Slashdot Mirror


Referee Recommends Disbarment For Jack Thompson

spielermacher writes "GamePolitics is reporting that Jack Thompson — the lawyer every gamer loves to hate — has apparently lost his court case and is facing disbarment. The Referee in the case has gone beyond the Florida Bar's request for a 10-year disbarment and is recommending a lifetime ban. From the Final Report issued by the court: '... the Respondent has demonstrated a pattern of conduct to strike out harshly, extensively, repeatedly and willfully to simply try to bring as much difficulty, distraction and anguish to those he considers in opposition to his causes. He does not proceed within the guidelines of appropriate professional behavior ...' All I can say is that it's about time."

280 comments

  1. Thank Goodness by Gat0r30y · · Score: 5, Funny

    At least the US Gov. managed to do one thing right today.

    --
    Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
    1. Re:Thank Goodness by jcr · · Score: 5, Informative

      At least the US Gov. managed to do one thing right today.

      It's not the US government, it's the state of Florida.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    2. Re:Thank Goodness by stebalo · · Score: 5, Funny

      Game over man, game over!

      --
      "I drank what?" - Socrates
    3. Re:Thank Goodness by nomadic · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's not the US government, it's the state of Florida.

      Speaking as someone living in Florida, the idea that the state of Florida did something right is even more astounding than the idea that the US government did right.

    4. Re:Thank Goodness by elemnt14 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Does this mean he can appeal to a higher court to try to get it turned around? Thats not a pleasing thought.

    5. Re:Thank Goodness by joyfeather · · Score: 1

      It's about time the court system in Florida got something right. (And I speak as a FORMER resident.)

    6. Re:Thank Goodness by JordanL · · Score: 5, Funny

      Allow the government to spy on us without haebeus corpus or warrants... Permanently disbar JT...

      We might have gotten the better end of that trade.

      (I kid...)

    7. Re:Thank Goodness by jcr · · Score: 4, Informative

      He could try suing the Florida bar in federal court, but the chances of the circuit court taking the case are pretty slim.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    8. Re:Thank Goodness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not the US government, it's the state of Florida.

      It's not even the state of Florida. It's the Florida Bar, which is a professional organization set up by the Florida Supreme Court. So while it was granted authority by the government of Florida, it isn't part of the government of Florida.

    9. Re:Thank Goodness by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, as someone who lives right smack in orange county I'm pretty much struck fuck dumb by this. It's like something gave them a violent allergic reaction and it manifested as common sense, decency, and good taste instead of anaphylactic shock.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    10. Re:Thank Goodness by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Funny

      He could try suing the Florida bar in federal court, but the chances of the circuit court taking the case are pretty slim.

      Yes, because of violent gay gamer conspiracy operating at all levels of the courts working against him!

      Hey, with Jack out of the picture, someone has to step up to the plate at Crazy Bastard Memorial Field.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    11. Re:Thank Goodness by Narpak · · Score: 1

      And to think that it only took them eleven years to wake up and smell the coffee.

    12. Re:Thank Goodness by stfvon007 · · Score: 5, Funny

      is it hot coffee?

      --
      All misspellings and grammatical errors in the above post are intentional and part of my artistic expression.
    13. Re:Thank Goodness by f8l_0e · · Score: 1

      I wish he was on an express elevator to hell, going down.

    14. Re:Thank Goodness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's the Florida Bar, which is a professional organization set up by the Florida Supreme Court.

      It's not even the Florida Bar. It's just some guy named Frank.

    15. Re:Thank Goodness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I often applaud the creative (!) insertion of four-letter profanities into sentences, however the use here doesn't make any sort of sense nor does it have "a nice ring to it."

      Two out of a possible five stars. It would've been one star but I applaud your (albeit vain) effort.

    16. Re:Thank Goodness by Anpheus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wouldn't either the sudden outbreak of common sense or anaphylactic shock in politicians and lawyers be ideal outcomes?

    17. Re:Thank Goodness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it go any other way?

    18. Re:Thank Goodness by lostmongoose · · Score: 5, Funny

      Does it go any other way?

      Of course it does. How do you think JT got here to begin with?

    19. Re:Thank Goodness by catwh0re · · Score: 1

      it gets good at about pg 141.

    20. Re:Thank Goodness by jcr · · Score: 5, Informative

      The bar brought the suit to revoke his license. The state actually issues the license, and can revoke it when the bar recommends that it do so.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    21. Re:Thank Goodness by CrimsonScythe · · Score: 5, Funny

      Has anyone tried spraying him with holy water*? I have a feeling it may work.

      *Or pasta water, depending on your particular religion.

      --
      The view was horrible and the smell was even worse; Julie severely regretted becoming a proctologist.
    22. Re:Thank Goodness by hedwards · · Score: 1

      And fortunately, they don't have to grant the requests as requested. Which means possible permanent disbarment in the state. I suppose technically, it could still be appealed, but with the amount of evidence against him, he'd be smart to just pay the fine and give up.

      From what I can tell, the only thing that's really been decided is that he's not to be allowed to file court papers. The question at hand is for how long.

    23. Re:Thank Goodness by Peyna · · Score: 1

      The Supreme Court of the United States has said more than once that their is no right to be licensed to practice law. They have also said more than once that the regulation of the practice of law is a matter entirely left to the states.

      Such a lawsuit would be dismissed in about five seconds.

      --
      What?
    24. Re:Thank Goodness by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    25. Re:Thank Goodness by Miseph · · Score: 1

      In fairness, I'm sure they would re-evaluate that position in the case of a state bar association unreasonably revoking licenses to practice law (based on, say, race or political affiliation), but this case is not such a one.

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
    26. Re:Thank Goodness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      obligatory http://gameoverman.ytmnd.com/

      _AC

    27. Re:Thank Goodness by jcr · · Score: 1

      Such a lawsuit would be dismissed in about five seconds.

      It would take a bit longer than that. The circuit court judge would probably take the time to write a hilarious dismissal.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    28. Re:Thank Goodness by Peyna · · Score: 1

      The United States District Courts are the trial courts in the federal judicial system. The Circuit Courts of Appeal are, as the name suggest, the appellate courts.

      So, it would be a district court judge doing the dismissal.

      --
      What?
    29. Re:Thank Goodness by Hemogoblin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, I believe it was a federal court that decided that JT would not be allowed to file court papers with them, unless they were also signed by another attorney. That didn't really have anything to do with this bar trial, other than JT trying to cut off the bar trial by going to the federal court, which slapped him down. I'm just a layman, so check out these links for better info: link 1 link 2

      What has happened, is that the bar trial judge has found JT guilty, and her recommendation is PERMANENT disbarment, which wasn't mentioned in the summary. It's old news that he was found guilty, but we originally thought he'd only get disbarred for 10 years. Now it's being made permanent AND he has to pay costs.

    30. Re:Thank Goodness by Dishevel · · Score: 0, Redundant

      It's the Florida Bar, which is a professional organization set up by the Florida Supreme Court.

      It's not even the Florida Bar. It's just some guy named Frank.

      It is not even Frank. It is his wifes, brothers buddy from college.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    31. Re:Thank Goodness by PIBM · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't think it is anymore..

    32. Re:Thank Goodness by chunkyq · · Score: 1

      I'm very disappointed in myself right now. I'm reading a discussion about Jack Thompson, but I read JT as Justin Timberlake.

    33. Re:Thank Goodness by Qhartb · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's not actually some guy named Frank. It's a broom.

    34. Re:Thank Goodness by renegadesx · · Score: 1

      Next thing you know he will come out and dsay he appealed the case to God and he overturned it. Next thing you know somebody will call Bellevue and this will finally be over with.

      --
      Make SELinux enforcing again!
    35. Re:Thank Goodness by jimicus · · Score: 1

      someone has to step up to the plate at Crazy Bastard Memorial Field.

      He's not dead yet, why would you have a field dedicated to his memory?

    36. Re:Thank Goodness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can someone who remembers their slashdot login and has signatures turned off verify that '-jcr' is in the signature of this poster, if it ***ISN'T*** then this is very sad.

    37. Re:Thank Goodness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Smart?!

      You obviously don't know Jack Thompson.

    38. Re:Thank Goodness by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      A million steps!

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    39. Re:Thank Goodness by somersault · · Score: 1

      yeah, 'dumbfuckstruck' would have had a nicer ring to it at least, even if it still makes no sense other than as self-pwnage.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    40. Re:Thank Goodness by The+Dancing+Panda · · Score: 1

      It was the gay porn submitted as evidence. As much as they love their censorship, they hate their gays more.

    41. Re:Thank Goodness by timster · · Score: 1

      I don't know, I think I like it. Read literally, it suggests that he was struck so much, he's unable to say "fuck". But he is saying "fuck", so it's self-contradictory. Nice touch.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    42. Re:Thank Goodness by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Funny

      Call it wishful thinking. :)

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    43. Re:Thank Goodness by C0vardeAn0nim0 · · Score: 1

      don't tell this to anyone on fark.com. i don't know if they can handle such a bad case of cognitive dissonance.

      --
      What ? Me, worry ?
    44. Re:Thank Goodness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the Florida Bar, which is a professional organization set up by the Florida Supreme Court.

      It's not even the Florida Bar. It's just some guy named Frank.

      It's actually the voices that Frank hears while playing video games.

    45. Re:Thank Goodness by DaveP+in+Ohio · · Score: 1

      If Jack Thompson is disembarred, can he still defend himself pro se in a lawsuit???

    46. Re:Thank Goodness by skorch · · Score: 1

      As both a scientist and a pastafarian, I can say with all confidence that boiling pasta water has a much greater chance of burning when coming into contact with JT's skin than holy water does

    47. Re:Thank Goodness by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1

      Frankly Qhartb, I'm surprised.

      --
      "I only speak the truth"
      Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    48. Re:Thank Goodness by Sczi · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty much struck fuck dumb by this

      I think the actual expletive should have been hyphenated. I don't generally deduct stars for grammar in vulgar statements, but the hyphen would have enhanced the readability. In terms of actual effect, I think the "fuck" lends a nice sense of gravity to the relative dumbness. However, I found the assonance of the repetitive "u" sound rolls off the tongue poorly, with "much struck" being particularly egregious. I'd give it 3/5, but I think it could easily pull a 4/5 with minor tweaks.

    49. Re:Thank Goodness by jZnat · · Score: 1

      Even if he could, it's never a good idea to defend yourself in court. You need an emotionless person to handle that for you. It's kind of hard to remain emotionless when you're talking about yourself.

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    50. Re:Thank Goodness by DaveP+in+Ohio · · Score: 1

      True, but I defended myself several years ago and the counsel for the plantiff withdrew the case because I had all the facts straight and knew how to present them... Debate is a wonderful course to take in high school. Never argue with a debater, they will take you down the primrose path and leave you there with too many facts that you can't dispute.

