Kiwis ban virtual drugs

Error message

Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/pied-piper.ermarian.net/includes/common.inc).

Pages

Author	Topic: Kiwis ban virtual drugs
Drew By Committee Member # 4233	written Thursday, November 3 2005 13:50 Profile #25 quote: Originally written by Ash Lael: A game that teaches kids to commit crimes is arguably causing harm maliciously and recklessly. I forgot to include the word "deliberate" in my definition. A game that's rated "M" for mature is not for children to play. We're not just talking about children here, though - we're talking about responsible adults. My questions to you are (a) what harm do these games do, and (b) is there any legitimate proof that they do? I think that the answer to both is no. Barring maybe a couple exceptions, most of the consuming market recognizes that these games are fantasy and for entertainment purposes only. Censorship is a slippery slope, Ash, and it doesn't take much before you're essentially living in North Korea or Utah. Where do you stop? Arguably, Avernum is worthy of censorship because its storyline includes defying authority, drug use, murder, and the occult. How do you feel about that? [ Thursday, November 03, 2005 13:51: Message edited by: Drew ] Posts: 2242 \| Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00
Student of Trinity Electric Sheep One Member # 3431	written Thursday, November 3 2005 23:58 Profile #26 Ban them all: the black market will recognize its own. -------------------- It is not enough to discover how things seem to seem. We must discover how things really seem. Posts: 3335 \| Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00
Ash Lael E Equals MC What!!!! Member # 5491	written Friday, November 4 2005 02:02 Profile Homepage #27 quote: Originally written by Drew: I forgot to include the word "deliberate" in my definition. A game that's rated "M" for mature is not for children to play. We're not just talking about children here, though - we're talking about responsible adults. My questions to you are (a) what harm do these games do, and (b) is there any legitimate proof that they do? I think that the answer to both is no. Barring maybe a couple exceptions, most of the consuming market recognizes that these games are fantasy and for entertainment purposes only. Censorship is a slippery slope, Ash, and it doesn't take much before you're essentially living in North Korea or Utah. Where do you stop? Arguably, Avernum is worthy of censorship because its storyline includes defying authority, drug use, murder, and the occult. How do you feel about that? I don't like Avernum, so it wouldn't bother me. :P Given that ratings don't stop too many people, if an artwork is sufficiently perverse in nature, it seems reasonable to me to ban it outright. For proof that art can influence people's behaviour in harmful ways, the Clockwork Orange example comes to mind. I know it's not a game, but still. Arguably, they would also have the potential to cause psychological harm that wouldn't manifest in murder, but still isn't exactly desirable. The slippery slope argument is absurd, because guess what? Censorship happens here, and it ain't a big deal. I don't live in fear of the thought police. Deceny standards are not ridiculous - Sin City didn't even get an R rating here. Suppose a game came out where you played a torturer, and the sole aim of the game was to get information out of your prisoners. What exactly would the world lose by banning such a game? What about a game that specifically portrayed drug use as being a wonderful thing - even with an 18+ rating, if it's on the shelves it will be played by kids. [ Friday, November 04, 2005 02:06: Message edited by: Ash Lael ] -------------------- Sex is easier than love. Posts: 1861 \| Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00
Milu Shock Trooper Member # 1249	written Saturday, November 5 2005 04:29 Profile Homepage #28 When I was a teenager, I once played a freeware (?) game which was a bit like the one that's mentioned in the article. It resembled Pacman or that sort of game. It worked only on mac. It's interesting that this newer game doesn't contain graphical violence (according to the article), and it's (kind of) the reason why it was "red-flagged for possible banning": "If teens perceive that drugs are harmless or fun from video games, they will be more likely to try them. It's just like TV shows in which kids drink alcohol." Other games like Postal 2, for example, get banned because of having too much graphical violence. Posts: 259 \| Registered: Saturday, June 1 2002 07:00
Drew By Committee Member # 4233	written Monday, November 7 2005 14:47 Profile #29 It is a slippery slope, Ash. Consider the Dark Ages of Western Europe. Posts: 2242 \| Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00
