Slashdot Mirror
Jack Thompson Sues Facebook For $40M
angry tapir writes "Jack Thompson has sued Facebook for US$40 million, saying that the social networking site harmed him by not removing angry postings made by Facebook gamers. The lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Thompson is best known for bringing suit against Grand Theft Auto's Take Two Interactive, Sony Computer Entertainment America, and Wal-Mart, arguing that the game caused violent behavior."
Wasn't this idiot disbarred a couple years ago? Could he really be so desperate to feed his narcissism?
This man seriously needs some help from a professional.
I know that doesn't stop him using other lawyers to sue people, but I would think it probably says a lot about the validity of said facebook postings if he *was* struck off for being a serial asshat.
ARGH!
Sorry Jack, but Facebook didn't make people hate you. You did that all on your own.
What a tool!
Violent gamers posting violent messages? What did he expect?
Jack Thompson Sues Everybody, For No Reason.
Why is he still going? Don't they make him pay his opponent's costs when he loses? Shouldn't he be broke?
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
I really hope this Lawsuit is thrown out, simply because people are entitle to their opinions of this guy and what he stands for. He seems to forget that he's on some sort of one man crusade to fight computer game industry, and puts himself out there ans is not ready to be scrutinized for what he believes in. These individuals are using the tools provided to them to voice their opinions. We still have that right to free speech. I have not read these posts, and nor do I want to, thus the beauty of the Net. Now that Mr. Thompson has advertised that these posts exists, he's drawing national attention to them and may find that more people agree with the angry posts rather than his points.
I don't necessarily agree with vial and viscious things but people will do what people will do.
Life takes interesting turns, but the most interest is when you're off the beaten path.
I think Jack Thompson's caused more harm to "Jack Thomspon" than any other entity possibly could.
Angry comments by gamers on Facebook? Gamers, get over it. The man's just a litigious nut who hasn't got anything successfully banned in the United States. Saying bad stuff about him only gives him more ammo to criticize and sue companies with. Don't worry, Jack Thompson isn't going to get between you and Grand Theft Auto 19 or Halo X Spin-off.
Freedom is drinking a beer in the park when you're supposed to be at work.
Living in a country where you can't sue people for amounts like forty million dollars for Facebook postings sounds, well, friggin ridiculous.
I wonder how much just keeping the legal system running and churning through all these cases costs in tax dollars for a US citizen...
.: Max Romantschuk
"Jack Thompson [said] that the social networking site harmed him by not removing angry postings made by Facebook gamers."
"Jack Thompson [argued] that the game caused violent behavior."
Seems to me these angry postings prooved his cause
by showing game caused violent behavior.
The world belongs to those who get up early. - I'm far from being the king of Earth then
Jack Thompson should be disbarred. His lawsuits are nothing but frivelous and a waste of tax payer money. He must have blown all his money that he earned from his tv show and now needs to keep filing idiotic lawsuits in hte hopes to make money for his ridiculous lifestyle. This guy should be disbarred and then he should be exiled from our country.
....Jack Thompson has already threatened Slashdot with a US$100 million lawsuit, saying that if the "news for nerd" site does not filter and removing any angry postings made by its' members.....
....Jack Thompson has already threatened Slashdot with a US$100 million lawsuit, saying that if the "news for nerd" site does not filter and removing any angry postings made by its' members.....
Good luck with that.
"Well, would it be possible to sue you people?" "Sue me? Why would you sue me? What are talking about?" "Punitive damages." "Yeah, but why would you sue me?" "I don't know, sue everybody!" -Sol Rosenberg
This just in, angry crackpot won't piss off and die already. Next!
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
Our right to free speech is a serious burden for this man, what can we do to ease his suffering?
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Wow, this guy is a total sissy. If he really thinks he can win this lawsuit, then he is sorely mistaken. Here's why. Facebook claims no ownership of anything said on Facebook, much like slashdot. In fact, Facebook's only guidelines really are simply no pornography/racism. Seeing as this doesn't include slander/libel (whichever fits, cannot remember which is which anymore), Facebookers are free to say anything they want. Facebook's only real obligation is to report anything that could be of concern to the Department of Homeland Security. Now, being that Facebook is such a big thing right now amongst people with both no social life and people with huge social lives, I'm going to go ahead and say Facebook is going to win this one. Good for you Facebook, but you're still a website for attention starved assholes. Anyways, when Jack Thompson made his claim against GTA and it's publisher, he HAD to know he was going to piss people off. Congratulations Jack, you're famous, but you're an idiot.
"Chance favors only the prepared mind." -Archimedes
He's just a really skilled troll, and everyone always falls for him.
I would have to disagree, a troll is aware of his/her trolling, it is intentional.
Jack is like a troll, except for the fact that he is dead serious, and there is no "lol, trolled".
He really would restrict your rights and regulate the hell out of video games and the
rest of the online world that in his eyes is destroying the morals of America.
music lover since 1969
A few months from now, he'll be suing himself, arguing that he caused violent behavior.
Watchout /. people are saying disparaging things about this nut case here!
Wherever you go, there you are.
Jonathan Lee Riches
If I post on here that I would pay someone $50 to punch Jack Thompson in the face, would that cause him to sue Slashdot for $40m? :)
It is my personal OPINION that blocking a person's ability to openly express his or hers OPINION is only an action a person or persons would do who may or may not be the product of interspecies breeding or possible breeding too close to one of too similair genetic makeup.
