Way too negative: Jack Thompson

Where to begin with this one...

Its just like the Joe Quesada page was,maybe even worse.

edited 12th Jun '11 9:25:31 AM by Ultimatum

New theme music also a box

Yeah, I agree that the page is too negative (and potentially slanted, especially since I think being anti-violent video games seems to be a synonym for being anti-video games on that page). I also think that the long description can probably be cut a bit.

"irhgT nm0w tehre might b ea lotof th1nmgs i dont udarstannd, ubt oim ujst goinjg to keepfollowing this pazth i belieove iN !!!!!1 d

I'll admit to not being a fan of Jackie boy but I'd like to note that aside from... relatively rare examples of leading wording ('wacky antics' and perhaps calling his tactics 'desperate', as well as later in the description saying he made a 'general ass of himself' at the proceedings regarding his disbarment...), most of the really extreme stuff on that page's description is undeniable fact. Jack Thompson really did write an inflammatory letter to Strauss Zelnick's mother comparing her son to Ted Bundy, which invoked Godwin's Law. He really did file gay porn into court records. He really did file criminal harassment charges against Penny Arcade for making donations to charity.

Mostly the problems I see is with the trope list. Should we really have a trope list for a person? Especially with stuff like Amoral Attorney and Ambulance Chaser... even if they do sort of fit...

Maybe limit it to things that are more or less neutral -towards him-, like his comparing people he doesn't like to famous murderers and dictators...? (which... he does do a lot, and can't really be denied)

I'd definitely say kill stuff like Laser-Guided Karma and Lawful Stupid on the trope list though. (especially since neither fits: Laser-Guided Karma is when a random act of kindness or hostility boomerangs back on you in a directly traceable way, Jack Thompson's ridiculous antics and antagonization of the court system didn't make his case any -better- but they weren't some random act of pettyness that came back to haunt him, they were him showing open contempt and disregard for the system he worked in until they got sick of it. Lawful Stupid is clearly just 'hurr, he's a lawyer and he's stupid, Get it?')

Actually, the more I look at this, the more I think we should just kill the trope list. The description of him is more or less based entirely in fact, maybe needs a little bit of tweaking for wording, but the trope list is really where the negativity shines. Most of the description is just a list of things he's done or said (with external citations, I might add). I say kill the trope list, change a bit of the wording on the description, and edit-lock it.

edited 13th Jun '11 12:07:29 PM by savage

Want to rename a trope? Step one: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The link to that article is dead.

Insert witty and clever quip here. My page, as the database hates my handle.

Fixed. Somehow a character code got into the link, even though it doesn't need it.

Edit: or not. Here. the forum is breaking it, cut and paste. It's in our wiki article as well, so. I removed it from my post up there.

http://www.gamervision.com/users/sean/articles/jack_thompson_writes_an_e_mail_to_take_two_ceo_s_mother1

edited 13th Jun '11 12:07:55 PM by savage

Want to rename a trope? Step one: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

^ URL links that are too long will always end up broken up with an extra hyphen and space when posted on the forums... in any format.

edited 13th Jun '11 12:17:42 PM by SeanMurrayI

Oh, Jack, how you never truly leave my life.

On one hand, that page is very negative, and some of the examples should be trimmed out... I probably put up a couple of them myself. Also, if we're going to just not have trope listings for people in general, we should just cut all those.

That said, as someone who has spoken with the gentleman in question (back in my days as a video game reviewer), yes, quite a few of those tropes are earned. He really is pretty much anti-video games. I asked him point blank about Tetris; while he didn't object to the content of the game itself, he thought it distracted kids from what he viewed as more worthwhile ways to spend time, like reading literature or playing sports. So he really would be satisfied if the video game industry folded; he just picked his battles so as to hit where he thought he would be most likely to win.

As a side note, I do know how to keep him from actively insulting you when speaking with him - refuse to insult back. Don't point out that he's being insulting; just continue to be polite to him. He eventually catches on, and in the meantime, you just prove your points against him more.

Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.

Should he even have a page at all?

Infinite Tree: an experimental story

Jack Thompson found in: 118 articles, excluding discussions.

This title has brought 406 people to the wiki from non-search engine links since 20th FEB '09.

Well, it's a healthy page... Not sure how many of those wicks are of a 'Jack Thompson sucks' bent though, not really sure if I should check or not.

I find the best way to deal with logical fallacies such as ad hominem are to point them out in at least a relatively civil manner, then continue with your argument, not returning an insult in kind.

edited 13th Jun '11 12:49:03 PM by savage

Want to rename a trope? Step one: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Actually, that's the real question we should ask. He didn't really create anything. He really didn't do anything besides inspire a few webcomic artists for some easy Take That! punchlines and help get extra readership for video game websites (we used to joke that he was like a pinata - take a few whacks and the candy-like pageviews started pouring out). And getting disbarred has turned him into a minor footnote for the entire industry.

When the most notable thing he's done is make Take-Two Interactive lawyers justify their retainer fees, we may just have the litmus test at just how little one needs to do to justify a page here.

edited 13th Jun '11 12:46:44 PM by 32_Footsteps

Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.

I wonder. He's not really a creator of any works. He's not a character in a work. He's not a trope. It isn't a Useful Notes page.

