China Blocks Gaming For More Than 3 Hours

On August 26 2005 03:10 NotSorry wrote:
That has to blow for MMORPG, I mean completely cuts out the possiblity of any end game raid in WOW, and raids in most other games for that matter.

On August 26 2005 06:47 haduken wrote:
What does this has to do with democracy? You people should stop using this lame issue to blame the country for christ sake.

I think it's a wise move on their part but probably very difficult to implemented it fully. The important part is they that showed initiatives, they CARE.

Most of you don't realise or don't want to admit how damaging games can be to your life. Sure, it is fun but really when it comes down games are just another trap corporations use to leech your time and money.
However, we as a society can't stop this new wave just like when we can't stop rock'n roll and skateboarding was back in the 80s.

So the question is? where is the balance?

On August 26 2005 07:53 MoltkeWarding wrote:
Agree. Communism isn´t to blame for China´s faults. Chinese people are to blame for China´s faults.

In this case, the government is stepping in to take care of a large problem caused by Chinese people: gaming addiction. Good luck.

On August 26 2005 06:47 haduken wrote:
What does this has to do with democracy? You people should stop using this lame issue to blame the country for christ sake.

I think it's a wise move on their part but probably very difficult to implemented it fully. The important part is they that showed initiatives, they CARE.

Most of you don't realise or don't want to admit how damaging games can be to your life. Sure, it is fun but really when it comes down games are just another trap corporations use to leech your time and money.
However, we as a society can't stop this new wave just like when we can't stop rock'n roll and skateboarding was back in the 80s.

So the question is? where is the balance?

On August 26 2005 02:45 1hp wrote:
http://sc.gosugamers.net/forum.php?i=forum&visa=9&rubrik_id=118576&read=1

Obviously taken from gosugamers, might as well take the topic maker's quote:

"Shanghai. August 23. INTERFAX-CHINA - The Chinese Government unveiled a new system Tuesday to prevent individuals from playing online games for more than three consecutive hours, which must be installed for every online game in the country."

"Development of the system is scheduled for completion at the end of September 2005. Internal testing is scheduled to begin in October of 2005. After internal testing, trial operations of the system will be held using the games "The Legend of Mir II" and "The World of Legend" operated by Shanda, "Westward Journey Online" and "Fantasy Westward Journey Online" operated by NetEase, "World of Warcraft" and "MU" operated by The9, "JX Online" and "First Myth Online" operated by Kingsoft, "The Legend of Mir 3G" operated by Optisp, "Lineage II" operated by SINA, and "Blade Online" operated by Sohu."

"Compulsory deployment of the new system is expected to begin for all massive multiplayer online role-playing games and casual games in China in late 2005 or early 2006."

http://www.interfax.cn/showfeature.asp?aid=4913

Props to Petar "RayOfLight" Jager and GGnet for topic. If this has been posted before, sorry, but it would be impossible to search this type of thing.

P.S. seems like fewer people will die from gaming for 40hours straight now. Wish this sort of stuff was introduced in Korea too, except for professional gamers.

On August 26 2005 06:47 haduken wrote:
What does this has to do with democracy? You people should stop using this lame issue to blame the country for christ sake.

I think it's a wise move on their part but probably very difficult to implemented it fully. The important part is they that showed initiatives, they CARE.

Most of you don't realise or don't want to admit how damaging games can be to your life. Sure, it is fun but really when it comes down games are just another trap corporations use to leech your time and money.
However, we as a society can't stop this new wave just like when we can't stop rock'n roll and skateboarding was back in the 80s.

So the question is? where is the balance?

On August 26 2005 08:05 Sky101 wrote:

?? It has everything to do with democracy, you just don't get it because you never had the pleasure to enjoy it.

On August 26 2005 08:11 SuNDAnce wrote:

Why are you always trying to make a cake from shit?And this is hardcore shit.

Most of you don't realise or don't want to admit how damaging games can be to your life. Sure, it is fun but really when it comes down games are just another trap corporations use to leech your time and money.
However, we as a society can't stop this new wave just like when we can't stop rock'n roll and skateboarding was back in the 80s.

On August 26 2005 07:53 MoltkeWarding wrote:
Agree. Communism isn´t to blame for China´s faults. Chinese people are to blame for China´s faults.