    51. Re:Thank Goodness by 3p1ph4ny · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure why it's sad, however it's not his signature, it's in his posts.

    52. Re:Thank Goodness by slashdotwannabe · · Score: 1

      Hey, with Jack out of the picture, someone has to step up to the plate at Crazy Bastard Memorial Field.

      Build it, and they will come.

      --
      This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
    53. Re:Thank Goodness by rudeboy1 · · Score: 1

      You are correct in this. However, I would love to know how many occasions JT has actually made it through a trial without resorting to flailing his arms about and sputtering out sentance fragments. I have a deep seated belief that this is why he does what he does today. When he's filing briefs and suits based on what he believes is morally right, he's not acting on behalf of a paying client. Who in their right mind is going to hire an attorney with this guy's record of shenanigans? It would not surprise me in the least to learn that he took up this cause as a last resort because acting the way he does now completely screwed him out of a client base at one point earlier on in his career.

      --
      Raging in an online forum won't do anything for the world around you. To see change, you must take action.
    54. Re:Thank Goodness by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 1

      Oh please, this is one of the few states where a man can walk around in dick-tight pants and a pirate hat and nobody will consider it terribly out of the ordinary.

      Our most famous state citizen is a mouse that supposedly has a girlfriend he never seems to do much with but spends an awful lot of time with a bunch of guys (including a sailor without any pants) wearing nothing but a pair of boxers.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    55. Re:Thank Goodness by Workaphobia · · Score: 1

      You forgot to say something anti-Islamic. You're a mere shadow of the former King Bastard.

      --
      Evidently, the key to understanding recursion is to begin by understanding recursion. The rest is easy.
    56. Re:Thank Goodness by jhsiao · · Score: 1

      Just because he can't file court papers, doesn't mean he's defanged.

      Reading the document, I believe that his own lawyer--Ray Reiser--could file court papers for him. Since Mr. Reiser is a longtime colleague on other cases (e.g. taking over the Alabama case), I won't hold my breath that we've seen the end of Mr. Thompson in the courtroom. In fact, it would be even more likely that Mr. Thompson would be called as an expert witness on videogame violence by Mr. Reiser.

      And you don't need to be licensed to practice law to be a interviewed on a news program.

  2. It's not just lifetime disbarment by Southpaw018 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Judge also wants him to cough up $43,000 to cover the Bar costs because the whole thing was so outrageous.

    --
    ACs are modded -6. I don't read you, I don't mod you, I don't see you. Don't like it? Don't be a coward.
    1. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by bloobloo · · Score: 5, Funny

      The Judge also wants him to cough up $43,000 to cover the Bar costs because the whole thing was so outrageous.

      That's a lot of beer

    2. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by mrmeval · · Score: 3, Informative

      107,000 gallons if you like home brewing very good American swill. A little less if you go for real beer. Less if you go for chinkweiser and not enough if it's German beer. ;)

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    3. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by dhavleak · · Score: 1

      It seems too good to be true.

      Is there anything to stop him from making the exact same amount of noise, but just hiring other lawyers to do the legal mumbo jumbo?

    4. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3500 gallons of German beer (2EUR per liter).

    5. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Is there anything to stop him from making the exact same amount of noise, but just hiring other lawyers to do the legal mumbo jumbo?

      I can't see any competent lawyer touching him with a 10' pole.

    6. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by jamesh · · Score: 4, Funny

      I can't see any competent lawyer touching him with a 10' pole.

      Good thing there aren't any incompetent lawyers out there then...

    7. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by virgil_disgr4ce · · Score: 1

      A 10' lawyer-pole?

    8. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

      After being in a courtroom with Thompson, beer only makes you want to go take a leak. You want stuff that's at least 40-proof.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    9. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exsqueeze me, I'm an 11-foot Czecheslovakian, may I be of assistance??

    10. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by clickety6 · · Score: 2, Funny

      The Judge also wants him to cough up $43,000 to cover the Bar costs because the whole thing was so outrageous.

      That's a lot of beer

      It's a hell of a lot of hot coffee ! ;-)

      --
      ----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
    11. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by CountBrass · · Score: 1

      Why would any lawyer who's seen JT get disbarred for his behaviour step in and start behaving in the same way on JT's behalf?

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    12. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have a Lawer license?

    13. Re:It's not just lifetime disbarment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My God - there ARE other people that know about Budweiser masquerading as beer instead of realy being beer...

  3. so what by heptapod · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He'll probably make more cash being a commentator on Fox News pushing their particular agenda. He's been defanged but no one's cut his vocal cords.

    1. Re:so what by Kenoli · · Score: 1

      People stopped listening to him a long time ago.

    2. Re:so what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give the kids some time to play more video games. They'll get around to it.

    3. Re:so what by thermian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      People stopped listening to him a long time ago.

      Ah no, there you're wrong. Never underestimate the entertainment value of a nutbar in vocal mode.

      What they've done is stop taking him seriously. I'm a long way from being tired hearing about him.

      In my opinion, one of the best treatments of his obviously deranged state is that done by de-rez http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/de-rez/55-Jack-Thompson-The-Movie

      Serious coffee on keyboard time.

      --
      A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
    4. Re:so what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Weak troll effort. Who modded this up to a 5?

    5. Re:so what by Known+Nutter · · Score: 1

      Personally, I'd like to see Jack Thompson gay it up with Ted Stevens on youtube. Or not...

      --
      Beware of the Leopard.
    6. Re:so what by Wandering+Wombat · · Score: 1

      They put things in the out-tubes?

      --
      I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
    7. Re:so what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He'll probably make more cash being a commentator on Fox News pushing their particular agenda. He's been defanged but no one's cut his vocal cords.

      They had to remove the parts demanding his vocal cords be removed and castration to avoid him reproducing. Several member thought it went too far but it was a split decision.

    8. Re:so what by thermian · · Score: 1

      Nice to see someone paying homage to Adams with a suitably obscure sig.

      My three years at college were spent with a sign containing that phrase on my door. I lost count of the number of times clueless fellow students asked me what it meant.

      --
      A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
    9. Re:so what by merreborn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He'll probably make more cash being a commentator on Fox News pushing their particular agenda. He's been defanged but no one's cut his vocal cords.

      His disbarment would discredit him in a very real way. For a major television network to present him as a credible expert after this, they'd have to think their viewers complete idiots.

      It remains to be seen just how low an opinion fox news holds of their viewers.

    10. Re:so what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Two words - Nancy Grace.

    11. Re:so what by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...they'd have to think their viewers complete idiots.

      There might be a place for him as White House press secretary.

    12. Re:so what by JohnnyGTO · · Score: 2, Funny

      We don't want him, we think he's nuts. Send him to CNN their the ones with the wacky agendas.

      --
      Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
    13. Re:so what by segfault7375 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ... For a major television network to present him as a credible expert after this, they'd have to think their viewers complete idiots.

      Yeah, I think that's about right these days.

    14. Re:so what by seachnasaigh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Um, yeah. I think they have a pretty low opinion of their viewers' intelligence already. And I'm not sure they're wrong. Have you SEEN Fox News lately? Their definition of a credible expert leaves me with some confusion about the definition of the term.

      --
      Irish by birth, Southern by the Grace of God.
    15. Re:so what by cyphercell · · Score: 1

      Fox News????!!! Are you fucking serious?

      --
      Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
    16. Re:so what by sedmonds · · Score: 0

      they'd have to think their viewers complete idiots.

      The GP -did- say Fox News.

    17. Re:so what by StaticEngine · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Not necesarily. This is FOX we're talking about. They could simply paint him as the victim of some "Activist Judges," and as a martyred hero for the god-fearing, hard-working moral people of America.

    18. Re:so what by game+kid · · Score: 1

      For a major television network to present him as a credible expert after this, they'd have to think their viewers complete idiots.

      This is Fox News we're talking about.

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    19. Re:so what by Gideon+Fubar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That might work.. until someone asks him about the gay porn he kept submitting to the courts.

      --
      http://www.xkcd.com/354/
    20. Re:so what by Nimey · · Score: 1

      they'd have to think their viewers complete idiots.

      Consider that this is Fox News. Think upon the sort who regularly watches Hannity, O'Reilly, Coulter, and the rest, the type who thinks catering to bias and partisanship is "fair and balanced".

      They don't have to think.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    21. Re:so what by magus_melchior · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think they still have Karl Rove appear as a "guest commentator", so their opinion of their viewers is frighteningly low.

      On the other hand, Rove is the Joseph Goebbels of the neoconservative Republicans...

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    22. Re:so what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His disbarment would discredit him in a very real way. For a major television network to present him as a credible expert after this, they'd have to think their viewers complete idiots.

      Therefore, Fox News.

    23. Re:so what by Don_dumb · · Score: 1

      Rove is the Joseph Goebbels of the neoconservative Republicans...

      I don't think his kids will want to hear that.

      --
      If this were really happening, what would you think?
    24. Re:so what by Tom · · Score: 1

      His disbarment would discredit him in a very real way. For a major television network to present him as a credible expert after this, they'd have to think their viewers complete idiots.

      Two words: Uri Geller

      The way was completely destroyed, and everyone who cares to do even a little research knows he's a charlatan, and probably a criminal.

      And yet, he just keeps going. And the media keeps inviting him back, presenting him again, falling for him all the time. They are either unbelievably dumb, or think that their viewers, readers and listeners are.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    25. Re:so what by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      He's behind the times. These days he should submit "video evidence" that is just a tape with a Rick Astley music video on it.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    26. Re:so what by christ,+jesus+H · · Score: 1

      Fox News has been pretty unashamed about believing that thier viewers are idiots, they dont even pretend to respect them. Really Jack Thompson is a perfect "expert" for them. Just like thier political "experts", hes really just a guy with a specific personal agenda, who actually knows very little about the subject hes discussing. He would fit in perfectly with the rest of Roger Aisles minions.

      --
      Ohh spiteful one tell me who to smote and he shall be smolten!
    27. Re:so what by Myopic · · Score: 1

      You incorrectly imply that there was a time when broadcasters didn't treat their customers as imbeciles. That has never been the case.

  4. Censorship? by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Who tagged this story "censorship". Jack Thompson can think or say whatever he wants, but abusing his legal standing to further his cause is not acceptable to the Bar. Also he's acted unprofessional numerous times.

    1. Re:Censorship? by JCSoRocks · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not tagged Censorship because the gov't is censoring him... it's tagged Censorship because that's what he's always pushing for and he's finally getting the throttling he deserves.

      --
      You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
    2. Re:Censorship? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe Jack Thompson thought he was being censored when the courts objected to him including gay porn in his legal filings.

