if you enjoy motral combat or movies like Saw you need to be locked up in a mental institution.
It's deeply disturbing that you may have been serious when you made this comment. Hopefully it was just a joke. One would have to be both extremely sheltered and very inexperienced in the real world to write that out with a straight face.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Parents need to take responsiblity, exactly what this law would accomplish. Parents would have to buy the game then hand it to their kids if they want to, instead of this system we have now which is anarchy.
if you enjoy motral combat or movies like Saw you need to be locked up in a mental institution.
Right, unlike the current system. Where, you know, kids commonly have $200 for the Xbox 360 and another $60 for the game, buy a hand-me-down TV from Goodwill on the sly and play the game in their bedroom... (Or in the right there in the living room.) After all, the equipment isn't owned by their parents, and can't be locked up, locked down, unplugged, or otherwise rendered inaccessible.
Dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria! ξ
P.S. I may not have enjoyed the Mortal Kombat movies; I also haven't seen any Saw movies so I guess I can't comment on the last line. ζ
Me, I don't mind it. Watched alot of violent movies, some nasty horror / gorefests, etc. as a kid. My Dad didn't mind if I watched those movies with him when I was young as he brought those VHS tapes home for rent (he was fond of action, war, horror, comedic movies, but especially action). Came out just fine.
Now, if you don't think it's appropriate for your kids, then that's fine and you hash that with your family. But don't come with the "Kalifornia People's Committee For Proper Thought" to tell me what's appropriate in my house, my family. If you think your kids are that weakminded that they'll turn out corrupt by viewing such things, then again... that's up to you.
I police my household and set the rules (you know, parenting). You police yours.
You didn't come out just fine, and some of this crap isn't even appropriate for adults; it should be outright banned.
Me, I don't mind it. Watched alot of violent movies, some nasty horror / gorefests, etc. as a kid. My Dad didn't mind if I watched those movies with him when I was young as he brought those VHS tapes home for rent (he was fond of action, war, horror, comedic movies, but especially action). Came out just fine.
Now, if you don't think it's appropriate for your kids, then that's fine and you hash that with your family. But don't come with the "Kalifornia People's Committee For Proper Thought" to tell me what's appropriate in my house, my family. If you think your kids are that weakminded that they'll turn out corrupt by viewing such things, then again... that's up to you.
I police my household and set the rules (you know, parenting). You police yours.
You didn't come out just fine, and some of this crap isn't even appropriate for adults; it should be outright banned.
Outright banned eh? You know what, that sentiment is exactly why Scalia and the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the 1st amendment and against the book burners and puritans and those that deem they can judge what ideas are and aren't objectionable. The first amendment is specifically there to protect us from this banning of ideas, objectional art, satire, dark comedy, political views, etc, even if the majority wishes to ban them. Even banning things that 95%+ of us find objectionable is a slippery slope.
This is the subtlety between having rights and simple majority rule. Majority rule without rights is often tyranny to the minority.
This law in California was the first step to putting a damper on game content in general for everybody including adults, it was not just about protecting kids. The first amendment is there to protect us from that slippery slope, and the Supreme Court just chiseled that in stone as plain as day. One of the greatest rulings in the last decade as far as I'm concerned.
GW2 "built from the ground up with microtransactions in mind" 1) Cash->Gems->Gold->Influence->WvWvWBoosts = PAY2WIN 2) Mystic Chests = Crass in-game cash shop advertisements
Parents need to take responsiblity, exactly what this law would accomplish. Parents would have to buy the game then hand it to their kids if they want to, instead of this system we have now which is anarchy.
if you enjoy motral combat or movies like Saw you need to be locked up in a mental institution.
Right, unlike the current system. Where, you know, kids commonly have $200 for the Xbox 360 and another $60 for the game, buy a hand-me-down TV from Goodwill on the sly and play the game in their bedroom... (Or in the right there in the living room.) After all, the equipment isn't owned by their parents, and can't be locked up, locked down, unplugged, or otherwise rendered inaccessible.
Dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria! ξ
P.S. I may not have enjoyed the Mortal Kombat movies; I also haven't seen any Saw movies so I guess I can't comment on the last line. ζ
Well good, then you have no objections to the law since you know "kids don't commonly have $200 for the Xbox360," and all.
Me, I don't mind it. Watched alot of violent movies, some nasty horror / gorefests, etc. as a kid. My Dad didn't mind if I watched those movies with him when I was young as he brought those VHS tapes home for rent (he was fond of action, war, horror, comedic movies, but especially action). Came out just fine.
Now, if you don't think it's appropriate for your kids, then that's fine and you hash that with your family. But don't come with the "Kalifornia People's Committee For Proper Thought" to tell me what's appropriate in my house, my family. If you think your kids are that weakminded that they'll turn out corrupt by viewing such things, then again... that's up to you.
I police my household and set the rules (you know, parenting). You police yours.
You didn't come out just fine, and some of this crap isn't even appropriate for adults; it should be outright banned.
What do you know exactly that everyone else doesn't about Warmaker? I mean seriously, do you think you're helping your cause by making personal and unwarranted personal attacks on a guy because you have a difference of opinion. If anything, he appears to be respectful and tolerant and you appear to be hateful and narrow-minded. I think I'd prefer his upbringing to yours.
I doubt it. Someone who enjoys movies like that most likely tortures pets, you wouldn't want to touch them with a 10 foot pole.
The authority for the FCC to censor has been diminished and continues to be diminished every decade since it was given such an authority by the Supreme court 60 years ago. Soon they will actually have to do what they were designed to do and manage the broadcasted RF Spectrum. The states were never given similair authority as it clearly violates the 1st ammendment.
What gives the FCC authority to censor doesn't have anything to do with a law. Its private agreements with broadcasters to use the RF spectrum. This is why the FCC has been struck down repeatedly from invoking Net Nuetrality. The Net is not broadcast, its all done by wires where the companies do not need to reserve RF frequencies. Cable TV on the other hand is first recieved by broadcast from viacom or the like then it goes into wires. Viacom has made agreements with the FCC facing penalty to censor for access to its ability to broadcast.
The ESRB is also voluntary. For instance if a game publisher produces a game solely for the PC, they will not have to get an ESRB rating. Many do so they can get the store space from brick and mortar or digital distribution sources. They also do it to increase consumer confidence in their products.
(mod edit)
Your comment has nothing to do with what you quoted. Want to try that again?
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
The authority for the FCC to censor has been diminished and continues to be diminished every decade since it was given such an authority by the Supreme court 60 years ago. Soon they will actually have to do what they were designed to do and manage the broadcasted RF Spectrum. The states were never given similair authority as it clearly violates the 1st ammendment.
What gives the FCC authority to censor doesn't have anything to do with a law. Its private agreements with broadcasters to use the RF spectrum. This is why the FCC has been struck down repeatedly from invoking Net Nuetrality. The Net is not broadcast, its all done by wires where the companies do not need to reserve RF frequencies. Cable TV on the other hand is first recieved by broadcast from viacom or the like then it goes into wires. Viacom has made agreements with the FCC facing penalty to censor for access to its ability to broadcast.
The ESRB is also voluntary. For instance if a game publisher produces a game solely for the PC, they will not have to get an ESRB rating. Many do so they can get the store space from brick and mortar or digital distribution sources. They also do it to increase consumer confidence in their products.
(mod edit)
Your comment has nothing to do with what you quoted. Want to try that again?
I was flipping through the channels once and saw a scene in a movie, some woman was being raped while being eaten alive like in some zombie movie. Wow what sick freaks watch that to be entertained, they need to be locked up. Even the Romans weren't this socially deviant.
if you enjoy motral combat or movies like Saw you need to be locked up in a mental institution.
It's deeply disturbing that you may have been serious when you made this comment. Hopefully it was just a joke. One would have to be both extremely sheltered and very inexperienced in the real world to write that out with a straight face.
