Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Supreme Court Declines Jack Thompson Appeal

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the take-the-hint dept.

The Courts 100

eldavojohn writes "Jack Thompson was disbarred last year in Florida, putting a halt to annoying lawsuits targeting game makers and the constitutional rights of gamers. Well, he had appealed to the United States Supreme Court (scheduled to be heard last Friday) to get this overturned, but instead they declined to even hear his appeal. They wouldn't even give him the time to review his appeal, so it appears his disbarment for life stands. Florida had declined to file a response to Thompson's appeal, and it turns out they didn't need to. Sad day for Jack Thompson, but a great day for gamers everywhere." This comes shortly after Thompson was frustrated by the vetoing of some legislation he promoted in Utah.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

He'll Be Back (5, Insightful)

gbulmash (688770) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671123)

The problem with zealots and fanatics is that these kinds of setbacks only help to make them believe that they just need to fight harder. It's a sad, sick feedback loop where defeat reinforces their mania instead of chipping away at it. I seriously doubt this is the last we'll hear of Jack Thompson. He'll just come up with new and creative ways to be a thorn in the side of gamers and freethinkers.

Just because he's disbarred, he can still find some rich, old lonely lady to fund his evil plans... much like Lex Luthor did in Superman Returns. But seriously, even though he's not a lawyer anymore, that doesn't stop him from getting one to act as his proxy. He just needs to find another manically deluded soul who either has a law degree or the money to pay for lawyers, and he'll be back.

Re:He'll Be Back (5, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671161)

He'll probably just turn to violence, and blame it all on video games once captured.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671163)

I think you seriously over estimate the man.

Re:He'll Be Back (1, Insightful)

StreetStealth (980200) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671243)

You're probably right. While credibility may not be a huge obstacle to appearing on the likes of Fox News, his disbarment, continued absurdist hijinks, and now this have probably dipped him below the mark where he's likely to be picked up by "news programs" as a "school shooting expert" or other disturbing titles in the future.

He still has an audience, no doubt, but by this point it's probably nearing the contemporary size of the Uri Geller faithful.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 5 years ago | (#27676637)

So what you are basically saying is - Jack Thompson/Sarah Palin 2012 ??

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

Chees0rz (1194661) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671237)

For some reason this made me think of Rudy Ruettiger... how I hate that movie...

Re:He'll Be Back (4, Insightful)

Narpak (961733) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671283)

He'll just come up with new and creative ways to be a thorn in the side of gamers and freethinkers. ... He just needs to find another manically deluded soul who either has a law degree or the money to pay for lawyers, and he'll be back.

While this might be true at least he is no longer allowed to use his status as a lawyer to harass people. And further more any lawyer that would act on his behalf risks equal punishment. In fact, if any lawyers are out there that want to work with him and use illegal and unethical acts to support cases based upon false accusations, unsubstantiated research and anecdotal evidence; then by all means I hope they all join hands and march into disbarment under his banner. Though more likely any lawyer who wish to have a career and a reputation, beyond any sort of misguided personal crusade, will avoid him like the plague.

Perhaps Jack Thomson will be back, and perhaps he will continue to cause noise regarding video games, but his disbarment, and the public airing of some of the things he did to deserve that disbarment; means that very few with grievances against the video game industry will want to be associated with him. Prohibiting him from practising law should hopefully be a warning to others that if they wish to present a case against something; then that case should be based upon reason and respect. And not lower themselves to such vile acts as Thomson engaged in.

I am saddened that serious matters are distracted from by someone such as he. I enjoy video games, but I think there is reason to debate and research the effects of gaming (and for that matter TV and other medias) effect on children and adolescents. Audiovisual media with interactive components have a massive potential to affect the mental development of children; for good or bad. Understanding how and why is important. Unfortunately self-righteous people like mister Thomson are on both sides of these issues and they continue to validate the existence of their counterparts.

Re:He'll Be Back (2, Insightful)

DustyShadow (691635) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672953)

While this might be true at least he is no longer allowed to use his status as a lawyer to harass people.

It's actually against the legal rules of ethics for attorneys to harass people. Although I haven't read the details on why he was disbarred, I am willing to bet that had a lot to do with it.