In this case, the government is stepping in to take care of a large problem caused by Chinese people: gaming addiction. Good luck.

?? It has everything to do with democracy, you just don't get it because you never had the pleasure to enjoy it.

On August 26 2005 21:49 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:


Because the government limiting your freedoms is a good thing!



I think a better question is, what fucking business does the government have telling you how many hours you can play a video game? I mean, may as well tell you how many hours you can sleep, how many hours you can allot for eating, how many hours you can allot for the three S's (Shit, shower, shave). Hell, why not just let the government tell you what age you can live to? Surely, they know what's best, and everyone knows it's all downhill after 35, so why be allowed to live past then?

On August 26 2005 22:02 T______T wrote:


Then you can have education campaigns explaining the dangers of playing too much. Let's not pull this crap and tell people how to and not to spend their time.

Also, this is something that I have noticed with people from Asia in general (as well as, to some extent, people from every country). When we insult a policy in your country, we are not insulting you as a person.

On August 26 2005 22:21 T______T wrote:
If the education campaigns don't work, then pull them. Still, it's better than this semi-fascist shit.

On August 26 2005 23:15 Sky101 wrote:
Chinese kids are brainwashed by the Communists so no matter how we try, they just won't understand real democracy.

On August 27 2005 00:01 Excalibur_Z wrote:
Sky is right. I can't believe there are so many people in this thread who like the government running its people's lives. The government should have no say regarding to what degree people play games. I will explain a bit from the American point of view.

In America, the people are granted the power by birthright, and it is then lended to the government. By the will of the people, various fundamental laws are created, but they must never infringe upon their basic rights. I don't know how it is in China - maybe the government controls all the power, but that's not the way it works here.

The main argument I'm seeing by haduken is that kids and youths become addicted to video games, then use up all their family's money and contribute nothing in return, and turn out to be failures. Why does the government have anything to do with it? That is up to individual families to decide. Look, I'm 22 years old. I can say swiftly that if I didn't have a job and wasn't currently saving money to move into my own place, my parents would throw me out of the house. They wouldn't do it to be cruel, they would do it as a last resort, because they know that if I wasn't pushed that I wouldn't accomplish anything. In any case, that is my parents' decision to make, because it's their house. You say the government speaks for the people, and many concerned families encourage this legislature because it means their kids will be forced to contribute to society. However, why should my neighbor's family have anything to say about what happens to me? Why does their will trump the will of my own family?

On August 27 2005 00:01 Excalibur_Z wrote:
Sky is right. I can't believe there are so many people in this thread who like the government running its people's lives. The government should have no say regarding to what degree people play games. I will explain a bit from the American point of view.

In America, the people are granted the power by birthright, and it is then lended to the government. By the will of the people, various fundamental laws are created, but they must never infringe upon their basic rights. I don't know how it is in China - maybe the government controls all the power, but that's not the way it works here.

The main argument I'm seeing by haduken is that kids and youths become addicted to video games, then use up all their family's money and contribute nothing in return, and turn out to be failures. Why does the government have anything to do with it? That is up to individual families to decide. Look, I'm 22 years old. I can say swiftly that if I didn't have a job and wasn't currently saving money to move into my own place, my parents would throw me out of the house. They wouldn't do it to be cruel, they would do it as a last resort, because they know that if I wasn't pushed that I wouldn't accomplish anything. In any case, that is my parents' decision to make, because it's their house. You say the government speaks for the people, and many concerned families encourage this legislature because it means their kids will be forced to contribute to society. However, why should my neighbor's family have anything to say about what happens to me? Why does their will trump the will of my own family?

On August 27 2005 04:17 uT)Murray wrote:
mmorpgs are like drugs, they get you addicted and you become a slave of mmorpg. why should not they deal with that problem? game addiction can be as bad as alcohol addiction and drug addiction.

On August 27 2005 05:15 MaTRiX[SiN] wrote:
do u have laws in finland deciding how much alcohol u can drink? ..

On August 26 2005 03:21 LaZyScV wrote:
That's stupid. I would move out of China just because of that crap.

On August 27 2005 04:17 uT)Murray wrote:
mmorpgs are like drugs, they get you addicted and you become a slave of mmorpg. why should not they deal with that problem? game addiction can be as bad as alcohol addiction and drug addiction.

