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!

Child's Play Breaks a Million Bucks

CmdrTaco posted more than 6 years ago | from the that's-a-lotta-game-boys dept.

The Almighty Buck 81

Utoxin noted that Child's Play has raised the bar for their annual games for hospitals charity. They say "Not only did we break the million dollar mark, but we decimated it with our new total of $1,135,000! This significant achievement made this holiday season a happier, brighter one in our fifty partner hospitals. To everyone who has contributed to this amazing milestone, thank you! The hospital wish lists are still online, and some have seen new items added. While we try to get lots of new games and more to the children in time for the holidays, the hospitals have a need for equipment year-round. Likewise, we will continue to accept donations through Amazon, PayPal and the mail until next year's fundraiser kicks off."

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

What Are They Talking About? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21865644)

It did better than that! It grossed $44 million world wide [imdb.com] !

decimated? (1)

Swampash (1131503) | more than 6 years ago | (#21865682)

It's like... donations made a quantum leap! What a sea change!

Re:decimated? (2, Informative)

kalidasa (577403) | more than 6 years ago | (#21865780)

"Decimated" means "killed every tenth," in other words, "lined everyone up and killed every tenth person in line." I suppose you could argue that $1M equals 90% of the actual total received, but I wouldn't use that particular metaphor myself.

Re:decimated? (3, Informative)

VirusEqualsVeryYes (981719) | more than 6 years ago | (#21865868)

"Decimated" means "killed every tenth," in other words, "lined everyone up and killed every tenth person in line."
That's the ancient, root definition, referring to the killing of every one man in ten of a mutinous Roman legion. The current English definition has been generalized to the destruction of some percentage of something.

But it's still inappropriately used in the summary. Commence the "!decimated" tagging...

Re:decimated? (2, Funny)

ubrgeek (679399) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866014)

You're absolutely correct. And now that you've also managed to raise $1,135,000 for charity, we're more than willing to use your definition of the word ...Oh, wait ...

Re:decimated? (0, Offtopic)

mi (197448) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866022)

referring to the killing of every one man in ten of a mutinous Roman legion.

The current English definition has been generalized to the destruction of some percentage of something.

It is a foolish generalization, and decent-educated people ought to reject it. It is "generalized" by ignorant people (like the guy in the article), who don't even realize, that the dec-prefix in this word is the same as in, for example, decade.

And if you are going to argue, we should accept it because of "common (mis)use", then you may as well accept it as used in the article/summary:

But it's still inappropriately used in the summary.

Indeed...

Doctor Who got it right (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21866146)

What's amusing is that when The Master orders the population be decimated, he then further explains that he wants one tenth of the population killed.

Re:Doctor Who got it right (1)

WilliamSChips (793741) | more than 6 years ago | (#21867834)

By the end of the universe, "decimate" has drifted in meaning to "cut into ten pieces".

Re:decimated? (1)

mecenday (1080691) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866470)

Since when does a word only take a single definition?

I'd say it's similar to how "virus" is generalized to include "trojans" and "worms"... or how "hacker" is used for "cracker" in main-stream speech. I don't think it's really misuse to use them more generally, and I don't think people who distinguish the terms are just being pedantic jerks.

When you use the more specific version, you are now into jargon territory. It helps you be more precise, but you have to realize that you've stepped outside general speech patterns.

Don't write off context. It's almost always clear from context which sense is being used in a comment or discussion. As someone who knows the difference, it should be really easy for you. You don't have to point out the other usage every single time it's used in another way.

Re:decimated? (1)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866564)

You don't have to point out the other usage every single time it's used in another way.

But then how will the grammar nazis compensate for never touching a woman?

Re:decimated? (2, Funny)

veganboyjosh (896761) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866630)

But then how will the grammar nazis compensate for never touching a woman?

"But then how will the grammar nazis compensate for never having touched a woman?"

Fixed that for ya...oh wait...

How about "obliterated"? (1)

sosiosh (695034) | more than 6 years ago | (#21868794)

The reason "decimated" is the wrong word in this article is because there is a perfectly good, perfectly correct word to use. This word is "obliterated," and it means completely destroyed.

