Slashdot Mirror


Valve Will Stop Removing Controversial Games on Steam Unless They Are 'Illegal or Straight up Trolling' (geekwire.com)

Valve will no longer remove games from its Steam game marketplace unless they are "illegal, or straight up trolling," according to a statement from the Bellevue, Wash.-based gaming company posted today. From a report: The announcement comes a week after Valve removed a controversial game that simulated school shootings, following a nationwide outcry to ban the title. Last month it also issued warnings to developers about adult content in games. In its blog post, Valve executive Erik Johnson writes that "Valve shouldn't be the ones deciding this." "If you're a player, we shouldn't be choosing for you what content you can or can't buy," it reads. "If you're a developer, we shouldn't be choosing what content you're allowed to create. Those choices should be yours to make. Our role should be to provide systems and tools to support your efforts to make these choices for yourself, and to help you do it in a way that makes you feel comfortable."

176 of 368 comments (clear)

  1. Sweet! by TiberiusKirk · · Score: 1

    [sarcasm] Does that mean they will reinstate Active Shooter? [/sarcasm]

    1. Re:Sweet! by phantomfive · · Score: 1
      No, not for a while it seems:

      In the short term, we won't be making significant changes to what's arriving on Steam until we've finished some of the tools we've described in this post.

      From the official announcement.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Sweet! by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      Active Shooter's removal was not because of content, it seems. The developer's business partner had already been kicked out for copyright infringement, review manipulation, and customer abuse. Here.

    3. Re:Sweet! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well you are an idiot.

      You cannot legally purchase a hand gun until the age of 21. A long arm can be purchased at age 18. It's federal law... I don't know why there is an age discprency.

      No, you can't incrementally choose to restrict my purchase of a semi-automatic rifle because you "feel" it creates carnage.

      There is no reason to restrict the age of firearm purchases to '25' and this date seems pulled out of your non-sensical ass.

      Schools ceased teaching critical thinking skills .. they just want to pass tests.

      Most of everything else you mentioned is basically crazy. Teachers can't visit 200+ homes and even then they are powerless to do anything. You basically have to be murdering your children to have them taken away. It isn't the teachers job to enforce child care. Social services exist and they are awful.

      Kids, this is what happens when you have a random idiot post their thoughts on a public platform and sadly people listen to this insanity. It's not based anywhere in reality. This is the problem with society today and people like this are the reason shit happens. I doubt this person would lift a finger for anyone in trouble, but they are happy to randomly spout non-sense on the internet.

      Me, I'm a happy gun owner and I help people in need. I've spent entire weekends helping the less fortunate. (Which is most of my available free time). You... doubtful.

    4. Re:Sweet! by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I assume they'll call it a troll

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    5. Re:Sweet! by renegadesx · · Score: 1

      The age discrepency hasn't faced a Supreme Court challenge yet, there is a good chance it's unconstitutional. The home room teachers dont have 200 students, more like 30. Its more to do with current teachers dont have the power to do anything because of PC lefty shit.

      --
      Make SELinux enforcing again!
    6. Re:Sweet! by Undead+Waffle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      2. Raise the age to purchase a gun or use a gun without supervision to 21.

      I'm all for this provided we raise the age of adulthood to 21. That also means you can't vote until 21. If you aren't mature enough to have a gun you aren't mature enough to choose the leaders of the country. The pro gun control crowd wouldn't go for that though because young people tend to be very liberal.

      3. Raise the requirements for assault rifles and other weapons with the potential for mass carnage. Require a more thorough background check. If you can't get the equivalent of a security clearance, then you probably shouldn't be owning a weapon of war.

      "Potential for mass carnage" and "weapon of war" are undefined. These are scary sounding terms that mean nothing. Full auto has been essentially banned since 1986. This is why gun owners roll their eyes at "assault weapon" bans.

      4. Raise the requirements on handguns to 25, and require regular certification if you are going to carry a concealed handgun. Can you hit what you shoot at and can you reasonably identify appropriate targets from bystanders? This wouldn't be to produce a marksman, but to at least make sure of a minimal level of knowledge, including keeping a gun secure.

      Most states already require some amount of qualification for a concealed carry permit and to renew one if I'm not mistaken.

      5. Limit the amount of ammunition you can buy at once for assault style weapons. A licensed gun range maybe able to get unlimited, but only for use at that range. If someone brings in the spent casings they can buy more.

      Again, "assault style weapons" is a ridiculous term. It's literally defined by things like what angle the grip is and whether the stock is adjustable. The whole concept of an "assault weapon" is a complete fraud. The campaign against "assault weapons" was created in part with the intent of deceiving people into thinking they were still talking about fully automatic rifles and getting them on board with something they didn't understand. Hence the similarity to the term "assault rifle", which is the term for the select-fire rifles that had already been banned.

      Also, you don't need very much ammo for a mass shooting. Ammo is heavy. From what I've read most mass shootings involve up to around 300 rounds fired. You can shoot that much in a day at the range.

      6. Teach critical thinking in schools. Too many people don't learn how to think logically. Include funding for after school programs. Keep people busy doing something, not messing around in some gang or something.

      I'm actually on board with this. I would expand it to teach things like logical fallacies and manipulation tactics so people are harder to manipulate with propaganda.

      7. School uniforms, because they equalize things somewhat for students, and give people a bit more even chance.

      On the fence about this. Part of me wants to let people dress like crazies so they're easier to identify.

      8. Harden school's with fences and limit access points where guns can come in to something with a metal detector. Yah, I'd like to live in a world that is not required. We aren't in that world.

      Security should probably be dealt with on a local level. It's a big country and I'm not sure there is a one size fits all solution. There should definitely be security guidelines for newly built schools though. And maybe some experts sent around to do security assessments.

      9. Offer to pay for training for school teachers who wish training in firearms. They must pass with a high degree of competence to be allowed to carry a likely concealed weapon. Don't pay them more to do it. Don't pressure them to do it. Just make it something they can get if they want it. Spread teachers that are armed out so that they are somewhat d

    7. Re: Sweet! by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

      why so old?
      A better solution is probably just.
      bring back compulsory military service for 16 to 18 year olds.

    8. Re:Sweet! by terrycarlino · · Score: 1

      The idea of addressing school gun incident by addressing the student's home life is actually very good. There was even a locality that tried it. They put social services, the people responsible for handling truancy, school administrators and a member of the judiciary all in the same place and handled disciplinary and truancy problems holistically. Unfortunately they were required to stop because the ACLU decided they were violating parents rights to raise their kids badly.

    9. Re: Sweet! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      OK, have all the guns you want, but you're only legally allowed to fire them against the government.

    10. Re: Sweet! by laurencetux · · Score: 1

      one big problem is that given the science of projectile weapons is a known thing if you have access to a machine shop and a chem lab you can make just about anything you want if you also have the plans.

      heck a PaintBall "marker" can be very easily modded reversibly to be lethal without using abnormal balls

    11. Re:Sweet! by Jiro · · Score: 2

      A lot of that falls under "easy for the law to abuse". For instance, if you require regular certification to show you can hit things with your gun, the government can decide to make all the gun ranges illegal so there's no way to become certified (which has actually happened).

      And randomly visiting homes is called the "surveillance state".

    12. Re: Sweet! by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 2

      The alternative is children constantly get murdered at school.

      Huh? Why would that start happening?

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    13. Re:Sweet! by Anil · · Score: 1

      >> 5. Limit the amount of ammunition you can buy at once for assault style weapons. A licensed gun range maybe able to get unlimited, but only for use at that range. If someone brings in the spent casings they can buy more.

      I hear this, and similar, arguments often; you make this argument while at the same time, you are stating "require regular certification ... Can you hit what you shoot at".

      These are (somewhat) mutually exclusive.
      If i am to be capable of hitting what i shoot at, I need to practice. If i need to practice, I need enough ammo (that i can afford (via bulk buying rates, for example)).

      Sure, this depends on the type of shooting, and the type of gun (long range practice doesn't usually use a ton of ammo, for example).

      and yes, you could also just buy more ammunition while at the range, to have enough for your practice session, but this is then price limiting. When ranges switch to 'only range-bought ammo allowed', this is usually followed by price gouging.

      Making ammo unreasonably expensive, or artificially supply limited is gating firearms only to wealthy or members of the good-old-boy's club.

    14. Re:Sweet! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Dude, 'assault rifles' are effectively banned, along with all full autos.

      A semi-auto AK-74 is not an assault rifle. You can get an AR for less.

      You apparently know you're ignorant, but post anyhow.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    15. Re: Sweet! by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      I've got a metal lathe at home. I don't need a 3d printer now.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    16. Re:Sweet! by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Because over half the population would not only vote you out if you voted for it, but a significant percentage would rise up with their semi-automatics in protest?