Ash Lael E Equals MC What!!!! Member # 5491	written Monday, November 7 2005 15:38 Profile Homepage #30 quote: Originally written by Drew: It is a slippery slope, Ash. Consider the Dark Ages of Western Europe. Yep, and allowing Gay marriage is a slippery slope to allowing adults to marry children. And banning heroin is unthinkable, because just think back to the horrible days of Prohibition. And environmental laws are clearly going to lead to shooting people to cut down on methane emissions! -------------------- Sex is easier than love. Posts: 1861 \| Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00
Drew By Committee Member # 4233	written Monday, November 7 2005 16:00 Profile #31 At the outset, I would point out that none of your examples have anything to do with a freedom of expression, which is what's being discussed. My Dark Ages reference is valid - the church imposed its strict morality on Western Europe, and I would argue that this act stymied cultural development for centuries. There's a reason the eras following were called "The Rebirth" and "The Enlightenment," after all. quote: Originally written by Ash Lael: Yep, and allowing Gay marriage is a slippery slope to allowing adults to marry children. No. The age of consent, certainly regulated in some way by each of the fifty states here and (I assume) in Australia, would intercede. quote: And banning heroin is unthinkable, because just think back to the horrible days of Prohibition. There aren't compelling reasons to keep alcohol legal, frankly - the opportunity for people under the influence of alcohol to negatively effect others is very high. Chalk it up to the industries' lobbies. quote: And environmental laws are clearly going to lead to shooting people to cut down on methane emissions! Now that's just silly. Posts: 2242 \| Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00
Joseph Stalin Infiltrator Member # 5991	written Monday, November 7 2005 16:18 Profile Homepage #32 or ash was being sarcastic playing grand theft auto isnt a bad thing unless you think setting cops on fire, randomly shooting people,doing drugs is the thing to do in life [ Monday, November 07, 2005 16:19: Message edited by: The Force Is Strong In This One ] -------------------- Visit the RIFQ Forums Posts: 462 \| Registered: Tuesday, June 21 2005 07:00
The Immortal BANNED Member # 4	written Monday, November 7 2005 16:30 Profile Homepage #33 quote: For proof that art can influence people's behaviour in harmful ways, the Clockwork Orange example comes to mind. I know it's not a game, but still. Arguably, they would also have the potential to cause psychological harm that wouldn't manifest in murder, but still isn't exactly desirable. You're missing a key point- if a book (especially one that horrible) is enough to make people go on murdering streaks, there was clearly something wrong with those individuals to begin with. quote: Suppose a game came out where you played a torturer, and the sole aim of the game was to get information out of your prisoners. What exactly would the world lose by banning such a game? A lot. Hell, now that you mention this, I want to play the game already. Okay, it might be short- but I am hooked to the premise. If made well, it could be a bleak and beautiful poem. In fact, I want to feel both the tension and exhilaration as I plunge the thumbscrews into my next victim, even when he has already answered my question. I want to have a game that does not shy around the mind of a torturer. I want to havea game that will move me to identify with his brutal lust for blood. But not just in the way that I might revel in violence- I want a game that will teach me the fear and pain of the torturer, as well as the vile pleasure he gets from his black art. And if you're smallminded and meek enough to say that this makes a killer out of me, you are both a reactionary philistine and a vile monster. quote: What about a game that specifically portrayed drug use as being a wonderful thing - even with an 18+ rating, if it's on the shelves it will be played by kids. No, it won't be. Have you ever heard of Wal-Mart? Apart from the "strictly voluntary" servitude of Mexicans, they're also responsible for killing off any game that dares to receive a M-O (mature only) rating by not putting it on its shelves. Other retail outlets work in a similar fashion. If a game pushes too many anti-corporate buttons, it is killed instantly since it will never, ever, ever see a place on a shelf. The game about the torture will only exist in my dreams since your precious censorship has killed it before it has even been born. Not that this prevents blatant and tasteless sexual and brutal pornography from going up on shelves- but that's an argument of taste, not censorship. -------------------- 私のバラドですそしてころしたいいらればころす Posts: 6936 \| Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00