Re:He'll Be Back (2, Informative)

Narpak (961733) | more than 5 years ago | (#27674375)

Quote from wikipedia: [wikipedia.org]

"In February 2007, The Florida Bar filed disbarment proceedings against Thompson over allegations of professional misconduct. The action was the result of separate grievances filed by people claiming that Thompson made defamatory, false statements and attempted to humiliate, embarrass, harass or intimidate them. According to the complaint, Thompson accused Alberto Cardenas of "distribution of pornography to children," claimed that the Alabama judge presiding over the Devin Moore case "breaks the rules, even the Alabama State Bar Rules, because he thinks that the rules don't apply to him," and sent a letter to Blank Rome's managing partner, saying, "Your law firm has actively and knowingly facilitated by various means the criminal distribution of sexual material to minors." Thompson claims that the complaints violate state religious protections because his advocacy is motivated by his Christian faith"

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 5 years ago | (#27675487)

OH! I see now. The problem wasn't that he was harrassing people, it was that he was harrassing *other lawyers*. No wonder he got disbarred. I was about to say how could that be a disbarring offense, as it's nothing new and a lot of lawyers wouldn't keep their license more than a few years.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

Ogive17 (691899) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673065)

While this might be true at least he is no longer allowed to use his status as a lawyer to harass people. And further more any lawyer that would act on his behalf risks equal punishment. In fact, if any lawyers are out there that want to work with him and use illegal and unethical acts to support cases based upon false accusations, unsubstantiated research and anecdotal evidence; then by all means I hope they all join hands and march into disbarment under his banner.

Hmm, where have I heard this scenario before? Oh yeah, from a few of the lawyers recently appointed to the DoJ.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673341)

Unfortunately self-righteous people like mister Thomson are on both sides of these issues and they continue to validate the existence of their counterparts.

That's a lot like South Park's Mister Mackey doing more to encourage drug use than to discourage it. Anti-games activists would do better to somehow convince Thompson to join the pro-violence side so that he would get people to rethink their positions about the free availability of GTA games.

Disbarment doesn't stop him from suing. (1)

billstewart (78916) | more than 5 years ago | (#27679723)

You don't have to be a lawyer to sue somebody - he can still do that. What it does interfere with is whether he can sue somebody on behalf of a client, as opposed to being the plaintiff himself (or one of the lead plaintiffs in a class action.) He doesn't even need to have a lawyer, and he's already no stranger to having a fool for a client, though it's possible he can come up with some sucker who'll represent him for a share of the take without an upfront payment, or some political action group that'll fund his next lawsuit against his next victim even if he's the plaintiff.

They say there's no bad publicity as long as they spell your name right, but here on /., I've seen Thompson and Thomson already :-)

Re:He'll Be Back (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27671293)

Seriously? Jack Thompson has to be, officially, the least relevant human being the world. He's had his shit pushed in by virtually every court he's seen the inside of.

He's fucking finished.

Re:He'll Be Back (2, Funny)

indi0144 (1264518) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671807)


<quote>He's fucking finished</quote>

or

FINISH HIM!
(distant moans)
Gamers WIN!

Re:He'll Be Back (5, Funny)

Scarletdown (886459) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672479)

He's fucking finished

or

FINISH HIM!
(distant moans)
Gamers WIN!

Flawless victory... Legality.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673175)

Flawless victory... Legality.

Nicely done. *Wipes monitor*

Re:He'll Be Back (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27673815)

Burma shave.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

C0vardeAn0nim0 (232451) | more than 5 years ago | (#27678617)

taking a hint from fark's book:

you, sir, owe me a new keyboard.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 5 years ago | (#27675747)

Seriously? Jack Thompson has to be, officially, the least relevant human being the world.

You're right about that. It appears he hasn't won a single victory in court in his crusade (unless you count getting attention a victory). Most of the other pro-censorship voices have distanced themselves from him because he clearly is off his rocker. He was also never the most dangerous when it came to people or organizations advocating censorship in games.

In tragedies where someone who plays games is responsible, games get blamed by the media. Just a few weeks ago I read a 10 year old jumped off a roof with a parachute and died. The article implied it was because he played a wrestling game, instead of pointing out that his mother shouldn't have left him alone all day and the roof of the building shouldn't have been unlocked. It's sensationalism like that which has always been far more dangerous and ridiculous than Jack.

