GameStop Manager Suspended After "Games for Grades"

mikesd81 writes "A manager at a GameStop has been suspended for instituting a 'games for grades' policy. 'Brandon Scott says he started a unique new policy in his store to promote good grades in school but now his employer has sent him to detention for speaking out of turn. Scott says he's been suspended by GameStop in the wake of his unconventional "games for grades" policy at an Oak Cliff store.' Apparently, on his own, Scott decided to stop selling video games to any school-age customer unless an adult would vouch for the student's good grades."

Comments

Bad idea

[Fierythrasher]

I can understand giving kids a discount for good grades...had he done that and been suspended then that would have been wrong, but refusing to sell? That's just bad business.

Re:Bad idea

[toddbu]

Bad business, perhaps, but is it bad policy? I hear a lot of people complaining that corporate America is heartless and doesn't care, yet when one guy tries to do something that's right for the kids then he gets picked on. Why is it unreasonable for a company to say that they're unwilling to promote bad grades?

Re:Bad idea

[ultranova]

Bad business, perhaps, but is it bad policy? I hear a lot of people complaining that corporate America is heartless and doesn't care, yet when one guy tries to do something that's right for the kids then he gets picked on. Why is it unreasonable for a company to say that they're unwilling to promote bad grades?

And when your local grocery store decides that they won't sell to you unless you can show a written confirmation from your local church that you have been there the last Sunday, is that still okay ? After all, being devote fundamentalist Christian, the grocer is convinced that you'll burn in Hell unless you convert, so he's simply being caring and trying to do right for you.

There is a huge difference between caring about people and trying to force your will on them, no matter how benevolent you think you're being. And traditionally, resource starvation has been one of the most efficient ways of coercion, as any army laying siege can tell you. Such enforcement might seem like it's nothing now because it's directed against kids and an unimportant resource; but even kids are human beings and shouldn't be subjected to arbitrary use of power by anyone who cares to do so. Besides, it's best to nip these things in the bud.

That, by the way, is also where the libertarian concept of "only physical force is coercion" falls flat on its face: I can kill you without ever lifting a finger against you if I control some vital resource.

Re:Bad idea

[StikyPad]

I was going to moderate, but I think you might actually believe what you're saying. So assuming you're not trolling:

when your local grocery store decides that they won't sell to you unless you can show a written confirmation from your local church that you have been there the last Sunday, is that still okay ?

No. Religion is explicitly prohibited as a reason for discrimination. What the manager did was not at all unconstitutional. If it was in violation of anything, it was corporate policy.

There is a huge difference between caring about people and trying to force your will on them, no matter how benevolent you think you're being.

There's also a huge difference between forcing your will on someone and refusing to do business with them. Namely, the former is generally illegal (with the exception of parent-child relationships) while the latter is perfectly reasonable, provided your business isn't a government protected monopoly like power or water.

I can kill you without ever lifting a finger against you if I control some vital resource.

True, which is why vital resources are protected by the government. Video games hardly fall into that category. Your argument of food is hypothetically valid, though in practice no single entity controls distribution, nor is the prospective buyer prohibited from growing/hunting his own, or going to a soup kitchen, etc. Aside from that, using your influence to deliberately cause or contribute to the death of someone else is clearly a criminal act, as is knowingly failing to prevent the death or egregious harm of another in the absence of danger to self or others. It's really a stretch to compare a sales policy on video games to willful disregard for life.

Re:They can just say that they fired him for lack

[garcia]

They can just say that they fired him for lack of sales and be done with.

There's a high probability that they don't have to give him any reason why they let him go. Honestly, while this might be great and all in theory, I don't see why GameStop wouldn't act the way they did, it would be different if this guy owned his own store and was instituting his own policy. When you work for corporate America you follow the proper channels or you end up like this poor bastard.

Lesson

[Kohath]

The lesson here is: don't try to be someone's Mom unless you are his Mom.