Joseph Stalin Infiltrator Member # 5991	written Monday, November 7 2005 17:01 Profile Homepage #34 god damn TM your violent today arent you -------------------- Visit the RIFQ Forums Posts: 462 \| Registered: Tuesday, June 21 2005 07:00
Ash Lael E Equals MC What!!!! Member # 5491	written Monday, November 7 2005 18:12 Profile Homepage #35 Drew - you missed my point. I was seeking to demonstrate that the slippery slope argument was useless. Just as legalizing homosexual marriage isn't going to lead to lawful paedophilia, banning maybe 2 games a year isn't going to lead to the return of the Dark Ages. -------------------- Sex is easier than love. Posts: 1861 \| Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00
Ash Lael E Equals MC What!!!! Member # 5491	written Monday, November 7 2005 19:35 Profile Homepage #36 quote: Originally written by Trrr's Mrtr: *You're missing a key point- if a book (especially one that horrible) is enough to make people go on murdering streaks, there was clearly something wrong with those individuals to begin with.* Sure. But the fact that an ad for pizza isn't going to make you pick up the phone and call Dominos unless you actually want to eat a pizza doesn't change the fact that advertising means more pizzas get sold. quote: A lot. Hell, now that you mention this, I want to play the game already. Okay, it might be short- but I am hooked to the premise. If made well, it could be a bleak and beautiful poem. In fact, I want to feel both the tension and exhilaration as I plunge the thumbscrews into my next victim, even when he has already answered my question. I want to have a game that does not shy around the mind of a torturer. I want to havea game that will move me to identify with his brutal lust for blood. But not just in the way that I might revel in violence- I want a game that will teach me the fear and pain of the torturer, as well as the vile pleasure he gets from his black art. And if you're smallminded and meek enough to say that this makes a killer out of me, you are both a reactionary philistine and a vile monster. Rightio. You're the one getting sick thrills from playacting a torturer, and I'm the vile monster. Whatever you say. quote: No, it won't be. Have you ever heard of Wal-Mart? Apart from the "strictly voluntary" servitude of Mexicans, they're also responsible for killing off any game that dares to receive a M-O (mature only) rating by not putting it on its shelves. Other retail outlets work in a similar fashion. If a game pushes too many anti-corporate buttons, it is killed instantly since it will never, ever, ever see a place on a shelf. The game about the torture will only exist in my dreams since your precious censorship has killed it before it has even been born. Not that this prevents blatant and tasteless sexual and brutal pornography from going up on shelves- but that's an argument of taste, not censorship. Now, that's just plain funny. 1. We're talking about Australia/New Zealand, not America the magical land of no-censorship. No Wal-Mart here. 2. Ignoring that, if Wal-Mart decides not to carry Game X, that's not censorship anyway. That's business. You want ultra-violent games, obscure French art films, or silver-tipped toenail clippers, go somewhere that sells them. 3. Down here, our game stores do carry games with the maximum ratings, and they are regularly played by underage kids. 4. Are you seriously telling me that underage kids don't play Grand Theft Auto in America? 5. Not sure what exactly you're referring to in the last paragraph - but it sounds like you'd agree that violent pornography like that deserves to be banned? -------------------- Sex is easier than love. Posts: 1861 \| Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00
Thuryl ...b10010b... Member # 869	written Monday, November 7 2005 21:33 Profile Homepage #37 The phrase "that's an argument of taste, not censorship" would seem to imply pretty specifically that he disapproves of it but doesn't want it banned. :P -------------------- My BoE Page Bandwagons are fun! Roots Hunted! Posts: 9973 \| Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