Re:How about "obliterated"? (1)

mecenday (1080691) | more than 6 years ago | (#21869288)

... and when people use "hacker" in the popular sense, there is a perfectly good, perfectly correct alternative in "cracker."

I believe you missed my point.

Re:decimated? (1)

Ninjaesque One (902204) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866652)

Common use is the only way in which words are formed. Even a coinage depends on its common usage in order to flourish. Therefore, what you are suggesting to do(to reject common usage) is to stagnate our language, make it a breeding ground for foul things. Better to stir it a little, and at least enjoy it for the little while it lasts. The dictionary-makers define misused, as of a word, as a word said to be misused. If there is no intent to create a word or new meaning(since the old meaning is ancient, the new meaning middle-aged). The usage panel(66%) accepts the usage for people(Here [thefreedictionary.com] ), but not things. Yet in the thesaurus of that very same dictionary I linked to, the synonyms-- annihilate, etc-- are perfectly suitable for things. Why should not decimate expand its usage to things, then? The English language is plenty big enough, the countries with it plenty wide enough, to accommodate such a meaning. Do we use the word "myriad" to mean "10,000"? Does "inculcate" still mean "trample"? Words change.

Re:decimated? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21869512)

Ha. This thread awoken my pet peeve! Now I am forced to rant! ;-) As is usual for my rants I will not be editing this post too carefully so expect the worst and move on if you want to read something related to the original topic.

It is true that language always changes over time through common misuse but just because it happens it doesn't make it a good thing. In some cases, words become redundant and their loss is not missed, in other cases the useful words providing richer semantics and subtle nuances are being lost because their meanings are not preserved, often because of inconsistency brought on by ignorance.

Words are misused because of poor education, ignorance, foolishness or laziness; none of these are good things (children--and adults even--in many communities cannot speak without replacing every other word with an obscenity or inappropriate word because they just don't know enough words to express their thoughts; the words exist but we as a society don't value them enough to maintain their use).

What is the result of this?

During the time that are word is starting to be misused--when some people still hold to the intended meaning and others use it wrongly there is misunderstanding and miscommunication; meaning is distorted and clouded--the language degrades. People often point to languages evolving in the past as evidence of why this is a good thing as it adds colour and flavour to our language. When language changes creatively such as a new use of a metaphor or an invention of a new word to describe something where a word did not previously exist the language becomes richer; but when ignorance is the cause of change it always involves a loss of richness and quality--the word that was once used for one purpose is now no longer useful for that purpose. Usually there was a perfectly good word to describe the thing being described but now there is no equivalent to replace the old meaning. Take the word "decimated" for example--now this word is misused through past ignorance there is no word to replace it i.e. to describe something reduced by approximately 10%. Maybe this is not an example I particularly care about but there are many others.

Perhaps once a meaning has already been changed and the new use is now common we aren't really affected because we all understand what is meant. I am not so sure about this either.

Literature was much richer more than 60 years ago as the language was much richer and and more precise; nowadays we can only use a fraction of those words available to us because meanings were lost and words were used to describe things that were already described correctly by other words, adding redundancy. Words that provided subtle nuances in meaning, used incorrectly but original usages not replaced are now lost to us.

Today we speak today with vocabularies the equivalent of decaying swamp sludge rather than the vibrant forest we should have.

Anything resulting from ignorance should never be construed as a positive force!

Now go ahead and mod me off-topic.

Re:decimated? (1)

Wavicle (181176) | more than 6 years ago | (#21867160)

It is a foolish generalization, and decent-educated people ought to reject it.

Yes, quite right.

Now, why don't you take all this energy you have and go around shouting about how the word "gay" is misused to mean "homosexual."

Re:decimated? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21867238)

The Cambridge Guide to English Usage states that the nonspecific use of this word to mean devastate or severely reduce the numbers of is 'nowadays the commonest use of the word in both British and American English, and it's registered without comment in modern dictionaries.' //I'm a grammar nazi, and even I hate you

Re:decimated? (1)

xouumalperxe (815707) | more than 6 years ago | (#21868846)

It is a foolish generalization, and decent-educated people ought to reject it. It is "generalized" by ignorant people (like the guy in the article), who don't even realize, that the dec-prefix in this word is the same as in, for example, decade.
And the same prefix as DECent, DECadent, DECaffeinated (ooops, the prefix is actualy de-), DECant, DECal, right? Er... except none of those use the dec- prefix, most (but not all) having de- prefix for negation -- which is actually not that far-fetched a misinterpretation of the etymology of 'decimate'. So get off your high horse.