(mod edit)
You're a sane man among a planet of freaks. But you have no concept of reality. You can't lock up people for view points.
A: It's unethical
B: Illegal
C: It's physically impossible, and monetarily impossible. Prison criteria already turns taxpayers into hobos.
Me, I don't mind it. Watched alot of violent movies, some nasty horror / gorefests, etc. as a kid. My Dad didn't mind if I watched those movies with him when I was young as he brought those VHS tapes home for rent (he was fond of action, war, horror, comedic movies, but especially action). Came out just fine.
Now, if you don't think it's appropriate for your kids, then that's fine and you hash that with your family. But don't come with the "Kalifornia People's Committee For Proper Thought" to tell me what's appropriate in my house, my family. If you think your kids are that weakminded that they'll turn out corrupt by viewing such things, then again... that's up to you.
I police my household and set the rules (you know, parenting). You police yours.
(mod edit)
You don't even know much about me, so how can you tell I'm fine or not? I'm not because my Father let me watch flicks that you have a weak stomach to?
Just because your knees quiver and shake over some things, don't think others are weak in these same things.
You can keep the "Kalifornia People's Committee For Proper Thought" in your lifestyle, me personally, I don't need fools like them or you telling me what's proper for me and my family.
Again: You police your household, I police mine.
I prefer the government not to barge in and rule my household.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
You have been issued a warning by one of our moderators.
Warning Category: Flaming
Reason: MMORPG.com does not tolerate personal attacks on other posters. Please keep your arguments and posts on topic, and argue the ideas and topics of the thread instead of insulting other users."
__________________________________
What about "Free Speech" huh? What about it huh? huh huh huh? Free Speech huh. Free Speeeeeeeech. Free Speeeeeeeeeech'aaah.
Actually when the Constitution was written Free Speech is political speech, not art. Personal attacks in a debate on politics is exactly what is protected, not deviant art. The part in the Constitution dealing with art is here here in Article 1 Section 8:
"The Congress shall have Power To...
...To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"
First of all this is about Congressional law promoting art and science with a Patent or Copywrite system. In addition, notice the keyword "useful" in describing Arts, which is subjective. Some of this deviant crap is not useful it is useless, therefore doesn't come under protection of Copywrite law. So basically everything is assbackwards these days, the stuff that needs to be defended isn't, and the stuff that is defended has no right to be defended.
____________________
*reading the Rules of Conduct* http://www.mmorpg.com/disclaimers.cfm#conduct Nazi Fascist Communist Hypocrite, did I miss something? Don't tell me with a straight face, while posting in a Nazi Fascist Communist website, all about LIbertine Free Speech, it's kind of funny.
You stated in one sentance usefull is subjective, than stated in the next sentance it's useless.
Sorry so which is it. If it's subjective than someone could find it usefull, even just as entertainment. Or is it useless and not subjective at all.
You also stated that free speech deals with political speech. than called this a nazi fascist.... website - which of course are politcal statemetns about a private forum.
So once again which is it.
Venge
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Parents need to take responsiblity, exactly what this law would accomplish. Parents would have to buy the game then hand it to their kids if they want to, instead of this system we have now which is anarchy.
if you enjoy motral combat or movies like Saw you need to be locked up in a mental institution.
Right, unlike the current system. Where, you know, kids commonly have $200 for the Xbox 360 and another $60 for the game, buy a hand-me-down TV from Goodwill on the sly and play the game in their bedroom... (Or in the right there in the living room.) After all, the equipment isn't owned by their parents, and can't be locked up, locked down, unplugged, or otherwise rendered inaccessible.
Dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria! ξ
P.S. I may not have enjoyed the Mortal Kombat movies; I also haven't seen any Saw movies so I guess I can't comment on the last line. ζ
Well good, then you have no objections to the law since you know "kids don't commonly have $200 for the Xbox360," and all.
Deliberately missing or ignoring the point doesn't make a very convincing arguement. ξ
You stated in one sentance usefull is subjective, than stated in the next sentance it's useless.