The Immortal BANNED Member # 4	written Monday, November 7 2005 21:50 Profile Homepage #38 "Sure. But the fact that an ad for pizza isn't going to make you pick up the phone and call Dominos unless you actually want to eat a pizza doesn't change the fact that advertising means more pizzas get sold." Well, yeah. Merely by virtue of the fact that people know your product, they will know where to get pizzas when they want one. One of advertisers' biggest goals in advertising is to get you to know that their product exists. "Rightio. You're the one getting sick thrills from playacting a torturer, and I'm the vile monster. Whatever you say." You're a vile monster because you are small-minded and have a worldview so narrow that it may well pass through the eye of a needle. To bring your logic to its natural conclusion, you may as well ban all poetry like the debaucherous smut it is. But first, you'd have to ban the bible. "1. We're talking about Australia/New Zealand, not America the magical land of no-censorship. No Wal-Mart here." So wait- you make general statements on censorship, bringing the argument into the level of abstraction, and then chide me for bringing up particulars? Good job. "2. Ignoring that, if Wal-Mart decides not to carry Game X, that's not censorship anyway. That's business. You want ultra-violent games, obscure French art films, or silver-tipped toenail clippers, go somewhere that sells them." *Where?* I have not, at ANY retail outlet, seen a place that carries AO games. And perhaps not even because all business agree not to CARRY them, but consider this: Computer game companies need to make money to stay alive (unless they're EA). Even if they DO make a AO game and some computer joins out there DO put it on their shelves, the number of people who will have ready access to it are infinitely smaller when just a few companies (Wal-Mart, Best Buy, etc) decide to nix it. At that point, the games cease to bring in a profit and cease to be made. You are arguing, essentially, for corporations as the final arbiters in the quality of an artform. And that to me is utterly abhorrent. "3. Down here, our game stores do carry games with the maximum ratings, and they are regularly played by underage kids." Good for you. No really, I mean it. Of course, I'd love to see actual limits pushed- not just bigger digital breasts on "heroines" and hardcore sex scenes in gangster shooters. I'd love to see sex in a meaningful role in games- for instance, what of a geisha girl who is regularly abused in grotesque ways by her master, who yearns to murder him for both her freedom or vengeance? Yeah. I am ready to play this game. (But, you know, that stuff doesn't sell. But if we just have the sex scenes with the geisha girl be more erotic, and allow the player to play them repeatedly, and maybe not even force the player to kill the master, but rather to seduce him... Corporations could easily reduce good ideas to pornography. But that's not the subject of this debate.) So, I suppose, your point is irrelevant at best when describing a generalized notion of censorship. "4. Are you seriously telling me that underage kids don't play Grand Theft Auto in America?" HAH. You know San Andreas? The only installation in the series to get the Adults Only rating? Yeah. They were basically bullied into releasing a "sanitized" version to get the rating knocked down, so the game would be put back on the goddamned shelves. When a franchise that is madly successful cannot overcome a simple rating, you begin to realize the incredible power these forces have over game developers. "5. Not sure what exactly you're referring to in the last paragraph - but it sounds like you'd agree that violent pornography like that deserves to be banned?" Not as much "should be banned" as much as "should never have been made in the first place". That doesn't mean I'm for stompin' em out, I just think that it's a tragedy that we can't approach these subjects with maturity. Just imagine how much better our society would be if we began entertaining our kids and adolescents with actual art. But, you know, that doesn't really foster consumerism in the long run, so to hell with it. EDIT: Okay, yeah. Thuryl summed up my argument for your #5 more tersely. [ Monday, November 07, 2005 21:53: Message edited by: Trrr's Mrtr ] -------------------- 私のバラドですそしてころしたいいらればころす Posts: 6936 \| Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00
Thuryl ...b10010b... Member # 869	written Monday, November 7 2005 21:55 Profile Homepage #39 quote: Originally written by Trrr's Mrtr: You are arguing, essentially, for corporations as the final arbiters in the quality of an artform. And that to me is utterly abhorrent. And you're arguing for, what, forcing Wal-Mart to carry every game whether it wants to or not, regardless of rating? :P Seriously, if businesses refuse to carry titles of their own accord, I don't see that there's all that much that governments can reasonably do about it. -------------------- My BoE Page Bandwagons are fun! Roots Hunted! Posts: 9973 \| Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