And, since his lawsuits seem to get thrown out of court almost immediately, this really doesn't change anything at all.

Re:He'll Be Back (0, Redundant)

plover (150551) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671317)

Oh, absolutely. Next stop: the U.S. House of Representatives. He just has to carpetbag his way around the country until he finds some particularly gullible district and start selling them locally with his trash talk. If he keeps a low profile by making only local appearances and speeches, and picks his battle against an opponent so stupid that he or she doesn't discover his background, he might not rise to enough prominence to be outed by the national media until it's too late.

If we have districts full of Americans that are stupid enough to elect a convicted felon or a deceased candidate, we surely have some that will elect a disbarred lawyer. I'm thinking that in some parts of this country, "disbarred lawyer" might even be proudly worn as some perverse badge of honor: "I was so right about this stuff that they created a conspiracy to kick me out so I wouldn't reveal the TRUTH, the TRUTH they are HIDING from YOU!"

Re:He'll Be Back (5, Funny)

Foobar of Borg (690622) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671359)

If we have districts full of Americans that are stupid enough to elect a convicted felon or a deceased candidate

Well, in all fairness, the deceased candidate was running against John Ashcroft. Who do you elect, a corpse or John Ashcroft? Not much of a contest really.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672129)

Well, in all fairness, the deceased candidate was running against John Ashcroft. Who do you elect, a corpse or John Ashcroft? Not much of a contest really.

In retrospect, we really should have elected the corpse of John Ashcroft. Then maybe Bush wouldn't have appointed him.

Anyway, Missouri likes to elect dead candidates
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/weird/NATLMayor-Dies-Wins-Re-election.html [nbcnewyork.com]

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

billstewart (78916) | more than 5 years ago | (#27679605)

We couldn't have elected the corpse of Ashcroft - he's Not Dead Yet, and even now he still won't get on the cart. But I would have happily had Richard Nixon back rather than George W. Bush, and the fact that Nixon was already dead doesn't change that...

Re: Ashcroft (2, Insightful)

rksrb (818209) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673165)

While I don't agree with anything else that he stands for, he did say "NO!" from his hospital bed when George W. sent Gonzo to renew the approval for the ongoing warrentless wiretapping. I do respect him for that.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

ameyer17 (935373) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671507)

Except if he is actually stupid enough to run, I'm pretty sure someone will point out his past to his opponent. And it's not like a quick Google search won't find any dirt.

Re:He'll Be Back (2, Funny)

fastest fascist (1086001) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671869)

If we have districts full of Americans that are stupid enough to elect a convicted felon or a deceased candidate, we surely have some that will elect a disbarred lawyer.

Don't be such a bigot. What, just because you're batshit insane, made some bad choices in your life or happen to be dead, you should be barred from a career in politics?

Re:He'll Be Back (2, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672455)

because you're batshit insane, made some bad choices in your life or happen to be dead, you should be barred from a career in politics

One is enough?

Damn, congress would have to leave in alphabetical order to avoid clogging the exits!

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

NevarMore (248971) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673309)

Have you ever run for office?

If you had you'd know that by entering in to politics at all you've already met the requirements for the first two. After a few weeks campaigning you'll want to make the third one happen.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 5 years ago | (#27676681)

Oh hell no. Just ask Michelle Bachmann.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

db32 (862117) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673825)

You do understand that the difference between a convicted felon and any other politician is one of them has been caught. So a convicted felon is the better choice because we know we can catch him. As far as the corpse...shall we review who the corpse was running against? I would vote for a dead guy any day over that loon.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

Workaphobia (931620) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671395)

Forget it, he's done. He spent all his sanity long ago and he has nothing left but fumes of paranoia. Without his honor no one will listen to him. The talk shows aren't exactly scrambling to find disbarred lawyers to consult or interview.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672477)

Oh, I bet Springer and similar quality talk shows wouldn't mind.

I even guess the audience would have the perfect level of intelligence to understand his arguments.

I could also see him as a talk show host. Why not? There's plenty of wackos and nutjobs on talk radio, you think we'd notice one more?

Re:He'll Be Back (2, Insightful)

afidel (530433) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671513)

What lawyer would work with him? Seriously would YOU risk your livelyhood on someone so bad at what you do that he got permanently banned from the field?

