Supreme Court decision

[Jeralt2100]

The best explanation of their thoughts is a few pages into the ruling itself as a footnote.

Direct quote:

JUSTICE ALITO accuses us of pronouncing that playing violent video games ?is not different in ?kind? ? from reading violent literature. Post, at 2. Well of course it is different in kind, but not in a way that causes the provision and viewing of violent video games, unlike the provision and reading of books, not to be expressive activity and hence not to enjoy First Amendment protection. Reading Dante is unquestionably more cultured and intellectually edifying than playing Mortal Kombat. But these cultural and intellectual differences are not constitutional ones. Crudely violent video games, tawdry TV shows, and cheap novels and magazines are no less forms of speech than The Divine Comedy,and restrictions upon them must survive strict scrutiny?a question towhich we devote our attention in Part III, infra. Even if we can see in them ?nothing of any possible value to society they are as much entitled to the protection of free speech as the best of literature.

Makes sense to me anyway

 

[Johnnyallstar]

The best explanation of their thoughts is a few pages into the ruling itself as a footnote.

Direct quote:

JUSTICE ALITO accuses us of pronouncing that playing violent video games ?is not different in ?kind? ? from reading violent literature. Post, at 2. Well of course it is different in kind, but not in a way that causesthe provision and viewing of violent video games, unlike the provision and reading of books, not to be expressive activity and hence not toenjoy First Amendment protection. Reading Dante is unquestionably more cultured and intellectually edifying than playing Mortal Kombat. But these cultural and intellectual differences are not constitutional ones. Crudely violent video games, tawdry TV shows, and cheap novels and magazines are no less forms of speech than The Divine Comedy,and restrictions upon them must survive strict scrutiny?a question towhich we devote our attention in Part III, infra. Even if we can see in them ?nothing of any possible value to society they are as much entitled to the protection of free speech as the best of literature.

Makes sense to me anyway

I do like Alito. He's one of those few black robes who has his head screwed on straight more often than not. The one thing I would argue is that the differences aren't as much cultural as they are format based. Why is violent art or television okay when violent games aren't? That's merely a format difference, but he's right enough.

 

[Jeralt2100]

I think Scalia is just noting the differences in their responses to the case here. Ultimately though, they're still agreeing. There are no constitutional differences between video games and other media in the eyes of the court.

 

[fierydemise]

I think Scalia is just noting the differences in their responses to the case here. Ultimately though, they're still agreeing. There are no constitutional differences between video games and other media in the eyes of the court.

Well kinda, if the Alito decision was the controlling decision it would be really bad news. The Alito decision accepts that violent video games may be singled out for special scrutiny but the California law in question is too broad. Had his decision controlled this wouldn't be over, we'd have 5-10 more years of states writing new laws to hit violent video games while the Supreme Court fleshed out exactly where the line of acceptability of regulation was.

Scalia's decision ends all of that, he says point blank that video games are no different then other media, it is the best possible decision we could have gotten.

 

[Jeralt2100]

Admittedly I haven't gotten to Alito's decision yet, though I was pretty certain it would be along the lines you just mentioned Fierydemise. Thankfully, without some definitive new research that proves violent games are harmful without any doubt (not going to happen) we won't have to worry about the states passing laws like this one again.

 

[Etra488]

It is now illegal to bar the sale of a violent video game to minors.

You may direct your thanks to the Supreme Court. Of America.

And in other news, the giant Mass Effect 2 ad that pops up and covers half the screen is annoying as hell.

User was suspended for this post.(3 days)

Great news.
As for the bold - KGB mods. Say something against the website and you get banned. Ironic timing considering the posts by mods saying that they don't do this........

It comes down to a question of "Is this user respecting us, the site, contributors (and of course other users)?" If you don't want to be respectful, go hang out in 4chan.

 

[Jimbo1212]

It is now illegal to bar the sale of a violent video game to minors.

You may direct your thanks to the Supreme Court. Of America.

And in other news, the giant Mass Effect 2 ad that pops up and covers half the screen is annoying as hell.

User was suspended for this post.(3 days)

Great news.
As for the bold - KGB mods. Say something against the website and you get banned. Ironic timing considering the posts by mods saying that they don't do this........

It comes down to a question of "Is this user respecting us, the site, contributors (and of course other users)?" If you don't want to be respectful, go hang out in 4chan.

...or any other forum as I do not know of any other forum that does not allow for criticism of the website because why do the mods care?
If people find pop-ups annoying, why can they not say? Are you that desperate for users that you think some people saying some advert is annoying that it will kill the website? Would you not prefer people to say something is crap and then you can change it rather then people leaving on mass and being left with a handful of people on the forums?
As I said, punishing people for making a negative comment about the website screams that you are desperate for money/people which is a poor image to have.

 

[dyre]

It is now illegal to bar the sale of a violent video game to minors.

You may direct your thanks to the Supreme Court. Of America.

And in other news, the giant Mass Effect 2 ad that pops up and covers half the screen is annoying as hell.

User was suspended for this post.(3 days)

Great news.
As for the bold - KGB mods. Say something against the website and you get banned. Ironic timing considering the posts by mods saying that they don't do this........