Sorry so which is it. If it's subjective than someone could find it usefull, even just as entertainment. Or is it useless and not subjective at all.
You also stated that free speech deals with political speech. than called this a nazi fascist.... website - which of course are politcal statemetns about a private forum.
So once again which is it.
Venge
It takes someone to make a judgement if art is useful or not, since you Anarchists won't I will, I deem it useless therefore not under the protection of copywrite law.
Parents need to take responsiblity, exactly what this law would accomplish. Parents would have to buy the game then hand it to their kids if they want to, instead of this system we have now which is anarchy.
if you enjoy motral combat or movies like Saw you need to be locked up in a mental institution.
Right, unlike the current system. Where, you know, kids commonly have $200 for the Xbox 360 and another $60 for the game, buy a hand-me-down TV from Goodwill on the sly and play the game in their bedroom... (Or in the right there in the living room.) After all, the equipment isn't owned by their parents, and can't be locked up, locked down, unplugged, or otherwise rendered inaccessible.
Dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria! ξ
P.S. I may not have enjoyed the Mortal Kombat movies; I also haven't seen any Saw movies so I guess I can't comment on the last line. ζ
Well good, then you have no objections to the law since you know "kids don't commonly have $200 for the Xbox360," and all.
Deliberately missing or ignoring the point doesn't make a very convincing arguement. ξ
You guys string together a bunch of political cliche's you heard from somewhere else, and then regurgitating it into a paragraph.
You stated in one sentance usefull is subjective, than stated in the next sentance it's useless.
Sorry so which is it. If it's subjective than someone could find it usefull, even just as entertainment. Or is it useless and not subjective at all.
You also stated that free speech deals with political speech. than called this a nazi fascist.... website - which of course are politcal statemetns about a private forum.
So once again which is it.
Venge
It takes someone to make a judgement if art is useful or not, since you Anarchists won't I will, I deem it useless therefore not under the protection of copywrite law.
And I ignore your judgement and say, "Freedom is freedom and don't need 'uses' it just is a state of being."
--When you resubscribe to SWG, an 18 yearold Stripper finds Jesus, gives up stripping, and moves with a rolex reverend to Hawaii. --In MMORPG's l007 is the opiate of the masses. --The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence! --CCP could cut off an Eve player's fun bits, and that player would say that it was good CCP did that.
Comments
It's deeply disturbing that you may have been serious when you made this comment. Hopefully it was just a joke. One would have to be both extremely sheltered and very inexperienced in the real world to write that out with a straight face.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Right, unlike the current system. Where, you know, kids commonly have $200 for the Xbox 360 and another $60 for the game, buy a hand-me-down TV from Goodwill on the sly and play the game in their bedroom... (Or in the right there in the living room.) After all, the equipment isn't owned by their parents, and can't be locked up, locked down, unplugged, or otherwise rendered inaccessible.
Dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria! ξ
P.S. I may not have enjoyed the Mortal Kombat movies; I also haven't seen any Saw movies so I guess I can't comment on the last line. ζ
Outright banned eh? You know what, that sentiment is exactly why Scalia and the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the 1st amendment and against the book burners and puritans and those that deem they can judge what ideas are and aren't objectionable. The first amendment is specifically there to protect us from this banning of ideas, objectional art, satire, dark comedy, political views, etc, even if the majority wishes to ban them. Even banning things that 95%+ of us find objectionable is a slippery slope.
This is the subtlety between having rights and simple majority rule. Majority rule without rights is often tyranny to the minority.
This law in California was the first step to putting a damper on game content in general for everybody including adults, it was not just about protecting kids. The first amendment is there to protect us from that slippery slope, and the Supreme Court just chiseled that in stone as plain as day. One of the greatest rulings in the last decade as far as I'm concerned.
GW2 "built from the ground up with microtransactions in mind"
1) Cash->Gems->Gold->Influence->WvWvWBoosts = PAY2WIN
2) Mystic Chests = Crass in-game cash shop advertisements
Well good, then you have no objections to the law since you know "kids don't commonly have $200 for the Xbox360," and all.