On August 26 2005 23:37 Abang_Zealot wrote:
Holy shit 3 hours are ages already :O
Who plays for longer than that O.o Major headache and you'll feel like crap afterwards~

On August 27 2005 05:16 Chris307 wrote:


"The best government is that which governs least."

On August 27 2005 00:01 Excalibur_Z wrote:
Sky is right. I can't believe there are so many people in this thread who like the government running its people's lives. The government should have no say regarding to what degree people play games. I will explain a bit from the American point of view.

In America, the people are granted the power by birthright, and it is then lended to the government. By the will of the people, various fundamental laws are created, but they must never infringe upon their basic rights. I don't know how it is in China - maybe the government controls all the power, but that's not the way it works here.

The main argument I'm seeing by haduken is that kids and youths become addicted to video games, then use up all their family's money and contribute nothing in return, and turn out to be failures. Why does the government have anything to do with it? That is up to individual families to decide. Look, I'm 22 years old. I can say swiftly that if I didn't have a job and wasn't currently saving money to move into my own place, my parents would throw me out of the house. They wouldn't do it to be cruel, they would do it as a last resort, because they know that if I wasn't pushed that I wouldn't accomplish anything. In any case, that is my parents' decision to make, because it's their house. You say the government speaks for the people, and many concerned families encourage this legislature because it means their kids will be forced to contribute to society. However, why should my neighbor's family have anything to say about what happens to me? Why does their will trump the will of my own family?

On August 27 2005 00:01 Excalibur_Z wrote:
Sky is right. I can't believe there are so many people in this thread who like the government running its people's lives. The government should have no say regarding to what degree people play games. I will explain a bit from the American point of view.

In America, the people are granted the power by birthright, and it is then lended to the government. By the will of the people, various fundamental laws are created, but they must never infringe upon their basic rights. I don't know how it is in China - maybe the government controls all the power, but that's not the way it works here.

The main argument I'm seeing by haduken is that kids and youths become addicted to video games, then use up all their family's money and contribute nothing in return, and turn out to be failures. Why does the government have anything to do with it? That is up to individual families to decide. Look, I'm 22 years old. I can say swiftly that if I didn't have a job and wasn't currently saving money to move into my own place, my parents would throw me out of the house. They wouldn't do it to be cruel, they would do it as a last resort, because they know that if I wasn't pushed that I wouldn't accomplish anything. In any case, that is my parents' decision to make, because it's their house. You say the government speaks for the people, and many concerned families encourage this legislature because it means their kids will be forced to contribute to society. However, why should my neighbor's family have anything to say about what happens to me? Why does their will trump the will of my own family?

On August 27 2005 09:47 BloodyC0bbler wrote:


As just a general base. Asian culture is very very much oriented on family, people, etc... Parents in asian countries, in most cases, would not throw their child into the street to fend for themselves. They love their kids, and when the kids are older and successful, it is expected that the children will take care of them. This is how the cycle goes. They are also very friendly usually, towards neighbours and most people they meet. This isnt a case where Family X with the problem is really pissing off Family Y that doesnt, because if Family Y doesnt have the problem they really wont mind. The kids in Y might game a bit, but not enough that it contricts what they would normally do, while it sets forced guidelines for X to follow. The government made a decision that would reflect the cultures wishes. You will also note that the outcry is coming from western gamers, not asian. You might ask why, well youve seen some of their responces. This is not a decision that infringes on the Chinese culture in the way you make it sound, they dont have a true democracy, nor do they have a true communist society, its more of a mix now.

The difference you should realize is China is not America, its beliefs, values and way of operating is completely different. It isnt an individualistic system, its one based more upon people. In a sense, they system opens up for better human relation, while ours teaches us to fend for ourselves and walk over anyone who gets in our way. And as China is not America, this decision in no stretch violates any breach you might feel in their culture on any level thats serious. If this wasnt a problem, the government wouldnt have stepped in to try and fix it.

On August 27 2005 11:53 TreK[cF] wrote:
how long of a break do u have to take? 3 hours play = 3 hours break ?

On August 27 2005 07:42 haduken wrote:
People do not recognize the extend of the addiction in China and the social problems it has created. The only organization that is in a position to do something about it IS the government and i believe they have done this in accordance with the expectations of the culture. Obviously you would never expect a democractic government to implement similiar measures in a western country but IMO a western country would probably never have a video games addiction problem like the extend in China.

