Your Announcements

Cheesestorm a star? – coolj

CoolJ

Member

Posts: 354
From: ny
Registered: 07-11-2004
NOW I've seen it ALL! LOL!

In a publication I ran across:

Games and Culture
Volume 1 Number 1
January 2006 89-96
© 2006 Sage Publications

Contains an article by professor Cynthia Haynes, PhD of the University of Texas at Dallas titled:

Armageddon Army Playing God, God Mode Mods, and the Rhetorical Task of Ludology

In the article and appearently during a lecture at the 2005 Digital Arts & Culture conference, Dr. Haynes quotes non other than our very own **get ready** CHEESESTORM! - as a representative voice of the Christian Right video gameplaying youth! LOL!!

She quotes CheeseStorm from the follow thread:
What game would Jesus play?

Here's the quote from her paper.

quote:

Over on Christian Coders Network (CCN, 2005), we meet Cheesestorm, who responds to the thread “What game would Jesus play?”: Jesus would probably let you reload before continuining [sic], unless you were a camper.
And if his gun was better he’d just try to smack you with it. Then again, he may not know how to use it properly, since he lived a while back, then again (again) he could tap into God’s mind and download like anything, but then he could use . . . AIMBOT!! And he would ironically be betrayed three times by his own teammate, and he wouldn’t even hold X to boot them, or leave negative feedback. And if he snuck up on you he’d ask you first if you were AFK. Can you imagine what his micro would be like? He wouldn’t
even need his TV on, 5v1, bust into suicide . . . can you guess what happened? “Headshot?”
BOOOOM HEADSHOT. Seriously though he’d probably play StarCraft. (CCN,
2005)

What disturbs me is Dr. Haynes ability to ignore all the other posts in that thread - some serious and some obviously sarcastic - and finds a quote from one of the few professed non-Christians on the site. If Dr. Haynes wants an honest perspective, why not just ask?

Of course, if it supports her thesis, I guess its ok....

from the article...

quote:
In so doing, we must keep in our mind’s eye the pockmarked, acned faces of those young people marching straight into the violent confluence of games, politics, and religion, with no god mode available in Iraq or anywhere else U.S. troops are deployed in the Global War on Terror.

Anyway, maybe CheeseStorm can get a PS3 with all the royalities he'll be getting from the book deal! lol!

HanClinto

Administrator

Posts: 1828
From: Indiana
Registered: 10-11-2004
The Official Cheesestorm Appreciation Thread!

quote:
Let me introduce you to another young person, Jose Antonio Gutierrez. Jose has
the unfortunate distinction of being the first U.S. casualty of the Iraq war, killed on the
1st day of the invasion, March 21, 2003.1 Jose’s death is marked by two radical incongruities
vis-à-vis our erstwhile gamers SteadyAim and Cheesestorm: He was not a
U.S. citizen, and he was killed (for real) by friendly fire.

Cheese -- how's it feel to be this influential in doctoral research papers?

--clint

Edit: BTW, I don't think that she necessarily thinks that Cheese is a Christian (she might though -- I really don't know). Regardless, at first glance it seems that her point more rests on the ability of gamers to seamlessly integrate games, religion, life and death, and that they're sortof losing touch with reality. I could be wrong though -- I honestly don't have the patience to read through her whole paper right now.

[This message has been edited by HanClinto (edited November 27, 2006).]

CoolJ

Member

Posts: 354
From: ny
Registered: 07-11-2004
quote:
Originally posted by HanClinto:
Regardless, at first glance it seems that her point more rests on the ability of gamers to seamlessly integrate games, religion, life and death, and that they're sortof losing touch with reality. I could be wrong though -- I honestly don't have the patience to read through her whole paper right now.]