I wish more people in our society would learn this lesson. I'm old enough to not need a Mom to tell me what to do or not to do. Kids, on the other hand, already have a Mom and don't really need 50 of them.

GREAT Business, GREAT sense

[Moryath]

Look, fools, you can't have it both ways. Either there are going to be standards, or there aren't. There's already a standard that you don't sell M-rated games to underage kids, this isn't any different.

If he's unwilling to sell games to kids who are flunking out of school? I TOTALLY LOVE THAT STAND. Seriously, think about it. We have major issues these days with schools being fucked up. If kids aren't making the grade, we may love games, but just letting them play the games is not going to teach them to take school (and work) seriously.

Fuck Gamestop for suspending him. They should be putting him on a pedestal and making this a nationwide policy.

Re:GREAT Business, GREAT sense

[Jartan]

If he's unwilling to sell games to kids who are flunking out of school? I TOTALLY LOVE THAT STAND. Seriously, think about it. We have major issues these days with schools being fucked up. If kids aren't making the grade, we may love games, but just letting them play the games is not going to teach them to take school (and work) seriously.

What's the cutoff though? I agree if someone is flunking and in danger of being held back a year then they shouldn't be playing games. But what about people who are barely passing? Are you willing to go so far as to let society dictate to them a change in lifestyle? Do you even know if the school that person is going to is properly testing the student?

When so many questions are being asked about the institutions supplying those grades (in the US) the idea seems dangerous. A lot of those kids who are barely passing are the smart ones because they aren't buying into the bullshit daycare system they've been shoved into.

Re:GREAT Business, GREAT sense

[rainman_bc]

and since grades are set based on relative achievement No, grades are set based on achievement against a standard. Most schools don't grade on a curve. I used to have university profs say "everyone starts with an A, it's yours to lose".

Props to the Gamestop guy for trying to bring some morality to this industry.

Re:GREAT Business, GREAT sense

[fishybell]

They should be putting him on a pedestal and making this a nationwide policy.

Because, after all, gamestop should be parenting rather than, oh, I don't know, the parents. If parents wants to let their kids play games all day instead of studying they're not exactly right, but more power to them. You can't force people to make the right desisions.

Re:GREAT Business, GREAT sense

[Planesdragon]

Not everyone graduates highschool, By the time you're 20, if you haven't graduated highschool or gotten a GED, you're as far outside the norm of "everyone" as someone who's parents were filthy stinking rich.

and since grades are set based on relative achievement, a certain percentage of kids will always get bad grades Nope. Grades are based on absolute achievement -- otherwise they're meaningless. What backwards school did you go to?

Re:GREAT Business, GREAT sense

[JNighthawk]

I graduated high school with a 2.2 GPA. I *hated* class (but loved high school, since I got to hang out with my friends). Most of my classes were boring and slow, especially AP Comp. Sci. I played video games for *at least* 20-30 hours a week throughout high school.

Where am I now? Volition, Inc. I'm a game programmer.

Grades are bullshit, mostly. They're a measure of your desire to let the system mold you, your tolerance for menial busy-work, and your memorization skills. Not all classes are like that (very few at my college were, so I actually liked those classes and studied), but most public education is like that.

It's none of Gamestop's business what grades kids get. Leave the parenting to the parents.

Re:GREAT Business, GREAT sense

[The Living Fractal]

He wasn't forcing anyone to do anything. He was reserving his right to refuse business to anyone. He doesn't even need a reason.

And his manager exercised the right to suspend him without pay.

And the world spins on...