I would hate to suffer the actions of such a person or persons.
this guy may even get the chance to see a judge. He's been disbarred, and his legacy is one of contempt for the US Legal system.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Is tort and legal system reform...
Proven batshit crazy nutjobs like Jack Thompson should be banned from filing lawsuits himself and should have a sane person appointed on his behalf to judge as to whether or not to file a suit.
Corporatism != Free Market
Even if the suit itself had merit (which it does not), I highly doubt Facebook would be held liable for what its users say or do (even a expert in the article says this). This is just another attempt by our favorite lawyer to get in the news again. Well, I guess he succeeded somewhat.
Delete all these comments before Jack reads them or you are totally getting sued!
For those of you who know the Sponge Bob cartoon, you're familiar with the episode where Sponge Bob sees some graffite on a Garbage bin outside the restaurant. When he read the statements allowed, the foul words were the sounds of dolphins. I'd personnally love a few facebook comments to inject the dolphin (porpoise) sound bite. It would make me wonder if he would insist on interpretation of such sounds to find out what was being said so he could then turn around an sue people.
Phhhhhhbbbbtbtttttbtbtbbbtbbtbtbt! Mr Thompson. Ha
Life takes interesting turns, but the most interest is when you're off the beaten path.
Seriously. Who is pulling his strings??
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
From a fairly recent Court Order
"Thompson may petition the Court, but may do so only through the assistance of counsel, whenever such counsel determines that the filing has merit and can be filed in good faith. However, Thompsons frivolous and abusive filings must immediately come to an end. Further, if Thompson submits a filing in violation of this order, he may be subjected to contempt proceedings or other appropriate sanctions. All other pending petitions, motions, and requests for relief filed by Thompson are hereby denied without prejudice."
After reading that Court Order, I must say that this man needs professional help. No, I am not talking about legal help. The examples provided by the Court are very convincing.
but seriously, there must be a first stage screening/review before it's accepted to proceed... right?
Bottom line: he's a fucking idiot!!!!! My tax dollar going to waste for this crackhead's court cases, just because he's too fucking lazy to get a job like a normal person. This bastard is as low as they come.
(sorry slashdot, but he might be suing you next for allowing me to post this :D")
in as much as you are only telling things to people you know, and presumably would use your mouth to say much the same thing - are you not immune from a lot of this?
Surely there is something in freedom of speech when it comes to talking to friends..
I assume these comments were on a "We hate tiresome prick Jack Thompson" type page, so I appreciate this doesn't reflect this article directy.
He really would restrict your rights and regulate the hell out of video games and the
rest of the online world that in his eyes is destroying the morals of America.
But can he really believe that? I mean, seriously, most historians and anthropologists would agree that the "morals of America" haven't changed very much in 230+ years. I just don't think people have a problem discerning between video games and reality.
My blog
Surely "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech". I realise that there was to violence, the guy offering $50 to anyone who punched Jack Thompson in the face isn't protected but this was removed. He could possibly argue under Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. 418 U.S. 323 (1974), (opinions could not be considered defamatory. It is thus permissible to suggest, for instance, that someone is a bad lawyer, but not permissible to falsely declare that the lawyer is ignorant of the law: the former constitutes a statement of values, but the latter is a statement alleging a fact.) that some of the messages posted were statements of facts but any comments about his unfitness to practise would surely be vindicated by his disbarrment anyway? Also since Facebook has no liability for comments posted on it they were going above and beyond what is required of them by law by removing even the incitement to violence. He doesn't really seem to have a leg to stand on.
Once again, Jack Thompson attempts to sweep the concerns of the people under the rug. Why won't Jack Thompson respond to rumors that Jack Thompson raped and murdered a young girl in 1990? Is he afraid of the truth coming out?
/playingwithfire
...if its TRUE!
They still allow him in court rooms?
this is the most important sig ever! In your face 446154!
most historians and anthropologists would agree that the "morals of America" haven't changed very much in 230+ years
{{citation needed}}
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
Awesome. Thanks for that link :]
He really would restrict your rights and regulate the hell out of video games and the rest of the online world that in his eyes is destroying the morals of America.
But can he really believe that?
Yes, he really does. It was rap music before it was video games, but he honestly believes they are destroying our moral framework.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_(attorney)
Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
A video. Not a video game.
Just the same, a video can be made with special effects. No need to actually assault the little f*ckwit (who, like Glenn Beck, still hasn't denied raping and murdering a girl in 199), just do a little green screen punching, mix with a little digital magic using some stock footage of the jackass (extra points for using footage where he has spittle running down his chin during one of his batshit-crazy tirades), and Bob's your uncle.
I might be wrong, but wasn't JT disbarred and not allowed to practice law anymore? Wouldn't that mean that his lawsuits would have to be 'prosecuted' by another attorney?
Has he been introduced to Orly Taitz? I'm thinking perfect couple!
Yes, he really does. It was rap music before it was video games, but he honestly believes they are destroying our moral framework.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_(attorney)
The truly ironic part is that people like him do far more damage to this country than any cultural phenomena they point their fingers at.
Just imagine if he got his way.. how many of our rights would be trampled and how many would feel oppressed due to someone else's morality being forced upon them?
Why are we still reporting or even caring about this man? Ignore him. He's just trying to get back attention for his crusade. I repeat, ignore him.