Sadly, it would be more interesting if you were right. However, after a lot of jumping around, she sums it up toward the end. It turns out to be just another tiresome 'Bush's Evil Empire' rant and how much of an evil genius he is. Oh wait!? I though he was a stupid Chimpy McBushky...now I'm really confused!?

quote:
I am not interested in creating another serious game, rather in taking a war game and hacking into the Bush administration’s tactic of “playing god” in a global theater of mixed realities, religious holy wars, and cultural ambiguities. I am interested in deconstructing and remixing (reverse engineering) for critical/social purposes the relationships between the U.S. military recruitment tactics, the Bush administration’s faith-based foreign and military policies, and their stealth recruiting engine, the computer game America’s Army.

hohum.

Faith_Warrior

Member

Posts: 490
From: So.Cal.
Registered: 09-05-2006
quote:
Originally posted by coolj:
What disturbs me is Dr. Haynes ability to ignore all the other posts in that thread - some serious and some obviously sarcastic - and finds a quote from one of the few professed non-Christians on the site. If Dr. Haynes wants an honest perspective, why not just ask?


Of course, she probably wanted to use something controversial and put her tag on it as being the “Christian” mindset. Who needs facts? Controversy sells! No one will bother the check the facts... she's got a phd so she is inherently correct.

GUMP

Member

Posts: 1335
From: Melbourne, FL USA
Registered: 11-09-2002
Writing my impressions while reading it:

1. My initial guess she is attempting to make the point that the current conflicts are religion based. As in, the religious beliefs in the US are part of the problem. And video games somehow add to this problem.

2. Christian games are somehow tied into an overall initiative? I'd agree that entertainment can certainly affect people beyond our expectations but I don't recall a XX meeting where we discussed references to the Iraq war...heh. I've never been accused of being an unknowing part of a conspiracy before.

3. She visited the TGS forums before we switched to XX. Surprising who manages to find us.

4. Uh oh, she just mentioned Nietzsche. Internal alarms sounding.

5. What should academics do? They could try double-checking their facts first of all. Then after that they might interview us in order to fully comprehend our motives. Forum posts don't exactly clear indications of the mindset of an individual.

6. I would hope that our games would not lull into a false sense of security when it comes to facing a real life scenario. At the same time basic is designed to weed out those not capable of serving. I doubt a person greatly affected by a fictional game would make it.

7. A game designed to counteract the supposed effects of America's Army? ok.

8. Honestly, she's lost me with those examples of "variations in playing god mode".

9. She makes a very good point about how game designs can "lull players into accepting ideological conditions". In fact, I'd say that is the Christian game industry in a nutshell. We define reality within a fictional universe. Though fictional, many aspects are purposely designed to be analogous to real life. We then expect players to play by the rules with the imperative to believe the basis for the fictional backdrop and behave as if it was true. In this manner real-life concepts can be introduced in an nonthreatening manner since players would be considering them within the context of the game.

This is the same for other entertainment that can instead of have a negative influence. But while the creators of this other entertainment may not directly contain the motive to negatively influence we obviously are motivated to be positive influences.

10. Very political in the end.

CoolJ

Member

Posts: 354
From: ny
Registered: 07-11-2004
@Faith_Warrior - yeah - that's the impression I got too.

@Gump - nice breakdown.

also, I'm not even sure why she mentions the 1st person to die in the Iraq war being an immigrant, whatever she's trying to connect seems to be a real stretch to me.

[This message has been edited by coolj (edited November 28, 2006).]

ArchAngel

Member

Posts: 3450
From: SV, CA, USA
Registered: 01-29-2002
well, I couldn't read past cheesestorm's bit, being, in my mind, the only redeemable part of the paper. it was a jumbled mess.
she sucks. I rule.


anyhow, tho, that was a good bit to quote.
cuz Jesus would probably play Starcraft.

------------------
Yes, I'm still better than you
Soterion Studios

buddboy

Member

Posts: 2220
From: New Albany, Indiana, U.S.
Registered: 10-08-2004
haha! no kidding. Starcraft rocks.

------------------
that post was really cool ^
|
[|=D) <---|| me

Lazarus

Member

Posts: 1668
From: USA
Registered: 06-06-2006
I never played Starcraft...

The music is good though.