Re:He'll Be Back (2, Insightful)

cdrudge (68377) | more than 5 years ago | (#27674519)

For the right price, someone will join up with them. If there is one Jack Thompson, there are others that just haven't been identified yet.

Re:He'll Be Back (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27674687)

Sadly while few lawyers will work with him, many legislatures still listen to him. He is still an effective lobbyist and disbarment probably won't stop that.

So ... ? (1)

eennaarbrak (1089393) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671601)

I seriously doubt this is the last we'll hear of Jack Thompson

Jack Thompson's antics has already discredited him as a lawyer (at least where it matters). This news is not important to the gaming industry in any significant manner.

The fundamental question of whether video gaming will be regulated by the right is not a matter of Jack Thompson, but in how the US constitution is upheld by the powers that be.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

pHus10n (1443071) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671755)

"But seriously, even though he's not a lawyer anymore, that doesn't stop him from getting one to act as his proxy." --- Quote

True, it doesn't stop him from getting a lawyer. But if I was in that profession, I think the last client I would want to take legal advice from would be someone who was disbarred...

Re:He'll Be Back (2)

Haeleth (414428) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672247)

Excellent. More hilarous deluded rants to enjoy, and more righteous thrashing from courts that understand what the US constitution means.

The people in power have repeatedly shown that they don't take fanatics like Thompson any more seriously than we do. So let him rant. If anything, he helps the cause of free speech, by discrediting the opposition. ;)

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672409)

Jack is a bit like a comic villain from the old Batman series. A bit inapt, a bit scary, a bit maniac and so insanely over the top. All he really needs is some funnily clothed henchmen and we're set.

And just like them, he comes back once in a while, but we all know that his schemes, even when everyone suddenly loves him again despite what he did before, will eventually fail. But it's a really cool thrill 'til then.

Well, at least it was when I was a kid. Now it's mostly comic relief. I mean, when you compare it to the real nasties of the trade, Jack really helps to brighten my day.

Re:He'll Be Back (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27672701)

raivo pommer-www.google.ee
raimo1@hot.ee

200 milliard euro

Die Wirtschaftskrise wird sich drastisch auf die Steuereinnahmen von Bund, LÃnder und Gemeinden auswirken. SteuerschÃtzer erwarten einem Bericht der Berliner Zeitung zufolge in den nÃchsten vier Jahren Mindereinnahmen in einem historisch beispiellosen AusmaÃY. Bis zu 200 Milliarden Euro weniger sollen die Ãffentlichen Kassen demnach einnehmen. Alleine in diesem Jahr fehlten aufgrund der Rezession zwischen 25 und 30 Milliarden Euro, berichteten demnach mit der SchÃtzung befasste Experten.

Danach werde das Steuer-Loch immer grÃÃYer, weil auch für die Folgejahre die SchÃtzungen nach unten korrigiert werden müssten, berichtete die Zeitung. ZusÃtzliche AusfÃlle entstünden durch die Steuererleichterungen im Rahmen der beiden bereits beschlossenen Konjunkturpakete. Die offizielle SteuerschÃtzung für den Zeitraum 2009 bis 2013 wird am 14. Mai vorgelegt.

Raus aus der Kreditklemme

Wie die bereits beschlossenen Konjunkturpakete wirken, wollen Bundesregierung, Wirtschaft und Gewerkschaften am Mittwoch bei einem SpitzengesprÃch im Kanzleramt überprüfen. Die beiden MaÃYnahmenpakete mit einem Gesamtvolumen von 80 Milliarden Euro zeigen bereits erste Wirkungen. Allerdings wollen Regierung und Wirtschaft abwarten, bis die MaÃYnahmen voll greifen. Ein drittes Konjunkturpaket, wie es vor allem die Gewerkschaften fordern, lehnen sie deshalb ab. Thema der Spitzenrunde dürfte auch das gemeinsame Gutachten der führenden Wirtschaftsforschungsinstitute sein, das morgen vorgelegt werden soll.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672965)

The problem with zealots and fanatics is that these kinds of setbacks only help to make them believe that they just need to fight harder.