What next for Mr. Thompson, sue Slashdot? Maybe I shouldn't feed potential ideas for that Troll though ;).
from Jack Thompson wikipedia article:
>though as of September 19, 2009 he has stated he intends to resume practicing law as of October 1st as he was 'never disbarred'.
uh... looks like we need a goodluckwiththat tag, too.
If he was really serious about changes the morals in America, he would do so by helping those in need. In my opinion, people as a whole may listen to the guy who screams the loudest, but they are inspired by the guy doing what they themselves want to do but are either too afraid or too lazy to do.
I eat Karma for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. That's why I don't have any.
America(the contry, as in USA) never had any morals. It was build on pillage and destruction or existing culture and then on salvry to bootstrap a new economy.
I don't think your trolls exist.
A million times i've been accused of being a troll by idiots who don't accept that we can have different opinions.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
He's just a really skilled troll, and everyone always falls for him.
I would have to disagree, a troll is aware of his/her trolling, it is intentional. Jack is like a troll, except for the fact that he is dead serious, and there is no "lol, trolled".
On usenet, the distinction is made between a "troll", and a "netkook"; their behavior is often strikingly similar, except that the former is doing it intentionally to incite reponses, whereas the latter actually believes what he's saying.
Jack, I gather, is more of a kook than a troll...
We live, as we dream -- alone....
Breaking news... "Jack Thompson sues Slashdot and OrangeMonkey11 $40M for not removing angry postings about him".
Streisand Effect
This guy has to be the most ridiculous human being on the face of this planet. You feel sorry and at the same time despise this guy.
Barratry:
"The act of persistently instigating lawsuits, often groundless ones."
It's a crime. If anyone was seriously threatened by one of these, they could simply file charges. Facebook is already protected by the law per TFA, as Thompson should be well aware. Being aware and persisting makes it all the more likely he'd be convicted of this, and in each case receive greater fines and/or jail time.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
Except, the morals of American have changed very much in the past 230 years. Even stating such a thing as "historians and anthropologists would agree that [they] haven't" is completely absurd. Either you're just a troll or some kind of nutcase who believes the propaganda that is spammed by the US politicians and various groups.
The founding fathers, for instance, were not religious madmen who thought it was a good idea to have religion play a major role in society. The current leadership is. That's just one thing... now can you name others?
Silly.
Yeap, and before rap music, rock and roll destroyed our moral framework.
And sometime before rock and roll, swing destroyed our moral framework.
I am sensing a pattern here.
It's not violent games that make me mad, It's fucksticks like him. Please somebody kill the stupid fucker and lets be done with it.
Right, so we've gone from a nation that puts the ten commandments in four different places in the supreme court building, and other references to God in the architecture of the Library of Congress, the White House,and the Jefferson Memorial, to a country that bans prayer in school. From a country founded by the Puritans (even I would consider extreme conservatives) to a country slowly state-by-state legalizing gay marriage and has a thriving and pervasive porn industry. I'd say the Morals of America have greatly changed since it's founding.
DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
Shakespeare invents 'your mom'
This new rock throwing game is destroying our caveman morality! We must stop it and only allow the throwing of rocks in the time-honored ritual fashion of our tribe!
If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
Come on, as everybody knows who posts anywhere on any message board the number one rule: Don't feed the trolls.
He is just a big enough troll to bring it out of immature flame wars and into a court room.
Yes, we all know he is dumb, but if you feed the trolls, they will want more. Just ignore him. Obviously nobody likes him. He got disbarred, which means that is how much people enjoy his presence.
As long as we pay attention to him he will not stop. I stopped caring about Jack Thompson once he got disbarred. He lost hiw little war he started once that happened. I say let the man die his slow painful death, which is exactly what is happening right now, but don't give him reason to continue doing it.
Turn the other cheek and just ignore the troll.
The world is how you make it
Jack is like a troll
It's just rumor, but someone told me that he had his name changed to "Thompson" from "Golf". His name used to be Jack Golf.
Free Martian Whores!
Oh I can, I can!
THE BIKINI
I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
I am sooooo going to blast him on Facebook this afternoon! What fun!
Aye, people don't like change.
Yet we knew that, and we're still astonished?
ilovegeorgebush
"In his court filing, Thompson says he's been harassed ever since the 60 Minutes episode. His house has been shot at, his car vandalized, and he's had "sex aid devices sent to his home." At night, he has to take his phone off the hook to keep from being awakened by angry callers."
All I can say here is, don't make an ass of yourself and expect to not make enemies, EVERYONE knows that, from political leaders to gang members. If you can't take the heat of doing what you believe in, damn well keep out of it.
as for this quote: "Unlike our President, Thompson does not have the Secret Service to protect him."
That's because your continued survival does not benefit anyone, anywhere, ever.
well I'm sure he's had his undies in a wad because Australia banned Left for Dead 2 and the US did not. For a country that was essentially a British prison colony (to non-aboriginals) for over 100 years, you'd think they would be more lax than other countries, but nope... of course, parts of the US were British prison colonies, too, but the number of people sent was vastly dwarfed by the number sent to Australia. Still, coincidence...?
For the better, of course. Who needs all that witch-burning hooey?
What day is it? Could you please tell me?
I believe you are half-right. Jack Thompson is dead serious, but, like a "troll", he acts intentionally to rile people-up.
Like a troll, the real purpose of Thompson's actions differ from the face-value intent of his actions. Thompson fully understands that his lawsuits will fail. Like a troll, he files them to gain notoriety. A troll is satisfied with yanking your chain. Quite unlike a troll, however, Thompson uses his notoriety to advance a cause. But that cause is advanced, if at all, outside of court and in the media.