Realm Master

Member

Posts: 1971
From: USA
Registered: 05-15-2005
Cheese is a SHE?!?!?!?!?!?!


quote:
Originally posted by coolj:

Here's the quote from her paper.


HEY!!! I DO NOT HAVE THAT MUCH ACNE!!!!


Wow... Cheese got quoted... amazing...

Man, I wouldn't mind being quoted...

------------------
yeah, im a little crazy
The following Image was created by me:

Lazarus

Member

Posts: 1668
From: USA
Registered: 06-06-2006
Where do you get that? He's male(afaik).
Realm Master

Member

Posts: 1971
From: USA
Registered: 05-15-2005
Oh, Good. Whew.

I thoguht I just read taht Cheese was a she.

I was about to have a nervous breakdown.

that was scary...

------------------
yeah, im a little crazy
The following Image was created by me:

Max

Member

Posts: 523
From: IA
Registered: 09-19-2004
wow man, slow down yer fingers a bit, lol.

3 Cheers for cheese I say!

Plus, Jesus would DEFINATELY play SC.

------------------
To err is human--and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben

Blind belief is dangerous. - Kenyan Proverb

Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. - Pablo Picasso

Lazarus

Member

Posts: 1668
From: USA
Registered: 06-06-2006
...even though it's about a bunch of weird aliens, humans, and "overlords" ?

I wonder how she found that thread - or this site.

Max

Member

Posts: 523
From: IA
Registered: 09-19-2004
"You require more vespene gas"
"Spawn more overlords!"
"I can't build there, something's in the way"
"Need a light?"
"You must construct additional pylons"
"You've not enough minerals"
"My life for Aiur!"
"Somebody call for an exterminator?"
"Additional supply depots required"

I love SC, it's the best.

------------------
To err is human--and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben

Blind belief is dangerous. - Kenyan Proverb

Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. - Pablo Picasso

Lava
Member

Posts: 1905
From:
Registered: 01-26-2005
Where is CheeseStorm anyway?

------------------

ArchAngel

Member

Posts: 3450
From: SV, CA, USA
Registered: 01-29-2002
a sound that is music to my ears:

"Battlecruiser operational"

that marks the beginning of the end of my enemies.

well, atleast some of the time.

------------------
Yes, I'm still better than you
Soterion Studios

Faith_Warrior

Member

Posts: 490
From: So.Cal.
Registered: 09-05-2006
There is also this issue:
Copyright© 2000-2006, Christian Coders Network. All rights reserved.
Not a very bright holder of the phd to forget that everything posted is under copyright and that site permission needs to be obtained before doing such a thing with quotes as she did. Oh... but she's probably liberal and social engineering takes presidence over law and morality so it muuust be all right.
GUMP

Member

Posts: 1335
From: Melbourne, FL USA
Registered: 11-09-2002
Our Media makes this point:

quote:
Unfortunately, there is no clean, bright line in cyberspace regarding the borrowing of others' works.

Siva Vaidhyanathan. an author, NYU professor and widely acknowledged expert on digital copyright, argues persuasively that the borrowing permitted by the [US] Copyright Act's fair use provisions apply not only to text works but to visual works as well.


It's not like she's taking the content of CCN wholesale and then making a profit on it. I've never head of there being a lawsuit over the usage of information contained within forum posts.

quote:
she's probably liberal and social engineering takes presidence over law and morality so it muuust be all right.

While I agree she probably thinks this, national laws and morality don't quite go hand in hand. Also, besides implying that cheesestorm's writings were examples of a Christian gamer (which was likely a goof and not a purposeful lie) how were any of her actions immoral? In fact it probably would have been better to list the quote as from an "unnamed Christian gamer". After all, it's pretty embarrassing to be used as an example of someone who is conflating reality and video games (it's rather obvious she meant the two examples to be viewed in a negative sense).

[This message has been edited by Gump (edited November 28, 2006).]