      Btw, he really did this. And he likes to dress up as Batman.

    3. Re:Censorship? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so she's loose now because she dumped your ass in middle school and found someone more endowed to fill her nights.

  5. Sorry, but I just have to do this... by SiriusStarr · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ding-dong the witch is dead
    Which old witch? The wicked witch
    Ding-dong the wicked witch is dead
    Wake up you sleepyhead
    Rub your eyes, get out of bed
    Wake up the wicked witch is dead
    She's gone where the goblins go
    Below - below - below
    Yo-ho, let's open up and sing and ring the bells out
    Ding Dong' the merry-oh, sing it high, sing it low
    Let them know the Wicked Witch is dead

    :-)

    --
    Fear the penguin.
    1. Re:Sorry, but I just have to do this... by Bomarc · · Score: 1

      One contract that I was at had an incompetent DBA. (The first time I began to question her abilities was when she asked if changing the desktop bitmap would impact system performance). When I found out she was terminated (about 15 minutes before a meeting I was going to host) I found a .mid file with this on it. Only my manager knew the real reason for the song playing in the background...

      Yo-ho

    2. Re:Sorry, but I just have to do this... by allanw · · Score: 2, Informative

      One contract that I was at had an incompetent DBA. (The first time I began to question her abilities was when she asked if changing the desktop bitmap would impact system performance).

      It does. At least on very old computers with little RAM, if you had a large desktop image, it'd have to swap it from disk to display it, so the desktop would take very long to display. I still remember the days...

    3. Re:Sorry, but I just have to do this... by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      I seem to remember stories that MS wouldn't give support on their server OSes if you switched the default ugly green background. But that's probably just rumour. And while you are right, that the image would take up some space in memory, it would probably only take up about 4 megs, even for a 1280x1024 image. Which isn't a whole lot for most modern systems. If you're running your computer that close to the red line, you could probably do with an upgrade.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    4. Re:Sorry, but I just have to do this... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      "At least on very old computers with little RAM"

      Hate to tell you, but I once paid $900 for 16 MB of system RAM, and my first graphical Windows (3.1) machine had 4 MB in it. And that stupid BMP format MS insisted on using took up a LOT of valuable hard disk space.

    5. Re:Sorry, but I just have to do this... by TheLink · · Score: 1

      1) Changing the desktop bitmap does impact system performance.
      2) If you don't know it doesn't necessarily mean you aren't a good DBA

      If you set your desktop to no background picture, Windows works faster when redrawing stuff - no need to redraw your picture, no need to remember your picture in RAM.

      If you have a 1 million pixel pic on your screen and it is 24 bit it takes at least 3MB of RAM to store it uncompressed. In the old days when computers had 16MB or less, 3MB was significant. IIRC my first win 95 box didn't have much RAM. Nowadays just loading up facebook and clicking a few times will cause my browser to use up > 60MB of RAM.

      I personally set my desktop background to black since I usually prefer my windows maximized to full screen, so I don't often see the destop.

      --
    6. Re:Sorry, but I just have to do this... by phorm · · Score: 1

      Yup. Also, in the win9x days, using a .JPG file for a background would require enabling "Active Desktop," which was a pretty big resource hog in the earlier periods of windows.

      Of course, loading a 32-bit 1500x1100 BMP file tended to use a fair bit of memory as well. I seem to remember watching some low-RAM machines /w crappy graphics cards go to town just trying to clear a window and repaint the background with those in place.

    7. Re:Sorry, but I just have to do this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...... er, DUH! The original post didn't say the response, only that she asked. And it was the *START*. Some people *REALLY need to read the post before they respond!

    8. Re:Sorry, but I just have to do this... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It definitely seems like there's disk churning sometimes after using a lot of high-memory applications on Windows XP, and then uncovering the desktop. I doubt it's the only thing being paged back in, but I bet that it is.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:Sorry, but I just have to do this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iuqwed hoqw oiqdwlk noniwqnd qinqw ndwqlkdw ngfeiu jigew jowemg klwngjwgiu HE YF K KJQ FKJk usah adnhsa nbdajds dakjd nqkwqkid n iqwd nbfb iu oiwow h wqnhu iuwqndwnjuqwdbf i iqndjwq kj qkjwq hjfejAKA iudssdhi njasdn njads iuqwed hoqw oiqdwlk noniwqnd qinqw ndwqlkdw ngfeiu jigew jowemg klwngjwgiu HE YF K KJQ FKJk usah adnhsa nbdajds dakjd nqkwqkid n iqwd nbfb iu oiwow h wqnhu iuwqndwnjuqwdbf i iqndjwq kj qkjwq hjfejAKA iudssdhi njasdn njads iuqwed hoqw oiqdwlk noniwqnd qinqw ndwqlkdw ngfeiu jigew jowemg klwngjwgiu HE YF K KJQ FKJk usah adnhsa nbdajds dakjd nqkwqkid n iqwd nbfb iu oiwow h wqnhu iuwqndwnjuqwdbf i iqndjwq kj qkjwq hjfejAKA iudssdhi njasdn njads iuqwed hoqw oiqdwlk noniwqnd qinqw ndwqlkdw ngfeiu jigew jowemg klwngjwgiu HE YF K KJQ FKJk usah adnhsa nbdajds dakjd nqkwqkid n iqwd nbfb iu oiwow h wqnhu iuwqndwnjuqwdbf i iqndjwq kj qkjwq hjfejAKA iudssdhi njasdn njads

  6. All I can say is.... by BZWingZero · · Score: 1

    It's about time! I really hope they make sure he pays the court costs.

  7. Muahahahaha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Florida Bar Wins.

    Fatality

    1. Re:Muahahahaha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finish him!

  8. Owned by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

    I believe I speak for all of us when I say, "OWNED!"

    Hopefully, no one will listen to him any more if he gets the disgrace of permanent disbarment. Some crazies might, but with that kind of mark on his record, I can't imagine any mainstream press would touch him.

    --
    "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    1. Re:Owned by nomadic · · Score: 2, Funny

      Some crazies might, but with that kind of mark on his record, I can't imagine any mainstream press would touch him.

      Well there's always Fox News.

    2. Re:Owned by Edward+Teach · · Score: 3, Informative

      Shouldn't that be "PWNED!"?

      --

      Setting his threshold to 5, Sparky eliminated most of the trolls on /.

    3. Re:Owned by PIBM · · Score: 1
    4. Re:Owned by VanessaE · · Score: 1
      I was thinking more like...

      <speech voice="quake">THREE frags left.</speech>

      (Where the other three are the RIAA, MPAA, and Microsoft)

  9. But...But... by Ngarrang · · Score: 4, Funny

    Bill G. retires. And now Jack T. is being disbarred. Who will be the slashdot editor post about for us to all agree on in our complaints?!

    --
    Bearded Dragon
    1. Re:But...But... by LoverOfJoy · · Score: 1

      There's still George B. for a little bit longer.

    2. Re:But...But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Who will be the slashdot editor post about for us to all agree on in our complaints?!

      With that type of grammar, I nominate you.

    3. Re:But...But... by The+FNP · · Score: 1

      Just because Bill G. is retired, doesn't mean we won't hear lots of bitching about Steve B. here on /.

      --The FNP

    4. Re:But...But... by hedwards · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Give Bill a break, it's not like we don't have Steve B. to mock. And to be fair, Steve is at least 3x the schmuck that Bill ever was.

    5. Re:But...But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cowboy Neal?

    6. Re:But...But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Give Bill a break, it's not like we don't have Steve B. to mock. And to be fair, Steve is at least 3x the schmuck that Bill ever was.

      Yep. From all reports Bill only threw a cushion.

    7. Re:But...But... by lupine_stalker · · Score: 1

      Bill G. retires. And now Jack T. is being disbarred. Who will be the slashdot editor post about for us to all agree on in our complaints?!

      Don't worry mate, the MAFIAA is still around and Fox News is still broadcasting, we have plenty of material.

      --
      Ninjas use italics.
  10. Soon, Jack Thompson for Senetor/representative by nicolas.kassis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Don't think it's the last time we see this guy lobbying for the elimination of xyz. Just a little bump in the road.

    1. Re:Soon, Jack Thompson for Senetor/representative by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

      Given SatanicPuppy's comment, he's already got the filibuster down.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
  11. The ruling is a trip. by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I love reading legal documents where it's clear that the person being deposed is batshit crazy, and they're trying not to use pejorative language while stating the facts.

    As an example, the line "During his testimony, the undersigned Referee asked for clarification of Mr. Thompson as to which of the four binders of exhibits in evidence he was referring. Once clarified, Mr. Thompson spoke at length, before re-addressing the issues" is footnoted with the following:

    What followed the Court's inquiry regarding clarification as to in which binder the document was located, is twenty-three (23) pages of testimony by Mr. Thompson involving matters such as: why he had not shaved that day for court; referring to the "Twinkie" case about the killing of a Mayor in San Francisco; a lawsuit filed by him in Kentucky in 1999 involving allegations regarding a video game entitled, 'Doom'; an interview with Matt Lauer from NBC's Today show; the killings in Columbine; information about a Lt. Colonel David Grossman regarding his book, On Killing; information regarding addressing the American Bar Association and his shared Christian values with David Grossman; former President Bill Clintonâ(TM)s radio address regarding David Grossman (sometime during the Clinton administration years); an appearance with now deceased CBS reporter Ed Bradley of 60 Minutes; comments by Peggy Noonan-former President Ronald Reagan's speech writer-and an article she wrote for The Wall Street Journal; comments about the movie starring actors Russell Crowe and Al Pacino, called The Insider; issues regarding products liability and 'Big Tobacco'; the alleged targeting by Mr. Thompson by Blank Rome; information about Doug Lowenstein described as the president and chief lobbyist for the parent company of the ESRB (Entertainment Software Rating Board)--which Mr. Thompson alleges now "represents gun running cartels." T 1068, line 7; an article published in Reader's Digest with actor Tom Hanks on the cover; Mr. Thompson's meeting with convicted murderer Devin Moore on death row; a contention of a racial component in defendant Moore's case, "they certainly have it to contend with in Alabama being a slave state," T 1070, line 15, 1071, line 1; information that allegedly occurred the week of the Final Hearing in this disciplinary matter regarding comments made by a law enforcement officer in Australia and New Zealand equating a spike in teen violence with interactive violent video games; an article which purportedly appeared in Time magazine quoting David Grossman; the connection of violence towards law enforcement officers and interactive video games that simulate the killing of officers; and the numerous civil lawsuits filed across the country in various jurisdictions which lead to the filing of the Strickland case in Fayette, Alabama.

    I'm almost going to miss the crazy bastard. This stuff is too good to be fake.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    1. Re:The ruling is a trip. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Funny

      I've got to admit, after reading that, I'm really rather curious as to why he didn't shave!