Re:GREAT Business, GREAT sense

[RobertM1968]

Really now, I think you are missing a very valid, important point this whole plan causes... PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT - the parents are forced to be involved in their kids' game-playing choices, as well as the fact their kids are getting good - or bad - grades is a reinforced memory. The fact that this store wont sell the kids games unless they are getting good grades should also thus (hopefully) prompt more parental involvement "Gee, that store manager was right... maybe I should look into other ways besides denying them the latest game to assist them in getting better grades"

Of course, the reality is probably that more parents, overburdened enough already just trying to make ends meet, will get less involved (or it wont change their involvement at all) under the false sense of security in the fact that "Gee, the store manager has already dealt with that issue"

Now, as for your change in lifestyle comment... I dont know about you, but if I was getting bad grades, and playing video games, I can guarantee you my parents would insist on a change in my lifestyle... (1) no games, (2) It would hurt sitting for at least a few days from the ass whooping I'd get. Am I condoning #2? No. (Though it was decent incentive for me to be an Honor Roll student)... but things that fit in the #1 category SHOULD be something considered by EVERY parent who wants to see their kids have a chance to succeed. Is school the be-all-end-all for having a successful life? NO... but it does help - in the very least, it opens up opportunities allowing the kid-turning-adult to choose when the time comes. Would you rather that, or a kid that wasnt motivated to do well in school who then complains the rest of his life that all he can be is a janitor? Being a janitor by choice is fine... not having a choice because when you were a kid, there was no incentive for good grades and behavior (and no punishment for bad) is pretty fucked up.

Your DayCare comment makes no sense... I doubt this story is about the guy not selling to kids in daycare. As for non-daycare school, I had some tough times because I was bored (thus didnt do my work, and had to struggle at the last minute to stay on the honor roll)... but I found that with the right motivation, that changed... got into AP classes, got more mentally challenged (pun possibly intended), and did far better in those classes than in the standard level classes.

Besides, it really shouldnt matter what SOCIETY does - it should really matter what is right - or wrong... not opinions, not faith, not "everyone does it".

For this guy to take such a stand, takes guts... funnily, if you go back in time a bit, substitute games with anything else that shouldnt be sold to a certain age, such as... cigarettes... you find something really interesting... he probably would be in the exact same situation had he not sold 17 year olds cigarettes because he didnt think he should be selling something to a kid who may not yet understand the risks they were undertaking... nowadays, if he DID sell those cigarettes, he'd get fined or worse... too much of a stink for the corporations to try to validate such sales. So, know you have a corporation looking for nothing more than making more money - at whatever legal expense, with no moral implications because of a society that doesnt care. And you apparently support that. Nice.

Re:GREAT Business, GREAT sense

[tsm_sf]

Good for you, Mr. Exception. Mr. Rule is the guy filling your soft drink.

Re:GREAT Business, GREAT sense

[LoverOfJoy]

In my experience, people use the term "curve" in vastly different ways. I believe the "real" usage of a curve is when the distribution of scores are taken and only the top x% get As the next y% get Bs etc. all the way down to Fs so no matter how hard or easy a test is, someone is guaranteed to get an A and someone is guaranteed to get an F.

As far as I know, this is only done when there are a lot of people (enough to get a good distribution) and even then typically only in very demanding disciplines (like medical school).

But some teachers will talk about a curve when they really mean that if everyone gets question #17 wrong then everyone's score will go up by x%

Another way I've heard people use it is when a teacher says he'll shift the top score in the class to 100% and whatever he has to add to the score will then also be added to every other student. For instance, the smartest kid in the class got a 92%. Then everyone in the class gets +8% added to their score.

I've seen a lot of variants to these types of "curves" but I've never had a true curve like the one I first described in any of the three colleges I've attended. That's not to say that no teacher in any of the schools I attended ever used a curve...perhaps some did...but I never was in their class nor did I ever hear of a fellow student complaining about it (and I heard lots of students complaining about all kinds of things in their classes).

I would be really surprised to hear of a high school or middle school that actually brought a kids score down because of a curve. Have you ever heard of a kid getting an 85 on a test but got an F because he happened to be on the low end of the curve (everyone else scored higher)? In my experience, if you did the work and followed the directions you were pretty much guaranteed a B- or higher. Every time I got lower or any of the people I knew got lower, it was because they didn't do an assignment, turned things in late on a regular basis, or something similar.