Maybe so, but it doesn't matter much when the zealot/fanatic in question is being reduced to the status of a lunatic ranting on the streetcorner. He's done.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

SpooForBrains (771537) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672969)

The problem with zealots and fanatics is that these kinds of setbacks only help to make them believe that they just need to fight harder. It's a sad, sick feedback loop where defeat reinforces their mania instead of chipping away at it. I seriously doubt this is the last we'll hear of Jack Thompson. He'll just come up with new and creative ways to be a thorn in the side of gamers and freethinkers.

What you have just said could be reworded, with very little effort, to describe Richard M Stallman. While I can't comment specifically about Jack Thompson (I haven't followed the news about him in anything more than a cursory fashion), I think we should recognise that the sort of fanaticism described in this quote can often be a driving force for good, as well as *ahem* evil.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

ultranova (717540) | more than 5 years ago | (#27675533)

I seriously doubt this is the last we'll hear of Jack Thompson. He'll just come up with new and creative ways to be a thorn in the side of gamers and freethinkers.

Actually, it has been argued that Thompson is helping gamers, by being so clearly insane that he gives anti-game people a bad name, a bit like a non-religious version of Jack Chick or Fred Phelps.

Re:He'll Be Back (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27676369)

I seriously doubt this is the last we'll hear of Jack Thompson. He'll just come up with new and creative ways to be a thorn in the side of gamers and freethinkers.

Actually, it has been argued that Thompson is helping gamers, by being so clearly insane that he gives anti-game people a bad name, a bit like... Jack Chick or Fred Phelps.

FTFY. He's every bit the over-religious nutbar as Chick, and he's every bit the trolling lawyer-type as Phelps.

Burn the Heathen!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27677589)

The problem with zealots and fanatics is that these kinds of setbacks only help to make them believe that they just need to fight harder. It's a sad, sick feedback loop where defeat reinforces their mania instead of chipping away at it. I seriously doubt this is the last we'll hear of Jack Thompson. He'll just come up with new and creative ways to be a thorn in the side of gamers and freethinkers.

Just because he's disbarred, he can still find some rich, old lonely lady to fund his evil plans... much like Lex Luthor did in Superman Returns. But seriously, even though he's not a lawyer anymore, that doesn't stop him from getting one to act as his proxy. He just needs to find another manically deluded soul who either has a law degree or the money to pay for lawyers, and he'll be back.

Are you somehow implying this WON'T be the year of Linux on the desktop?

Fixing it up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27680097)

The problem with zealots and fanatics is that these kinds of setbacks only help to make them believe that they just need to fight harder. It's a sad, sick feedback loop where defeat reinforces their mania instead of chipping away at it. I seriously doubt this is the last we'll hear of Lunis Torvballs. He'll just come up with new and creative ways to be a thorn in the side of gamers and freethinkers.

Just because he's irrelevant, he can still find some rich, old lonely corporation to fund his evil plans... much like Lex Luthor did in Superman Returns. But seriously, even though he's not important anymore, that doesn't stop him from getting Slashdot to act as his proxy. He just found other manically deluded souls who either have a law degree or the money to pay for lawyers and programmers, and he's back.

Re:He'll Be Back (1)

CompassIIDX (1522813) | more than 5 years ago | (#27680503)

He's already responded, and reassured us all the show will continue:

In response to [GamePolitics'] speculation that "the... decision almost certainly ends Thompson's fight to have his permanent disbarment overturned," - Not at all. I have four more options, all better than this one. This was the longest of shots. All four of the others are much, much shorter shots. Stay tuned. As Winston Churchill implored: "Never give in. Never, never, never, never, never."

http://kotaku.com/5223111/supreme-court-on-jack-thompson-appeal-no-thanks [kotaku.com]

Stop giving him attention (5, Insightful)

gcnaddict (841664) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671143)

Just stop posting stories about him. Stop posting anything which would give him any attention at all unless it's about something which really is a threat. In that case, spread the word high and low to kill whatever the threat may be.

The less attention you guys personally give him, the more neglected he'll feel and the less of an attention whore he might become. Granted, this might not work, but it's better than talking about every major event in his life.

Re:Stop giving him attention (5, Insightful)

rob1980 (941751) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671185)

The less attention you guys personally give him, the more neglected he'll feel and the less of an attention whore he might become.