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    2. Re:The ruling is a trip. by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      His Level 14 "Wall of Words" didn't have high enough defense.

    3. Re:The ruling is a trip. by The+Iso · · Score: 1

      We laughed at him and made jokes, but he proved, beyond the shadow of a doubt and with geometric logic, that murder simulators cause violence.

      --
      "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows." - Bob Dylan
    4. Re:The ruling is a trip. by Darundal · · Score: 1

      Can someone post a link?

    5. Re:The ruling is a trip. by DrivingBear · · Score: 1

      Facial Hair = Wisdom
      QED

      --
      How can that be?
    6. Re:The ruling is a trip. by Anonymous+Meoward · · Score: 1

      I love reading legal documents where it's clear that the person being deposed is Katherine Harris crazy

      Fixed it for ya.

      Seriously tho', we need to put a stop to the disease that is Florida. To quote Bugs Bunny: "South America, take it away!"

      --
      --- The American Way of Life is not a birthright. Hell, it's not even sustainable.
  12. Dismemberment? by SoupGuru · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dang it! I totally thought that said "dismemberment"!

    --
    What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable
    1. Re:Dismemberment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can honestly say, I'm not the only one who hoped that happened to him, can you?

    2. Re:Dismemberment? by JohnnyGTO · · Score: 1

      Put the Clydesdales away pa, the man said disbarment. Dang, thought we'd have us a good old draw and quarter!

      --
      Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
    3. Re:Dismemberment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Dang it! I totally thought that said "dismemberment"!

      *BOOM HEADSHOT*
      Logic PWNS --> Jack Tompson

    4. Re:Dismemberment? by lysse · · Score: 1

      It's surely obvious that his member is so redundant that he wouldn't even miss it...

  13. Good riddance to bad advocate by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's really a shame that the anti-violent game lobby has someone like JT as a de-facto spokesman.

    Ultimately - even if you disagree - they have a reasonable position. i.e. it's generally bad for kids to play violent games. and all reasonable positions should be considered. Having someone who goes off at wild tangents, blames everything on games whether there's any evidence or not and pisses off the entire legal system is not really a good person to have on your side.

    1. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Bane1998 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's really a shame that the anti-violent game lobby has someone like JT as a de-facto spokesman. Ultimately - even if you disagree - they have a reasonable position. i.e. it's generally bad for kids to play violent games. and all reasonable positions should be considered. Having someone who goes off at wild tangents, blames everything on games whether there's any evidence or not and pisses off the entire legal system is not really a good person to have on your side.

      We'll have to agree to disagree that it's a reasonable position. I think it's unreasonable to make that jump that it's 'bad.' Further, even if I agreed, it's not up to the government to decide this, it's up to the parents and families and individuals. The Video Game Industry, afaik, has always been reasonably responsible in rating their games, and parents can decide if thier kids can play M-rated games or not. I really don't understand the basis for the 'anti' argument at all. Don't like it, don't play it, and don't let your kids play it.

      Though I think sheltering your kids is far more harmful to their development than letting them play M-rated games, you don't see me insisting we pass laws saying you should let your kids play whatever games they want to. It's not my business to tell you how to raise your kids.

    2. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It may be a reasonable position, but is it a correct one? So far nobody's been able to come up with any hard numbers agreeing with it. All the results are either "no correlation" or "kids who play violent video games are slightly less likely to be violent than average".

      The position that if you're standing in the airlock of the ISS and give a good shove off, sending yourself flying away from the station and towards Earth, you'll burn up in the atmosphere is also a reasonable one. It just happens not to be correct. One orbit later you'll find yourself bumping off the ISS again. Common sense might say one thing, but orbital mechanics says another. I suspect the same thing's at work: common sense might say that violent games should beget violent acts, but reality and psychology don't work the way common sense says they should. Nothing new there, lots of things that're true violate common sense.

    3. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's reasonable about their position? Children shouldn't play violent games unsupervised? Ok, I'll but that. But what's reasonable, that video games are primarily at fault, and reasonable adults should change their entertainment habbits for the unsupported emotional convienence of others. Or could it be that children are not subject to supervision they need. Let's not confuse superstition for reason.

      I know who to blame. The parents. All of them. Children are the same as they always were. Nature has seen quite ably to that. Parents for whatever reason, have changed their priorities. Their children just aren't as important as they were. They are 1st in rhetoric only. It's why there should be special child licences and taxes. Make parents pay more, a lot more, at every opportunity. They'll think about and appreciate what they're spending the reasources and eventually time on more. And that will result in better children becoming better adults. The idea that someone's narccasistic view of their own genetic tailings is in any way obligates me to some sort of self-sacrifice is ridiculous.

    4. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "It's really a shame that the anti-violent game lobby has someone like JT as a de-facto spokesman. "

      Not unless one supports that lobby, who remind me of the anti-comic book loons when I was young (eons ago).
      IMO they richly deserve him.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    5. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Sure, the position is reasonable, but that's for parents to decide, not legislators. It's not like movies are similarly restricted.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    6. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by cephah · · Score: 3, Informative

      I used to think it was a silly position as well, but after reading a post on slashdot recommending this book I've gotta admit that I've changed stance on the subject. He compares video games with the military's conditioning. Say what you want, the guy knew a lot on the subject. PS: It's only the last chapter of the book that's about video games / movies and their effects but the rest is an interesting read.

    7. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "they have a reasonable position. i.e. it's generally bad for kids to play violent games"

      How and when this became a reasonable position?

      It is *adults* very seriously playing violent games (ie: war) which it is bad.

      I see no reasonable position claiming there's any kind of relationship between playing indians and cow-boys or looking at how many times Wile E. Coyote ends crashed at the bottom of so high cliff and Irak war.

    8. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      First of all, where's the evidence that playing violent video games is actually bad? In Rome, people used to take their kids to the arena to watch gladiators kill, or be killed, by each other, elephants, lions, tigers, bears and so forth. The fact is that violence, and sometimes rather extreme violence, has been part of human entertainment for millennia. Heck, during wartime, educating the kiddies in violence has long been a tradition, just in case they're needed to either fight in battle or defend their homes.

      Beyond that, it's the parent's job, not some legislator giving a psychological blowjob to religious fundamentalists (whose holy book is filled with all kinds of murder on small and large scale). I resent any lunatic lawyer, politician or religious fruitcake telling me how to raise my kids.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    9. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by geekoid · · Score: 2

      "...generally bad for kids to play violent games."

      Please cite the study that comes to that conclusion. Be specific as to the age range the studies includes.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    10. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Indeed. Video games seem to have taken the place of tabletop roleplaying games as THE NEXT BIG EVIL THAT WILL TURN OUR KIDS INTO PSYCHOPATHS AND AWAY FROM JESUS!!!! It's the same sort of cranks with the same kinds of junk science, badly interpreted or even completely fraudulent statistics and with the same underlying support from the enemies of freedom; the Religious Right.

      I remember being a kid and having my parents all concerned that because I was playing D&D and Battletech that I was well on the way to the lunatic asylum. There were no lack of Jack Thompsons back then who were simply liars and lunatics.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    11. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by CodeBuster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      i.e. it's generally bad for kids to play violent games

      So be a good parent and don't let them. The price of convenience for lazy parents cannot and must not be the end of free speech for everyone else. The ratings system was and is a good compromise, it puts the tools into the hands of the parents to make their own decisions with regard to the welfare of their children and it should have ended with that. What I don't understand is why anyone would want to be on the side of limiting freedom of speech. The founding fathers were extremely wise in the considered trade-offs they made in those first ten amendments to the Constitution. They knew that some people would say things which they didn't agree with or didn't like hearing, but they had the foresight to realize the tremendous upside potential and value of free speech, even potentially objectionable speech, to the continuation of freedom and the democratic way of life. If you have to suffer the reality of violent video games, pron, and Rush Limbaugh so that free speech can continue then I say so be it.

    12. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. It may be bad for kids to play violent video games...but then that's why kids have parents.

      There are a lot of things that adults do that are dangerous for children. Parents need to tend to their children and the government needs to go tap phones or torture prisoners or something.

    13. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Gideon+Fubar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's a lot more to military conditioning than target practice or tactical training. While these things are comparable in some ways, there are significant differences.

      For example, gamers are not subject to the same regime of fitness and discipline as recruits, and can stop at any point without fear of retribution. A soldier cannot stop training simply because he is tired, bored, hungry, there's something on TV, etc.

      There is a point to what you're saying, but the anti-games lobby (and JT in particular) tend to blow it way out of proportion.

      --
      http://www.xkcd.com/354/
    14. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please cite the study that comes to that conclusion. Be specific as to the age range the studies includes.

      Also, don't even think about citing studies conducted with no meaningful controls. The studies I've seen compare Little Johnny's behavior after playing GTA4 to his behavior after playing Candyland. They should compare it to his behavior after playing Cowboys and Indians.

    15. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have to agree with you on that. Fortunately most anti-violent video game groups have taken steps to distance themselves from our dear JT.

      AC because of mod points.

    16. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by MadnessASAP · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Have to agree with you on the not burn up part. But I'm kind of iffy on bumping into the ISS part. Assuming the shove was retrograde you would find your perigee to be slight slower then the ISS and your orbit slightly more eccentric so what would happen is that you would continue to distance yourself from the ISS at a rate nearly equal to the rate at which you were shoved. Many many orbits later you would find yourself bumping back into the ISS but the amount of time it would take for that means that something else would have likely disturbed your orbit (likely atmospheric drag) and you would burn up.

      Of course you would run out of Oxygen before any of this happens though. Other then that a good analogy.

      AC because of mod points.

      --
      I may agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to face the consequences of saying it.
    17. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by schon · · Score: 2, Funny

      my parents all concerned that because I was playing D&D and Battletech that I was well on the way to the lunatic asylum.

      Well, their concerns about D&D were unfounded, but the Battletech combat system was intentionally designed to make people crazy. After trying to GM a game of Battletech 20 years ago, I'm still recovering!

    18. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I don't believe it's ever been demonstrated that violent video games are more harmful to children than video games in general. As far as I know, it's still within the realm of possibility that it's the social isolation that's the real problem rather than the subject matter.

      In this day and age any kid that goes outside to kill Nazis has bigger problems than video games to worry about.

    19. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by hedwards · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's a lot more to military conditioning than target practice or tactical training. While these things are comparable in some ways, there are significant differences.

      To be fair, even target practice and tactical training have to be done over when moved to the real world.

      You're not going to learn to shoot well enough to pass the marine corps' firearms tests through a video game, no matter how much time you spend or how much some people would like to believe that's the case.