On August 27 2005 09:34 naventus wrote:
You people are so fucking narrow minded. I don't understand how you can put forth a logical argument without even really thinking about everything that's going on. This is especially directed at Sky and Excal.

Whether or not the government has a role in our lives is left to the government/culture/people. But the issue here is that the US, nor any government, is a shining example of individualism. Of course we are much better at it, and our innovation/entrepreneurship has carried us far. But, my point is that our country does many of the same things that you bitch about. It is HYPOCRITICAL to do so. Examples? How about Patriot Act? Is that not the government barging in on its people "for their good" but not necessarily in their consent? How about the failed temperance movement+amendment oh so long ago? Admittingly, the US government has mostly kept off the personal affairs of people- but that depends where you draw the line.

My point is that in many ways this is not just a fault of government to overregulate, but of people. Issues like these arrive because they are in part caused by human nature that is universal. To point fingers at X country and claim they are fools and obviously ignorant is stupid and hypocritical. These are issues that must be faced with insight, understanding, and a devotion to solve them. There is no simple and few-worded approach because you would simply be coloring over the colors with black and whites, and missing the complexity.

On August 27 2005 11:53 TreK[cF] wrote:
how long of a break do u have to take? 3 hours play = 3 hours break ?

On August 26 2005 07:53 MoltkeWarding wrote:
Agree. Communism isn´t to blame for China´s faults. Chinese people are to blame for China´s faults.

In this case, the government is stepping in to take care of a large problem caused by Chinese people: gaming addiction. Good luck.

On August 27 2005 13:38 baal wrote:
and who cares, it wont take more than a couple of hours for the crack to be out.

On August 27 2005 13:40 BloodyC0bbler wrote:


Yeah, but in china, do you want to be the guy using that crack, if your found out, who knows they might take your nuts.

On August 26 2005 21:54 haduken wrote:


Please go back and read what democracy is then come back and convince how this has anything to do with it. If anything, the government is actually listening to the people this time, most parents in China don't want to see their kids playing games which is an issue i won't bother go into but then again the number of parents > number of kids and the parents make up the population of the country.

On August 26 2005 23:15 Sky101 wrote:
Chinese kids are brainwashed by the Communists so no matter how we try, they just won't understand real democracy.

On August 26 2005 23:45 camooT wrote:

goddammit. study some history.

"prohibition"
"alien and sedition acts"
"minimum drinking age"
"minimum smoking age"
"illegal drugs"

And if this issue is a burden on families, let them deal with it. But the government has no right barging in and dictating how people spend their personal time.

Any restriction to freedom is bad. I beleive u'll realize in the end. And if the reason for this is because parents want their kids to stop playing games and they can't control them, then they are BAD PARENTS.

On August 27 2005 15:31 camooT wrote:
minimum drinking age is a bad thing?

prohibitting firearms in public is a bad thing?

speeding limits are a bad thing?

gaming addiction is a problem in china. the chinese government is enforcing a law that tries to fix it. they didn't say you couldn't game at all. they said you could game 3 hours a day, then you have to do something productive.

drugs are a problem for some families in the U.S., why don't we just let those families deal with it?

Yes. It's the gaurdian's responsibility to decide what their children consume. If they want to allow their kids to drink alchohol at home, then the State has no right to force them otherwise.. Public intoxication is a different matter, because other people are affected by it.

Yes, and this isn't even law in many parts of the United States.

Whoever owns the road sets the rules for the road. If the State owns it, then they set the rules.

See my response for alchohol. I'll never understand Republicans (assuming you are one; I don't know for sure, and I've been in trouble for assuming this).

don't dodge the question. you could also argue that this is your car, why can't you do with it what you like? the government has these restrictions in place to keep people safe. likewise with gaming, a three hour restriction to keep you from wasting your life away.

anyway, i've said this before -- labeling the problem doesn't fix it. "it's the parent's responsibility" isn't a valid argument if the problem persists.

On August 27 2005 17:01 Veigh wrote:
Just to add the democracy-flavour to camooT's good comments:
US people actually want a drinking/drug/etc. prohibition THEMSELVES. It's not like the almighty Uncle Sam decides to do so. In the past these laws are chosen via electorate-representatives and that's why you have them right now.