Or he'll step up his efforts and when there are no sane people to keep his outlandish behavior in check, he'll be one step closer to getting his way. Jack Thompson isn't some anonymous coward you can filter out of a discussion thread just because you think he's a troll - as long as he's loud enough to get legislation on the table for discussion, he's somebody you need to keep an eye on.

Re-read my comment (1)

gcnaddict (841664) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671261)

Or he'll step up his efforts and when there are no sane people to keep his outlandish behavior in check, he'll be one step closer to getting his way. Jack Thompson isn't some anonymous coward you can filter out of a discussion thread just because you think he's a troll - as long as he's loud enough to get legislation on the table for discussion, he's somebody you need to keep an eye on.

This is why I said:

Stop posting anything which would give him any attention at all unless it's about something which really is a threat. In that case, spread the word high and low to kill whatever the threat may be.

Legislation filed by him counts as "outlandish behavior."

I'm just tired of hearing about stuff that doesn't affect me. If he tries to get legislation out, then by all means, slam him. Otherwise, if it's just his own life going down the drain, stop giving him attention for it.

Re:Stop giving him attention (1)

ukyoCE (106879) | more than 5 years ago | (#27674547)

Exactly - the problem isn't that he gets attention on Slashdot. The problem is he keeps getting put on Fox News and other networks, spouting his BS. And that's something that attention on Slashdot and other sites can help fight back against.

Re:Stop giving him attention (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27671219)

Stop eating Popplers! Stop eating them with honey mustard sauce. Stop eating them with tangy sweet-and-sour sauce. Stop eating the new fiesta Poppler salad. Stop taking advantage of the money-saving 12-pack. Stop enjoying Popplers on the patio, in the car, or on the boat. Wherever good times are had!

Re:Stop giving him attention (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671289)

Just stop posting stories about him.

It's a for-profit website. They want views and articles about him tend to get them.

Re:Stop giving him attention (2, Insightful)

arkhan_jg (618674) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671689)

On the other hand, there's the schadenfreude we derive from seeing Jack finally get his comeuppance.

After years and years of thinking 'surely THIS time', it's really satisfying for the court system to catch on to what us gamers have seen all this time - that he's an utter loon who besmirches the name of anything he's a part of.

I don't know about you, but in this case, I'm really glad to see that justice has finally been done.

Re:Stop giving him attention (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672523)

It's not reall Schadenfreude on my side. It's just Freude that the system works and doesn't hand free reign to people who don't care about the constitutional rights of others.

Seeing someone being kicked out of his job (permanently) doesn't really fill me with glee. Imagine you were banned from using a computer ever again. I'm not happy about his misery. I'm happy that he was stopped from making other people miserable.

Re:Stop giving him attention (2)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672503)

What? Can you imagine that he might stop spewing his rants and someone could take over the banner of "ban those violent games" that one could mistake for someone that you should take serious?

As long as Jacky is fuming, ranting and raving, you can use him as a poster child: "Look, that's someone who thinks video games are violent. Well, would you rather be a violent gamer or would you prefer to be like THIS?"

Re:Stop giving him attention (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673001)

The less attention you guys personally give him, the more neglected he'll feel and the less of an attention whore he might become.

I see what you're saying, but bear this in mind.

Last time I looked there's about 1.4 million slashdot users. Take away inactive accounts and twitter sockpuppets and you're down to about half a million. If ten percent of those are here on a regular basis, thats only 50k. The USA has 300 million. Then there's the rest of the world...

Slashdot isn't representative. Any publicity he gets here is rounding errors, a blip. The people most likely to agree with him -arguably the most dangerous ones - sure ain't here.

Granted, this might not work

Indeed.

Seriously... (2, Informative)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671175)

...Jack WHO?

The man was barely relevant before. Now he is irrelevant.

R.I.P. Jack What's-His-Name. Time to move on.

Re:Seriously... (1, Offtopic)

Trintech (1137007) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671379)

...Jack WHO? The man was barely relevant before. Now he is irrelevant.

So was Joe the Plumber but he's still doing talk shows and appearing in the media.

Controversy sells. This won't be the last we hear from him.

Re:Seriously... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672545)

No, he's VERY relevant!

If someone comes along and talks about how violent video games are and that they should be banned, point at Jack and say "hey, look, you're taking his side".