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    17. Re:Sweet! by Shotgun · · Score: 2

      And if you're going to raise the age, then they can't join the military until 21.

      How it makes sense to TRAIN people to shoot other people at 18, but make it illegal for them to own a gun or even buy a BEER is ridiculous.

      And they can't get married until their 21. If you're not responsible enough to own a machine that uses a small amount of volatile material to accelerate a smaller amount of metal, you have no business locking yourself into a life altering contract. In fact, make it 21 to enter into ANY contract, including one for a student loan.

      Really, my point is to pick a friggen' age for when we decide that someone is an adult and stick to it.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    18. Re:Sweet! by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Bingo, the NRA is acting like we should all just drop our kids off at a camp style school that raises them right and teaches them to be fascists.
      Meanwhile, they can't stop talking about how colleges brainwash kids into being liberal.

      Interesting lack of awareness and introspection.

    19. Re:Sweet! by Stolovaya · · Score: 1

      I know it's sarcasm, but probably not. They've identified the developer as a "troll" (https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/evkp3a/active-shooter-removed-from-steam-by-valve).

      If a non-troll dev tried the same thing...maybe it would fly?

    20. Re:Sweet! by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Listen to conservative radio. A common theme is that parents don't raise their kids right. Parents don't teach their kids consequences or reality or something, so they shoot up schools.
      The logical endpoint of this is someone else raises your kids. I'm extrapolating that out.

    21. Re:Sweet! by renegadesx · · Score: 1

      Drinking alcohol is not a legal right. A constitutional amendment was required because it was the states because until then only the states had that sort of power.
      The second amendment is very clear, and the Supreme court is very clear that military grade firearms is a legal right federally. The only gun that the Supreme Court has rejected civilians have a right to was a sawn off shotgun and the ruling was very clear that it was because it served no use in a war scenario. The second amendment was intended to give rebels a fighting chance in a civil war in case the government turned tyrannical.
      If you ever want to understand the ideology of the Bill of Rights, the Deceleration of Independence and the first few amendments, it was around a paranoia of Government abuse. Remember that the tyranny of the British crown was a very recent thing back then.

      --
      Make SELinux enforcing again!
    22. Re:Sweet! by mentil · · Score: 1

      Most of the geriatrics in Congress don't qualify as 'adults', so let's just set it to square root of -1.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    23. Re:Sweet! by Agripa · · Score: 1

      3. Raise the requirements for assault rifles and other weapons with the potential for mass carnage.

      Raise the requirements beyond what? Manufacturer and registration of new assault rifles for civilian use has been banned since 1986.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    24. Re:Sweet! by KingBenny · · Score: 1

      i doubt regulation is the answer ... http://www.brusselstimes.com/c... but it will sure as hell prevent civilians and citizens from having one at home :)

      --
      Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
  2. I'll get some popcorn. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's a welcome sudden breakout of common sense. Let's see how long it lasts!

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
    1. Re:I'll get some popcorn. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      all valve did is challenge developers to make the most disgusting and controversial game they can. it will not end well.. for anyone.

    2. Re:I'll get some popcorn. by AC-x · · Score: 1

      Now hopefully there will be another outbreak of common sense and they'll actually do some quality control instead, so we don't have a situation where indie games are selling better on a Nintendo console of all things than on PC because it's almost impossible to find good new games on Steam among the flood of terrible, low effort games slapped together with a few pre-made game assets.

    3. Re:I'll get some popcorn. by bickerdyke · · Score: 2

      Since when has something to be bought, played or watched for people being up in arms about its mere existence?

      --
      bickerdyke
    4. Re:I'll get some popcorn. by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      all valve did is challenge developers to make the most disgusting and controversial game they can. it will not end well.. for anyone.

      That would be "trolling."

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    5. Re:I'll get some popcorn. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It really depends if it hurts their bottom line or not. Since they are not funded by advertising it comes down to if developers and retailers (who sell Steam products like game cards) decide they don't want to be associated with this. Since Steam is so popular it will be hard for developers to move away from them even if they want to.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:I'll get some popcorn. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      It reads "unless they are illegal or straight up trolling". Of course, that means that your comment would be removed too, but that a sacrifice I'm willing to make.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    7. Re:I'll get some popcorn. by fafalone · · Score: 1

      My guess is it won't even start, let alone last. "Or straight up trolling" is a loophole big enough to drive a Star Destroyer through.

  3. Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this crap. by slacka · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As a liberal and libertarian, I'm fine with *ADULTS* having access to any kind of content they want. If they want to take the no censorship, high road they sure as hell need to clean up their age verification system. I play counter strike and BF4(non-steam) with my 15yo. niece and I've seen his game library, and I know damn well many of his games are supposed to be over 18.

    First hit of google on how to work around steams age restriction:

    https://steamcommunity.com/dis...

    > You can buy games on Steam no matter what age you are as long as you set your age to over 18 when a store-page asks for you DoB

    So it pains me to say this, but until they fix this gigantic loophole, they are in the wrong here.

  4. Good by AdamStarks · · Score: 1

    The left wants them to ban anything vaguely alt-right-ish, the right wants them to ban anything with breasts and/or penes. Neither side being happy seems like a decent compromise.

    1. Re: Good by bursch-X · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, no, no. The left also wants to ban sexuality for the large part because itâ(TM)s objectifying the wahmens. Humiliation of male sexuality, cheap puns and physical assault on male genitalia is fine, though.

      --
      There are two rules for success:
      1. Never tell everything you know.
    2. Re:Good by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 2

      There is no outright ban in question here. Valve can absolutely choose whether or not to do business with other companies, and do so with impunity. They are not forced to eschew all sense of morality, they are choosing to. My company buys products from other companies and sells them to consumers. Any notion that Valve MUST allow access to all game devs, regardless of content, is like telling me I need to buy from every supplier out there that wants to sell through my consumer conduit, which is ludicrous. I don't believe that corporations should have the same rights as people, but they should certainly have the right to decide with whom to partner, and they do.

      --
      This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
    3. Re:Good by The+Cynical+Critic · · Score: 1

      I think you should add "far" to the groups you're describing there because I don't think the mainstream left or the right wants to censor games quite like that.

      Don't get me wrong, there are still plenty of people who want to censor games for plain dumb reasons, but those people tend to belong to either the religious right (who are incidentally the reason why the App Store doesn't allow anything remotely sexual in nature) or their equivalent social justice obsessives on the left.

      --
      "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
    4. Re:Good by spth · · Score: 1

      It is not that simple.

      Regarding your "and do so with impunity", you'd also have to consider the actions of non-state actors. There could well be powerful pressure-groups that could force Valve to apply censorship.

      Regarding your "they should certainly have the right to decide with whom to partner", I see a difference between "normal" businesses and monopolies. I am not familiar enough with the market, to have a good opinion on Steam being a monopoly or not. But monopolies, due to their power within a given market essentially amounting to being similar to that of a state, should be held to similar standards as a state actor when it comes to non-discrimination.

    5. Re:Good by x0ra · · Score: 1

      I'm perfectly happy with boobs, penises, weed, etc. Please stop generalizing.

    6. Re: Good by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Odd, the left is generally associated with wanting more sexual activity, e.g. through promotion of contraception and the normalization of sex. Feminists in particular regard the sexual revolution, when women were liberated to engage in and enjoy sex thanks to the contraceptive pill and changes in attitudes, as a very good thing.

      Even porn has adopted some feminist ideas in recent years, with the popularity of movies that focus more on the mutual pleasure the actors are experiencing and less on the "hammering a slut" aspect.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:Good by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      I'm very left wing, but I'm also very for free-speech and against censorship. I'm all for terrible games being published, but I'm also for campaigns against buying them and pressuring them to not publish through market forces

    8. Re: Good by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      The left also wants to ban sexuality

      Oh that's why they want to basically enforce monogamous relationships and make access to contraception hard. Wait, which left are you talking about again?

      Humiliation of male sexuality

      Sounds like you want to enforce your idea of what I should be like on me.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    9. Re: Good by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The left is no more monolithic than the right, plenty of 'pearl clutchers' on both sides.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    10. Re: Good by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      'The left' is incoherent and diverse, with their own Nazis.

      You describe average western college campus leftists. But even there, you have neo Stalinists and not quite so insane ones, who will mostly 'grow out of it'.