The Immortal BANNED Member # 4	written Tuesday, November 8 2005 08:45 Profile Homepage #40 Communism. :P No, really. You're asking me, "How can we make CEOs responsible?" That's a question without any reasonable answer- you may as well ask how to get Emi and Avex to stop putting mass-manufactured crap on the Oricon every week. So what's the answer? Well, if people actually generate a demand for well-crafted, artful games, they'll get what they want. If they want Dead or Alive Volleyball or San Andreas, they'll get what they want. The customer ain't always right, but them's always the customer. Of course, there are still censorship lobbyists who would lob lawsuit after lawsuit on video games that they think are indecent- the same people who have absolutely no vested interest in it. So before games that are truly marketed to adults begin trickling out, the reactionary, ¢hri$tian lobbyists will have to be shot. But, you know, big loss. :rolleyes: -------------------- 私のバラドですそしてころしたいいらればころす Posts: 6936 \| Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00
Drew By Committee Member # 4233	written Tuesday, November 8 2005 14:21 Profile #41 quote: Originally written by Ash Lael: Drew - you missed my point. I was seeking to demonstrate that the slippery slope argument was useless. Just as legalizing homosexual marriage isn't going to lead to lawful paedophilia, banning maybe 2 games a year isn't going to lead to the return of the Dark Ages. It isn't useless, though. It's used in law all the time to prevent bad precedent from taking effect. You give censorship-minded people an inch, and they'll take a yard. You are obviously one such person that would want more censorship applied than just a couple games a year. You'd probably like to see porn banned, right? How about violent movies? And that painting in the National Art Gallery featuring the nude woman sure doesn't seem like art to you... With regard to Walmart, it has a right to do what it wants. If it increases its bottom line by promoting the fact that it won't sell rated-M games, it should, as it has every right to do so. It's a great example of industry self-regulation - no government intervention necessary. Posts: 2242 \| Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00
The Immortal BANNED Member # 4	written Tuesday, November 8 2005 15:25 Profile Homepage #42 "No government intervention necessary to ensure censorship?" For someone who is eager to end censorship lobbyists, that you would turn over the onus for discerning good art to corporations is rather vile. Skip games in general- that we trust virulently irresponsible corporations to entertain us in all facets of life is negligent to an extreme. Sure, the only foil to corporate censorship is the consumer driving the corporations to change, but who will lift a finger against the bullet train of superfluosity and inane pornography when it is what we were fed to accept? I don't think that anything should be banned or enforced or anything. I just think that two things are absolutely imperative: 1. Encouraging people to not allow mindless foms of entertainment to take center stage 2. Murdering all censorship lobbyists in cold blood And PS- trusting corporations to such an extent is a prime indicator of your liberalism. -------------------- 私のバラドですそしてころしたいいらればころす Posts: 6936 \| Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00
Ash Lael E Equals MC What!!!! Member # 5491	written Tuesday, November 8 2005 15:32 Profile Homepage #43 quote: Originally written by Drew: It isn't useless, though. It's used in law all the time to prevent bad precedent from taking effect. You give censorship-minded people an inch, and they'll take a yard. You are obviously one such person that would want more censorship applied than just a couple games a year. You'd probably like to see porn banned, right? How about violent movies? And that painting in the National Art Gallery featuring the nude woman sure doesn't seem like art to you... Okay, maybe it isn't useless. But it is logically invalid. "You give censorship-minded people an inch, and they'll take a yard... You'd probably like to see porn banned, right?" Hey, news flash, genius! We HAVE an inch down here! We HAVE censorship! As far as I know, we've ALWAYS had it! And porn ISN'T banned! How about that! I'm amazed that you can repeatedly assert that X will happen if censorship is allowed a foot in the door, with complete and utter disregard to the actual facts. PS: Ignoring TM right now, because he's wandered off into his own little world again. [ Tuesday, November 08, 2005 15:34: Message edited by: Ash Lael ] -------------------- Sex is easier than love. Posts: 1861 \| Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00
Drew By Committee Member # 4233	written Tuesday, November 8 2005 15:50 Profile #44 TM, industry responds to societal tastes and demands. Brittany Spears is popular, and so we have Jessica and Ashley Simpson. "Survivor" is popular, so we have "Dog Eat Dog." Sure, there is some degree of industry saying "hey, look here, this is cool so you should like it," but nine times out of ten, their ideas fall flat on their faces - see Ashley Simpson. Industry just bombards us with so many products that it seems they have a stranglehold on our imaginations. Despair at the times and the morals all you want, but you can only waive the victim flag so much - ultimately, it's your responsibility to turn off the television, not purchase that game, etc. Posts: 2242 \| Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00