Re:decimated? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21869760)

I don't really see what is so bad about this guy's use of "decimate". If the past amount was $1,000,000 they beat that total by approximately 10% you can see how he could have intended it to be correct. It is not precisely correct but it is close enough for me.

What would have been closer to the common misuse of "decimate", in my opinion, is if they raised $100,000,000,000 and used "decimate" to say they completely and utterly beat their previous total.

Re:decimated? (1)

petes_PoV (912422) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866382)

The current English definition has been generalized to the destruction of some percentage of something.

Where that percentage is definitely not generalised, but is specifically 10 percent - i.e. decimate = reduce by one-tenth.

You're right though, it is an inappropriate use of the word

Looks Right To Me (1)

severoon (536737) | more than 6 years ago | (#21868486)

Well, if you consider the goal at $1M, they accomplished that goal and added $1 extra for every $10 of the goal. That's kinda like killing every tenth dollar in line. I admit, it's a stretch, but seems like an somewhat appropriate (though unintentional) usage to me. :-)

It's called 'metaphor' (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21866484)

If the quote had used destroyed instead of decimated would you complain that nothing was physically destroyed? M-Webster has this as one definition of decimated:
to cause great destruction or harm to
Surely you can rise above pedantry and understand that there is nothing wrong with the metaphor of 'destroying' a goal.

Re:It's called 'metaphor' (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21866908)

Surely you can rise above anti-pedantry and not miss his point? Destroying a goal means beating it soundly. Metaphorically (but not literally) that makes sense. However, destroying a percentage of a goal makes no sense, either metaphorically or literally.

Re:decimated? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21868034)

"Decimated" means "killed every tenth," in other words, "lined everyone up and killed every tenth person in line."
That's the ancient, root definition, referring to the killing of every one man in ten of a mutinous Roman legion. The current English definition has been generalized to the destruction of some percentage of something.

But it's still inappropriately used in the summary. Commence the "!decimated" tagging...
They not only made a million, it looks like they made 10% more! Can't this count as decimation?

Re:decimated? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21866248)

I think that the article poster was playing with words and knew exactly what decimated meant when he wrote it. I read it as a tongue-in-cheek way of saying they got an extra 10%, but using a sensational language that most people will think means more than it really does.

Logically though, a decimated target should mean they raised less.

Re:decimated? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21865830)

One tenth of last year's total? Does anyone know why donations were down so much? The housing crisis, maybe? Or the Iraq War?

I did my part (0)

ShawnCplus (1083617) | more than 6 years ago | (#21865686)

Hooray. I gave 100 bucks earlier this year along with donating during the Desert Bus for Hope run. Congrats guys and good job.

Re:I did my part (1)

somedumbusername (1205248) | more than 6 years ago | (#21868060)

Do let everyone know about it won't you?

Gabe (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21865708)

Too bad Gabe is such a prick. Seriously, not since Theo DeRaadt has the world seen such a total asshole.

Ok, I've never met him personally, but I've been reading Penny Arcade for years (and I had the misfortune to play against him on Xbox Live Halo 3). Gabe's run in with Harlan Ellison is a perfect example of what a raging egomaniac he is.

I doubt that Child's Play is anything to Gabe but a chance for shameless self-promotion.

Re:Gabe (5, Insightful)

ceejayoz (567949) | more than 6 years ago | (#21865836)

I doubt that Child's Play is anything to Gabe but a chance for shameless self-promotion.
Who gives a shit? Sick kids around the world got a million dollars worth of toys out of it.

Re:Gabe (2, Insightful)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#21867518)

While I do not have any idea the issue at hand here, I'm not a big fan of the ends justify the means.... children getting X amount of toys doesn't just make something okay.

Re:Gabe (1)

ceejayoz (567949) | more than 6 years ago | (#21867658)

I'm interested in knowing what possible damage the alleged shameless self-promotion has done to anyone that offsets the benefits Child's Play has brought.

If Gabe were using it to get good PR after beating his wife to death or something, you might have had a point.