      Spend a year in the bible belt, the right also has a substantial tribal group with a stick firmly up it's ass. They are just as convinced as any leftist that only they are right and that they are 100% right. Granting thumpers are losing numbers every year, while Trump brought out the loony left.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    11. Re:Good by mentil · · Score: 1

      It's for liability reasons. Curating means if anything 'gets through', they have a target on their back. Letting everything through means they're not liable for what's there. Kickstarter did the same thing years ago, for the same reason.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    12. Re:Good by mentil · · Score: 1

      the right wants them to ban anything with breasts and/or penes

      And vagina.
      Am I doing this right?

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    13. Re: Good by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      During 'Snowden', the left wanted to define 'lying about birth control' as rape. Until they were asked where they would build all the new women's prisons. Then they wanted to define lying about barrier methods of birth control as rape, but only those that also prevent STDs, so not diaphragms.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  5. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So it pains me to say this, but until they fix this gigantic loophole, they are in the wrong here.

    Maybe parents can check their kids ages on their accounts? I tend to be unsympathetic to the "you should be watching your kids 24/7" argument, but to verify their ages on their accounts?

    Also, what have you done about your niece's game collection.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  6. Re:â(TM) by mmdurrant · · Score: 3, Funny

    That game has been out forever, it's called Nuclear War and just like in Civilization, Gandhi is a fuckin' dick.

    --
    I see my shadow changing, stretching up and over me...
  7. My next game by OrangeTide · · Score: 2, Funny

    I need to make a video game about two anthropomorphize male-identify assault rifles that fall in love.

    Spoiler 1: the climax is they shoot up an abortion clinic, and save many God fearing babies.
    Spoiler 2: In the sequel the duo solve global warming, and reduce our dependence on oil through an innovative carbon tax system.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re:My next game by Cederic · · Score: 2

      Don't even make her a prostitute. Just let the game offer that as a career path for young fit healthy attractive women, with the alternatives being a trophy wife for a rich sportsman or a hard slog trying to climb the corporate ladder.

      Let the gamers choose which route they prefer :)

    2. Re:My next game by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      Isn't there a game like that already?
      Publishers love controversy, it gives them free publicity. It was part of GTA's marketing strategy for instance.

      It sounds like a great idea for an indie game, if only for that reason.

  8. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I play counter strike and BF4(non-steam) with my 15yo. niece and I've seen his game library, and I know damn well many of his games are supposed to be over 18.

    If your niece already has gender issues, this probably isn't going to help.

  9. Should've Stayed a Solved Problem by Kunedog · · Score: 1

    Silly us, we thought this had already been settled decades ago with the moral panic over Mortal Kombat. Nintendo self-censored the SNES version and lost millions, while Sega raked in the cash. MK II would be released with blood and gore on both consoles, but with the new Mature rating. Parents could inform themselves and choose accordingly, while the choices of consenting adults weren’t to be fucked with.

    But nooo, we had new moral panics led by Jack Thompson and Anita Sarkeesion, with the gaming press even cheerleading the latter.

    1. Re:Should've Stayed a Solved Problem by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 2

      Nintendo self-censored the SNES version and lost millions, while Sega raked in the cash.

      On the other hand, Sega is no longer in the game console market, whereas Nintendo's brand as a kid-friendly platform has helped them maintain their position as one of the main players in that market.

      I far and away prefer the uncensored version of the game, but I can definitely see why a company would decide to exercise a degree of control over what they allow on their plaform.

    2. Re:Should've Stayed a Solved Problem by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, Sega is no longer in the game console market, whereas Nintendo's brand as a kid-friendly platform has helped them maintain their position as one of the main players in that market.

      Both Nintendo and Sega got taken to the cleaners by Sony with their strong third-party support and superior hardware. Philips CDi was "family friendly." Family friendly is not what kept Nintendo in business, it's the strong in-house content that kept the company afloat despite their disastrous choices in most other aspects of their business until the Wii. Sega didn't really have that, and they finally sunk after holding strong in the Genesis era.

  10. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by fafalone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A libertarian would say parenting is the responsibility of parents, not the market. If Steam wants to offer parental controls, that's certainly their choice, but they should be under no such obligation. And perhaps your nieces parents, who I'd imagine know the girl much better than you, have determined that she is mature enough to play some or all 18+ titles? As a left social libertarian myself, I wouldn't want Steam to try to second guess parental discretion like that.

  11. So, what's trolling, again? by talldean · · Score: 1

    Is a shitty game where you go into a school to shoot kids trolling, or not trolling?

    Like, them defining what they mean by that would help.

    1. Re:So, what's trolling, again? by jszpilewski · · Score: 1

      The trolling part was the description of the game put by the developers with an insulting message to all those who see such game settings questionable.

  12. Never Forget! by bursch-X · · Score: 1

    I played this game on the Amiga. It was brilliant. Is it still around on other platforms?

    --
    There are two rules for success:
    1. Never tell everything you know.
  13. As it should be by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Steam should not be a place to express a viewpoint. It's a platform to hook game devs and game players up. Nothing more.

    No one is forcing you to buy a game you find objectionable.

    1. Re:As it should be by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 1

      Steam should not be a place to express a viewpoint. It's a platform to hook game devs and game players up. Nothing more.

      No one is forcing you to buy a game you find objectionable.

      They have every right to express a viewpoint, just as every game dev has a right (and the ability - Steam isn't a monopoly) to sell their games elsewhere. I'm as liberal as they come, so please pardon me, but by your logic every store that sell magazines should be forced to provide shelf space for porn mags, gun mags, and those with extreme viewpoints. Companies like Valve shouldn't be able to push their viewpoints on their industry, but they have the right (though not a responsibility) to form their own definitions of what is objectionable and decide how to enforce that.

      Devs don't have an absolute right to access every distribution platform just because the platforms exist, regardless of their content.

      --
      This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
    2. Re:As it should be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There have been "nazi" games on Steam since the day it opened. Most of them are from the Wolfenstein brand. Some actually let you play as the Germans.

      One thing I know for sure, I certainly don't want you modern day SJW Nazis deciding what I can or cannot purchase.

    3. Re:As it should be by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What’s hilarious is that gamers are cheering this move, praising Steam for being an impartial marketplace while “game journalists” all over Verge, Kotaku, Polygon, Rock Paper Shotgun, Gamespot, and on and on and on are throwing tantrums, because they want steam to enforce censorship (*their* censorship, mind you — which ideally for them would mean censoring violence!percievd sexism, perceived misogyny, perceived xenophobia, and on and on).... because game journalists are all just wanton authoritarian activists who hate their job, the industry, and their audience.

    4. Re:As it should be by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Games are a form of art, and all art is both expressive and inherently political. You can't separate the two, and nor should you.

      Valve should just own it. Yes, they are happy to make money selling games about shooting up schools. No need to distance themselves from it, any more than PornHub needs to distance itself from making money out of legal pornography.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:As it should be by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Auschwitz Camp Management. Can you keep up with the increasing volumes of new inmates, find the space for them all to sleep, keep them fed and healthy and still manage your costs, all while preventing escape, meeting production targets and furthering the strategic objectives of the Führer.

      I mean, realistic sims are big in Germany these days.

    6. Re:As it should be by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

      but they have the right (though not a responsibility) to form their own definitions of what is objectionable and decide how to enforce that.

      Valve has a lot of rights here. They are wisely choosing to stay out of the conversation by saying "We don't give a shit. We just wanna sell games." Unless it's illegal or "Straight up Trolling." That's how it should be. Valve could exercise all sorts of rights, but they are not. And I commend them.

      They should not be in the business of judging games on any sort of criteria except the ones they already are: Illegality, and/or "Straight up Trolling" Leave it up to the consumers to decide which games are good and which are not.

      Allowing a controversial game of any kind on Steam, by Valve, is a very bold move. Far too often companies are getting sucked into political and/or moral debates they have no business being involved in. Valve is one of the braver ones deciding that caving to social pressure isn't such a good idea. Good for them.

  14. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 2

    How far does parental discretion go? Too much parental discretion leads to deaths by Christian parenting and/or medicine denial, and "lesser" problems like obesity, malnutrition, alcoholism and drug addiction.

    --
    Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
  15. Re:An open-minded view of things by Notabadguy · · Score: 1

    You're refreshingly open-minded. 95% of people post here seem to believe on of two things;

    1. Everything any Democrat politician ever says is stupid, and anything a Republican politician ever says is automatically right.

    or

    2. Everything any Democrat politician ever says is stupid, and anything a Republican politician ever says is automatically right.

    The idea that perhaps people on BOTH sides of the political spectrum sometimes make a good point, or have a good idea, is rare, and refreshing.

    There is another belief, which I think most of us actually have...

    Everything any ____ politician ever says is stupid.

  16. Steam will be removed from apple as they censorshi by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Steam will be removed from apple as they do censorship in there app store.

  17. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Q-Hack! · · Score: 1

    Back in the day, if you payed with a credit card, you were considered an adult by default. Not sure if that still applies with all the new charge to your phone capabilities.