You think in the next elections the revolutionary minimum-state-Nozick-like extremist will become president? He who shouts: "responsibility to the people, stop sentences, stop crime regulation, hell, even stop having a police, or an army, let the people themselves take care of their own safety?" You think the ordinary citizen in the US wants that? Man, he is glad that he can live his ordinary life and that he doesnt need to be scared for his diet coke to be intoxicated by greedy industrials.

Maybe it's useful to realize that implicitly, we're all happy with a government that sets regulations, creates laws and decides what's good for us.

Regarding the government: we expect it to take certain measures at certain moments. Gaming-regulations are just an example of this. Apparently there were enough voices in China that wanted this and enough research about harmful effects was done before a rule like this was implemented.

I'm not going to respond to the other things you said, because your responses were laughable, and the reader can see that.

Much of the surprising diversity in the Chinese media is attributable to the fact that most state media outlets no longer receive large government subsidies and are expected to largely pay for themselves through commercial advertising. As a result, they can no longer serve solely as mouthpieces for the government but must also produce programming that people find attractive and interested so that money can be generated through advertising revenue. In addition, while the government does issue directives defining what can and cannot be published, it does not prevent, and in fact actively encourages state media outlets to compete with each other for viewers and commercial advertising.

The number of newspapers in China has increased from 42 -- virtually all Communist Party papers--in 1968 to 382 in 1980 and more than 2,200 today. By one official estimate, there are now more than 7,000 magazines and journals in the country. The number of copies of daily and weekly newspapers and magazines in circulation grew fourfold between the mid-1960s and the mid-to-late 1980s, reaching 310 million by 1987. (2)

A prime example has been the party's flagship newspaper, People's Daily, which had been rigidly controlled under Mao, used against his enemies, and copied verbatim by every other newspaper in the country during the Cultural Revolution. This leading daily was reformed and enlivened in the late 1970s and early-to-middle 1980s by then editor-in-chief Hu Jiwei. Hu expanded the paper's size and coverage, encouraged public criticism through letters to the editor, called for promulgation of a press law to spell out journalists' rights, and introduced a sprightlier writing style.

On August 27 2005 16:31 nova_442 wrote:
If the State would stop giving aid to people who get addicted to drugs we could also remove the restrictions on them. Removing restrictions while maintaining various entitlement programs that act as a safety net for stupidity is the best way I can think of to waste taxpayer money.

I think that's one problem the libertarians have in this country, although the biggest is still that promising bigger and better socialist programs gets you elected. Anyone who has as part of his platform to remove all funding for family planning, substance abuse treatment, and the like has my vote.

Let's let people and their families take care of themselves, eh?

EDIT@ Social Security: Social Security is about the most inefficient way of using your money to save for retirement. If you and your employer invested the same amount of money into a mix of stocks and bonds (transitioning to safer investments as you get close to retirement) you'd EASILY outstrip the modest money S.S. guarantees. What's even worse is that when *I* retire Social Security benefits will be slashed, the retirement age will be raised and I won't see the money I put in. Yes I know you weren't arguing effectiveness but you have no idea how badly I want to kill the golden cow.

Individual rights should not be susceptible to being voted away. Not that this gaming restriction is a huge deal, but it should seem horrible on principle. If you can justify a relatively harmless ban such as this, you're on a slippery slope where far worse obstruction of liberties can be implemented.

So? A society can't be truly free if the majority can democratically vote to destroy the rights of others. Majority vote doesn't automatically make something right.

You make a good illustration for why democracy by itself isn't necessarily conducive to freedom. The government should have contitutional safeguards against tyranny of the majority.

About the restrictions, they are COMPLETELY VALID when they PROTECT people from other people, but not when they LIMIT people from nothing. I also agree with the drug staff. I myself beleive drugs should be completely forbidden and no help for drug addicts. If they destroy their lives, they pay for it, not the rest trought taxes. Also murderers/rapers should be executed, no wasting money in jails. And for those who say "they can be rehabilitated", plz, lets be honest
Any policy that goes for reducing taxes and reducing states investment is good, whereas the other way it is not. Unfortunatly, eventhough no one beleives in communism, marxism ideas have sneaked almost in every country where people beleive state should take care of them. State is there to avoid people to harm other people, and nothing else. The less money it takes from taxes, the better it is.