      Last time I shot, over a decade ago, I was a fair shot, but I wouldn't personally think that the limited experience I had with a real rifle would prepare me for trying to pass that test. And that's real weapons work, not simulated conditions.

      Likewise with the tactics, a lot of that ends up being muscle memory and training in using ones senses as part of the strategy, you aren't going to learn that via a video game, ever. Perhaps one could learn the very basics, but I doubt that it would take even a day to teach that.

    20. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by sesshomaru · · Score: 1
      And again! (sigh)

      .

      Massive quotes to follow:

      The Premise:

      Lt. Col. Grossman, a former paratrooper who has taught psychology at West Point and is now a professor of military science in Arkansas, has Good News and Bad News to reveal. The Good News is the attractive and inspiriting proposition that most people have a powerful instinctual disinclination to kill other human beings, and under normal conditions, including their own presence on a battlefield in immediate proximity to homicidal strangers, will refuse to do so. The Bad News is that modern media culture produces an abnormal condition in which ordinary children are all too likely to become much more effective killers than, say, a typical American GI facing the SS in Normandy. And Col. Grossman is supremely confident that he can prove both of these contentions. His attempts to do so, in these two fantastic and extremely dispiriting parodies of rational argument, are fascinating illustrations of the intellectual level of much contemporary American social science.

      Some absurdity:

      Grossman is much given to psychologizing monocausal explanation, with the result that many of his military historical dicta are absurd. Take a single example: Gunpowders superior noise, its superior posturing ability, made it ascendant on the battlefield. The longbow would still have been used in the Napoleonic Wars if the raw mathematics of killing was all that mattered, since both the longbows firing rate and its accuracy were much greater than that of the smoothbore musket. But a frightened man, thinking with his midbrain and going ploink, ploink, ploink with a bow, doesnt stand much of a chance against an equally frightened man going BANG!BANG! with a musket. The traditional explanation for the decline of the longbow is less subtle: an arrow could not penetrate plate armor, whereas an arquebus ball could, and did, and gunpowder thus rendered the longbow thoroughly obsolete by the mid-16th century, around which time the last Dialogue Between Hermes and An English Solider was published.

      This is just sad, but what's even sadder is that there are people who take this nonsense seriously. I'll leave it with his conclusion:

      Brooding over this review, I was pondering Grossmanism with a friend the other day; if you dont know any history, he remarked, you dont know anything at all:. That, I think, is indeed part of the story: a genuine ignorance of history is probably a pre-condition for this sort of warmed-over Rousseauvian sentimentality about an extremely violent human past, and contemporary American social scientists are pretty innocent of history, particularly of the range of historical evidence that makes historians intensely hostile to this sort of overarching claim; historians are by nature splitters, not lumpers. A reverence for quantitative methods is also part of the story: Grossman, after writing off the most recent evidence as indeterminate, proudly disdains data for American violence which predate FBI statistics, appearing innocent of the problem that the FBI started accumulating statistics fairly recently, and did so at the start of a long fall in American crime rates, followed by a long rise, so in essence two data points become the statistical universe for conclusions about allegedly fundamental human traits. Marshall, too, fell afoul of this reverence for quantitative methods, and as a result invented the statistics that would instantiate his claim. Finally, Grossmanist thought is wonderfully prepared to write off all of our ancestors experience as unscientificthey are assumed to have perfectly misunderstood themselves, and the vast array of their art and literature and political philosophy that concerned itself with war and violence is readily written off as no better than fantasy.

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    21. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      Ultimately - even if you disagree - they have a reasonable position. i.e. it's generally bad for kids to play violent games. and all reasonable positions should be considered.

      all reasonable evidence should be considered.
      We won't know whether [position] is reasonable unless there are scientific facts to support it.

      Whether a position is reasonable or not (remember geocentrism?) is somewhat subjective in nature, whereas evidence (aka facts) is not.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    22. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Having been a gamer since I was 4 yo, and been in the Army, I can say with 100% truthiness that the assertion that games are like military training methods is absolutely ridiculous.

      If you want to see something that is similar to the US military's training methods, go look at a religious organization. Both are based on transferring the trainee's self worth onto the approval of the group. Military just uses "corrective training" (i.e., exercise as punishment) to "simulate the stress levels of a combat situation".

      The main thing that games train is hand-eye coordination and reaction times. General problem solving/analytical skills too.

      In the Army at least, marksmanship is one week long, sometimes slightly longer maybe.

      Firing an actual rifle is *nothing* like playing any of the games that have weapons in them, rifles or not, America's Army game or not. Not even *close*. The two activities are so far removed from one another that there is little similarity beyond the fact that both deal with "weapons" (despite one being really merely a representation of a weapon via pixels). For instance, most FPS games do not even accurately represent binocular vision, which is fairly key in actually firing a weapon (not to mention the field of view of games is typically 75-90* while a human's FOV is 260* or such). Most also have the character firing from the hip, never or rarely using the sights. Most do not take into account proper ballistic physics etc. Hell, most of them don't even have accurate reload animations for the supposedly authentic weapons they're simulating.

      The idea that using a mouse and keyboard somehow improves your marksmanship is incredibly absurd.

    23. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by srjh · · Score: 3, Informative

      Close... the perigee becomes lower and the period becomes faster, so you will slowly overtake the ISS.

      Although the orbits intersect, when you get back to where you started, the ISS is slightly behind, so you won't run into it.

      It's actually another good example of a violation of common sense in orbital mechanics - you have to decelerate to speed your orbit up, and vice versa.

    24. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Gideon+Fubar · · Score: 1

      Indeed, I completely agree. It's somewhat similar to suggesting that playing a martial arts oriented game somehow makes you into a action movie-esque fighter. The parallels that i see are purely in organizational and logical areas, and can't be realistically compared to actually doing the things depicted in the games.

      I also believe that anyone with high-school level psychology knowledge (i.e. anyone who has actually read any Pavlov, et al) would be able to differentiate between the 'reward' of a couple of hundred in-game points and some flashing lights (and maybe a 'congratulation'), and the 'reward' of not having your drill sergeant call you a maggot in front of your peers. The process of molding soldiers requires strict control over the majority of the recruits' lives, and this is something video games don't (and can't) have, except in border cases where problems would exist even without the games.

      --
      http://www.xkcd.com/354/
    25. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by m0rm3gil · · Score: 1

      Grossman's book is interesting but a lot of his points are either speculation or just plain made up. As an example his arguments about why Rome used short swords is one example of pure fiction, his argument about the psychological impact of soldiers wearing helmets is pretty much just him pondering an idea.

      When you start to run into things like that you begin to wonder how much other stuff he just made up.

    26. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by m0rm3gil · · Score: 1

      I always thought that longbows were easily able to penetrate plate armour with the right sort of tips on the arrows. I was under the impression that guns replaced bows because you can train any man to operate a musket in a couple of hours, to train a longbowman properly you have to start from early childhood.

      The point that Grossman is full of crap remains the same though.

    27. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

      Oh, you will. The shove was towards Earth, normal to the orbital path, remember?

    28. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by jwilcox154 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed. Video games seem to have taken the place of tabletop roleplaying games as THE NEXT BIG EVIL THAT WILL TURN OUR KIDS INTO PSYCHOPATHS AND AWAY FROM JESUS!!!! It's the same sort of cranks with the same kinds of junk science, badly interpreted or even completely fraudulent statistics and with the same underlying support from the enemies of freedom; the Religious Right.

      Wow, I didn't know Hillary was a part of the Religious Right. All this time I thought she was a leftist who is trying to ban the sale of violent video games to children. This is one step closer towards a total ban on video games someone doesn't like. IMO, Hillary is no different than Jack Thompson. Seems to me there is little difference between the right and the left as they both have their share of those who cry "Won't somebody please think of the children?"

      BTW, I am a Christian who doesn't support bans on video games.

    29. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I haven't yet seen anybody (except maybe Jack) seriously propose a law to ban minors from playing any game. There have been a few laws passed preventing stores from SELLING games with certain ratings to unaccompanied minors. That seems to fit pretty well with your philosophy: if you don't want your kids to play it, don't buy it for them. If you do, buy it for them (or for yourself and let them watch ;)

    30. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I don't think the point is that you're learning military skills, but that you're getting some militaryish psychological conditioning.

    31. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by ShooterNeo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, I had a chance to test this. Before Army Basic Training, I spent hours on the videogame "America's Army", which has a level that is an accurate representation of the Fort Benning range. I remember it was pretty difficult to score 'expert' in order to be allowed to go to sniper training, which helped a lot in multiplayer.

      Well, in real life, I found my training carried over. It took a few practice sessions to get used to the weapon, but pretty soon shooting the real m16 felt like "clicking" on targets with the mouse. I found that I could shoot very rapidly and accurately, and easily scored 38/40 hits on qualification day.

      It was easier and I scored higher than in the video game, ironically. Kind of like how I found a real car is easier to drive than a Grand Theft Auto car if you are using a PC keyboard for control.

    32. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Please cite the study that comes to that conclusion. Be specific as to the age range the studies includes.

      I did a straw poll around my office. People agreed that GTA 4 is great fun but not a kid's game. Ages typically 23-40. A couple of fathers. All involved in game development.

      Even if there is no long term harm, some people think it's bad for children to be playing violent games in and of itself. Children are probably not going to be harmed by most media images, especially if they have enough exposure, but I'm not going to encourage a very young child to watch The Exorcist, or hard core porn, or even the news.

      So, unless you have a study that says it's harmful to keep violent games away from children, I think that it's entirely up to the parents, and if they don't like their kids playing violent games, they're entitled to their opinion.

    33. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Erikderzweite · · Score: 1

      What military training are you referring to? Everyone knows that gamer's favorite weapon is Quicksave/Quickload. If you find a way to simulate this in real life - you don't need any training at all :)

    34. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Would there have been any studies into the effect of video game violence without people saying they're bad.

      As it turns out, the evidence suggests that the harm is minimal to non-existent, but it's nice to know.

    35. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by cephah · · Score: 1

      Interesting read. Thanks for posting it. :)

    36. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      So you think that it's fine to give Manhunt 2 to a 5 year old?

      Do you also consider it unreasonable that some parents don't want their children playing such a game?

      Or that we have ratings telling parents what ages games are suitable for?

      I'm not defending laws that mandate how parents should raise kids here. Just that some people don't like their own kids playing violent games.

    37. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      With all due respect, that was a truly awful response. For starters, you know that a "straw poll around [your] office" is not, by any stretch, what the OP meant by citing a study. It's not even a study at all; it's a survey, and not even a meaningful one since the selection process is anything but random and representative.

      Second, your original post mentions some sort of "anti-violent video game lobby," but now you conclude that "it's entirely up to the parents." That's what the vast majority of people have been saying all along. Whenever a nutjob like Thompson crops up, the response is essentially "shut up and be a parent." Very few people here will argue with you that parents shouldn't be in control of the games children play or the movies children watch.