    --
    Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
  18. Re:An open-minded view of things by aliquis · · Score: 1

    So... really just one thing?

    I can tell you that both of your sides lies and are bad.

    Swedish perspective so you know I'm right.

  19. Re:â(TM) by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 1

    It's called Global Thermonuclear War. But maybe we should play tic tac toe, Joshua.

    --
    This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
  20. Its not the censorship.... by renegadesx · · Score: 1

    I agree with Valve that if you want to make a game about school shootings, great! Free expression FTW.
    My issue is Steam is so bloody crowded full of absolute shit, I can't find anything good to play and its turning me off the platform. Its been a year since I have purchased anything on Steam directly, more through places like Humble Bundle.
    Its a crowded mess full of asset fips and one man super buggy shit that are borderline playable.

    --
    Make SELinux enforcing again!
    1. Re:Its not the censorship.... by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Good. I'm happy that Steam is focussing on connecting game developers with people that want to play their games, but it'll be nice if they stop thinking I want to play JRPGs designed for 12 year olds.

      It's maybe my own fault, I'll play anything once..

    2. Re:Its not the censorship.... by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      My issue is Steam is so bloody crowded full of absolute shit, I can't find anything good to play and its turning me off the platform.

      Things you consider "abosolute shit" are considered "good" by someone else, and vice versa.

      That's actually a big part of Valve's announcement (http://archive.is/KtduG). They want to give their customers better tools to find games they like and ignore games they don't.

      No they aren't. There are thousands of half-completed asset flips crowding the Steam store. I don't bother looking at it anymore, as it is so completely filled with shit.

      And the Steam suggestions? Most of them are "early access" incomplete games who's developers are just trying to grab as much cash as they can before abandoning the project.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  21. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by AC-x · · Score: 1

    >> You can buy games on Steam no matter what age you are as long as you set your age to over 18 when a store-page asks for you DoB

    > So it pains me to say this, but until they fix this gigantic loophole, they are in the wrong here.

    The problem is that's one of those easier said than done things. How do you create a fool-proof age verification system?

  22. 2, 3 & 4 would violate the second ammendment by renegadesx · · Score: 1

    Otherwise an achievable list
    Number 2 would get thrown out on second amendment grounds unless you change the legal age of an adult to 21, bearing arms is a legal right for all adults and is not negotiable unless there is a constitutional amendment to repeal the second amendment which most states will block.
    Number 3 would have no chances under the supreme court without a constitutional amendment, the reason the sawed off shotgun got rejected was because it wasn't useful in a war scenario.
    Number 4: again, raise the legal age of an adult or a second amendment change, dont expect either to happen.
    Otherwise everything else on the list is quite achievable. I would add one more: the media should not be encouraged to make shooters celebrities.

    --
    Make SELinux enforcing again!
  23. How to protect your game by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Make sure you have a game website thats yours.
    Update that site with news, media, events related to the game.
    Make sure all social media and any "game" site has links back to your own site.
    Ensure you have your own trusted payment system in place and in use if needed.
    Have other methods of payment beyond a US CC company.
    Have a set of networks and the ability to quickly change from all 3rd party services to your own networks.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:How to protect your game by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Then they attack your hosting provider. And your hosting provider kicks you off their platform. And then your hosting provider says "Man, I wish we didn't do that. We don't do that in the future. Promise!", just like Valve is doing now. And just like Valve is doing now, your hosting provider won't let you back onto their platform despite having the change of heart.

      Fuck you, Cloudflare. Fuck you, Valve. You can't have it both ways. Take a stance and stick to it. Don't fucking ban shit and then act like you care about free speech, open platforms, etc.

    2. Re:How to protect your game by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Some email list to keep users updated on later changes to websites?
      Funny how all this censorship results in having to use the oldest networking tech to try and keep publishing in 2018.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  24. Re:2, 3 & 4 would violate the second ammendmen by renegadesx · · Score: 1

    Forgot to mention, not sure about where the Supreme Court would come down on #5 that one I really dont know about if the 2nd Amendment covers ammo, should be fine but Im not aware if it's been tested in the supreme court or not.

    --
    Make SELinux enforcing again!
  25. Re:An open-minded view of things by renegadesx · · Score: 1

    On the issue of guns it's also about what's legal. The Supreme Court has been very clear that the Republicans have been mostly right about what the Second Amendment is. If you want gun control you need to stop pretending like its optional and push for a referendum to repeal the Second Amendment. Most states are red and will likely vote against it, but it's really your only legal way at enacting gun control.

    --
    Make SELinux enforcing again!
  26. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    I'm not saying Valve should be confirming the age. I'm saying it's reasonable to expect/require that a parent looks at their child's account to make sure it's not set to 18+

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  27. "Think about the children" by pablo_max · · Score: 2, Informative

    People like you are the reason we can't have nice things.
    You expect the world to raise your kids for you because you are too lazy to check what they are doing or don't care enough to guide them.

    The government nor any company should be telling us how to live our lives and what we cannot look at. So, fuck you.

    1. Re:"Think about the children" by houghi · · Score: 1

      Yet the drinking age in the US is one of the highest in the world. You are an adult at 18, but are not allowed to drink. So the government IS telling you how to live your life. That is not even about "save the children and the terrorists". It is telling that you are not allowed to drink as an adult.

      This is also not to protect you as in "Cocaine is illegal, because it is bad" ad you can buy alcohol legally without an issue at a certain age.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  28. Doh! #2 was supposed to be switched around from #1 by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Stupid error on my part. That was supposed to say:

    seem to believe on of two things;

    1. Everything any Democrat politician ever says is stupid, and anything a Republican politician ever says is automatically right.

    or

    2. Everything any Republican politician ever says is stupid, and anything a Democrat politician ever says is automatically right.

    More likely, perhaps, lots of people have various ideas and points of view that have value. Sometimes "A and B" is the best answer, rather than arguing over A or B.

    My kid does the opposite. She almost never argues and almost always wins. It goes like this:

    Her: Can you take me to ...?
    Me: No, I'm sorry, I'm tired.
    Her: Okay, I'll be quite so you can nap. After a nap can you take me?

    Her: I want to play with my toy.
    Me: Sorry, it's time to go.
    Her: Okay, I can take my toy in the car.

    Her: I want to wear my new T shirt.
    Me: It's cold, you need a warm shirt.
    Her: Okay, I'll put my jacket on over my T-shirt.

    That's a three year old.

    I wish us grown-ups could learn how to say "okay, I see your point. We can address that by ...". Especially our "leaders", why can't they be as diplomatic, and frankly mature, as a three year old? Have we EVER heard this "debate" in Congress?:

    D: Everybody should get X. My bill gets X for everyone (except rich people making over $50K)
    R: That would be nice, but your bill costs $10 billion. We're already over budget and can't afford it.
    D: Okay, the program I proposed 3 years ago isn't working out as well as I expected. We can cancel that and move the funds to this.

    Wouldn't that be wonderful? Wouldn't it be great to even ever hear any Democrat or Republican say "we thought it was a good idea, but it's not actually working that well, so we can stop doing that."

    Hmm, maybe if I encourage my daughter to keep doing "okay, I see your point, let's do this", perhaps one day should could grow up to make a real difference as Speaker of the House or President or something.

    I suppose McCain did SOME of that, as did Lieberman, and that's part of why they got along so well - they respected each other's viewpoints, though they were different.

  29. Re:â(TM) by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

    The only winning move is not to play.

  30. Re:Furry Porn & Anime Tiddies by sanf780 · · Score: 2
    Power to the user? To any internet users? I do not know where to start

    The issue I have with random internet users is that they can build something marvellous or something horrible. I have seen how an indie game has been hidden from the front page on launch week three weeks ago because some users started adding tags like "Nudity". The thing is, having a game on Steam meant something years ago. It made sense to browse which games were introduced into Steam. Not anymore.

    Humble Bundle also had a bundle full of anime titties not so long ago. I assume there are many people interested in erotic Visual Novels since the 90s.

  31. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    That's just the thing. Most people who categorise themselves will stick to that category right until they don't.

    I'm libertarian right until your unvacinated child plays with mine.
    Goverment regulation is socialism right until it is necessary to keep functioning.

    etc.

    I feel like writing a chrome plugin for Slashdot that replaces "I'm {$political_philosophy} and so ..." with "On this specific point of discussion I hold {$political_philosophy} views." Though I fear it may kill the Slashdot comments section as people run out of things to argue about.

  32. Re:â(TM) by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

    Wait...Gandhi really was a dick. Go read about what he thought of the khaffirs. Hell, go read the whole wikipedia article about him, including what he campaigned for during WWII. So do you mean to tell me that you had a game of civilization that was actually historically accurate?