On August 27 2005 18:17 camooT wrote:
the slippery slope theory is getting old. i'd like to see it in action. wasn't roe vs wade the beginning of a slioppery slope to national moral decadence? why are people not getting drunk and having lude sex in the streets yet (even here, in the bay area)?

no, but it doesn't make anything wrong either. yes, popular opinion was behind the japanese internment, and it was behind the war in iraq. but popular opinion was also behind prohibition (a positive measure by all means, it just couldn't be enforced), it was behind the New Deal, it was behind sewer systems, public transit, labor reform, etc. etc.

i agree with you on the first part. on the second issue though, i'd like to hear you opinion on what counts as "tyranny of the majority." you're advocating a return to the pre 20th century idealogy that the majority can't be trusted to govern themselves. by what means then, will we be governed? the topic at hand is a social issue - video games screwing up people's lives. can we trust a self-elected congress to manage all our social issues? or do you believe still that these issues (among others, like drugs, education, labor) don't deserve government involvement? if these measures have proven to work (see examples i cited in the last page), then it follows that these measures are in fact, practical, regardless of whether or not they were enacted as a result of "mob rule." you can't just dispute results with ideology.

On August 26 2005 22:55 Freezer_au wrote:
what if pj is in a important tourny that lasts longer then 3 hours ?

halfway through tourny pj says:
"sorry i gotta go i been on 3 hours! bye"

On August 27 2005 07:52 Caution wrote:
LOL im sure glad that i dont live in China =/

On August 27 2005 19:35 AnGuRuSO wrote:


omg I hope you aren't seriously worrying about that

On August 27 2005 18:24 camooT wrote:

ok. i disagree with you, but if i were to argue with you, it would be over morality, and i don't care much for that. i just want to point out that communism has nothing to do with what we're talking about. china isn't a communist country, what it's doing isn't "communist," it's "marxist" not "marxism" and read the thread and actually try to form an argument before posting . while i like to hear people's opinions as much as the next person who doesn't give a fuck, i also like my opinions with sound, reasonable arguments supporting them.

when will people realize that statement of opinion doesn't constitute an argument?

On August 27 2005 19:47 camooT wrote:
MMORPGs tend to more addictive because of the social aspect. same thing can happen in starcraft, but not too many people actually make friends on bnet.

On August 27 2005 17:58 camooT wrote:

congratulations, you win by ad hominem.

Most of you guys are closet Statists.

A bunch of you are mini-fascists.

On August 27 2005 20:28 camooT wrote:
i'm well aware of what the term means, having attended a year of debate meetings, thank you.

this is how you conclude your argument. i can't reasonably come up with another name for that than ad hominem.

make up your mind .

don't dodge the question. you could also argue that this is your car, why can't you do with it what you like? the government has these restrictions in place to keep people safe. likewise with gaming, a three hour restriction to keep you from wasting your life away.

anyway, i've said this before -- labeling the problem doesn't fix it. "it's the parent's responsibility" isn't a valid argument if the problem persists.

I didn't dodge; I answered why I have no problem with it. The "it's your car" argument is ridiculous; it's your body, so who cares what you do when on someone else's property? That statement is identical to yours.

However, that doesn't mean that the State must step in if they don't solve the problem. In doing so, the State utilizes resources taken from others, which causes more problems (you have to look at every result of an action). Because the gamers are only hurting themselves and their families (if they let them), there is no need to utilize the police power of the State to step in.

It isn't a logical fallacy, which is why you were struggling to find a name.

On August 27 2005 17:58 camooT wrote:

comparatively, china is in a much worse state as far as personal rights go. compared with most of the world though, it is heaven .

On August 26 2005 03:51 LetMeBeWithYou wrote:



Yes. Especially MC takes over 5 hours ~_~;;

Though look on the bright side. They'd never have to suffer 5 hours of ultra boring in MC

On August 28 2005 00:09 NeVeRDiEDrOnE wrote:




WTF in China ive seen a man stabbed to death on a crowded street and people going along without even having a look at him, was told by varius friends better not to help when I see a woman being raped. HEAVEN??? The one thing I regret most in my entire life was the trip to china.