Because notoriety is Thompson's only power, it behooves Slashdot, et al., to stop feeding that power. It should do so by rejecting all stories about Thompson unless he actually appears to be accomplishing something.
Hey Jack, you're a fucking tool....Though IANAL, I do believe that several states (California being one) have laws about abuse of the legal system and filing frivilous lawsuits.
I would say "quit while you're ahead Jack," but that wouldn't make any sense, so I guess I'll say, "quit before you sink even lower than being disbarred."
Pot, cocaine and heroin used to be legal. You could own people. Gentlemen were expected to wear hats when in public, and remove them indoors.
This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
Oh they exist. rlm in the baseball world (on usenet) would be a good example. But people are far too quick to cry troll.
Clearly all that felon blood makes them more susceptible to the violent, drug using influence of video games!
It's a joke people, chill out.
$_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
to actually *be* an ass hat?
I.e. a hat where someone's head is placed between the buttocks?
Because if there isn't then maybe there's some subtle joke I'm missing when people call others "an asshat".
I'd say the Morals of America have greatly changed since it's founding.
Yeah, I miss the old days of witch-burning, slavery, and industrial child labor, too. /p
This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
X (where X is a country more than two hundred years old) never had any morals. It was built on pillage and destruction of existing culture and then on slavery to bootstrap a new economy.
Fixed that for you (both the semantics and the syntax). Every country on the planet was built by the "winners," who almost always displaced prior inhabitants. Virtually every country (less than a couple hundred years old anyway) featured slavery (or a closely related form of cheap labor extracted involuntarily) at some point. No, that doesn't make it right, but as Dr. King said "the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends towards justice." We aren't perfect, but at least we seem to be getting better.
$_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
Correction: Virtually every country (more than a couple hundred years old anyway) featured slavery (or a closely related form of cheap labor extracted involuntarily) at some point.
$_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
I hate to be Socratic, but I think the answers to these questions are instructive.
1) Who / What financially enables Jack Thompson to do what he does from the confines of his posh Coral Gables home?
2) Could Jack Thompson afford to do what he does absent such means of support?
3) Could pressure be applied to the source of his support? (i.e., his enabler)
4) Who / what supports his enabler?
5) Could pressure be applied to his enabler's supporter?
6) Why hasn't pressure been applied to his enabler's supporter?
After all, he did say playing violent video games caused violent behavior and I, for one, feel that his baseless and unproven accusations have damaged the reputations of millions of gamers. Furthermore, his actions have surely caused some undue pain and suffering to the economic models of the gaming industry itself.
I'm thinking $43,000,000 ought to make me feel a little bit better about myself after being presented by Mr. Thompson as ticking time bomb of Grand Theft Auto induced homicidal intent.
I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.
a country founded by the Puritans
Bullshit. One colony out of fifteen was founded by Puritans. Virginia was already doing quite well by the time those idiots landed in Massachusetts and damn near starved themselves to death with their idiotic collective farming scheme.
This mythology of the Puritans "founding the country" is progressive-era propaganda.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
to a country that bans prayer in school.
Prayer is not banned in school. Kids can pray all they want. Government-forced prayer is banned in school. For some reason that gets conservatives so mad you would think they were about to bust an artery.
Yes, he's wrong.
We've gotten better. Just remember that every time someone trots out a "founding fathers woulda" comment.
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
I can't say he keeps me up at night.
There have been many such people in power over the years, and there appears to be no lasting damage.
It's pretty hard for these extremists to slip past public opinion, and even when the public is with them, it typically doesn't last for long.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
At least I think by now we can all agree that opera music should be banned?
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Hey, I like your post!
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Um... we stopped wearing onions on our belt.
Or was that just a fashion?
I drank what? -- Socrates
...their idiotic collective farming scheme.
Darned hippie communists!
I drank what? -- Socrates
Yeap, and before rap music, rock and roll destroyed our moral framework
D&D, comic books, and probably cave paintings.
[Insert pithy quote here]
It also behooves Slashdot, et al., to be mindful of his actions. Attention may stroke his ego, but inattention might let him get something done that would be more difficult in the harsh light of criticism.
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
And I fail to see which of these should be considered bad. Maybe the wearing the hats in public?
First off... 15 colonies? only 13 founded our country. what are the other two you are talking of?
Secondly, it was far more than one colony that was founded by 'Puritans',
Massachusetts, Puritans
Rhode Island, Religious folks fleeing from Puritans
Pennsylvania, Quakers
New Jersey 'New Lighters'
Maryland Catholics
Virgina Anglicans
6 of 13 colonies are founded out of religious beginnings, and New York city had/has such a high concentration of jewish folk since it was New Amsterdam
6 1/2 out of 13 isn't exactly propaganda. Its half the story.
Actually, can you link to somewhere I can read more about this? It's an interesting story I definitely haven't heard yet.
I would caution you about references to the Bush II era VP. The others are fine, and I agree with them, but Cheney is like Dracula/Chuckie/Freddie and Jason combined, except with all the nice parts removed and extra evil installed. You'd would not be sued by him, but he might eat your still quivering heart while playing cat's cradle with your entrails.
Why, there were quite a few founding fathers that didn't want slavery. In fact, it seems that the original drafts of the constitution banned slavery and had to be changed in order to get a few of the southern states on board. They compromised by placing the ability to ban imports of slaves and to tax their possession and make slave ownership and sales impractical in the future.