  33. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by fafalone · · Score: 1

    We have laws for that. I (and most libertarians) certainly don't support abolishing laws against seriously beating or neglecting your kids, ...or apparently giving them drugs and excessive alcohol (?); but we're not talking about illegal abusive conduct here, just video games.

  34. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Solandri · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Do you screen the games your kids play for deer crossing the road? Would it surprise you to learn that deer are more dangerous than school shootings?

    So a student is more likely to be killed by a deer than from a school shooting. Where are all the walk-outs and protests advocating deer population control?

    For some perspective on the scope of the school shooting problem, look at the stats the CDC puts out. For 2015, the leading causes of death among the 15-19 year old demographic were:

    3,919 deaths - Accidents (mostly automobile accidents and drug overdoses). 282x more than school shootings.
    2.061 deaths - Suicide. 148x more.
    1,587 deaths - Homicide (mostly outside school, and gang related). 114x more.
    583 deaths - Malignant neoplasms (cancer). 42x more.
    306 deaths - Heart disease. 22x more.
    195 deaths - Birth defects. 14x more.
    72 deaths - Influenza (the flu). 5.2x more.
    63 deaths - Chronic lower respiratory diseases. 4.5x more.
    61 deaths - Cerebrovascular diseases. 4.4x more.
    52 deaths - Diabetes. 3.7x more.
    41 deaths - Complications from pregnancy and childbirth. 3x more.

    A protest over excessive rates of teen pregnancy could potentially save 3x more lives than a protest over school shootings. Likewise, teaching kids not to each too many sweets, to exercise, not to smoke, get the flu shot, use sunscreen, not to join gangs, to buckle their seat belt, not to use drugs, and offering them counseling for depression, would all be much more productive uses of our time and effort than worrying about or debating school shootings. For that matter, controlling deer populations to reduce the number of fatalities from striking deer could potentially save 1.35x as many students' lives as lost to school shootings.

    If you want to tackle a life-threatening issue that students face, probably the best choice is suicide. It results in more than a hundred times as many student deaths as school shootings. But when's the last time you saw the media run a story about teen suicide? The only reason school shootings are even on the radar is because of the media using them to play the "think of the children!" card against guns.

  35. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by fafalone · · Score: 1

    We need *more* people to be independent thinks who don't strictly adhere to their political parties philosophy. To stand up and say 'hey, this is where we're wrong' and break from the party in pursuit of common sense and doing the morally correct thing. It would be a much better world. So it doesn't bother me one bit to disagree with other libertarians and say according to my interpretation of the philosophy, not requiring vaccinations fall under serious abuse, like beating and raping, that laws about are acceptable. Libertarianism isn't anarchy that opposes all laws, there's a place for police power, it's just that in many places it goes too far.

  36. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Rande · · Score: 1

    Have the system send nudes directly to the police.
    If they aren't over 18, they can be charged with creating child porn and no one wants to risk that.

    If they send someone elses nudes then they can be charged with revenge porn or copyright infringement and again, no one wants to risk that.

    Hey, if FB wants peoples nudes, why not join the club?!

  37. What about a FPS with Valve as the target? by Required+Snark · · Score: 1
    Assume that someone takes an existing open source FPS platform and mods it to make gameplay occur at Valve HQ. All you have to do is change the name to Vasevalve (Vaseline + Valve) or some such and get some game developer nerd models as targets. Name the targets after the board of directors and all the current and former c-suite office holders. The most points for a kill are assigned to the two targets Eric and Johnson. No relation to any person living or dead. Honestly.

    Do you think they would happily host that game? What about a game shooting kindergartners and puppies? Or making the targets only women. How about KillAChristian or KillAHonkey? The latter would feature a shooter who could be black, "Mexican" (whatever that means) or some obviously Asian guy. How would your average AltRight/closet KKK Slashdot reader respond? (sarcasm)I'm sure none of them would be uncomfortable at all.(/sarcasm)

    Even though I don't play FPS games, there is one that I would play, and I think it would be a big hit: KillSlashdot. Scrape user id names for all the targets. Hours and hours of harmless amusement.

    --
    Why is Snark Required?
    1. Re:What about a FPS with Valve as the target? by cheetah_spottycat · · Score: 1

      I think that would fall square into the "outright trolling" category.

  38. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by fafalone · · Score: 1

    If that's what you want to believe that's fine, but don't go claiming it represents a mainstream belief. Parents having no authority over minor children is not in any way consistent with any significant group of libs, and your description seems to place it under the beliefs of anarchists. Perhaps you're just another one of those extremely biased leftists who keep accusing libertarians of being anarchists?

  39. Oh boy by DrXym · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They're really going to reap what they sow with this policy.

    1. Re:Oh boy by DrXym · · Score: 1

      So you think when we start seeing titles like "Concentration Camp Architect", "Preschool Dating Sim" or whatever that users will be happy? Perhaps a tiny % of libertarian idiots will be. The majority will not be. Not in the slightest.

    2. Re:Oh boy by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      that users will be happy?

      Turn it around. Why would users be unhappy? Are they forced to buy it? No where does it say Valve will promote the titles. If you're unhappy because someone else somewhere in the world that doesn't affect you is an arsehole, maybe the correct answer is not to be locking all of society in a bubble but rather a healthy dose of antidepressents.

    3. Re:Oh boy by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I expect there will be a lot of hastily made crapware designed to test Valve's limits.

      Remember the outrage over Wolfenstein having the player kill Nazis and depicting them as evil? I'm expecting a badly made FPS where you play Nazis repelling an SJW invasion and purifying the fatherland to appear soon.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Oh boy by DrXym · · Score: 1
      They'll be unhappy for the same reasons they're unhappy when other social platforms host terrorism, pedophilia, racism etc. More so, given that many Steam users are under the age of 18.

      It's a stupid move by Steam to open themselves up to this. A sane policy would be to require games to abide by regional content rating systems and banhammer those which are shown to be flagrantly in violation.

    5. Re:Oh boy by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      But that is their policy. At no point did they say they will host games that are banned. At no point did they say they will not advertise regional ratings.

      The thing that may upset the very people who are unhappy about life the universe and everything is that the game itself wasn't actually banned, just removed from Steam due to a silly policy of thought-policing.

    6. Re:Oh boy by DrXym · · Score: 1

      No, it's not a big straw man you idiot. It's a predictable consequence of a service that doesn't have a proper policy on that kind of content.

    7. Re:Oh boy by DrXym · · Score: 1

      No more than any other game platform. Google App store (for example) requires games to rate themselves according to the markets they sell in. It takes down games which are in violation of those ratings or the service policy. Steam only needs to do something similar. Absent of that they will find themselves on the receiving end of lots of negative press until they DO change their policies.

    8. Re:Oh boy by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Well, to be fair some of the modern day conservatives are literal Nazis and quite open about that fact, and it's a game about killing Nazis...

      Snowflakes getting butthurt that someone made a game about murdering them?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:Oh boy by DrXym · · Score: 1

      No, not extortion, common sense. Inviting the absolute worst people in the world to publish "games" on their platform will not end well. This is completely obvious.

    10. Re:Oh boy by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Sexualizing kids is in right now with the journalist crowd. Put them in drag and you'll get glowing reviews for "progressiveness".

      Sadly, it is. The media seems focused on normalizing pedophilia and ignoring child trafficking.

    11. Re:Oh boy by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Well, to be fair some of the modern day conservatives are literal Nazis and quite open about that fact

      That's not fair at all. That's like saying "well, some modern day liberals are literal feminazis/socialist/communists/doubleplusungoodthing"

      They're both fair accusations to roughly equal degrees. Rs and Ds each pander to their own sort of deplorables in order to gain votes. There is still a difference, though; the Rs are pandering to people who believe other people should be attacked, and the Ds are pandering to people who think other people should be defended.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  40. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by x0ra · · Score: 1

    As a liberal and libertarian,...

    No, you're not.

  41. Re:â(TM) by Xenx · · Score: 2

    I only read the wikipedia article, about him and ww2 so I'm not exactly an expert. But, it is what you suggested. In WW2 he campaigned for India's freedom from Britain. He said that they should not support a war meant to secure the freedom of others, when their own freedoms were being denied. He also wanted to see a peaceful resolution to the war, instead of bloodshed. He sounds like a real monster.

  42. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by pots · · Score: 1

    A true libertarian would say that parents shouldn't be infringing on the child's liberty, and that free market (the only entity which is allowed to make decisions) will decide what media is and is not suitable for children to consume.