      That said, if anybody DID want to argue over any specific case it's worth pointing out that children not watching The Exorcist or hard core porn or the news is conventional wisdom, but doesn't seem to have more than an emotional reaction to back it up. I wouldn't show my children porn either (though I'd have no problem with the news and would only have a problem with a horror flick if they were so young they were going to end up with nightmares--and let's be honest, in that case we're protecting ourselves from a sleepless night at least as much and probably more than we're protecting our children), but I can't justify why. With the exception of children so young that they simply imitate anything, I'm not sure what the issue is. We're stuck up about sex enough, maybe a generation of people for whom it isn't such a massive social taboo would be good for us. *shrugs*

    38. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      He compares video games with the military's conditioning.

      Of course, when you join the military, the conditioning you are subjected to is compulsory. With a video game, the player -- or the player's parent -- can flip the power switch at any time.

    39. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ultimately - even if you disagree - they have a reasonable position. i.e. it's generally bad for kids to play violent games.

      [Citation needed]

    40. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It was easier and I scored higher than in the video game, ironically.

      Game controllers are designed for a variety of purposes. Guns are for putting bullets where you want them. Video game guns are designed to look neato and be easy to hold up for long periods of time - they're too light to be accurate if they could fire bullets.

      Seriously though, the military has been using video games of various types up to and including a super high end version of laser tag for many years now. Of COURSE the skills are applicable, it's just not a complete solution for training.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    41. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Assuming we're talking about Grossman's On Killing, an excellent book, by the way, I don't buy into his assertion that 'In the military, they put you in a uniform, hand you a rifle, stick you in a foxhole, and have man-shaped targets pop up at you, while a drill sergeant screams at you to shoot it. In DooM, you sit in a chair, sipping a Mountain Dew, while deftly using the WASD keys and the control key to shoot down floating demons. Both of these are CONDITIIONING YOU TO KILL!'

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    42. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Maybe I was a bit irritable. But really I wasn't trying to suggest that the attempt to ban games was reasonable. Just that thinking it's bad for children to be playing these games is a fair enough position, even if the only reason to consider it bad is that their parents don't like it. You don't really need a study for that.

      Now, it's true that this is ultimately up to the parents. But it's also beneficial to everyone to educate the parents and to give them the tools to help make their decisions. Without a few people telling us how disgusting and depraved the games we love are it's possible that the industry wouldn't have added ratings.

    43. Re:Good riddance to bad advocate by Quila · · Score: 1

      He compares video games with the military's conditioning.

      I've done both. Nothing alike. Grossman may know Army, but he doesn't know video games. There's a big difference between serious training to kill under stress conditions and emphasizing cooperation and trust among the team, and mashing buttons on a console controller. The mindset is completely different. The military does use video games for training, but it's LAN play stressing team tactics, not for desensitizing.

      I would recommend his other book about the effects having to kill has on people such as police and soldiers.

  14. Take Two must be sad on this. by SYSS+Mouse · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Take Two must be sad that he will no longer do free advertisement.
    Well, he may still, but no one will listen to him.

  15. Or not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's let good news be for once, hmm?

  16. My greatest fear... by painehope · · Score: 1
    ...is that he finds a respawn spot.

    Humor aside, we all know that he'll end up as a "moral pundit" or some similar shit on FOX News.

    --
    PC moderators can suck my White pierced, tattooed dick. If you think pride == hate, s/dick/Aryan meat mallet/g.
    1. Re:My greatest fear... by v1 · · Score: 1

      finally I'll get praised for my spawn camping!

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    2. Re:My greatest fear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      finally I'll get praised for my spawn camping!

      From the console of god's big server:

      FlBAR killed JackThompson with weapon_commonsense
      JackThompson: See?!?! MURDER SIMULATOR!
      v1: stfu n00b.
      v1 killed JackThompson with weapon_crowbar.
      JackThompson: I have proof he's aimbotting. (insert pronographic link here)
      -ADMIN-: Oh hell no.
      User JackThompson left the game(Kicked By Console.)
      -ADMIN-: v1, You
      did spawncamp. You know the rules.
      User v1 left the game(Kicked by Console.)

  17. Darn by NiceGeek · · Score: 1

    I read that as "dismemberment" - oh well, disbarment works too.

    1. Re:Darn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did too...though I was in for a very interesting story.

  18. Who will replace him? by idiot900 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Penny Arcade made a very good point a few years ago, when Thompson was threatening them:

    We are actually fortunate that the current actor is so impotent in his role. Imagine what might happen if some charming, efficacious attorney took his place. The more I consider it the more I think we may be lucky to have Jack playing the part of the alarmist. The alternative might be someone who is actually capable.

    Now that it is even more obvious that Thompson is a nutcase, who is going to take his place? Someone competent in that role? That is a scary thought.

    1. Re:Who will replace him? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There might just be no replacement for Jack Thompson that is indeed capable. Why would a sane person do what he has tried to?

    2. Re:Who will replace him? by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not like he has a job and when he's gone someone else will apply for it.
      If someone was really good at this, they would already be doing it.
      Not that someone won't step up for some other reason.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Who will replace him? by trytoguess · · Score: 1

      I can almost believe that in his deathbed Thompson will admit he REALLY loved video games, and playing a popular fool was an ultimate sacrifice to prevent a replay of the comic book censorship... Well ALMOST.

    4. Re:Who will replace him? by initialE · · Score: 1

      The simple answer is that there is money and power at stake here. So why isn't someone already taking up the role of alarmist?

      Well for one, as long as Jack was around, he would risk being grouped together with Jack as "just another radical over-the-top wiseguy". I'd draw a parallel here - Why doesn't the FSF have anyone better than Richard Stallman as spokesman? Because as long as he is around, whoever else speaks out for the FSF would all of a sudden be in the same camp as the bearded unwashed guy.

      --
      Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
    5. Re:Who will replace him? by bigbigbison · · Score: 1

      I've never understood this line of reasoning. It isn't as if there can be only one anti-videogame violence advocate. There's nothing stopping someone rational from appearing on television and promoting legislation.

      --
      http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
    6. Re:Who will replace him? by Kharny · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It reminds me of a dutch politician some 10 years ago. He was an extreme right party (pretty much a 1 man party, atleast, he was the only one ever elected to the dutch house of representatives).
      The guy was so hilariously extreme and obnoxious that just his being there, was making sure extreme right would stay a fringe political movement.

      Unfortunately, he retired, got replaced by a more competent, charismatic person(pim fortuin) and the mess of that incident still has reprecussions 4 years after that party crashed and burned.

      --
      Make a man a fire and he will be warm for a day, set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life
    7. Re:Who will replace him? by Schnapple · · Score: 1

      Now that it is even more obvious that Thompson is a nutcase, who is going to take his place? Someone competent in that role? That is a scary thought.

      People always say this (usually with the added "we're lucky to have Jack Thompson" like Penny Arcade did) and I see why they do but I have two issues with it.

      1. The average non-gamer person doesn't look at Jack Thompson and say "oh wow he's crazy" they say "oh wow he's a lawyer and well spoken and, gee, I've always thought maybe these video game things were bad for you". Yes, his letter to the dude's mom calling the guy a Hitler Youth was insane. Yes, the Word document was over the top. The average person has never heard of either of those, they just see Jack Thompson on CNN (yeah, I know CNN is moving away from using him) and they see how he very calmly and rationally says a bunch of stuff that people want to believe and the people they bring on to oppose him do NOT have their shit together and they get annihilated. But if JT gets disbarred, his credibility goes away. He becomes someone who is no longer smart enough to be a lawyer. He becomes Fred Phelps where people say "well he was disbarred for a reason probably"
      2. The other prong is people saying "well if the next person to take up a crusade against video games is not insane then we have a problem". I don't believe there will ever not be a person with a crusade that is not insane because: there is nothing wrong with video games. Yes, there is a line at which things can go too far. You know what? The game industry regulates itself. No console maker will allow an AO-rated game on their console. Even M-rated games have to "auditon" to be on consoles. And even on the PC where it is, in theory, an untamed land, the industry regulates itself. Games with bad overtones are taken out and beaten. Like those white supremacist games, or JFK Reloaded (which, for the record, I liked).

      Gamers are not stupid. And people are not stupid. We need to stop treating people like they are stupid and when they demonstrate ignorance, educate them. Yes, there are games out there where you rape women. Guess what? They're from Japan where this is perfectly legal. They're not in stores. Your kids are not buying them at GameStop. If they're downloading them off of BitTorrent then that's your issue to regulate. Yes, you murder people in GTA4. Guess what? Your kids aren't supposed to be playing that game. If they are then either you're not doing your job as a parent or - more likely - it's impossible to keep your kids sheltered at all times. It's OK. They're going to play a video game. They're going to see some naked breasts in a magazine. They're going to drink a beer before they're 21. It probably won't kill them. And if you outlaw video games then the kids will watch porn, and if you outlaw porn then the kids will read dirty books, and if you outlaw dirty books then the kids will spank it to the lingere section of the Sears Catalog. And if you ban that they'll just make shit up. Stop treating your kids like they're non-functional retards and life will be better.

  19. Singlemindedness by mitch.swampman · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Since I'm relatively unfamiliar with Thompson's history, I went and read his Wikipedia page, and I have to give him this: he certainly pursued his goal singlemindedly. I figured he would be in some right-winger's pocket or something, but the guy really went after EVERYONE. It's not often you see someone who sincerely doesn't care about anything except the axe he's grinding.

    1. Re:Singlemindedness by gujo-odori · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why a right-winger? Left-wingers are at least as hostile to freedom of speech when the speech is something they dislike.

    2. Re:Singlemindedness by mitch.swampman · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, I knew he's a hardcore-conservative born-again Christian and I saw the recent story where he sent pictures of hot gay sex to the court, and not in a "hey, check out this hot, hot gay sex" way. So I allowed myself a little speculative license.

    3. Re:Singlemindedness by Gideon+Fubar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As a supposed left winger, i agree. People who put their causes above all else are the problem here. Defending ideological territory at any cost is akin (isomorphic?) to religious zealotry.

      Displaying my supposed left-wingedness, i'll say that religions are fine, provided you don't shove them down everyone else's throats. The same goes for ideological platforms. Thankyou.

      --
      http://www.xkcd.com/354/
    4. Re:Singlemindedness by sp332 · · Score: 1

      Just going by content, it seems more likely that a right-winger would dislike this stuff than a left-winger. Says nothing about the character of the two sides.

    5. Re:Singlemindedness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? How dare you! You shut up, you conservative moron!