Re:Gabe (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#21867764)

Was speaking in general, know nothing about the alleged issue in this case.

Re:Gabe (4, Informative)

ashridah (72567) | more than 6 years ago | (#21867956)

Actually, I'm pretty sure Child's play was started after Jack Thompson started his raving about how games only create deviants, and the Penny-arcade people wanted to show him up in a way that was more constructive than responding directly to his infantile arguments.

So far, Child's play has raised a huge amount of money, and helped make being hospitalized less sucky for lots of children, and given Gabe/Tycho a way to thumb their nose at Jack, which I'm all for. Not that it'll matter to Jack, mind you, since he's a raving lunatic, and incapable of dealing with rational arguments anyway.

ash

Re:Gabe (1)

ctd600ftlb (1210574) | more than 6 years ago | (#21870516)

I believe Child's Play was created in response to this article - http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20031118/LIVING/311180742 [heraldnet.com] At the bottom of the about page on Child's Play's site, the original PA news post, as well as the author's response is posted. The link to the original column doesn't work anymore, but I'm pretty sure that's the one. Apologies if this was posted elsewhere, I looked but didn't see it. And I'm on board with the opinion of if Gabe is aiming for some shameless self-promotion, that's perfectly fine with me. They've raised three million, maybe three and a half by now, for kids in children's hospitals in just five years, I think? Yeah, shameless self-promotion is alright with me.

Re:Gabe (3, Insightful)

immcintosh (1089551) | more than 6 years ago | (#21868436)

While I do not have any idea the issue at hand here...
Just stop right there. There is no "ends justify the means" here. This is a charity event. There is no evil ulterior motive that could make a difference. The ends and the means are the same--people are donating toys to sick children. They're not being robbed blind, this is a willing donation. While it's true that the success has been going to their heads a bit, it's not exactly surprising considering they just raised over a million dollars of charity with their pet project. I think any of us might be a bit arrogant about that fact too.

As for the OP in this little thread... accusing somebody of being a raging egomaniac in comparison to Harlan Ellison is almost mind bogglingly ironic. If it's true this must have been a real case of unstoppable force meeting immovable object.

Re:Gabe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21869862)

Toys like ... murder simulators?

Actually, I'd kind of like to donate a bunch of "Operation!" games to kids in hospitals. Then ask the doctors to go play with the kids. Hilarity ensues.

Re:Gabe (3, Funny)

revlayle (964221) | more than 6 years ago | (#21865932)

Hello??? HARLAN ELLISON! He totally owns everyone in the raging-prick-ego-maniac dept; Gabe had a small victory... but Harlan is still the world's biggest dick.

Re:Gabe (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21866876)

Hehehe.

From one of Isaac Asimov's books of humorous anecdotes.

A long time ago at a science-fiction writer's convention a few authors were standing around talking when another author walked by. One author explained to the group, "That's the next Harlan Ellison." Whereupon another author said, "Should we kill him now?"

Re:Gabe (5, Insightful)

rhennigan (833589) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866058)

Yeah this is exactly the type of thing pricks like Gabe do; help raise over a million dollars for sick children. What a prick...

Re:Gabe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21868898)

You know who raised lots of money for sick children?

Hitler. Are you gonna tell me that he wasn't a prick?

Re:Gabe (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21866286)

Most charity is fundamentally egotistical in nature. In fact, most everything we do is egotistical, even stuff we think of as altruistic. We've just been taught that ego is shameful, and so we dress our actions up in language which hides the self-gratification.

So, frankly, wanking Gabe's ego in exchange for coordinating the flow of $1m of toys and games to kids coping with chemo is a fair trade to me. Does mean I have to like the guy, or hang out with him on Friday night.

Re:Gabe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21869898)


Most charity is fundamentally egotistical in nature. In fact, most everything we do is egotistical, even stuff we think of as altruistic. We've just been taught that ego is shameful, and so we dress our actions up in language which hides the self-gratification.

/quote>

That's just your sucky glass-half-empty attitude that tells you that.

Egotistical people are gratified by helping themselves, non-egotistical people are gratified by helping others.

People choose what they are gratified by--that's what makes them either selfish or selfless, not the fact that they end up gratified.