  43. Re:Doh! #2 was supposed to be switched around from by N1AK · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't that be wonderful? Wouldn't it be great to even ever hear any Democrat or Republican say "we thought it was a good idea, but it's not actually working that well, so we can stop doing that."

    It would, but will it ever happen if the voters then vote the person who spent $x billion on the program that wasn't working out of office because the other party target the electorate with a campaign highlighting their incompetence for wasting that money. There was a great episode of the West Wing that provided a great story of exactly this paradox (I think it's Slow News Day). In the episode about reforming social security two of the 'good guys' in the white house staff have to explain how they got a Republican who had argued for years for the same reforms they wanted voted out of office with a cynical campaign attacking him for those views because they thought they could get a democrat who would be aligned with them on other issues to replace him; and now they can't get any other Republicans on board, because even though they agree with it they don't want the same thing to happen to them.

  44. Re:An open-minded view of things by N1AK · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    He's got 80%+ approval ratings amongst republican members so yes I think most people think he is. You're making the mistake of thinking that republican has some fixed definition and doesn't change with it's membership and their views.

  45. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Maybe my child falls into some of the categories of unvaccinatable and relies on herd immunity.
    Maybe I just triggered your special topic so you just latched onto it without actually bothering to follow the conversation or the point of my post.

  46. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 1

    People used to go to war when then were 8-9-10-11-12 years of age. In fact even younger children in the modern world participate in all sorts of conflicts around the world. The western world isn't slightly inconvenienced by that last time I checked.

    The fact that we arbitrarily raise the entry age of adulthood doesn't mean nature follows. It also doesn't mean that younger children don't know the concept of death and they shouldn't be taught to value life above everything else in this world. So, maybe, just maybe, it's not Valve's task to set arbitrary age limits. Maybe just maybe parents and society, through proper education, should set the priorities and values of the growing population.

    Also, this giant loophole just cannot be solved technically unless you force children to authenticate using their birth certificate. Then someone should check its validity and ... sorry, this can hardly be solved technically unless you put a Valve employee next to every child trying to log in to their account. You must realize it's simply impossible.

  47. Re: â(TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The same could be said of socjus and social media.

  48. Re:An open-minded view of things by Brymouse · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You have a very mistaken belief of how the bill of rights works. The 2nd amendment is simply protecting a natural right from infringement by the government. In the absence of the 2nd amendment, all people still have the exact same rights.

    Even if this did happen, and the feds thought it could be enforced, we'd have a civil war trying to enforce it.

  49. Re: An open-minded view of things by Undead+Waffle · · Score: 1

    Then how come there are so many youtube videos of people going to those gun control rallies and talking to random people who don't know anything beyond the standard talking points?

  50. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Undead+Waffle · · Score: 1

    Nonsense! Their age verification system is bulletproof. That's why they keep making me confirm I was born on January 1 1900.

  51. Straight up trolling by iTrawl · · Score: 1

    Does that mean that Bunker Blaster will also not be published on Steam? Nor any of the other titles shown there?

    --
    "Everybody's naked underneath" -- The Doctor
  52. Amorality is immorality by Sqreater · · Score: 1

    Refusal to make a judgement on such things is a convenient avoidance of responsibility and approaches business psychopathy. Imagine living in Nazi Germany while knowing what is going on and making no judgement. Just because you are in business doesn't relieve you of the obligation to be a human being who is part of his social environment. I believe the major cause of school shootings is 50 years of movies pushing the theme of "just revenge," not video games, which are active displacements of the rage and anger that would lead to school shootings, but that doesn't mean obviously disturbing video games like this that callously make money on the sufferings of individuals and families should be allowed by those who make them and those who provide them. Being in business does not relieve you of your obligations to society.

    --
    E Proelio Veritas.
  53. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by null+etc. · · Score: 3, Insightful

    a student's odds of being killed in a school shooting in any given year are (51 million) / (13.9 per year) = 1 in 3.67 million. About 120 Americans are killed every year by deer [vox.com]. (325.7 million Americans) / (120 per year) = 1 in 2.71 million.

    You must be a poor scientist, because you shouldn't compare the number of school children killed by one type of fatality with the number of ALL Americans killed by another type of fatality.

    If 120 Americans are killed every year by dear, how many of those Americans are school children?

  54. All True Art is "Straight up Trolling" by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Although this is a good first step, the "trolling" clause really bothers me - really great art is stuff that provokes, just as trolling does - its something that makes people perhaps think In a different way than they did before...

    Furthermore it's easy to see why people troll on Twitter and other platforms - it gets a quick response and is easy just to fling some verbal poo to see what sticks. But someone bothering to write a whole game about something? I find it hard to believe someone would put so much effort into something if they did not see a deeper meaning to what they were putting out.

    We'll see what actually gets removed to judge how well this new clause works in practice.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:All True Art is "Straight up Trolling" by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Although this is a good first step, the "trolling" clause really bothers me - really great art is stuff that provokes, just as trolling does - its something that makes people perhaps think In a different way than they did before...

      trolling seem to have, detached from the meaning, of generally winding (and so on up to flinging shit threats of violence crapflooding and doxxing

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    2. Re:All True Art is "Straight up Trolling" by SoftwareArtist · · Score: 1

      I'm also bothered by that part. It seems to undercut their whole argument. If they just said, "It's not our job to make judgements, you can do anything as long as it's legal," that would be a consistent position. I'm not sure I agree with it, but I can see how a reasonable person might adopt that viewpoint. But trolling? Do they seriously think trolling is so much worse than anything else in the world, it's the sole legal activity they're going to ban? And how do they define trolling anyway? Anything designed to be offensive? Or maybe it also can't have artistic merit? And who judges artistic merit?

      They first say they won't make judgements, then punch a big hole in the middle of the policy by requiring themselves to make judgements. And it's a super subjective hole at that.

      --
      "I'm too busy to research this and form an educated opinion, but I do have time to tell everyone my uninformed opinion."
  55. Re:An open-minded view of things by TiberiusKirk · · Score: 3, Informative

    This! I keep telling people the government doesn't give you any rights; you have them already. The government can only take your rights away.

  56. Re:An open-minded view of things by terrycarlino · · Score: 2

    Meaningful gun legislation is prosecuting people who use guns in the commission of a crime. Meaningful gun legislation is a requirement that every U.S. citizen be required to take a gun familiarization course so they can overcome their irrational fear of firearms.

    The merits of gun control is ensuring that you hit what you aim at.

  57. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Cederic · · Score: 1

    Consider that many of those deaths due to deer are because the human involved was doing something wrong

    As opposed to the deaths in school shootings?

    That's a fucking weird measure to choose to use as a comparison.

  58. I used to have a shop selling games by nagora · · Score: 1

    It was up to me what to stock; never seemed a problem. Maybe multinational companies just don't have the staff or something.

    --
    "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
  59. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Cederic · · Score: 1

    does not have a steam library full of games that are âoesupposed to be over 18â, because Steam does not currently allow AO (adults only) rated games. Further, the ESRB rating is not legally enforceable

    You'll be telling me pegi18 doesn't exist next. Legally enforceable is pretty irrelevant to his argument, "supposed to be over 18" doesn't infer legal enforcement of that constraint.

  60. Re:2, 3 & 4 would violate the second ammendmen by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    The purpose of the 2a was to keep military weapons in the hands of the people, and to avoid the need for a standing military as it was known to be injurious to freedom (holy shit, I had to write that twice because Google keyboard auto-"corrected" that phrase to "indoors to a few people".) It's obvious that this means ammo too, and furthermore, it means military ammunition like AP or HE rounds. If the supremes say otherwise, that's judicial activism; the authors and historical proponents of the amendment made this amply clear in their writings at the time, so there is literally no room for confusion as to its purpose.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  61. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

    If your niece already has gender issues, this probably isn't going to help.

    Gasp! You dare offend zir on Slashdot??

  62. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    I should have clarified that "the victim was doing something wrong".

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  63. Re:2, 3 & 4 would violate the second ammendmen by Talderas · · Score: 1

    It is highly unlikely that blanket restrictions on ammunition would be constitutional for the same reason under which poll taxes are struck down as unconstitutional. Ammunition bans and poll taxes both restrict a person's ability to exert a right.

    --
    "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  64. Can do that at work or anywhere else. Screaming at by raymorris · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, when someone has an idea, but they don't know anything about the topic, and someone else does know about the topic, an effective conversation goes something like this;

    Person A: I have an idea that might work, or might spark a different idea that works, but I don't really know much about this topic. What do you think of ...?

    Person B: That's an interesting idea. In my home town, we had a bus system. The way that worked ...