Re:Seriously... (4, Insightful)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673209)

No, he's VERY relevant!

If someone comes along and talks about how violent video games are and that they should be banned, point at Jack and say "hey, look, you're taking his side".

Surely we can do better than association fallacies? That kind of sloppy argument is better left in the hands of the dickholes like Thompson.

Response (1)

AtomG (1501811) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671287)

Mr. Thompson responded with an appeal to get his status as biggest douche in the universe overturned. "I'm not a douche!", said Thompson.

Why is this news now after... (1)

gearloos (816828) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671319)

I thought he was relegated to Utah and representing the Osmonds in their suit with the Jackson 5 over the shutes and ladders fiasco.

cmon /. YAWN.......... (1)

gearloos (816828) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671329)

Get some real stories and stop upping this garbage.

Well, there are other options (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27671331)

He could appeal to the court of public opinion.

Dang it was hard to say that without bursting into laughter.

But, yeah, he's the Black Knight [wikipedia.org] and it's time to move on. Supreme Court rejection? He'll say it's "only a flesh wound" and keep on screaming "none shall pass!"

W00t! (1)

SL Baur (19540) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671403)

Jack Thompson was disbarred last year in Florida, putting a halt to annoying lawsuits

The spelling and grammar nazi side of me says "putting" is something you do on a golf green. The rest of me says, "w00t!".
 

Re:W00t! (4, Funny)

overzero (1358049) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671577)

The spelling and grammar nazi side of me says "putting" is something you do on a golf green.

This explains why the Nazis weren't known for their grasp of the English language or their golf skills.

Re:W00t! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27671597)

Put and putt share a present participle. Both are conjugated as "putting".

I'd file a bug report for this, as it's undesirable behavior, but I don't know who's maintaining the English language these days.

Re:W00t! (1)

greed (112493) | more than 5 years ago | (#27675131)

It's not just that there's no official maintainer....

It's all the forks that have happened over the years, with local dialects, pidgins, patois, and so on, each with their own user base, and varying levels of maintainer control.

It seems almost anyone is allowed to commit to en_US, for example. How else could "literally" mean "not literally"? Or "bi-monthly" mean "every other month" and "twice a month"?

Re:W00t! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27675791)

Twice a month is "semi-monthly".

Re:W00t! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27678263)

Put and putt share a present participle. Both are conjugated as "putting".

I'd file a bug report for this, as it's undesirable behavior, but I don't know who's maintaining the English language these days.

RESO WONTFIX.

English is supposed to have obfuscated orthography.

Re:W00t! (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 5 years ago | (#27716751)

Er, isn't that NOTABUG?

Re:W00t! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27671721)

What would you have written instead? "puting"?

Re:W00t! (1)

FiloEleven (602040) | more than 5 years ago | (#27675287)

"Puting" is what happens when you spend the energy to solve a problem but are resting on assumptions that are taken as axioms when they too need to be worked out. What often happens is that while the solution you come up with works in theory, it goes to hell in practice because you've only solved the second half of a problem that, due to false assumptions, doesn't even exist in reality.

For examples, see most US legislation, especially TARP, the Food Safety Modernization Act, the stimulus package, USAPATRIOT Act, DMCA...

Co$ lawyer (1)

wiredlogic (135348) | more than 5 years ago | (#27671515)

Thompson's tenacity would fit in well with Scientology's breed of sharks. He just has to move to Clearwater and he's set for life.

In Related News... (2, Funny)

Anenome (1250374) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672015)

(Voiceover): It's Channel 5 News at 11, and now, our top story:

Cristy: Noted anti-video-game crusader Jack Thompson's appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court was denied today. Thompson was disbarred by the Florida Supreme court earlier this year and was seeking to be vindicated and have his license reinstated...

John: In related news, a D.C. prostitute just around the corner from the bar nearest the Supreme Court turned down Jack Thompson's last $20 in his bid for a blowjob. The madame is quoted as saying to Thompson, "No way, you creepy ass mother-fucker, get a life, Jesus." Thompson's office could not be reached for comment. Cristy?

Cristy: Well, looks like that's another 'happy-ending' Thompson won't be getting today.

All: Ahahaha.

IANAL (5, Funny)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 5 years ago | (#27672167)

I am not a lawyer, but... neither is Jack Thompson now.