    6. Re:Singlemindedness by wiredlogic · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Yesh. You totally don't want to be the one preaching scientific objectivity at a Greenpeace rally where everyone is chanthing the mantra that the world is going to end tomorrow if we don't return to a subsistence culture.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    7. Re:Singlemindedness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Defending ideological territory at any cost is akin (isomorphic?) to religious zealotry.

      The two are indeed isomorphic: the latter is a subset of the former.

    8. Re:Singlemindedness by randyest · · Score: 1

      Hillary Clinton, Tipper Gore. Both left-wingers. Both involved in trying to censor entertainment. Can't think of any right-wingers into that off the top of my head.

      --
      everything in moderation
  20. I hope he got well paid by onkelonkel · · Score: 3, Funny

    I hope he got well paid by Take Two for all his work in publicising Grand Theft Auto.

    --
    None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
  21. Getting rid of the competition by DeadDecoy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well of course they made a move to disbar Jack Thompson. There can only be one king asshole and they certainly weren't going to let some schmuck hold the title.

  22. ugh by nomadic · · Score: 1

    I'm reading the magistrate's report, and even though I thought I was used to his craziness I'm shocked by what he's done. Take Two can easily weather the bad publicity, and even benefit slightly if they handle it right. The kind of garbage he pulls with the lawyers who "cross" him (i.e. file any sort of court pleading that he doesn't like) is beyond absurd. Sending letters to lawyers' wives accusing them of selling pornography to children, for example.

    1. Re:ugh by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      He sent the letter to the lawyer's wife indirectly because he'd been barred from contacting the lawyer's client. Crazy stalker loony, he is.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    2. Re:ugh by nomadic · · Score: 1

      He sent the letter to the lawyer's wife indirectly because he'd been barred from contacting the lawyer's client. Crazy stalker loony, he is.

      His vendetta against Tew Cardenas is even more disgusting than his other actions; it's a well-respected firm down here. I went against them in a case once and they were consummate professionals who deal fairly and cordially with me, and I can't imagine going through what those lawyers had to put up with from Thompson.

  23. Nice Tags by AnalogyShark · · Score: 1

    "court, pcgames, censorship, suddenoutbreakofcommonsense, haha (tagging beta)" I swear sometimes the tags on stories make me laugh more than the story themselves. But good riddance to bad rubbish as they say. But, it won't be long for someone new to come and take up the reins where he left off.

  24. So.. by Madsy · · Score: 1

    Will his "victims" get their money back and their cases reopened, if this is supported by the court's evidence?

    1. Re:So.. by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Will his "victims" get their money back and their cases reopened, if this is supported by the court's evidence?

      What cases? The man is a lousy lawyer, he never actually won any of these cases.

  25. money, the ultimate show stopper by khallow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is there anything to stop him from making the exact same amount of noise, but just hiring other lawyers to do the legal mumbo jumbo?

    I doubt he'll be able to find anyone to work for free. Tilting at windmills is cheap only if it's your windmill and you're doing it on your own dime.

  26. Shaving was the problem. by T-Kir · · Score: 1

    He probably realised that shaving tools can be considered 'weapons' and after visualising a game called "Barbers 101 - Virtual Tutorials" his mind nearly asploded.

    He is that batshit crazy he probably even thinks people can kill other people using an electric shaver!

    --
    Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
    1. Re:Shaving was the problem. by Torvaun · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you can't kill someone with an electric shaver, you're not trying hard enough.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    2. Re:Shaving was the problem. by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 4, Funny

      To be specific, it can be used as a blunt instrument in a blow to the temple or trachea. Removing the guard can allow it to cause lacerations, probably most effective when striking an eye. The batteries can be removed, shorted, and then ingested by the victim, potentially causing major internal damage. It can be held by the ends and used to choke the victim.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    3. Re:Shaving was the problem. by froon · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's it. No more CSI for you.

    4. Re:Shaving was the problem. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      You could jam it down someone's throat (most of them are conveniently shaped for that. The batteries can be cracked open and used as poison. You could use the charging cord as a garrote, or unwind the motor coil for same. The blades could be extracted and used to slice arteries, or force fed to the victim.

    5. Re:Shaving was the problem. by Anzya · · Score: 1

      If it is electric shaver with a cord it could also be dropped into a bathtub with the victim to electricute them.
      Or simply strip the cables and electricute them that way...

      --
      "This message was brought to you by Sarcasm and Troll Feeders United (or STFU, for you un-hip people)."
    6. Re:Shaving was the problem. by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Uh it's possible to be killed with an electric shaver, I can think of many many ways.

      You don't want to be killed with an electric shaver.

      1) It would likely be rather unpleasant, maybe not as unpleasant as being killed slowly via paper cuts but still one of the bad ways to go (there are worse ways of course but let's skip those).

      2) It would be quite embarassing/humiliating (not that it matters after you're dead, but if you get to realize you're being killed by an electric shaver it probably adds to the pain).

      --
  27. Re:Window Dressing by Ortega-Starfire · · Score: 1

    Wait, what?

    --
    ---- Liquid was a patriot ----
  28. IANAL by EdIII · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This seems to be in Florida only.

    If he is disbarred there, can he pass the bar in another state?

    1. Re:IANAL by StaticEngine · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disbarment

      "However, under the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct, which have been adopted in most states, disbarment in one state or court is grounds for disbarment in a jurisdiction which has adopted the Model Rules."

    2. Re:IANAL by compro01 · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but AFAIK, in theory, yes, in practice, hell no.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    3. Re:IANAL by bigbigbison · · Score: 1

      Even if there weren't agreements between states the fact that not only is it recommended that Jacko be disbarred or even disbarred for a lengthier term of 10 years but for life makes it very unlikely that anyone would let him practice law again. Of course being kicked off the case in Alabama and unable to practice law there doesn't prevent him from claiming to be part of the case.

      --
      http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
    4. Re:IANAL by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Generally no. Most states will not allow you to practice law if you are disbarred in another state.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    5. Re:IANAL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He can apply to the bar of any state. All, however, have a moral character screening portion of the admittance criteria. He'd have to report his disbarment, which will make gaining entry somewhere else pretty darn hard. Of course, he could omit it, but omitting a disciplinary action from an Alabama pro hac vice application was one of the things that got him recommended for permanent disbarment in the first place. No, if the FL Supreme Court disbars him permanently, that'll be the end of his ability to practice law for others. He can always represent himself, of course.

    6. Re:IANAL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe, but unlikely. Passing the bar exam is just one component to being admitted to the bar. There are ethical considerations as well (and a review board), and being disbarred in one state will likely make it impossible to get on the bar in another.

      When Bill Clinton lost his license to practice law, there's a reason he didn't try to get another in NY.

  29. Sounds famil-iaa-r by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    '... the Respondent has demonstrated a pattern of conduct to strike out harshly, extensively, repeatedly and willfully to simply try to bring as much difficulty, distraction and anguish to those he considers in opposition to his causes. He does not proceed within the guidelines of appropriate professional behavior ...'

    Does this description vaguely remind aanyone else of the behaaviour of certiaan groups? I caan't put my finger on it...

  30. Did anyone else read the headline as by skribe · · Score: 2, Funny

    Referee recommends dismemberment for Jack Thompson?

    I know. Too much Dexter.

    --
    Blog
    1. Re:Did anyone else read the headline as by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know. Too much Dexter.

      Hmm, I blame videogames. -JT

    2. Re:Did anyone else read the headline as by NewsLeech · · Score: 1

      Referee recommends dismemberment for Jack Thompson?

      I know. Too much Dexter.

      No, too much wishful thinking.

  31. RIAA and MPAA? by Vrallis · · Score: 1

    That's all good (and well deserved), but when are they going to get around to the RIAA and MPAA lawyers? They're just as bad at predatory practices and push the limits constantly. Disbar all of them as well!

    1. Re:RIAA and MPAA? by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Evil, overreaching bastards, yes, but they don't quite have the "batshit crazy" all over them like JT does.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  32. Big problem though... by stubear · · Score: 1

    Jack Thompson will simply reinvent himself as a lobbyist and if you think he was bad as a lawyer, wait until he has no rules by which to follow. I'm not so sure if just keeping him an ineffective lawyer would have been better.

    1. Re:Big problem though... by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      wait until he has no rules by which to follow.

      Who cares if there's rules or not? It's not like he followed them.

      --
      It's been a long time.
  33. Summary line by ak_hepcat · · Score: 1

    My fiancee just read that as "Referee Recommends _Dismemberment_ For Jack Thompson".

    And while that may be slightly harsh from my perspective, I'm sure it'd get quite a few votes.

    --
    Support FSF: Stop thinking with your wallet, and think with your imagination. (cc/non-commercial)
  34. yea but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That paragraph should have ended with "only to end by saying 'so clearly the document has to be in the bonder on the left'" purely in the name of legal thoroughness.

  35. I read "jack johnson" and "dismemberment" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ya

  36. I am the only one here against his disbarment by scourfish · · Score: 1

    I believe that magnificent troll's ability to practice law would be doing society a grave tragedy. I mean, would you have prevented Andy Kaufman from wrestling women or Sacha Cohen from screwing with people's heads. If they disbar Thompson, then one of my modes of entertainment is severed.

  37. This story is misleading, nobody read the PDF? by Awptimus+Prime · · Score: 2, Informative

    I have to question the journalism skills of a gaming site. Just like slashdot, they are very quick to do stories that promote a certain way of thinking, correct or not. Here's a bit of the PDF they built the story on:

    "It is apparent that other costs have or may be incurred. It is recommended that all such costs and expenses together with the foregoing itemized costs be charged to the Respondent, and that interest at the statutory rate shall accrue and be payable beginning 30 days after the judgement in this case becomes final unless a waiver is granted by the Board of Governors of the Florida Bar. It is further recommended that Respondent shall be deemed delinquent and ineligible to practice law persuant to R. Regulating Fla. Bar 1-3.6 for failure to timely pay the costs assessed in this proceeding."

    It looks more, to me, he's in trouble with just Florida, but only if he doesn't pay his fees on time. My understanding is, he could skip paying this. I don't think he's commented on what he'll do, but it's highly likely he'll pay like any other lawyer and be able to continue pestering people in Florida. Regardless, he has 49 other states to harass.

    1. Re:This story is misleading, nobody read the PDF? by Peyna · · Score: 3, Informative

      Congratulations, you can read the last page.

      The bit about costs is separate from the rest of the recommendation. If the Supreme Court adopts the referee's recommendation, he'll be disbarred for life. That's pretty much standard language they probably include where you temporarily lose your license if you don't pay the costs of the proceedings against you. If the final punishment was simply a reprimand, then the failure to pay would become more important. The costs issue is a separate punishment from the disbarment.