Re:Gabe (1)

ZorbaTHut (126196) | more than 6 years ago | (#21871116)

That's just your sucky glass-half-empty attitude that tells you that.

Egotistical people are gratified by helping themselves, non-egotistical people are gratified by helping others.

People choose what they are gratified by--that's what makes them either selfish or selfless, not the fact that they end up gratified.


I don't think this is actually an argument with what he's claiming. I think you're just agreeing with him from a different angle.

Re:Gabe (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21866454)

Too bad Gabe is such a prick. ... I doubt that Child's Play is anything to Gabe but a chance for shameless self-promotion.
If only the world was filled with such pricks.

Re:Gabe (4, Funny)

acvh (120205) | more than 6 years ago | (#21867438)

"Too bad Gabe is such a prick. Seriously, not since Theo DeRaadt has the world seen such a total asshole."

Tycho, is that you? Harlan? DivX?

so Gabe kicked your ass at Halo 3. get over it.

Re:Gabe (1)

xant (99438) | more than 6 years ago | (#21868234)

Nah, it's actually Gabe himself, posting as Misfit. [penny-arcade.com]

Wonderful (2, Insightful)

pedantic bore (740196) | more than 6 years ago | (#21865746)

Bravo! This kind of grass-roots charity warms my heart.

If this sort of thing sounds good to you, check out Rotary International [rotary.org] because they do this sort of thing, on a global basis, year round. There are plenty of other similar organizations; shop around to find one that works for you.

Re:Wonderful (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21871766)

There is another site out there trying to help out hospital related charities as well. Check out http://www.hospitoogle.com/ [hospitoogle.com]

Never makes mainstream news though.. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21865772)

..because games are "murder simulators".

I wished this kind of stuff made the news instead of the numerous violent video gamer portraits that are painted by TV and Paper news.

Re:Never makes mainstream news though.. (1)

LordHuggington (1210226) | more than 6 years ago | (#21869648)

Color me the eternal optimist, but I would hope charities like this would at least help to reduce the witch hunt mentality a tiny bit from the mainstream media. The extreme anti-game types are pretty much set in their ways, but I think there are a lot of others who can be swayed not to write videogames off as big, bad killing simulators. The mainstream coverage of the Wii alone in 2007 put gaming in a more positive light this past year. As for Child's Play, I do believe they got a little bit of national attention when they started it up for this year's drive, so the media is at least showing a little bit of positive coverage in the industry.

Re:Never makes mainstream news though.. (1)

ivan256 (17499) | more than 6 years ago | (#21874908)

Presidential candidate Duncan Hunter [opensecrets.org] has raised a million bucks too, and you've probably never heard of him from the mainstream news...

Um. (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21865786)

I wouldn't call 100,000 or so past their goal "decimating" anything, although it's certainly great that they managed to get that much. The ego-stroking is a bit lame.

Re:Um. (2, Interesting)

GR|MLOCK (203716) | more than 6 years ago | (#21865850)

You may want to look up the meaning of the word 'decimate' and consider how surpassing your goal by 10% is actually pretty close to the spirit of the word.

Re:Um. (1, Funny)

PatrickThomson (712694) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866048)

Didn't the dollar drop by more than 10% in value in the last year?

Re:Um. (1)

theantipop (803016) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866246)

Maybe, but it will buy just as many Nintendo DS games as last year.

Re:Um. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21866036)

if 100,000$ isnt that much to you, id be happy to take it off your hands

Re:Um. (3, Informative)

meringuoid (568297) | more than 6 years ago | (#21867138)

I wouldn't call 100,000 or so past their goal "decimating" anything

To decimate is to reduce by one tenth. It was a punishment for mutinous units in the Roman army, where all the men would be lined up and every tenth man executed.

Since their goal was 1,000,000, and they exceeded this by one tenth, their usage of the word 'decimated' is actually not too bad. All too often people use 'decimated' to mean 'completely destroyed', but at least here there's a factor of 0.1 involved.

Re:Um. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21871480)

...after which the legion/unit would be disbanded.
Isn't that the same as 'completely destroyed'?

But we can go on discussing the meaning of 'to decimate', and actually all that matters is that lots of kids get lots of toys.