He's basically a Moral Guardian and hate figure for people who like video games. Is he really someone we need to have a page on, or should he be left to Wikipedia?

"Well, it's a lifestyle"

He's been a 'character' in many works, as an Acceptable Target due to his pogrom against videogames. I'm not sure if that qualifies though.

Want to rename a trope? Step one: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Has he been a character in many works? I know that he's been referenced in Penny Arcade, VG Cats, and Little Gamers... and probably a few other Two Gamers on a Couch webcomics. That seems more than a little thin.

Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.

If not for this, I'd be happy to see this page cut.

It does not matter who I am. What matters is, who will you become? - motto of Omsk Bird

Don't forget Ctrl Alt Del!

The man may not be a creator of works, but he is well known for trying to destroy them. He's the one who argues that video games are too violent, in court and in media.

He has directly affected the videogame industry, though exactly how may be under debate. This makes him important to a media wiki. That those who are fans of videogames have referenced him in their own works is a bonus.

There is a fine line between recklessness and courage — Paul McCartney

>Don't forget Ctrl Alt Del!

Oh, how I wish I could. D:

Want to rename a trope? Step one: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Here's the thing - he's been less effective than other Moral Guardians. I challenge anyone to name a single successful change he's made to the video gaming industry.

Compare that to Dr. Frederic Wertham, who basically got EC Comics to shut down (except for Mad Magazine). Or The National Legion Of Decency, who would kill movies by decrying them as "morally objectionable." Or the Parent Television Council, which has been responsible for increasing restrictions on broadcast television. All of these have been referenced in works as well, and they were more prominent and more effective than Thompson.

So why does Jack Thompson get his own page? Why does he get more than a paragraph on the same page as other Moral Guardians? The more I think of it, the more I think this should be cut. I mean, he has more of a presence on this site than Danielle Bunten Berry, and she's just one of the most important developers in the industry all-time. I know, No Such Thing As Notability and all, but I think someone should at least contribute to entertainment in some way (good or ill) before they get troped.

Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.

He's... made Moral Guardians look silly?

edited 13th Jun '11 1:41:34 PM by savage

Want to rename a trope? Step one: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I think he's notable in that I've heard it theorized he's why Video Games have never gone through the equivalent of all the things you listed, Footsteps. By being the prominent crusader against video games and insanely incompetent at it, he kept any crusader that could actually do damage from gaining any mindshare.

Apparently I am adorable, but my GF is my #1 Groupie. (Avatar by Dreki-K)

I can promise you, that is not his intention, and he's also not the first to have pulled that feat off. He's just the most recent example; I think we have Most Tropers Are Young Nerds coming in to play (i.e. he got a trope page simply because he's the most prominent Moral Guardian that a number of people could name).

Reminder: Offscreen Villainy does not count towards Complete Monster.

Well, whether or not he deserves a page, there's a point in history where if you -ever- saw Video Games in the news, Jack Thompson was there to talk about it (and if there was violence perpetrated by anyone under 30, Jack Thompson was there to... talk about videogames).

edited 13th Jun '11 1:48:17 PM by savage

Want to rename a trope? Step one: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

@Footsteps

Well, yeah, duh, he pretty obviously didn't do that intentionally. Doesn't change the net result that he may well be why all the things you listed didn't happen to video games.

Basically, rather than being successful enough to affect a change, he was arguably the right combination of prominent and incompetent enough to ironically prevent the industry from having to go through one.

edited 13th Jun '11 1:51:39 PM by Jeysie

Apparently I am adorable, but my GF is my #1 Groupie. (Avatar by Dreki-K)

Chick Tracts and Sonichu pages have more right to exist than this. Those pages have serious problems, too, but at least they're actual works.

Jack Thompson would be about as deserving of a page as Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church. Someone becoming so detested by any segment of society that it gets him mentioned for this in works and media just doesn't merit having a page for the person.

edited 13th Jun '11 2:00:37 PM by SeanMurrayI

Ah, so Jack Thompson is the Moral Guardian with an F in Moral Guarding, the Nice Job Fixing It, Villain of videogames.

Okay, maybe he shouldn't have more prominence than videogame developers. But he is important to that medium.

If you want to see what happens when the chief moral guardian of videogames is competent by moral guardian standards, look at Australia. They have effectively banned R-rated videogames over there.

It's because of the mistakes of Thompson that M-rated games are more accessible than AO-rated games. The blockading of sexual games in America was done quietly. But because Thompson called attention to violence in videogames, the fans of the violent games were able to make their counterattack and keep those games available.

edited 13th Jun '11 2:10:47 PM by AnonymousMcCartneyfan

There is a fine line between recklessness and courage — Paul McCartney

INUH,

I do not think he should. I think one could make the argument that he is relevant to video games somewhat, but I do not believe the link is a great one and I certainly do not think that he is important enough to video games themselves to have his own page here, especially if its existence will likely lead to more bashing and negativity. Basically, I think that the costs outweigh the benefits here.

I do not think that a page about someone who is not even associated with a work helps fulfill the purpose of this wiki, but your mileage may vary there I suppose.

edited 13th Jun '11 2:47:13 PM by LouieW

"irhgT nm0w tehre might b ea lotof th1nmgs i dont udarstannd, ubt oim ujst goinjg to keepfollowing this pazth i belieove iN !!!!!1 d