Lava
Member

Posts: 1905
From:
Registered: 01-26-2005
But is everything said on this forum copyrighted by CCN? What if I created a catchphrase and decided to sell stuff on it, but I started saying it here? Does CCN own my catchphrase? What about game ideas? IMO, if forums cant be responsible for what members say on here, they can't own what is said on here.

But putting that aside, shouldn't she have asked Cheesestorm to use his quotes in the first place?

------------------

[This message has been edited by LAVA (edited November 28, 2006).]

Realm Master

Member

Posts: 1971
From: USA
Registered: 05-15-2005
Let's sue her!

Ohh! OOH!! I get ot be the bailif! (Is it even spelled that way?)


quote:
Originally posted by LAVA:
But is everything said on this forum copyrighted by CCN? What if I created a catchphrase and decided to sell stuff on it, but I started saying it here? Does CCN own my catchphrase? What about game ideas? IMO, if forums cant be responsible for what members say on here, they can't own what is said on here.

But putting that aside, shouldn't she have asked Cheesestorm to use his quotes in the first place?


CNN owns my catchphrase?!?!? Aww...

Yeah though, a PHDed person ought to have the professional courtesy to AT LEAST SAY PLEASE!

I just got back from school... kinda high on adrenaline... 0_0

I don't even know WHY I'm pumped up on Adrenaline... I'm bored at shcool.

------------------
yeah, im a little crazy <--(Apparently this isn't mine anymore )
The following Image was created by me:

[This message has been edited by Realm Master (edited November 28, 2006).]

Faith_Warrior

Member

Posts: 490
From: So.Cal.
Registered: 09-05-2006
Actually there was just a ruling recently that said forums are not responsible for what is written there by members. This clears the legal responsibility of forum owners regarding what people post on their forums.

As for legal right to what is posted, generally the author retains rights to what is printed but of course the forum site would have some level of responsibility regarding the ownership of submitted works to the site. In a court of (US) law the site would never be able to use such a right as claiming the work as their own, not unless the writer wound up with cement shoes and no one was left to claim it. Some forum sites make it a note in the posted copyright line that posted information is owned by the poster, but still just mentioning that such work was taken from CCN has got to be flagrant violations of th law or morality (didn't say “=” or would have used one word phrase “moral law”).

GUMP

Member

Posts: 1335
From: Melbourne, FL USA
Registered: 11-09-2002
quote:
just mentioning that such work was taken from CCN has got to be flagrant violations of th law or morality

The laws of the US are still being settled on this point but I'm curious why you think her actions are immoral?

"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density at any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property." - Thomas Jefferson

You may also find this interesting:

http://bfp.sp.unipi.it/~pievatolo/lm/kantbraz.html

CheeseStorm
Member

Posts: 521
From:
Registered: 11-28-2004
I've seen this quote in a couple places now, I don't know why people can't tell that it was a joke.
Faith_Warrior

Member

Posts: 490
From: So.Cal.
Registered: 09-05-2006
quote:
Originally posted by Gump:
The laws of the US are still being settled on this point but I'm curious why you think her actions are immoral?

It's immoral because it's not the truth, it is a jest that is being passed on as factual so that the writer may use it to make a point in conclusion. Hey, I'm not a Republican nor a big Bush supporter, but I can figure out what I'm looking at.

GUMP

Member

Posts: 1335
From: Melbourne, FL USA
Registered: 11-09-2002
I'd completely agree there but what does that have to do with copyrights and the fair use of information?
Faith_Warrior

Member

Posts: 490
From: So.Cal.
Registered: 09-05-2006
quote:
Originally posted by Gump:
I'd completely agree there but what does that have to do with copyrights and the fair use of information?