On a sidenote: the mates of the condemned men had to do the killing, a rather gruesome detail which made the punishment even harsher and more feared.

Re:Um. (1)

phoebusQ (539940) | more than 6 years ago | (#21867434)

Ego-stroking? You've got to be kidding me. It's more like feeling great about helping others. Did you donate?

Re:Um. (1)

DRAGONWEEZEL (125809) | more than 6 years ago | (#21869248)

Seriously? Come on.

The one day I don't have mod points. >100000K to be exact which meant > 10%.
That's decimating a goal when it comes to raising money, and more so when your "reaching" for your goal.

This isn't an investment, this is a charity any money raised is a good thing, and they deserve a little stroking.

I say you lend em a hand...

Good Use of Power (5, Insightful)

RobBebop (947356) | more than 6 years ago | (#21865834)

I saw this on Penny Arcade the other day, and it is good to see that Tycho and Gabe have used the power of running a top ranked webpage for a greater social benefit.

Kudos the them, and to everybody who enjoys successful and a love for charity.

Re:Good Use of Power (1)

vodevil (856500) | more than 6 years ago | (#21868046)

This is one of the few charities that I believe in supporting. This year, instead of giving gifts to my brothers and sisters, I made a donation to Child's Play. Next year, I think they can do even better.

Contributors (5, Insightful)

techpawn (969834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866008)

Does this count the donation that they made in Jack Thomson's name when he welshed on donating a large sum for making a violent video game to his specifications... Or was that last year?

Re:Contributors (1)

Macthorpe (960048) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866082)

I'm pretty sure that was last year... and if I remember correctly, the donation was made to the ESA, so it won't count :)

Re:Contributors (1)

nlitement (1098451) | more than 6 years ago | (#21867172)

You should check this [n4g.com] out.

I hope they can fix them (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21866054)

A million dollars is going to take a lot of money to replace. Hopefully they'll be more careful next year.

You people are sick (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21866110)

Congratulations on putting murder simulators into the hands of our kids. I vow to put a stop to this! I won't rest until the people responsible are made to pay for their crimes.

Regards,
Jack Thompson

P.S. Gabe and Tycho just threatened me.

Re:You people are sick (1)

Zibblsnrt (125875) | more than 6 years ago | (#21869292)

I know the AC here was posting in jest, but stuff like this has to annoy the hell out of the "gamers are bad!" crowd. Nothing like taking someone's neat little worldview and, to use an inappropriate metaphor given the subject, shooting it in both kneecaps; I can hear the cries of "this doesn't count!" from here. I kind of wonder if the low coverage this sort of thing gets is because people simply don't know about it, or because it would add uncomfortable nuance to the coverage of the whole video game issue.

That probably goes double for Gabe and Tycho. Didn't they butt heads with Thompson sometime in the last year already? I seem to recall them donating $10,000 to some charity in his name because he refused to...

Re:You people are sick (1)

bigbigbison (104532) | more than 6 years ago | (#21869764)

I'm sure that people like Thompson who are blindly opposed to videogames would go straight for Hitler and say something like, "Hitler made the trains run on time but that doesn't make his regime a good thing."

cost of illegal invasion of iraq on the house? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21866214)

must be, as it is NEVER mentioned among the things that have caused yOUR national bankruptcy.

homeowners, banks (currently selling out to the 'axis of evile' countries), oil prices (sure to rise even further in response to yet another 'glorious victory' announcement). talk about being bushwhacked?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071229/ap_on_sc/ye_climate_records;_ylt=A0WTcVgednZHP2gB9wms0NUE [yahoo.com]

is it time to get real yet? A LOT of energy is being squandered in attempts to keep US in the dark. in the end (give or take a few 1000 years), the creators will prevail (world without end, etc...), as it has always been. the process of gaining yOUR release from the current hostage situation may not be what you might think it is. butt of course, most of US don't know, or care what a precarious/fatal situation we're in.

for example; the insidious attempts by the felonious corepirate nazi execrable to block the suns' light, interfering with a requirement (sunlight) for us to stay healthy/alive. it's likely not good for yOUR health/memories 'else they'd be bragging about it?