It comes down to a question of "Is this user respecting us, the site, contributors (and of course other users)?" If you don't want to be respectful, go hang out in 4chan.

But complaining about an ad is hardly disrespect, and there's no need to use such hyperbole (4chan).

I have a good deal of respect for my parents, but I still complain when they call me to ask about inconsequential stuff.

 

[Etra488]

...or any other forum as I do not know of any other forum that does not allow for criticism of the website because why do the mods care?
If people find pop-ups annoying, why can they not say? Are you that desperate for users that you think some people saying some advert is annoying that it will kill the website? Would you not prefer people to say something is crap and then you can change it rather then people leaving on mass and being left with a handful of people on the forums?
As I said, punishing people for making a negative comment about the website screams that you are desperate for money/people which is a poor image to have.

Primarily because the function of the forums is to generate constructive and interesting conversation. The place to complain about site policy is here:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Moderation-Team

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Tech-Team

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Ideas-for-The-Escapist

We do read comments posted in those groups.

 

[Etra488]

But complaining about an ad is hardly disrespect, and there's no need to use such hyperbole (4chan).

I have a good deal of respect for my parents, but I still complain when they call me to ask about inconsequential stuff.

And we respect and value our users. But we'd like them to complain about us in more constructive and helpful ways. See my previous comment in this thread about places you can suggest things.

 

[Jimbo1212]

...or any other forum as I do not know of any other forum that does not allow for criticism of the website because why do the mods care?
If people find pop-ups annoying, why can they not say? Are you that desperate for users that you think some people saying some advert is annoying that it will kill the website? Would you not prefer people to say something is crap and then you can change it rather then people leaving on mass and being left with a handful of people on the forums?
As I said, punishing people for making a negative comment about the website screams that you are desperate for money/people which is a poor image to have.

Primarily because the function of the forums is to generate constructive and interesting conversation. The place to complain about site policy is here:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Moderation-Team

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Tech-Team

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Ideas-for-The-Escapist

We do read comments posted in those groups.

But no one else reads them.
Why not let people post things like this in forums? It will create no harm and make all the mods look like fair people, rather then the KGB and banning anyone who says a bad word about the Escapist. You could even get some good threads come out of it about how to place adverts etc.
As it stands, you are just causing threads to be made about how unhappy people are with this site and why they are quitting it.

 

[Etra488]

But no one else reads them.
Why not let people post things like this in forums? It will create no harm and make all the mods look like fair people, rather then the KGB and banning anyone who says a bad word about the Escapist. You could even get some good threads come out of it about how to place adverts etc.
As it stands, you are just causing threads to be made about how unhappy people are with this site and why they are quitting it.

This is becoming an off-topic, private discussion. I'll be PMing you to continue.

 

[dyre]

...or any other forum as I do not know of any other forum that does not allow for criticism of the website because why do the mods care?
If people find pop-ups annoying, why can they not say? Are you that desperate for users that you think some people saying some advert is annoying that it will kill the website? Would you not prefer people to say something is crap and then you can change it rather then people leaving on mass and being left with a handful of people on the forums?
As I said, punishing people for making a negative comment about the website screams that you are desperate for money/people which is a poor image to have.

Primarily because the function of the forums is to generate constructive and interesting conversation. The place to complain about site policy is here:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Moderation-Team

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Tech-Team

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Ideas-for-The-Escapist

We do read comments posted in those groups.

But no one else reads them.
Why not let people post things like this in forums? It will create no harm and make all the mods look like fair people, rather then the KGB and banning anyone who says a bad word about the Escapist. You could even get some good threads come out of it about how to place adverts etc.
As it stands, you are just causing threads to be made about how unhappy people are with this site and why they are quitting it.

I doubt it's bad enough to cause anyone to quit, but I agree, more lenient moderating in this regard would only help The Escapist's image.

 

[LetalisK]

Good. I approve of this decision. 7-2 is a pretty ironclad decision and would most likely take several decades to undo, if at all.

Now, can we move on?

 

[Optional Opinion]

So children can now get their hands on violent games legally?
How is this a good thing?

I thought it would be better to establish better boundaries not demolish them, so games can no longer be called evil because of the fact opinion that children shouldn't be playing these games.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Reading the opinion now, and...Holy Shit.

That is one broad ruling. I figured the Court to settle on the applicability of the Miller test as pertained to the California law. I love you so much right now, Antonin Scalia. I promise I will keep my bitching about originalism to a minimum.

By the way, footnote 3 is awesome. I get the feeling Thomas will be walking funny for a few days after that one.

 

[ElNeroDiablo]

This ruling isn't about if 10 year-olds can walk in and grab a (ESRB-rated) R-rated game off the shelves (in fact, it's the store workers who have the duty to yay/nay the sale of such type games on case-by-case basis), but more about the fact that no state can now try and ban video games of any sort as they are protected as 'Free Speech' under the First Amendment.

I'm waiting for Extra Credits to use this case to make a sequal video to this one - http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/1961-Free-Speech

 

[Savagezion]

It means that if someone sells a M rated game to a minor the government CANNOT fine the people responsible. They can be sued, but not fined. Everything is as it always was.