The act of slavery is irrelevant to someone pulling out a founding fathers argument. It's like Criticizing Obama's health care plan or foreign policy because he never rode a Farris Wheel.
of course, parts of the US were British prison colonies, too
Wasn't that just Georgia, and just for debtors?
Many of the indentured servants (temp slaves) sent to Australia and the US had been prisoners. Most the of prisoners had been in debtors' prisons. debtors' prisons are prisons for people that fail to pay their debts.
What's just as interesting is that the colony that the Puritans founded is now one of the most socially progressive states in the nation. Maybe the religious zealots got sick of the winters and moved south.
Maybe someone should config up his own "alt.kook" froup so he can then sue the Usenet?
Like most memes that are factually incorrect, that "puritan founding of America" idea is based on a perceptable trend in American thought. These sexually repressed, "rejection-of-self", rigid, religiously informed cultural traits seem highly correlated to puritan values.
"Reality continues to ruin my life" - Calvin and Hobbes
This is a bit like suing the Xerox company for providing the copy machine to the guy who stapled photocopies of your a$$ to all the phone poles in town.
1) You photocopied your own a$$ and let someone else get a hold of it
2) You determine that Xerox is liable for that.
3) ???
4) SUE!
--
Toro
Dear God, I really hope that the ??? step in the profit meme isn't actually "sue." That is a frightening thought.
This mythology of the Puritans "founding the country" is progressive-era propaganda.
Don't you mean socially-and-religiously-conservative-era propaganda?
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
First off... 15 colonies? only 13 founded our country. what are the other two you are talking of?
Nova Scotia and Newfoundland? Neither were part of the 13 Colonies (obviously), but both were early British colonies. IIRC, there were attempts early in the Revolutionary War to agitate Nova Scotia (which then bordered with Maine) against the crown, but the mostly military and loyalist population of the colony shrugged them off.
The English word fart is one of the oldest words in the English vocabulary.
The founding fathers did believe that religion plays a major role in society. They just did not believe that you should be forced to believe in someones god. Having religion being the base of why your laws come to be is not a bad thing. As long as the laws make sense outside fear of god. The founding fathers worked to make it so there was no state church.
Indeed. And Pennsylvania was sort of the anti-Massachusetts. It's always annoying when people categorize the early America experience based solely on the one colony.
However, most of the colonies were in the opposite camp of Pennsylvania on most issues, such as religious freedom, relations with Indians, and self-government.
Then technically I should be able to sue Jack Thompson for continuously making his presence known in the media, because anything he says, and just seeing his name in print is offensive to me.
And this has been another installament of Captain Obvious!
False. A considerable number of them were Deists, meaning that they accepted a supreme being - God, Allah, FSM, what have you - but not organized religion.
get away with censoring people because it hurts his "good name" or some such meaningless drivel
I can't think of *any* more meaningless drivel than the fact Jack Thompson *had* a "good name" in the first place. Case closed due to lack of evidence ?
...the words "douche" and "bag" come to mind...
Clones are people two!
The hell? The Virginia colonists DID starve themselves to death. Jamestown was totally dependent on supplies and colonists being shipped in, and collapsed repeatedly. Today, Plymouth, where the Puritans set up, has a population of 55,000. Jamestown? Completely abandoned; it took until 1994 before they even found where it was.
There's an anti-Jack Thompson group? Where do I go to become a fan?
No good deed goes unpunished. - Avon, Blake's 7
The founding fathers, for instance, were not religious madmen who thought it was a good idea to have religion play a major role in society. The current leadership is. That's just one thing... now can you name others?
No, they were not. And the current leadership? No. Even Bush wasn't really a fundamentalist madman. Yes, there are a few idiots out there making loud noises, but the fact of the matter is they are very much in the minority.
The vast majority of Americans believe in a secular government and they believe in the separation of church and state.
My blog
Although banning people who make overly long sentences that ramble on and on with no sign of stopping and treat punctuation as a game of "pin the tail on the donkey" (thanks Terry) might be a distinct improvement and stop people like me attempting parody at 02:00 when in fact I am just tired and bored and just wanted to try and boost my pitiful karma for a change with a +5 Funny post.
Did I win ?
These types of games have RATINGS. Parent should be involved in childs desision to play them (or NOT). This is an old argument that has often been taken too far. It's like Ozzy and Rob Halford being sued over songs they wrote because some clown killed themselves and their parents misplace blame!
And sometime before rock and roll, swing destroyed our moral framework.
It's the fault of the church. The original corrupting influence was theatre, and the church knew this, but none the less allowed plays providing they were on religious themes, but before you know it you've got Shakespeare writing about all kinds of crazy secular shit, and eventually theatres allowed in the city, and the final nail in the coffin of morality, allowing female roles to be played by actually female actors. Everything after that in the collapse of morality is postscript.
Loose lips lose spit.
I'd say the Morals of America have greatly changed since it's founding.
For the better.
Well then... How about a Slashdot mod category of "netkook" in addition to troll... But what would be the karmic offset and point difference for "netkook"? Afterall, a netkook could incite some meaningful debate, which can be a good thing, especially if their comment is backed by some legitimate research... But I suppose most netkooks do not have legitimate research to back their claims... Hmm, on second though, nevermind all that...
When it comes to Jack Thompson, I think he's a little of both. Afterall, he must enjoy the attention he gets for his wild claims and frivolous lawsuits, which is definitely trollish. Perhaps, "kooky troll"?
a country that bans prayer in school.