we're intending for the whoreabully deceptive (they'll do ANYTHING for a bit more monIE/power) felons to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather', as well as a # of other things/events.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying [google.com]

dictator style micro management has never worked (for very long). it's an illness. tie that with life0cidal aggression & softwar gangster style bullying, & what do we have? a greed/fear/ego based recipe for disaster.

meanwhile, you can help to stop the bleeding (loss of life & limb);
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/28/vermont.banning.bush.ap/index.html [cnn.com]

the bleeding must be stopped before any healing can begin. jailing a couple of corepirate nazi hired goons would send a clear message to the rest of the world from US. any truthful look at the 'scorecard' would reveal that we are a society in decline/deep doo-doo, despite all of the scriptdead pr ?firm? generated drum beating & flag waving propaganda that we are constantly bombarded with. is it time to get real yet? please consider carefully ALL of yOUR other 'options'.

the creators will prevail. as it has always been.

corepirate nazi execrable costs outweigh benefits
(Score:-)mynuts won, the king is a fink)
by ourselves on everyday 24/7

as there are no benefits, just more&more death/debt & disruption. fortunately there's an 'army' of light bringers, coming yOUR way.

the little ones/innocents must/will be protected. after the big flash, ALL of yOUR imaginary 'borders' may blur a bit? for each of the creators' innocents harmed in any way, there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile, will not be available. 'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet, & by your behaviors. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi glowbull warmongering execrable. some of US should consider ourselves somewhat fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate. it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc....

as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis. concern about the course of events that will occur should the life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order. 'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

meanwhile, the life0cidal philistines continue on their path of death, debt, & disruption for most of US;

gov. bush denies health care for the little ones

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/03/bush.veto/index.html [cnn.com]

whilst demanding/extorting billions to paint more targets on the bigger kids

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.war.funding/index.html [cnn.com]

& pretending that it isn't happening here

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3086937.ece [timesonline.co.uk]

all is not lost/forgotten/forgiven

(yOUR elected) president al gore (deciding not to wait for the much anticipated 'lonesome al answers yOUR questions' interview here on /.) continues to attempt to shed some light on yOUR foibles;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3046116.ece [timesonline.co.uk]

Movies aren't what they used to be (0, Offtopic)

Peter Cooper (660482) | more than 6 years ago | (#21866528)

Hurrah, can't believe a 19 year old movie has continued to have such good theater attendance to break the record gross for an 80s horror movie. Congrats!

Re:Movies aren't what they used to be (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21867280)

This from the person who used the name Peter Cooper.

You had it coming (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21866606)

Just don't let that child play with your expensive toys.

Child's Play: (1)

TofuMatt (1105351) | more than 6 years ago | (#21867340)

Proving, every year, that people who play GTA do more than just kill real people.

A million for kids' OSS - wow!!! (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21867612)

//shameless plug:

I guess it isn't *this* childsplay:

http://childsplay.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]

Because I would be really envious - I am currently a main dev for TuxMath and TuxTyping:

http://www.tux4kids.com/ [tux4kids.com]

and I can assure you know one has given me a million! //end shameless plug

(however, a lot of folks who have heard of tuxmath and tuxtype may not know that they are being actively developed again).

David Bruce

Re:A million for kids' OSS - wow!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21868342)

and I can assure you know one has given me a million!
Your attempt at being funny was decimalized by your bad speliing.

hostpitals swimming in $$$$$ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21869872)

if the hospitals really gave a shit, they would have done it themselves... think of the poor children?

fuck that, think of all those -poor- hospitals!

ever take a look at any of your insurance bills? any of your hospital bills?

think about it, $100,000 is nothing to a hospital these days... if they really gave a shit, they would enny up themselves.

Oh... Child's Play (1)

SystematicPsycho (456042) | more than 6 years ago | (#21873478)

And for a second I thought Chucky was back.

a certain pirating site.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21874120)

chose to donate money towards childs play...looks like they werent the only ones....

More games (not just gaming sites) should do this (1)

bryanbrunton (262081) | more than 6 years ago | (#21874422)

I have a game that donates to charity, more precisely to Heifer International (www.heifer.org). In fact, as I have tired of programming the thing, the donation aspect is one of the main motivators for actually working on it.

It is a clone of risk called Grand Strategy (www.denizengames.com).

Our motto is: Good can come from global domination.
 
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?