I doubt it. Someone who enjoys movies like that most likely tortures pets, you wouldn't want to touch them with a 10 foot pole.
Your comment has nothing to do with what you quoted. Want to try that again?
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
I was flipping through the channels once and saw a scene in a movie, some woman was being raped while being eaten alive like in some zombie movie. Wow what sick freaks watch that to be entertained, they need to be locked up. Even the Romans weren't this socially deviant.
I got the first turok for easter when I was 8 or 9. I turned out fine.
You're a sane man among a planet of freaks. But you have no concept of reality. You can't lock up people for view points.
A: It's unethical
B: Illegal
C: It's physically impossible, and monetarily impossible. Prison criteria already turns taxpayers into hobos.
You don't even know much about me, so how can you tell I'm fine or not? I'm not because my Father let me watch flicks that you have a weak stomach to?
Just because your knees quiver and shake over some things, don't think others are weak in these same things.
You can keep the "Kalifornia People's Committee For Proper Thought" in your lifestyle, me personally, I don't need fools like them or you telling me what's proper for me and my family.
Again: You police your household, I police mine.
I prefer the government not to barge in and rule my household.
"I have only two out of my company and 20 out of some other company. We need support, but it is almost suicide to try to get it here as we are swept by machine gun fire and a constant barrage is on us. I have no one on my left and only a few on my right. I will hold." (First Lieutenant Clifton B. Cates, US Marine Corps, Soissons, 19 July 1918)
"Dear Nerf09,
You have been issued a warning by one of our moderators.
Warning Category: Flaming
Reason: MMORPG.com does not tolerate personal attacks on other posters. Please keep your arguments and posts on topic, and argue the ideas and topics of the thread instead of insulting other users."
__________________________________
What about "Free Speech" huh? What about it huh? huh huh huh? Free Speech huh. Free Speeeeeeeech. Free Speeeeeeeeeech'aaah.
Actually when the Constitution was written Free Speech is political speech, not art. Personal attacks in a debate on politics is exactly what is protected, not deviant art. The part in the Constitution dealing with art is here here in Article 1 Section 8:
"The Congress shall have Power To...
...To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"
First of all this is about Congressional law promoting art and science with a Patent or Copywrite system. In addition, notice the keyword "useful" in describing Arts, which is subjective. Some of this deviant crap is not useful it is useless, therefore doesn't come under protection of Copywrite law. So basically everything is assbackwards these days, the stuff that needs to be defended isn't, and the stuff that is defended has no right to be defended.
____________________
*reading the Rules of Conduct* http://www.mmorpg.com/disclaimers.cfm#conduct Nazi Fascist Communist Hypocrite, did I miss something? Don't tell me with a straight face, while posting in a Nazi Fascist Communist website, all about LIbertine Free Speech, it's kind of funny.
You stated in one sentance usefull is subjective, than stated in the next sentance it's useless.
Sorry so which is it. If it's subjective than someone could find it usefull, even just as entertainment. Or is it useless and not subjective at all.
You also stated that free speech deals with political speech. than called this a nazi fascist.... website - which of course are politcal statemetns about a private forum.
So once again which is it.
Venge
Deliberately missing or ignoring the point doesn't make a very convincing arguement. ξ
It takes someone to make a judgement if art is useful or not, since you Anarchists won't I will, I deem it useless therefore not under the protection of copywrite law.
You guys string together a bunch of political cliche's you heard from somewhere else, and then regurgitating it into a paragraph.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhQYhvKxhpI
And I ignore your judgement and say, "Freedom is freedom and don't need 'uses' it just is a state of being."
--When you resubscribe to SWG, an 18 yearold Stripper finds Jesus, gives up stripping, and moves with a rolex reverend to Hawaii.
--In MMORPG's l007 is the opiate of the masses.
--The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence!
--CCP could cut off an Eve player's fun bits, and that player would say that it was good CCP did that.