledgeable about the subject of video games as a whole, and I've played my fair share of Halo 2 and other shooters, including the Ghost Recon series, which is regarded as one of the most realistic FPSs (first-person shooters, in case you aren't familiar with the terminology). I also enjoy strategy games, in which the death toll is often far higher than what you'd encounter in a FPS. I'm an archer, a martial artist (Tae Kwon Do), and I was taught how to operate a gun by my grandfather, who's an experienced hunter. And, oddly enough, I've never felt the urge to kill, or even seriously injure, anyone. I imagine that killing in self-defence would be extremely difficult for me, despite my alleged desensitization. Now I'd like to dismiss a misonception (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and not assuming that you're twisting the truth) you have about games like Halo, which are called FPSs. These are not "sniper games." They are games presented in first person, in which you shoot enemies, manage ammunition, and explore levels. You may fail to see the distinction between "sniper" and "first person" based on that description alone, but if you ever take the time to play any of these games, you'll understand that there is no comparison between playing a FPS and operating a rifle. Which brings me to my next point- games can't accurately "train" you to commit violent acts, despite your claims. First off, games are innacurate by their very nature, and they give you less practical knowledge on operating firearms than watching a few hours of History Channel would. Secondly, I'm going to walk you through a typical scenario of me playing Halo 2, which is probably the best FPS available right now1) I rotate the right control stick slightly, then hold down the right trigger. There is no violent intent towards my enemy, wether it's an AI-controlled bot or a human opponent I'm facing online- it's a simple challenge in the case of the former and a friendly competition in the case of the latter.(2) On screen, a series of polygons which emulate bullet trails appear. Those polygons collide with the polygons rendered to represent my enemy, and those same polygons then emulate my opponent dying.The important distinction here is that there is no gun, no bullets, and no enemy. There is a rotation of the control stick and a pull of the controller's trigger, resulting in a change of the onscreen display. Anyone who can't see the difference between this and the act of firing a gun at a human being is clearly unfit to be playing these games and, frankly, is an idiot. Which, once again, leads me to the next point I'm going to make. No one in their right mind would ever do the things that you blame on video games. A quick glance at such actions shows that there are far bigger, far more serious causes than violent media behind them. Now, you may wonder, "Why would someone kill a person in a video game if they think it's wrong to do in real life?" Well, the truth is, no one gets hurt when you kill a video game character. There are corporeal consequences to commiting acts of violence on rea
Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
Amazon are refusing to take down the fake ones because they dont explicitly break their rules, and instead pull the ones complaining about the fake reviews.
To make matters worse, when someone adds a 1* review to the self-published book, they copy that negative review to either my book or the o'reilly alternative. So we are getting our ranking pulled down by real reviews written about a different book.
This has been ongoing for months and amazon are doing nothing about it, even though it shows that you can't trust amazon reviews at all. What interested parties can do is go to this page and leave 1* comments to balance off the fake ones.
But what's even worse than the fact that Jack Thompson is flat-out wrong, is the fact that he, and those like him, end up hiding the real issues. Lets take the Columbine shootings as an example. There were plenty of people ready to blame music, tv, and video games for the shootings. Michael Moore examined the absurdity of these claims in Bowling for Columbine by observing that the shooters were bowling the morning of the shooting -- so why not blame bowling? The real issue was that these kids who committed the murders were the target of ongoing emotional torment and bullying from a lot of their classmates. Rather than say, hey wait a second, maybe we have to do something to prevent bullying and to teach kids to respect one another as human beings, Jack and his ilk blame all the wrong things. But then again, it's probably easier for Jack to attack these things than reach a 17-yr old highschool jock and try to get him to actually respect people who don't fit in.
I noticed a general trend.
There is an extreme amount of hatred towards Jack Thompson. Having read through some of the correspondence (already listed as links on other posts) it is very clear how this came about.
It is fine to have people of different persuasion or a different ideological bent. If you treat people you disagree with in a courteous & professional manner, they will most often respond in a civil manner.
However, if you take a juvenile approach towards your opponents, belittle them, and insult them, they will respond in kind.
Mr Thompson is only receiving what he has sown.
GG