    We have conversations like that at work. A few days ago I posted a "I don't know much about the topic, but ..." post here.
    Unfortunately, since the late 1980s US political dialog is more like:

    Person A: You bastard murderer, you want everyone to take their assault weapons to schools and shoot up kids! Why do you want that to still be legal!? We have to ban handguns now, and all semiautomatic machine guns! You murderous piece of shit!

    Me: Wow you're an idiot. Take a Vicodin and go get a clue, please.

    Some of the change is probably related to the TV news networks going full partisan in the late 1980s. We went from Walter Cronkite trying to at least appear some neutral to one network demonizing Republicans and another demonizing Democrats. Viewers moved to whichever network was aligned with their political views, and the news they see is all demonizing "the other side".

    Also the change is how primaries work, in the 1950s, made a difference. Until then, the debate would be mostly *within* each party. People were arguing a particular point, but arguing with people they mostly agreed with on other things. After that, the parties became more homogeneous on issues, with Republicans taking one side and Democrats taking the other side. So now instead of debate amongst friends, people are trying to defeat the enemy.

  65. How about a game where by fredrated · · Score: 1

    the shooter enters the Valve office and kills all the employees?

  66. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

    Most of the games I played as a teen would these days have been rated 17+, the criteria has really dropped to the point of making ratings worthless. I will not let my 10 year old play (some of) them (ex. Witcher 3), but others I don't really care about. I do not rely on Steam or anything else to make that call, I tell him what he may and may not play. That's the only real solution, parents have to parent, the end. You cannot outsource that job.

    That said, the games I most often boycott are not rated MA at all. They simply enable communication with strangers on the internet. Those are banned completely, but it is surprising how many of them are out there. You are way, way likely to be exposed to the most vile forms of racism, horrible and demeaning sex acts, terrible descriptions of violence and just about every other normally censorable topic via the chat systems than you are from the games themselves, which are usually geared toward entertainment. There are lines games do not cross, but people will.

    It's a fair criticism that youtube is one of the absolute worst, and it's fairly impossible and self-defeated to ban that, but the benefits outweigh the risks, and normally hte comment section gets ignored. But the point remains: it is the social part of gaming that lately is the most terrible.

  67. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Talderas · · Score: 1

    While viewing store page for a 18+ game is a loophole there's a pretty large divide between viewing the product page and purchasing the product and the latter contains on a narrow set of paths by which a minor could purchase the product without direct parental consent.

    There four sources for paying for steam products. Credit cards, debit cards, steam wallet, and prepaid credit cards. Of these... good luck having enough funds in the steam from selling items on the market place but it might work for some really cheap items on steam. Both credit cards and debit cards cannot get into the minor's hand without a parent's express permission. Banks won't issue either to the minor without a parent's consent and the parent's name on the account because that protects the bank. Even if the minor is able to make purchases with one or the other, why are you, the parent, failing to monitor the purchasing if you are concerned about it? The final method, pre-paid credit cards, is the only one that minors can use to circumvent parental supervision but this posits that the minor has an income flow with which to purchase the card which at this point we're talking minors of age 15+ in most cases.

    --
    "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  68. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by Rhacman · · Score: 1

    It is already fixed and has been so. If parents aren't using the controls available that is on them as guardians.

    https://support.steampowered.c...

    --
    Account -> Discussions -> Disable Sigs
  69. We regulate deer you know by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    we let hunters cull herds and put fences up to keep them away from busy roads. We also take steps to address automobile accidents, drug overdose, suicide, Homicide, cancer and well, all the examples you cite.

    But when it comes to ending gun violence we do next to nothing. We ban convicted felons from owning guns but we leave glaring loopholes in the system that let them obtain them with ease. We allow ownership of weapons intentionally designed to kill people (the AR-15's caliber and bullet velocity are designed to maximize the size of the wound) while regulating how fast a car can go to be "street legal".

    You're entire argument rests on a false premise that we should do nothing to prevent gun violence because we haven't completely eliminated all other forms of death. I'm too lazy to look up the name logical fallacy you're employing but it's pretty obvious it's a fallacy.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:We regulate deer you know by mentil · · Score: 1

      His implication is that a unit of time/money/political capital spent on reducing gun violence would be more effectively spent on some more probable cause of death. It is plausible that politicians could debate about gun violence all day and achieve nothing that has a statistically significant effect on the gun violence stats, yet spend the same day passing a dozen laws that slash far more common causes of death. Of course, there are diminishing returns for those 'other causes' whereas a perceived lack of firearm regulation can be considered more egregious or to require simpler regulations to solve.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    2. Re:We regulate deer you know by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Ariel atom. Only the 1 has a VIN, all later versions are track only.

      Many other cars have always been illegal for street use. Put a non DOT tire on your car...illegal to street, just cause it's got racing slicks.

      Also my Mustang is technically illegal to drive in CA, but neener neener, can't catch me! Actually it's legal, right now, weekend project is to put the good parts back on.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  70. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by elgatozorbas · · Score: 1

    A true libertarian would say that parents shouldn't be infringing on the child's liberty

    True libertarians want to be acknowledged as independent persons, mind their own business and do not welcome any paternalistic interference from others. I would imagine them raising their children in the same way, with respect for their individuality, BUT, as long as they are minor, protecting them from influences the parents deem undesirable.

  71. Re:â(TM) by Anil · · Score: 1

    That was a great game, amazing sound/graphics/interface/everything for its time.
    It was based on a card/board game; which is also a ton of fun.

  72. Re:An open-minded view of things by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Same as 'all your sides'...Politicians lie and are bad, Duh. Otherwise they'd have honest jobs.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  73. Re: An open-minded view of things by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    GGP is trying to use 'loopholes' to take away an explicitly permitted thing. Which was legal until about 10 years ago, when the SC slapped down DC.

    Had Hillary won, we effectively wouldn't have a 2nd amendment anymore, via bad SC justices. It was that close.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  74. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by tooyoung · · Score: 1

    Your post seems to suggest that people can only choose a single issue to focus on, rather than targeting multiple issues. If someone were championing vaccines to prevent the flu, would you write a similar long post using your data to point out that accidents and suicides cause far more deaths than influenza?

    I'm not throwing my hat into this whole gun control debate, but I just don't understand what sort of point you're trying to make with your post.

  75. Re: An open-minded view of things by Shotgun · · Score: 1

    Ok then. How come there are so many youtube videos of POLITICIANS LOBBYING FOR CONTROL MEASURES who don't know anything beyond the standard talking points?

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  76. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

    Is there a way to determine someone's age over the internet?

  77. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Most common category of 'unvaccinatable': Parent is a moron that wants to freeload on herd immunity.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  78. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by ausekilis · · Score: 1

    I play counter strike and BF4(non-steam) with my 15yo. niece and I've seen his game library,

    I'm more curious about how his niece is a dude. Not judging, just having met many people that identify as both.

  79. Valve as publisher or distributor by Raven268 · · Score: 1

    There is no legal requirement on a distributor to carry all content. Valve is not a common carrier. There is still less requirement on a publisher to accept all books. To use a slippery analogy, your local bookstore is not required to carry porn, nor is John Walker Publishing (a made up name) required to accept it. This is just Valve trying to avoid criticism and, perhaps, threats from terrorists.

  80. Interesting idea, but were 100% Dems for 90 years by raymorris · · Score: 1

    That's an interesting idea.

    It occurs to me the southern vote was solid Democrat from the time Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1875 through the time when the Democrats were filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1964. All southern governors were Democrats for 90 years, 90 years during which whites controlled the vote in the south.

    To whatever extent Republicans started embracing the south in 1968, they were becoming *more like* the Democrats, who had controlled the South for nearly a century. Lessening their opposition to racism would have *reduced* partisanship, not increased it.

    Poll numbers bear this out. Their wasn't a radical increase in partisan attitudes after 1968. There was more partisanship BEFORE - the south hated the party of Lincoln and Everett Dirksen. Dirksen was seriously in danger of being assassinated by Southern white activists.

  81. Re:â(TM) by Raven268 · · Score: 1

    I don't worry about that. I worry about specific credible threats to particular people or groups. Those are illegal. Arguably incitement to stochastic terrorism – trolling for the violent – is a credible threat. In a large enough population you can find someone willing to attack just about anyone for just about any crazy reason. (For instance, the Pizzagate conspiracy theorists trolled up Edgar M. Welch, who fired on – one cannot make this up – the Comet Ping Pong pizzeria with a semi-automatic rifle because of specious claims it was the center of a child-abuse ring.)

    But in any event, It is Valve's right to say what they distribute or publish, barring specific law to the contrary.

  82. Re:An open-minded view of things by Stolovaya · · Score: 1

    The problem is that many pro-2A people agree that there is a problem (kids getting shot in schools). However, the things proposed solutions usually fall into either 1) unhelpful security theater (i.e. banning bump stocks) or 2) a dismantling of the 2A.