Are you just drilling for something to pick on? Jeez so many peeps giving me a hard time today :P
If you want the answers I guess you'll just need to speak to a layer, though they will undoubtedly give you two separate and conflicting answers. Oh and if you really want to get confused, check with a layer that deals with French law

GUMP

Member

Posts: 1335
From: Melbourne, FL USA
Registered: 11-09-2002
Not really. You made a comment on copyright and I responded. I consider point 9 of my overview a much more interesting topic.
Faith_Warrior

Member

Posts: 490
From: So.Cal.
Registered: 09-05-2006
It looks more to me as you are trying to pull any sense of morality apart from law. You ask why it is immoral, well she misled the audience, be it intentionally or accidentally that is irrelevant, the conclusion demonstrates the intention of the paper imo. Secondly and more so my point, she took the comments without asking, this in its self shows that the first part of my assumption is correct that it was her intent to mislead. We can squabble now about copyright laws but I just have no interest in writing three pages of forum posts on a retarded thread as this. If you are just trying to prove that law and morality are complete opposites than that's your dilemma, there is nothing to justify amorality.
GUMP

Member

Posts: 1335
From: Melbourne, FL USA
Registered: 11-09-2002
Not opposites. They just can't be conflated. For example, euthanasia might be legal in some nations but is it moral? Or in this case her actions--at least as far as copyright laws--weren't illegal (at least not in the US right now). But you say they're immoral so I asked why and linked to a relevant discussion via Immanuel Kant (a Christian philosopher born in the 18th century).

Also, I'd agree that she misleads her readers but that's a separate issue.

Anyway, I have an interest in IP rights and such but if you feel this topic retarded please don't feel compelled to respond any further. Not trying to pick on you or anything...

Faith_Warrior

Member

Posts: 490
From: So.Cal.
Registered: 09-05-2006
quote:
Originally posted by Gump:
Not opposites. They just can't be conflated. For example, euthanasia might be legal in some nations but is it moral? Or in this case her actions--at least as far as copyright laws--weren't illegal (at least not in the US right now). But you say they're immoral so I asked why and linked to a relevant discussion via Immanuel Kant (a Christian philosopher born in the 18th century).

That's called throwing out the baby with the bath water. So since you view some laws as immoral, they all are, or at least that is how you are trying to argue the point. I don't recognize this way of argument as being rational.

quote:

Also, I'd agree that she misleads her readers but that's a separate issue.

Of course you feel it's a separate issue, it gives weight to what I'm saying.

quote:
Anyway, I have an interest in IP rights and such but if you feel this topic retarded please don't feel compelled to respond any further. Not trying to pick on you or anything...

Huh? You want to talk about IP right or something now? That would be a better context for this conversation, maybe you were really just talking about something else entirely anyway, but I see you are just trying to blow me off at this point, so I'm off...

[This message has been edited by Faith_Warrior (edited November 29, 2006).]

GUMP

Member

Posts: 1335
From: Melbourne, FL USA
Registered: 11-09-2002
quote:
That's called throwing out the baby with the bath water. So since you view some laws as immoral, they all are, or at least that is how you are trying to argue the point. I don't recognize this way of argument as being rational.

That fine distinction has been recognized by philosophers for centuries. Several options. A law may have a moral basis, a law may not have a moral basis, and a moral stance may not be covered by any law, a law may knowingly allow for the sinfulness of man, or there may be laws invented for new situations not directly related to morality (traffic laws allow for ease of transportation but in of themselves they are not related to morality[obviously breaking them is another issue]).

Example:

http://www.rationalchristianity.net/bad_laws.html

quote:
Of course you feel it's a separate issue, it gives weight to what I'm saying.

One immoral act may not have any implications for another. As in, they're not directly connected. One immoral action in a series of actions does not automatically make all these actions immoral, unless these further actions directly follow from an initial immoral act.

quote:
Huh? You want to talk about IP right or something now? That would be a better context for this conversation,

IP Rights and Copyrights Laws are closely related...

quote:
maybe you were really just talking about something else entirely anyway, but I see you are just trying to blow me off at this point, so I'm off...

And, no, that wasn't a brush off. You indicated you were irritated by something else: "Jeez so many peeps giving me a hard time today". My writing style might be confrontational but my response was genuine. If you don't want to discuss this then don't. No worries. I wouldn't have responded at all now except I wanted to clarify the point you stated as irrational.