Thompson Says Florida Bar Requested Psych Test

MBCook wrote with a link to a GamePolitics story about another chapter of the Jack Thompson saga. Sheila M. Tuma, a person associated with Thompson's Florida Bar evaluation, has requested that the colorful lawyer 'seek psychological testing and accept a 91-day suspension of his law license.'. Though they attempted to confirm this with the Bar, no one was inclined to give the site a comment. "The e-mail explaining the situation was sent to GamePolitics by Thompson himself. The recommendation comes following issues stemming from Thompson's Bully case last year where there were issues regarding his professional conduct."

Comments

Re:What a Goof

[endianx]

Who really needs psychological testing are the media outlets that continue to give this lunatic a platform. Like Slashdot? And you and I?

Paris Hilton

[Gertlex]

Jack is such an attention whore... And we dig it just as much as the rest of the world digs Paris Hilton's everyday antics.

The two would make a good pair... Thompson and Hilton: The Publicity Whoring Masters

Been done before

[orclevegam]

He's actually been ordered to take Psych test before and he managed to pass them. The guy is a moron, but unfortunatly he's not clinically insane. What will happen this time is probably the same thing that happened last time. He'll go do the test, pass it (although probably give the psychologist giving the test some interesting data to work on), and then make a huge PR event out of the fact that he's legally sane. He's got a few screws loose, but he's not missing any of them so they can't actually diagnose him with anything. They need to just disbar the guy and have done with it.

Re:What a Goof

[Enoxice]

I clicked the link. I got as far as the word "screamo" and stopped.

Re:What a Goof

[Red Flayer]

Who really needs psychological testing are the media outlets that continue to give this lunatic a platform.

Why is that? The media companies that give him an outlet make money off his attention-whoring -- they are acting quite rationally.

The real problem are the people who listen to, and believe, the demagogues -- in Thompson's case, because it's easier than addressing causes of violence other than cultural acceptance of it. This is particularly true of those in positions of power.

Going a little further, the problem (in the US) is that our electoral system + apathetic populace + corporate mass media == positive return on demagoguery. But I really don't want to get sidetracked down that road, so:

Jack Thompson is not a fool; he might even be unstable; but he fights for something he believes in, and does so pretty well, albeit via use of questionable methods. To belittle him is to belittle the effect he has on free speech issues wrt gaming, and that is a foolish thing to do. If you consider him an enemy, you should analyze his strengths as much as his weakneses.

Eh, this is going nowhere fast

[Steeltalon]

Psychological examination probably won't prove anything and his mental acuity isn't even really the thing that seems to cause problems. It is his professional demeanor or lack of therin. His conduct is unacceptable and his disbarment should be based on that. I'm sure that they're just hoping that he fails in order to give them "solid" justification to get rid of him.

Re:That makes sense.

[Valdrax]

Well, on one level I don't understand celebrity worship, but really, I think almost everybody has their celebrities. For most/many/some slashdotters they may not be actors, but it could be Joss Whedon, Linus Torvalds, Theo de Raadt, ESR, Richard Stallman, and even--as the GP mentioned--Thompson. Same kind of celebrity tracking, just a different kind of celebrity! (I'm think of names I see fairly regularly on slashdot..)

Well, yeah, I care about their newsworthy actions because they are usually doing something that affects my life (or at least the products I buy and use).

But I don't care about their marriages, their divorces, their kids (adopted or not), the cars they drive, the clothes they wear, the houses the live in, the vacations they take, or any of the rest of that stuff that shows up in the tabloids, in the entertainment section of the news, or in People magazine. As far as I'm concerned, the entertainment section of any cable news half hour is just 5 minutes of important news about the world events and political decisions that affect our lives that's not getting covered.

I mean, I care about what movies Brad Pitt's gonna star in 'cause he's one of my favorite actors, but I'd really rather be punched in the face than hear the term "Brangelina" EVER again in my life. That's the sort of nonsense I just don't understand. People who pin their hopes and dreams on mundane details of the daily lives of people they'll never personally know disappoint me.

Of course, I'm almost certainly preaching to the choir here on Slashdot.

Re:What a Goof

[MinutiaeMan]

"The multitude of books is a great evil. There is no limit to this fever for writing; every one must be an author; some out of vanity, to acquire celebrity and raise up a name, others for the sake of mere gain." -- Martin Luther predicts the Internet, ca. 1530

Re:what?

[Khaed]

He's not that bright of a person. He's a shifty asshole, but he's not really a smart shifty asshole. If you see the e-mails he sends out, it's very apparent that he's just... sort of a stupid guy.

I haven't believed that Jack Thompson cares much about the things he argues for in a while. I think he's just got very, very serious problems and gets off on the attention. He's like a real life, professional troll. He enjoys stirring up shit, and being in front of the camera. He likes that gamers are pissed at him. But if it wasn't gamers, it would be someone else.

By revealing this publicly, he not only gets attention, but a new round of shit storm with gamers on the web. People will post this and make fun of him and he'll jot off angry e-mails.

Re:What a Goof

[Red Flayer]

I think you missed my point -- companies don't have morality. And acting within the moral code of corporate management, the morally correct action is that which maximizes profit without exposing the company to undue risk.

At any rate, you're conflating rational thought with morality. Morality often entails making irrational actions within the framework for decision-making.

Note that I'm not supporting this; nor making any kind of judgment about it -- it's just the way that it is.