This has never been true in the US. Repeating that over and over doesn't make it true.
No, it's the removing of the hats that really irks people. Indoors or outdoors, it's clearly immoral.
You would have thought this moron would have learned his lesson after being disbarred. I hope the judge takes every asset Thompson owns this time round just for being the worst example of a scabarous parasite on society.
Its people like Thompson that make everything we buy cost more because the providers have to cover their asses against letigious little creeps like him.
Kinda interesting how Jack Thompson sues Facebook for angry comments, but avoids SlashDot like the plague.
Now, instead of game companies, he is going after kids with computers.
And seeing as how he doesn't like people talking bad about him or calling him late at night, the judge should tell him to treat the situation as a lesson in not publicly making an ass of yourself, and use his previous behavior as an example of what not to do.
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
The Irony of Jack Thompson is that he makes more gamers violent with rage then GTA, The victim - Facebook's forums should sue him for the perpetuating this anger.
Jack is like a troll, except for the fact that he is dead serious,
Y SO SERIOUS?
So they permitted slavery in the USA for the case of political expediency of getting a few more states on board. Sounds like a value decision to me.
Those two don't really count in a discussion about US craziness. They ended up in what is widely considered the sane part of North America.
Back from July 2008, I think this was-
Summer-camp chaplain: This country was founded by men who were reverent...
Me: It was also founded by Virginia tobacco speculators!
*Those* guys certainly don't fall under the category 'reverent', unless you count the Almighty Dollar, er, Almighty Pound Sterling.
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
Mozart, Rossini, Verdi, and Offenbach have some pretty amazing operas. Others like Wagner mostly don't do much for me or bore me to tears, but some people like it.
Ha.
Ha ha.
Heee hoo hahahahahahah.
You're funny.
Our society's standards for behavior have changed dramatically since WWII.
I see advertisements in the paper with pictures of women dressed and posed exactly as they used to be shown in Playboy and Penthouse magazines, back when those magazines were considered immoral.
I hear and see many things on TV and Radio that would have caused the broadcaster to lose their license.
The beat goes on...
For every problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious and wrong.
I'd say the Morals of America have greatly changed since it's founding.
Thank God.
Get your dogma outta my yard!
Just a nitpick: Rhode Island and Connecticut were both founded by Puritans who disagreed with the Massachusetts founders and left.
The cake is a pie
what does your tribe eats for dinner? We want to shit bricks too so pleas share the recipe.
Of course the original is still wrong, as a country is an abstract concept and not able to directly posses a sense of morality or notions of ethics.
Individuals can have a sense of morality. The idea that a large country could have a unified block of morality is absurd. Now a country can certainly embody certain values.
A document like the U.S. Constitution can lay-out these ideals, however they are called ideals for a reason. As a nation we may aspire to them, but I don't think it is possible for a republic to ever fully realize it's ideals. A republic ideals will always be far grander then reality allows.
For the same reason dictatorships can easily realize their ideals, as a dictatorships ideals are generally nothing more then the perpetuation of it's own power.
So they permitted slavery in the USA for the case of political expediency of getting a few more states on board. Sounds like a value decision to me.
Exactly.
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
Would love to comment, don't want to get sued.
It was a value decision. Or should I say valuable decision. Without it, the US wouldn't have come together and history as we know it would have been completely different with perhaps slavery existing in it to this day. Values such as the freedom of speech that allowed abolitionist to convince people on the ending of slavery wouldn't have existed as the newly formed states may not have ever pact together or if they did, the union would have been much weaker.
Most of the rest of the modern world had outlawed slavery in their main countries with their insular possessions coming soon after about the same as the US walked into the civil war. Even while England had banned slavery by the 1700's, it was allowed in their colonies like India and places in Africa. Africa still has parts that allow slavery to this day.
This guy is obviously a class act douchebag. He's sued enough people previously, he must certainly be aware of the safe harbors provision of the CDA, so all this can really amount to is a publicity stunt (which, unfortunately is working...here at least). Don't the courts have some sort of method available to them to deal with people that abuse the court systems by filing frivilous lawsuits without any legal merit? Maybe if they threw him in the lockup for a few months he wouldn't be so trigger happy on the retarded lawsuit machine gun.
Well, the common moral framework has been destroyed and re-created over that period of time, more than once in some cases. Look at how we feel about "bastards" (born out of wedlock), or the "N-word" (which used to be part of childrens' rhymes). Look at the content of tv (now radio/internet) programming, it's totally different. Objectively, I do think it is fair to say that much of the old moral framework was destroyed (as new frameworks evolved), and that popular media, definitely including music, played a huge role in changing the norms. So, if you are a conservative, meaning "conserve," meaning you generally like to keep things the way they are in this place at this point in time, by that standard terms like "moral decay" or "decline" make perfect sense, and blaming the media for ushering change makes sense, too.
Umm... hate to burst your bubble, but the industrial revolution (and thus industrial child labor) occurred after the founding of the USA.
Funny but even in your list I only see Puritans listed once. The claim as I read it was that "this country was founded by *Puritans*" not that it was founded merely by religious folk. Catholics != Quakers != Puritans...