I imagine parents would go ballistic if their kid got a C or less in a class simply because, while they did the work well, others did it better.

You posted as an AC but if you do happen to read this, how were curves calculated and used in your undergraduate classes (and what was your major)?

Re:GREAT Business, GREAT sense

[MetaPhyzx]

You, are the exception to the rule (as was I). I saw this fella on CNN a few days ago, and his argument was that he was bothered by seeing kids come into his store who did not have basic reading skills, yet could tell you anything you wanted to know about the games. His policy was that he would not sell to a kid that was not passing in school, and if any kid got a slate of A's he would pay for a game out of his own pocket.

While he did overstep he did so out of a legitimate concern. Normally we see something like this in a "moral" light, for instance a pharmacist who refuses to sell the morning after pill, which is completely wrong.

This man's stance was a desire to see parents involved in what their children were doing, more so than any punishment.

Re:GREAT Business, GREAT sense

[n dot l]

Your DayCare comment makes no sense The comment makes perfect sense. It refers to the fact that public education in our society has almost nothing to do with education and everything to do with giving parents a place to park their kids while they go off to work.

If it were really about education then AP courses would be available everywhere. Also, the regular courses would be harder and students would graduate high school knowing the things we teach in first year university. It's not impossible - in fact it's how it's been done for years in Europe (though I hear Europe's been dumbing down as well), and Japan.

Instead we have a system (the majority of teachers, principals, school boards, regulatory agencies, etc) that doesn't give a shit what the students do so long as they sit still, play nice, and don't cause too much trouble. If that's not a day care I don't know what is.

Overall I agree, society should stand up for right and wrong, but this isn't the way to do it at all. Not letting kids buy games because they're failing is like attacking gays because straight people are divorcing in record numbers - it's shooting way off target at an only vaguely related "problem".

The real problem I see with this is 16-18 yr olds

[CrazyJim1]

Example: Someone has a car and good grades, but doesn't like to cart his mom with him. Result: No games for you!

Great idea, bad implementation

[Reason58]

Chuck E. Cheese used to have something very similar. You bring in your report card, and you would get free tokens for each good grade. When I read the title I thought this is what the manager was doing and thought it was a fantastic idea. After reading his negative-reinforcement approach, however, I agree fully with his dismissal.

Because it's not his place to do so

[Rix]

He hasn't the authority to be making those decisions. If the president of GameStop decided to do this it would be fine. When a peon goes behind the President's back and does it, it's a different story.

!GREAT Business, !GREAT sense

[mobby_6kl]

This guy is a fucking moron. I mean the guy from TFA, not the parent poster. I'll refrain from insults for now although I completely disagree on all counts. To get this out of the way, let's ditch the ratings too, they're bullshit. This way there shouldn't be any confusion about standards.

First of all, declining to sell the games to customers on random basis (he defines what "good grades" are, doesn't he?) is not what he was supposed to do. If he thought this would be beneficial to the business, he should've talked to the actual owners. He didn't and he got in trouble.

Secondly, the reason schools are all fucked up is NOT video games. I repeat, video games are not the reason schools suck. I'm rather big on procrastination, and I don't need any games to avoid working on the thesis. Neither do these kids. They'll find something else to do, which would be inevitably more interesting than doing homework. There are many options available, one could argue on slashdot, get drunk with their underage friends, watch paint dry, or, hell, even read a book.

And finally, even if we ignore the above two points, his negative approach is still stupid. Positive reinforcement would've worked just as well if not much better, without attracting any of the criticism. Simply give kids discounts for good grades. I've seen this done in a local computer hardware store, and while the discount wasn't huge, it was a nice touch. Maybe make each subject graded above X points worth a 5pp discount, or something. The more good grades the kids have, the more games they can buy. Everybody wins.

So in conclusion, fuck that guy. I'm glad they put a stop to this retarded policy before it could spread anywhere.