Re:IANALANIJT (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673049)

A new meme?

Re:IANAL (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27676689)

Valentine to Jack Thompson:

Roses are red
Violets are blue
IANAL
and neither are you

Love to see Suits get their Just Desserts (1)

Moe1975 (885721) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673315)

Hooray

This made my day.

Nothing better than to see a Suit get his/her just desserts, PARTICULARLY at the hands of other Suits.

I love it!

Re:Love to see Suits get their Just Desserts (1)

NDPTAL85 (260093) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673409)

Yeah because just wearing a suit makes someone evil or something.

Re:Love to see Suits get their Just Desserts (1)

Moe1975 (885721) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673479)

Yeah because the term "Suit" is surely not figurative or something.

Re:Love to see Suits get their Just Desserts (1)

NDPTAL85 (260093) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673981)

Yeah because language isn't supposed to be clear and effective for communication or anything.

Re:Love to see Suits get their Just Desserts (1)

Moe1975 (885721) | more than 4 years ago | (#27684361)

Hmmm

I looked at many of your previous comments . . . you are a little ASTROTURFER aren't you?

How pathetic, I knew there was something wrong with you.

The best part is his response (1)

bigbigbison (104532) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673569)

I love his response. In typical Jacko fashion he doesn't see this as a set back at all. He claims he has 4 other ways to get his license back that are even more likely to work than the Supreme Court.

why do I suspect that one of them involves changing his name so he can try to get a license under his new name?

Re:The best part is his response (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 5 years ago | (#27680739)

I hope he tries this.

Personally I would love to see this guy arrested, charged, tried, and convicted.

Come on Jack...keep digging.

Re:The best part is his response (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#27711465)

He claims he has 4 other ways to get his license back that are even more likely to work than the Supreme Court.

Then why didn't he try those first?

Good Idea (1)

Masked-Vandal (171079) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673713)

Disbarment is an excellent way to stop religiously-motivated extremist lawyers. Just look at Fred Phelps, for example.

Oh wait...

Don't worry about Jack (1)

Legion303 (97901) | more than 5 years ago | (#27673941)

He can always get a job as an expert on Fox News.

He's not quite "done" yet! (1)

sherpajohn (113531) | more than 5 years ago | (#27674045)

Or so Game Politics quotes:

In response to [GamePolitics'] speculation that "the... decision almost certainly ends Thompson's fight to have his permanent disbarment overturned," - Not at all. I have four more options, all better than this one. This was the longest of shots. All four of the others are much, much shorter shots. Stay tuned. As Winston Churchill implored: "Never give in. Never, never, never, never, never."

Im ashamed of you all (1)

Twyst3d (1359973) | more than 5 years ago | (#27674599)

To know you have been beaten. To know you cant ever fight again. Must be a terrible feeling. Doesnt make anything he did right per say. But I cant help but feel bad for the guy. If I was him I would probably be considering suicide right now.

Re:Im ashamed of you all (1)

CompassIIDX (1522813) | more than 5 years ago | (#27680457)

To know you have been beaten. To know you cant ever fight again. Must be a terrible feeling. Doesnt make anything he did right per say. But I cant help but feel bad for the guy. If I was him I would probably be considering suicide right now.

...

per say

Really?

When you can't get this passed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27674659)

...in Utah, you know you have problems.

I lived there during college and am LDS myself and they do some crazy stuff there in the the name of the children.

Re:When you can't get this passed... (1)

Y2KDragon (525979) | more than 5 years ago | (#27675305)

Seriously. How far off the reservation do you have to go when UTAH won't even take your calls anymore?

Oh yeah, he'll be back (1)

Zooperman (1182761) | more than 5 years ago | (#27675223)

I agree with the first guy. He won't be slowed down by this, he will gain encouragement from it like any megalomaniac would. Luckily Planet Earth is rapidly running out of people who take him seriously, and oddly enough most of it is his fault. Once there is nobody left and his pathetic attempts at self-promotion fall on deaf ears, I am betting he will turn to violence to call attention to himself again.

Don't you mean... (1)

frankiejunior (1531679) | more than 5 years ago | (#27675573)

Don't you mean "...but a great day for everyone everywhere" ?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?