That sums up the stance taken by every single parent generation since the dawn of mankind. The problem is an absence of LOGIC, it is perfectly fine to take a practical and fact based opinion and tell it to others. The key here is to tell it to others, not force it on them. "We threw mud balls until Willy got his eye taken out by one that had a rock in it, so our parents made us play with nerf guns instead." Sound and reasonable, "We threw....so our parents made us never play anywhere near mud again" is much more in line with the JT line of thinking. All things fade or change in time, who cares if in thirty years a whole generation of adults are shaking their heads wondering what the blue hell they were thinking with that tattoo, it doesn't really matter in the end, unless you get a tattoo of someones name, now that's idiotic. Like my grandfather said to my mom when I was playing Resident Evil and she said it was "Too violent," "Deb, in WWII I killed two Japs with a peice of piano wire in the dead of night because my gun jammed and they came running at me, at sun up I realized one of them was a kid, THIS is NOT violent." Of course he then took a long drink of homemade hooch and told us all about the first time he found out what Ben-Wah balls are....same day.
He's just a really skilled troll, and everyone always falls for him.
I would have to disagree, a troll is aware of his/her trolling, it is intentional. Jack is like a troll, except for the fact that he is dead serious, and there is no "lol, trolled".
On usenet, the distinction is made between a "troll", and a "netkook"; their behavior is often strikingly similar, except that the former is doing it intentionally to incite reponses, whereas the latter actually believes what he's saying.
Jack, I gather, is more of a kook than a troll...
Right. People think of the term "troll" as referring to some sort of monster, like the ones beneath the bridge in the story about the billy goats. But "trolling" is actually an old word for fishing by dragging a line with a baited hook or hooks behind a slow-moving boat. You can see how the older definition applies...
The CB App. What's your 20?
Can we call Jack Thompson "Whacko Jacko"?
Catholics and Anglicans at the least are not Puritans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puritan
Can we call Jack Thompson "Whacko Jacko" now?
Support your local school shooter, give them your firearms.
I kid you not, my great grandmother, who was 93 when I was five, FORCED all the men in my family to wear hats outside and she made everyone come into the entry hall to remove their hats BEFORE she let us in the inner door of the house as it was "Highly improper," to take your hat off in front of a woman. She was dead serious that this was the way things were done and I never saw my grandfather, father, brother, or cousins outside without a hat until she died. She was delusional, sure, but this lady kept a loaded shotgun beside her rocking chair, she used to keep a pistol but declared that since her eyes were going she need something with a bigger spread. What she doesn't know is that for the last year we replaced it with a peice of pipe mounted to a wooden stock and painted. I loved that woman.
Aaron Diaz has a perfect comic strip for this: http://dresdencodak.com/2009/09/22/caveman-science-fiction/
... Because next, he'll be suing us for making fun of him. The guy seems to react like a kid running to his mother, whenever people are "mean" to him. Rather, running to his lawyer instead. No willingness to adapt to the times or other people at all. "Mommy, this game is too scary! People are mean to me! I want money NOW!!!!" I'm almost with the people who suggested ignoring him until he goes away, like any troll.
That there has been a sharp decline in our morality since the development of culture?
Jack Thompson sues 8 month old pregnant women on basis that her boy-to-be will engage in violent video games and rant about him
Different time, same year:
(during sing-along in dining hall; the songs often drove me nuts, even when they didn't have any political content)
Camp staff: He [Columbus] said the world was round-o, he said it could be found-o...
Me, mimicking the song's cadence: Which all educated men of the time knew-o...
Mr. Cohen, my former AP United States History teacher (upon an emailed report of the above exchanges):
Ah, the perils of knowing your history - losing your innocence.
jcr seems to be on to something about the "Puritan" line being trumped up for Progressive ideological reasons; makes you wonder where these 'errors' come from - it ain't just laziness (although come to think of it, that explains some of it)
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
Oblig:
http://dresdencodak.com/2009/09/22/caveman-science-fiction/
I still wouldn't call those 6 states/colonies as founded by "Puritans". They were founded by people and groups of people fleeing religious persecution. The actual founders simply had enough pull with the King of England to be given the grant to go found the new colony as long as they abided by English rule. The people that the founders brought with them initially (and advertised to in England and other British holdings/colonies) were mostly from one religious group or another which was being persecuted where they currently lived, which is what gave them the incentive to drop everything and go to the "frontier" where they would be the only people currently present, and thus, would not have some other majority of people who were already there to continue the persecutions.
And in fact, the definition of "Puritan" at that time was "any number of English religious groups which thought that the English Reformation had not gone far enough", in other words, you can IMMEDIATELY remove "Catholics" from that list, since the Catholics were completely AGAINST the Church and England to begin with and were and still are loyal to the Catholic Chruch and the Pope (which the Church of England was created because the King of England didn't like how the Pope had responded about getting a certain marriage annulled...).
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
It's like Criticizing Obama's health care plan or foreign policy because he never rode a Farris Wheel.
Well to be honest, it's not like he's Bill Clinton or anything... but she is smoking hot.
He reminds me of a certain patent troll that just won't die.
If we really want to trot out a "Founding Fathers" thing, why bicker over the ideology vs. political expediency of slavery? Just cite the fact that they didn't allow women to vote.
This sig is false.
No, I mean "progressive" era propaganda. If you look into who the so-called progressives were, starting around the end of the civil war, they were the people who thought that it was the government's job to make us into "better" people. They were behind prohibition, eugenics, forcing American Indians into government schools to try to wipe out their culture, and many other rotten things.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
STFU, you troll! ;)
Sounds to me more like our moral framework as such never existed.