    I can only speak for myself. The 2A isn't going away, and trying to chip away at the 2A is going to be met with resistance. I don't even own again and I'm against all the attempts to weaker the 2A.

  83. Re:Interesting idea, but were 100% Dems for 90 yea by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    the southern vote was solid Democrat from the time Democrats opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1875

    Earlier than that, even. Some Southern states went to Grant in the late 1860s/early 1870s, but it was pretty solidly Democratic before that, with the Southern Democraft vote during the Civil War, and a blue block during the 1850s. The Whigs were pretty strong in the South in the 1830s-40s, but the civil war buildup put the South in the Blue for over a hundred years.

  84. Re: An open-minded view of things by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    One on day one. No doubt, in the model of the most corrupt, openly partisan, SC justice, Sotomayor.

    And now we're all waiting for Ginsburg to finish dying. Clintons overconfidence just keeps on giving.

    Also explain why the money flow into the Clinton global bribe fund dropped to virtually zero after she lost? You could kid yourself that it wasn't open corruption, until the day after the election. Now you are just willfully ignorant and look a fool.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  85. Re:Steam will be removed from apple as they censor by scdeimos · · Score: 1

    Steam will be removed from apple as they do censorship in there app store.

    The Steam client isn't available in Apple's App Store, never has been. Apple users wanting a Steam client have always downloaded the .dmg installer directly from Steam, https://store.steampowered.com...

  86. Can you list what we do? by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    to regulate gun violence? I can wait two weeks for a gun show (there's a small one about every 2 weeks where I am, it's a major city though) and pick up a gun with zero back ground checks. I could be a convicted felon or a kid with an obvious fake Id and walk out with an AR-15, a shot gun and plenty of ammo. It might take me a bit of time at Mikky D's to save up the money, but I'd be ready to go in about 6 months tops. 3 if I worked full time.

    Read up on the history and design of the AR-15. What's interesting is how much work went into making them ideally for killing men. Slower velocities allow lower calibers to do more damage because the bullet spins and leaves a huge wound in the meat. That's bad for hunting, since you probably want to eat that meat, but great for killing.

    We absoultely regulate what's street legal. Where do you think the phrase "Street Legal" came from. There are a variety of modifications that are disallowed. It varies by jurisdiction though, so it's possible that your neck of the woods really has no laws.

    And that's a lousy cheap shot at the end. But really, it's all you have. Your not a gun rights advocate per se. Or if you are your a patsy for the NRA. The point of stopping all gun regulation (which is the NRA's stance) isn't to protect your rights. It's to make sure there's nothing between the NRA (a gun industry lobbying group) and a sale. We're letting people die so the NRA's sales don't drop a little bit...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Can you list what we do? by quicks0rt · · Score: 1

      "You can purchase a gun from a private seller without a background check, not from a dealer. That varies by state as there are states that require all sales (including private sellers) to go through an FFL."

      And you don't see a problem with that as well? Why is it that only some states are going through FFL and not all?

      "Your comments on the AR-15 are incorrect. The reason the 5.56 round was adopted by the Military was to allow soldiers to carry more ammo and fire weapons with reduced recoil. Less recoil and noise reduces flinching in shooters and allows greater accuracy. The AR-15 is no different than a number of other firearms that use 5.56 ammo."

      Let's see... Carry more ammo and increase the accuracy... because?

  87. Jursidiction by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    Valve Will Stop Removing Controversial Games on Steam Unless They Are 'Illegal or Straight up Trolling'

    Illegal in what jurisdiction? US? Any?

  88. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

    There have been 316 fatalities from school shootings since 1998, of which 38 have occurred in the 5 months of 2018.
    Over half of those within the last 7 years.
    List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States

    2018 - 38
    2017 - 15
    2016 - 09
    2015 - 21
    2014 - 17
    2013 - 18
    2012 - 43
    2011 - 5
    2010 - 8
    2009 - 3
    2008 - 16
    2007 - 34
    2006 - 15
    2005 - 12
    2004 - 1
    2003 - 6
    2002 - 11
    2001 - 6
    2000 - 6
    1999 - 19
    1998 - 13

    Over the same period of time, Canada has had 7 school shooting fatalities (3 incidents), including 2 deaths which occurred outside of school grounds.

  89. Re:â(TM) by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

    Nothing wrong with that. As long as I can also release the game where CLINTON runs around and rapes women.

    Go for it, good luck getting anyone to buy it though.

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  90. Re: â(TM) by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Not noone, but the numbers of unhinged is currently beyond counting.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  91. Re: An open-minded view of things by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Only possible if there were more than twice as many Ds as Rs. GGP is simply wrong.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  92. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    No that's the most common category of unvaccinated. The most common category of unvaccinatable (implying something can be physically not done) is allergic reactions followed closely by immune system related problems.

    Mind you I actually know someone in this category. You know what her parents did? Arranged a second doctor to stand beside her with epinephrine while she was vaccinated and then when the swelling went down they kept her for observation in hospital, so even that is a bit of a weak excuse.

  93. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by djinn6 · · Score: 1

    Canada is 1/10th the population of the US. On a per-capita basis, they're twice as bad.

  94. Re:An open-minded view of things by suutar · · Score: 1

    in the absence of the bill of rights the people _should_ still have the exact same rights... but after 200ish years of twisting verbiage (I'm looking at you, interstate commerce) it's not quite working out that way.

  95. Re:2, 3 & 4 would violate the second ammendmen by Agripa · · Score: 1

    Number 3 would have no chances under the supreme court without a constitutional amendment, the reason the sawed off shotgun got rejected was because it wasn't useful in a war scenario.

    The defendants were not represented at the USSC trial. The matter was referred back to the lower court for a determination but again, the defendants were not represented and by that time one was dead. The whole thing was a setup.

    http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/d...

  96. Re:â(TM) by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

    I didn't say he was a monster.

  97. Re: â(TM) by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

    Yep he never seemed like a dick to me, more like product of his times.

    Ah, so being racist is ok so long as you were born in the correct time period. Got it.

    When your fellow country folk are being put down and controlled... Sorry, re-educated, you're probably not going to have the nicest things to say about your benefactors and their wars.

    Speak of education...actually the English were perhaps the biggest contributor to the fall of the caste system. England was ok with it in general, but they disagreed with a few things: Lower caste people shouldn't be punished more for the same offense than that of an upper caste person, and equal education shouldn't be denied to lower castes. England did rule this country, so they did enforce these rules. This meant that the lower castes could be equally educated to everybody else, and they had just as much capability of becoming wealthy as everybody else, which subsequently had the effect of, over time, all of the castes began to intermingle because the differences between them became blurred. Lower caste members could pass for higher caste members. Different castes began to intermingle, which was still illegal under traditional Indian law (itself based on hinduism,) and communication between them was strictly regulated. The problem for the powers that be was that it became extremely difficult to enforce afterwards.

    It's for this exact reason that lower castes, including the untouchables, began to prefer British rule because they were more empowered under it. This isn't at all to say that British rule was all rainbows and gumdrop smiles, mind you, but many lives improved under it. A friend of mine who passed away recently lived in that era, and he in particular was one of those who didn't like it when England left (hence why unlike those who deify Gandhi, I'm able to see it from both sides here, because prior to that I had an opinion of Gandhi that is more in-line with the rest here.) While Ghandi was known as a leader there, to most he was more or less just another one of the political figures, until he was assassinated, thus becoming a martyr. The people who had the biggest influence on England leaving were Bhagat Singh, Nehru and Subash Chandra Bose; Gandhi is further down the list, though it wouldn't have happened if it weren't for WWII. If you notice in that wikipedia link I gave, backing England in WWII had popular support in those days. Major political changes didn't occur until AFTER Gandhi was assassinated, but you don't hear about the unsung heroes that martyrdom always overshadows.

    Just look at JFK, he was a terrible president: He was the CAUSE of the Cuban missile crisis, and not only did he put us in Vietnam but his administration oversaw the coup and assassination of Ngo Dinh Diem, while having the CIA rig Vietnam's elections. Then he gets shot, and suddenly he's a hero.

  98. Re:Fine, just make sure kids aren't buying this cr by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

    One tenth of 316 would be ~32 not 7. So 1/5th as bad.

  99. Re:â(TM) by Xenx · · Score: 1

    I never said you did. I merely made a sarcastic remark about his character in relation to said events. My point still stands, however. In the context of those events, he was only a man trying to obtain freedom for his people. I'm not saying he was/wasn't a wholly good man, just that his action in relation to WW2 were entirely justified. Using them as an example for why he is a dick seems unfounded.