On August 28 2005 00:43 haduken wrote:


what part of down town pusan did you confused China with?

On August 27 2005 17:56 HnR)hT wrote:
The U.S. constitution says what the government CAN do, not the other way around. Similarly, it is assumed that the people are free in all instances unless specified otherwise, in accord with the liberal philosophy described in the declaration of independence. However, the constitution is now routinely ignored and violated by the government at all levels. The country was essentially libertarian for the first century and a half of its existence, but is moving closer to totalitarianism.

On August 28 2005 02:05 PlayJunior wrote:
Netherlands says that US government are comunists, facists and so on.
Simple as it is.

On August 28 2005 02:34 Veigh wrote:


I beg your pardon? That's the most upside-down comment I ever heard...

On August 28 2005 03:16 baal wrote:
w0000t nobody has posted something worth for camoot to read???

Isnt that the purpouse of teamliquid.net forums? waaaiiiit.... it isnt!!!

So get off your high horse bitch, people are not here to please your writting taste, morons and dummies have the right to post their silly posts too, and you seem to be the only one frustrated about that, a simple "omg, moron!" reply to them is more than enough k?... good.


Anyway, too bad somebody said what i was going to say (in a more stupid way tho) but well, i say this chinese crap is absolute bullshit but i am against ANY prohibition that doesnt affect a 3rd person.

This includes Drugs, abortion(please no debates about that right now), euthanasia and the right to play for over 3 fucking straight hours omfg!


And by the way, if kids are dying because of games, shouldnt the government stab their parents in the face instead of passing idiotic laws?

On August 28 2005 05:18 Chibi[OWNS] wrote:


You still don't get it? A few irresponsible kids/parents - a single murder in millions and some widespread general discipline problems - are enough to justify a global lockdown on computer gaming? Sure, I'll see you at the end of Logan's Run

On August 28 2005 00:09 NeVeRDiEDrOnE wrote:
WTF in China ive seen a man stabbed to death on a crowded street and people going along without even having a look at him, was told by varius friends better not to help when I see a woman being raped...

On August 27 2005 13:37 baal wrote:


moron -.-, so lets forbid extreme sports because people get addicted to adrenaline...

I dont need the government what i can or cant do with myself, if i want to play for 5 consecutive days till i die its my fucking choice.

On August 28 2005 07:02 Chibi[OWNS] wrote:
I didn't say there wasn't a problem, I was suggesting that banning computer games by law isn't the best way to resolve a rather primative social 'crisis'

On August 28 2005 03:16 baal wrote:
w0000t nobody has posted something worth for camoot to read???

On August 28 2005 11:02 camooT wrote:

both -____- and hnr)ht have made good posts. haduken, nova, and some other people have made good posts.

excuse me if i flame people in a debate thread, but if you don't know your shit, you shouldn't post here, period.

here's how i think debate threads should be run.
http://teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=30070

there's no one to moderate the idiocy, so flaming them out is the only option.

On August 28 2005 06:59 MoltkeWarding wrote:


Obviously youve needed government supervision for a long time. You´ve now sunk to the point of no return. I think 10 years of prison time may yet sort you out though.

On August 28 2005 16:15 baal wrote:


read my post again, i didnt say you shouldnt flame them, im baal, remember? o_oa

I said flame them, just dont get frustrated, stupid people will always be stupid, so its your choice, to slap them trying to make them smarter, or to slap them just because its fun... i chose # 2.

Anyway, i appreciate you didnt just tried to insult me back, but i guess the purpouse of tl.net isnt to satisfy me either, but it should

On August 28 2005 17:41 SpringWind wrote:
You can treat it as a joke,no one will obey it

On August 28 2005 00:09 NeVeRDiEDrOnE wrote:




WTF in China ive seen a man stabbed to death on a crowded street and people going along without even having a look at him, was told by varius friends better not to help when I see a woman being raped. HEAVEN??? The one thing I regret most in my entire life was the trip to china.

On August 26 2005 23:45 camooT wrote:

you're a fucking idiot. how did you make 1000 posts and not get banned yet?

On August 28 2005 23:20 camooT wrote:
because you're a fucking retard and your posts are fucking retarded.

(like that, baal?)

On August 28 2005 23:20 camooT wrote:
because you're a fucking retard and your posts are fucking retarded.

(like that, baal?)