Additive identity, multiplicative cancellation, distributive multiplication over addition: pick any two (unless 1 = 0)
> 6 of 13 colonies are founded out of religious beginnings
You know that Puritans were a specific sect, right? You wouldn't say that all the colonies were founded by Catholics, just because they're also Christians, would you?
What was the score for the Pennsylvania Quakers vs. the New Jersey New Lighters?
No other country allowed women to vote at the time. Well, not all women with the exception of a few small countries. In fact, there are some that still do not allow them to vote. Furthermore, there are countries in existence today where no one is allowed to vote. Women in New Jersey had the vote since the beginning of the country. Women got the vote nationally within 30 years of most other places.
Why would you think the values held today were reflective back then and why would you assume that our more recent enlightenment is somehow damaging to previous cultures? The fact is, the entire formation of the US is what allowed woman's suffrage to progress in the US. You know, things like free speech and such that wouldn't have been enshrined in a bill of rights had not a compromise happened.
Only on /. when you starting discussion about Jack Thompson you can expect a flame about slavery.
That's {{fact}}
Which RENDERS as (citation needed).
Geek card please!
Everytime Jack Thompson makes an appearance to applie legal douchbaggery, Tim Buckley looks less like a hack. Hopefully, Jack has not gotten a Swine Flu shot and dies a horrible, horrible death in the near future.
The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
Yes...it has just been a gradual decline....
Did anyone think to tell them when they landed that they hadn't actually crossed the Atlantic yet?
FGD 135
Interesting
One of the guys from GamePolitics asked him if he used the actual 'report group' funciton and see if that worked, Jack responded calling him and idiot/moron as he usually does with that site (he used to troll the comments sections quite frequently in the past.
Looks like they did it themselves and one of the groups listed in Thompsons lawsuit and it was gone within 24 hours
He could have easily did this himself but no, because he didnt go though the proper channels nothing happened. He may think he is a celebrity so a letter to the CEO is the way for him to do it. He may think hes so important that the CEO would drop everything and see into the matter personally.
This reeks like a desperate grab for attention. http://gamepolitics.com/2009/10/01/one-mouse-click-later-thompson-fb-group-removed
This sig has been distributed under the Creative Commons license.
It's always annoying when people categorize the early America experience based solely on the one colony.
That was largely a result of post-civil war propaganda. The north had to be painted as morally pristine, so they promoted the pilgrims and whitewashed their failures.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
>>That was largely a result of post-civil war propaganda. The north had to be painted as morally pristine, so they promoted the pilgrims and whitewashed their failures.
Mmm, except the south controlled textbook purchasing, since the states tending to buy en masse, but the northern states tend to allow individual schools or even teachers to buy textbooks. Hence the southern side tended to be whitewashed when talking about the Civil War.
And how many more gamers would be forced to go "outside", be bored and hang out in parking lots, where they sell real guns and knives, instead of destroying digital peeps.
Bonus points to Jack Thompson for saying the oen guy must be a counter strike player and all he played was sonic
Warning:Spinning fast may cause homicidal instincts
What was the score for the Pennsylvania Quakers vs. the New Jersey New Lighters?
I'm pretty sure the Quakers didn't score at all.
"All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
Amidst all the other arguments going on here, second-guessing what would have been the historical outcome 'if', is never going to win.
It's obvious that the country wouldn't be founded like it was if the compromise wouldn't have happened. I mean some states simply refused to ratify the constitution. Two states even waited until after George Washington was elected as the first president and took office before ratifying the constitution and accepting the compromise.
The divide would have been what later because the south during the civil war and if the north would have compiles a separate country from the south, then it would have taken an unfounded invasion to end slavery in the south. In fact, that probably wouldn't have happened because the south would have been no more important to us then Mexico at the time and we wouldn't have cared how they ran their country as long as they left us alone.
I mean seriously, the entire premise for the abolition of slavery on the largest part of the continental north America would have been removed. The argument doesn't have to win, it just clearly shows how stupid the counter argument is.
You're talking about a much later period, around the 1950s on. I'm talking about the time between the civil war and world war one.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
No, Deist meaning that they accepted that there may have been a transcendent creator or that there may be some sort of deity immanent [sic!] in the universe but that did not engage in theistic intervention in the day to day lives of people or in support of states or governments or cultures or other aspects of civilization, and that at best the existence of the deity can only be determined through the study of nature.
That is: if there is a God then it is either no longer present in the universe at all, or is present but chooses not to engage with humanity (no answering prayers, no revelation via burning bushes or other supernatural phenomena, etc.)
"God, Allah" (same thing) is a theistic being in anything actually describing its ("His") actions, talking and otherwise interacting directly (for better or worse) with selected individuals and/or actually appearing in person.
FSM is a theistic being in that it can touch people with its noodly appendages.
You cannot believe in a theistic being and be a deist simultaneously, although you could take a "silent theistic being" position wherein a theistic being exists in some withdrawn, non-interacting state, and has done so for at least the age of the geological record (i.e., billions of years) or even since the structure forming epoch (from the concordance model of cosmology) began. That would be theism in the limit of low and distant (in space-like or time-like senses) interaction. Theism in the limit of small numbers of interactions about at least 13.6 billion years ago is equivalent to deism.
Around the turn of the century it was novels, because god-fearing Americans only need one book.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
Or he could be a genius and trolling so extreme to prevent it from happening. Now if we only had this kind of troll to be against public healthcare ...