The Immortal BANNED Member # 4	written Tuesday, November 8 2005 16:37 Profile Homepage #45 "You"- I like that idea. As if, were I to turn off the games and television, entertainment would ultimately become worthwhile and meaningful. People like corporately homogenized crap? People are* corporately homogenized crap.* On the most basic level, people- this generation especially- were formed ENTIRELY by liberal, bourgeoisie values. Boobs! Che shirts for $15 apiece! Cultural non-rebellion! Maybe this is what people "really want", but that it is what they were always told to want renders the whole situation a bit specious. So okay. I can turn off the boob toob. But when I do, what will change? People will still demand bloodless non-art because they were raised on bloodless non-art. Worst part is, the curve is getting worse. Relying on your "solution" poses a catch-22 that does not speak well on your devotion to "democracy". PS- Is "my own little world" australian for "I will not make even the most half-assed attempt at understanding the content"? I'm not very familiar with the australian dialect, but after repeated uses, I'm beginning to glean some meaning from it. PPS- You will notice that, even when I find an argument absolutely illogical and insufferable, we at least extend the politesse of a response. I have never written an entire rebuttal by calling opponents ignorant, even when they are. Or maybe you're ignoring me because I'm denying the rights of businesses- in which case you are neither justified in doing so, nor are you preaching a particularly christian doctrine. I won't presume, but you don't give me much room not to. -------------------- 私のバラドですそしてころしたいいらればころす Posts: 6936 \| Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00
Ash Lael E Equals MC What!!!! Member # 5491	written Tuesday, November 8 2005 16:56 Profile Homepage #46 TM - When you say that censorship lobbyists should be murdered in cold blood, I find it difficult to tell where you're being serious and where you aren't. What I mean by you being in "Your own little world" is that you're ranting away in a very passionate manner without seeming to worry about whether it makes any sense to the person on the other end of the conversation. I can't discuss an issue with you if I can't understand what you're saying (or more accurately, what you mean by what you're saying). -------------------- Sex is easier than love. Posts: 1861 \| Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00
The Immortal BANNED Member # 4	written Tuesday, November 8 2005 17:06 Profile Homepage #47 "TM - When you say that censorship lobbyists should be murdered in cold blood, I find it difficult to tell where you're being serious and where you aren't." Are you really that dense? If you are, I apologize. If not, your excuse is as poor as it is vitriolic. "What I mean by you being in "Your own little world" is that you're ranting away in a very passionate manner without seeming to worry about whether it makes any sense to the person on the other end of the conversation." 1. Then ask for clarification. When asked, I will provide. 2. Drew and Thuryl got it just fine. You may have to accept that your breadth of understanding is not universally shared. -------------------- 私のバラドですそしてころしたいいらればころす Posts: 6936 \| Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00
Jumpin Salmon ? Man, ? Amazing Member # 5755	written Tuesday, November 8 2005 17:13 Profile #48 I am starting to enjoy this discussion. Especially the part where Andrew is sarcastically called a genius. That added a great deal of merit to the conversation. this message sponsored by steve jackson Posts: 4114 \| Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00
Ash Lael E Equals MC What!!!! Member # 5491	written Tuesday, November 8 2005 17:46 Profile Homepage #49 Salmon - Eh, I got frustrated. You're right, I should have kept my cool. Sorry about that, Drew. TM - I can tell the murder thing wasn't serious. That was my point. It clues me in that you don't mean everything you're saying, so I'm not sure what exactly you do mean and what's just vague screaming. For example, I'm not certain what you mean when you say "corporate censorship". Are you talking about works of art not being made because they aren't going to sell? Or what? [ Tuesday, November 08, 2005 17:49: Message edited by: Ash Lael ] -------------------- Sex is easier than love. Posts: 1861 \| Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00