      In many states lawyers are suspended each year for failing to pay their bar dues. As soon as they pay them, they're reinstated.

      --
      What?
    2. Re:This story is misleading, nobody read the PDF? by Awptimus+Prime · · Score: 1

      I skimmed the whole thing. It doesn't seem like much will happen here. We'll see.

    3. Re:This story is misleading, nobody read the PDF? by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

      your understanding is flawed. gamepolitics.com got it right.

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
    4. Re:This story is misleading, nobody read the PDF? by Headw1nd · · Score: 2, Informative

      On page 166 it very clearly states that they are recommending life disbarment, regardless of whether he pays or not.

    5. Re:This story is misleading, nobody read the PDF? by jesdynf · · Score: 1

      I thought about that, and came to the conclusion that it's boilerplate text, there so that if they decide to ignore her recommendation for disbarment, the bill still applies.

      If he never plans to practice law again -- and really, good luck with that -- he probably CAN skip paying it.

      --
      Yahoo! Pipes are awesome. How awesome? http://pipes.yahoo.com/jesdynf/slashdot
    6. Re:This story is misleading, nobody read the PDF? by gnarlyhotep · · Score: 1

      Why didn't you just post "tl;dr" and be done with it?

      Why you choose to willfully ignore the actual recommendation of the referee in favor of a supplemental recommendation is just perplexing. And you got modded up for it, brilliant.

      In case your skimming isn't up to snuff, the referee found that a lesser 10 year disbarrment was inadequate, and spent 160+ pages excoriating Jack Thompson as completely and wholly unprofessional and lacking in ethics. I completely fail to see how that equates to nothing much happening here.

  38. Well when he is disbarred by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

    they can always make a video game based on him:

    "Jack Thompson: Video Game Attorney"

    You get to control Jack Thompson and be in court and select what objections and arguments you want to use to prove your case. If you lose too many cases, you might get disbarred and the game is over.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    1. Re:Well when he is disbarred by techsoldaten · · Score: 2, Funny

      Other ideas for Jack Thompson video games:

      How about "Jack Thompson, Homeless Ex-Attorney," where the goal is to panhandle for enough money to get online, then solicit donations from old ladies to keep up your crusade against video games?

      Or "Jack Thompson's Texas Hold Em," where you play the game by arguing with the dealer about signing loyalty oaths and get up from the table every other hand until the other players have you escorted from the casino?

      Or "Jack Thompson's Civilization," where you attempt to remove art, commerce and government systems from a modern society in favor of strict 18th century morality?

      Or "Jack Thompson's Wild Filings," which would be an ARG, where you would try to win legal cases by posting the wildest photos from the Internet instead of written arguments and solve puzzles through the use of ancient christian symbology?

      Or "Jack Thompson's Hentai Explosion," where a fully rendered 3D Jack Thompson wanders the streets of Tokyo looking for chances to score with big breasted anime characters in school uniforms, then execute successful finishing moves on the characters and their worldly possessions?

      Or "Jack Thompson's Battleship," where you shoot your own boats out of the water and win by accusing the other side of cheating so much they get pissed off and refuse to play anymore?

      Or "Jack Thompson's Punch Out," where the only character you can fight is Jack "Glassjaw" Thompson, there are no TKOs, and you basically get to beat on Jack for hours? ... the list goes on ...

      M

    2. Re:Well when he is disbarred by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      OBJECTION!!!

      The defendant makes video games and is thus evil and in league with the homosexuals, and if you rule against my client I'll appeal, saying you're attacking my religious beliefs!!!

      --
      It's been a long time.
  39. Free Speech? by gillbates · · Score: 0, Troll

    While I can understand why we should not censor what someone else creates, a game doesn't really qualify as speech. Sure, it might make a political point, but no one buys video games because of the political angle. If they did, the hottest games on the market would be titles like: "Run for Senator 2008," and "Executive Power: Iran Nuclear Diplomacy," and "Capitol Gang: Election 2008".

    Games are meant for fun, not political statements. Instead of trying to cast game censorship into the mold of free speech rights, we would do better simply to establish the rational basis for freedom of creativity, and the "pursuit of happiness". It is less dishonest and has a greater overall positive impact on those with a freedom-vs-security mindset.

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
    1. Re:Free Speech? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you believe that "free speech" only applies to political speech? Games don't make political points, but there are many games whose primary purpose is to tell a story or deliver a message.

    2. Re:Free Speech? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I can understand why we should not censor what someone else creates, a game doesn't really qualify as speech.

      Please go crawl back under your bridge. Speech means expression, video games are expression, you are not even a particularly interesting troll.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Free Speech? by gillbates · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that games fall in line more with the "pursuit of happiness" than freedom of speech. If you get people to accept the pursuit of happiness as a fundamental right, then you get freedom to do much more than granted by the mere freedom of speech.

      --
      The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
  40. I, for one, will welcome Mr. Thompson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To the ranks of ordinary citizenry where he will have to pay a lawyer in order to implement his constant legal threats and bullying.

  41. Don't assume.... by Khyber · · Score: 1

    You think most people that watch Fox News will even have a clue about his disbarment? The spin gets played in the main hours, the stuff that might even remotely matter is played like near-noon when people are at work or just heading to lunch.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  42. not the end by Tom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You think we've seen the last of Jack?

    I don't think so. They guy has found out you can make a living out of being an asshole, he's not likely to drop that recipe for success. My bet is that he'll be doing the pundit round next. He'll found some institute so his CV can read "former lawyer, now chairman and founder of the No More Violence Institute" or something like it, and then he'll go from TV station to TV station and spread his crap. Very few of them will tell their viewers about his disbarment.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:not the end by christ,+jesus+H · · Score: 1

      Heres what he should call his new PAC; World Housewives Organization for the Repeal of the ESRB . . . or WHORE for short.

      --
      Ohh spiteful one tell me who to smote and he shall be smolten!
  43. You will see him on TV or in churches... by Dekortage · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is there anything to stop him from making the exact same amount of noise, but just hiring other lawyers to do the legal mumbo jumbo?

    Chances are he will hit the talk show circuit, particularly among conservatives, to give speeches about video games and the decline of civilization (or law) as we know it. I half expect him to show up at a local church and be proclaimed a prophet.

    And he'll write a book.

    --
    $nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
    1. Re:You will see him on TV or in churches... by Real1tyCzech · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The evangelical Right is now the evangelical Left. The moral christian platform has never fit well with limited government conservatism and they've slowly started getting pushed to the Left. Now if only we could get Arnold to join 'em.

    2. Re:You will see him on TV or in churches... by rudeboy1 · · Score: 1

      And he'll write a book.

      Too late... He already did.

      Definitely worth a click to read the comments, the accompanying recommended items (The Joy of Gay Sex?) and the tags. Comedy gold.

      --
      Raging in an online forum won't do anything for the world around you. To see change, you must take action.
    3. Re:You will see him on TV or in churches... by Workaphobia · · Score: 1

      That's the beauty of this, JT's apparent senility level has been rising for a long time now, but this decision confirms and solidifies his downward spiral in the public's eye. I doubt any talk show host would have him now.

      --
      Evidently, the key to understanding recursion is to begin by understanding recursion. The rest is easy.
  44. At least read the last few pages by BoogieChile · · Score: 1
    Download it. It's only a megabyte. Read it. It is a beautiful thing... The fun really starts at the bottom of page 144, when Judge Tunis listed as part of her reasons for going for the full disbarment examples of Jack's behaviour right there in her own courtroom! Not to mention Jack's final glorious stand, the last day he was in court;

    "Mr. Thompson came to the Disciplinary Hearing with a 16-page written objection. He had numerous extra copies which he clearly intended to, and in fact did, hand out to the media and others in the courtroom. Undoubtedly, his conduct indicated his every intention to read the objection into the record in open court and then leave.

    A clear reading of the document in evidence makes this apparent, as he writes of leaving the proceeding and courtroom therein. Not only did he in fact write about his conduct in leaving the courtroom in his objection, but he in fact walked out of the courtroom.

    Clearly, Mr. Thompson's intent was to turn the Disciplinary proceeding into a press conference wherein he wanted to read his 16 page objection, distribute copies while in court and leave. What may not be apparent from the written transcript is that when the Court stopped Mr. Thompson from making a speech, by reading aloud word for word his written objection to the proceedings, he physically left the podium and while continuing to speak, wandered through the gallery of the courtroom where the public sits. He had previously prepared extra copies of his written objection and distributed them from the front row to the back of the courtroom, as the undersigned watched and the court proceedings were underway.

    Thus, in Mr. Thompson's last contact in court with this Referee and by his own conduct, he yet again corroborated the notion that he refuses, and will continue to refuse, to abide by the professional standards and rules required of members of The Florida Bar."

    Beautiful. Just...wow, words fail me. Ten out of ten, Mr Thompson...

  45. He's only disbarred in Florida... by metal+slime · · Score: 1

    As happy as I want to be from this, Jack Thompson is just the sort of prick who will pack up and move to another state that would accept is insanity. So it's probably not the last we've heard from him.

    1. Re:He's only disbarred in Florida... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Disbarment in any state usually means that you're banned from all states. Most states ask you when you apply if you have or have had licenses in another state. If you've been disbarred or suspended, etc. Even if they don't ask, they certainly will revoke the license if they find out you've been disbarred.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  46. Mis-read by No2Gates · · Score: 1

    It didn't say "disbared", it said "dismembered"

    --
    Every time you call tech support, a little kitten dies.
  47. I dunno... by sxeraverx · · Score: 1

    I dunno about you guys, but I recommend re-barment. Shoving a length of steel re-bar through his body sounds pretty good to me...

  48. Crazy? Don't mess with the Florida Supreme Court by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Florida Supreme Court also had weighed in. An excerpt:


    Thompson's most recent filings are repetitive, frivolous, and, like his earlier ones, insulting to the Court. One of Thompson's recent filings contains what Thompson refers to as a "children's picture book for adults" that rehashes his previous arguments in illustrated form which he states was necessary due to "the Court's inability to comprehend" his arguments. Between the text of the motion, Thompson pasted images depicting swastikas, kangaroos in court, a reproduced dollar bill, cartoon squirrels, Paul Simon, Paul Newman, Ray Charles, a handprint with the word "SLAP!" written under it, Bar Governor Benedict P. Kuehne, a baby, Ed Bradley, Jack Nicholson, Justice Clarence Thomas, Julius Caesar, monkeys, and a house of cards, and the motion concludes with a photograph of the cover of Thompson's book, Out of Harm's Way.

  49. With any luck by Aroll · · Score: 1

    This guy has totally to watch some Too fast Too furious. And with any luck, maybe, hopefully, he might not listen to the "The tricks you have seen in this movie have been done by professionals, make no attempt to repeat them at home."